Called Shot system [Archive] - Wizards Community

Called Shot system [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Rntaboy
05-31-05, 05:36 PM I found this system written by Al Souza
Called Shots

When a player, or monster, wants to make a called shot he should state it before the combat begins. The player states which of his attacks will be used for the called shots. The DM then determines the difficulty of the attack and applies a penalty to the attack roll.

Easy: -2, examples are hitting an opponent's shield, tearing a shirt with a "Zorro" mark, hitting an arm or leg for no special effect.

Moderate: -4, spit in the face, hitting the leg for reduced movement, breaking a potion on their belt.

Difficult: -8, hitting a hand making it useless, knocking off a helmet, slashing off armor straps, kick in the groin.

Rediculous: -12, decapitation, put out an eye, stake through the heart, using your sword as a tongue depressor.

The attacker must then roll a successful critical hit to have the called strike go through. He would forfeit his 2x, 3x, 4x damage for the special effect, but if the effect is to decapitate then it would be better than the multiple damage dice. DMs should use these rules with caution. Be sure to give the appropriate penalty for the called shot. Remeber they must first roll the threat range and then hit the opponent. Penalties apply to both rolls.
Is it really going to break combat if you remove the "must score a critical" line? I think simply increasing the penalty to hit is better, and would allow people a better opportunity to do something really cool and cinematic at a desired time. This would make it easier to do cool stuff against easier targets with lower AC, but keep it fairly diffcult to connect with a called shot against a challenging opponent. I think I would make the "Decapitation" and "Stake through the heart" called shots require a critical because they are basically instant death. Any thoughts?
Rntaboy
05-31-05, 09:17 PM Anybody?
Thorak
05-31-05, 09:28 PM Yes, removing the critical requirement without, at the very least, tripling those penalties and limiting a successful called shot to non-natural-20s is overpowered.

I'd even say that with the critical requirement, it's overpowered. It's not that hard to critical on a 15-20 (18-20 weapon, Improved Critical or Keen), and that means you've got a 1/4 chance of confirming instant kills on low-AC opponents.

The one time a DM allowed called shots in 3.5, the ranger found an Arrow of True Strike that never lost its charm. One enemy died in the first round of every combat, the most menacing looking one. And that was given a -16 to hit them in the eye or throat. It was ridiculous, until he finally botched and rolled a 1. Part of that was the problem of the arrow, but the other was that critical hit systems that allow for instant kills, or even increased damage, are going to unbalance the campaign.

Besides, just wait till your DM uses it against you. 40 archers, all trying to shoot your PCs in the eye. That's gonna suck.
Rntaboy
05-31-05, 09:43 PM I'm approaching this from a DM's perspective, and thinking about implementing a system like this in my game. I guess that because I don't play with people who are munchkins, and who play for the enjoyment of the pure game, and not to see how badass of a broken character they can make, I really don't see room for such tremendous abuse as Thorak spoke of. I want to allow my players to do the cool stuff they think of, and have it actually have some effect in the game. Here's an example:
I have a player with a Halfling Barbarian/Bear Warrior named Bagwaggle Strongflick. He is as chaotic as chaotic can get, and some of his favorite things to go in a rage are headbutt and flick male adversaries between their legs. I would really like to allow his player to perform a called shot for these types of attacks, and it to have some sort of effect on the guy who got headbutted.
Thorak
05-31-05, 11:04 PM I'm approaching this from a DM's perspective, and thinking about implementing a system like this in my game. I guess that because I don't play with people who are munchkins, and who play for the enjoyment of the pure game, and not to see how badass of a broken character they can make, I really don't see room for such tremendous abuse as Thorak spoke of. I want to allow my players to do the cool stuff they think of, and have it actually have some effect in the game. Here's an example:
I have a player with a Halfling Barbarian/Bear Warrior named Bagwaggle Strongflick. He is as chaotic as chaotic can get, and some of his favorite things to go in a rage are headbutt and flick male adversaries between their legs. I would really like to allow his player to perform a called shot for these types of attacks, and it to have some sort of effect on the guy who got headbutted.
Potential abuse, without even getting complicated;
Level 2+ bard, with a Keen rapier. Casts True Strike on himself, then get's a +8 to stab someone through the eye/throat for an instant kill.

