Did anyone else decide to scrap the hit location rules?

After our 12th game we just decided that it does not work for us because half the time there was some enviromental factor or story factor that kind of messed with the hit location.

Anyway, the GM running our DH does not complain about rules too much, but tonight he just ask if we could scrap it.

Anyone out there do the same thing?

I just get the players to roll a second set of d% for the hit location. I figure that every shot, if it hits, should have the (roughly) same chance of hitting each location without regards to the abstract difficulty of the shot. Ie, you should have roughly the same chance of catching a guy in the torso with a confirmed hit from 5m away than you should of catching him in the torso with a confirmed hit from 200m.

I understand the reverse-precentage and multiple hit location was designed to cut down on the amount of dicerolling needed, but honestly it's only one extra set of dice with no extra maths attached, which in return keeps my suspension of disbelief in check. I still use the Multiple Hits chart when GMing though if A) I actually remembered to bring the screen and B) someone rolls a bucketload of hits (FA-fire, for example).

One of the many examples of why this was not working for us was that a PC had just gotten herself untied from a table in time to be attacked by this other person. When she stabbed that person, the hit location was on one of the legs, yet the table was too high for that to make sense. We have had a couple of Head butting scenes too that just did not go with the chart.

The game works perfectly fine without the location rules, so I think that is why my friend wanted to just scrap them. Personally, I never liked them in WFRP 2ed, so I am happy to see them go in this (it's an outdated concept and I was supprised to see it in 40K).

I guess if you scrapped the random hit location rules you could still allow for aimed shots. This would potentially allow for characters (and villains!) to take advantage of exposed areas without the somewhat fluky feel the game currently has.

I expect most professionals are trained to aim for the body anyway to increase their chances of hitting.

The body location on the hit locations chart has the greatest chance to hit. Most other games assume unless said, that you hit the body.

This will bring up an interesting point when it comes time to roll on the critical hit chart. He will still give us called shots, but I assume there will be less variety when it comes down to it. I normally do not like tables to roll on all the time, but those critical tables are wicked!

When I run the new WFRP, I am really interested to see how they deal with this because I noticed that they did not include random hit locations, but critical hits are dealt with differently too.

The DH combat system is abstract by design, and an attack is not just a punch or a kick, but a series of aggressive moves intended to look for (or create) an opening in your opponents defence, and then exploit it.

A stated headbutt is actually an Aimed Attack at the opponents head, and incurs the regular -20 penalty (because you're essentially deciding to not use any opportunities to strike at other locations even if they might present themselves) and does not use the random location rules.

Remember that legs include hips, and arms include shoulders, so hits to the leg may be a kick to the hip, for example. Also, in your example with the table in the way, you might rule that the table actually provides cover for the legs, and the random hit locations in this case actually worked to provide a defensive advantage. "He moves to kick you in the knee, but a deft sidestep forces him to shift his aim, and results in his kicking the table. Ouch."

I find the rules work find, providing you understand them and use them right. The "1 A = 1 punch" way of looking at it is NOT how the rules are designed.

On a tangent: The random spread for DH is modelled with firearms in mind, where you are more likely to score body hits. The WFRP spread is different, and reflects that in a swordfight you are more likely to hit arms and legs. You may want to use the WFRP spread for melee attacks, if you accept the increased book-keeping.

**** it, I wish the other GM in my group (the one who is running our DH game) had the time to be on this forum (his job requires him to be away from a computer unlike my job).

If it was not for those Critical hit charts, it would not be nessesary for hit location. I might need to point this out....

With the except of called shots, I don't use hit locations in my game. All hits are assumed to be body hits unless circumstances dictate otherwise. I haven't had any problem with doing that.

Since partial cover forms an important part of the tactical depth of the system, I would advise against not using hit locations. Considering how fluent combat is, an illogical hit location usually translates to one of two things: The zone is behind cover, in which case the attack has to get through the cover first or the attacked location is merely unlikely. In the latter case, it helps to describe the actual attack after it has been resolved - you don't headbutt people in the leg, but you might kick them, both actions being resolved with a standard unarmed attack.

Cifer said:

I don't think that is a good idea. If they rolled a hit, it should hit them. I understand about armor, but if half of their body is behind something, then add a penalty to their roll. That would piss me off to find out that after I hit someone with a 15% roll and barley made it only to find out that part of their body was covered by a big rock or something (bloody hit chart!!!

After all, you are rolling to see if you hit them and not whatever they are partially hiding behind (I think that is covered in the minus to your skill roll)

That is not correct, there should be no reduction because of how much of the target is visable unless (and it's a big unless) you call a shot (which can only be done on single shot) at -20 to hit in which case you pick a location (the wise man picks a location that is not behind cover.

In this system there are plenty of weapons that can blast straight the through the cover so it is not automatically regarded as a miss.

And after all, if you succeeded in your roll to hit, then you hit, right?

That's like saying "because you hit, you go through the armour too". Yes, if you roll a hit you hit if it gets through the armour and the TB. Just because you rolled a hit doesn't mean it's actually got through to the person yet, you have just managed to put the bullet into the same area of space as the leg.

It's the same reason why you roll Dodge after a successful hit roll. The successful hit means you put the bullet into the area of the target at the time you aimed. A successful dodge, however, means that between the time of the barrel of the weapon being pointed at the target, and the trigger pulled, the person isn't quite where you aimed anymore.

It's an abstract system by it's nature, just because you've rolled a "hit" doesn't mean you've actually hit them.

