VP/WP System Discussion

[Xeviat]

(If you are unfamiliar with the VP/WP system, you can read it here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/adventuring/vitalityAndWoundPoints.htm#vitalityPoints.)

The Starwars Roleplaying Game introduced the vitality point/wound point system to the d20 universe. I had heard of it then, but I didn't give it a chance in my games until it was rereleased in Unearthed Arcana. After thinking it over for some time, I decided to introduce it into my games.

I'll never go back to hit points. The VP/WP system, if you are still unaware, replaces the standard HP system. In the VP/WP system, your former HP become your VP, your vitality points. Vitality points are a measure of your character's endurance. When you take damage from an attack, the damage is subtracted from your vitality points; this represents that you were able to shrug off the attack, expending some energy in the process to ensure that you were uninjured. When you are out of vitality points, or when you are critically hit, the damage is instead applied to your wound points (WP). A character has a number of WP equal to their current Constitution score, though this number can be raised with feats.

There are two great things the VP/WP system has done for my games. First, the VP/WP system is more descriptive than the HP system. When a character suffers VP damage, the player knows not to feel too threatened; they were scratched, bruised, or hit very hard in the armor. When a character suffers WP damage, they know they were hurt, and the subsiquent fatigue that comes along with WP damage shows it. It's also much easier for a DM to realistically describe what damage looks like, especially when players ask (as they always do) "how does he look?" in reference to NPCs or monsters; if a npc or monster has only taken VP damage, they might appear "a little tired, but otherwise fine" or "in fighting condition", but when a monster or npc has taken WP damage, you could describe the injuries and the fatigue that comes along with it, saying "he looks pretty injured" or "he's clinging onto life". Sure, you can still describe things in this way with the HP system, but someone fights just as well with 1 hp as they do with 100.

The second aspect of the VP/WP system that has improved my games is that it makes combat more realistic without taking away the heroism of the system. Characters still have alot of VP, and can survive rounds of punishment (that is, if they are a melee character); but criticals are scary and rewarding. In one game I'm running, a good 40 percent of the world's population has natural weapons, so when a character without natural weapons gets in a bar fight with someone who does, they feel the danger of the situation (in my version of the VP/WP system, unarmed attacks don't deal WP damage unless you take the -4 lethal damage penalty; though I do have a system of Nonlethal damage still). Even a lowly dagger can put fear into a player's game.

I've been using the VP/WP system for some time now. I've added a few other things to it, such as the alternate death and dying rules (which utilizes fort saves to resist death rather than percentiles), and I am looking to tweek sneak attack to fit in with the VP/WP system some.

I will be posting my full VP/WP rules shortly. Until then, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the matter; discuss the pros and the cons, your thoughts and feelings, and especially your experiances. One of my main goals as a DM and game tweeker is to make the game as realistic, but still as simple as possible. I feel VP/WP offers a way to make that more possible.

What do you think?

[CYMRO]

I am all in favor of more realistic combat.
I have considered VP/WP for Altvogge, but I have hesitated. I am interested in hering more from those with experience using.  Pro and con.

and I am looking to tweek sneak attack to fit in with the VP/WP system some.

Sneak attack and death attack both, if you use assassins.

I also wonder about the NPC thing.  

[Xeviat]

I'll kick it off then. You've heard my pros, so I don't really need to describe them in depth.

So, from my experiance using it, two main "cons" pop up. The first is that it is a new system which requires some learning; some players just aren't willing to learn anything new. Second, as a major house rule user, I've been forced to change things mid campaign, which throws a wrench in a few things. Third, combat is more deadly and random, which suposidly hurts the PCs (but I haven't seen the PCs offed by a single crit yet).

As for NPCs only getting WP, I don't do that. There is no way something can have a CR greater than 1 if it only has 10 hp and it's dead. I don't care how high it's BAB and AC are; NPCs with only WP are toasted by a single area affect spell.

[Lmns Crn]

I've been doing some thought experiments concerning VP/WP in DnD, but I have some good experience with the system as presented in Star Wars d20, which was my introduction to tabletop gaming.