True Strike makes any mere penalty to hit absolutely laughable if it's less than -20.

As for Bagwaggle, just have him make unarmed strikes (which both those moves would be considered), and flavour accordingly. It won't do any more damage, but that's because it's assumed you're trying to hit vulnerable spots like that anyway, and they're trying to not let you. It's already built into the system.

Really want him to be hitting people in uncomfortable places? Suggest he take levels in Rogue or some other Sneak Attack class.
Mellowship Slinky
06-01-05, 12:14 AM Gee ... if only there was a feat that let you take penalties to your attack roll in order to get a bonus to your damage ...

gee...
Deviston
06-01-05, 12:46 AM Or just take out True Strike.

*tang* *shnick* *PFST!* fizzle fizzle fizzle . . . slither slither slither

Oh shat . . . worms. . .

::END SUBSCRIPTION::
Thorak
06-01-05, 02:00 AM Gee ... if only there was a feat that let you take penalties to your attack roll in order to get a bonus to your damage ...

gee...
Your point? Taking -12 to have a 1/4 chance of instantly killing a Great Wyrm Red Dragon with a 1st level spell is a heck of a lot different than using a feat to get +12 damage for the same penalty.
Nitneuq Onitnarat
06-01-05, 08:21 AM Your point? Taking -12 to have a 1/4 chance of instantly killing a Great Wyrm Red Dragon with a 1st level spell is a heck of a lot different than using a feat to get +12 damage for the same penalty.

An arrow in the eye wouldn't kill a Wyrm [/irrelevant]
d_nychus
06-01-05, 09:16 AM An arrow in the eye wouldn't kill a Wyrm [/irrelevant]

I think decapitation and a stake through the heart would, though.

At high levels, with huge attack bonuses along with BAB and Strength, this system is just plain dumb. EVERYONE will be taking a -12 to hit, using a wide crit ranged weapon, and just pumping up every attack bonus they can think of, because of the instant kill. It makes weapons with a 20/x3 and 20/x4 absolutely useless. It would break the game.

Never trust a system made by someone who misspells 'ridiculous.'
Will Brandiman
06-01-05, 09:49 AM Called shots pop up every few weeks on this board and are generally shot down in a matter of hours because the idea runs contrary to the entire d20 system. Anytime a player says "I aim for his head" you should just answer with "Well what have you been aiming for the rest of the time?" and administer a beating with the +1 Munchkin Bane greatclub.
tarkin
06-01-05, 11:14 AM D20 has LOTS of called shots systems already.

I will name a few of the more popular ones. Ones with * can be done by anyone with no training, or just by taking a feat.

Sneak Attack (to the vitals)
Power Attack feat* (to the vitals)
Trip* (to the legs)
Sunder* (to the weapon)
Disarm* (to the wrist)
Monk's Stun (to the head)
Assasin's Death attack (to the vitals)
Hamstring feat (sneak attack to the ankle)
Arterial Strike feat (Sneak attack to the arteries)
Coup De Grace* (to the vitals)

This list is partial, there are many others. The key things is that all of these called shot systems are REASONABLE and fair, not "I win the battle simply cause I can cast True Strike" and if they kill/remove you from battle, it takes a LOT of work/special sitatuions, not just a single round.
Rntaboy
06-01-05, 11:33 AM I stated in my first post that post that called shots that would result in instant death would require a critical hit for the instant kill to occur. And a DM could easily say that a called shot cannot be executed while under the effects of a true strike spell. I would really like to be able to tell my halfing friend that everytime he headbutts an opponent, the opponent may be dazed (has to make a Fort), or if he flicks an opponent below the belt, that opponent my be stunned.
tarkin
06-01-05, 01:39 PM A critical hit is laughable low requirement (Improved Critical anyone?). Look at the deadly called shot systems above. Death Attack: 3 rounds of waiting Coup De Grace: make them helpless first Those are the kinds of things that are reasonable. Criticals are not. Even with an expensive magic item, Vorpal requires a natural 20, not a "critical".

