Lasting and Permanent Injuries to the Pelvic Area

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Edges

Considering the elderly, if an old man had 6, 7, 8, or 9HP and fell a yard onto the hard floor, he would take 1d-1. If he was particularly decrepit, and had 4 or 5HP, he'd take 1d-2. At max damage, none of these men would be crippled under your proposed system (whereas in real life this problem happens pretty often). If the threshold was 2/3HP, then you could break a hip by falling down once you were old enough to have a 7HP or less. (Low ST kids wouldn't worry as they're too short and have higher HT.)

Don't forget that these kind of accidents, although 'common' still don't happen to the average old person every day, every week or even every year. We hear about those that do happen because they are terrible accidents, whereas every time an old person falls and doesn't break a hip, it's just a stumble.

I've seen it happen, mind you. I worked at a nursing home at the maximum care ward (Alzheimer's and other mental impairment). But it happened once over the summer I worked there and there were 200 people at the nursing home. That's 18,000 man-days in which there was one occasion severe enough to break something in the pelvic area.

I'd peg the person in question at 4-5 HPs. She was frail (80-90 lbs.) and she would have had low HP for her mass due to osteoporosis. This means that in any fall, she would have been at risk.

But don't forget that since this doesn't happen in nearly every fall, we need to make allowances for the fact that often, when the elderly slip, it's a critical failure. And that allows for x2 and x3 damage.

Originally Posted by Edges

I'm not making a big deal out of it. It won't bother me if you prefer the HP threshold. But it does seem odd that it would take around twice as much damage to crack the pelvis as it would the femur.

That's partly an issue of the fact that the pelvic area covers rather diverse things. Many blows that hit that general area will not impact the pelvic girdle until after passing through muscle tissue in the rear or organs in the front. And, of course, there's a far greater chance that a blow is deflected effectively from the pelvic girdle than the femur, since the femur is all but guaranteed to take the brunt of any blow that falls on the thigh.

Then there's the point that not all crippling strikes to the leg necessarily break the femur. Many of them might have hit weaker bones, muscle or joints. At the level of resolution we're working with, we simply set minimum HP breakpoints at which something is crippled and expect GMs to describe the injury in a way consistent with the attack and the situation.

Given that, it's not unreasonable that it would take less to make a leg non-functional for at least some time than it would take to make a person utterly unable to use both legs due to trauma to the pelvic girdle. One can be done with tissue damage alone, the other pretty much demands that you break bones that lie beneath tissue.

Finally, there's a game balance issue. It ought to be far harder to cripple both legs at the same time than to cripple one.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by SuedodeuS

One reason to drop the threshold a bit is to help encourage characters to actually aim at the pelvis. As it stands, shooting the pelvis is harder (-3) and less likely to disable the foe (unless using Pi++ or Imp, where disabling is equally likely). I think exactly the opposite is true in reality. This might be due to it being easier to hit the pelvic bone than to hit the bones of the leg, and GURPS doesn't go into this level of detail.

Could be that the legs, while easy enough to hit with a melee attack, are harder to hit with a ranged one. They move around a lot, after all, and besides, hitting something long and narrow is easier with a swing than a bullet.

I think that a good part of what makes the pelvic area a good target is that even on a running man, its location is relatively predictable. Unlike the arms, the legs and even the head, it can't swing around all the time. It's the middle, which other things are attached too.

I might give a -1 penalty to Dodges to for attacks to the Groin. Harder to shift your mid-section out of the way than moving your leg a bit.

Originally Posted by SuedodeuS

If you'd prefer not to drop the threshold, an option would be to have a 50% (or whatever you feel is realistic, though you'd be best to make it n-in-6 for quick resolution) chance of hitting nothing beyond meat on a limb shot. This would impose a blowthrough limit to damage (not injury) to that limb equal to 1/2 the crippling threshold. Naturally, such a limit doesn't apply to the pelvis (which probably has HP as a blowthrough limit as per HT). As an added bonus, such a mechanic makes it possible to get hit in the arm/leg without getting crippled and not having to rely on it being a completely anemic hit. You can modify the probability of missing the bone based on the wounding multiplier, making Pi+, Pi++, and Imp actually better than Pi on limbs. At a glance, 2-in-6 of a full hit (ignore pre-crippling blowthrough) for Pi-, 3-in-6 for Pi, 4-in-6 for Pi+, 5-in-6 for Pi++ and Imp.

This is a very nice thought and I'll definitely consider such a thing. It's a bit annoying that all rifle fire at the limbs leads to Permanent Crippling, with no ifs and buts allowed.

