Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Illithius 10-18-03, 03:55 PM	maybe...I was just thinking about vampires and firing wooden crossbow bolts at their heart.....seems pretty ok...becuase the heart is a fine target (+8 ac) has the basic AC of the character too (except for size) benefits from full concealment (%50 miss chance) and may be protected withcover (variable...maybe the vampires arm is blocking the heart....I'd say maybe a locked half-cover should work...oh look at that...theres only one type of cover in 3.5...ok...so +4 ac there)...with a vampire monk of maybe 10th level....that makes the heart have an AC of...38 maybe? (10 base + 8 size + 2 special monk + 4 dex +4 wis + 4 cover +6 natural)...I'm talking roughly...with a 50% miss chance too... and thats pretty hard for anyone to pull off if this vampire is a challenge... then along comes a +5 bolt and a +3 crossbow and bless spells...and all sorts of buffers and the icing: true strike suddenly that heart looks like a pot-shot right? I say...WRONG! magic helps guide weapons to a body, and may not be used to target a specific part...it only veers the weapon towards the actual body...doesnt care is it hits a hand of a head...(this is all IMO) so I say that when making called shots...the only modifiers may be base attack bonus, ability bonus, possibly MW, and possibly other conditions (high ground, invisibility, etc.)...and if a monster knows it has an achilles heel (vampires heart) then perhaps it will have a bonus to protect that...cause he wouldnt be so careless... just an idea...maybe it'll work
ManTimeForgot 10-18-03, 05:29 PM	It's a lot more complicated than that Illithius. I'm sorry to say but if you make every shot a called shot, then D&D has just gotten too deadly. My friends and I played hardcore D20 a while back, with called shots and all, and it wasn't bad, but that was because we VASTLY powered up all the characters. With standard characters a barbarian will walk up to a wizard at first level and chop his head off. Human Barbarian 18 str + 4 str from rage = +6 to hit. Weapon focus gives another +1 to hit. Now with +8 to hit at first level the barbarian can take a called shot to the head which is a tiny structure (about the size of a pixie for a medium size creature which amounts to a GRAND total of+2 AC) and lop the wizard's head off. Let's take a wizard. Dex of 14 which means he has 12 AC and that is it. I mean the barbarian doesn't even have to rage to be able to take the guy's head off. Without rage its a +6 to hit, and against the head's 14 AC, this wizard is going to die in one maybe two rounds. That just does not work. Gonna have to think of some better ways to do it than just size. Also called shots need to take time, otherwise every fighter and their cousin will just do them in full attack actions. How do you justify not including certain modifiers? True strike guides the weapon to its target; if the target is some spot on the chest, then why wouldn't it work? How do you determine which modifiers to apply? Insight wouldn't work? Luck wouldn't work? Thank You all and have a nice day. Signed, The Man Time Forgot
Vaalingrade Ashland 10-18-03, 05:42 PM	My way: AC +10, +Dex (always) +size mod, +4 from armor So, a the head of that wizard would be: 12 + 10 + 8(diminutive size) +4 = AC 34 A called shot if a full round action that provokes an AoO. Using a called shot with a ranged weapon also invokes a 50% miss chance.
ManTimeForgot 10-18-03, 05:52 PM	Last Time I checked the human head is bigger than a toad which is dimunuitive. Ergo the human head which is about 1ft in height (about the same height as a pixie) is a Tiny structure. Calling the head diminuitive is just crazy (even still that is only +4 to ac not 8. Fine which is the size of a fly nets +8 to ac. To be honest my friends and I when we did our hardcore d20 game did double the size modifiers to AC. Since hitting a dragon should not be difficult considering it is larger than a house. Damaging the sucker should be difficult, hence we made natural armor give DR. And tagging a fly should be ridiculous, so the fly is +16 AC, but according to the core D&D rules the fly is only +8 to ac and the diminuitive toad is +4. Also ashland, where are you getting that extra +10 AC from? Base 10 + 2 dex + head size (which should only be +2) + mage armor which is +4 = At a maximum 18 ac. Thank You all and have a nice day. Signed, The Man Time Forgot
Oilam Sence 10-18-03, 05:56 PM	Called shots may be made ballanced... but two words ruin all the balance TRUE STRIKE
alix 10-18-03, 06:03 PM	Main idea leads to that Magic bonuses lead not to the point of target body, but just body. So you have no use from sch spells and effects, when you just make called shot
Vaalingrade Ashland 10-18-03, 06:03 PM	We've always doubled AC to size. I didn't even realize that wasn't the real rule. I add a +10 because it is far easier to shield something the opponent is conciously striking at repeatedly than to block all incomming attacks.