I can answer about the NPC thing really quickly. Tougher, boss-type NPCs have vitality; cannon fodder types do not. This is designed to enable encounters that are numerically uneven, without having to water-down the enemies' levels. Think in terms of a party of four PCs facing off against two dozen orc soldiers, or a squadron of Stormtroopers, or otherwise outnumbered. Since the thugs have no VP, they drop like flies when they start taking damage, so the DM can plan that kind of combat using comparative-level NPCs that have the kinds of feats and attack bonuses and whatnot to challenge the PCs, but the battle's still "winnable."

So, in a way, the use of Vitality-less NPCs is a variant that makes combat a little less realistic, and a little more romanticized-- the whole point is the creation of disposable thugs for the PCs to dispatch in large quantities.

In terms of pros, you have the no-vitality-thugs option, should you choose to use it. You have a way for PCs to heal more quickly without relying on magical healing, because Vitality comes back pretty fast.

And as Xeviat points out, it provides a built in way to add some color and realism to combat. Taking VP damage is demonstrably different than WP damage in terms of what happens in-game, and the definition of VP damage as "damage you barely avoided" rather than "damage that just hit you" goes a long way to explain why a high-Con barbarian can get peppered with arrows and repeatedly sworded, without dying like it seems a normal person ought to after all that punishment.

Cons, for me, involve mainly little mechanics details. I got used to VP/WP in Star Wars before I moved on to fantasy genre DnD, and the latter is more complicated in terms of damage in combat. We have sneak attack, and spell damage, and magical healing, and nonlethal/subdual damage, and temporary hit points, and other things that make damage less straightforward. I'm a little hesitant to further complicate that by introducing VP/WP, though I expect I'd feel better about that if I could just address what happens to all those abovementioned effects under that system.

The other Con is that I've never liked what the standard-issue VP/WP system does to the crit ranges and multipliers of weapons that would otherwise threaten on a 20 and crit for x3 or more. If I want to crit more often, I'll swing a 1d8 longsword. If I want to crit more painfully, I'll swing a 1d8 warhammer, and cave in sternums with a x3 multiplier. VP/WP would make both weapons statistically identical (except that one's slashing and the other's bludgeoning, of course), and that's a little bit of fun, mechanical flavor that I'd be sad to see depart.

One thing that occurred to me is to leave the multipliers alone, and just count WP damage as a doubling. So, a weapon with a x2 multiplier does non-doubled damage to WP, like always. A weapon with a x3 multiplier does non-doubled damage to WP and another hit's worth of damage to VP. A weapon with a x4 multiplier would do non-doubled damage to WP and two hits worth of damage to VP when it hits. Note that this is not playtested; it's just my hypothetical musings.

Another potential con is the effect of spell crits in a VP/WP system. Since all spells that require attack rolls default to a 20/x2 critical threat/multiplier, and most have a pretty high damage, crits with them can be pretty painful. Take for example Scorching Ray, as a 2nd level spell, doing 4d6 WOUNDS damage (average: 14 points) when it crits. Assuming average damage, you need a 15 Con just to avoid dropping unconscious on the spot, even if that's your first hit in the fight. Even if you're a 20th level character (since your WP never increases unless your Con increases, or you take the Toughness feat.)

[CYMRO]

Even if you're a 20th level character (since your WP never increases unless your Con increases, or you take the Toughness feat.

Making Toughness add WP would seem to actually make that feat worthwhile.

One thing that occurred to me is to leave the multipliers alone, and just count WP damage as a doubling.

Seems logical on the surface.

[Lmns Crn]

Even if you're a 20th level character (since your WP never increases unless your Con increases, or you take the Toughness feat.

Making Toughness add WP would seem to actually make that feat worthwhile.

The way it's set up in SWd20 is that there are two similar feats, and each can be taken multiple times with stacking effects. Quickness adds 3 VP to your maximum, and Toughness adds 3 WP to your maximum.

So yeah, in a VP/WP system, Toughness is actually pretty useful, but Quickness is rather unimpressive.

[CYMRO]

So, what is the workable answer for sneak/death attack?
What aboot Smite?

[Lmns Crn]

So, what is the workable answer for sneak/death attack?
What aboot Smite?

A good question. I'd assume that both would go with the default treatment of large-damage attacks (i.e., taking off VP until all the VP are gone, then taking off WP with remaining damage.) There might be a few interesting workarounds, perhaps along the lines of one point of damage from every d6 of Sneak Attack bonus going directly to wounds damage. Haven't really thought too hard about that one yet, much less playtested it.

