The Synergy Workshop

[Polycarp]

Development Decisions IV

Inevitably, a combat system is needed.  There are a few important considerations here.

On Combat

First and foremost, this is a skill system; combat should be treated as a skill.  This is often not the case '" d20 and TRoS, despite their many, many differences, both use mechanics for combat that are completely different from their (non-weapon) skills.  The result can be somewhat disjointed, and in any case the idea of synergy bonuses requires that we integrate physical combat stuff (melee fighting, wrestling, etc.) with physical non-combat stuff (jumping, swimming).  If combat wasn't in the skill system it would destroy Synergy's most basic and integral mechanic.

That said, I think it's inevitable that combat skills are going to be more detailed and with more special rules than most other skills in any system that's not completely ultra-rules-lite.  Not that there's anything wrong with that '" but I imagine Synergy as ideally being sort of rules-medium.  CJ has a lot of odd weapons, weird poisons, and crazy fantasy armors (bark, spider silk, etc.), and I want that to be reflected in the rules.  Iskites can re-grow limbs, and I want that in the rules too.  I want a combat system that edges closer to TRoS, but isn't as meticulously simulationist and doesn't require an entirely different mechanic.

What we currently have is an opposed skill mechanic.  When two characters fight, they roll Melee Combat (or whatever).  Were this a normal skill, whoever had the highest number would win.  The major problem here is a lack of player choice.  We are dangerously close to d20 fighter territory ('I attack it with my sword.  Miss.  I attack it with my sword.  Hit.  I attack'¦').  We could solve this through combat actions '" maneuvers, feats, special moves, and other such things.  I haven't ruled that out yet, but I prefer to have some choice at the core of the system rather than just piling a bunch of maneuvers on top of it.

My Wager

My experience with The Riddle of Steel has made me a fan of the idea of having to choose between offense and defense.  In TRoS, you have a set number of dice in your dice pool for an entire round (which consists of two exchanges), and you must allocate those dice between attacks, defenses, and other special maneuvers.  Putting too much on an attack can be risky, because if it fails, you'll have precious little to defend with on the next exchange.  The 'Combat Wager' is a simpler arrangement that tries to preserve the same trade-off with a different mechanism.

That said, I'm not necessarily set on the wager system - it's just the idea that I like the most right now.  Combat probably requires the most playtesting of any part of a system, because if it's broken the results can be very discouraging to a player.  I've resisted putting too many concrete numbers in for this reason: I could put up a table for the exact modifiers that range and movement gives to the ranged attack TN, or examples of different grades of cover, but these things can always be done later once I'm sure the wager system is something I want to keep.

The Big Caveat

The most glaring drawback to the wager system is that our system is no longer zero-able anywhere.  When all you have to do is win an opposed roll, it doesn't matter if your respective modifier is -20 or +200 as long as the relative distance between your modifier and the opponent's is the same.  Once we start wagering points, however, we are now compelled to make sure characters have positive modifiers (because you can't wager negative numbers, and if your roll result is zero or less you aren't making an attack at all).

This is a bit unfortunate, but it simply means that I have to consider where I want zero to fall.  It may be that with this mechanic it is no longer realistic to start human-ish creatures at +0 for every attribute.  Maybe such creatures should start with, say, all attributes at +1 - this helps us ensure that most characters will easily have at least one point to spend in combat (barring extremely bad luck).

Damage and Wounding

Of course, the biggest omission here is damage.  The combat system at present is all about how one scores a hit - but what happens once that hit is scored?  That, I'm afraid, is something for another day.

[Polycarp]

Taking another look at Combat and Damage

I do like the combat system at present, though it's a little different from what I've seen before and might come off as a bit intimidating just because of the guesswork involved in the whole wager mechanic.  We shall see.

I've been beating my head against the wall trying to figure out a wound/damage system I liked.  On the one hand, I'm a fan of how TRoS does it (I'm more of a fan of the wounding than the combat itself '" combat in TRoS, with all the maneuvers, tends to require more of a time and research investment than I actually want to make).  On the other, I've been worried that a TRoS-like system might be too complex in comparison to the rest of the ruleset.

