This all started with a debate on hit locations over on the forums at basicroleplaying.com (http://basicroleplaying.com/forum/basic-roleplaying/).
The gist of it is that side A says totally random hit locations are bunk - fighters always aim for a specific location. Side B says fighters take whatever opening the defender leaves open. There is, of course, some truth to both sides.
So I'll through out the following houserule for discussion:
If the attacker suceeds and the defender fails their dodge or parry roll outright, or does not apply a reaction to the attack, the attacker chooses the location hit. If the defender makes their dodge or parry roll but the attacker wins the opposed roll the attacker rolls location randomly.
This leaves the defender without any reactions left in a tough spot, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. Any thoughts?
The gist of it is that side A says totally random hit locations are bunk - fighters always aim for a specific location. Side B says fighters take whatever opening the defender leaves open. There is, of course, some truth to both sides.
So I'll through out the following houserule for discussion:
If the attacker suceeds and the defender fails their dodge or parry roll outright, or does not apply a reaction to the attack, the attacker chooses the location hit. If the defender makes their dodge or parry roll but the attacker wins the opposed roll the attacker rolls location randomly.
This leaves the defender without any reactions left in a tough spot, but that isn't necessarily a bad thing. Any thoughts?