In western movies and even real life western style duels have always interested me and I’d love to incorporate this in my campaign besides for the basic turn style fighting, and trading hit points points back and forth, I was thinking about add something like this. Imagine death and saving throws except you are try to beat the rolls of the NPC you are dueling. Obviously this is difficult as if you lose it would be an outright kill. I don’t want a duel to last very long like normal combat but don’t want to outright kill a players character not sure what to do about this.
Here's how I'd do it if I *had* to use D&D (for a western setting I'd use a different game system entirely).
Each player rolls a d20 and adds their dex modifier. This represents their accuracy. As it's a duel no-one is wearing armour or similar so we can dispense with the idea it wouldn't do a huge amount of damage. Moreover, firearms like the peacemaker weren't terribly accurate without substantial training and practice.
I would rate the results as follows:
<15 - Shot Misses 15-20 - Shot hits a hand, foot, or other non-essential area - shot deals 1/4 of PCs total HP 21-25 - Shot hits a limb (arm, leg etc) but misses vital organs, or blood vessels - Shot deals 1/2 of PCs total HP 26-28 - Shot hits a vital organ or blood vessel - Shot deals 3/4 of PCs total HP 29-30 - Shot hits the head, heart or lung - Shot kills - PC dies >30 - Shot also kills
I would further add a bleeding mechanic - A the character loses 1/8 total HP per minute of in game time (representing blood loss which was how the majority of those hit by miniballs or early bullets would die). If treated, great, the bleeding goes away. If untreated - death.
I would recommend checking out the Aces and Eights system though to see how that works (even if you end up importing their mechanics into a D&D ruleset) it's a really good western setting rpg.
Hell yea I’ll have to check that out thank you I still don’t know if I like the dying out right though I wonder if I could combine yours and the one above where it would knock them to 0hp so saves have to be made and time so be healed but there is a victor in the duel.
Hell yea I’ll have to check that out thank you I still don’t know if I like the dying out right though I wonder if I could combine yours and the one above where it would knock them to 0hp so saves have to be made and time so be healed but there is a victor in the duel.
It's your table so run it how you wish, but in my experience (which stretches far beyond D&D) character death has to be a possibility or it's like playing with zero stakes. Character death introduces those stakes and reminds players that their characters are not immortal. I've had a lot of players express a desire to play new characters or tell me how much they enjoy just making a new character up and are hopeful that in some future campaign they'll get to play that character.
I don't know when players and DMs became so averse to character death in their games but to me it's like a game of Pandemic, Forbidden Island, or Betrayal at House on the Hill (Board Games played with a team). I've had more fun losing those type of games than winning many others.
Extending that to your setting, the expansion of the 'Wild West' is so engaging a concept specifically because of how dangerous it was. The small acts of kindness in this harsh frontier were amplified because you were giving something you already had so little of (time, money, resources). The figures that made their way into popular culture were so enduring because in that land exploration brought with it the real risk of never returning. It did also bring with it massive acts of barbarity, brutality and all but genocide. Actions at that time had far reaching consequences. What you did mattered.
Now, if you just want a gunslinger type of setting where you eliminate that, cool. I've been a writer for longer than I can remember though and the one thing that is essential in anything you create is to have real risks and consequences. A millionaire giving £10 to the homeless guy on the street doesn't mean a darn thing. The person on the breadline themselves handing that same homeless guy their lunch? That means something.
If you're not into consequences and weight of actions at your game table though, that's cool and you should do what works for your game group. I'm coming at it from a particular direction. You should approach it from yours. Ultimately you'll run your game differently to everyone else who will give you advice :D
Death doesn't have to be the ultimate thing to avoid losing in a duel - simply losing it might mean losing status within the community, or losing some important artifact that the duel is all about possessing.
The duel idea is cool. Having a detailed map with barrels, carts and buildings placed for cover would be good if you make them do an actual fight. Have the enemies (and players) take the ready action once they take cover to shoot with almost total cover at any person that comes in view, and make their attacks do a lot of damage to make it an actual threat, so that none of the characters just stand in the middle of the street and get shot at with no consequences. I would also not take away the possibility of death because any person going into a duel should know that if they lose, they might die, and it makes the story more intense and dramatic.