------------------

And the idea of outlawing True Strike demonstrates ignorance. We used True Strike as an example to prove it is a bad idea in general, not as 'the' reason not to do it. It is not that particular spell that is the problem it is the silly idea that a mere penalty to hit is sufficient balance for an ability that powerfull. The game is set up so that hitting is relatively easy to do, especailly on your first of several blows. Power Attack is FAIR. a -1 to hit results in upto a +2 to damage, not any of this super debilitating crap.

You want a stunning effect? Fine. Take STUNNING FIST. You don't even have to be a monk to take it:

STUNNING FIST [GENERAL]
Prerequisites: Dex 13, Wis 13, Improved Unarmed Strike, base attack bonus +8.

You don't like those particular pre-reqs? OK, make up a similar feat, BUT DON'T GRANT IT WEAKER PRE-REQS. It is perfectly OK to modify the pre-reqs, but the ability you describe clearly has an established power level, which you should stick to. Removing the requirement to take the feat is munchkinism, let alone make it very easy to take it.

Here, I will make up a similar feat with reasonable power level, designed for a Cleric instead of a Monk:

STUNNING MACE [GENERAL]
Prerequisites: Dex 13, Wis 13, Weapon Focus (any Bludgeoning weapon), Heal 11 ranks)
[/quote]

As Stunning Fist but may only be used with a Bludgeoning weapon the character has Weapon Focus in.

In game explanation: your character uses your knowledge of the body to allow you to stun someone with a blunt weapon.
Mellowship Slinky
06-01-05, 01:52 PM Your point? Taking -12 to have a 1/4 chance of instantly killing a Great Wyrm Red Dragon with a 1st level spell is a heck of a lot different than using a feat to get +12 damage for the same penalty.

That's exatly my point: power attack allows you to add 2 damage for 1 attack bonus (if two-handing)

If you take a -12 and critically hit with a scythe, you'll do 48 extra damage, the scythe will add in an extra (minimum) 8 damage, bringing your damage to 56.

Meaning that (in this specific case) with nothing but a (nonmagical) scythe, a +12 BAB and the power attack feat, on a roll of 20 you force a save vs massive damage, guaranteed.

Chance of insta-kill? check!

Make a feat called "precision attack" that allows you to take a minus to hit for a plus to damage with light and ranged weapons but has a requirement of 15 or so dex and (maybe) 5-8 ranks in spot, and you're allowing anyone who wants to to make "called shots" through either power attack or precision attack.

If they want to do some of the other effects? Well there are a bunch of class abilities/magic items that do such things.
Rntaboy
06-01-05, 02:06 PM Even with an expensive magic item, Vorpal requires a natural 20, not a "critical".

But you get the chance to decapitate with every swing of a vorpal weapon, with a called shot the effects only apply if the player states he is using a called shot for said attack. So in actuality, the number of times you can expect to see this happening is very low. Also, if you miss with the called shot, your attack doesn't connect, and does no damage. Let us consider these things.
The Gunslinger
06-01-05, 06:12 PM My players and I have talked about called shots now and again, and the one thing that puts a big stop to it is ... if you're gonna allow it, monsters should be allowed to do it too. Dragons, giants, high level NPC's ... DM's can make their pets cast true strike and make called shots to necks too.
Will Brandiman
06-02-05, 09:31 AM I would really like to be able to tell my halfing friend that everytime he headbutts an opponent, the opponent may be dazed (has to make a Fort), or if he flicks an opponent below the belt, that opponent my be stunned. Then tell him that his opponent is doubled over in agony after the below-the-belt strike. Tell him that his nose has just been splattered across his face when the headbutt landed and is now pouring blood. Just don't give it an in-game effect! The D20 combat system already assumes that all combatants are going for the vital areas of the enemy. It is also assumed that the enemy is guarding those vital areas. Any called shot system requires a complete reworking of the entire combat system, right down to the most basic levels of AC and hit points. It's unnecessary.
Rntaboy
06-02-05, 02:41 PM Then tell him that his opponent is doubled over in agony after the below-the-belt strike. Tell him that his nose has just been splattered across his face when the headbutt landed and is now pouring blood. Just don't give it an in-game effect! The D20 combat system already assumes that all combatants are going for the vital areas of the enemy. It is also assumed that the enemy is guarding those vital areas. Any called shot system requires a complete reworking of the entire combat system, right down to the most basic levels of AC and hit points. It's unnecessary.
Okay, so guy who is doubled over in pain is still 100% combat effective?
Cadfan
06-02-05, 02:51 PM Yes.

