Do you want locational damage? I do, and I think it would fit very well. However, I do not want the Fallout version where your limbs will actively cripple and then you'll move slower/fuzzy hearing/etc. I liked the way locational damage was integrated into mods like UV, where after you take enough damage to a limb, an attribute might be damaged 5 or 10 points. I found that this system was more passive, and well integrated.

The only time i want any sense of "location damage" is if im ranging and want to get a headshot lol.

otherwise, nah not really fussed about it.

The Unnecessary Violence way of doing it looks great.

YES! I want to cripple limbs!

jump off something too high and break your legs. its that simple.

Headshot/strike and crippling! but headshot/strike is most imporatnt of the two imo

I would love extra damage on the head/area where the armour is not covering

I want to be able to hit where the armour is weaker and do more damage if I hit, maybe seeing the armour being harmed and blood coming out of the wound.

If I shoot a reindeer with my crossbow and it hits his behind leg, I should use the next half an hour tracking him by the blood on the snow, and find him immobile about 0.5-1 kilometers away.

If I hit the heart, he'd only run for 100-200 meters before dying on his feet.

If I hit the head and the damage is enough to kill him, he drops where he stands. If not, the bolt bounces off the skull and he's wounded, but not lethally.

Voted yes.

Locational damage can only add to combat immersion. Possibly have it toned down in lower difficulties and actually be a feature that makes higher difficulties hard......instead of giving opponents excessive amounts of health.

Yes please. I found it so annoying in Oblivion when I headshotted zombies, and they didn't die.

I'm torn between my two sides on this one.

Generally, I think an RPG's combat should be more determined by character skill than player skill, and the need to aim for vital parts of the body for the advantage would ruin that a bit.

Still though, it's annoying when you can soak a million arrows into someone's head and do nothing, and then shoot someone once in the leg and they die.


I think I'd want it to work like most FPSes, where you just do more damage based on what location you hit. But not as extreme as most FPSes.. I think the difference should only be slight.



Another note - My Dad likes the Elder scrolls series. But he hates FPSes because he can't aim worth a [censored]. If combat was overly reliant on locational damage, he, and I'm sure plenty of others wouldn't be able to play it as well.

Sure, we're all probably just as good in FPSes as RPGs but we should consider other people too.

I know some people get annoyed when we suggest Fallout mechanics, but this is one of the few things from Fallout which would fit TES.

Yes, of course! But I think it could be even better than FO3, with specific spots being more lethal, and dismembering being possible anywhere (like a toned down version of new MGS game). A general anatomy of bones and organs could be there (not actually visible, but just like for hit detection purposes). Bones should be broken by blunt, or head knocked in, or chest collapsed, etc. Slashes should kill if they hit the throat, or slice open the abdomen, strong enough ones could maybe even cut off limbs or decapitate with heavier weapons (but more precisely than FO3). Stabs/impales should kill if they hit the heart or neck or head, lead to death if they puncture lungs or groin. That would be ideal but, alas, not likely to see that kind of thing for a while. Who knows, maybe they'll push the envelope like they did with Oblivion.

EDIT:
@Jonas Sancter

Why? The only reason this became the convention, was because there was no way for games to handle a proper simulation, and because the original RPG games were like digitalized table top games. I think that it's been long enough, and that RPGs can start to break free of those restrictions. RPG means role playing (game), and to me, the more immerssive the game is, the more I feel like I'm really that character, not just a puppet master.

headshots with the bow...

a stealthy neck slit with a knife...

it needs these.

what I really hated and still hate in fallout games is that human enemies can take up to 10 point blank head shots with a shotgun and still be running around after me.

sure its an rpg but to blend rpg with realism would be a perfect balance. This is what hardcoe tries to do right? instead of making gun skill determine damage, make it determine how steady you hold the gun, and how accurate you are.

This! This 1000x times!

RPGs can still have progression through experience and all that, but it just needs to start affecting different things now that computers (by this I include consoles, which are just highly packaged computers) can handle all the stuff that the numbers used to have to compensate for due to the inability for the original game computers to handle them. Blade skill can govern how quick your strikes are, how accurate your parries are, how close yo where your cross hair is your sword strike, the odds of you successfully disarming a foe or getting disarmed, of fumbling, etc. Bow skill can determine how well you aim, how quickly/successfully you notch your arrows, how well you aim while moving, how much force you can draw your bow with.

This is my dilemma. I think the best approach would just be to have extra damage for headshots, and nothing else. Full locational damage works in RPGs through the likes of VATS, but there's no way it can really be implemented in a TES game. Unless they want to just go ahead and abandon the notion of creating an RPG altogether.

Yes. It would be very useful for Archers and headshots.

If your succes in combat relies much more on your reflexes instead of your weapon skill that makes increasing your skills much less important in the game.

I don't think the bow sight should physically wobble about. There should just be a hidden radius of deviation from where your crosshairs are actually pointing, dependent on your Marksman skill. For instance, someone with a Marksman skill of 1 will see their crosshair pointing exactly where they want it to, but the arrow could end up flying anywhere within a large radius of where they intend. Someone with a marksman skill will have the arrow fly exactly where they aim it (gravitational effects permitting).

What a load of tripe. In an RPG game you take on the role of your character. Your actions are determined by your CHARACTER'S skills and stats, NOT your own. RPGs should not "break free" of the shackles that define what an RPG is. What you want to play is an FPS or a hack'n'slash action game. Don't get them confused with RPGs.

Well we already have a blocking system in Oblivion which relies more on the player's reflexes rather than ingame skill. Also hitting with a bow is completely based on player skill. Oblivion is an action RPG, not a turn-based RPG like NWN or DA:O. =)

I think locational damage could only make the game better. It wouldn't need to have a huge role in combat, just a nice extra.

But what if those stats determine not damage (which seems totally weird that some people's arrows hurt more than others), but other stuff as you use the weapon. Something like strength affecting how much damage you do (to a certain, limited, extend) would make sense, because it determines how far back you can pull your bow, how hard you can swing a big weapon.

Yeah I liked the Fallout 3 limb crippling system.

I think you got yourself in a bit of a muddle there.

Beautiful.

Please Bethesda, HIRE THIS MAN!