Post/Author/DateTime	Post
rice830 02-16-07, 10:23 PM	~Ok, i know that so many people have obsessed over the called shot idea, and i was wondering if any kind person would point me in the direction of what they believe is the Best Called Shot.
Illithid_Tentacles 02-16-07, 11:54 PM	There isn't one, because Called Shots are universally a Bad Idea, with regards to 3.X.
Crimson_Concerto 02-17-07, 02:23 AM	There isn't one, because Called Shots are universally a Bad Idea, with regards to 3.X.QFT
JustinA 02-17-07, 01:45 PM	~Ok, i know that so many people have obsessed over the called shot idea, and i was wondering if any kind person would point me in the direction of what they believe is the Best Called Shot. I recently posted some thoughts on this in a thread about parrying: The way called shots are typically handled is a really bad idea because it breaks the assumptions of the game system. Sean K. Reynolds explains that thoroughly and authoritatively in this essay (http://boards1.wizards.com/leaving.php?destination=http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/rants/calledshots.html). But when I wanted to run a modern pulp game using D20, I really felt the need to include some of mechanic which would allow someone to, for example, shoot the villain in the leg as they're attempting to escape. Without that you were missing a major staple of the genre. Thinking about this problem led me to realize that there are two things people want from a called shot mechanic: First, they want to inflict some sort of "special effect" on their character they're targeting. They want to throw acid in their face and blind them or shoot them in the leg and stop them from escaping. Second, they want to strike a vulnerable part of the body and do extra damage (they want to shoot somebody in the head). The first option I thought of was to use the critical rules as Reynolds suggests: They automatically deal with the "extra damage" scenario, and you could add in a system in which the character dealing the critical could decide to, instead, do normal damage + a special effect of some kind. That's not a bad way to go, but the problem is that there's no way to actually "call" a critical. You can't model the situation where a sharpshooter aims for a headshot or Pulp Hero shoots his opponent in the leg to stop them from escaping. This thought led me towards the idea of allowing people to accept a penalty on their attack roll in order to increase their critical threat range. This worked in simple cases, but I eventually decided the mechanic was too exploitable when used in combination with Improved Crit and keen and the like. (Players weren't using the mechanic to make called shots, they were just using the mechanic to improve their criticals unilaterally. And raising the penalty to a point where they stopped doing that simply made the mechanic undesirable in all situations. You could stop it from stacking with other crit range increases, but that only compounds one of the more foolish mistakes of the 3.5 revision.) So then I decided to cut out the middleman of critical hits and simply allow players to accept a penalty on their attack roll to either aim for a special effect (a crippling blow, etc.) or extra damage. In the case of the penalty for achieving a special effect, I'm still tweaking. But here's a simple version using a modified version of the Massive Damage Threshold: When you make a called shot to a limb, you suffer a -4 penalty on your attack. If the damage from your attack is larger than the target's Con score, the target must make a Fortitude save (DC 15). If they fail the save, the targeted limb is incapacitated until the damage is healed. (There are two different directions I'm trying to develop this: One includes tweaks for more serious effects -- such as blindness -- by accepting a larger penalty. The other allows a character to accept a larger penalty in order to increase the Fort save DC. I've found solutions which include both, but not elegant ones.) (Variants I'm playing with: Setting the called shot threshold to Con + level. Setting the Fort save to equal 10 + the attacker's BAB. These are both designed to help the rules scale with level.) In the case of causing extra damage, however, my eye was naturally drawn to Power Attack: -1 to attack/+1 to damage. The only problem is that Power Attack is a feat and a called shot is something anyone should be allowed to try. My solution was simple: Anyone can make a called shot by accepting a penalty to their attack roll. For every -2 penalty to their attack roll, they gain a +1 bonus to damage. The penalty cannot exceed the character's BAB, although a character with a BAB +0 or +1 can still accept a -2 penalty for +1 damage. In practice, this makes Power Attack basically an "improved called shot" feat, which seems to work fine in practice. (Its utility is a little lessened, but its still a meaningful improvement. Plus, Power Attack has always been primarily a gateway feat in any case.) Now characters could aim for the head or the heart or whatever took their fancy, accept the penalty, and go from there.
Netherek 02-17-07, 04:24 PM	Mongoose' Quintessential Fighter has a interesting Called Shot option, it works off of Crits... The major problem with Called Shots is that if it doesn't move the story along, they bog the game down. If you choose to allow them outside of crits then you should only allow one a round by a player, and probably have a save for the victim to resist the effects like in DMG application of damage to various locations.
Nerana 02-17-07, 05:27 PM	I did institute rules for them in my game, though I'm considering removing them after rereading some of the rules and realizing a basic assumption--that is, you're always looking for the most vulnerable spot. However, this was the rule: in exchange for accepting a -4 to your attack roll, you attack, aiming for a specific area; if you then score and confirm a critical hit , you can gain a special effect based on that area. (Note that a 'head shot' dazes, rather than auto-kills because no.) A throat shot might impose arcane spell failure against spells with verbal components, a shot to the hand a penalty on attack rolls, to the leg a penalty to speed, etc. However, since I put in that rule, my players just don't seem to want to bother using them any longer.
Hida Reju 02-21-07, 12:20 PM	How about a skill trick based off of Sense motive 5 ranks and spot 5 ranks that simulates the Chink in the Armor feat to cut armor bonuses in half for the next attack you make against a single target with a move action. That to me similates a called shot.
Edymnion 02-21-07, 12:28 PM	Remember, any called shot you can make, that horde of kobold sorcerers with crossbows and True Strike can make as well, and since theres 20 of 'em, one of them is bound to make a natural 20 True Strike Called Shot to your head every round. Oh, and the kobolds are on a cliff behind cover. Roll up new characters please.
Mnky 02-21-07, 03:00 PM	I had some called shot thingy where you take the assumption that any character is always aiming for the most vulnerable point unless they state otherwise. A critical hit is them hitting this weak point. A character can choose another part to aim for, and if they score a crit they don't deal extra damage, but the target suffers appropriate penalties.
Arcade 02-22-07, 09:47 AM	I've been barely working on this myself. Sean K. Reynold's article has some good arguments in it, so I haven't explored it too much. Treat any called shot like a Sunder- after all, that's the rule you use when you're aiming for a hydra's head. I was only going to allow any special effects on criticals, but I am also using WP/VP system, so it goes better with that idea. The damage dealt versus CON (or WP) determines the severity of the injury, from barely scratched to severed. If no called shot was made, the hit location is random. In a non VP/WP, a character could do a sunder and then trade in damage for the chance to do a special effect. Look at a lot of the sneak attack feats for inspiration (hamstring attack, for instance).
Lord_Tirian 02-22-07, 01:01 PM	The only thing that I've ever liked was The Book of Iron Might, because Mearls is a good writer, including Balance Alert-columns which are warning me. :)
Mitsukai_sama 02-26-07, 02:26 PM	SKR's rant on called shots (http://www.seankreynolds.com/rpgfiles/rants/calledshots.html) usually ends these discussions pretty quickly. That said, I may allow my players to make called shots against a specific parts of the body, but only under very particular circumstances. Say, for instance, a golem was crafted that was nigh-impervious to damage of any kind (contrived, but bear with me). However, construction was incomplete... there are three weak points in the golem's plating, vulnerable to particular damage types, and to defeat the golem, sufficient damage must be dealt to each of these weak points. For the purpose of aiming attacks, you may treat these as individual targets, though the golem itself remains one creature for the purpose of Taget: Creature effects and the like (though being a golem, this is probably moot). Even then, this mechanic is flawed... Don't let your players make called shots unless you have very, very good reason.
Hida Reju 02-26-07, 05:30 PM	Like I think I said in some other thread, called shots work better in a game where armor provides not a bonus to AC but Damage reduction. When Full plate can provide DR 5-10/- and No AC bonus then it starts to work to have a called shot option. At the same time reducing armor class leads to power attack abuse and you have to then look at using the option for Class bonus to defense that was in Unearthed Arcana. So now you have a class bonus to defense that makes you harder to hit and a bonus to Damage reduction that can only be countered with a called shot feat or mechanic. This balances itself out nicely. All of these options will make this game slower to play. If you have to do it then it may be better to just change systems to some other one that has a system you like and convert it to fantasy. Its not like we all do not have the power to think it out for ourselves.
Draz74 02-26-07, 07:36 PM	Besides fluff, what is the difference between Power Attack and using a called shot? Answer: the "Str 13" prereq, and the "double damage with two-handed weapons" thing. Oh, and called shots work with light weapons. Other than that ... they both mean you're trading accuracy for extra damage. (With an abstract HP system, hitting a certain area really just means "more damage.") So I propose splitting Power Attack into two feats: Called Shot Prereq: none On your action, before making attack rolls for the round, you may choose to subtract a certain number from all melee attack rolls and add the same number to all damage rolls. This number may not exceed your base attack bonus. The penalty and bonus apply on all attacks until your next turn. Power Attack Prereq: Str 13, Called Shot When you use the Called Shot feat on attacks made with a two-handed weapon, or a one-handed weapon wielded in two hands, you deal +2 damage for every -1 penalty you take from the feat. Power attack builds with two-handed weapons are already so powerful (compared to other melee builds) that making them take an additional feat won't hurt game balance. Optional: Just as a character without Combat Expertise can still fight defensively in a lame way, you can let characters without these feats make a "called shot" by accepting a -4 penalty on an attack roll in order to deal +2 damage if they hit. It's a weak option, but it might be nice once in a while, especially since it only affects one attack -- not all your attacks for the round like Power Attack. This makes more sense if you also have an "Armor as DR" thing going.
Romulus LoneWolf 02-26-07, 08:20 PM	I had some called shot thingy where you take the assumption that any character is always aiming for the most vulnerable point unless they state otherwise. A critical hit is them hitting this weak point. A character can choose another part to aim for, and if they score a crit they don't deal extra damage, but the target suffers appropriate penalties. The problem here is that it doesn't simulate the reality of armed combat, where a good hit can cripple an opponent's limbs. I find it strange that D&D doesn't allow you to dismember your opponents with a solid swing of your greatsword...