[SuedodeuS]

Originally Posted by Icelander

Could be that the legs, while easy enough to hit with a melee attack, are harder to hit with a ranged one. They move around a lot, after all, and besides, hitting something long and narrow is easier with a swing than a bullet.

I think that a good part of what makes the pelvic area a good target is that even on a running man, its location is relatively predictable. Unlike the arms, the legs and even the head, it can't swing around all the time. It's the middle, which other things are attached too.

I might give a -1 penalty to Dodges to for attacks to the Groin. Harder to shift your mid-section out of the way than moving your leg a bit.

This was something else I thought of, although more along the lines of giving a larger penalty to hit the Legs on a ranged attack rather than an effective bonus to hit the Groin. Your solution has the advantage of consistency, as it treats melee and ranged the same (a Leg Parry is generally your best bet to avoid a groin shot in melee).

Originally Posted by Icelander

This is a very nice thought and I'll definitely consider such a thing. It's a bit annoying that all rifle fire at the limbs leads to Permanent Crippling, with no ifs and buts allowed.

The numbers might need some tweaking, and noting that it's actually "potentially-crippling hit" rather than strictly "bone hit" is necessary, but I think it's a good start.

[jacobmuller]

Originally Posted by Icelander

Some recent tactical doctrine teaches recruits to aim for the pelvic area of opponents. The reasons for this are manifold;[/SIZE]

Lowered aim-point counts for intimidation too.
I read something about this, long time gone by, from a patrol officer who attended a seminar on lowered-lethality, improved stopping power aim-points and put it to use. May have been Guns&Ammo...

Normal doctrine is aim for centre mass which unfortunately leads to a high rate of suspect death.
Seminar promoted concept of aiming for thigh bones. Groin+upper leg = larger target than chest; hits to thigh-bones / pelvis are higher probability than hits to vitals and higher probability of a knock-down when hit.

Officer later encountered knife wielding crazy who refused to stop when pistol was pointed at his chest, but dropped his knife and froze when aim was lowered "I thought you were going to {castrate me}". the perp explained.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by jacobmuller

Lowered aim-point counts for intimidation too.
I read something about this, long time gone by, from a patrol officer who attended a seminar on lowered-lethality, improved stopping power aim-points and put it to use. May have been Guns&Ammo...

Normal doctrine is aim for centre mass which unfortunately leads to a high rate of suspect death.
Seminar promoted concept of aiming for thigh bones. Groin+upper leg = larger target than chest; hits to thigh-bones / pelvis are higher probability than hits to vitals and higher probability of a knock-down when hit.

Officer later encountered knife wielding crazy who refused to stop when pistol was pointed at his chest, but dropped his knife and froze when aim was lowered "I thought you were going to {castrate me}". the perp explained.

That's not something to rely on, though.

I'd allow it as a Perk, though. +1 to Intimidation when using a gun because s/he tends to aim at the privates. Perhaps have it be +2 and only affect men.

[Crakkerjakk]

Originally Posted by Icelander

That's not something to rely on, though.

I'd allow it as a Perk, though. +1 to Intimidation when using a gun because s/he tends to aim at the privates. Perhaps have it be +2 and only affect men.

Call it Testi-kill.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by Crakkerjakk

Call it Testi-kill.

Unfair, sir, unfair.

You know that punning posts should be clearly marked in order to prevent innocent forumites from stumbling onto them unawares and suffering irrevocable mental scarring.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by SuedodeuS

This was something else I thought of, although more along the lines of giving a larger penalty to hit the Legs on a ranged attack rather than an effective bonus to hit the Groin. Your solution has the advantage of consistency, as it treats melee and ranged the same (a Leg Parry is generally your best bet to avoid a groin shot in melee).

Indeed. And if a Groin shot that misses by -1 hits the Legs (roll left or right) on 1-3 and the Body on 4-6, it actually becomes a valid option to target the Groin.

Not better than the Body, but different and at least not clearly worse.

Originally Posted by SuedodeuS

The numbers might need some tweaking, and noting that it's actually "potentially-crippling hit" rather than strictly "bone hit" is necessary, but I think it's a good start.

I agree.

As for tweaking, at first glance, it seems like it should be more than a 50% chance that a bullet through a limb will hit a bone, but at the same time, I don't want it to be automatic for larger diameters. Well, maybe it is realistic than shotgun slugs will cripple limbs except in exceptional circumstances.

So maybe try 1-3 for pi-, 1-4 for pi, 1-5 for pi+ and automatic for pi++.

Or, since I use WCM for all wounds anyway, limbs or not (but cap at blowthrough), I could just say that there's a 1-4 chance that the hit will be potentially crippling. While larger bullets do make bigger holes, the difference is not enough to justify twice the chance to hit bone. It should be a function of damage.