ManTimeForgot 10-18-03, 06:33 PM	Well I like what you have there Ash except for the part about the 50% miss chance with ranged weapons. I suppose that you allow called shots out to the weapons max range. Well the guys and I when we got together to make our hardcore d20 game decided that that was ridiculous: we know how hard it is to hit a small target with a gun that has a scope let alone a sling that has no scope. So we decided that sneak attack was roughly a called shot in how it functions (not in terms of mechanics just how it functions), and thus we limited all ranged weapon called shots to 30ft distance just like sneak attack (and other precision damage bonuses). The only way to increase this was to take out of core feats which extended the sneak attack range, and by default the range at which called shots could be made. Called shots with a weapon call for a level of accuracy, but that is what the full round action is for: to aim. I think putting the 50% miss chance on there is too detrimenatal to ranged weapons, especially when used at close range. If I sneak up behind someone with a crossbow and point the crossbow at their head, then there should be no 50% miss chance; the guy should just die. Also the +10 AC, while I agree with it on principle, when we did our system, we simply added an additional -4 to the attack roll for doing called shots simply because it required more dexterity to hit the target. (doubling size mods is also almost a must for a system with called shots). I recommend checking out the "grim and gritty" rules system. You should be able to find it on line somewhere. It is a very elaborate realistic rules system, which the guys and I used as a basis for our Hardcore d20 setup. Thank You all and have a nice day. Signed, The Man Time Forgot
detectevil 10-18-03, 06:57 PM	All systems that use the Concept of Called shots fall under one of these two Categories. Or called shots don't represent much advantage, so nobody remembers using then. Or called shots are too good when compared to the penalty they incur, so every shot is a called shot. There is a system of called shots, in L5R, that is based on the idea that you are always trying to hit your enemy in the most lethal spot possible. So there is no called shot for the heart, the head, etc. You just anounce you want to take X penalty to deal X extra damage. Kind of like power attack. In such case, instead of stating: "I want to hit the vampire's heart", you would just shoot it. If your attack reaches some DC the DM has decided was the amount necessary to hit the vampire's heart, than there it is. You would make called shots to hit an arm, a leg, making a disarm. The problem with D&D is that it already has manouvers that cover most of this funcionalities.
Illithius 10-18-03, 07:22 PM	regarding called shots to the head...its much easier to avoid a blow directed at your head because 1.) you are more threatened and will move out of the way at all costs 2.) a chop to the head is more easily dodged than one to your mid-section....just duck or lean forward or back a bit its hard to put that in DnD terms...but I think thats why IRL head hits arent drastically common i think... (perhaps extremities may benefit from double dexterity bonus [with maybe a minimum bonus too] and double size bonus?)
Oilam Sence 10-18-03, 08:04 PM	Ok? we have some ideas of how to make a called shot... Now what effect should it have? Just -2 penalty for actions that are tied to that spot seems too simple... there should be way to loose a limb, or to kill someone in 1 shot even if you dont do enough damadge. Still this should be balanced so that it wouldn't be must do for everybody. The problem of current system is that for example archer cant kill even an ogre in 1 shot without 20 20 20 or magic. Ive seen a system where if you beat your targets AC by 10 DM rolls a crit. hit (not just multiplied dmdg, but table for almost any spot on the body and the effects), Because if you beat it by 10 you probably hit what you wanted.