BeefotronX 02-27-07, 12:36 AM	My experimental version of 'called shots': Maiming attack: A halfway point between lethal and non-lethal attacks. (It is already established in RAW that you can deal non-lethal damage with a -4 penalty) By attacking non-vital parts of the opponent, the damage you deal is not as serious, but you can potentially maim your target. Take a -2 penalty on attack rolls if you are attacking to maim. Normal hit: Damage is half lethal, half non-lethal. Round down. Critical hit: Maiming hit. Choose an extremity to attack: arms, legs, or head. Deal your normal weapon damage as ability damage, not normal damage. Do not multiply the damage; for higher critical multipliers, add +2 to damage for each multiplier above x2. The ability damage is divided evenly (round down) between Constitution and one other score depending on the extremity targeted: Strength for arms, Dexterity for legs, and Wisdom for head. If the target is reduced to half his Strength or lower by a maiming attack, an arm is severed or ruined, requiring a regeneration effect to restore. If the target is reduced to half his Dexterity or lower by a maiming attack, a leg is severed or ruined, requiring a regeneration effect to restore. If the target is reduced to half his Wisdom or lower by a maiming attack, he is either blinded or deafened, (50% chance of each) requiring a regeneration or other effect that cures blindness or deafness to restore.
JustinA 02-27-07, 11:55 AM	So I propose splitting Power Attack into two feats: Called Shot Prereq: none On your action, before making attack rolls for the round, you may choose to subtract a certain number from all melee attack rolls and add the same number to all damage rolls. This number may not exceed your base attack bonus. The penalty and bonus apply on all attacks until your next turn. Good rule of thumb: If it's something that anyone could reasonably attempt, then anyone should be able to attempt it. Thus it shouldn't be a feat, a class ability, or a trained-only skill. Is it reasonable that anyone should be able to try to aim for a more vulnerable part of their opponent? Yes. So the basic mechanic for a called shot shouldn't be a feat, class ability, or a trained-only skill. Hence the methodology of my earlier post: 1. Anyone can make a called shot by accepting a -2 penalty for a +1 bonus to damage (capped by BAB, although even characters with BAB +0 or +1 can take a -2 penalty for a +1 bonus). 2. Introduce two feat tracks: Power Attack and Power Shot (the former for melee, the latter for ranged). Both improve the mechanic to a -1/+1 trade-off (double the bonus if using a two-handed weapon or a composite bow). The Improved versions of both feats improve the mechanic a second time to -1/+2 (double the bonus if using a two-handed weapon or a composite bow). Optional: Just as a character without Combat Expertise can still fight defensively in a lame way, you can let characters without these feats make a "called shot" by accepting a -4 penalty on an attack roll in order to deal +2 damage if they hit. It's a weak option, but it might be nice once in a while, especially since it only affects one attack -- not all your attacks for the round like Power Attack. This makes more sense if you also have an "Armor as DR" thing going. The problem with this is that, at low levels, there will be situations where this is better than the advanced feats. (Specifically when you've got BAB +1 and you need a natural 20 to hit.) The natural 20 loophole is always a problem with the Power Attack mechanic, though. Probably enough of a metagame loophole that you should simply disallow the use of Power Attack if you can only hit an opponent on a natural 20 (so that you always have to accept at least SOME penalty in order to benefit from the bonus damage). This actually ties into a design-tweaking problem I've been having: After putting this in playtest for a few months, I am now playing with a revision: Characters without the Power Attack/Shot feats get the same -1/+1 trade-off, but they only get the bonus damage to their FIRST attack. The only problem with this is that, at low levels, this is only inferior to Power Attack if an attack of opportunity is provoked later in the round. And that doesn't seem all that useful for a feat ("marginally better attacks of opportunity"). OTOH, keeping th -2/+1 trade-off for non-feated characters but leaving the bonus for only the first attack seems too weak to actually be used. Not sure which solution is preferable.
StormKnight 02-28-07, 05:39 PM	Called shots to 'vital areas' make exceptionally little sense in D&D. By default, you are attacking an opponent to cause as much damage to them as possible. This means you WILL hit an opponent in a vital area if at all possible, and will strike them in non-vital areas if not. So why should "I am ONLY going to hit in the vital areas" increase your damage? You are losing incidental damage, and losing the ability to inflict minor damage in order to cause the target to open up to more serious damage (nicking the arm to cause the target to drops its gaurd long enough to get in a decisive hit). The only place it might make sense is if you were fighting some creature where you really DIDN'T want to hit it anyplace else; maybe something that leaks acidic blood so you only want to get a single, fatal hit to it. Our main house rule for called shots is to use Power Blow. However, you can attempt a special effect called shot - if the damage would drop the target to 0 or fewer HP, you instead do half damage and inflict whatever effect is appropriate. So if you want to hit the bad guy in the leg to stop him escaping, you can do it - providing you cut down his HP enough to where you had already won the fight anyway. Or you could just try a good 'ol fashioned Trip.
Cyanide300 03-01-07, 04:19 PM	I'd say the best way to simulate a "called shot" in D&D 3.5 would be to create a feat that allows the character to automatically critical on her next attack if she hits. Usable once per day. Then the character can say "I shoot him in the face" or whatever he wants to say and then make the attack roll. If he hits, he successfully shot the orc in the face, or whatever. This approach is simple, not unbalancing, and still allows the player to feel as though he's made an extra effort to hurt this particular opponent when it counted the most.
Xeviat-DM 03-01-07, 07:33 PM	Remember, any called shot you can make, that horde of kobold sorcerers with crossbows and True Strike can make as well, and since theres 20 of 'em, one of them is bound to make a natural 20 True Strike Called Shot to your head every round. Oh, and the kobolds are on a cliff behind cover. Roll up new characters please. That assumes that the called shot system in question has called shots to the head as instant kills. Mine doesn't. I've published mine in the Campaign Builder's Guild's "Campaign Builders' Guide", Issue 3, back in October. The premise is that you can take a penalty to hit in order to attack a specific area, like a limb or the head. If you succeed, your opponent has to make a Fort save vs the damage you dealt. If they fail the save, they take a -2 penalty on certain actions, or they suffer an ill status effect for a period of time (generally till they recieve 1 point of magical healing, a DC 15 heal check, or heal naturally). There are no instant kills. The worse that can happen is a blindness effect, which requires a called shot (eye), which is a -8 attack penalty, and requires a critical hit to be scored, and requires the optional "limb destruction" variant I attached. You can download issue 3 of the "Campaign Builders' Guide" at: http://www.thecbg.org/downloads/CBGuideOct06.pdf Enjoy. PS: Sean's article, again, incorrectly assumes that all called shot systems are going to assume that you are dealing extra damage. It incorrectly assumes that the creator of a called shot system hasn't already taken into account that characters will be attacking unarmored portions of the body (that's why breastplate is AC +5 while half-plate is AC +7; breast plate covers less of the body). In fiction, called shots are done for two reasons: to avoid armor, and to hinder. Since characters are always trying to avoid armor (otherwise there would be an armor sundering option, or an option to attack a lower AC for accepting DR), the only reason that is left is to hinder. Not deal more damage, but to cause a status effect. If a wizard can cause certain status effects with a 1st or 2nd level spell, with a save and no attack roll or with an attack roll and no save, then I think it is fair for a fighter to be able to do it with an attack roll (at a penalty), with less damage (my system has half-damage being taken for called shots to make them less deserable), and a save.
Sphyre 03-04-07, 08:08 PM	You're making a called shot everytime you attack. "I swing my sword and try to kill him. Ok I rolled a 10 + 5, a 15, does that hit?" "Yes" "Ok, Lets see how well I hurt him, I do 1d6+2, I rolled a 6, and deal 8 damage." "You hit a resounding blow, knocking your enemy to the ground." Just because you're using numbers doesn't mean the realism of trying your hardest to hurt your enemy isn't being done. Your characters are assumed to be know how to kill - better than you, because they actually do it a lot more than you do.
Dracomortis 03-04-07, 08:33 PM	The only time I have ever allowed player's to make called shots is to do something unrelated to combat - challenge an NPC to a game of darts, shatter a beer bottle with a thrown dagger sitting across the bar, or knock an enemy commander's visor down over his helmet. They have no effect on battle, but they provide nice little cinematic bonuses.
JustinA 03-04-07, 09:15 PM	The only time I have ever allowed player's to make called shots is to do something unrelated to combat - challenge an NPC to a game of darts, shatter a beer bottle with a thrown dagger sitting across the bar, or knock an enemy commander's visor down over his helmet. They have no effect on battle, but they provide nice little cinematic bonuses. I don't understand how a game of darts or shattering a beer bottle constitutes a "called shot". Both involve hitting an inanimate object and (in the latter case) dealing damage to it. This is already covered in the rules and has nothing do with any sort of called shot mechanic.
Xeviat-DM 03-05-07, 03:47 AM	Exactly! No one has a conniption fit when someone wants to target a specific part of an inanimate object, like, say, the hinges of a door. No one freaks out over a trip (called shot to the legs, makes someone prone), or a sunder or disarm (called shot to a weapon, makes someone unarmed). No one has commented on my suggested system, where called shots have status effects tied to them, rather than making something easier to hit or easier to damage.
Valk 03-05-07, 04:02 AM	I don't think a D&D game would improve with called shots. People seem to have enough trouble already when calculating their attack and damage, and the system seems to work pretty well. But if the topic starter wants some mechanics, I know of a (sucky) 'beta' RPG that does use called shots. A called shot can inflict leg injury, arm injury, eye injury or extra damage; all types of injury have simple described effects decreased movement speed, penalty to hit, concealment to all opponents. With regard to the extra damage the system is designed in such a way that normal attacks deal more damage on average, but the called shot for extra damage has greater potential damage.
