No, i don't have it. Yes, i want it badly.

Therefore i propose the following: This thread's express purpose is the discussion of damage systems. Anything from tracking character damage, to vehicles, to planets, to whatever. What i'm aiming for here is the generation of discussion and the collection of ideas about damage in RPGs. I labor under the (possible foolish) assumption that with enough time and input we can actually generate an incredibly flexible damage system that can be used nigh-universally with very few tweaks.

At this stage i don't have much to add to a discussion, for the damage system i was most recently contemplating was not only cumbersome, but it wasn't very powerful either.

Thanks for any input you feel the desire to add.

Thomas

Part of the reason that a perfect system for any part of a game is Ever-elusive is because different games, different players, different scenarios, these things all have different needs. So, unless the system can change to acomodate these all, then no system is ever going to be perfect.

So, unless you can narrow down what the criteria are, I think you're going to get a zillion answers.

Here's the first to kick it off:
When a character gets in a fight or combat or otherwise suffers an injury or some sort, somebody playing should describe it in really nifty detail.

OK, freeformers taken care of. What's the next spec?

Mike

Mm, I'll take a whack.

What about damage as related to skill? In some systems, skill determines whether or not damage occurs, but the actual type/amount/severity of damage depends on the weapon, the armor, or other things. I've seen a few systems that did both (skill and weapon type both influence total damage), and a few that went over in the other direction (doesn't matter if you're using a butter knife or a sledgehammer, only matters how well you can use it).

I have a certain preference for skill-based damage, but I can see why ignoring weapon type would be highly unsatisfying for some people.

I've always liked the system used by The Window and Mutants and Masterminds. Basically, when you get hit, roll. Success means you shrug it off. Failure means you're hurt, and don't really take any penalty except to future attempts to shrug of injury. (Jeff Likes Heroic.) Failure by a lot means you're fucked.

The way I'm thinking of handling combat in Pull is that it reduces your style trait (the number under which dice must roll to be counted as successes). In effect, the actual damage of a gunshot is not as relevant as to how it affects the image you're trying to portray to the rest of the criminal underworld. That being the case, simply being attacked is enough to reduce your style, the success of the attack isn't such a big deal. In some cases, attacking at all reduces your style.

That's only the way I'm working it for now. The hope is that it discourages using violence as a solution to problems.

Mike Holmes wrote: Here's the first to kick it off:
When a character gets in a fight or combat or otherwise suffers an injury or some sort, somebody playing should describe it in really nifty detail.

OK, freeformers taken care of. What's the next spec?

Jeph wrote: I've always liked the system used by The Window and Mutants and Masterminds.

I've cited this article before, but it's very much on point here: Hitting Them Where It Hurts by Charles Franklin, in The Way, the Truth, and the Dice, which suggests a three-tiered approach to damage based on real-world combat data: killed, incapacitated and in need of medical attention, or wounded.

Heather Manley wrote: In some systems, skill determines whether or not damage occurs, but the actual type/amount/severity of damage depends on the weapon, the armor, or other things. I've seen a few systems that did both (skill and weapon type both influence total damage), and a few that went over in the other direction (doesn't matter if you're using a butter knife or a sledgehammer, only matters how well you can use it).

As Mike (and subsequently just about everyone else) pointed out: I should probably focus the topic down a little bit. I therefore propose that, for now, we focus on tracking damage.

Whether damage is tracked through HP or through stat decreases. I've always felt that most current models are very unsatisfactory. Also, reading M.J.'s linked article may help broaden your views on damage (it did mine anyway).

Inherent in tracking damage is determining when it is taken and how much is taken after the system resolves that a hit will occur. This is also open to discussion. Whether you use opposed damage/toughness rolls (ala Shadowrun), or a weapon damage roll (ala D&D), or whatever.

I think that these two subjects will keep us adequately occupied for a while. And while Mike is right about damage systems satisfying the game desires of the players (which will be different depending on the player), i do believe that we can get something together that is more comprehensive and something that can be enjoyed by most players with very little adaptation. Keep the ideas coming, i like what i've read so far.

Thomas

Jack Spencer Jr wrote: This is called "selling it" in pro wrestling. It makes sense to have it here.

LordSmerf wrote: As Mike (and subsequently just about everyone else) pointed out: I should probably focus the topic down a little bit. I therefore propose that, for now, we focus on tracking damage.

Thanks Mike, i found the article to be helpful, to a degree. Hunter Logan has a good set of definitions and executes a rather good breakdown of damage systems as a concept. A good bit of discussion could be had by simply grabbing his list of ways of tracking damge, but i'll let anyone interested read it on their own.