The duel idea is cool. Having a detailed map with barrels, carts and buildings placed for cover would be good if you make them do an actual fight. Have the enemies (and players) take the ready action once they take cover to shoot with almost total cover at any person that comes in view, and make their attacks do a lot of damage to make it an actual threat, so that none of the characters just stand in the middle of the street and get shot at with no consequences. I would also not take away the possibility of death because any person going into a duel should know that if they lose, they might die, and it makes the story more intense and dramatic.
Isn't the point of a duel that it's a 1v1? Usually with no cover?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny. Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I am probably wrong, I don't read a lot of westerns, but if the two people miss or something wouldn't they go diving for cover before they get shot at again? I know that some duels had one bullet, but weren't cowboy duels a little more chaotic? At least in the stories, real life was probably different. I feel like I have seen cowboy duels where they were both behind cover and shooting at each other from there. I may be wrong though.
I had put some thought into a potential quickdraw, gunslinger mechanic where characters proficient with firearms got a skill called Eagle Eye, which is an action you take on your turn that raises your AC against firearms by 5 points and gives you a +5 to hit until your next attack, and plus 1d6 piercing to the damage of your next attack. Eagle Eye is stackable if you keep using it on subsequent turns, which is where you get those classic western standoffs, and you have two characters preparing to dodge and dive for cover, judge the mettle of their opponent, and gamble over when the perfect moment to strike might be.
It carries a strategic element, since if one opponent might decide before the other that they've amassed enough stacks to drop the enemy before the other, and if they're right then they prevent them from stacking until they become a threat, and if they're wrong then the fight is essentially over for them, and either they get dropped or things devolve into a conventional gunfight with cover and ricochet and maybe some fisticuffs if someone gets in too close. And one character might make that decision based off any amount of factors. Maybe they belive themselves more skilled than their opponent, maybe they're first in the initiative and get to make the call first, or maybe they just feel lucky. Just like in a classic western showdown, it all comes down to that one gamble.
In western movies and even real life western style duels have always interested me and I’d love to incorporate this in my campaign besides for the basic turn style fighting, and trading hit points points back and forth, I was thinking about add something like this. Imagine death and saving throws except you are try to beat the rolls of the NPC you are dueling. Obviously this is difficult as if you lose it would be an outright kill. I don’t want a duel to last very long like normal combat but don’t want to outright kill a players character not sure what to do about this.
The blow would knock them to 0 HP (and thus unconscious) and cause death saving throws to be made.
Thus, just like in the films, the doctor runs out into the street to patch them up before they bleed to death.
That could work I’m assuming my player would have some sort of cleric or healer to support their party and just have a town doctor run out to the NPC.
Here's how I'd do it if I *had* to use D&D (for a western setting I'd use a different game system entirely).
Each player rolls a d20 and adds their dex modifier. This represents their accuracy. As it's a duel no-one is wearing armour or similar so we can dispense with the idea it wouldn't do a huge amount of damage. Moreover, firearms like the peacemaker weren't terribly accurate without substantial training and practice.
I would rate the results as follows:
<15 - Shot Misses
15-20 - Shot hits a hand, foot, or other non-essential area - shot deals 1/4 of PCs total HP
21-25 - Shot hits a limb (arm, leg etc) but misses vital organs, or blood vessels - Shot deals 1/2 of PCs total HP
26-28 - Shot hits a vital organ or blood vessel - Shot deals 3/4 of PCs total HP
29-30 - Shot hits the head, heart or lung - Shot kills - PC dies
>30 - Shot also kills
I would further add a bleeding mechanic - A the character loses 1/8 total HP per minute of in game time (representing blood loss which was how the majority of those hit by miniballs or early bullets would die). If treated, great, the bleeding goes away. If untreated - death.
I would recommend checking out the Aces and Eights system though to see how that works (even if you end up importing their mechanics into a D&D ruleset) it's a really good western setting rpg.
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
Hell yea I’ll have to check that out thank you I still don’t know if I like the dying out right though I wonder if I could combine yours and the one above where it would knock them to 0hp so saves have to be made and time so be healed but there is a victor in the duel.
