I like the called shots system in TOR, but find it quote limiting, especially if your opponent isn't bearing a shield or using a weapon. What do you think of the following?

Swords:
Great Success: disarm opponent
Great Success and Feat Die 7+: break shield or piercing blow
Extraordinary Success: immediate second attack

Spears & Arrows:
Great Success: piercing blow
Great Success and Feat Die 7+: disarm opponent
Extraordinary Success: immediate second attack

Axes & Mattocks
Great Success: destroy shield
Great Success and Feat Die 7+: disarm opponent or piercing blow
Extraordinary Success: immediate second attack

I am not sure, but I think the disarm quality you mention would take a little away from the Bearded Axe virtue. Disarming an opponent or destroying his shield is pretty much what makes that virtue special. You would, in a sense, be giving all weapons that ability.

Though I maybe wrong.

The bearded axe can accomplish these things without needing a called shot, so I don't think it really diminishes its value. If anything, it expands the bearded axe's potential. IMHO of course!

So, to have a second attack with a sword you have to call the second attack and then get an extraordinary success or fail all together?

In my experience, players don't do normal called shots. I don't know if they would ever try for more difficult ones?

That's a good point. My feeling is that the extraordinary success line is not something players would try to achieve; that it is only an option in case an extraordinary success is achieved.

So, in other words, let's say a hero with a sword tries to achieve a piercing blow (great success needed as well as 7+ on feat die). He rolls an extraordinary success. He can take a second attack OR he can take the piercing blow.

So... This isn't just expanding called shots, you've basically changed the way weapons work at an essential level. Because it seems you've lowered greatly the number needed to wound... And saying "well you also need an extraordinary success" isn't saying much because the odds of getting one I've found to be much higher than those of getting a regular piercing blow. As well as basically making the called shots an after-the-fact ability whereas before you needed to "call" it, hence the name, while making a piercing blow something you need to call(at least by the way you used the phrase "tries to achieve")

Have you actually tested these ideas using the dice? Because it seems to me more like you just came up with the idea and randomly assigned a number to it. Remember, great and extraordinary successes already have their own effect in combat, and I'm not sure I see these options as a suitable alternative.

Right now this is just an idea. I haven't tested it at all. I'm just floating ideas around. I feel the existing called shot system is limited and flawed; you can't make a called shot with an axe unless the defender has a shield, for example. If the opponent isn't armed, your sword has no function with called shots. But using bows and spears always gives you an option. That's problematic IMHO.

Do you have any experience with players and called shots? In my time LMing, players don't make called shots enough for it to matter (and by enough, I mean only once in 8+ sessions).

Just seems like trying to fix something that is only a problem on paper.

Are you saying that achieving an extraordinary success is easier than achieving a piercing blow? That would be an issue. This is the type of stuff that really helps to see whether an idea has any merit, so I appreciate it. Here is an example, using a character with a rank 2 in sword (edge 10, injury 16) facing an orc soldier (parry 4, armor 3d).

- Forward stance (TN 6 + 4): 74.07% chance to hit, 18.51% chance for piercing blow, 7.05% chance for wounding, 2.78% chance for an extraordinary success

I may have done this all wrong, so please correct me if that is the case. Thanks!

As a player, I try them once or twice in a session. It really isn't a problem; I'm just a tinkerer who enjoys house ruling stuff.

I have had way more extraordinary successes than Piercing blows in my game. The odds tend to be higher, one chance in 6 of getting a 6 on each die, not dependent on getting a high roll on the fate Die.

I don't know if your percentages are correct(Seems a bit low on the extraordinary to me), But they don't take into account spending Hope. Low Feat die plus two sixes may not hit the TN, but pop a hope in and BAM! Extraordinary success. (Especially if it's a favoured skill)

I have had at least 5 extraordinary successes in 3 sessions and I think maybe 3 piercing blows(None of which actually connected). But, I've NEVER had a player make a called shot... Not after they heard what it took. They'll take the great success afterwards but they don't want to rely on it. I severely doubt adding another effect will change that


And as for your argument about "If the opponent isn't armed, your sword has no function with called shots" yeah... Called shots are designed to give you an advantage, but you're already at an advantage. You've basically already got what a called shot does. Same with someone without a shield. They're already a few dice lower TN because they don't have one. Also, I seriously don't see a sword breaking a shield... That's what that Axe is designed to do... Swords aren't designed to do that.

I think you might be taking the term "Called Shot" in a very D&D way which is to be expected. I don't personally think Called Shot is the right term to use. They are not "Called Shots" as we're used to them, which is what it seems you're kind of trying to turn them into. They're more Proactive Advantages... Doesn't roll off the tongue as well though. They aren't a way to hit your opponent in a specific place, they are there to give you an specific advantage based on what the weapon is used for. Making weapons do things they really aren't designed for doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

And I personally abstract the combat in my head. You are not trading single hits for single hits. The round encompass maneuvering for the best hit. You are attacking, not making AN attack in a way most other games look at it so you COULD be swinging two or three times and maybe only connecting once or connecting a little each time. Attacking a second time feels very D&D to me where a single round is very clearly "An attack, A move, etc..." and TOR is not really structured like that. Combat is as fluid as you imagine it to be.

Sorry for the rambling... I just typed as things came into my head. And I don't know how much made sense.

I see where you're coming from. Different strokes for different folks, as they say.

The percentage for a rank 2 swordsman to achieve an extraordinary success (two 6's) is very low: 16.67% to roll a 6 on 1d6 and to roll two 6's on 2d6 is 2.78% (or 16.67% squared). Perhaps your players are ranked higher in their weapon skills; a rank of 3 would achieve an extraordinary success with a forward stance 6.94% of the time (thank you, Anydice.com!). Did you perhaps mean 'great success' rather than 'extraordinary success?'

Anyways, landing an extraordinary success is still a lower percentage occurrence than achieving a piercing blow with a sword -- maybe your dice are wonky!

I like the idea of what is trying to be done here.

I am still working with the One Ring game system to read it and learn it.

But I embrace the effort, since I see how well such things work for me and my group in Green Ronin's Dragon Age, with relatively widly different mechanics.

To me, you should be able to make or atempt a called shot with any weapon, against any defense. Whether that is easy or difficult and the effects would obviously vary. So I see the statement in another thread, "keep it simple at first."

But, comma, if I have an axe and want to do massive damage or gain combat advantages on a foe, I'm not giving up that desire simply because the guy has no shield. I'm gonna chop off something, or try to.

So I see the problem, but the answer is clouded by my lack of One Ring experience as yet.