Goodman Games

I have only read a few things from the Appendix N S&S material that the DCC RPG is trying to emulate, but is high PC mortality supported by these stories? The RPG Barbarians of Lemuria also tries to emulate this genre and it's take is that the PCs start off as special heroes and only get better from there. DCC it seems is trying to emulate Original D&D more than the S&S genre.

That's my take. Please correct me if I am wrong.

You bring up an excellent point, and one that is difficult to address. I don't think that the main protagonist dies in Appendix N fiction any more than the main protagonist dies in any other fiction, if this is the point you are raising. Conan never died in the stories. Fafhrd and Mouser didn't die. The mortality rate around them can sometimes be high, as Elric can attest.

I think that the real rationalle behind high mortality rate in DCC (and OD&D and Metamorphosis Alpha, and many other RPGs of the era) is that many of the stories of the genre have horror and fear as an element in them, and the easiest way to inspire fear in a player is to keep the character in constant danger of death. Ideally you'd like for characters to be near death at all times, to fear death at all times, but not actually to die.

More recent RPGs have changed this philosophy by promoting changing types of hit dice (d10's have more hit points than d6's) higher levels (and thus more hit dice) or other extremes like a "hit point kicker" (HackMaster). These are all intended to improve the survivability of the character but have the unintended consequence of also removing much of the fear of death. Characters often become more like walking tanks or cartoon characters who can shrug off damage and keep on coming.

Anyway, to answer your question: No, I don't think that the Appendix N literature directly supports high PC mortality.

Yes durability and fear of death is a tricky balance.

or other extremes like a "hit point kicker" (HackMaster).

Hackmaster has a high mortality rate, even with the hit point kicker.

the threshold of pain of the character is like 30% of their hit points (it does improve with lvls) and the weapons deals extra damage if the damage die hits the maximum number (exploding dice).

finarvyn wrote:You bring up an excellent point, and one that is difficult to address. I don't think that the main protagonist dies in Appendix N fiction any more than the main protagonist dies in any other fiction, if this is the point you are raising. Conan never died in the stories. Fafhrd and Mouser didn't die. The mortality rate around them can sometimes be high, as Elric can attest.
...
Anyway, to answer your question: No, I don't think that the Appendix N literature directly supports high PC mortality.

For that matter, the protagonists and main characters of fiction stories seem to treat morale and vigor much like game characters treat hit points.

Conan gets fatigued enough to fall unconscious at least once. He "resurrects" himself, but the narrative effect is much like a D&D character getting killed and resurrected by his party.

Frodo and Sam, pushing themselves to the limits of their endurance to get to Mount Doom, are very much like a D&D party struggling to get through the dungeon after they've run out of healing potions.

Harold Shea in "The Roaring Trumpet" spends most of the story being tired, hungry, and uncomfortable. He is much like a low-level character with injuries and just two or three hit points left.

Notably, Jack Vance's important characters sometimes die, but those are often not really heroes. The major protagonists of Vance's stories do not die.

If you were making a game to really emulate Appendix N, each player character would need to have points for vigor, willpower, and morale. In real life, and in Appendix N, people push themselves to the limits of their willpower, and then collapse into unconsciousness. In D&D, characters push themselves to their last hit point and then fall down dead.

I often wonder if 0 hit points shouldn't represent dead.

It seems like if the goal is to capture the spirit of literature, then characters shouldn't die so quickly. Characters get bashed on, beaten up, and eventually knocked out. Then they heal up and eventually get back into the adventure. In this spirit, the DCC "rollover" rule may be a fantastic guide.

Naturally if a character falls from a cliff or into a vat of acid or gets hit square-on by a fireball the DM could rule that death happened, but perhaps in other circumstances being stunned should be the norm instead of being dead.

Just me questioning my own style, but doing so out loud...

finarvyn wrote:I often wonder if 0 hit points shouldn't represent dead.

It seems like if the goal is to capture the spirit of literature, then characters shouldn't die so quickly. Characters get bashed on, beaten up, and eventually knocked out. Then they heal up and eventually get back into the adventure. In this spirit, the DCC "rollover" rule may be a fantastic guide.

I do love the rollover rule. I had considered something similar for 4e D&D.

Naturally if a character falls from a cliff or into a vat of acid or gets hit square-on by a fireball the DM could rule that death happened, but perhaps in other circumstances being stunned should be the norm instead of being dead.

Just me questioning my own style, but doing so out loud...

Personally I like the fear of death to be real but actual dead to be rare for PCs. I have been having some luck with this in my 4e game. Two sessions ago the fighter was at one below his negative bloodied value and had failed to death saves. He survived but he knew he got lucky. Then last time the party was neaarly TPKed. Again they survived but realised that they ccould have died.

