Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Correlating Player Satisfaction, Combat Speed, and HP / Damage Modeling
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="innerdude" data-source="post: 6939406" data-attributes="member: 85870"><p>Which, then, of the hypothetical combinations posed by @<em><strong><u><a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=6779310" target="_blank">aramis erak</a></u></strong></em> produce the kinds of gameplay a certain group might be looking for? </p><p></p><p>For example, which model(s) would a group looking for ultra-realism choose? Obviously no model will be perfect, considering human physiology is one of the most complex sciences we know of, and would would be dependent on what it was trying to model as well. An RPG trying to model a U.S. football game is going to model damage much differently (bruising, fatigue, and debilitating but non-lethal wounds). Whereas trying to model people fighting with guns will be entirely different.</p><p></p><p>If I were to guess, I think hit points + damage step offers the most potential for realism (please note I'm making no judgments on playability, I'm merely trying to evaluate them categorically), as it seems to be the best way to represent the broadest possible set of in-game fictional states. You can model fatigue, resolve, "mojo," while also having distinct "break points" where actual "hurting" comes into play. This also allows for modeling particularly devastating attacks which can bypass hit points entirely and move an opponent directly down to the next damage step. It actually makes me wonder why D&D has never gone the route of adding damage steps --- though the whole concept of "bloodied" from 4e seemed to be a move in that direction.</p><p></p><p>Damage steps also have the potential benefit of making combat quicker, since combat becomes "swingy." Having had loads of experience with Savage Worlds' version of damage step + damage save, I can say that it does produce a very "cinematic" flavor of combat, where you're doing everything in your power to maneuver, position, and use every tool at your disposal to set up enemies to deliver a killing blow. The problem comes in the "swinginess" of the proceedings. If the dice aren't in your favor, combats can go from "cinematic" to downright tedious. Imagine a fight scene in a movie that just goes on far too long, with no meaningful change in state to the outcome. Fists are flying, weapons flailing, but nothing's really happening for say, 5-6 minutes of extended screen time. Eventually you start to tune out and go, "Okay, can we just end this?" </p><p></p><p>Damage saves are the outlier, and the reason to me seems pretty apparent---they're naturally and intrinsically a metagame/dissociated mechanic. In thinking about it, I'm not even sure how you could even make the attempt to associate a damage save to in-game causality. Savage Worlds makes no bones about its damage save mechanic; it's a choice made by the player to change the fiction within the game state. "I don't actually want my hero to get hurt, so I'm going to spend an action point to roll and see if he actually wasn't damaged even though the GM's attack says he should be."</p><p></p><p>From a simple gameplay standpoint, it's easy to see why Gygax stuck with straight hit points. It's an easy concept to digest from a player's perspective (even if the in-game fictional positioning rapidly becomes untenable). And it eliminates the "rocket tag" syndrome of straight damage step. Straight hit points is probably the most easily "playable" system, but on its own is certainly the least "realistic," at least as historically implemented in D&D.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="innerdude, post: 6939406, member: 85870"] Which, then, of the hypothetical combinations posed by @[I][B][U][URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=6779310"]aramis erak[/URL][/U][/B][/I] produce the kinds of gameplay a certain group might be looking for? For example, which model(s) would a group looking for ultra-realism choose? Obviously no model will be perfect, considering human physiology is one of the most complex sciences we know of, and would would be dependent on what it was trying to model as well. An RPG trying to model a U.S. football game is going to model damage much differently (bruising, fatigue, and debilitating but non-lethal wounds). Whereas trying to model people fighting with guns will be entirely different. If I were to guess, I think hit points + damage step offers the most potential for realism (please note I'm making no judgments on playability, I'm merely trying to evaluate them categorically), as it seems to be the best way to represent the broadest possible set of in-game fictional states. You can model fatigue, resolve, "mojo," while also having distinct "break points" where actual "hurting" comes into play. This also allows for modeling particularly devastating attacks which can bypass hit points entirely and move an opponent directly down to the next damage step. It actually makes me wonder why D&D has never gone the route of adding damage steps --- though the whole concept of "bloodied" from 4e seemed to be a move in that direction. Damage steps also have the potential benefit of making combat quicker, since combat becomes "swingy." Having had loads of experience with Savage Worlds' version of damage step + damage save, I can say that it does produce a very "cinematic" flavor of combat, where you're doing everything in your power to maneuver, position, and use every tool at your disposal to set up enemies to deliver a killing blow. The problem comes in the "swinginess" of the proceedings. If the dice aren't in your favor, combats can go from "cinematic" to downright tedious. Imagine a fight scene in a movie that just goes on far too long, with no meaningful change in state to the outcome. Fists are flying, weapons flailing, but nothing's really happening for say, 5-6 minutes of extended screen time. Eventually you start to tune out and go, "Okay, can we just end this?" Damage saves are the outlier, and the reason to me seems pretty apparent---they're naturally and intrinsically a metagame/dissociated mechanic. In thinking about it, I'm not even sure how you could even make the attempt to associate a damage save to in-game causality. Savage Worlds makes no bones about its damage save mechanic; it's a choice made by the player to change the fiction within the game state. "I don't actually want my hero to get hurt, so I'm going to spend an action point to roll and see if he actually wasn't damaged even though the GM's attack says he should be." From a simple gameplay standpoint, it's easy to see why Gygax stuck with straight hit points. It's an easy concept to digest from a player's perspective (even if the in-game fictional positioning rapidly becomes untenable). And it eliminates the "rocket tag" syndrome of straight damage step. Straight hit points is probably the most easily "playable" system, but on its own is certainly the least "realistic," at least as historically implemented in D&D. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Correlating Player Satisfaction, Combat Speed, and HP / Damage Modeling
Top