After some thinking and chatting, I think I'm leaning towards implementing something very much like TRoS '" but not the regular version.  TRoS also has a free 'Quickstart' version for introducing people to the game, which features simpler mechanics.  What's most relevant is that the Quickstart TRoS damage table is just that '" a table '" as opposed to several pages of them.  Regular TRoS specifies wounds and damage for different damage types and dice tables for hitting different parts of the body depending on what the angle/direction of your blow is; Quickstart TRoS just asks where you are attacking (which body part, as opposed to which vector in space your weapon is moving along).

For those of you who haven't played the system, wounds in TRoS cause three main effects.  Shock is a one-round penalty immediately caused by taking a wound, Pain is a long-term penalty that can only be healed over time, and Blood Loss is 'health damage' that can kill you if you accumulate enough of it.

The Health Problem

Speaking of 'health damage,' I'm not really satisfied with my current Health mechanic.  The problem came up when I was thinking about poisons.  In most systems, you roll to resist poisons based on your physical constitution; Synergy, at present, has no such attribute.  The reason it doesn't have such an attribute is because there are no skills associated with it '" stamina might make you a better runner, but there isn't anything you can 'do' with health.

That means that health, or whatever you want to call it, has to be a separate mechanic, as it currently exists.  But it's not actually something you can make a check with, so how do we do poison and disease resistance rolls?  In addition, since it can't advance by the same system other attributes to (by taking skill points), how do we decide who is more fit/resistant than others?

I'm thinking the answer might be some sort of derived attribute.  I mean, people who are more physically fit have stronger immune systems, and might be more resistant to physical harm and poisons as well.  Maybe Str+Sta or something like that; none of the other attributes are relevant to physical health at all.

[Nomadic]

Health as designed in most RP systems is what in real life is composed of a persons physical fitness combined with their willpower. No clue if that helps you at all.

[Superfluous Crow]

I think in most instances that poison will have the same effect on different people. Resisting poison like it's usually done in DnD is fairly unlikely. So you could have poison effects be more inevitable. Perhaps use stamina to keep yourself conscious and alive (I'd say that was a physical exertion) until someone gives you the antidote or otherwise cures you of the ailment. This approach doesn't really help with disease I'll admit.
For wounds, I'd say that having to use tables in game every time someone is hit will take up a lot of time. Alternatively, you could pose some generic penalties during combat, and if severe enough wounds are dealt you can roll on a table when the wounds are inspected later. For instance, you take a warhammer to the chest and is dazed, taking penalties, but you keep on fighting. After the battle comes to an end the medic inspects your wound and the generic penalty instead becomes the penalty associated with "Broken Ribs" for instance. (this is the way Incapacitating Wounds are handled in Unhallowed Metropolis)

[Polycarp]

I think in most instances that poison will have the same effect on different people. Resisting poison like it's usually done in DnD is fairly unlikely. So you could have poison effects be more inevitable. Perhaps use stamina to keep yourself conscious and alive (I'd say that was a physical exertion) until someone gives you the antidote or otherwise cures you of the ailment. This approach doesn't really help with disease I'll admit.

For wounds, I'd say that having to use tables in game every time someone is hit will take up a lot of time. Alternatively, you could pose some generic penalties during combat, and if severe enough wounds are dealt you can roll on a table when the wounds are inspected later. For instance, you take a warhammer to the chest and is dazed, taking penalties, but you keep on fighting. After the battle comes to an end the medic inspects your wound and the generic penalty instead becomes the penalty associated with "Broken Ribs" for instance. (this is the way Incapacitating Wounds are handled in Unhallowed Metropolis)[/quote]
I took a look at Unhallowed Metropolis and the differences don't seem that great - even in UM you still need to look at how severe the damage is (scratch, flesh, serious, incapacitating) and where the damage is inflicted (e.g. a hit to the leg makes you roll to avoid being knocked down), the same two pieces of information used on the TRoS quickstart damage table.  UM damage is more standardized, which is probably good, but I'm not as fond of the idea of calculating penalties after the fact.  I'm sure it speeds up combat, but combat is also designed to be fairly lethal and short, so the use of a table may not be too much of a delay.