It's your table so run it how you wish, but in my experience (which stretches far beyond D&D) character death has to be a possibility or it's like playing with zero stakes. Character death introduces those stakes and reminds players that their characters are not immortal. I've had a lot of players express a desire to play new characters or tell me how much they enjoy just making a new character up and are hopeful that in some future campaign they'll get to play that character.
I don't know when players and DMs became so averse to character death in their games but to me it's like a game of Pandemic, Forbidden Island, or Betrayal at House on the Hill (Board Games played with a team). I've had more fun losing those type of games than winning many others.
Extending that to your setting, the expansion of the 'Wild West' is so engaging a concept specifically because of how dangerous it was. The small acts of kindness in this harsh frontier were amplified because you were giving something you already had so little of (time, money, resources). The figures that made their way into popular culture were so enduring because in that land exploration brought with it the real risk of never returning. It did also bring with it massive acts of barbarity, brutality and all but genocide. Actions at that time had far reaching consequences. What you did mattered.
Now, if you just want a gunslinger type of setting where you eliminate that, cool. I've been a writer for longer than I can remember though and the one thing that is essential in anything you create is to have real risks and consequences. A millionaire giving £10 to the homeless guy on the street doesn't mean a darn thing. The person on the breadline themselves handing that same homeless guy their lunch? That means something.
If you're not into consequences and weight of actions at your game table though, that's cool and you should do what works for your game group. I'm coming at it from a particular direction. You should approach it from yours. Ultimately you'll run your game differently to everyone else who will give you advice :D
DM session planning template - My version of maps for 'Lost Mine of Phandelver' - Send your party to The Circus - Other DM Resources - Maps, Tokens, Quests - 'Better' Player Character Injury Tables?
Actor, Writer, Director & Teacher by day - GM/DM in my off hours.
Death doesn't have to be the ultimate thing to avoid losing in a duel - simply losing it might mean losing status within the community, or losing some important artifact that the duel is all about possessing.
The duel idea is cool. Having a detailed map with barrels, carts and buildings placed for cover would be good if you make them do an actual fight. Have the enemies (and players) take the ready action once they take cover to shoot with almost total cover at any person that comes in view, and make their attacks do a lot of damage to make it an actual threat, so that none of the characters just stand in the middle of the street and get shot at with no consequences. I would also not take away the possibility of death because any person going into a duel should know that if they lose, they might die, and it makes the story more intense and dramatic.
Isn't the point of a duel that it's a 1v1? Usually with no cover?
Look at what you've done. You spoiled it. You have nobody to blame but yourself. Go sit and think about your actions.
Don't be mean. Rudeness is a vicious cycle, and it has to stop somewhere. Exceptions for things that are funny.
Go to the current Competition of the Finest 'Brews! It's a cool place where cool people make cool things.
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat Off - Mod Hat Also Off (I'm not a mod)
I am probably wrong, I don't read a lot of westerns, but if the two people miss or something wouldn't they go diving for cover before they get shot at again? I know that some duels had one bullet, but weren't cowboy duels a little more chaotic? At least in the stories, real life was probably different. I feel like I have seen cowboy duels where they were both behind cover and shooting at each other from there. I may be wrong though.
I had put some thought into a potential quickdraw, gunslinger mechanic where characters proficient with firearms got a skill called Eagle Eye, which is an action you take on your turn that raises your AC against firearms by 5 points and gives you a +5 to hit until your next attack, and plus 1d6 piercing to the damage of your next attack. Eagle Eye is stackable if you keep using it on subsequent turns, which is where you get those classic western standoffs, and you have two characters preparing to dodge and dive for cover, judge the mettle of their opponent, and gamble over when the perfect moment to strike might be.
It carries a strategic element, since if one opponent might decide before the other that they've amassed enough stacks to drop the enemy before the other, and if they're right then they prevent them from stacking until they become a threat, and if they're wrong then the fight is essentially over for them, and either they get dropped or things devolve into a conventional gunfight with cover and ricochet and maybe some fisticuffs if someone gets in too close. And one character might make that decision based off any amount of factors. Maybe they belive themselves more skilled than their opponent, maybe they're first in the initiative and get to make the call first, or maybe they just feel lucky. Just like in a classic western showdown, it all comes down to that one gamble.