Dungeon Master 10-18-03, 09:07 PM	You could always rule that for every 5 points above the required number to hit the target you gain a 50% increase to damage. Of if you want to use called shots, you could do it the way I do: Called shot is a full-round action The target gets a bonus to AC depending on its size (I double these AC bonuses because I don't think they are high enough as is) Either the called shot provokes an AoO, or you just get a penalty to AC because you are concentrating on hitting this little spot and not on defending yourself.
Vaalingrade Ashland 10-18-03, 10:14 PM	For damage to spots, I think I'd use my Maim rules (my PCs rarely use called shots because they dislike slowing the game down to do the math). Maim If the confirmation roll on a critical is a 20, you score a Maim threat. on confirmation,[begin on topic portion of mechanic] the target loses 1/4 of total (i.e. full) HP and lose the abilty to use that limb (it is cut off). For Maims that hit the head (see table), instead the target loses 1/2 HP and takes 4x damage. Maim table (d8) 1-2 -- arm 3-4 -- leg 5 -- Head 6-7 Broken ribs, -5 to all rolls, Critical failure is now 5 and below 8 -- Bleeding torso wound, lose 3 Hp/ round.
ManTimeForgot 10-18-03, 10:46 PM	Sorry to burst anyones illusions about fighting but in real life called shots are made every time some one attacks. There is no generic shot to the body. Only an idiot or an inexperienced fighter goes for just straight body shots. You will find some of the larger fighters will go for the floating rib, solar plexus, or collar bone, but those are still called shots. The head has to be struck the most often of just about any place on the body in a fight. That's all there is to it. In real life weapons change the battlefield immensely though. Once weapons are involved any shot to the head becomes nearly an instant victory. In real life hand to hand fights will take about 10 seconds if it is a long fight with multiple opponents. If weapons are involved a fight should last no more than about 5 seconds, ever. The only possible exception to the above is if an Aikido fighter is involved. Total defense versus total offense boils down to a contest of skill. If skill be matched, then it becomes a contest of endurance. And even then, that fight will never last more than a minute or so. Thank You all and have a nice day. Signed, The Man Time Forgot
Vaalingrade Ashland 10-18-03, 10:51 PM	I believe our 'called shots' are based on taking your time and focusing on the strike. It often irks me when the abstraction takes away the usefulness of a sniper. In the words of Largo: snipers pwn!
Edymnion 10-18-03, 11:25 PM	You know, I always find it funny when people mention a wooden steak to a vampire's heart, especially during combat. D&D Vampires aren't mindless, and I'm pretty sure any of them that have been vampires for more than a week are going to invest in a breastplate ;)
Nephet 10-18-03, 11:57 PM	D&D has no adequate rules for these kinds of called-shots. Therefore it's the DM's responsibility to decide their efficacy on a case by case basis.
Bort333 10-19-03, 02:50 AM	Why are people obsessed with called shots? They are dumb.
Xychotic 10-19-03, 05:43 PM	...when someone refers to the classic means of slaying a vampire and misspell the tool. It's a riot to think that you have to put a wooden "steak" through the heart of a vampire. It reminds of the ancient Bunnicula books. Folks, it's "stake." We all know this, so, I'm just clarifying the spelling. The best you'd do with a "steak" is make them laugh so hard they go gaseous.
Vaalingrade Ashland 10-19-03, 05:55 PM	What did that have to do with called shots? My concern is mostly with snipers. They really have no combat value in the current combat system.