I'm going to look more at UM and take it under consideration, so thanks for bringing it up.

[Superfluous Crow]

I see your point; I'm not saying that UM is the smoothest system ever or that the after-the-fact penalties won't cause complications (e.g. you are in a battle and is disoculated or get your throat slit but continue through the fight until somebody reminds you that you are blind or bleeding to death). But it does keep the in-combat rules few and easy to remember; if the combat is meant to be fast and visceral, looking up a table everytime someone is hit would only hurt that tone. That is, unless you can condense the damage table to a single table so you can employ it in a fast cheat-sheet-like way. Having to flip through a book everytime someone suffers a hit is a pain in my opinion (granted, I can't remember how much space the quickstart TROS damage table takes up, so this might be a superfluous argument).
An interesting idea for health (probably not useful though) would be to make it the average of all your abilities; in a way, most of your abilities could describe some kind of death resistance.
Strength, stamina and coordination are all aspects of physical prowess and bodily health; how well-trained and powrrful your body is. Perception, aptitude, and cunning all contribute to willpower and awareness; the ability to perceive, analyze, and face the situation head on. Charm might in a way either symbolize some kind of personal force of character, a lust for life, or it might simply be a sort of stubbornness allowing you to hang in there and perhaps convince yourself somewhat that you aren't dying. Probably not a useful approach as I said, but thought I'd bring it up.

EDIT: I remember one issue I had with the wager in a lethal system like tRoS: it was not worth it. Whenever you were faced with an enemy you would be an idiot not to put at least half your dice into defense unless you were fighting a particularly inept individual. In effect, being hit just once is so damn painful to your character that relaxing on the defense can only end badly. I like the wager, but this is an issue you should probably find a way around. Perhaps less lethality or some kind of backup defense or loss of advantage instead of instead dismemberment ^^  

[Polycarp]

So I've posted a damage/wound system.  It ended up looking a little less like TRoS than I originally thought, and there aren't any tables involved (though certainly the information could be put into a table if players found that to be easier).  It's a bit more forgiving than TRoS; the initial shock isn't nearly as bad as TRoS's steep penalties, and level one wounds are not nearly as bad.  I ended up putting the "fatal" level of wounds at level 5, like TRoS does, but that's a bit tentative - it could be shifted upwards if necessary.

CC, I do understand the idea of people being risk-averse when the stakes are higher, and to some extent that's a good thing - I've had plenty of experiences with players in other systems who never worried about going all-out until their hit points were perilously low, and I like the idea of actually caring about your defense from the start of a fight.  Whether the stakes are too high or not I think is something that won't really be known until I actually do some testing.

I think your idea about Health is very interesting, but I'm reluctant to do that here because Breath already relies on all attributes.  Though naturally more experienced characters will tend to have higher derived attributes as well, I want to avoid a situation in which characters necessarily have both a high Breath and Health.

[Nomadic]

Chiming in a bit late but anyhow... on the poison thing I am in agreement in that it should be more inevitable. Saves shouldn't cure poison, simply weaken it's effect until the next save.

In the case of a serious poison that doesn't go away until death or cure the save simple prolongs life so there is more chance for a cure to be administered (if the poison causes constant damage a save might temporarily shut it off or reduce the amount). Meanwhile with a less serious poison that has the chance to go away over time the save can keep them going until the poison wears off (reduce temporary penalties).

[Polycarp]

I'm of the same opinion, Nomadic.

I was thinking that poisoning could rely on two checks.  The first would be a check made ahead of time by the poison's creator to see how potent it is (since that can vary quite a bit, especially without modern instruments).  That will determine how far the poison progresses and how fast.  The second check, a Health check made by the target, will be capable of modifying the poison's spread, but not how lethal it will eventually be.

