Adding sub-locations for forearms, thighs and shins

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Rasna

Not specifically for arms and legs, otherwise I wouldn't have the necessity to make my own HR. In GURPS rules, there is the subdivision in hit location for arms and legs, but not the dedicated penalty to hit every single sub-location nor the "sub-sub-locations" for forearms, thighs and shins.

It's pretty clear, based on Hitting 'Em Where It Hurts, that the penalty for a single sublocation is -4 (in addition to the location modifier).

[Rasna]

Originally Posted by Anthony

It's pretty clear, based on Hitting 'Em Where It Hurts, that the penalty for a single sublocation is -4 (in addition to the location modifier).

Hitting 'Em Where It Hurts IMHO is a good and simple "quick&dirty" rule, but can be quite inaccurate.

Taking arms and legs as example, if you use that rule, thighs (22,5% each) are at -6 to hit (-2 for legs plus -4 for the rule), while hands and feet (5% each) are at -4 to hit. Same for shins (25%) which are at -5 to hit according to HTWIH rule. And this is a bit self-contradictory, because it must be: the bigger the area, the smaller the malus to hit. That's why I prefer my House Rules in this case, where shins and thighs are at -3 to hit (-4 for their upper and lower sublocations, -5 for ankles) and knees are at -5 to hit.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by Rasna

Hitting 'Em Where It Hurts IMHO is a good and simple "quick&dirty" rule, but can be quite inaccurate.

Taking arms and legs as example, if you use that rule, thighs (22,5% each) are at -6 to hit (-2 for legs plus -4 for the rule), while hands and feet (5% each) are at -4 to hit. Same for shins (25%) which are at -5 to hit according to HTWIH rule. And this is a bit self-contradictory, because it must be: the bigger the area, the smaller the malus to hit. That's why I prefer my House Rules in this case, where shins and thighs are at -3 to hit (-4 for their upper and lower sublocations, -5 for ankles) and knees are at -5 to hit.

I think your conflating Hitting them where it hurts from HT and the armour location rules from LT



"Hitting them where it hurts" (HTpg69) doesn't line up sub locations with specific chances, it only talks about partial cover of locations in general

so the unprotected part of a hand with 2 in 6 armour partial cover is -5 (-4 for the hand and another -1 for the 2 in 6 partial cover)

the unprotected part of a leg with 2 in 6 armour partial cover is -3 (-2 for the leg and another -1 for the 2 in 6 partial cover)




The armour location table (LTpg100) does reference sub locations.

Both by area as a percentage of torso for the purposes calculating armour weight and cost.

and as a chance of being hit as a further 1d6 sub location.

They are kind of doing the same thing in different ways so I don't think you can take the same way of calculating the extra penalty to avoid partial armour based off n-in-6 from "hitting em where it hurts" and apply it to derived n-in-6 values from the sub locations in LT.

[Rasna]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

I think your conflating Hitting them where it hurts from HT and the armour location rules from LT



"Hitting them where it hurts" (HTpg69) doesn't line up sub locations with specific chances, it only talks about partial cover of locations in general

so the unprotected part of a hand with 2 in 6 armour partial cover is -5 (-4 for the hand and another -1 for the 2 in 6 partial cover)

the unprotected part of a leg with 2 in 6 armour partial cover is -3 (-2 for the leg and another -1 for the 2 in 6 partial cover)




The armour location table (LTpg100) does reference sub locations.

Both by area as a percentage of torso for the purposes calculating armour weight and cost.

and as a chance of being hit as a further 1d6 sub location.

They are kind of doing the same thing in different ways so I don't think you can take the same way of calculating the extra penalty to avoid partial armour based off n-in-6 from "hitting em where it hurts" and apply it to derived n-in-6 values from the sub locations in LT.

Mine was an answer to Sir_pudding and Anthony. Of course sub-locations for arms and legs are listed in Low-Tech, but I haven't found sub-sub-locations for thighs (which I've divided in upper [6 on 1d, 25%, -4 to hit] and lower [6 on 1d, 25%, -4 to hit]), shins (WIHDI upper [3 on 1d, 25%, -4 to hit], lower [2 on 1d, 25%, -4 to hit], ankles [1 on 1d, 5%, -5 to hit]) and forearms (WIHDI upper [3 on 1d, 10%, -4 to hit], lower [2 on 1d, 10%, -4 to hit], wrists [1 on 1d, 5%, -5 to hit]; nor the hit penalty for every sub-location (GURPS Campaigns gives -2 to hit arms and legs and -4 to hit hands and feet, but it doesn't give the penalty to hit thighs or upper arms, for example, only the dice roll for these specific parts when hitting arms or legs).

