Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Flapjack 04-11-06, 10:46 PM	I'm planning on starting a new game in a few weeks and I was talking to my players about some variants that we may want to try. I brought up the injury system as well as the wounds/vitality. We were all intrigued with injury and thought it might make combat a bit more meaningful, since one attack can really turn the tides. I wanted to hear some feedback from some people who have played with this variant just to see if it worked well and kept the game balanced or if it really messed up classes and monsters that have low/lacking fortitude saves. Any relevant responses appreciated.
Lina_Inverse 04-11-06, 11:40 PM	The injury system was poorly made. More often than not the system benefits monsters far far more than PCs. It makes clerics/druids an even bigger piece of brokenness being they have the hitpoints of fighters. Finally it makes nukes so pitiful as to be a joke, since for a nuke to do anything they would have failed they probably would have failed the save vs. death anyways. Finally, the injury system makes no diffrence on "one attack can really make a diffrence" Because in the normal hp system a succesful full attack or spell has a good chance of actully killing your target anyways.
bradjob 04-13-06, 12:46 AM	My group was also intrigued by the injury rules, but found them lacking. What we have done is create a a seperate save than the fortitude save to use, a 'wound save'. My friend did some complex math and created a table to give each class a 'wound save' based on its hit die size, so each class is still differant. It works well with monsters for the same reason. The only real flaws are creatures with no Con, and the fact that you are essentually giving all monsters max hp. I don't have the chart with me, but if your interested I could post it tomorrow.