Mnky 03-05-07, 07:30 AM	No one freaks out over a trip (called shot to the legs, makes someone prone) That's because tripping someone up is going to be useful pretty often, and is relatively simple rule wise. The same with disarming. What more do you want to do? And I'm pretty sure tripping involves more than trying to chop their legs off, anyway.
Sphyre 03-05-07, 08:48 PM	I don't think a D&D game would improve with called shots. People seem to have enough trouble already when calculating their attack and damage, and the system seems to work pretty well. Amen! I know college level math students who have a hard time with d20 + BAB + str + weapon bonus... :rolleyes: I don't even know if there's a way to make it even simpler.
Kukamunga 03-06-07, 02:55 PM	I think this is dumb.. as it stands... everyone who is fighting is always taking a called shot... when you fight you make a called shot.. hence the reason for the variable dammage.. when you make your max dammage with a critical you actually hit it.. otherwise you missed it.. and depending on what you got for dammage you can extrapolate where your weapon came down...
wrecan 03-06-07, 03:14 PM	Called Shot to the Arm: Improved Disarm Called Shot to the Leg: Improved Trip Called Shot to an Item: Improved Sunder Called Shot to Vitals: Improved Critical and/or Power Attack Add in ranged versions of said feats for ranged called shots. Best Called Shot Rules Ever and totally compliant with 3.5!
Dracomortis 03-06-07, 03:41 PM	I don't understand how a game of darts or shattering a beer bottle constitutes a "called shot". Both involve hitting an inanimate object and (in the latter case) dealing damage to it. This is already covered in the rules and has nothing do with any sort of called shot mechanic. In darts, you're not just aiming for an object (the dart board), you're aiming for a specific part of the board - usually the center, thus it's a called shot. Shattering a beer bottle, though, probably does not count.
Mnky 03-06-07, 03:45 PM	Called Shot to the Leg: Improved Trip But but you can't trip people with a decent crossbow shot, can you?
Illithid_Tentacles 03-06-07, 03:47 PM	In darts, you're not just aiming for an object (the dart board), you're aiming for a specific part of the board - usually the center, thus it's a called shot. Shattering a beer bottle, though, probably does not count. No, it's not. When you attack another person, it's assumed that you're trying to hit the person's most vulnerable spot, which might change any number of times during combat. He might even have multiple areas that you could attack at any given moment. Same thing with a dartboard- you're trying to hit the bullseye, or the triple-score ring of the 20, or what have you. A poor shot that still hits the board is like hitting a guy with a greatsword, but rolling a 1 for damage. A bullseye would be like a critical hit and rolling max damage.
Xeviat-DM 03-06-07, 04:49 PM	That's because tripping someone up is going to be useful pretty often, and is relatively simple rule wise. The same with disarming. What more do you want to do? And I'm pretty sure tripping involves more than trying to chop their legs off, anyway. I'm under the assumption that you didn't read my rules, did you? Here they are in brief. You can make a called shot on the arm, leg, head, eye, or ears. A called shot to the Arm or Leg applys a -4 penalty to hit, a called shot to the head applies a -6 penalty to hit, and a called shot to the eye or ears applies a -8 penalty to hit. The called shot provokes an attack of opportunity. If the attack hits, roll damage normally. The opponent makes a Fort save (DC = damage dealt); if they fail, they suffer a -2 penalty to certain actions (the actions are on the "damage to specific areas" table from the DMG). I've been considering altering this to utilize status effects instead (fatigued, sickened, dazed ...), so I'd be giving warriors a way to inflict status effects that casters have been able to do for a long time (and some with 0 level spells at that). I understand the belief that called shots that increase damage would mess up the game (that's what the power attack mechanic is useful for, though there maybe should be a non-power version), but my mechanic doesn't do that. No one has really mentioned it either.
Mnky 03-07-07, 08:13 AM	mm, I think I did read them. Sorry, I just can't see many situations where you might want to, say, give someone a penalty to listen checks but slashing their ear. Or decrease their movement speed when you could trip them up. Especially as a penalty of -2 won't make that much difference at higher levels. Maybe that's just me. Do you players use this rule very often? The rule itself seems reasonable, but do you allow people do make called shots with ranged weapons? That would render the attack of opportunity bit invalid. Do you allow the same limb to be targeted multiple times, with the penalties stacking?
Mitsukai_sama 03-08-07, 01:25 AM	But but you can't trip people with a decent crossbow shot, can you? Well, you can pin and disarm, with the right feats...
Xeviat-DM 03-10-07, 04:10 PM	mm, I think I did read them. Sorry, I just can't see many situations where you might want to, say, give someone a penalty to listen checks but slashing their ear. Or decrease their movement speed when you could trip them up. Especially as a penalty of -2 won't make that much difference at higher levels. Maybe that's just me. Do you players use this rule very often? The rule itself seems reasonable, but do you allow people do make called shots with ranged weapons? That would render the attack of opportunity bit invalid. Do you allow the same limb to be targeted multiple times, with the penalties stacking? Then you may not have read closely. The ear is listen and initiative, which could knock someone down a few places. In addition, a minor ear wound dazes the opponent, so that's the real reason. You might want to do a leg wound, which is a -2 penalty to Balance, Climb, Jump, Move Silently, Ride, Swim, and Tumble checks; Reflex saving throws; Dexterity checks, and thier speed is also reduced by 1/2, instead of a trip because the trip doesn't damage them unless you have improved trip (and the trip only really lasts till they get up). You can't make caled shots with ranged attacks unless you have the Ranged Called Shot feat, just like you can't make ranged disarms or ranged trips or ranged grapples without said feats from Complete Warrior. Yeah, this is slightly unrealistic, and perhaps unnecessary (since the attack penalties balance out the benefits), but that's how I wrote it currently.
kadeity 03-10-07, 04:23 PM	The way i do called shots is to just say "what are you trying to hit"? then give them a -4 to hit, plus the penalties for attacking something of whatever size category the object they wanna hit is, and any armor bonuses that might apply. Like if they aim for the heart, but hes wearing a breastplate, he gets the breastplate armor. I use a critical fumble table based on body parts, so if they hit say, an eye (which is diminutive) then they automatically get the critical associated with the eyes. If the target was wearing a helm that grants ac, he gets his dex and helmet only to ac. I like the idea honestly. Primarily the size categories for the target.
Sphyre 03-11-07, 03:52 AM	The way i do called shots is to just say "what are you trying to hit"? then give them a -4 to hit, plus the penalties for attacking something of whatever size category the object they wanna hit is, and any armor bonuses that might apply. Like if they aim for the heart, but hes wearing a breastplate, he gets the breastplate armor. So... do you allow people to do "called defense?" Because if you notice someone is trying less to hit you in general and more to hit you in a certain spot, you can easily protect that spot, and since they aren't trying to attack any other spot, you effectively ruined their entire offense. There's a reason why you're always assumed to be trying your best to attack the person, the same as you're always assumed to be trying your best to defend yourself.
kenicolo 03-12-07, 08:24 PM	what i do is that with every attack the player roll another dice and randomly hit a bodypart with some effects, this is done at no penality. When making a called shot, he takes a penality equivalent to the size modifier. so aiming for a eye is if i remember diminutif so the target gain an additionlan +8 to ac on his eye, this bonus is added to its regular ac.I use the efect described in the DMG.
JustinA 03-12-07, 11:56 PM	But but you can't trip people with a decent crossbow shot, can you? Let me shoot you in the leg with one, we'll see if you fall down. ;) Justin Alexander http://www.thealexandrian.net
JustinA 03-12-07, 11:58 PM	So... do you allow people to do "called defense?" Of course he does. Did you not read his post? He applies a -4 penalty to hit. I suppose you could handle it as a +4 bonus to AC, but it's more consistent with other mechanics to handle it as a penalty to the attack. There's a reason why you're always assumed to be trying your best to attack the person, the same as you're always assumed to be trying your best to defend yourself. An assumption which works fine... unless what you're attempting to do with an attack is something other than lethally injuring them or knocking them unconscious. Justin Alexander http://www.thealexandrian.net
Sphyre 03-13-07, 01:28 AM	Of course he does. Did you not read his post? He applies a -4 penalty to hit. I suppose you could handle it as a +4 bonus to AC, but it's more consistent with other mechanics to handle it as a penalty to the attack. In a way. -4 and always keeping that body part away can be quite different. And all you need is truestrike to destroy any calledshot system. An assumption which works fine... unless what you're attempting to do with an attack is something other than lethally injuring them or knocking them unconscious. Like tripping them, disarming them, sundering an item, or the like. :tongue: The game allows for a lot of different non-damaging moves without needing a called shot system. If you want to make a new kind, just make a new feat - that's how it's balanced. The things that don't require a good amount of training to pull off with any degree of success reliably are combat options outlined in the PhB. There's even rogues and their ambush feats now... yet they had ambush feats in the past, like hamstring.
JustinA 03-13-07, 02:06 PM	And all you need is truestrike to destroy any calledshot system. True strike destroys Power Attack? True strike destroys the trip maneuver? Yeah, I'm not buying it. Like tripping them, disarming them, sundering an item, or the like. :tongue: Well, I'm glad I managed to convince you that you were completely, totally, and absolutely wrong in your earlier post. The game allows for a lot of different non-damaging moves without needing a called shot system. If you want to make a new kind, just make a new feat - that's how it's balanced. Sundering, disarming, and tripping aren't feats. If it's something that anyone could reasonably attempt to do (like shooting someone in the leg to hamper their movement, for example), it shouldn't be something that can only be done with a feat. (Although feats can be used to make those things easier to do.) Justin Alexander http://www.thealexandrian.net
Xeviat-DM 03-13-07, 02:18 PM	I still believe that conditions are the way to go. If a wizard can daze someone with a 0 level spell, with only a saving throw and no attack roll, then a fighter should be able to daze someone with an attack roll, some damage, and a saving throw. Here's a list of conditions I think a physical attack could do: Blinded Dazed Deafened Disabled (duh) Exhausted Fatigued Nauseated Sickened Of course, stun is still around, but that's already a feat and that shouldn't be changed.