For the DCC RPG I really like the luck stat. I am considering a house rule to allow permanent luck burning (and it would be permanent for thieves and halfings too) to avoid a death blow. For example, if a PC has 5 hp and gets a blow for 8 points of damage then that character could permanently burn 4 luck to remain at 1 hp.

I am also considering allowing 1st level PCs to add their stamina score to their hp instead of the bonus hp adding at each level.

finarvyn wrote:I often wonder if 0 hit points shouldn't represent dead.

et. al.

I'm influenced by the games I've played over the years -- many of which have had rules that seem near-universally useful.

Champions/Hero System in one edition introduced the power to change your target, and built it on the same structure as it's already existing 'killing attack'. The thinking was, if you can kill your target, why not be able to change the target instead?

So, yeah, zero hit points could simply be "you're in the hands of the plot line now..."

GnomeBoy wrote:

finarvyn wrote:I often wonder if 0 hit points shouldn't represent dead.

et. al.

I'm influenced by the games I've played over the years -- many of which have had rules that seem near-universally useful.

Champions/Hero System in one edition introduced the power to change your target, and built it on the same structure as it's already existing 'killing attack'. The thinking was, if you can kill your target, why not be able to change the target instead?

So, yeah, zero hit points could simply be "you're in the hands of the plot line now..."

What do you mean by change your target?

fjw70 wrote:What do you mean by change your target?

HERO is effect based. Instead of Fire Blast, Electicity Blast, Cold Blast, etc, there is a single power Energy Blast. What the energy blast looks like is entirely up to the player (chosen once at chargen). Mechanically they are all basically the same. So there is a "power" called transform. Transform acts like a killing attack for all intents and purposes right up until BODY is reduced to 0. At which point instead of dying, the F/X of the transform power takes place: human to frog, living being to stone statue, normal self-motivated individual to totally enslaved thrall, whatever. So in a backward sort of way, Killing Attacks in HERO are really just specialized versions of transform where the F/X is always "living being to dead body".

While we are on the subject of alternatives to death, RISUS is extremely narrative in style and the result of its conflict resolution system is "what happens to the loser is entirely in the hands of the victor." As a comedy game, most conflict is of the RP type where you get to embarrass your opponent in amusing ways, but it can be played straight making "death" the most likely outcome.

Well, I think that the aim should not be to reproduce the dynamics of the literary medium; it's obvious that the main characters cannot die otherwise the writer wouldn't have much to write about.
Rather, the game should emulate what happens *around* the heroes, and the way the characters must go to *become* heroes.
If you want to think in gaming terms, Conan, Fafhrd, Elric etc. are very successful PCs, who survived different campaigns by always making their saves
Obviously some rules should/could reflect some things we see in the novels (e.g. the possibility of not dying but be taken out of action) but other than that, I think that almost all editions of D&D do a good job at reproducing the S&S "feel." The notable exception might be 4e, in which the risk of death for first level characters is essentially zero; even in 3e a character can (and often does!) die with a sword stroke.
For my Classic D&D games I use the Shock Recovery rules in the old Judges Guild ref. sheets.

rabindranath72 wrote:Well, I think that the aim should not be to reproduce the dynamics of the literary medium; it's obvious that the main characters cannot die otherwise the writer wouldn't have much to write about. Rather, the game should emulate what happens *around* the heroes, and the way the characters must go to *become* heroes.
If you want to think in gaming terms, Conan, Fafhrd, Elric etc. are very successful PCs, who survived different campaigns by always making their saves

Right. We aren't talking about a game that automatically lets you be Conan or Elric. You have to get there by avoiding death. For every Elric there are 10,000 unlucky schmucks who didn't make it.

rabindranath72 wrote:Obviously some rules should/could reflect some things we see in the novels (e.g. the possibility of not dying but be taken out of action) but other than that, I think that almost all editions of D&D do a good job at reproducing the S&S "feel." The notable exception might be 4e, in which the risk of death for first level characters is essentially zero; even in 3e a character can (and often does!) die with a sword stroke.
For my Classic D&D games I use the Shock Recovery rules in the old Judges Guild ref. sheets.

Personally, I like Hackmaster's approach. True they get the HP kicker, but with threshold of pain you can get knocked on your butt by one attack. And then your down writhing in pain, unable to attack or act while the enemy can walk over and deliver a coup de grace. And as has also been mentioned there are pentrating dice that can spell a one hit kill if your lucky (or unlucky as the case may be). And let's not even mention the crit tables. These rules do a couple of things. They make PCs very reluctant to just rush into combat, and they simulate being able to take more damage theoretically, but also stay realistic in regards to what an actual solid sword hit, axe whack or mace smash does to you.