Its an abstraction.

It may seem unrealistic that someone would be "struck heavily in the stomache with your mace, causing him to double up in pain" and then immediately the guy recovers and fights back, but is that really worse than "you hit him for 38 points of damage," and then the guy immediately attacks back?
Beamup
06-02-05, 03:01 PM You're making the mistaken assumption that, just because you tried to do this, he's doubled over in pain and incapacitated.

Any of several things might happen if you try such a move:

1. You hit your target, and hurt him a lot, but he's pumped up on adrenaline and fights through the pain. (Takes damage, still above 0 HP.)

2. You tried to get in the solid blow, but it wasn't quite as good as you'd hoped, and it doesn't do that much. (Takes damage, still above 0 HP, alternate description.)

3. You hit him good, and he doubles over in pain, but manages to straighten up enough to deflect your followup blow. (Takes damage, still above 0 HP, alternate description.)

4. You got in a good solid hit, and he's incapacitated by the pain. (Took damage dropping him to 0 HP.)

5. You know how to hit somebody to temporarily incapacitate them, and did it. He's doubled up unable to act. (You had Stunning Fist and used it successfully.)

The result of an attack is dictated by the rules, not what you wanted it to do. If the rules say he's still combat-capable, then he's not doubled up in pain long enough to take advantage of it.
Bruunwald
06-02-05, 03:03 PM It's a game. It's not life-and-death. If someone wants to get gonzo with their game, let them, for crying out loud. How does it hurt you people and how does it harm your precious, well-worshiped rulebooks?

Here's my called shot system:

Decide the size category of the target area. Add a bonus from this table to the target combatant's overall AC based on the size category:

Small +4
Tiny +8
Diminutive +12
Fine +16

If the hit is successful, add the same modifier to the weapon's damage roll. The benefit of this is it allows for possible kills on critical hits without making them in any way a certainty. Plus, if the attack roll misses, it misses entirely, even if it would otherwise have been a hit under normal circumstances, thus discouraging the rule's overuse.

Apply rules on dealing non-lethal damage normally.

You don't HAVE to allow the villains the use of it, in any case. It depends on what sort of game you are playing. But if you do, it's just a heightened challenge.

And again, who cares if he wants a table rule to make his game more interesting? He's not in your game, is he?
Lord Schpungus
06-02-05, 06:16 PM There's another name for your called shot system, Bruunwald. It's called Power Attack, and it has an additional limitation - your Base Attack. I liked what you did, until I realized all you did was rename Power Attack.
Vahenir
06-02-05, 06:51 PM The Book of Iron Might and Torn Asunder both have called shot rules. They don't require a Critical Hit to be scored.. but they -do- impose HUGE penalties on any attempted called shot. And I mean -huge- penalties.
Will Brandiman
06-03-05, 04:49 AM Okay, so guy who is doubled over in pain is still 100% combat effective? Was going to reply but see that Cadfan got there first and said pretty much everything that I would have.
Ariarig
06-03-05, 11:36 AM One more time today, I agree with you Tarkin... What a wisdom ! :)

I also find Will Brandiman very fair when he says that Anytime a player says "I aim for his head" you should just answer with "Well what have you been aiming for the rest of the time?"

In combat, I guess that every time you try hitting your foes, you try to cause the most lethal blow. It is so, a "called shot"... You miss the eye or the heart, not because you made it intentionally or forgot to explain your DM you aim this particular vital area, but just because you did not hurt enough to reach your goal... I would add to the very well made list of tarkin that every critical is a successful called shot. It is just the DM work to give such a cinematic flavor... Each time a warrior scores a critical, which represents enough damage generally to kill any common guy in the street, it is the result of a successful called shot and the DM can describe it as a headcutting, or a precise blow right in the heart...

