Tink-Tink-Boom vs. the Death Spiral: The Damage Mechanic in RPGs

Broadly speaking, every traditional role-playing game has some sort of system for tracking the health and well-being of its characters. Classically, as in Dungeons & Dragons, these are expressed as Hit Points. Other systems such as Savage Worlds or Vampire: The Masquerade use some sort of qualitative wound mechanic. For the purposes of this article, which will compare the relative merits of each approach, we’ll call the former approach Tink-Tink-Boom (or TTB for short) and the latter the Death Spiral.

Broadly speaking, every traditional role-playing game has some sort of system for tracking the health and well-being of its characters. Classically, as in Dungeons & Dragons, these are expressed as Hit Points. Other systems such as Savage Worlds or Vampire: The Masquerade use some sort of qualitative wound mechanic. For the purposes of this article, which will compare the relative merits of each approach, we’ll call the former approach Tink-Tink-Boom (or TTB for short) and the latter the Death Spiral.



Regardless of the particular gloss, all systems with a damage mechanic fall into one of two categories: an attritional model (TTB) where you are fine until you aren’t (either falling unconscious or dying) or a system of gradual decay (Death Spiral) whereby accumulated wounds seriously impact your ability to function.

The biggest advantage of the TTB approach is simplicity. You (generally) have a bank of Hit Points. Things do damage to you that deplete that bank. When you hit zero Hit Points, you die. Some systems, like those derived from Basic Roleplaying such as Call of Cthulhu or King Arthur Pendragon, introduce a tripwire point that triggers unconsciousness prior to death—if your character takes enough damage to reduce them below that threshold, you simply pass out. Other systems, such as the Palladium Books family of games, Champions, or Dragon Heresy, break Hit Points into two categories representing mere shock or bruises on the one hand and life-threatening injuries on the other. (Often in these systems, characters have far more “shock” points than “vitality” points.)

These elaborations on the basic TTB system were presumably introduced in an effort to add a dash of “realism” to the mechanic, as that is the fundamental downside of the classic Hit Point arrangement: in real life, people who suffer repeated injuries tend to feel the effects well prior to expiring.

And thus the Death Spiral.

Whether as a result of wanting to treat injury more realistically or (somewhat paradoxically) to move the system in a more narratively-focused direction, qualitative wound categories have been around for decades. Early White Wolf games like Ars Magica and Vampire: The Masquerade helped pave the way with their hierarchical wound categories. More recent systems such as Apocalypse World and its many offshoots use variations on this approach as well, albeit often through ticking off boxes or filling in a track on the character sheet.

What these systems all have in common is that, as more boxes are ticked or wound categories are marked off, more and more penalties accrue. Perhaps in a dice pool system you lose dice out of your pool; in a system that relies on single dice rolls, you likely suffer a penalty to your roll. You might also suffer shock effects, lose actions, etc.

The point is: getting wounded slows you down and makes you a less effective fighter. It also tends to speed up your headlong rush towards the final curtain as the penalties accrue—hence the term “death spiral.”

Although there’s much to be said for the increased realism of this approach, it also must be said that it comes with an increased burden of modifiers and conditions to keep in mind. Although this may not weigh too heavily on a player’s shoulders, I can say from personal experience that keeping track of NPC wounds is often an onerous imposition for already-harried GM brains.

What do you say, gentle reader? Is the simplicity of the TTN system not worth the loss of realism? Is the Death Spiral too brutal, or is it grimly satisfying? And is that grim satisfaction worth the extra variables required of the players and GM to track?

On a final, personal note, this will be my last UGC article for EN World. It’s been a lot of fun writing these game theory articles, as well as the Storyteller’s Vault and Statosphere Roundups, and I’m looking forward to continuing to read the excellent output from UGC contributors both present and future!

This article was contributed by David Larkins (sirlarkins) as part of EN World's Columnist (ENWC) program.We are always on the lookout for freelance columnists! If you have a pitch, please contact us!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
Death spiral mechanics are fine provided players are willing to have their adventuring parties do something rash like stop and rest for a few days - or even go back to town - to allow the injured a chance to recover.

