(A) DIYElfgame Combats driven by Heartbreak
I have spoken about changing HPs and HDs into “Hearts” (name is still work in progress) -> https://vdonnutvalley.wordpress.com/2023/11/09/hearts-hd-system-and-what-does-it-entail/
And because of that classical OSR/NSR combat crumbles. Hearts actually reverse Paradigm of the Odd where you always roll damage and not for hits – with hearts you do not roll damage, only hits.
I had my thoughts about combat and it’s failings. Big pools of HPs, Attacks of Opportunity, always fighting to the death due to being in best shape all the time (unless dying). I would like to make it more realistic without mechanizing it. And the answer comes from my recent sweet love of 2400 https://jasontocci.itch.io/2400. It is simple FKR system in which you don’t have HPs. You have only your life and three types of damage – you die – you’re injured – you haven’t felt it. Break armor or things to mitigate damage or cancel it completely. That’s it. Roll for attack as for any other skill. No ACs, no bonus actions, no damage roll – you either kill’em, hurt’em or whiff it. Okay, you may injure them lightly for a few hours instead lasting wounds but hindrance is a hindrance.
You may think it is not a combat system and you’re right. But it works its magic. Characters take cover. They don’t take unnecessary risks. Always keep some armor on and try anything to avoid direct confrontation with overwhelming force. Semi-realistically but still within the rule of cool. You just can’t tank hits. If you get one you are hindered – and suddenly your best result on a roll can be weak success or success with consequence. You are injured after all. And even best armor can only take a few hits before becoming useless. It actually kinda looks like OSR combat but without so much rules and plot armor elements. Without so much of the abstraction. Okay, I can spend days explaining this stuff but just take a look at this article if you’re interested https://pretendo.games/2020/11/24/combat-in-24xx/
But there are not only rules for combat in the void – some of it is prescribed in class design. What about it? Well, I understand the gameplay perspective – you want plate-armoured knight but not everyone. So armor gets restricted. You want fighters to be only ones who cover all weapons. So they get restricted. Suddenly a wizard cannot swing a stick and wear basic gambeson. I would go different way. Everyone can use any armour but it is expensive. Plate – if it even is available – is oppressively expensive. Mail armour is cheaper but still outside the reach a lot of people. Gambeson can be bought by common folk. A wizard can go around in full plate!
What is it that really prevents people from fooling around in their armours all day? Well, it seems armour wasn’t particularly comfortable and wearing it for extended periods was tiring and even hurt your neck and shoulders. It was expensive. You didn’t wear it – at least the metal parts – unless anticipated combat. It could rust easily. It was greasy and probably stank. What more can I say than the experts? Check out this thing https://acoup.blog/2019/06/21/collections-punching-through-some-armor-myths/
Okay so the armor is covered. What about weapons? Also not so much restriction. Most weapons is easy enough to use by anyone with minimal training. One of the most successful weapon in history – spear – is just a sharpened stick and you don’t need much to use it. Same with axes, maces, daggers, crossbows. You can train and get better – but you’re pretty capable with minimal training. There are two – or rather three – weapons which are really training dependent. First one is a sling. Depending on the type it may require more or less of practice but general combat readiness shouldn’t be as much of a problem. But it is not a pick-and-go. Next weapon which requires competence is a sword. And not only for dueling – even chaotic battle combat with it can be hard, you need to know how to hold it, how to cut and thrust, how to parry. It is really solid mid-range weapon with offensive and defensive capabilities once you get too close for a spear. But you need to know how to use it. And in case of a sling I think training is negligible – I’d allow anyone to use it without specific training because it is very easy to find one and train for a while. But sword? So, everyone can use a sword but without being a Fighter with training you don’t get some perks of it and it’s basically like a light axe in your hands. Another weapon is a bow. Drawing a bow requires muscles used in barely anything else. You need to train to use it. There is not a question so again – Fighters get it by virtue of being combat trained. I feel this is way more accurate than some arbitrary limitations.
Besides all of that – I’d really need some easy to reference guide on weapon and armor types – I still wonder on “damage” roll. To release GMs from adjudicating every wound maybe the d6 roll is in order. But instead of six levels of damage I’d go for three. Baseline on a 2-5, weaker on a 1 and stronger on a 6. What it means is of course matter of situation. 6 with a club against plate armour probably means it’s dented or enemy it shaken. 1 with a dagger against unarmed is probably a shallow cut but cut nonetheless. So combat is generally deadly and woundy even high-level combat.
Initiative? I doubt that. Enemies don’t have stats. You’re reacting to what they do, to what danger they present. Your miss is their hit. Act accordingly to what flows from the fiction, GM should just get a sheet with participants to not miss anyone. Any questions?