Toptomcat 10-19-03, 06:11 PM	Sorry to burst anyones illusions about fighting but in real life called shots are made every time some one attacks. There is no generic shot to the body. Only an idiot or an inexperienced fighter goes for just straight body shots. You will find some of the larger fighters will go for the floating rib, solar plexus, or collar bone, but those are still called shots. The head has to be struck the most often of just about any place on the body in a fight. That's all there is to it. In real life weapons change the battlefield immensely though. Once weapons are involved any shot to the head becomes nearly an instant victory. In real life hand to hand fights will take about 10 seconds if it is a long fight with multiple opponents. If weapons are involved a fight should last no more than about 5 seconds, ever. The only possible exception to the above is if an Aikido fighter is involved. Total defense versus total offense boils down to a contest of skill. If skill be matched, then it becomes a contest of endurance. And even then, that fight will never last more than a minute or so. Thank You all and have a nice day. Signed, The Man Time Forgot That's true in melee combat, but not ranged combat. With a bow, crossbow, or gun, it's best to aim for the center of mass to ensure the greatest number of hits, as a hit on anything but a limb with any one of those is reasonably lethal.
ManTimeForgot 10-19-03, 06:14 PM	Bort: People are "obsessed" with called shots because real life combat only uses called shots. People want called shots for a measure of realism. We all figure D&D combat strives to mimick real life as accurately, while making it simple, as possible. Many of us feel that adding a called shot feature would not be exceedingly complicated and would not be overpower. Thank You all and have a nice day. Signed, The Man Time Forgot
Twisted Puppy 10-19-03, 06:17 PM	Originally posted by Vaalingrade Ashland My way: AC +10, +Dex (always) +size mod, +4 from armor So, a the head of that wizard would be: 12 + 10 + 8(diminutive size) +4 = AC 34 A called shot if a full round action that provokes an AoO. Using a called shot with a ranged weapon also invokes a 50% miss chance. VA, this is as good (and easy to use) as any called shot system I've seen suggested. I must say that I'm going to keep with my current method of called shots: that is, they AIN'T HAPPENIN'!! I agree that without them, snipers lose their value, but when my players asked me about called shots, I pointed out that if they could use them, so could the bad guys, and they haven't asked about it since. Good job, though, and thanks for posting it. Another DM in our group may give it a try, and I would be interested to see how it worked out.
ManTimeForgot 10-19-03, 06:20 PM	Ostensibly that is what we are talking about here Toptomcat, but then with ranged combat it becomes a matter of sniping. Sure a shot through the arm will put a man down, after he bleeds to death. Exactly like hunting deer, wound it and let it run down. A shot with a crossbow through the arm is not going to kill immediately, nor will it prevent the person from engaging in combat with anything other than a 2hander of a weapon. I applied the sneak attack limitation to the range at which ranged called shots could be made to reflect how hard it is to make called shots at a range. A person with a crossbow in the dead middle of combat isn't taking a called shot, almost certainly, but then what do you do about the "sniper" types. Shouldn't sneak attack be a feat or something. Why should it be beyond the purview of the fighter types, especially one which proposes to shoot accurately, to hit vital areas? Having the called shot be a full round action means that sneak attack will always be more powerful, but the called shot will be none-the-less useful. Thank You all and have a nice day. Signed, The Man Time Forgot
Edymnion 10-19-03, 10:28 PM	I'll just say this, and it usually stops any of my players from ever wanting to see called shots ever again in my game. Anything you can do, any enemy with an intelligence of more than 3 is also going to be able to do. You want called shots to the head? Fine, then the badguys will be swinging clubs at your head like they were playing baseball. Arms or legs? Hope you like sitting in one place doing nothing, cuz there's a sorcerer over there with a heavy crossbow and the True Strike spell. Basically, Called Shots are player attempts for easy wins. But for some reason, they tend to throw fits when the monster completely removes their character from battle in the first round using the same tactics they used in the last 50 fights. How about an elite squad of evil halfing dagger throwing sorcerers with Hold Person, True Strike, and that like to aim for the Head/Neck/Kidneys? No, called shots are not a good idea, simply because they ruin combat far too quickly.