But now that you mention it, crit sneak attacks in a VP/WP system would kill people extrodinarily dead if the bonus d6's went to wounds damage. Difference in lethality is drastic, since under the normal system, sneak attack bonus damage is not multiplied when there's a critical hit. So maybe those bonus d6's should always do Vitality damage (unless the target has no VP left, of course) while the normal weapon damage goes to Wound damage upon a critical hit as normal.

Could be a general rule of thumb for VP/WP system crits: If it's doubled in a HP system, it goes to WP damage in a VP/WP system. If it's not doubled, it doesn't.

I have no familiarity with the assassin or death attack mechanics, but if they're modeled after sneak attack, I assume they'd be handled in the same way.

[Xeviat]

Luminous, thank you for the cons you posted, because those things are adressed in my variant. I will post the variant VP/WP additions I use (but I won't get into my alternate death and dying rules just yet).

[spoiler=sneak attack]The conclusion you came to is actually the generally accepted rule; if damage isn't normally multiplied in a critical, it goes to VP even on a crit. But something about a sneak attack (which creatures who are immune to critical hits are also immune to sneak attacks) doesn't sound like an attack that should do VP damage. An early, but simple solution that was presented to me was to remove all sneak attack dice, and replace them each with a cumulative +1 wp damage. So when you attack with a sneak attack, you do VP damage as normal, but also do some WP damage. Elven Doritos suggested changing this to +2 at first and having it go up by 2 at even levels starting at 4th (this way it starts off with enough oomph). But, brainface helped me to come up with another option: sneak attacks at first level deal VP damage and then provoke a fort save (DC 10 + 1/2 rogue level + Int mod); if the save fails, they take WP damage equal to the damage of the attack in addition to the VP damage. This means a rogue can kill with one hit, or pretty close. It will take some minor playtesting (for instance, they might need to deal additional damage dice or multipliers at higher levels for the ability to continue to scale appropriately), and perhaps rogues shouldn't be able to flank sneak attack with this (never liked it anyway). But it's something to think about.[/spoiler]
[spoiler=spell damage]In a VP/WP system, I think spells could be reworked to take the system into account. Since attack roll spells can crit, perhaps other spells should be able to "crit" too. For instance, if you toast someone with a fireball, and they roll a natural 1 on their save, you've critically hit them with the fireball. They would take normal vp damage, and perhaps 1 point of wp damage for every die of the effect. But, to keep things balanced, if someone rolls a natural 20 on a save vs. a fireball or other save for half effect, they instead take no effect. This has some ties in with evasion; evasion changes to "treat successes vs. reflex half effects as critical successes (thus taking no damage)" and improved evasion changes to "treat failures vs. reflex half effects as successes (thus taking half damage)" and a possible epic evasion will be "treat critical failures vs. reflex half effects as failures (or possibly successes)". Thus, any damage dealing spell can crit. But, in defense of scorching ray, which deals an average of 14 damage as you stated, a fighter could be dealing 14 damage at 3rd level anyway (2d6 is 7 damage, +3 str, +1 enhancement ... you just need another 3 damage from power attack or another source; at 4th level it's even easier).[/spoiler]
[spoiler=magical healing]UA already changed cure spells. The dice cured heals vp, and the caster level cured heals wp. I'll need to adress this in my MP system when I get around to it, though.[/spoiler]
[spoiler=nonlethal/subdual damage]In the UA system, there is no such thing as nonlethal damage; I don't like that. In my system, nonlethal damage attacks affect VP normally, but if you crit with one you deal nonlethal damage. When nonlethal damage matchs your current WP, you are staggered; when it exceeds, you're unconscious (unless you have diehard, in which case you're still limited to a standard action).[/spoiler]
[spoiler=temporary hit points] Only one other person has brought up temp. hp in a WP system to me before, so kudos. I'm assuming your problem with it is the fact that temp HP doesn't protect you at all from a critical hit. I solved this by stating that temp HP protects against all damage, be it VP or WP. If you crit, you'll take a chunk of their temp HP off.[/spoiler]
[spoiler=crit ranges and multipliers of weapons]=) This is my favorite. Your solution is one that's often proposed, but it isn't balanced; it's actually making axes and picks weaker. Here is my solution: when you roll a hit, you deal vp damage, even if the hit is a critical threat. If you confirm your critical threat, then you also deal wp damage. With that in place, 20/x3 and 20/x4 weapons can safely become 20/x2 and 20/x3 weapons, dealing double or triple damage to wounds on a critical hit. An axe wound simply hurts, and a pick wound does horrible things to your insides. Here's why it's balanced: On average, a longsword will threat twice as often as an axe, but the axe will deal twice as much wp damage on a crit. The reason I had to add vp damage on a crit was because without it, axes and picks were dealing more vp damage on average, but the same wp damage on average. I've tested this in game; axe and pick (and worse, greataxe and scythe) wounds typically kill (though again, I have alternate death rules that give PCs a chance to survive horrible injuries), but rapiers wear opponents down quickly (because of the fatigue).[/spoiler]