Sphyre 03-14-07, 01:13 AM	True strike destroys Power Attack? True strike destroys the trip maneuver? Yeah, I'm not buying it. ~snip~ Well, I'm glad I managed to convince you that you were completely, totally, and absolutely wrong in your earlier post. ~snip and stuff~ I beleive you're sorely confused about the following: My position on adding a called shot system to 3.5 The effect, if any, anything you have said has effected my position on called shots. What I mean by when I say a "called shot system" above the combat system currently supplied by 3.5. In addition, I demonstrated the fact that "called shots" already exist in D&D through the form of combat maneuvers feats and special abilities. Although, when refering to adding a called shot system, people are talking about "I stick my sword in his eye" or stupid things like that that have much greater effect than combat maneuvers that may impose temporary combat penalties. If you're going to respond to my posts, do so in context; otherwise there is no point in your responding to them, nor is there for me to respond to you.
JustinA 03-15-07, 10:48 AM	Although, when refering to adding a called shot system, people are talking about "I stick my sword in his eye" or stupid things like that that have much greater effect than combat maneuvers that may impose temporary combat penalties. Except, of course, that this is a strawman you've concocted all by yourself with no relationship to the people you're actually responding to in this thread. Thanks for letting us know that you're just talking to yourself.
Mitsukai_sama 03-17-07, 08:55 AM	True strike destroys Power Attack? True strike destroys the trip maneuver? Yeah, I'm not buying it. Umm... what? He said "called shot system," not "elements existing in DnD that obviate the need for a called shot system." You're treating the two as if they were the same, which isn't so. That having been said: Off the top of my head, I can think of a build that is capable of dealing at least 80 additional damage without any net loss in attack bonus, thanks to a first-level spell. Such spells certainly make attacks more lethal, especially in the instance of Power Attack, or any attack that inflicts a condition or other status effect (as it is nearly guaranteed to hit). Keep this in mind as you're advocating a called shot system. ... flaming, etc. ... I would refrain from saying such things - at least to me, it severely weakened the credibility of any argument you had. Maturity goes a long way in persuasion (hell, even when you happen to be wrong). ... Sundering, disarming, and tripping aren't feats. No, they are maneuvers that (nearly) all creatures are capable of executing, abliet some better than others. Anyone can aim for their opponent's head when the opportunity presents itself, but they'll probably just give them a nasty cut... it takes a high-level assassin to make that lethal shot with any degree of consistency. The game already accounts for actions other than directly harming your opponent through the conventional means ([Ambush] feats, special combat actions, etc.), and the fact that some will be better than others. 95% of the time, called shot systems proposed are so unbalanced that making a called shot the optimal play all the time, usually by assuming that everyone can perform the special attack equally well (which just plain isn't the case). This situation is only worsened by the fact that it is very easy to buff your attack bonus (True Strike, etc.). Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this is what Sphyre meant by "And all you need is truestrike to destroy any calledshot system." OP'd status effects that all characters can inflict with equal skill, as they retain the ability to buff their attack bonus to increase the probability of it working. It just doesn't make sense.
Sphyre 03-17-07, 01:26 PM	Except, of course, that this is a strawman you've concocted all by yourself with no relationship to the people you're actually responding to in this thread. Thanks for letting us know that you're just talking to yourself. A strawman argument is one that calls information out extraneously (such as you have done) and then while people are distracted by that, claims something based on that. I have done no such thing. If anything, you've only been doing that. If you wish to have some idea of what I was talking about, Mitsukai_sama's first statement points out the first point in which you started diverging from what I was saying. But I don't waste my time arguing with people who seemingly intentionally take what I say out of context to argue with me, that's just a waste of my time.
Xeviat-DM 03-18-07, 02:02 AM	I am still amused that the opponents of Called Shot systems are still refering to Called Shot systems in a vague sense, not refering to any in specific. Does it take an assassin to knee a man in the crotch? Does it take an assassin to sucker punch someone (knock the wind out of them)? Does it take an assassin to punch someone in the nose so that it breaks, blackening and tearing up both of their eyes? D&D's combat system does not replicate what injuries can do to someone until negative HP. If you're fine with that, then fine, don't use called shot systems. I think that WP/VP is the most simplistic and realistic way of attempting realism in D&D, without changing many things, but my proposed called shot system seems to be a simple alternative. Again, if a wizard can do something with a 0 level spell, then why can't a fighter do it? Fighters can already make someone shaken for 1 round, why not dazed with some penalty?
JustinA 03-19-07, 06:59 PM	95% of the time, called shot systems proposed are so unbalanced that making a called shot the optimal play all the time, usually by assuming that everyone can perform the special attack equally well (which just plain isn't the case). And, yet again, we've got someone arguing against random strawmen with no relationship to what's actually being discussed in this thread. Tell ya what: Instead of talking about some hypothetical 95% of called shot systems which aren't being discussed in this thread except by yourself, let's talk about the called shots which ARE being proposed in this thread. Thanks. A strawman argument is one that calls information out extraneously (such as you have done) and then while people are distracted by that, claims something based on that. I have done no such thing. Why lie? What on earth do you think it's possibly going to accomplish? I quoted you calling out extraneous information and then claiming something based on it: "Although, when refering [sic] to adding a called shot system, people are talking about "I stick my sword in his eye" or stupid things like that that have much greater effect than combat maneuvers that may impose temporary combat penalties." You'll notice that none of these "people" are to be found in this thread, nor are these "I stick my sword in his eye" called shot systems to be found here. Please don't lie again. And please stop posting your strawmen. Thanks. Justin Alexander http://www.thealexandrian.net
Sphyre 03-20-07, 02:08 AM	Why lie? What on earth do you think it's possibly going to accomplish? I quoted you calling out extraneous information and then claiming something based on it: "Although, when refering [sic] to adding a called shot system, people are talking about "I stick my sword in his eye" or stupid things like that that have much greater effect than combat maneuvers that may impose temporary combat penalties." You'll notice that none of these "people" are to be found in this thread, nor are these "I stick my sword in his eye" called shot systems to be found here. Please don't lie again. And please stop posting your strawmen. Thanks. Justin Alexander http://www.thealexandrian.net It's easy to say someone posts something out of context when you're taking what they say out of context. Stop falsely creating issues that don't exist, and using terms incorrectly to make yourself look right. How ironic of you, huh?
JustinA 03-20-07, 11:09 AM	It's easy to say someone posts something out of context when you're taking what they say out of context. Stop falsely creating issues that don't exist, and using terms incorrectly to make yourself look right. How ironic of you, huh? Tell ya what: If you can quote ANYBODY in this thread advocating for a called shot system in which you can choose to "stick a sword in his eye", I'll apologize. If you can't do that, then you're a self-admitted liar and you need to apologize to me. ... I'm waiting. Justin Alexander http://www.thealexandrian.net
Greg K 03-20-07, 12:50 PM	Xeviat-DM If you did not already have your own system, I would have suggested the Book of Iron Mightfrom Monte Cook's company, Malhavoc. It is written by Mike Mearls and allows physical attacks to do exactly what you have listed. For anyone interested in checking out the system Iron Might maneuver system, I have provided links below to the preview introducing maneuvers, a web bonus providing more sample maneuvers, and the cheat sheet for building one's own maneuvers (The cheat sheet enhancement shows the different elements that can be used for designing maneuvers and explains what the different elements of a maneuver mean. The little box symbol constantly appearing in the cheat sheet enehancement should be a minus "-" sign ) The links are: The Sample Maneuvers Previews (http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?mpress_BOIM_preview) The bonus maneuvers web enhancement here (http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?mpress_BOIM_webenhance) The build your own maneuver "cheat sheet" web enhancement here (http://www.montecook.com/BOIM_Cheat_Sheet.html). I still believe that conditions are the way to go. If a wizard can daze someone with a 0 level spell, with only a saving throw and no attack roll, then a fighter should be able to daze someone with an attack roll, some damage, and a saving throw. Here's a list of conditions I think a physical attack could do: Blinded Dazed Deafened Disabled (duh) Exhausted Fatigued Nauseated Sickened Of course, stun is still around, but that's already a feat and that shouldn't be changed.
Xeviat-DM 03-20-07, 07:12 PM	Sweet Greg, I'll take a look at it. Always on the look out for more material to intigrate into my house rules. After reading those over, a lot of the maneuvers add up interestingly. If I did the math correctly, remaking the PHB Disarm action with these rules nets you a better disarm (you can avoid the opposed disarm or the attack of opportunity negating the disarm if you'd like). Also, I'm a bit confused as to how much of the penalties an "Improved X" feat like Improved Disarm would reduce from such a maneuver. I'll read up on it more, and see what else I can figure out. Again, thanks for pointing it out.
Sphyre 03-21-07, 03:31 AM	Tell ya what: If you can quote ANYBODY in this thread advocating for a called shot system in which you can choose to "stick a sword in his eye", I'll apologize. If you can't do that, then you're a self-admitted liar and you need to apologize to me. ... I'm waiting. Justin Alexander http://www.thealexandrian.net You're putting words in my mouth. Don't get mad at me for you having twisted something I said, and then extrapolating that and then comparing it to something I said, and making it look contradictory. It's like the telephone game, the more it gets passed around the more it's altered. I owe you no appology for you being intent on twisting my words, and falsely applying them to your own preconceptions. You owe both of us an appology for starting a fight that wastes both our time by warping what I said and creating a fuss about it. You may want to note that this has been railroaded beyond the discussion of D&D...
