I’m reconsidering part of the rule I proposed for special effects like impale in RuneQuest. The problem with any die showing a 0 is an impale as long as it’s a success is that it skews the chances of impaling at low skills quite a bit. With 20% skill, half your successful hits are impaling. Not what I’d really like to see.
Instead, I’m thinking of making it 0 or 5 showing on the 1’s die. This restores it to about 20% chance regardless of the skill. I think this works out to where rounding would happen with the original RQ: skill 15%, say, you have 3 chances out of 15 (05, 10, 15), while at 19 it’s still 3 but now out of 19, not becoming 4 out of 20 until you hit 20.
In some ways this is even easier to spot: multiples of 5 are special. Hard to imagine even my math phobic players objecting to that.
As is my wont, I’ve been noodling on some older games that have come up in conversation recently, and in particular RuneQuest 2e. I ran a RuneQuest campaign, back in the day, and I’m pretty sure we started with 1st edition, and later switched to 2e (or maybe I just did a different campaign of 2e… wouldn’t be the first time my memory of those long ago events was a little blurry). There were a lot of things I liked about RQ, and later the whole BRP line, particularly Call of Cthulhu, and its percentile dice system was one of the easiest things ever for players to grok. Your skill at driving was 32%, cool, roll under 32 on the percentile dice and you’re golden. Now, what exactly it meant to fail that roll when it was something as mundane as driving was a matter of interpretation and sometimes heated debate, but the basic principle couldn’t be simpler.
But I was never quite happy with the way things like criticals and fumbles were worked into the roll, or in RuneQuest things like impaling with your pointy weapon. The basic rule, with many variations on the exact numbers, was always something like compute 5% of your skill, if you roll that or less you’ve scored a critical hit. For instance if your skill was 100, then 01-05 was a crit; if your skill was 50, then only 01-02 (or maybe 03 depending on rounding). An impale would be similarly 01-20 with skill 100, while proportionally less the lower your skill. Fumbles were the reverse, though explained rather confusingly as starting at 5% (96-00) for skills less than or equal to 20 and being reduced by 1% for every full 20% in your skill (97-00 for skill 40, 98-00 for skill 60, etc.) This meant that unless you were great at mental arithmetic, you had to write down your critical, impale, and fumble range for each and every skill on your character sheet, updating it whenever the skill improved. And if you reached the point with skills at 100+ where you could split your skill into two actions with any division you liked as long as both were at least 50, recalculating with what you chose at the moment (or sticking to a split that you precalculated). Bleh, and double-bleh.
So, I’ve come up with a dice-rolling method for RuneQuest, BRP, and really any other percentile system that I really quite like. As far as I know this is original, though my memory being what it is and with all the time people have spent fiddling with things like this some pieces of it may have been published elsewhere and I’ve just forgotten running across it. As far as I can tell glancing through my Chaosium books, though, none of them have used this, sticking to variations on what I’ve laid out above. I think RoleMaster had a special convention for 66, maybe for all doubles, but I’m hazy on the details. Here it is, though, for your entertainment, with a tip of the hat to the famed Perrin Conventions that started the whole RuneQuest thing, the Macy Conventions:
The basic idea is to read the percentile roll cleverly, to simulate (more or less) the odds that calculating it the old way would have given you, and incidentally incorporating the 1d20 Hit Location roll into the same roll through more shenanigans in how you read off the result. Moreover, we want the whole thing be so simple and easy to remember that you wouldn’t have to keep looking it up once you understood it. Basically all doubles are special, either a crit or or fumble based on whether the roll qualifies as a hit or miss.
Special Results
Critical Hit: Any doubles (11, 22, etc.) that would normally hit
Fumble: Any doubles that would normally miss
Special Effect (Impale/Slash/Crush): Any roll that would normally hit with a 0 in either digit
Always Hit: 05 or less
Always Miss: 96 or higher
Hit Locations
Read the ones digit of your roll:
If tens digit is even: Use ones digit as location (0 = 10)
If tens digit is odd: Add 10 to ones digit
For reference the following is the hit location table from RQ 2. I haven’t really given much thought yet to whether there’s a way to simplify it to reduce the need to look it up, but the one look-up doesn’t strike me as that burdensome compared to the original. And of course if anybody finds the process of checking the tens digit this way a pain, they can just roll a separate d20. You probably should roll the separate d20 when you crit anyway, so crits don’t cluster in a couple locations. But for Ernalda’s sake, roll it at the same time as you roll your damage!
Humanoid Hit Location Table
D20
Area
Description
01-04
Right Leg
Right leg from hip joint to foot
05-08
Left Leg
Left leg from hip joint to foot
09-11
Abdomen
Hip joint to just under the floating ribs
12
Chest
Floating ribs to neck and shoulders
13-15
Right Arm
Entire right arm
16-18
Left Arm
Entire left arm
19-20
Head
Neck and head
Example: if you hit with a 27, that’s location 7, so left leg; if you hit with a 37 that would be 17, so left arm.
Examples
You have a skill of 39.
You roll 33! It’s a crit, and strikes the right arm (13)!
You roll a 55! It’s a fumble, roll on the fumble table.
You roll a 19! It’s a hit.
You roll a 20! It’s a hit to the abdomen (10), and the attack impales/crushes/slashes depending on your weapon!
You roll an 07! It’s a hit to the left leg (7), and again the attack impales/crushes/slashes.
You roll a 70! It’s a miss.
