I don't like the Hitpoints concept

By egalor, in Dark Heresy

Darth Smeg said:

In cases of sleeping victims, I don't roll. It's a no brainer. For people who sit on top of a bomb as it detonates, I don't roll.

Heh, **** straight - same here, mate :)

Btw, I don't believe I have had your email once?

We tried to get a mapping project up and going, using Excel. But it kinda died....

You can reach me at tarald at online dot no

There is no perfect system, role playing or otherwise.

The DH system is an abstract system designed to allow heroics and playability and it is still considerably more lethal that some systems I have played. Like any system, if a PC stacks a character then they will be difficult to hurt. But if the GM overcomplicates the system and slows the game down to shag the PCs more (oops I mean be 'more realistic'), I would probably look elsewhere.

Righteous Fury does happen, and NCPs should get it as best fits the story/gameplay. This can and does result in one shot kills.

If you want combat to totally focus on the Grim Dark go play Rolemaster (there is a reason no one plays it) or similar overly complicated game. Not much fun for a PC player to spend three game sessions 'role playing' a supperating wound, and not much fun spending a whole game session to resolve a skirmish.

Remember, it's about the fun, and the suspension of disbelief required to even play the game includes accepting an abstracted combat system.

And people do regularly survive gunshot wounds, including point blank gunshot wounds to the head (anyone remember the Judas Priest court case?).

Interferring with the fun is heresy...

ZAP ZAP ZAP.

I didn't much like the issues of critical existence failure that the wound system promoted either and did something similar to what Egalor sugested, though less extreme.

I simply took the Critical wounds off of the end of the wound track, made Critical Wounds non-cumulative, and tacked them to the side of the wound track -I also gave all characters 7 additional wounds to account for the missing critical levels of life at the end of the wound track. Every time a character lost wounds, they stood a chance of receiving a critical effect along with the loss of wounds. The level of the critical was determined by what percent of their maximum wounds were removed by the hit. It was something close to:

  • 1-TB: No additional effect
  • TB-50%: Critical 1-3 styled effects
  • 51%-75%: Critical 4-6 styled effects
  • 76% - 100%: Critical 7-9 styled effects.
  • 101% +: Critical 10 styled effects.

It was a little more structured and I went and updated all the talents I could find that would be effected by the change. There was also a more involved system for dealing with blood loss, what happens at 0 wounds, etc, but I don't have my notes handy.

I used the system for two or so years worth of DH and it worked quite well. Tough things were still tough, all weapons were to be respected because losing a hand sometimes just isn't worth it. On the odd side, it had the effect of actually reducing character death... although character maiming went up quite a bit.

Of course, if Lynata's view of wounds is taken, perhaps a simpler solution would be to just change the name of "Wounds" (it, after all, is kind of confusing judging from the various posts regarding medicae and healing) to "Luck" ;-)

"That's 28 damage Sam."
"Oh hell! I'm outa luck !"
"Damned strait, now give up that leg already! You lost it fair and square."

EDIT:

I just found my original writeup on the modified wound system. If interested, you can read more about it HERE .

egalor said:

- to be killed by a gunshot to his forehead from the point-blank range;

- to start bleeding after a gunshot/laceration.

borithan said:

egalor said:

- to be killed by a gunshot to his forehead from the point-blank range;

- to start bleeding after a gunshot/laceration.

Bleeding in 40k is much more serious than most bleeding in real life (severed arteries aside). Unless an artery is hit people will take a long time to bleed out from most wounds (even serious wounds would take a few minutes). In Dark Heresy it can happen in 5 seconds, and is likely to occur within a minute (all possible if major arteries are cut, but then it will probably be injuries that would be near impossible to treat in time, while in Dark Heresy they can be treated, again in the space of 5 seconds).

I take "Blood Loss" to refer primarily to fatal wounds that will kill you very soon, but not immediately, and less to actual exsanguination.

borithan said:

Bleeding in 40k is much more serious than most bleeding in real life (severed arteries aside). Unless an artery is hit people will take a long time to bleed out from most wounds (even serious wounds would take a few minutes). In Dark Heresy it can happen in 5 seconds, and is likely to occur within a minute (all possible if major arteries are cut, but then it will probably be injuries that would be near impossible to treat in time, while in Dark Heresy they can be treated, again in the space of 5 seconds).

In my view (and modest experience of human physiology) it is absoutely okay (in a simplistic way) how it works in DH. Critical damage causing Blood Loss is definitely a severed artery somewhere and the subsequent shock from the rapid blood loss (ie. hemorrhagic shock) is what can kill you rather fast (or cannot save you from death on the long run). The rapid bleeding from a severed artery can often be halted by rather simple measures (e.g. binding of the limb or the area) most of the time, even though this will not heal the victim in any way (i.e. in DH recover wounds), but it will stop him from dying for the time being.

bogi_khaosa said:

I take "Blood Loss" to refer primarily to fatal wounds that will kill you very soon, but not immediately, and less to actual exsanguination.