Xeviat-DM 03-21-07, 03:46 PM	So I bought Book of Iron Might, and like many other books printed by the company, it's almost all OGL. I'm going to tweek their called shot system just a little (instead of maneuver attack penalties and attack bonuses being multiples of 5, they'll be multiples of 4, since that's more in line with the current game and matches up with existing feats and mechanics a little more). Either way, very good system, great book. I find it funny that it seems Wizards copied some of the alternate skill uses given in this book, and might have copied the idea of the Style feats in this book for their tactical feats. Oh well, good book.
wrecan 03-21-07, 05:19 PM	Tell ya what: If you can quote ANYBODY in this thread advocating for a called shot system in which you can choose to "stick a sword in his eye", I'll apologize. The worse that can happen is a blindness effect, which requires a called shot (eye), which is a -8 attack penalty, and requires a critical hit to be scored, and requires the optional "limb destruction" variant I attached. a called shot to the eye or ears applies a -8 penalty to hit. The way i do called shots... if they hit say, an eye (which is diminutive) then they automatically get the critical associated with the eyes. aiming for a eye is if i remember diminutif so the target gain an additionlan +8 to ac on his eye, this bonus is added to its regular ac.I use the efect described in the DMG. Okay, that's three people on this thread advocating called shots systems which allow someone to stick a sword in someone's eyes. It seems to me you owe Sphyre an apology (or three).
Mitsukai_sama 03-21-07, 07:48 PM	Okay, that's three people on this thread advocating called shots systems which allow someone to stick a sword in someone's eyes. It seems to me you owe Sphyre an apology (or three). Well played, wrecan. :D
Mitsukai_sama 03-21-07, 08:20 PM	And, yet again, we've got someone arguing against random strawmen with no relationship to what's actually being discussed in this thread. Tell ya what: Instead of talking about some hypothetical 95% of called shot systems which aren't being discussed in this thread except by yourself, let's talk about the called shots which ARE being proposed in this thread. Thanks. Kindly read, reread, then post, in that order, though I'll humor you anyway. I merely warned that one should keep those points in mind when advocating a called shot system. Xeviat-DM's solution, while leagues more sound than most (to which I must applaud), still runs the risk of being hampered by the use of magic. With the expenditure of a first level spell, I'm dealing +80 damage at L20, with no loss to attack bonus. Say after other damage, I'm dealing 10 more damage on average, after all other modifiers (a bit low, actually, but let's stick with that), for an average total of 90. But the target I'm up against is an equally high level Knight who just keeps spamming Loyal Beyond Death, despite the fact that I'm pummeling him. I need to wait him out for about a minute. In this system, provided I haven't made a mistake, called shots are for half damage. So provided I hit with my called shot to the arm (not too hard with somewhere around a +35 total attack bonus with my Brilliant Energy weapon of choice), I deal 45 damage. Because Save DC is based on damage, they're looking at a Save DC that can't even be approached by most 9th-level spells, more than likely delivering an effect on par with a Bestow Curse. I'm not saying its necessarily OP, but something to examine very closely.
Xeviat-DM 03-22-07, 03:52 PM	With the expenditure of a first level spell, I'm dealing +80 damage at L20, with no loss to attack bonus. Say after other damage, I'm dealing 10 more damage on average, after all other modifiers (a bit low, actually, but let's stick with that), for an average total of 90. But the target I'm up against is an equally high level Knight who just keeps spamming Loyal Beyond Death, despite the fact that I'm pummeling him. I need to wait him out for about a minute. I'm glad someone pointed out the True Strike "problem", by which to say I don't consider it to be a problem. First off, where's the +80 damage coming from? If you're using my system, there is no extra damage from called shots. If you're using the Book of Iron Might system, you could get +8 damage for taking -20 to hit. If you're using Power Attack and a two-hander, you could get +40 damage from taking -20 to hit with a two-hander, but that's entirely core. If you're using the Book of Iron Might system, lets say you're trying to use True Strike to abuse a maneuver. Let's say you're trying to Blind the opponent (-30 to hit), and you take the effect only drawback (reduce penalty by 5; this means you won't deal damage with the called shot), and the saving throw drawback (reduce the penalty by 5; requiring a Fortitude save DC 10 + 1/2 BAB + Str bonus), making this blinding maneuver a total of -20 to hit, which will blind the foe for 1d4 rounds. You use True Strike to avoid this penalty, and you now think you've blinded someone with a first level spell, right? Blindness is a 2nd level spell, so you're saying this is unfair? It's not. Blindness is a single target spell, cast at a minimum range of 130 feet, has a permanent duration, and requires a Fort save (DC 12 + Int/Cha bonus; since the 2nd level version is a bard or sorcerer/wizard spell). This maneuver, for you, was effectively a 1st level spell that took two actions to cast (one to cast True Strike, another to make the attack), required a melee attack roll, has a 1d4 round duration, and requires a Fort save. Seems balanced to me. Stop complaining. No one here has advocated a Called Shot system that will cause instant death, to be abused by True Strike. The most varied and viable called shot system I have seen, better than my own, is the Book of Iron Might maneuvers, which I was only shown 2 days ago, and even it cannot be abused by True Strike when it comes down to the time it takes you to do it and the drawbacks/limitations of the maneuver. Would you think a 1st level spell, requiring a melee attack roll, 1 action to cast and 1 action to attack, with a Fort save, and a 1d4 round blindness, would be a balanced spell? Sounds fine to me.
Shinryouga 03-22-07, 05:56 PM	I updated a version of the crticical hit location and severity charts from 2nd Editions Combat and Tactics, along with a called shot mechanic for "threatening an effect" outside of a critical hit. I'm currently finishing a 2 year playtest of them, and they work perfectly fine once both DM and players remember "good for goose, good for gander". The update includes the rules for removing the effects of such wounds, which is also useful for other situations, like when a benevolent PC cleric offers to heal the farmer's broken leg. The system works well for when a PC wants to do something cool, like shoot a fleeing enemy in the foot, or slash a spellcaster's hand. Because it involves not only an attack roll (penalized if a called shot), and a fortitude save on the victims part, it seems to balance out fine. I found the system, in my game at least, helped with the competitiveness of fighters at later levels. And when a dragon decides it's had enough of that nasty sword, it can do the same and go for your arm as well. The only "downside" of this system is that it is exceptionally powerful in the hands of a huge or bigger, high base attack creature. Great Wyrm dragon's can routinely sever limbs. As my campaign reaches higher level, I am working on appropriate countermeasures to such balance problems. Anyone interested in a copy of the system to date is free to get one. Send me a private message; I'll try to get it out as soon as I complete my current update to it.
Sphyre 03-22-07, 06:22 PM	Kindly read, reread, then post, in that order, though I'll humor you anyway. From my experience, it doesn't matter how many times he reads it... he's still going to warp what you say until he's arguing about a point you didn't even make... (Wait, isn't that what a true strawman argument is? Hmm, I think it is. It would help if he could also use the term correctly, as opposed to trying to use it in a bombastic manner to "win" his arguement.) In reference to Xeviat-DM, it depends on how much the penalties are for making such a maneuver and how it can be done. I think -30 and -20 are much more in line than the earlier suggested size of the part system. Also, comparing someone to hitting someone in the eye and giving them blindness that's "Instantaneous" as opposed to the permanent duration on blindness/deafness (something as simple as dispel magic or dispelling touch takes care of it). Having the duration be 1d4 rounds as Xeviat-DM suggests, along with other provisions that are normally overlooked starts to make a viable system for called shots. Personally though, I'd just use the mechanics already given in the game... Make things into feats, martial maneuvers from the tome of battle, or ambush feats to implement 'called shot equivilents' that don't already exist in the system. The biggest advantage of making a system like this though, is that it allows anyone to attempt it, as opposed to with the current rules, without the prerequisite feat you aren't even allowed to attempt special maneuvers. Read the post. Get over yourself. I'm merely applying my opinion to the scenario. If you don't like it, tough luck, don't agree with me then don't respond. If you like it, you can't claim credit for it.
taski 03-23-07, 01:49 AM	Also, comparing someone to hitting someone in the eye and giving them blindness that's "Instantaneous" as opposed to the permanent duration on blindness/deafness (something as simple as dispel magic or dispelling touch takes care of it). For a while, I was considering designing a called shot system. The idea occurred to me that the wounds created by called shots, even if they're special penalties and not hit point damage, are purely physical injuries. It wouldn't be a stretch to allow the cure x wounds line of spells to fix them, and it would go a long way toward improving playability. The tricky part would be in figuring out which called shot could be healed by which level of cure x spell. Is a lost eye a major wound or a light wound? In any case, a single lost eye wouldn't make the target completely blind, unless they only had one eye to begin with. The biggest advantage of making a system like this though, is that it allows anyone to attempt it, as opposed to with the current rules, without the prerequisite feat you aren't even allowed to attempt special maneuvers. That's the kind of system I'd like -- one that anyone can attempt. But I'd also like to see feats that provide payoff for players who wish to invest in it.
Cantuse 03-23-07, 02:21 AM	In my opinion, the vast majority of reasons to use called shots is purely to disable an opponent. Whether its shooting a fleeing opponent in the foot, kneeing them in the groin or throwing acid in their face; its all about disabling the opponent. I think the real solution to this is to use the wound/vitality point system, as the rules for wound points for npc classes make this a lot more viable for PCs without breaking any real combat mechanics.
Greg K 03-23-07, 06:20 PM	For a while, I was considering designing a called shot system. The idea occurred to me that the wounds created by called shots, even if they're special penalties and not hit point damage, are purely physical injuries. It wouldn't be a stretch to allow the cure x wounds line of spells to fix them, and it would go a long way toward improving playability. The tricky part would be in figuring out which called shot could be healed by which level of cure x spell. Is a lost eye a major wound or a light wound? In any case, a single lost eye wouldn't make the target completely blind, unless they only had one eye to begin with.. The 2e Combat and Tactics critical system and and third party 3e supplement Torn Asunder by Bastion Press both added to the curing of critical effects to the healing spells. Both books would be good starting.
