Taking and giving damage...

[Carnifex]

I know, I'm a veritable luddite I've just got too much of an attachment to the old knuckle-bone rollers to give them up, I guess

 

[Tsyr]

Besides, dice-rolling programs and such are all well and good... but around here, of the half-dozen GMs I talk to, I am the only one who owns a laptop. Only one other even owns a palm. Two players own laptops, and one other owns a palm, but that doesn't help much. And using a desktop computer for gaming is just awkard, I know a GM who used to try. Even though it was right next to the table, it was still awkward as he had to move to use it, not to mention others could see the screen... and there isn't always room to set a big bulky monitor, not to mention keyboard and mouse, on a gaming table. A laptop at least takes up less space than a normal DM screen, so it's not too bad. And you can close it and use it as a dice rolling surface/book shelf/coaster/projectile shield when you need to. Besides, sometimes a laptop is a downright pain in the arse... ever get a BSoD right in the middle of a big combat?

"Uhhhh... sorry guys, I think we might have to start over, I just lost the combat plan.... gimmie a couple minutes for this thing to load back up..."

 

[nopantsyet]

I'm still not following.

So what if a player knows how much damage he does? He doesn't know how many hitpoints his target has, so it really doesn't matter. Besides, I think that giving a numerical value is much easier than trying to think up euphamisms for damage... ya know, carp like "It was a mighty blow", "You barely nicked him", things like that... which, anyhow, sorta go back to the whole "Why bother, it accomplishes the same thing in the end" point.

I prefer a combination. The players roll damage and I provide a description based on how severe the blow was in terms of the opponents overall strength. So if a character deals 5 hp to a Ghour Demon (avg. 114 HP) it's a "nick" or a "glancing blow." If, on the other hand, the character deals 25 HP, then I describe it as "a huge gash across it's chest" or a "solid strike to the shoulder" or whatever. They don't track the damage they've dealt, but they have a sense of it and after dishing out 80 or 90 HP and the thing is still standing, they know they have been beating on it and it's still going so it's a pretty tough creature.

As far as describing the condition of the monster as it takes damage, I use a rough rule of the first ~50% of total HP doesn't slow it down much, the next 25% it's taking noticable damage, then not until the last 25% do they notice any signs that the thing might be weakening.

 

[Rashak Mani]

Overall I understand your idea and agree that the ideal would be to avoid overwhleming players with mechanics... yet if you hide the damage rolls you will get questions like: Did I get a solid hit ? Did a lot of blood spurt ? Did the creature whince badly ?

Avoid the hassle and give the monster a Damage Reduction 2/- and surprise them ! Especially if they are counting the damage.

 

[The It's Man]

What about using an black marker on the third column of table 7.4 of the PHB your players use.

It will keep them in the dark completely about possible damage being done to their opponents.

 

[Psion]

I really think that is a silly thing to be concerned about. I have had a few players now and then count points, but usually they are wrong. Especially considering that multiple characters having element damage type weapons but typically have no clue how much DR or energy restistance a creature has.

I think that players SHOULD have some clue of how much damage they do. Like "nopants" I embellish with descriptions of how effective the hit was. If a player rolls maximum damage and it didn't end up doing any the PC will notice ("your blade doesn't even nick the golem", "you stab into the inky blackness of the creatures body*, but it doesn't seem to notice"). Likewise, the PC will know it their opponent wasn't severely injured (your sword bites into his shoulder, but he presses his attack nonetheless" or "he staggers back from your blow.")

* - This would be a nightshade, of course

 

[TBoarder]

Here's my argument for having the players roll for their own damage. After you cut away all of the role-playing that's done in D&D, what you're left with is a game. The more dice that the DM rolls for a player, the less it feels like a game and the more it feels like a narrative. Players rolling damage gives them more to do in the game. Take that away and I can almost guarantee that combat will become a much rarer occurance. What player wants to sit around, doing nothing. while listening to the DM explain what his PC is doing.

Also, there's the fact that this kind of situation harbors distrust between Players and DMs. There's no way that the players can know if the DMs cheating or not. Obviously this is an extremely pessimistic way of looking at it, but it's something that should definitely be looked at when making a decision like this.

 

[Ruined]

Maybe this should be another thread, but this brings up the concept of 'how many hit points I have left'? I've played in several games where I keep track of my hit points, and now I'm in a campaign where the GM records all of my hits and describes them instead of using numbers. I have to say I like the uncertainty method.

Yes it gives the GM more leeway. He can take the characters down for plot elements if neccesary, but I don't worry about that. We have faith in the DM. I've considered this method for my games, but usually I have my hands full.

That being said (and keeping relevant), I still want to roll my To Hit rolls and Damage rolls. There's a lot of fun involved in making that crucial good hit. There's also the agony of watching your dice 'betray you' roll after roll. It's part of the magic of the game (as long as players don't fudge rolls).

 

[Jackfrost]

ah

In order to tell people how much damage they did they would need a high enough spot check...
1 = you see him hurtin
20 = a deep cut is left in his right bisep, 3-5 damage

this would make the game so much more realistic...

 

[Victim]

Actually, spot checks would be better used to determine relative damage. For example, a high spot check could give a estimate of the creature's percentage of HP remaining, because be more visible. After all, a "crushing blow" to first level mage might be 3 points, while to high level fighter, 3 points is nothing.