If there is no "called shot" system in your D&D edition, it is probably not because someone up there, forgot to intoduce it, but because it has already been included in every part of the game, from sneak attack to feats...

:looloo:

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Rntaboy 05-31-05, 05:36 PM	I found this system written by Al Souza Called Shots When a player, or monster, wants to make a called shot he should state it before the combat begins. The player states which of his attacks will be used for the called shots. The DM then determines the difficulty of the attack and applies a penalty to the attack roll. Easy: -2, examples are hitting an opponent's shield, tearing a shirt with a "Zorro" mark, hitting an arm or leg for no special effect. Moderate: -4, spit in the face, hitting the leg for reduced movement, breaking a potion on their belt. Difficult: -8, hitting a hand making it useless, knocking off a helmet, slashing off armor straps, kick in the groin. Rediculous: -12, decapitation, put out an eye, stake through the heart, using your sword as a tongue depressor. The attacker must then roll a successful critical hit to have the called strike go through. He would forfeit his 2x, 3x, 4x damage for the special effect, but if the effect is to decapitate then it would be better than the multiple damage dice. DMs should use these rules with caution. Be sure to give the appropriate penalty for the called shot. Remeber they must first roll the threat range and then hit the opponent. Penalties apply to both rolls. Is it really going to break combat if you remove the "must score a critical" line? I think simply increasing the penalty to hit is better, and would allow people a better opportunity to do something really cool and cinematic at a desired time. This would make it easier to do cool stuff against easier targets with lower AC, but keep it fairly diffcult to connect with a called shot against a challenging opponent. I think I would make the "Decapitation" and "Stake through the heart" called shots require a critical because they are basically instant death. Any thoughts?
Rntaboy 05-31-05, 09:17 PM	Anybody?
Thorak 05-31-05, 09:28 PM	Yes, removing the critical requirement without, at the very least, tripling those penalties and limiting a successful called shot to non-natural-20s is overpowered. I'd even say that with the critical requirement, it's overpowered. It's not that hard to critical on a 15-20 (18-20 weapon, Improved Critical or Keen), and that means you've got a 1/4 chance of confirming instant kills on low-AC opponents. The one time a DM allowed called shots in 3.5, the ranger found an Arrow of True Strike that never lost its charm. One enemy died in the first round of every combat, the most menacing looking one. And that was given a -16 to hit them in the eye or throat. It was ridiculous, until he finally botched and rolled a 1. Part of that was the problem of the arrow, but the other was that critical hit systems that allow for instant kills, or even increased damage, are going to unbalance the campaign. Besides, just wait till your DM uses it against you. 40 archers, all trying to shoot your PCs in the eye. That's gonna suck.
Rntaboy 05-31-05, 09:43 PM	I'm approaching this from a DM's perspective, and thinking about implementing a system like this in my game. I guess that because I don't play with people who are munchkins, and who play for the enjoyment of the pure game, and not to see how badass of a broken character they can make, I really don't see room for such tremendous abuse as Thorak spoke of. I want to allow my players to do the cool stuff they think of, and have it actually have some effect in the game. Here's an example: I have a player with a Halfling Barbarian/Bear Warrior named Bagwaggle Strongflick. He is as chaotic as chaotic can get, and some of his favorite things to go in a rage are headbutt and flick male adversaries between their legs. I would really like to allow his player to perform a called shot for these types of attacks, and it to have some sort of effect on the guy who got headbutted.