I'll be away for the weekend, i expect you guys to have finalized the perfect damage system by the time i get back...

Thomas

Since you want to focus specifically on Damage Tracking, how about the following as attributes for the system:

Pros:

Fast Speed in gametime
Accuracy for Armor or resistance to damage
Accuracy for Specifics of the damage
Accuracy for Description of the damage
Information for Misses and what really got hit
Accuracy of Material Hit vs. Weapon Type
Accuracy for Long Term Effects of the damage
Accuracy for Immediate Ramifications of the damage
Accuracy for effects of brain damage



Cons:

Slow speed in gametime
Illogical Kills (a hit to the hand kills you instantly)
Armor never gets destroyed
Armor always gets destroyed
No benefit to large armor with high encumberance
No specifics on effects of different weapons types
No long term effects of damage
No immediate debilitating effects of the damage
Illogical or no good description of the damage
No way to know what weapon types do to non-armor materials
No effects for brain damage, just does damage or kills you



My personal feeling is that speed vs. accuracy are the two most important factors in any damage system. I'm not too concerned about the descriptions since most good GMs are going to be able to come up with good descriptions of the damage as long as they know what the end effect is on the character. For example, did they just take a bullet to the head that killed them? "You hear a loud crunch and feel a slight pressure to your head, then everything goes black and you see a bright light coming towards you. Angles begin to sing and your dead relatives appear with their arms open." Or whatever.

My biggest pet peeve is a system that kills you illogically. Having your arm blown off at the elbow should put you into immediate shock, but even if your hit points are at zero, it shouldn't kill you instantly, and in most cases the body immediatly constricts muscle around dismembered areas. Arteries and veins immediatly contract into the wound. Blood loss can be extensive, yes, but people don't often die from loosing a limb. They go into shock, and they get gangreen if they don't treat it. Obviously they can't use the lost limb. They're weakend from the blood loss, But they shouldn't just flat out die. Most good GMs faced with a system like this will simply ignore the fact that the character is supposed to be dead, and play them as if they're in shock. Of course, many systems like this don't specify which location was hit. Therefore the GM doesn't know where the damage occurred and is free to kill the character with a fatal chest head or neck wound. This is okay, but really puts the power of life and death in the hands of the GM rather than the hands of a dice roll and therefore fate.

Other systems allow the character to determine where they were hit. Frankly I'm not sure how this works, but I'm going to research it. What character would choose to take damage to an unarmored critical area under this type of system?

Like you, I'm always on the lookout for the perfect system. Computer games can always provide accuracy at speed, but computers are restrictive and make lousy GMs (right now anyway). Maybe the best solution would be to have a battle AI on a computer with a voice interface that could run on a laptop at gametime. You could just tell it, "Bob just took a hit from a level 9 transmortal with a triantium cyberclaw, tell me what happened to him." Even better, it listens to the game and gives you the stats as you go without even asking. But I'm dreaming right? Our AI technology isn't up to this. Besides, at least some of the fun of the game is in bending the dice and heckling each other.

Dood (whatinthehell is your real name, anyhow?),

That's exactly the sort of spec that I was talking about. And we could work that out in detail if we wanted to to get the "perfect" system for it. I'm sure we could do it in short order. But it would only be perfect for you, or people just like you. Further it might not make any sense in a particular game. For example, if you wanted the perfect damage tracking system for a game where you played a looney-toon sort of cartoon, would this be it?

Worse, without knowing what the other parts of the system are like, how can we make this one fraction accurately? It's goint to have to imply so much of things like the resolutions system anyhow. There are so many assumptions going into this...So I'm loathe to work on such a project. I doubt it would ever get into a game.

OTOH, there is this sort of Zeitgiest amongst many players that demands exactly the sort of damage tracking system that you posit. So I'm going to show you a system that covers all of your requirements. It's called GURPS.

So, let's look at the spec more closely:
Fast Speed in gametime
Around here that'a called low Search and Handling time. It's a given that this should be as low as possible. Nobody has ever said that they enjoyed counting dice just to count dice (I do love rolling big piles, however). In any case, GURPS is simple. Roll to hit, which takes into account the standard bonuses and penalties and a couple you didn't think of, and then roll for damage and hit location. Apply armor and Hit location effects.

Yes there are special rules for all sorts of things, and this can increase Search time. But only for players unprepared for the situation, or novices. I'm convinced that what players are saying when they say GURPS is slow is that they don't like the focus on the specific details that GURPs provides.