JustinA 03-25-07, 12:07 AM	Tell ya what: If you can quote ANYBODY in this thread advocating for a called shot system in which you can choose to "stick a sword in his eye", I'll apologize. You're putting words in my mouth. Really? You didn't say: "Although, when refering (sic) to adding a called shot system, people are talking about "I stick my sword in his eye" or stupid things like that that have much greater effect than combat maneuvers that may impose temporary combat penalties." You're not only lying, you're doing a very poor job of it. Seriously, you're still going to have to back that statement up. (Wrecan's lame attempt doesn't cut it, because it doesn't actually support your statement.) Justin Alexander http://www.thealexandrian.net
Sphyre 03-25-07, 04:34 AM	Really? You didn't say: "Although, when refering (sic) to adding a called shot system, people are talking about "I stick my sword in his eye" or stupid things like that that have much greater effect than combat maneuvers that may impose temporary combat penalties." I never said I didn't say that. Yet again you are trying to skew what I said. "I like to beat girlscouts at playing soccer" Saying "You didn't say 'I like to eat girls?'" by truncating the entire message. You're not only lying, you're doing a very poor job of it. Seriously, you're still going to have to back that statement up. (Wrecan's lame attempt doesn't cut it, because it doesn't actually support your statement.) I'm not lying. You're being an ******* and the only one here who doesn't notice it is you. So wrecan "quoted you" asking for any posts refering to poking eyes out. He did. But what do you do? You call it a lame attempt. My statements based on "elements existing in DnD that obviate the need for a called shot system." (as mitsukai_sama so eloquently put it as) and a "true called shot system" are completely different. You made your mistakes here, and this is why you're so far removed from reality: And all you need is truestrike to destroy any calledshot system. True strike destroys Power Attack? True strike destroys the trip maneuver? Misinterpretation number one of yours. I said Truestrike destroys any called shot system. Power attack is not a called shot. Power Attack is a 3.5 mechanic that alleviates the need for called shots to the 3.5 D&D system. At least in the context I was speaking. Everyone else gets what I'm saying, why are you out of the loop? Oh yeah, because mitsukai_sama pointed out that you're using two terms interchangably that aren't interchangable. Yeah, I'm not buying it. I'm not buying it either. Because I'm not saying truestrike destroys power attack. You TWISTED what I said into beleiving I said it. Good job. You're the one using strawman arguments here. Like tripping them, disarming them, sundering an item, or the like.Well, I'm glad I managed to convince you that you were completely, totally, and absolutely wrong in your earlier post. I'm glad you were able to warp what I said, and then took the one thing that you took of what I said correctly, and then tried to take credit for it because you actually understood it. Everyone else understood what I said... why are you the only fool not doing so? The game allows for a lot of different non-damaging moves without needing a called shot system. If you want to make a new kind, just make a new feat - that's how it's balanced. Sundering, disarming, and tripping aren't feats. Yet again out of context. When did I ever claim they were feats? Again, you completely thinking I'm saying something I'm not. :rolleyes: If it's something that anyone could reasonably attempt to do (like shooting someone in the leg to hamper their movement, for example), it shouldn't be something that can only be done with a feat. (Although feats can be used to make those things easier to do.) Currently in 3.5, it is something that only can be done with a feat. And sneak attack. It's called Hamstring from the complete warrior. If you want to nerf Hamstring by changing your rules for your game, that's your perogative, but I'm fine with it as is. You have done nothing but been trying to feed your own ego by imagining a world where people say things that they don't. I hope you're having fun, because you're just making yourself look like a fool. You don't owe me 3 appologies as wrecan said, you owe me a whole lot more than that. I wouldn't hold my breath on that either, because you're just going to post yet the same gibberish over again, use terms incorrectly, and act haughty, because, who would ever accept that they may have made a mistake? Obviously not perfect JustinA :rolleyes:
Xeviat-DM 03-26-07, 03:54 AM	Justin's point was that we don't require people to spend feats to be able to disarm, sunder, trip, grapple, bullrush, or overrun, because these are things that anyone can do. A feat means you can do it well. I'm not sure how many of our famously geeky community have been in real fights, but hitting a guy in the crotch, or simply aiming for someone's nose, is not an incredibly difficult maneuver. Heck, most "vital shots" are not hard at all. Knowing how to locate pressure points and put people into submission holds, those are hard. Poking someone in the eye = not hard. Additionally, about True Strike, unless a Called Shot system is allowing things that are entirely out of the reach of 1st level spells, then there is nothing True Strike can do to overpower a system. I've shown this with the Book of Iron Might called shot system, and the "Called Critical" system that someone suggested before wouldn't be ruined by it either. We have gotten a little out of hand here, but as an advocate of having a good Called Shot system in play, I do not think having one is out of the spirit of the game, or impossible to balance. To me, it's just like people's irrational fear of psionics: some people remember somebody somewhere doing something incredibly broken, and it has colored their opinions forever. Here is a small list of things called shots should not be able to do: 1) Ignore Armor: The AC granted by an armor already takes into account the amount of the body that is left open. Full plate leaves, for the most part, only the eyes open, and that's why it grants +8 AC. Aiming for the eyes does not mean you can ignore the AC; that's what everyone is trying to do. 2) Instant Kill: Called Shot (Brain), or other nonsense, would not work in the system. An Instant Kill is a 4th level spell effect at the lowest (Phantasmal Killer), and that spell requires two saves and is limited to creature types. Since the true instant kill spells don't come around until 5th level, such an effect is entirely out of the reach of a Called Shot system. As far as I can tell, none of the Called Shot advocates on this thread have suggested these two elements being in any Called Shot system.
Sphyre 03-26-07, 04:35 AM	I understand what Justin's point was in terms of what he was saying. My opinion that I don't mind the system being how it is, and the fact that he wants more is not what he's accusing me of. That which I took offense to was his warping of what I said into something that I didn't say. I didn't claim that truestrike breaks power attack, and his responding to me as I did was a big tip off to me that he warped what I said. In fact, most of his terse arguments against me are fabricated gross violations and obscure misinterpretations of what I said. It's easy to call someone a liar when you put words in their mouth. Selective misinterpretation is not an excuse to call someone a liar.
wrecan 03-26-07, 10:22 AM	(Wrecan's lame attempt doesn't cut it, because it doesn't actually support your statement.) I wasn't trying to support Sphyre's statement. You gave your word that you would offer an apology if it could be shown that a single person on this thread advocated a called shot system in which someone could stick a sword in another person's eyes. I gave you not one but three examples. If you didn't mean what you wrote, you should be more careful about what you promise to do. Rather than remain true to your word, you decided to attack the messenger. Conclude what you will as to what observers of this debate might take from that behavior.
Demonicazura 03-27-07, 09:57 PM	Well instead of proposing a penalty, maybe a sort of concealment? That would make trying to do something like stab out someone's eye hard to do, and true strike wouldn't affect it. And just in case for attacks and such that ignore concealment, call it something different, and give a bonus based on your BAB, because it'll be easier for a more experienced person to hit vital areas. It's just a suggestion, and is probably rather flawed as providing a fix for "called shots," but that's what I have to offer.
Mitsukai_sama 03-28-07, 12:31 AM	I'm glad someone pointed out the True Strike "problem", by which to say I don't consider it to be a problem. First off, where's the +80 damage coming from? If you're using my system, there is no extra damage from called shots. If you're using the Book of Iron Might system, you could get +8 damage for taking -20 to hit. If you're using Power Attack and a two-hander, you could get +40 damage from taking -20 to hit with a two-hander, but that's entirely core. First, if I'm coming off as complaining, I apologize, as this wasn't my intended tone. I only wanted to make a point of being wary of such a situation. The damage bonus assumes the full power attack of a Frenzied Berzerker (with the help of their increased power attack multiplier for two-handed weapons). Not core, granted, but the situation may well arise. I should also note that I'm not familiar with anything not WotC, so I cannot speak on such things.
Greg K 03-28-07, 12:48 AM	I should also note that I'm not familiar with anything not WotC, so I cannot speak on such things. That's too bad. You've missed a lot of great stuff that, imo, blows the majority of WOTC's material away
Mitsukai_sama 03-28-07, 02:29 AM	That's too bad. You've missed a lot of great stuff that, imo, blows the majority of WOTC's material away Depends on the publisher, as I've seen it. I've glanced at some material from Malhavoc Press, seemed pretty decent to say the least (as could be expected, I suppose). Then again, I've seen a lot of subpar third-party material as well. As a brief aside from the topic, are there any others you'd recommend, when my wallet allows?
taski 03-28-07, 03:15 AM	I think comparing called shots to "special attacks" like trip is a good idea. A lot of those provoke AoOs, and if the AoO hits, the action is wasted. Adding that to called shots would make players think twice about using them.. and makes truestrike risky.
Shinryouga 03-28-07, 07:55 AM	Umm, you do realize that of the "special actions", grapple attempts are the only thing that is "auto-defeated" by a successful attack of opportunity?
Greg K 03-28-07, 09:10 PM	As a brief aside from the topic, are there any others you'd recommend, when my wallet allows? Check out the link below which will take you to a thread on really good third party material. Not everything mentioned is DND related (there are some d20Modern and other d20/ogl game stuff mentioned). However, it will give you a good place to start looking. http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=191725
Xeviat-DM 03-29-07, 01:09 PM	Umm, you do realize that of the "special actions", grapple attempts are the only thing that is "auto-defeated" by a successful attack of opportunity? Disarm does too. DISARM Step 1: Attack of Opportunity. You provoke an attack of opportunity from the target you are trying to disarm. (If you have the Improved Disarm feat, you don’t incur an attack of opportunity for making a disarm attempt.) If the defender’s attack of opportunity deals any damage, your disarm attempt fails. Called Shots should be compared to the other combat maneuvers. The issue is this: should Called Shots be considered one maneuver (and thus have a single "Improved Called Shot" feat), or should they be considered different maneuvers since they have vastly different effects?
taski 03-29-07, 07:24 PM	I think called shots should be considered different maneuvers. A single feat that improves all of them would be too much, I think. We don't, after all, have Improved Trisarpple (Trip, Disarm, and Grapple all in one!). Also, I think some Called Shots should have tougher or more specific initiating actions than others. It should be rather difficult to poke someone's eye, and it should probably require a light piercing weapon (a greataxe is a bit unwieldy to perform such a delicate maneuver), and provoke an AoO because you're getting up close. Speaking of Maneuvers, I'm thinking that these called shots should be just slightly worse than any low-level Sublime Way maneuver. Initiators do pay something for their goodies, and it wouldn't be very nice to suddenly give them away for free. I'll have to study my ToB some more.