Here is one other rule I've added: When your VP reaches 0, you are fatigued. Fatigued is changed to apply a -2 penalty to all ability scores, and you can't charge or run. When you take 1 point of WP damage, you're fatigued as well. When your WP reaches 0, you're exhausted. Exhausted is changed to apply a -6 penalty to all ability scores, and limits you to a single standard action.

How do all of those changes affect the system in your mind? Again, I've been playing with this for some time now, and I haven't had my PCs haven't had any horrible accidents yet (in fact, the dualist character has taken muliple opponents out with single hits, and the vp/wp system is making her have a ton of fun).

[CYMRO]

Elven Doritos suggested changing this to +2 at first and having it go up by 2 at even levels starting at 4th (this way it starts off with enough oomph). But, brainface helped me to come up with another option: sneak attacks at first level deal VP damage and then provoke a fort save (DC 10 + 1/2 rogue level + Int mod); if the save fails, they take WP damage equal to the damage of the attack in addition to the VP damage

At the moment, I think I like Eldo's idea, or a variation thereof, better.
Brainy's idea, or a variation, seems like it would fit death attack better.

I agree with you on keeping nonlethal damage.

Temp hit points seem to become a powreful combat factor.

The whole crit thing is definitely the weevil in the cabbage to me.

[CYMRO]

So, when statting classes using VP/WP, do you replace the term hit die with vitality die?

Reworking spells and powers could be a headache, yes?

[Xeviat]

Spell reworking would be a synch to me.

And I believe you would call them vitality dice. I don't use the term VP in my house games, we just call them HP and WP; but by the rules you can't change the definition of HP (the d20 rules), so you have to call it VP in official stuff.

Death attack is simply save or die, not save or have a chance of dying. Eldo's has it's strengths (such as being easily added to the game), but I still don't think that +2 WP damage is effective enough at first level.

For instance, in the current rules, a 1st level rogue can kill a first level warrior with one hit. The 1st level rogue will deal around 1d6 (shortsword) + 1d6 (sneak attack) + 1 (str) with a sneak attack, for a total of 8 damage on average. The 1st level warrior has 5 hp on average since their first HD isn't maximized.

On the other hand, that same 1st level warrior will have 10 WP. Even having sneak attack go straight to WP with a save, you're still only looking at 2 to 7 damage with my earlier example, for an average of 5.5 damage. It still isn't that deadly.

[CYMRO]

Eldo's has it's strengths (such as being easily added to the game), but I still don't think that +2 WP damage is effective enough at first level.

Maybe changing sneak attack to 1d6 WP + 1/rogue level?

[CYMRO]

So, as far as crits are concerned...

Rather than changing all the weapon stats aboot, would it not make more sense to leave all crit ranges and multipliers alone.  Then, if a crit is confirmed all that normal multiplied damage that a weapon traditionally does would be VP.  In addition, a normal damage roll is made for said weapon, and that damage is sliced off of WP.
Does that make sense?

[Raelifin]

In my early days of studying the vp/wp system I thought the same things as you three. Eventually I decided on a variant that kept all hitpoint totals the same, all weapon damage and criticals the same but keeping the idea that a stab wound is deadly to most characters. All you need to do is have hitpoints gained at level 2 and above have the flavor of vitality points. If you guys want, I'll put some focus on including a more detailed explanation of the hitpoint variant on my site.