Thorak 05-31-05, 11:04 PM	I'm approaching this from a DM's perspective, and thinking about implementing a system like this in my game. I guess that because I don't play with people who are munchkins, and who play for the enjoyment of the pure game, and not to see how badass of a broken character they can make, I really don't see room for such tremendous abuse as Thorak spoke of. I want to allow my players to do the cool stuff they think of, and have it actually have some effect in the game. Here's an example: I have a player with a Halfling Barbarian/Bear Warrior named Bagwaggle Strongflick. He is as chaotic as chaotic can get, and some of his favorite things to go in a rage are headbutt and flick male adversaries between their legs. I would really like to allow his player to perform a called shot for these types of attacks, and it to have some sort of effect on the guy who got headbutted. Potential abuse, without even getting complicated; Level 2+ bard, with a Keen rapier. Casts True Strike on himself, then get's a +8 to stab someone through the eye/throat for an instant kill. True Strike makes any mere penalty to hit absolutely laughable if it's less than -20. As for Bagwaggle, just have him make unarmed strikes (which both those moves would be considered), and flavour accordingly. It won't do any more damage, but that's because it's assumed you're trying to hit vulnerable spots like that anyway, and they're trying to not let you. It's already built into the system. Really want him to be hitting people in uncomfortable places? Suggest he take levels in Rogue or some other Sneak Attack class.
Mellowship Slinky 06-01-05, 12:14 AM	Gee ... if only there was a feat that let you take penalties to your attack roll in order to get a bonus to your damage ... gee...
Deviston 06-01-05, 12:46 AM	Or just take out True Strike. tang shnick PFST! fizzle fizzle fizzle . . . slither slither slither Oh shat . . . worms. . . ::END SUBSCRIPTION::
Thorak 06-01-05, 02:00 AM	Gee ... if only there was a feat that let you take penalties to your attack roll in order to get a bonus to your damage ... gee... Your point? Taking -12 to have a 1/4 chance of instantly killing a Great Wyrm Red Dragon with a 1st level spell is a heck of a lot different than using a feat to get +12 damage for the same penalty.
Nitneuq Onitnarat 06-01-05, 08:21 AM	Your point? Taking -12 to have a 1/4 chance of instantly killing a Great Wyrm Red Dragon with a 1st level spell is a heck of a lot different than using a feat to get +12 damage for the same penalty. An arrow in the eye wouldn't kill a Wyrm [/irrelevant]
d_nychus 06-01-05, 09:16 AM	An arrow in the eye wouldn't kill a Wyrm [/irrelevant] I think decapitation and a stake through the heart would, though. At high levels, with huge attack bonuses along with BAB and Strength, this system is just plain dumb. EVERYONE will be taking a -12 to hit, using a wide crit ranged weapon, and just pumping up every attack bonus they can think of, because of the instant kill. It makes weapons with a 20/x3 and 20/x4 absolutely useless. It would break the game. Never trust a system made by someone who misspells 'ridiculous.'
Will Brandiman 06-01-05, 09:49 AM	Called shots pop up every few weeks on this board and are generally shot down in a matter of hours because the idea runs contrary to the entire d20 system. Anytime a player says "I aim for his head" you should just answer with "Well what have you been aiming for the rest of the time?" and administer a beating with the +1 Munchkin Bane greatclub.
tarkin 06-01-05, 11:14 AM	D20 has LOTS of called shots systems already. I will name a few of the more popular ones. Ones with * can be done by anyone with no training, or just by taking a feat. Sneak Attack (to the vitals) Power Attack feat* (to the vitals) Trip* (to the legs) Sunder* (to the weapon) Disarm* (to the wrist) Monk's Stun (to the head) Assasin's Death attack (to the vitals) Hamstring feat (sneak attack to the ankle) Arterial Strike feat (Sneak attack to the arteries) Coup De Grace* (to the vitals) This list is partial, there are many others. The key things is that all of these called shot systems are REASONABLE and fair, not "I win the battle simply cause I can cast True Strike" and if they kill/remove you from battle, it takes a LOT of work/special sitatuions, not just a single round.
Rntaboy 06-01-05, 11:33 AM	I stated in my first post that post that called shots that would result in instant death would require a critical hit for the instant kill to occur. And a DM could easily say that a called shot cannot be executed while under the effects of a true strike spell. I would really like to be able to tell my halfing friend that everytime he headbutts an opponent, the opponent may be dazed (has to make a Fort), or if he flicks an opponent below the belt, that opponent my be stunned.