Not sure what the JG shock recovery rules entail, but I'd love to hear about them. There was a rule at some point in D&D that if you took one blow equal to more than half your hp you had to roll system shock to avoid instant death.

GnomeBoy wrote:zero hit points could simply be "you're in the hands of the plot line now..."

I like the way you phrased this. It doesn't suggest that the DM has to save the character or kill the character, but that circumstances of the adventure will allow the character's fate to play itself out.

If the party is being driven off and can't get back to the body, things might be more grim. On the other hand, if the party can get to the body and cart it off, maybe splashing water in his face will bring him back.

The plot line rules!

onearmspence wrote:

or other extremes like a "hit point kicker" (HackMaster).

Hackmaster has a high mortality rate, even with the hit point kicker.

Maybe so, but a lot of this is because the monsters get the HP kicker as well. When you face 20 HP orcs, you may die a lot.

A really "heroic" setting to emulate heroic literature might give advantages to the players but maybe not to the monsters so that the PCs can dominate. (Of course, super-villians may get them, too.)

Sizzaxe wrote:There was a rule at some point in D&D that if you took one blow equal to more than half your hp you had to roll system shock to avoid instant death.

If you are speaking about AD&D2e, the rule was that you could die if 50 hps where inflicted. 3e had the same rule, which optionally scaled with size. I can't recall any (A)D&D rule which works based on a percent of hit points.

I've been a proponent of alternative approaches to damage and hit points for a while. At the very least, I think DCC could benefit from some sort of rapid recovery at the end of each encounter.

Regarding Appendix N, I think DCC is really two separate games. The 0-level funnel is a game where the "heroes" of the series are determined through luck, determination, etc. Then there's leveled play, which (I think) should follow more along the lines of the stories in Appendix N. But instead it's more like a traditional FRPG.

I think there's a number of options available to change this for the better. Many of them have been discussed ad nauseam on the forum. I don't want to completely rehash them. But I'll give one that's been stirring around in my mind for a while now...

All 0-level PCs have 3 + STA bonus hit points, minimum of 1. At first level, PCs get their hit points bumped up to the Stamina rating. This doesn't add to the hit points they had at 0-level. It just boosts them up. Then, PCs get a static boost to hit points per level. Wizards/Elves get +1 every 2 levels. Thieves, Clerics and Halflings get +1 every level. Warriors and Dwarves get a +2 every level.

Or, if dice are a must, Wizards/Elves get 1d2-1 every level. Thieves, Clerics and Halflings get 1d3-1 every level. Warriors and Dwarves get a 1d4-1 every level.

Stamina only gives a one time boost at 1st level. It does not apply again and again forever and ever. At the very least, this simplifies the effect taking attribute damage to Stamina has on hit points.

The net effect is that 1st level PCs are far more resilient but, over the long haul, higher level PCs are less silly in what they can withstand. So it gives a boost during low-level play without inflating higher-level hit points.

jmucchiello wrote:While we are on the subject of alternatives to death, RISUS is extremely narrative in style and the result of its conflict resolution system is "what happens to the loser is entirely in the hands of the victor." As a comedy game, most conflict is of the RP type where you get to embarrass your opponent in amusing ways, but it can be played straight making "death" the most likely outcome.

It's funny because all those threads about "Wound and Injury" systems fit here again. I've been reading SIFRP and, IMO, they do this well. And it fits with the hit points thing I just mentioned...

So when a character is dropped to zero their "fate" is in the hands of the opponent. The character can be maimed or scarred (maybe a -1d4 against an attribute, permanent, in DCC terms). Or killed. Or taken captive. Et cetera. Et cetera.

To avoid this in SIFRP, a character can take Injuries and Wounds.

To translate this into something workable for DCC, an Injury would allow a character to reduce damage taken by 3 + their level. Only one injury can be taken at a time (can't take two to lower one attack). And it's effect would be a -1 to all rolls. It should take longer to heal. Maybe one a day? So taking 3 Injuries in one day would require 3 days to get rid of them all? But a character can't have more than 3 at any one time.

And then with Wounds (again in DCC terms). A character can take a Wound to lower damage taken from an attack to zero. But, as a result, the character rolls one die type lower on all rolls (So d16, instead of d20. d14 instead of d16) and their encumbrance is increased by 1 level. So unencumbered PCs become encumbered, etc. For sanity's sake, a character can only take one Wound. It takes a week to heal a wound.

If a character is reduced to zero, they are at the mercy of the opponent. Which can be a very bad thing.

At the end of every encounter (using the hit point system listed above), a character recovers all hit points lost.

Might be too bleeding edge for DCC. But it's one way to address the discrepancy between protagonists in Appendix N and DCC.