@Dustin

It's simple, actually: Either you take the -20% to hit for a called shot or you risk striking the cover. In certain situations, this can even work to your advantage - most Full Auto-capable weapons fare better with Spray&Pray since the third hit will usually hit something that is not in cover while weapons such as bolters and plasma guns might just blast straight through the cover.

I like rolling one of those little d6s that has an arm, arm, leg, leg, torso and head on it

i also like saying boom head shot.

We like describing our intentions. That chart limits us. It's out, no worries. Your way is pretty hardcore, and that is coolio. Cifer & Milladson: I do like how you modify the story from those results.

This is one of my few complaints about this system and thankfully it is easily solved (learning basic skills and fate points are the other issues I have).

After reading through the new Warhammer, I can see why they got rid of this part of the game. I never personally liked hit location charts. If the GM wanted to keep it, I would not complain really since I am playing the game and not running it. But if I was running it (which I might some time in the near future), I am also canning it too. All I need to know is "did it hit? How hard? Cary on or die!"

Oh and for the record, I am not judging anyone here who that hit location chart works for (but I am judging you on your Heresies against the Empire ). I do appriciate the advice on just going with the roll and then describing how the hit went down. Now that I have thought about that, I like that idea.

I am usually the picky one about systems, not the other GM. So when he asked us before the last game if we could scrap it and see if it makes a difference, we knew it really was not working for him.

Regardless, I am glad I ask this question and appriciate the feedback.

This is one of my few complaints about this system and thankfully it is easily solved (learning basic skills and fate points are the other issues I have).

What's that issue with Fate Points? They're a part of the system I really like. In fact, I miss them quite a lot in a different system which lacks such a karma/fate/edge/willpower mechanism that makes that one make-or-break roll a little less likely to completely botch.

Well, it might not be that bad after talking with my GM today at lunch. BUT here is what I wish you could do with a fate point:

I wish you could spend a fate point on a basic success for something you are rolling for (except an advanced skill you do not have). Take for example: it is the end of the game and it is down to the wire and you HAVE to make that roll.... and you only have a 15% (or so). This is were that comes into play.

BUT, we realized that if we all ration our fate points and there are five of us, then it might be to easy to get through the harder parts of the adventure. So, that may the reason why that is.

The skill thing was mentioned on another post, btw.

I wish you could spend a fate point on a basic success for something you are rolling for (except an advanced skill you do not have). Take for example: it is the end of the game and it is down to the wire and you HAVE to make that roll.... and you only have a 15% (or so). This is were that comes into play.

Sounds like a classic problem of the system - A +0 test is just what it says on the tin: Challenging , even for professionals. Most relatively normal tests should be in the range of +20 or even +30, though the Rulebook doesn't spell this out very clearly. Having an adventure hinge on a test that is made 15% of the time sounds like bad adventure design to me if you don't plan for the possibility that the pcs blow it. Also note that a test that fails very closely may also mean you just didn't do a spectacular job. For example, if you're picking a lock, failing narrowly may result in opening the lock, but leaving marks on the door that will probably be spotted by the next guard wandering by.

Is there a specific situation you have in mind for this?

However, I don't think allowing a straight success for that will make things that much better as it recreates the classic Divine Shot problem: Get a lascannon and you'll one-shot the Big Bad for the cost of one Fate Point.

Actually, no. I don't have a specific example at all, funny enough. Where this comes from is other game were you are a hero above and beyond (Serenity, Buffy, Doctor Who, Spirit of the Century, etc.). I figured that since we have the blessing of the Emperor, then we must be heros in the pulp sense. But, my GM corrected me on that today in that conversation. We are blessed... but that blessing is not a happy kind of bless. In the heroic and marter that will never be known kind of blessed

The irony behind this is that I have not burnt a fate point so far just by luck, because I thought my character was going to get it twice (he had one critical hit so far and reduced to zero on the last adventure).

I am fairly creative with my players on how they spend their fate points. They are theirs to spend or even burn as they see fit to further the story, save their hides or maybe just look **** cool at a critical moment.

The official list of what you can do with FP got bigger with the release of Ascention and I have already adopted them.

Had a situation come up in my last game session where the Adept decided to take a running leap to clear a 4m gap in a damaged catwalk the team was traveling down. She failed badly enough that she was only going to make it about halfway and then plunge down to horrible doom. Character spends a FP and rerolls... And still fails! At this point the Assassin's player asked me if he could spend a FP to attempt a dramatic leaping rescue. Thinking this to be really cool, I agreed and allowed him to test Acrobatics to catch the poor Adept. One successful Acrobatics test later he has bravely hurled himself over the edge and caught the poor lady, then because it was more dramatic to call for it after the catch I had the Assassin roll his jump test, which he made. I describe a dramatic leaping rescue with a suitable land on metal deckplate and tumble to a stop scene and continue with the story...

Clearly that situation was not explicitly covered in the rulebook, which is why you have a GM. =) The fact that I have players who will spend their prescious fate points on each-other in certain situations makes me happy as a GM. It means that I am doing something right, at least as far as my group is concerned: Making them CARE about the story!

No real issues with the hit location system here. If you do decide to tweak it or scrap it keep in mind the effects such changes will have on certain talents. Players that build up into Sure Strike and Sharpshooter might be grumpy.

ZillaPrime: about that story on Fate points: FREAK'N AWESOME!!! That sounds like our kind of game!

About the hit location charts issue with talents, we will keep that in mind. I am sure if things do get to were it sucks without them or if we had to change too much, then we'll go back.