You have a skill of 65.
You roll a 34, it’s a hit to the right arm (14)!
You roll a 44, it’s a critical hit to the right leg (4)!
You roll a 66, it’s a fumble!
You roll a 100, it’s a fumble!
You roll a 01, it’s an impaling/slashing/crushing hit to the right leg!
Stuck Weapons
Addendum: I had forgotten that a successful impale left the weapon stuck in the target unless you rolled again immediately looking for double the chance of an impale, i.e. if you had 4% chance of impale, you had 8% chance of freeing the weapon that same turn. On subsequent turns you just had to roll an ordinary hit. So:
Freeing stuck weapon: roll again, looking for a hit with either 0s or 1s on either die.
Later turns it’s still just looking for an ordinary successful hit. Automatically successful after 5 turns trying, just as in the original rules.
A Look at the Odds
So, how close is this method to the original? The answer is pretty close. Crits are about twice as common, but ranging from 0% if your skill is <11 to 9% if your skill is 99+. For instance if your have skill 25 you have 2 chances in 100 of scoring a crit (11 and 22 instead of just on an 01); if you have skill 99 you have 9 chances in 100 (11, 22, 33, 44, 55, 66, 77, 88, 99), while a 91 score it would be only 8. Fumbles are the same but in reverse, just being more common at lower skills and less common at higher ones. Double sounds like a lot, but twice a small number is still pretty small, and at least some later editions of RQ switched to 10% of the skill anyway, to make the calculation easier and the combat more spicy.
Chance of impalement (or crushing/slashing if you use that option) is a bit closer to the original. Once you get past 10% skill, you have 9 chances to impale (01-09) + 1 chance for every 10% more skill. So at 50% skill that would be 14% (01-09, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50) instead of the original 10%, while at 100% it would be 18% instead of 20%. My experience is that differences that small are very hard for the players to even perceive, though your mileage may vary, and it’s not like the original was arrived at by any rigorous examination of the odds in real combat.
The always hit/always miss odds are straight from the original, while the hit locations are nearly identical: there are exactly 10 digits on the ones die, and exactly half of the the digits on the tens die represent adding 10 to get the upper half of the d20. The nearly part comes from the fact that since 00 is always a miss, you only get 4 out of 100 ways of rolling a 10 (20, 40, 60, 80). All the others are spot-on. There’s also the slightly odd fact that the always hit numbers are always going to be blows to the legs, but I’m not sure I’m that worried about it; if I were I could say that if you roll an automatic hit then you roll a d20 for hit location instead of just reading it off the dice. Is the one special case better or worse than people’s legs being slightly more vulnerable than the rest of them?
Characteristic Checks
Don’t multiply by 5 and roll under the stat, just roll a d20 directly against the stat. Unless you plan on using the crits and fumbles rules on the stat checks, it’s mathematically identical.
Based on some of the comments on my post on Super-Simple Combat Maneuvers, some people are looking for more crunch to the system, or at least a more reliable way of forcing the issue. Here are some possible added fillips, bearing in mind that to the extent that you make maneuvers a more attractive option than just doing damage you tilt the combat towards being resolved by the use of applicable maneuvers instead. The original rules were designed so that you probably couldn’t use them to win a combat you would otherwise lose, at least not without a big dollop of luck. The result, though, was that you probably wouldn’t bother to employ them unless circumstances gave you a specific reason to (we don’t need to defeat all these enemies if we can just get the MacGuffin to the Altar of Doom); it gave you a nice way of adjudicating attempts to do things outside the scope of the normal roll to hit/roll for damage/rinse and repeat cycle of combat, but it deliberately didn’t give you a lot of incentive to do so or choices to make in how to go about it.
If that’s not adequate, then here are some optional rules to try:
Advanced Maneuvers: accepting some penalty in return for increasing the chance of a critical that forces the issue. E.g. for every -1 you take to your defense, or -1 to the damage done if they refuse the maneuver on a normal hit, you increase the critical range by 1.
Special Training: in return for spending resources on special training in using maneuvers (e.g. Feats in D&D 3, or Edges in Savage Worlds) you get either an increase in the critical range, or an increase in the damage done if the defender refuses the maneuver.
Upping the Stakes: for every -1 you take to your To Hit roll, you increase the damage done by 1 if they refuse the maneuver.
Reducing the Cost: if you think that forgoing a critical is too high a price to pay, so nobody would try the option, you could make it do regular damage plus the maneuver on a critical, or you could defer the decision to apply the critical damage or the maneuver until after the damage is rolled.
The exact numbers would vary depending on the system being used (a +/-1 is a lot bigger deal in Savage Worlds than in a d20 system) and the feel you’re going for. You probably wouldn’t use all of these unless you wanted a very maneuver-centric game, and you should be prepared to tweak the exact numbers or even which ones you’re employing depending on how they work out in actual play.
Of these, I think I like Upping the Stakes the best. There’s something conceptually kind of nice about the idea that you can press for extra damage, but you have to leave a way for the defender to weasel out of it if they value their hide more than whatever the tactical disadvantage might be.
As far as my actual play goes, it’s too early to tell. Friday we only had one combat, and it was pretty much a straight-up hackfest, as the party fought off a group of Neanderthals. Nobody tried anything fancy except for one wimpy mage who tried playing dead. There was one PC death to a nasty crit, but nobody expected Expendable 1401 (yes, that was his name) to last more than a session or two in the first place.