tarkin 06-01-05, 01:39 PM	A critical hit is laughable low requirement (Improved Critical anyone?). Look at the deadly called shot systems above. Death Attack: 3 rounds of waiting Coup De Grace: make them helpless first Those are the kinds of things that are reasonable. Criticals are not. Even with an expensive magic item, Vorpal requires a natural 20, not a "critical". ------------------ And the idea of outlawing True Strike demonstrates ignorance. We used True Strike as an example to prove it is a bad idea in general, not as 'the' reason not to do it. It is not that particular spell that is the problem it is the silly idea that a mere penalty to hit is sufficient balance for an ability that powerfull. The game is set up so that hitting is relatively easy to do, especailly on your first of several blows. Power Attack is FAIR. a -1 to hit results in upto a +2 to damage, not any of this super debilitating crap. You want a stunning effect? Fine. Take STUNNING FIST. You don't even have to be a monk to take it: STUNNING FIST [GENERAL] Prerequisites: Dex 13, Wis 13, Improved Unarmed Strike, base attack bonus +8. You don't like those particular pre-reqs? OK, make up a similar feat, BUT DON'T GRANT IT WEAKER PRE-REQS. It is perfectly OK to modify the pre-reqs, but the ability you describe clearly has an established power level, which you should stick to. Removing the requirement to take the feat is munchkinism, let alone make it very easy to take it. Here, I will make up a similar feat with reasonable power level, designed for a Cleric instead of a Monk: STUNNING MACE [GENERAL] Prerequisites: Dex 13, Wis 13, Weapon Focus (any Bludgeoning weapon), Heal 11 ranks) [/quote] As Stunning Fist but may only be used with a Bludgeoning weapon the character has Weapon Focus in. In game explanation: your character uses your knowledge of the body to allow you to stun someone with a blunt weapon.
Mellowship Slinky 06-01-05, 01:52 PM	Your point? Taking -12 to have a 1/4 chance of instantly killing a Great Wyrm Red Dragon with a 1st level spell is a heck of a lot different than using a feat to get +12 damage for the same penalty. That's exatly my point: power attack allows you to add 2 damage for 1 attack bonus (if two-handing) If you take a -12 and critically hit with a scythe, you'll do 48 extra damage, the scythe will add in an extra (minimum) 8 damage, bringing your damage to 56. Meaning that (in this specific case) with nothing but a (nonmagical) scythe, a +12 BAB and the power attack feat, on a roll of 20 you force a save vs massive damage, guaranteed. Chance of insta-kill? check! Make a feat called "precision attack" that allows you to take a minus to hit for a plus to damage with light and ranged weapons but has a requirement of 15 or so dex and (maybe) 5-8 ranks in spot, and you're allowing anyone who wants to to make "called shots" through either power attack or precision attack. If they want to do some of the other effects? Well there are a bunch of class abilities/magic items that do such things.
Rntaboy 06-01-05, 02:06 PM	Even with an expensive magic item, Vorpal requires a natural 20, not a "critical". But you get the chance to decapitate with every swing of a vorpal weapon, with a called shot the effects only apply if the player states he is using a called shot for said attack. So in actuality, the number of times you can expect to see this happening is very low. Also, if you miss with the called shot, your attack doesn't connect, and does no damage. Let us consider these things.
The Gunslinger 06-01-05, 06:12 PM	My players and I have talked about called shots now and again, and the one thing that puts a big stop to it is ... if you're gonna allow it, monsters should be allowed to do it too. Dragons, giants, high level NPC's ... DM's can make their pets cast true strike and make called shots to necks too.
Will Brandiman 06-02-05, 09:31 AM	I would really like to be able to tell my halfing friend that everytime he headbutts an opponent, the opponent may be dazed (has to make a Fort), or if he flicks an opponent below the belt, that opponent my be stunned. Then tell him that his opponent is doubled over in agony after the below-the-belt strike. Tell him that his nose has just been splattered across his face when the headbutt landed and is now pouring blood. Just don't give it an in-game effect! The D20 combat system already assumes that all combatants are going for the vital areas of the enemy. It is also assumed that the enemy is guarding those vital areas. Any called shot system requires a complete reworking of the entire combat system, right down to the most basic levels of AC and hit points. It's unnecessary.
Rntaboy 06-02-05, 02:41 PM	Then tell him that his opponent is doubled over in agony after the below-the-belt strike. Tell him that his nose has just been splattered across his face when the headbutt landed and is now pouring blood. Just don't give it an in-game effect! The D20 combat system already assumes that all combatants are going for the vital areas of the enemy. It is also assumed that the enemy is guarding those vital areas. Any called shot system requires a complete reworking of the entire combat system, right down to the most basic levels of AC and hit points. It's unnecessary. Okay, so guy who is doubled over in pain is still 100% combat effective?