Xeviat-DM 03-31-07, 03:29 AM	I think called shots should be considered different maneuvers. A single feat that improves all of them would be too much, I think. We don't, after all, have Improved Trisarpple (Trip, Disarm, and Grapple all in one!). Also, I think some Called Shots should have tougher or more specific initiating actions than others. It should be rather difficult to poke someone's eye, and it should probably require a light piercing weapon (a greataxe is a bit unwieldy to perform such a delicate maneuver), and provoke an AoO because you're getting up close. Sounds good; perhaps they could be grouped by what you're trying to do: blinding attack, deafening attack, dazing attack, staggering attack ... unsure whre you draw the line. With the maneuver system I was shown in this thread, better effects have a larger attack penalty. Blinding someone for 1d6 rounds is a -30 to attack, while tripping someone is only a -20 to attack. From my small amount of time working with it, I've made called shot: arm, called shot: leg, called shot: head, called shot: eye, and called shot: ear. Arm and Leg are -4 to hit, Head is -8 to hit, and eye and ear are -12 to hit; though I'm not sure those penalties are going to be managable at all. About the weapon size to blind issue; you might not be damaging the eye itself. A wound to the brow could blind someone with blood, and a punch right to the nose can blind someone with tears.
brknstar 04-06-07, 02:43 PM	Similar to what a few others have said, my called shots rules were very similar to Sunder attacks, but the effect was pretty simple: ever see the DMG? Check out the page of variant rules that goes over damage to specific locations. That's all there was to it. So yeah, you could hit a guy in the head and not deal any extra damage, which may not be what some players are looking for, but the penalty of -2 to pretty much EVERY roll does help. Plus, I made all such penalties cumulative...so if you keep whacking an enemy in the head, the penalties go up and up and up. Again, it's a system similar to Sunder, so really good fighter-types could stop most called shots. I also made ranged called shots more difficult (basically a ranged sunder, but as if striking an area 2 sizes smaller than the creature's size, which adds some penalties). Not only that, but I made Precise Shot more worthwhile: you couldn't try a ranged called shot into a melee unless you have the Precise Shot feat. Anyway, the rule has worked, and those penalties listed in the DMG based on location are pretty worthwhile for the system. If you're just looking for more damage, it's not worth it, but if you like the effects, it's fun. And enemies love it too. FYI - abilities like True Strike didn't help with called shots. My explanation was that direct bonuses like that depended on something to the effect of prescience: knowing where the enemy would go. The problem was that you didn't know exactly where every single part of his body would be after he moved, so you couldn't make a called shot with the ability. Maybe that's a bad interpretation or whatever, but it kept the rule from being abused.
Archtyrant Terevoth 04-08-07, 01:56 AM	The problem here is that it doesn't simulate the reality of armed combat, where a good hit can cripple an opponent's limbs. I find it strange that D&D doesn't allow you to dismember your opponents with a solid swing of your greatsword... D&D isn't simulating realistic combat. If you got hit by a bite attack from a colossal dragon, you would be in pieces. Yet in D&D you just get hit and keep going.
RobbyPants 04-10-07, 10:38 AM	First and foremost: I would recommend agaisnt creating a called shot house-rule. It can add a certain level of "realism" to your game, but these types of rules are very abusable. Many effects of called shots can be easily replicated with existing feats and combat maneuvers: Power Attack - think of it as strking a vital area that is a small target, rather than hitting very hard Disarm - think of it as attacking an opponent's arm/hand Trip- think of it as attacking an opponent's leg Hamstring - this is actually a very called-shot-like feat that sacrifices sneak attack damage to hinder an opponent's movement Crippling Strike - an attack that deals Str or Dex damage. This could work like a called shot Now, some of these maneuvers require a feat or class abilities. For a simple house-rule, allow them (or at least some of the weaker ones) to be used untrained with a -2 penalty. Perhaps anyone can replicate a power attack, but they take an additional -2 to hit without the feat (so -3 to hit/+1 damage, or -3 to hit/+2 damage with a two-handed weapon). If you still feel that you want to add more to your system, I would strongly recommend keeping it simple, and not too powerful. The easier it is to insert into the core rules, the better! For a simple example, lets look at some things we could do for simple called shots: Arm - You take a -4 penalty to the attack roll. If you hit, you deal half damage (as the arm isn't "vital". We'll assume you're normally aiming for the head or torso). You may make a free disarm attempt if the attack is successful. Alternaltely, perhaps the opponent must make a Reflex save (DC 10 + the damage dealt) or drop the weapon. This second varient might get a bit broken at higher levels. Leg - You take a -4 penalty to the attack roll. If you hit, you deal half damage. You may make a free trip if the attack is successful. Alternatly, perhaps the opponent must make a Reflex save (DC 10 + the damage dealt) or fall prone. Head - Don't make head called shots uber-powerful! I would keep this one a bit weak. Perhaps take a -4 penalty to the attack roll. If the opponent is casting a spell, the Concentration DC increases by +2. If the attack deals damage, the opponent is dazzeled (-1 to hit) for one round. Resist the urge to daze or stun the opponent. This might seem "realistic", but it replicates some very powerful feats (such as Stunning Fist). Sensory organs - Do not allow these!!! Called shots to eyeballs (or whatever) get broken very fast! Do not allow snipers to shoot out targets eyes. All of your battles will quickly result in each side trying to mutilate the other side as fast as possible to blind the fighters and break the jaws and hands of all the caster! This is not what you'd want in the game. ;) Again, if you want to make a new system, keep it simple. Perhaps you could create a feat tree that reduces the penalty from -4 to -2, and might add some more powerful (but not too powerful) abilities. Just to reitterate, I'd recommend sticking with the core rules, and just use them to replicate the called shots.
JustinA 04-18-07, 02:35 PM	Sensory organs - Do not allow these!!! Called shots to eyeballs (or whatever) get broken very fast! Do not allow snipers to shoot out targets eyes. All of your battles will quickly result in each side trying to mutilate the other side as fast as possible to blind the fighters and break the jaws and hands of all the caster! This is not what you'd want in the game. ;) How busted can this really be? You're duplicating the effects of a 2nd level spell (that doesn't require an attack roll). Justin Alexander http://www.thealexandrian.net
RobbyPants 04-18-07, 03:09 PM	How busted can this really be? You're duplicating the effects of a 2nd level spell (that doesn't require an attack roll). It has more to do with a uses per day thing, as well as how easy it is for anyone to obtain. In order to cast the spell, you need to be a 3rd to 5th level caster and the defender must fail a Fort save. This also takes up a 2nd or 3rd level spell slot. In order to blind someone with a called shot, you need to hit them in the eye, and (I would imagine) do a single HP of damage to them. No save. No minium level requirement. No spell slot (unlimited uses).
Xeviat-DM 04-18-07, 04:29 PM	In order to blind someone with a called shot, you need to hit them in the eye, and (I would imagine) do a single HP of damage to them. No save. No minium level requirement. No spell slot (unlimited uses). I enjoy when people don't read entire threads. The called shot system I presented above requires, for an eye shot, an attack at a -12 penalty, requires you to deal damage, and allows a fortitude save (DC 10+damage dealt) to resist. Seems like casting "Blindness/Deafness" is a lot easier. And speaking from a spellcaster's position, you only need to hit someone with Blindness once. A reasonably well built Wizard can easily have 4 blindness/deafness spells a day around 8th or 9th level, no problem. That gives them one spell a fight, if necessary. Especially since my called shot system allows said blindness to be cured with a single point of magical healing, or a DC 15 Heal check ... not broken at all.
Nathreet 04-18-07, 06:27 PM	The main problem I have with called shots and special effects is that your normal attacks also hit vital areas (albeit at random) and yet have no special effects. Tracking what hits where for every attack would be a chore (but I know at least 1 system that does it). Second, I'd think a normal shot to the leg wouldn't slow you down so much. A powerful shot to the leg wouldn't just slow you down, it'd be a major injury requiring proper treatment or else it might lead to gangrene, major blood loss, etc. I think a called shot system that fits well with the rules would involve a size bonus to AC bonus based on the size of the target. A near miss might still hit a different part of the body and deal damage normally (I'd say 50:50 for a limb/head, since it could veer either way, and 100% for something like the heart). Enough damage would require a fort save vs. massive damage or else the limb would be lost/disabled (depending on the weapon). Lost or destroyed limbs/eyes/etc. require a regeneration spell to heal; normal healing doesn't work. Broken/disabled limbs may be healed normally. For example a crossbow bolt might injure a leg ("disabled") or take out an eye ("destroyed"). Damage is dealt normally regardless of the results of the fort save (though a failed fort save vs. a massive damage dealing head shot would result in instant death). Variations: Ordinary fort saves vs. massive damage might affect a random limb. For example, you might actually fall and break your leg. Or snap your neck. Or break your wrist. You might apply a penalty to attack (-2?) for called shots since the character must focus on a body part rather than picking whatever's open.
Xeviat-DM 04-18-07, 06:41 PM	A more simplistic way of doing a called shot system, instead of having them be maneuvers, is a called critical system. When you score a critical threat, before rolling your critical confirmation roll, you could choose to accept a penalty to your critical confirmation roll in order to potentially cause a penalty if the opponent fails a fort save. Or, depending on the amount you beat their AC by with your critical confirmation roll, you could choose from a list of effects you'd like to attempt. This sort of system would be great alongside a regular called shot system, because it would allow you to willfully deal a debilitating wound, or to have debilitating wounds come up randomly. Using the WP/VP system means you don't really need a called shot system for standard penalties (though blindness and slow and other conditions are still nice to have around), since being wounded fatigues you, and being fatigued means you suffer -2 str and dex, and you can't charge or run. WP/VP systems have gone a long way to making me not need a called shot system, but since I've gone back to HP I'd like one.
