New Combat option - Strike to Subdue

[klingor]

Hello again,
I've an idea for a sub-type of the basic Attack option - Strike to subdue.
You make your normal roll against DX to hit, but if you DO hit, you have the option to inflict Fatigue loss as opposed to Physical damage.This is so that you can render an opponent unconscious rather than kill them - you may want to take a prisoner, or you might be fighting a party member who has gone berserk or is under Mind Control.
My idea is that if you roll 4 (or 2 or some other number- GM fiat) less than your hit prob, you score a hit, but have the option to inflict the damage roll as Fatigue loss, so that eventually the opponent becomes incapacitated from fatigue rather than dead from physical damage. If your roll is low enough to hit, but not low enough to give you the option then the damage rolled is physical - you tried to hit with the flat of the blade but they took the edge instead.
The basic game mechanics are the same, but it gives players another option as to how the encounter pans out.
Cheers
Colin

[Deleted]

another interesting idea. again, i'm not sure i would use it but it seems balanced.

thoughts:
this makes me wonder. if a PC is under Mind Control, what can they do to break the spell? Since Mind Control is listed under the ILLUSION spells, my instinct is to let that character have a free Disbelief check each turn.

[klingor]

Hi Ewookie,
If they don't know they're being controlled, what should they try to disbelieve cf The Matrix.
My proposal simply gives a character another tool in his belt. It changes nothing in the basic structure of the game, merely adds an option for the character to use.
Cheers
Colin

[Deleted]

if you don't know something is an illusion, what would you try to disbelieve? think of it more as a resistance roll in this case.

[klingor]

Ewookie,

I think this should be in a thread in its own right (or perhaps a dissertation for a PhD), as it seems we're moving into metaphysics and ontology rather than discussing new LAW combat options!

Cheers
Colin

[Deleted]

yes, sorry for that. started a thread for it last night.

[Deleted]

just wanted to clarify...i don't think i would use this unless the adventure pretty much forced me to use it...because after beating someone into submission, i'd have to carry them if i wanted to keep them as a prisoner. it is a nice option to have though.

maybe rolling less than half your DX should inflict fatigue while anything else below DX inflicts real damage...but for some reason, i was under the impression that grappling was sort of designed for this sort of this thing. that could be another way of implementing this sort of thing...once you have grappled you are completely free to choose whether to inflict damage or fatigue.

[klingor]

Don't agree.
Case one - a friend goes amok for some reason and attacks the party. You don't know if it's temporary or permanent, but as you don't want to kill him without giving him the benefit of the doubt, you try to incapacitate rather than kill him. You can then try to find out why he went berserk and have a character rather than a corpse left when you do find out.
Second case - you beat an enemy into insensibility rather than oblivion then pick his brains at your leisure after combat is over.
In both cases you have the option of disposing of them, but you can do it at a time of your own choosing, rather than in the heat of the action.
Cheers
Colin

[Deleted]

i wasn't saying there aren't good cases for it. just saying i don't think i'd bother unless forced to. the case of a PC going amok is a 'forced to' scenario to me if that's the only way to make them snap out of it. the case of the enemy i want to question seems a bit too complicated for a programmed adventure...i wouldn't bother unless that were the only way to get the information needed. i think i see you thinking in a full-fledged RPG direction here...in that case, yes, this sounds good.

however, i still think it would be better, simpler (and safer) if you restricted this sort of thing to grappling. when grappled you get to choose whether the damage you inflict is actually damage or fatigue instead. the damage vs. fatigue decision is decided by the player not the dice, yet grappling is a teeny bit harder to accomplish than simply beating someone with a stick.

...but i don't want to be too stubborn about it. i would be OK with letting the attack roll decide whether it's damage or fatigue (if using the option)...if the decision is based on half the character's DX. example...

Turk has DX 12 (no armor). He is attacking an orc that he would like to interrogate. If he rolls 6 or below, his attack inflicts fatigue instead of damage. If he rolls 7-12, his attack does actual damage. Anything else, he missed.

[klingor]

Even in an encounter in a programmed adventure, combat to the death may leave an opponent unconscious (ST 1). You still have to decide what to do with them. If it is irrelevant whether they live or die, the adventure instructions would say 'If you kill all your opponents go to (23)' otherwise the instructions would say 'If you incapacitate all your opponents go to (24)'
(24) would read 'If all your opponents are dead go to (23) otherwise go to (25)'
(25) would read 'When your living opponents regain consciousness .....)
Cheers
Colin

[Deleted]

man, i'm so glad to see you on and hear from you again. i was a little worried about your health situation.

in your example, the adventure is specifically written to make use of this combat option you have devised. if getting to (25) is required to complete the adventure and the opponents were killed instead of subdued...OH NO!!! that would very much suck. it would really irritate me and would be very bad 'programmed adventure' writing unless it was strongly HINTED (as in hit me on the head) that I needed to 'subdue' the opponents instead of killing them. this would be one of those 'forced to use' situations i was talking about...and this could be very much simplified by just saying "if you _defeat_ your opponents, go to (25)"

if getting to (25) is just a 'bonus', like i said, i would probably not bother using the 'subdue' option as my success (and survival) would be less probable. it is better to live poor than die rich in my little world.

also, like i said (or meant), this is still a cool option to have in a refereed game.

[klingor]

Hi,
I gave the 23,24,25 scenario as an example of how the new option could be incorporated into an adventure.
I didn't mean that using it necessarily affected the effect of the outcome of the encounter on the adventure as a whole.
On the contrary, there are encounters in DCG games where options are available in a (near) combat situation that point you in the right direction ie to gain information, that would not have occurred to me to try.
It seems better, to me, to allow an opponent to be captured alive first. They can then be interrogated later (and killed if appropriate).
Cheers
Colin

[Deleted]

it is a nice option to have. i wouldn't use it but i'm sure others would.