Cadfan 06-02-05, 02:51 PM	Yes. Its an abstraction. It may seem unrealistic that someone would be "struck heavily in the stomache with your mace, causing him to double up in pain" and then immediately the guy recovers and fights back, but is that really worse than "you hit him for 38 points of damage," and then the guy immediately attacks back?
Beamup 06-02-05, 03:01 PM	You're making the mistaken assumption that, just because you tried to do this, he's doubled over in pain and incapacitated. Any of several things might happen if you try such a move: 1. You hit your target, and hurt him a lot, but he's pumped up on adrenaline and fights through the pain. (Takes damage, still above 0 HP.) 2. You tried to get in the solid blow, but it wasn't quite as good as you'd hoped, and it doesn't do that much. (Takes damage, still above 0 HP, alternate description.) 3. You hit him good, and he doubles over in pain, but manages to straighten up enough to deflect your followup blow. (Takes damage, still above 0 HP, alternate description.) 4. You got in a good solid hit, and he's incapacitated by the pain. (Took damage dropping him to 0 HP.) 5. You know how to hit somebody to temporarily incapacitate them, and did it. He's doubled up unable to act. (You had Stunning Fist and used it successfully.) The result of an attack is dictated by the rules, not what you wanted it to do. If the rules say he's still combat-capable, then he's not doubled up in pain long enough to take advantage of it.
Bruunwald 06-02-05, 03:03 PM	It's a game. It's not life-and-death. If someone wants to get gonzo with their game, let them, for crying out loud. How does it hurt you people and how does it harm your precious, well-worshiped rulebooks? Here's my called shot system: Decide the size category of the target area. Add a bonus from this table to the target combatant's overall AC based on the size category: Small +4 Tiny +8 Diminutive +12 Fine +16 If the hit is successful, add the same modifier to the weapon's damage roll. The benefit of this is it allows for possible kills on critical hits without making them in any way a certainty. Plus, if the attack roll misses, it misses entirely, even if it would otherwise have been a hit under normal circumstances, thus discouraging the rule's overuse. Apply rules on dealing non-lethal damage normally. You don't HAVE to allow the villains the use of it, in any case. It depends on what sort of game you are playing. But if you do, it's just a heightened challenge. And again, who cares if he wants a table rule to make his game more interesting? He's not in your game, is he?
Lord Schpungus 06-02-05, 06:16 PM	There's another name for your called shot system, Bruunwald. It's called Power Attack, and it has an additional limitation - your Base Attack. I liked what you did, until I realized all you did was rename Power Attack.
Vahenir 06-02-05, 06:51 PM	The Book of Iron Might and Torn Asunder both have called shot rules. They don't require a Critical Hit to be scored.. but they -do- impose HUGE penalties on any attempted called shot. And I mean -huge- penalties.
Will Brandiman 06-03-05, 04:49 AM	Okay, so guy who is doubled over in pain is still 100% combat effective? Was going to reply but see that Cadfan got there first and said pretty much everything that I would have.
Ariarig 06-03-05, 11:36 AM	One more time today, I agree with you Tarkin... What a wisdom ! :) I also find Will Brandiman very fair when he says that Anytime a player says "I aim for his head" you should just answer with "Well what have you been aiming for the rest of the time?" In combat, I guess that every time you try hitting your foes, you try to cause the most lethal blow. It is so, a "called shot"... You miss the eye or the heart, not because you made it intentionally or forgot to explain your DM you aim this particular vital area, but just because you did not hurt enough to reach your goal... I would add to the very well made list of tarkin that every critical is a successful called shot. It is just the DM work to give such a cinematic flavor... Each time a warrior scores a critical, which represents enough damage generally to kill any common guy in the street, it is the result of a successful called shot and the DM can describe it as a headcutting, or a precise blow right in the heart... If there is no "called shot" system in your D&D edition, it is probably not because someone up there, forgot to intoduce it, but because it has already been included in every part of the game, from sneak attack to feats... :looloo: