Topic: Attacking specific parts of the body

[RandalThor]

The thing is, every time I throw a punch, or a kick, or stab with a knife, it can be argued that I am making a called shot, as I am aiming (at that moment) for a particular location. I am not just blindly swinging in hopes of hitting something (of course, I hope to hit.....). Now, that location is generally a target of opportunity, but once I am thrusting or swinging, it is for a location. 

RMs combat system is an "after the fact" targeting system, where after the results are tallied, the location that became open prior to the strike is determined. (I guess it could be called a retroactive targeting system.)

But, not taking into consideration the concept of called shots, just because they are harder than regular attacks, is a miss in my book. But, then again, I have no problem in doing it my own way anyway. Something as easy as a -50 to -100 OB, depending upon the location shouldn't be discounted. (I think those mods are a little high - I would go with -30/leg to -100/eyeball, or something like that.) And remember, they still need to us OB for their own defense, so this is just another thing cutting into their OB.

Also, I think it is totally reasonable to require them to develop Combat Skills that could/would support it, like Disarm, Feint, Swashbuckling, etc... Maybe saying that the maximum OB they can devote to a called shot is dependent upon that skill bonus (before the mod).

[GrumpyOldFart]

Here's an idea.

1. You can't call the shot unless you get a crit.

2. Your target number for a called shot is 101-(crit roll)-(1 per skill rank attacker has in Tactics)+(1 per skill rank defender has in Tactics). If you get a crit, roll for called shot. If you roll higher than the target, you get to call it. But the higher your original crit was, the easier it is to hit the called shot target, and tactics skill (both yours and your foe's) does apply.

Clumsy, but it seems to cover all bases.

[GrumpyOldFart]

For a simpler version, attacker can adjust the crit location, but not the damage, up or down by (attacker's tactics)-(defenders tactics). If that's a negative number, defender gets to do the adjusting instead of the attacker.

[Usdrothek]

Just ask your players if they want called shots against them from their opponents. I can bet what the consensus will be

[apituluaheb]

I look at combat (and all other aspects of the game) like this: What is it you* are trying to achieve?

If you are just trying to kill them, then the regular attack/combat rules is how we go about it. If you want a specialized effect, say putting your arrow through your opponents weapon arm in order inhibit his combat capabilities, then I would hand out a negative modifier (not very light, depending upon the results wanted and action undertaken) and you would go about making your attack (or skill check, whichever). How well you do, determines how well you do. If you get a roll over and finish with a total of 287, then I would adjust the critical to reflect the desired affect. (In this case, very likely you pierced his arm in such a way as to make it impossible to use, as well as delivering stun/bleeding/etc...)

The tables aren't sacrosanct. It is the desired effect and success "grade" that matter.

*Whoever is performing the action at hand.

I totally agree with  Randalthor. And by the way i am sorry but i meant "... most realistic AMONG table games" Sorry! My english keeps triking me...
I gave up on making charts and specific critics for a few reasons:
 The charts are mathematecally VERY difficult to make, as i have no other similar chart to take examples from. For example, i started with the head chart thinking it would be good to make very difficult to hit, but as soon as you hit it the critic is C or above... or even directly D or E. But i forgot about the armor class and stuff and it all suddenly turned too complicated, and i hadn´t even started with arms or legs charts...

So what i am going to do ( as the game starts tomorrow and my players are getting impacient and i told them it would be a very realistic world full of possibilities.. )  IS: I ll apply negative modificators to their OB depending what they aim for. If the blow/shot  is aimed as ussually then i ll use the chats like always.
Now i am thinking about this, give me a clue if it´s more or less correct.
-Shots and Blows to the HEAD: -55 ( as it s  the first thing we "naturrally" "move away from damage", See what happened to Bush and the Shoe-thrower )
-Shots and Blows to the ARMS: - 45 ( as they move fast but are in the "natural" position for attacking/grabbing etc, so more vulnerable)
- Shots and Blows to the Legs: - 35 ( as they move less fast than the arms, note here that i been practicing Muay thay sice i was 17 and low-kicks are the easiest and nearest targets   )

I will then apply the general concept of the critic obtained to the part of the body hit.
Ok so that s it! Thanks for the repplies so far!

[RandalThor]

Those numbers don't change seem bad. The only thing I would change is the modifier to hit the head, I would make it closer to -70 because we are naturally geared to protect our heads/faces (and, more specifically: our eyes).

How are you going to modify the crits? (If you are at all.) I was thinking that, if I target your arm specifically (trying to limit your attacking, or whatever), and I succeed, the effects could be heightened, like double the modifier (if any) from the bonus as it applies to the injured arm, but it would be normally applied to other actions. Stuff like that. Another idea, one that I think only works for a head or other vital called shot, is moving the critical up by 1, so an A becomes a B, C becomes a D, etc.. If you happen to get lucky and get an E crit, then the roll could be modified by +20.

I think it is worth remembering that the character (or NPC, for that matter) is taking a fairly hefty negative to their base OB, making it more likely they fail to hit at all, in order to gain an extra effect if they do happen to hit. So, I think it ultimately balances itself out.

[Vector Z]

So what i am going to do ( as the game starts tomorrow and my players are getting impacient and i told them it would be a very realistic world full of possibilities.. )  IS: I ll apply negative modificators to their OB depending what they aim for. If the blow/shot  is aimed as ussually then i ll use the chats like always.
Now i am thinking about this, give me a clue if it´s more or less correct.
-Shots and Blows to the HEAD: -55 ( as it s  the first thing we "naturrally" "move away from damage", See what happened to Bush and the Shoe-thrower )
-Shots and Blows to the ARMS: - 45 ( as they move fast but are in the "natural" position for attacking/grabbing etc, so more vulnerable)
- Shots and Blows to the Legs: - 35 ( as they move less fast than the arms, note here that i been practicing Muay thay sice i was 17 and low-kicks are the easiest and nearest targets   )

I will then apply the general concept of the critic obtained to the part of the body hit.
Ok so that s it! Thanks for the repplies so far!

Allow me to complicate things further

Your system is not bad, but if you really want things to be realistic, don't forget the possibility that even if your players are targetting a specific body part, it's still possible to hit their opponent somewhere else. This could be on accident because the defender suddenly moves (for example, raising their arm to block a head strike), or because the attacker attacks another open spot reflexively ("crap! i couldn't resist that rib-shot"). All kinds of stuff could happen.

You might want to combine Marc R's idea with the penalties you're describing. If the attacker scores a critical, they can adjust the result by up to their rank with that weapon/attack. Then let the player choose. So if they're targetting the arm for example, and there's a result within their range that describes arm damage, they can change the critical to that. But if there is no arm crit (maybe only legs, trunk, etc) then maybe allow them to choose their original critical, or get no critical at all. Just an idea

But I suggest that whatever system you choose, make sure you explain all the details to your players beforehand, and tell them that you're still experimenting with this system to see if it works. If it seems too unbalanced, or if you find any other problems with it, you'll change the system to something else. This way they'll be ready for the likely event that it'll be changed later, as you work out the bugs, and you won't have to spend a lot of time explaining/justifying the change

[RandalThor]

VZ, what you are describing here is similar to the Ambush skill, and something I was thinking about. It is definitely a way to go, but I would say, instead of using their full ranks as the maximum they can modify to get the desired result, use a divisor, like one-half or one-third (rounding down - all RM rounds in a way that is least favorable to the PCs). Or make them develop the Ambush skill (making it a Combat Maneuver, and developing it for each weapon you want to be able to call shots with) to reflect specialized training. Of course, you can just use the skill Swashbuckling......

But, no matter how you do it (if you are), I suggest always making sure the player gives a clear effect they desire out of the called shot, and having that be the "total success" if they do really well - no matter what the table says.

[Vector Z]

Good point, Rand. I guess there would be no reason to develop ranks in Ambush if anybody can just call shots and get the same effect. Well, I guess the difference would be the hefty penalty to the called shots, but that's about it.

I thought Swashbuckling was more about flash than actual combat effectiveness, so I'm not sure that's the route I would take, especially when I've never seen a player in RL with any ranks in it Though I would love to hear the phrase, at least once, "I want to swashbuckle his head off!"

A general skill check might be the best route to go, with a GM assigned difficulty level, using the attacker's OB. Though I shudder to think of limbs and heads flying as a result of a single "non-attack" roll

[ReaperWolf]

Ages ago, before the advent of the current iteration of Rolemaster, there was a newspaper like ICE product a buddy of mine showed me with variant critical tables broken up by location so you could either randomly generate or pick a location (with a OB penalty) and any criticals dealt were checked against the appropriate critical table.

Alternatively you could port over the hit location & critical system from HARPs Martial Law.

For my own games, such actions are resolved with the Ambush skill with the attacker modifying up or down the critical result by their number of skill ranks in Ambush. This gives the player some control of where the blow lands and the in-game effects.

>>ReaperWolf

[RandalThor]

Though I would love to hear the phrase, at least once, "I want to swashbuckle his head off!"

That would be funny. The point being, though, there are skills already in place that are used similarly to what you are looking for.

A general skill check might be the best route to go, with a GM assigned difficulty level, using the attacker's OB. Though I shudder to think of limbs and heads flying as a result of a single "non-attack" roll

The main reason I buck this concept is because the rest of the game (I am talking RMSS/FRP primarily here) is built on the idea that a single skill isn't generally used in a multiple of ways. In order to use a skill differently, you need to develop another skill that allows you to do that. This is the typical ICE, never make it easy for the player-character ideology.

Take Tracking & Reading Tracks, as examples. With tracking, you can follow the trail, but in order to know what you are following you need read tracks. In the vast majority of other game systems out there the tracking skill is used for both, and there are likely other uses, as well. As another example, look at all the combat maneuver skills. You need to develop each of those, usually for a particular weapon, in order to do them, you don't just use your weapons ranks to reflect how good you are in disarming, feinting, etc... (Other than as one part of the limiter, i.e.: the bonus is derived from the lower of the two skills.)

So it doesn't seem to fit with the RM system to use your skill ranks in attacking with the weapon to also affect your called shot in the way you mention.  (Personally, I am OK with it, it just doesn't fit the rules system.)

[GrumpyOldFart]

That was one of the reasons I used Tactics instead of Ambush. You can specialize it to Tactics (Close Combat) if it helps. The other reason was so it could be put in terms of skill v. skill, to put the defender back into the process.

I dunno what you'd use for called shots at range though, since you don't have any way to sucker your target into giving you the opening you want and you have to successfully predict his motion while the missile is in flight in order to hit the spot.

[apituluaheb]

Very good answers here, thanks a lot to everyone.
I start the game in a few hours, i ve been thinking that in order to put all this in practice i might start the game with a "cultural meeting" (with all kinds of competitions) so they can practice and get use to it without worriyng about the damage... So they ll fight with wooden swords etc...
By the way there is no magic in the world i created, so i allowed only Semi-spell casters and no-spells caster, and modified the spells list to make them look like skills, taking away those of them who where not realistic (such as fire, ice etc)
That s why i want close combat to be as real as possible offering millions of possibilities.
I ll tell you all the results soon!!

[yammahoper]

Ambush at rabge is Targeting, or Sniping.  In SM, Targeting is used to reduce range penalties when firing a single shot in a melee round and sniping is ambush at range.

Toemato, tomato.

[Grinnen Baeritt]

Generally I wouldn't try allocating specific percentages to different areas... base it on the size of the area in relation to the attacker.

For Human vs Human assume a 20% chance of hitting the desired location, and apply a -40 to the attack.

If the attacker would PREFER to hit the specified area but really doesn't mind hitting another part then...

If the attack still connects with the full penalty applied then it has hit the specified location, adjust the crit discription to reflect it, but don't adjust the severity.

If the attacks fails to hit with the full penalty, but would hit with half the penalty applied then the target has been hit as normal.
Other than that the attack misses completely.

If the attacker wants to avoid hitting any area EXCEPT the specifed area then simply apply the twice the penalty, and apply as above.

Against an unaware target... or one that simply doesn't have the intellegence to spot that a specifc area is being targeted and vunerable (i.e. a Zombies head). Then either use Targeting/Sniping/Ambush... assume the desired location is hit with the discription or halve the penalties mentioned above with basic melee attacks.

[Zedul]

If the attacker wants to avoid hitting any area EXCEPT the specifed area then simply apply the twice the penalty, and apply as above.

You could do all that, but in my opinion it's like trying to raise the chassis and put off road tires on a Porsche Roadster.

Seriously, I think Rolemaster is complicated and time consuming enough in combat rounds and doesn't need any additional hankering for more advantages for players.  If you want a smooth running fun game session then bogging down combat rounds with endless optional called shot rules and so on and so forth just gets vexing.  We tried it before and the system just isn't set up to operate that way, if it is super important I would use another game system entirely.

If a player pressed for the called I would apply at least a -100 OB penalty as there are that many different regions on the body.  A -200 penalty if they insist on "only that part no exceptions" and that should be sufficient to cover the bases.  Meaning they wouldn't do it unless they have a clear overwhelming advantage in which case the gm would just rule it done rather than wasting time rolling dice.

Each to their own though.

[Grinnen Baeritt]

There might be occasions where both the GM and the players wish to go for called shots... such as not wanting to kill only capture...shoot them in the leg. So, coming up with an alternative that allows that opportunity, rather than a random hack at the opponent and hoping for such a result, is a good thing and at least merits discussion.

I can understand why "Pandering" to players might be considered a bad thing, especially when the "Pandering" is a one way street. Allowing called shots to the head which cause instant death, or blindness is one of those sorts of rules that "goes against the grain" when compared to the remainder of the system where such effects are relatively random. If any players demand inclusion of that sort of rule then they should expect equal treatment by the GM. The trick is using a system that is similar to one that is very close to what is already used. easy to remember and does not overly favour the result or unduly dissuade the attempt.

[Vector Z]

There might be occasions where both the GM and the players wish to go for called shots... such as not wanting to kill only capture...shoot them in the leg. So, coming up with an alternative that allows that opportunity, rather than a random hack at the opponent and hoping for such a result, is a good thing and at least merits discussion.

Again, I'm thinking that in this situation merely excluding non-targetted criticals achieves the desired effect. I would still argue that a combat round is much more than a random hack, and ultimately reflects the combatant's ability to land an effective attack. If they want to specifically shoot them in the leg, then just ignore/cancel non-leg crits.

Just to expand a bit on this, the above mentioned method makes perfect sense for "careful" attacks, as you're looking to injure, not kill, so excluding crits would be a good way to go, imo. But I always have people calling head shots, going for a quick-kill and trying to bypass the normal combat system. If this is allowed, then it undermines a central element of the game, providing a way for players to dipatch their enemies quickly, an attractive alternative to spending rounds upon rounds of normal attacks, and is just begging to be abused.

Anyway, if you just want to catch your enemy, isn't that what subdual attacks/crits are for?

[Zedul]

There might be occasions where both the GM and the players wish to go for called shots... such as not wanting to kill only capture...shoot them in the leg. So, coming up with an alternative that allows that opportunity, rather than a random hack at the opponent and hoping for such a result, is a good thing and at least merits discussion.

I can understand why "Pandering" to players might be considered a bad thing, especially when the "Pandering" is a one way street. Allowing called shots to the head which cause instant death, or blindness is one of those sorts of rules that "goes against the grain" when compared to the remainder of the system where such effects are relatively random. If any players demand inclusion of that sort of rule then they should expect equal treatment by the GM. The trick is using a system that is similar to one that is very close to what is already used. easy to remember and does not overly favour the result or unduly dissuade the attempt.

Perhaps it's just my experience but almost every player I've had who has bugged me about called shots was always seeking to min max and gain a special advantage by doing so.  When it comes to combat systems on games I really don't like to alter them and include a whole separate critical range for called shots because its always "going for the heart" "going for the head" as the player wants to be the ultimate tough guy and just kill whatever they hit instantly. 

The times I consider their request are when they are honestly doing it for the roleplay purposes, such as when the evil wizard is waving a wand of ultimate destruction and the player is intent on knocking that wand the heck out of the bad guys hand, but when it's all about "I am going to be better than other players because I am going to shoot the bad guys eyes out whenever I go into combat." It just irritates me until I sick a Greater Black Reaver on them and ask them to try a called shot on that thing. 

After 30 years of GM'ing I suppose I have developed a bias and a short fuse with players over issues like this because I heard it all a million times.

Anyway, just my take or add to the discussion.  In the end everyone is going to run their session in the way that makes their players and themselves the happiest.  I am usually in the minority on such things. 

[Zedul]

Anyway, if you just want to catch your enemy, isn't that what subdual attacks/crits are for?

   *Nodding in agreement*