Razaiel 10-19-03, 10:54 PM	I have been reading this thread with a lot of interest. In a lot of the games I have played in as well as being DM the issue of called shots has inevetably come up. As a player I like the idea of called shots because it can disable an enemy with one hit rather than taking several rounds to do the same thing. As a DM I tend to dislike called shots because players usually whine and complain when they get a dose of their own medicine. I guess that called shots should be included into the game to increase realism, but a word to the wise: sometimes too much reality in a fantasy game can be a bad thing. For example I started to use the critical hit table from 2nd Ed that made critical hits damage specific body areas (ie: limbs, head, torso) and would impose severe penalties upon the victim. This seemed like a good idea on paper, but in practice it took a lot of the fun out of the game. I guess that's my two cents on the topic.
ManTimeForgot 10-19-03, 11:12 PM	Well I can't talk for other people edymnion, but I don't care if the enemy can use called shots. I like the excitement. Knowing that the enemy can kill me raises the stakes. It makes me feel like there is something more to the game because it means that my character is not invincible. Thank You all and have a nice day. Signed, The Man Time Forgot
Vaalingrade Ashland 10-19-03, 11:41 PM	Actually, I'd be fine to disallow melee called shots if there were an aiming mechanic with ranged weapons.
ManTimeForgot 10-19-03, 11:51 PM	To be perfectly frank I would be content with a system for ranged called shots only as well. In melee combat adding in called shots would create a host of difficulties, but ranged shots would not complicate things. Thank You all and have a nice day. Signed, The Man Time Forgot
Gothic_Demon 10-20-03, 10:58 AM	I'm not sure that the DnD system is geared up to handle called shots, because it does require a lot of work on the part of the DM figuring out what the chance of hitting a specific body part is, how much damage a creature/person can take to said body part before it begins to take penalties, etc. There are problems with called shots that have already been mentioned and argued, so I won't repeat them. I do want to discuss the idea that people seem to have with called shots being great. It comes across to me that people seem to be comparing a called shot with a longbow or crossbow to a head shot with a sniper rifle. Simply hitting the target with a crossbow or longbow is difficult enough for the AVERAGE person, that such a called shot system is pointless, because you aim for the body because its the biggest target. As for a character, who is naturally better at these things, they want a called shot system to instantly kill, but it's not that easy! An arrow would kill as easily as a bullet if it is a perfect hit and goes right into the important places, but people hit with arrows generally didn't die of the arrow wound, even if hit in the head. They die of the infection and blood loss instead. And in melee combat, you don't simply aim for the body, you take whatever opening is given to you; wherever you can stick your dagger/sword/axe will do fine. Because of that, the ability to shoot someone in the head is less important than being able to hit them. So, I doubt it's really an issue of making the game more realistic, and more about power play to the players (and DMs) who want to make use of them. This is something that the HP values don't really help with. You'd probably have to look into a different way of recording and calculating hit points for a proper called shot system to work properly. That said, you might want to try allowing a called shot to ANY area, with a penalty to the roll based on the size of the area (e.g. legs -2, arms -3, head -4), and calculate a set number of hit points for that area (60% of full per leg, 50% of full per arm, 40% per head; NB it's not meant to add up to 100%. I'm well aware that it is currently at 260% body notwithstanding.) So, for a 20 hp character: Each leg has 12 hp. Each arm has 10 hp. The head has 8 hp. When the area has taken that much damage, allowed the called shot to 'work', otherwise it wasn't quite perfect enough. For particularly tough creatures modify the percentages. (E.G. A dragon might have really tough head scales, so it has 60% of its hit points as head hit points) Of course, the sum total of damage should also be taken from the 'real' hit points, and so many times a chopped off arm will be close to killing the guy anyway... Hope that's useful to someone... It was quite long. :)
the Horc 10-20-03, 12:36 PM	I would add the Reflex bonus to the save, and drop the STR bonus to hit (hitting harder does not necessarily means you hit where you want, though you might keep Dex bonuses in case of weapon finesse) and qite possibly halve the base attack bonus. Although you may be trying to chop the guy's head off, it's hard to do. Also, I would suggest that making a called shot should use the percentage system (so a guy's head has like 40% of the hitpoits, so if you chop at the head and exceed the damage of 40% of the remaining HP, the head comes off) Remember, class HD is pretty much the character's ability to dodge and weave and avoid most of the damage dealt (there is a physical toughening, but mostly it's that IMHO)