That's why I had to write my own HRs: in my campaigns, all Low-Tech and all strictly realistic, for me and the players it's vital to know these things. Enemies with partially uncovered arms and/or legs are by far more common than enemies in full harness, so, for example, it makes a lot of sense aiming specifically at uncovered thighs if enemy soldiers wear poleyns and greaves but not cuisses (or if their cuisses were of reinforced layered cloth, so they have less DR on thighs than on plate-covered shins and knees) or aiming at uncovered shins at enemies wear thigh-lenght hauberks.

[sir_pudding]

There's no reason to just target thighs if they have shin armor though. There's no game benefit of hitting thighs, it is just a normal leg hit, so you are better off targeting the unarmored parts of the leg in total.

[Rasna]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

There's no reason to just target thighs if they have shin armor though. There's no game benefit of hitting thighs, it is just a normal leg hit, so you are better off targeting the unarmored parts of the leg in total.

As explained before, using HTWIH and getting a -6 malus to target one thigh, which has a surface equal to 22.5% of torso area, isn't both realistic and playable, especially when you can target one hand (5% of torso area surface) at -4. Out of armour coverage, there are at least two additional reasons to target thighs instead shins: 1) you can hit the femoral artery with a cutting/impaling/piercing hit; 2) if you fight bare-handed, Hurting Yourself (B379) applies on shins (despite having DR 0) but not on thighs.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Rasna

As explained before, using HTWIH and getting a -6 malus to target one thigh, which has a surface equal to 22.5% of torso area, isn't both realistic and playable,

The penalty in this case would be only be -4. Leg is - 2, shin is 3/6 coverage so -2 and -2-2=-4. That would mean you most likely hit the thigh, but might hit the knee, and either way don't hit the shin armor.

especially when you can target one hand (5% of torso area surface) at -4

Hands are easier to hit relative to size on purpose. They are likely targets of opportunity in melee.

1) you can hit the femoral artery with a cutting/impaling/piercing hit;

If you want to target it specifically you can, at -5.

you fight bare-handed, Hurting Yourself (B379) applies on shins (despite having DR 0) but not on thighs.

Punching them in the knee, though isn't a bad thing for you.

If you avoid the shins (at -4) you are going to hit either knee or thigh.

[Tomsdad]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

The penalty in this case would be only be -4. Leg is - 2, shin is 3/6 coverage so -2 and -2-2=-4. That would mean you most likely hit the thigh, but might hit the knee, and either way don't hit the shin armor.
....

I think Rasna's goal is to be able to specifically target the thigh, rather than avoid the shin.

So I guess if you do combine the two systems (partial armour avoidance penalties and d6 sub locations) it would work out as the thigh being 2 out of 6 so the equivalent of avoiding 4 out of 6 so an additional -3 on top of the legs -2.


I guess upper and lower thighs would be 50/50 subdivision of the thigh so each would be 1 in 6 as leg sub location and thus avoiding a 5 in 6 chance of hitting some other part and so an additional -4 on top of the leg's -2.

Of course such further "sub-sub-locations" only work here if they are part of a sub location that has a N in 6 spread where N also sub divides down nicely!

Ultimately I'm not sure this works and I think this is stretching these systems too far, especially as there's a couple of non linear effect at work here as well.

e.g as you already said the fact that some body part are targets of opportunity more than their abstract surface area might suggest.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

I think Rasna's goal is to be able to specifically target the thigh, rather than avoid the shin.

There isn't any reason to target thighs specifically though.

[Rasna]

Originally Posted by Tomsdad

I think Rasna's goal is to be able to specifically target the thigh, rather than avoid the shin.

Yep. Basically, because I think that every sub-location should be specifically targetable (even if there are no special injury effects) and should have his own hitting malus.

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

There isn't any reason to target thighs specifically though.

At least three: to avoid armoured knees&shins, to have a chance to hit the femoral artery (probably, 1-2 on 1d when specifically target the thigh) but without an additional -2 to hit (-3 for thighs, -5 for the femoral artery) and to hit them with fists to avoid Hurting Yourself which applies to shins.