[DF][Combat Rules] Informal Poll/Advice: who uses "mook" rules?

[apoc527]

I'm debating how much of the DF combat rules to use to help speed up play. Specifically, I have used DFOntheCheap to create 150 point PCs with the goal of using the orcs from DFA1 as my main adversaries. The "BBEG" is a 200 point necromancer and she has a number of servitor zombies to help her out. I am also toying with the idea of a demonic servitor as a second "boss."

I don't want to game to be too lethal or too easy and I'm also considering upping the starting points to 200 for each PC (in fact, I have done this, and I'm probably going to go with it).

However, since I'm focusing on battling orcs and lesser foes, should I use the "mook" rules in DF2? Specifically:

1. Who uses the "1 point of damage is enough to bring down any mook" rule from DF2, pg 27? I find this rule to be somewhat outside the GURPS mindset and don't really like it, even though I understand it. Frankly, it smacks heavily of the 4th Edition of That Other Game, which had an identical rule for "minions"--they simply had 1 hp each.

2. If you use the "worthy" monsters rule and knock down monsters at 0 HP, does this reduce the threat level of the monsters to the point where many abilities aren't relevant? Should we treat the monster as dead or just at 0 hp and unconscious? What if you reduce a tough orc soldier to 0 hp, but that orc soldier has HT 12 and Fit? It just doesn't seem very GURPS to make him just arbitrarily fall down.

3. Or maybe I'm just misunderstanding or overapplying these rules? In a typical 250 point DF game, I can see why you'd want to speed up combat if you include 25 orcs to hack through. They are dead anyway, so why not speed it up, right? But in this particular instance, I'm planning on having only a few more orcs than PCs and if the orcs drop at 0 HP, the fights will be just too easy, won't they?

Now the poll part: who uses these rules in their DF games and when/why?

Thanks! This is the first time we will be using GURPS for non-modern/sci-fi and I want it to be fun and engaging--that's why I get nervous when I see optional rules like these and don't really have a feel for when I should use them.

[ULFGARD]

I ran DF without these rules because the main opposition for 250 point baddies in a couple of dungeons were ork soldiers. This meant they would qualify as mooks and be no threat. However, if I had been using bigger, badder monsters in those dungeons, I would have used the mook rules. It really depends on how tough you want it to be on the players.

Yes, play wasn't as fast, but it meant that even these titanic characters had to kill the bad guys and make them stay dead. On the other hand, I *DID* use this when they met up with a bunch of weaklings -- it would've taken too much effort in terms of rolls for almost no chance of real harm -- they were annoyances that slowed the PCs down. The only "worthy" surrendered and later betrayed them. He died... poorly...

[mlangsdorf]

Orcs with HP12 and Fit are still getting value from those traits as Worthies: they're harder to stun, knockdown, or strangle, and they are more resistant to HT based afflictions and magic.

I use the fodder rules, slightly modified: fodder always fails HT rolls to resist magic or afflictions, and drops weapons and treasure while fleeing after taking more than HP/4 damage. I don't like the 1 HP rule, because I think it cheapens some of the archetypes, but HP/4 lets me use monsters like Crushrooms as fodder and still have things work out reasonably well.

[korbeau]

For my part, the NPC (mook one) and PC are not build the same. It's not because the characters are 250cp they can fight something at 250cp.

They are some good thread about NPC in the forum. You should look at it :)

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by apoc527

1. Who uses the "1 point of damage is enough to bring down any mook" rule from DF2, pg 27? I find this rule to be somewhat outside the GURPS mindset and don't really like it, even though I understand it. Frankly, it smacks heavily of the 4th Edition of That Other Game, which had an identical rule for "minions"--they simply had 1 hp each.

The GURPS rule predates D&D 4e by several years. See B 417

Now the poll part: who uses these rules in their DF games and when/why?

I use the Worthy rule as is. Instead of the 1 hit mook rule I just (non-immune to Knockdown and Stunning) "mooks" autofail HT rolls for Knockdown (so all it takes is a Major Wound).

[Rasputin]

Originally Posted by apoc527

2. If you use the "worthy" monsters rule and knock down monsters at 0 HP, does this reduce the threat level of the monsters to the point where many abilities aren't relevant? Should we treat the monster as dead or just at 0 hp and unconscious? What if you reduce a tough orc soldier to 0 hp, but that orc soldier has HT 12 and Fit? It just doesn't seem very GURPS to make him just arbitrarily fall down.

Why are you giving an orc soldier HT 12 and Fit? It sounds like you don't want him to go down.

[Turhan's Bey Company]

I frequently treat orcs, goblins, and other horde-like monsters as something between fodder and worthies. I put lesser opponents out of action when they hit 0 HP or get a crippled limb, whichever comes first. In practice, given my players, that tends to mean two solid hits from a non-fighting character (thief, wizard, etc.) or one from a purpose-built fighter.

[Ulzgoroth]

I'm not a fan of mooks, but in their defense...

Originally Posted by apoc527

1. Who uses the "1 point of damage is enough to bring down any mook" rule from DF2, pg 27? I find this rule to be somewhat outside the GURPS mindset and don't really like it, even though I understand it. Frankly, it smacks heavily of the 4th Edition of That Other Game, which had an identical rule for "minions"--they simply had 1 hp each.

Bear in mind that while you can describe mooks as being bisected and spattered on the walls if you want (to emulate certain more over-the-top sources, for instance), the 1 HP mook can be semi-realistic as troops of low commitment who count themselves out of the fight once wounded, whether out of fear or because they just don't care enough to keep fighting when hurt.

[Crakkerjakk]

I started running an online DF game with the "1 hp of wounding drops a bad guy", but ended up moving it to "mooks die at 0 HP". I felt like the original version took something away from the PCs who had invested in being able to wallop things really hard. What we're using now stil speeds things up a bit, while rewarding the PCs who are the main damage sources by letting them mow down enemies more quickly.


In your case with just a couple bad guys, I don't see anything wrong with using the stock rules.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

The GURPS rule predates D&D 4e by several years. See B 417

I believe the first RPG use of 'mook' rules was the Feng Shui RPG, circa 1996.

On the topic of mook rules, if I used them, it would be something like 'a mook is dropped by a major wound and ignores all lesser damage', not 1 hp.