[Superfluous Crow]

How does blood loss work for wounds taken to already damaged limbs and areas? The wound imparts no penalty by itself, but does it impart blood loss?
Also, when is blood loss rolled for? Right after getting hit? Otherwise the most common forms of death will be suddenly keeping over, exsanguinated, or having one's head chopped off (players tend to go for the head when they have a chance of hitting it). There'll be a lot of severed heads :P
Maybe you should refrain from mentioning actual severing, and just say that it is ruined and death ensues and occasionally describe how the head is severed from the body.
Also, bludgeoning weapons should get some credit; they yield less blood loss and result in no advantages when going for winding or knockout. Also, I'm not sure an arrow to the intestines would result in winding? But it's a nice addition; after all, it's often seen in movies and such.
otherwise it seems rather solid.

[Polycarp]

How does blood loss work for wounds taken to already damaged limbs and areas? The wound imparts no penalty by itself, but does it impart blood loss?

Also, when is blood loss rolled for? Right after getting hit? Otherwise the most common forms of death will be suddenly keeping over, exsanguinated, or having one's head chopped off (players tend to go for the head when they have a chance of hitting it). There'll be a lot of severed heads :P[/quote]not[/i] do this is hopefully going to be the reason people didn't always do this historically - because, the value of the head being what it is, the head was frequently the best protected part.  Plenty of soldiers in history wore a helmet as their only piece of real armor (partially because it was also generally a lot cheaper than body armor).  Wise players (and NPCs) will realize this, and hopefully have to make a choice between striking the tempting but better-armored head vs. the less "squishy" but more poorly protected limbs.

Maybe you should refrain from mentioning actual severing, and just say that it is ruined and death ensues and occasionally describe how the head is severed from the body.

Also, bludgeoning weapons should get some credit; they yield less blood loss and result in no advantages when going for winding or knockout.[/quote]Also, I'm not sure an arrow to the intestines would result in winding? But it's a nice addition; after all, it's often seen in movies and such.[/quote]Possibly not, though I can't help but think that getting shot anywhere in the torso is going to make breathing significantly more painful.  I could make it so piercing/slashing weapons only do winding to the chest, but I'm a bit wary of putting too many caveats in the system.

Thanks for the great feedback.  I'll be working on this some more soon, though probably not until next month, as I'm leaving shortly for a bit of vacation.

[Ghostman]

As for the "going for the head" problem, I don't have any problem with it; we humans, at least, have a long tradition of going for the face/neck.

The reason that players might not do this is hopefully going to be the reason people didn't always do this historically - because, the value of the head being what it is, the head was frequently the best protected part.  Plenty of soldiers in history wore a helmet as their only piece of real armor (partially because it was also generally a lot cheaper than body armor).  Wise players (and NPCs) will realize this, and hopefully have to make a choice between striking the tempting but better-armored head vs. the less "squishy" but more poorly protected limbs.

If you're going to allow characters to target specific body parts, you might find it useful to somehow represent the creation of openings in one's defense throughout combat. Through my (admittedly meager) experience of sparring I've learned that it can be very difficult to protect your whole body at all times, especially when you're yourself making attacks. It's just a matter of time before some opening in your defense manifests, either through your own mistake or because of your opponent forcing you to block and dodge in a way that will result in one.

Perhaps characters could make a roll at the beginning of each round to determine which part they're failing to guard fully. Attacks to that bodypart would be easier to hit for that round. Higher results on the roll could represent optimal defense, where you don't present any easily exploitable openings.

[Nomadic]

How does blood loss work for wounds taken to already damaged limbs and areas? The wound imparts no penalty by itself, but does it impart blood loss?

That's not how bleeding out works :P

[Polycarp]

That's not how bleeding out works :P

wounds[/i] so much as wound states; if your arm is wounded to L3, a subsequent wound at L2 doesn't make the situation much worse.

[Drizztrocks]

This is really cool. It makes sense the way you did it, and i've always wanted a way for characters to be able to train in their skill to increase their level, or something like that. Anyway, good job.