Otto the Bugbear 10-20-03, 09:00 PM	The main problem with called shots is not how to work out the game mechanics. If the DM and players all agree that it should work a certain way, it will work that way. The problem lies in the fact that it is way to harsh on the PCs. One of the greatest changes made from 2ed to 3ed was to make monsters much more similar to PCs. This means that an orc fighter could have weapon focus and power attack, just like that human fighter (which I'm sure you all know;) ). When you allow every monster the PCs fight to have the same options as the PCs, called shots end up being a way to really screw up the characters. Monsters are, by game design, disposable. This means that if an ogre takes a called shot to the head from the elven archer, so what, that's (typically) what he was there for anyway. If that Ogre uses a called shot to the elven archer, you've just screwed with that character, possibly affecting that player's fun. And that's what it's all about, players having fun. Therefore, the first thing that should be decided is whether or not the intent is to screw up a player's night. If not, then the idea should just be dropped. Cheers Otto :)
Josh_Kablack 10-20-03, 09:32 PM	Originally posted by Vaalingrade Ashland Actually, I'd be fine to disallow melee called shots if there were an aiming mechanic with ranged weapons. I liked Frank's answer: Create a feat which is essentially a ranged weapon version of Power Attack and name that Feat "Called Shot". It's simple, it's not unbalanced, you have a mechanic for aiming and you have something to point players towards when they complain about wanting to do called shots.
Vaalingrade Ashland 10-20-03, 10:07 PM	I'm not too partial to that way because it stays in the abstract. I really would like the ability to aim at something.
Donnavin Snowolf 10-20-03, 10:55 PM	Well, you could always say what your aiming at. Like if you aim at the head, you're probably taking a -5 for +10 damage (bows are two handed weapons mind you :P). If you kill the creature with that shot, you hit. If you don't kill it but hit him (depending on how many hp the bugger has left) you missed the head, but hit the side of the neck, the collar bone, or maybe it just hit a rib. Of course, that doesn't let you nail an opponent's hand to a tree with an arrow. Which is one of the things I'd like a called shot for essentially.
halfhand 04-19-04, 01:15 PM	These called shot rules have been playtested in my group. The idea is that the actual location where to hit is not important, and therefore, Called shots works similarly to Power attack. For every -4 penalty to attack, weapons threath range for that particular strike is lowered by 1. Taking -8 to attack with longjohn gives 17 to 20 threat range.
Winternova 04-19-04, 02:23 PM	I've been struggling with my group over the inclusion of Called Shots for some time, and The system we've finally worked out is somewhat based on the old 2E rules: Limb and called torso strikes are -4 to hit while a headshot is -8. In 2E, you took an initative penalty to do such an attack, and I'm contemplating making the called shot take a full round, but that seems slightly severe. The other option I'm considering is that called shots cannot be made as part of a full attack option. That still leaves the hero able to make an attack and move around a bit though. The only effect that called shots have in my campaign is that a critical hit will effect the targeted location instead of being randomly determined (we use a modified 2E critical hit location/ severity chart.) The complaint in my group is that a called shot should do more. The reason it doesn't is because things would be too powerful. They'd just end up reducing a fight into a series of headshots, and while that may be more realistic and faster, there would be consequences for the players too. Though they may claim that they're cool with that, I still fear that the end of my group would begin with saying "The rest of the group observe Joe's character's head snapping backward, and emitting a red cloud before his lifeless body slumps to the ground." If the PCs can do it, so can the enemy. Though I like the ability to control monsters' abilities as though they were characters, I do use copious amounts of red-shirt nameless mooks. There are guys out there who's destiny in a perfect campaign world is to meet his end by my band of heroes, but in the meantime, he'll fight as hard and smart as racially possible, ie. whereas a man with a gun will know where cover is, I don't expect any C4-planting zombies. Every fight should feel like it will be their last. The inclusion of the more lethal called shot rule could certainly achieve this goal, and will definately result in more PC deaths-by-mooks. I DO Like lethal systems, but I'm having a hard time defining the lethatlity of called shots without adding a bunch of needless rules and stuff. I do like the idea of modifying threat ranges for called shots, or for adjusting Massive Damage Threshold (d20m) for called shots as well, and these will probably be what gets tweaked the most. I came up with a lethal system awhile back that dealt only with specific injuries, ie your character won't get hit with a mace for 5 points of damage, you'll get hit, blinded in one eye, and start bleeding to death. It's geared more towards d20m, and if anyone wants to take a look at it, feel free to PM me or something. All in all, this thread has been a good reading experience.
Nyvinyd 04-19-04, 02:44 PM	This is going a ways back, but the size of a fly being fine with a modifier of +8 is just fine, and shouldn't be compared to batting a fly out of the air. A fly has a NASTY dex bonus, that's why it's hard to hit. When you catch a fly flat-footed (sitting on a table and you have a flyswatter) then they really aren't that hard to hit.
Undercover 04-19-04, 03:20 PM	Originally posted by halfhand These called shot rules [...] the actual location where to hit is not important, :confused: I've noticed three types of common resistance against called shots: 1) It makes the game more dangerous for PCs. It's true, albeit much less dangerous than adding any non-core book to your games. 2) It makes the game more complicated/complex. True again, and from what I've seen adds as much complexity as the grapple rules. Less if well designed, more if badly designed. 3) It's assumed you're already trying to hit the most vulnerable spot so no called shots are necessary. False. Just take a quick look at padded armor and banded mail descriptions and illustrations. Neither includes a helmet and still you apply the same AC bonus even if assumed trying to hit the head. Arguments here says you focus your defense on this unprotected area evening out the penalties, but why your focus only adds +1AC if wearing a padded armor and adds +6AC if wearing a banded mail? It's illogical. And if you wear a full plate (wich includes a helmet) you suddenly get cocky and stop focusing on your defense at all? If it's assumed you're hitting the head, shouldn't the enemy get at the very least a bit dizzy after a few good blows? What if you just want to prevent escape and aim the legs? Conclusion: the simplicity the design team strived for doesn't support this assumption. An excerpt from a XVIth century arms' master, showing that indeed they could aim to specific body parts if well trained: When attacking, do not false only against an area that can be safely covered by the shield. For, the enemy's sword is still free to do you harm. Instead, false in such a way that your opponent is obliged to defend at least partially with his sword (such as a high reverse, or to the knee).
StormKnight 04-19-04, 06:13 PM	My personal called shot rules: Called shot to head/vitals/etc = Power Attack. Called shot to legs = Trip. Called shot to hand/arm = Disarm. 3) It's assumed you're already trying to hit the most vulnerable spot so no called shots are necessary. False. Just take a quick look at padded armor and banded mail descriptions and illustrations. Neither includes a helmet and still you apply the same AC bonus even if assumed trying to hit the head. The assumption is not "you are trying to hit the most vulnerable spots", the assumption is "you are trying to cause the most damage". Therefore, if the opportunity presents, you will strike at the most vital/least protected areas. If the opportunity does not present, you will strike at better protected/less vital areas.
Undercover 04-20-04, 03:49 PM	Originally posted by StormKnight The assumption is not "you are trying to hit the most vulnerable spots", the assumption is "you are trying to cause the most damage". Therefore, if the opportunity presents, you will strike at the most vital/least protected areas. If the opportunity does not present, you will strike at better protected/less vital areas. I was recalling an argument Will Brandiman came up with in another thread (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=3083857#post3083857) about this subject. The way you put it it's another argument and it seems fine, although I don't see it restricting the use of called shots. I'm just demonstrating that it's ok either to use or not to use called shots, it depends on the group's willingness.
