"Total" Hit Points an option?

[jstrong]

I'm thinking of taking up Legend with my gaming group.

I like much of what I see, but it seems the tracking of area-specific Hit Points would be a bit too cumbersome for our group. They are used to the d20 system "regular" mechanic of total hit points.

I like minor/serious wound stuff, but am thinking of just pooling all of a characters area HP's into an HP total for combat efficiency. I WOULD, however, use the area-specific hit table for critical hits (maybe) or serious wounds to add to flavour ("your knee has been crushed!" etc.).

My question is: does pooling hit points into a total have any game-breaking effects? I can't see any, but haven't actually played the system yet, so I want to be careful not to houserule something into things that will screw things up later.

 

[rust]

It would not break the system, but it would make combat much
less dangerous and potentially lethal than originally intended, gi-
ving the game a rather different "feel". That said, if you prefer to-
tal hit points and have no problems with a less gritty game, just
do it.

 

[Halfbat]

It can be done, and has been in Openquest. I tend to use it a lot except for flavour.

Using only total hit points gives the system a much _more_ lethal flavour, especially if major wounds are used (wounds over half total HP). The reason it ends up being more lethal is that basing things on the average of CON+SIZ normally ends up giving characters less hit points than they would normally have by adding up the hits spread around hit locations (e.g. 2 arms + 2 legs + head + etc).

Of course, targetting specific areas (e.g. head) are out so if your group uses that a lot it can mean peeps survive a bit longer.

 

[Lemnoc]

Some interesting and useful thoughts on this here:

http://retiredadventurer.blogspot.com/2012/04/hit-locations-in-openquest.html

 

[rust]

The reason it ends up being more lethal is that basing things on the average of CON+SIZ ...

Using the average of CON and SIZ is an optional rule for nonplayer
characters, player characters use CON plus SIZ, and I would also
use this with total hit points and reserve the average of CON and
SIZ for the "mooks".

 

[Da Boss]

I tend to use a variant of the Legend / D100 system with total hit points equal to CON +1 pt for every 1 pt of SIZ over 12 - but I like heroic / cinematic games

 

[jux]

It takes a lot out of it. When monster is hitt in certain location, other players will want to hit the same location. With total hit points, the monster will live twice that much.

 

[Mixster]

It takes a lot out of it. When monster is hitt in certain location, other players will want to hit the same location. With total hit points, the monster will live twice that much.

Nah, because now those players will be making useful combat maneuvers instead of choose location.

So all in all the combats might last a bit longer but the monsters will be helpless faster.

Having PCs hp at Con + Siz, and half that as a minor injury seems decent for not changing the game up too much.

It could result in the rather odd things that happen when people get hit by a crossbow and continue fighting, but that happens in normal legend as well.

 

[Cowboy]

What you can do is have total HP (CON+SIZ) and retain the locational HP scores but:
• Hits are always subtracted only from the total HP
• The locational scores are only used as wound thresholds - any wound doing more damage in one blow than the location's HP score is disabled (possibly with some permanent damage) and any wound doing more than twice this amount destroys it.

You get all the detail of the regular rules with just one pool of HP to track and a somewhat lower lethality.

 

[GamingGlen]

Have you even given the group a chance at trying the hit location system? It's not that hard to track since it's on the character sheet. They might surprise you, and actually like it.

Going back to the D&D system where you're as good a warrior when down to 1 HP as when you were at full HP is one of things I don't like about that system (as well as classes, levels, BAB...).

Cowboy's suggestion is a good in-between option, IMO.

 

[DamonJynx]

Cowboys post is sort of how BRP use Hit Locations as an optional rule (except IIRC they use CON+SIZ/2) and then each location is a % of the total. HP damage is taken from both the total and the location, when the location is reduced to X then it is useless but you weren't out of the fight unless you total HP were reduced to I think its below 0.

Personally, I think you should try the hit locations. Our group were staunch D&D players and they love using Hit Locations, mind you as players we all bemoan the lack of HP!

 

[Prime_Evil]

Cowboys post is sort of how BRP use Hit Locations as an optional rule (except IIRC they use CON+SIZ/2) and then each location is a % of the total. HP damage is taken from both the total and the location, when the location is reduced to X then it is useless but you weren't out of the fight unless you total HP were reduced to I think its below 0.

Personally, I think you should try the hit locations. Our group were staunch D&D players and they love using Hit Locations, mind you as players we all bemoan the lack of HP!

I like Cowboy's approach - it seems like a nice compromise between the BRP approach and the Legend / RQ 6 approach. It allows a sliding scale of granularity - those groups that want total hit points only can play the game that way and those that want hit locations only can also play the game the way that they prefer. You can even mix and match the two approaches if you so desire.