Accuracy for Armor or resistance to damage
It's not "realistic" that armor only reduce damage. Note how in GURPs armor does both (reduces damage and makes hits less likely). That's not even really accurate. IRL, what happens is that armor has a penetration threshold. If penetration is achieved (and that depends on a host of factors including things like angle of impact), then you get some attenuation of force, but not as much as you expect.

Anyhow, GURPs does what you ask and more. It even has a blunt trauma damage rule (impact absorbed via armor, and then still transmitted in broad form to the body).

Accuracy for Specifics of the damage
Weapons are rated for their type, Cutting, Impaling, Crushing (and a couple of optional ones). This has an effect on what sort of damage is done, and how much.

Accuracy for Description of the damage
Other than hit locations, the system doesn't do what you want here. But then you said it's not really important. GURPs does about as well as most non-chart based systems (Rolemaster). Most people agree that they can do as well as the chart (though the RM crits are pretty neat for the first play through).

Information for Misses and what really got hit
GURPS has that. Not only for shots that went astray, but for critical misses in melee and the like.

Accuracy of Material Hit vs. Weapon Type
The type, Cutting, Impaling, Crushing, all affect how the weapon interacts with different sorts of armor.

Accuracy for Long Term Effects of the damage
Rules for disabling or crippling limbs, in combat effect, and potential of permenance of loss of ability.

Accuracy for Immediate Ramifications of the damage
Shock rule says that the character takes a penalty to any action equal to the number of points of damage done.

Accuracy for effects of brain damage
Extra DR for the skull, and a myriad of potential special effects for head hits ranging from knockout due to concussion, to "instant" death.

Illogical Kills (a hit to the hand kills you instantly)
"Blowthrough" rule limits damage to limbs and the like, and damage isn't added directly. In any case, death occurs through an accumulation of points that represent system shock, and rolls are made based on the character's Health score. Characters can only die instantly from brain hits, or really massive trauma to the chest or abdomen.

Armor never gets destroyed
Armor always gets destroyed
Lot's of optional rules for tracking armor damage, none of which are ablative per se, but do speak to effects of damage in terms of the size of the attack, etc.

No benefit to large armor with high encumberance
Armor is very beneficial even when encumbering in GURPS (because damage hurts). Despite the fact that, realistically, armor is never all that encumbering, or people wouldn't have worn it. Also lots of fatigue rule effects as well in GURPS, which does occur IRL (not that you required that).

No way to know what weapon types do to non-armor materials
Lots of talk about what happens to stuff when it gets hit in GURPS. Whole chapters. In fact, vehicles has it's own book if you want to get really technical about building them.


Now, do I like GURPS? Not particularly. I use it occasionally for one-off games and for Traveller. In fact, you may have played it and not liked it. For various reasons. And lots of people curse the name of GURPS. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that it's one of the most despised systems in existence.

Not that it doesn't have all sorts of very loyal fans as well. It's just that it's rather extreme, you see. And that's the problem, again. The Ultimate combat system to some players is the one that I described (with Jack's correction). Which is the opposite of what you and the GURPS players seem to want.

So, have I made my point yet? If we want to discuss perfecting GURPS, we can traipse on over to the Usenet groups and talk till we're green. But I'd rather talk TROS. Which hits all your points even better with the exception that it'd be rejected because it doesn't address damage to materials. Ah well, have to throw out one of the most entertaining games because it doesn't have the precise specifications....

BTW, on the subject of computers, I've proposed CARP a lot. That's using the GM's laptop as a tool. I have programs that do just what you specify that I can run off of my machine. I think there's lots of ground there for improvements to some specifications. But, again, that's only "perfect" when I'd otherwise be playing GURPS. Which isn't often.

Mike

Here's how I do damage in my current setup:

There is no damage system, only injuries and intuition.

There are only injuries, for example, Sladmaer (a character) got his ankle broken the other week. Hmm, broken ankle. Impossible to run, or jog, or any similar highly active task. Hobbling is possible but is intensly painful. Firing bows, and melee combat, both take hefty penalties due to the pain.

Healing times are theoretically based around our approximations to real world healing times, but two of the characters have supernatural healing abilities so we pretty much make them up as we go along.

There is no way for the players to be killed by the results of dice (actually we use cards, but that's by-the-by); they can only be killed by their own choice (choosing to go toe-to-toe with an army is considered choosing to die).

Mike, why must you always crush my idealistic (read unrealistic) hopes and dreams. I guess i'll have to give this one up as a lost cause (which i guess i knew in the back of my mind, but i didn't want to admit it) since Mike's point is well taken. Damage, like almost every other systemic aspect can not be effectively considered apart from the specific game in question... Thanks Mike.

Thomas

Now, come up with a game so that we can make the perfect system for that. :-)

Mike