ChuckyD 04-20-04, 09:48 PM	The best way I have found to do it is this: The attacker gains these benefits: --Auto-threat(if to head, eye, other similar body part) I use the Threat-Critical-Instadeath critical hits optional rule in the DMG --Will "maim" depending on specific body part(similar to the rules of another poster here, but house-ruled, also got inspiration from the DMG on maim rules) The defender gains these benefits: --Gains size modifer of the target body part to their AC for that attack --Full Round Action for attacker(action goes off at the beginning of your next turn, giving the defender a chance to duck/hide/run/get some lucky cover from other people in the area) --AoO on attacker --Flat Footed for AC purposes for attacker It's useful if a specific situation calls for someone to knock something out of someones hand, slow them down by shooting their legs, or praying to insta-kill with an arrow through the eye.
Undercover 04-21-04, 08:27 AM	Remembering the title of the thread, let's give called shots rules a try. Location Hit Penalty Consequences Limbs -4 HP/2 damage incapacitates the limb. Hands, Feet -8 HP/3 damage incapacitates hand/foot. Head, Heart, Groins -8 +50% damage, daze: fort save DC = damage or dazed for 1 round. Neck -8 Damage repeats in the next round from bleeding. Eyes -12 Double damage, blinds. Miss by 1 hits the head. Penalties: it’s not only size that matters, but how easy it is to avoid the hit (i.e. a hand moves faster and more unpredictably than the torso) and balancing factors. Incapacitation: depending on the weapon it may be crushed bones (blunt), cut off (slashing) or temporary incapacitation until healed (piercing). Any use of that part is impossible while incapacitation lasts. A person without a working leg or foot suffers the same penalties as being exhausted. Weapons: you need a piercing weapon to reach the eyes or heart. Slashing or piercing weapons for the neck. HP/x: a fraction of full HP in damage to incapacitate. More than that is wasted. E.g.: if the fighter normally has 100hp, you need to inflict 50 points of damage to his right arm to cut it off with your sword (it doesn’t need to be all in a single blow), if the final strike to cut it off dealt 7 damage points more than necessary, those 7 points are lost. Blinding: one eye imposes a –2 penalty (DMG27), both eyes as per normal blind rules. Increased damage: a +50% or double damage means exactly that, you add 50% or double the damage inflicted. Creatures immune to criticals are immune to this damage increase. True Strike: makes you aim at the entire target as a general thing, preventing a called shot. Natural 20: lady luck is not so kind with such a precise strike and a natural 20 is not an automatic hit, it’s like a 19+1 :). Final thoughts: it seems that the way it’s set up the penalties are pretty much even with the benefits and with a reasonable amount of logic. Might have gotten more wordy than I originally wished, but it’s all simple and thus easy to learn (aside from incapacitation, there isn’t anything new under the sun). While it’s true the PCs will be in more combats than the NPCs, the penalties do not favor the underdogs, which are usually the NPCs. Two other considerations I forgot to mention: Calling the shot: it’s a full round action that doesn't draws AoO (not 1 round action as described in the previous post). Bleeding: is averted if the creature is healed or cured before it takes place.
Ankalagon 04-21-04, 09:10 AM	It could be as simple as The player states their intent (blind, kill etc 3 full rounds studying opponent (as per assassin). Double opponents MAX AC for the attack (including size and range modifiers). The called shot must do MAX dice damage i.e PC's or DM must roll an 8 if using a longbow. The target makes a DC15/20? Fort save or just follow CDG rules for the outcome. It is this outcome that dictates whether or not the player intent succeeded (incapacitate, kill etc) And yes on that basis a small damage weapon would be easier to achieve this, but they do not have the range. Also a small damage weapon is generally easier to hit a vital area with. In the above you are: 1) Allowing player intent 2) Making it difficult 3) Throwing in a very random element 4) Giving the opponent a chance to avoid That is quite balanced in my view, might no be perfect but there ya go. I think called shots are crap anyway. D&D is not a lethal system. It is a power game and the two do not go hand in hand. You will have to look at a lot of ways to achieve GAME BALANCE if you wish it to be genuinely lethal. MERP anyone?