Roll_Over_Vic_Veller 04-18-07, 06:51 PM	In order to blind someone with a called shot, you need to hit them in the eye, and (I would imagine) do a single HP of damage to them. No save. No minium level requirement. No spell slot (unlimited uses). I would say that any called shot to the eye should allow some sort of Ref. Save. I would anyway. One of my favorite examples of a called shot in combat is the old "cut the caster's tounge out" trick. I love that one.
RobbyPants 04-18-07, 07:24 PM	I enjoy when people don't read entire threads. The called shot system I presented above requires, for an eye shot, an attack at a -12 penalty, requires you to deal damage, and allows a fortitude save (DC 10+damage dealt) to resist. Seems like casting "Blindness/Deafness" is a lot easier. And speaking from a spellcaster's position, you only need to hit someone with Blindness once. A reasonably well built Wizard can easily have 4 blindness/deafness spells a day around 8th or 9th level, no problem. That gives them one spell a fight, if necessary. Especially since my called shot system allows said blindness to be cured with a single point of magical healing, or a DC 15 Heal check ... not broken at all. You're right. I didn't read the entire thread. I was replying to JustinA who was replying to my post. I read the OP and responded to that with my first post. Sensory organs - Do not allow these!!! Called shots to eyeballs (or whatever) get broken very fast! Do not allow snipers to shoot out targets eyes. All of your battles will quickly result in each side trying to mutilate the other side as fast as possible to blind the fighters and break the jaws and hands of all the caster! This is not what you'd want in the game. ;) How busted can this really be? You're duplicating the effects of a 2nd level spell (that doesn't require an attack roll).
Egarb 04-25-07, 12:49 PM	Heres the system i came up with recently for an upcoming d20 modern game. === Called Shots === What are Called Shots? A called shot is an attack against a specific part of the body. Why would I want to make a called shot? Called shots can be used to disable or hinder opponents, granting you an edge in combat. How do I initiate a called shot? 1) Declare that you are making a called shot instead of a normal attack. 2) Decide what sort of called shot you are making. 3) Attack your opponent at the increased AC on the table (see below) or take the penalty for the specific attack. 4) Determine the effect on your opponent using the following rules. === Called shots to limbs === ======================================== ======== | Locations AC Bonus* Total HP | |======================================= =========| | Arm (Left/Right) +2 1/4° | | Legs +1 1/3 | | Head +8 | | Eyes +10 1/5 | | Wings +1 1/2 | |======================================= =========| | * See Helmets | | ° Per Limb | ======================================== ======== Damaging a limb Every limb has a maximum hp equal to some fraction of the creatures total health (Always round up instead of down) except for the head. When a limb is damaged keep track of the damage dealt to each limb. All damage dealt to the limbs still counts towards the creatures HP count, but the damage for hitting periphial limbs may be decreased (or increased!). When a limb reaches 0 hp (Lethal and Subdual) it cannot be used any longer until healed. If it reaches -10 (Lethal) it is maimed beyond natural healing and needs either medical or magical healing. Dealing more damage than would reduce it to -10 deals no more damage to the creature. Massive damage cannot be inflicted via any limb except the head. Healing a limb A limb can be healed in much the same as a creature. A heal check can be performed on a specific limb. Any damage that is healed to a limb also counts towards the creatures max hp. If the creature itself is healed limb damage is healed last. To magically heal a limb in combat the caster must succeed in touching the limb itself, increasing the AC as appropriate. Setting a broken limb To begin the healing process of broken limb it must be properly set and cared for. The heal check DC is 30 - Creatures Con bonus. Once set the limb goes to -9 and will begin healing 1d3 days later. A limb can be magically healed before this time. A cure moderate wounds spell is sufficient to set a broken limb without a heal check. A cure minor wounds spell provides a +10 bonus to the check. AC bonuses for limbs of smaller or large creatures The AC bonus for limbs follows the rules for granting AC bonuses based on size (Except for the eyes and head). For larger or smaller creatures, scale the value as needed (On medium creatures arms are tiny, legs are small, the head counts as fine, and the eyes are always two points harder to hit than the head). This AC bonus is used instead of the creatures normal size bonus. === Status effects for called shots on body parts. Arms: Attacks to an arm deal half normal damage Hit: -2 to attacks with that arm (including any attack made with a two handed weapon used in that hand) until the beggining of the attackers next turn. Multiple hits stack. -1 to the AC bonus of any sheild used in that arm until the beggining of the attackers next turn. Multiple hits stack. Minimum sheild bonus of 0. 0 : Cannot use this arm. -10: Arm is maimed. Needs regeneration or surgery. Crit: Fort save (DC 10 + Str or Dex + 1/2 BAB) or drop weapon. Legs: Attacks to the legs deal half lethal damage and half subdual damage. Hit: -5 to base land speed until the beggining of the attackers next turn. 0 : Creature falls prone and cannot stand. -10: The legs are maimed. Needs regeneration or surgery. Crit: Fort save (DC 10 + Str or Dex + 1/2 BAB) or drop prone. Head: Attacks to the head deal 1d6 extra damage. Hit: -2 to initiative (This immediately modifies the turn they go on, this never allows a character to go more than once per round). Fort save (DC 10 + Str or Dex + 1/2 BAB) or be stunned for one round. Crit: Stunned for one round Eyes: Attacks to the eyes deal normal damage. Hit: 25% miss chance until the beginning of the attackers next turn. This effect does not stack. 0 : Nearly blinded. The creature is dazzled and has a 40% miss chance. -10: Permenantly blinded. Needs regeneration or surgery. Crit: Fort save (DC 10 + Str or Dex + 1/2 BAB) or be blinded for 1d4 rounds. Wings: Attacks to the wings deal half normal damage Hit: -5 to fly speed until the beggining of the attackers next turn. Multiple hits stack. 0 : Cannot use wings. -10: The wings are maimed. Needs regeneration or surgery. Crit: Fort save (DC 10 + Str or Dex + 1/2 BAB) or be unable to use the wings for 1d2 rounds. Other Effects: When a creatures limb is maimed it must make a DC 15 fortitude save or take one point of constitution damage. When a creatures limb is maimed it takes 1d8 nonlethal damage. Representing pain. If a critical called shot is made the effects of the hit are multiplied by the weapons critical modifier in addition to the critical effect. Unless otherwise stated the 'Hit' effect stacks. === Non Limb Specific Called Shots === What are they? Any attack that takes the place of a standard attack to get a specific effect. Under this new definition some special attacks such as trips and disarms are "Called Shots". Reading the format Proceded by the name of the special attack is the relevent ability, use this to determine your bonus to the attack roll instead of strength or dex. A penalty is listed, add this number to your attack roll. The format also shows whether it is a ranged or melee attack. New Special Attacks: Agile Strike (Dexterity) Melee Total Penalty: -5 As a full round action you can attempt a normal attack that denies your oppnent their dexterity bonus to AC. Combat Throw (Strength) Melee Total Penalty: -10 As a full round action you throw your opponent 10 feet away from you and ends up prone, this attack incurs AoOs and your opponent is entitled to an opposed strength check. This attack deals no damage. Suprise Shot (Dexterity) Ranged Total Penalty: -5 As a full round action you can attempt a ranged attack that denies your opponent their dexterity bonus to AC, this attack incurs AoOs. === Helmets === Throughout history helmets have been one of the most important pieces of armor, second only to shields in some eras. These optional rules can be used in anchient or modern settings. Helmets provide a +1 bonus to AC all heavy armors and some others come with a helmet. A matching helmet can be bought for any suit of armor (for +1 to the purchase DC or an extra 50 gold) or individually (DC 10). Though helmets provide extra protection, they penalize vision and hearing, they impose a -4 to spot and listen checks and a -1 to initiative checks. Aside from the +1 to AC they also provide they grant a +2 to ac for checks to confirm criticals agains the head or eyes. Anytime the head is struck there is a small chance that the helmet will be knocked off (Reflex save DC 10 + 1/2 attackers BAB to prevent), it is also possible to disarm an opponent of their helmet. It is a move action to don a helmet.
Egarb 04-27-07, 08:04 PM	Did I kill the thread or just jump in right after it died?
Sphyre 04-28-07, 01:28 AM	Did I kill the thread or just jump in right after it died? the latter. I wouldn't mind if it were the first though. Let it die.
brknstar 05-04-07, 02:45 PM	Hah! It will never die! Here's me reposting my called shots rules, which work just like everything else in D&D, for the most part. Enjoy or ignore at your leisure...my group uses it and it seems to work. Called Shots Called shots allow you to aim an attack at a specific target on an opponent in order to deal additional effects above and beyond damage, based on where you strike the target. These rules use the “Damage by Location” variant found in the Dungeon Master’s Guide. Note that penalties caused by called shot damage stack in the case of numeric penalties to dice rolls, and are doubled on a successful critical strike with a Called Shot. For movement penalties, the first successful called shot halves movement, the second quarters it, and the third makes the target immobile (in the case of land movement, they may be able to crawl at the DM’s discretion). Called Shots in Melee Combat: · This is a full-round action (an attack). · You specify the location that you are attempting to strike on the target. · You provoke an attack of opportunity (AoO). If the AoO is successful, your called shot attempt fails. · You make an opposed attack roll against the opponent. If this roll is failed, your called shot attempt fails. · If successful, you have struck the location you initially specified and deal damage normally. If damage is successfully dealt to the opponent, they also apply the effects of the Damage by Location rules from the DMG. Called Shots in Ranged Combat: · This is a full-round action (an attack). · You specify the location that you are attempting to strike on the target. · You cannot attempt a called shot into a melee unless you have the Precise Shot feat. You cannot attempt a ranged called shot against a creature that is 3 or more size categories smaller than you. · If you take damage from an attack of opportunity on you (from firing a ranged weapon while in melee, for instance), your called shot attempt fails. You make an attack roll with the weapon as normal, however you are considered to be firing at a target at least two size categories smaller than your target’s actual size.