And in time-sensitive adventures they provide a wonderful choice for the players/PCs - do we stop and risk running out of time, or do we press on and risk running out of characters. Love it! :)

The system we use ends up more or less like [MENTION=4937]Celebrim[/MENTION] 's in practice: most of the time you're in TTB land but if you get really clobbered you're into death spiral territory. We also have a potentially-unconscious range between fully functional (above 0 h.p.) and dead (at -10 h.p.). I'd like to bring in some sort of staggered mechanic; the problem there is finding a simple way to make it work equally well at very low and very high levels, I haven't found one yet and so this remains but a theory.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Blue

Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal
In my experience, what it comes down to is that realistically, getting injured sucks.

What that means is that if the game tries to track injury in anything like a realistic fashion, the experience of play of being injured really isn't that fun and doesn't particularly enhance the story.

I'm with you when it comes to epic or heroic games, like D&D.

But games where like Call of Cthulhu or others where you are an ordinary schlub, where your average scene isn't fight to the death, you need consequences besides "living and fine" and "dead".
 

Celebrim

Legend
I'd like to bring in some sort of staggered mechanic; the problem there is finding a simple way to make it work equally well at very low and very high levels, I haven't found one yet and so this remains but a theory.

My rules you get staggered when you have less than 10% of your maximum hit points remaining.

Death spiral mechanics are fine provided players are willing to have their adventuring parties do something rash like stop and rest for a few days - or even go back to town - to allow the injured a chance to recover.

I don't really think this is a functional answer. I mean it's a very Old Skool and Traditional answer, and it is functional for games that maintain the full list of tropes, rituals and methodologies of play that where part of Old Skool gaming. But it is not and has not been a functional answer for every table even going back to the 'old days' when we weren't actually cognizant enough to even realize we actually had completely different methodologies of play governing how we played. It took me until the early 2000's to really understand Gygax's writing in the 1e DMG, because only then did I get inside Gygax's head and realize what unspoken assumptions were governing his play and how - at least for those assumptions - the advice he was giving was actually very functional and well thought out. It had to that point only seemed weird because I wasn't playing the same game he was, even when I was using the same rules to do it.

In brief, that old school model is this:

1) There is a dungeon that is the focus of play.
2) There is a nearby Haven that the party can retreat to.
3) There are such a large number of players that it is not functional for the gaming group to insist that everyone be present in order to game.

From those assumptions arise all sorts of wonders.

But you can remove those assumptions and end up with a game were the stopping to allow the injured a chance to recover doesn't really work. As such, assuming that the game can accommodate that and so having a rule set that requires it very much limits the sort of game you can play. In fact, even Old School gaming can't accommodate that model in the strictest sense, which is one of the reasons that they never even attempted to model injury realistically.

Imagine the situation in play. You've shown up at Gygax's house as one of the 15 players for that evening. You elect a party leader/caller because otherwise it would be bedlam, and your well organized group spends about 15 minutes pouring over the collection of maps made by the map makers before planning a well organized raid on some sublevel of the vast Castle Greyhawk. In essence, you are playing a game not that dissimilar from the early Raids on a game like World of Warcraft, you are just doing it on paper. Now imagine mechanically if you have a Death Spiral injury system and your character is now down for the count. Socially what you are asking those other 14 players to do is abandon the 'raid' and take you back to town to recover. If they do, the night's gaming is basically over. There is no 'waiting for a week' to let you get better because per the DMG real time is basically game time. Waiting for a week means no one at the table can use this character again for one week real time. You will have ruined every one at the table's evening, including that guy who hasn't been able to play for two weeks and was really looking forward to this. There is a strong social impetus to just abandon you, and suddenly you have table tension between the Chaotics who are OK with that, and the lawfuls who are mechanically forced to not be OK with that. So forget it. TTB is the way to go; slap a cure moderate wounds on it and move him off the front line. That way everyone continues to have fun.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Celebrim

Legend
But games where like Call of Cthulhu or others where you are an ordinary schlub, where your average scene isn't fight to the death, you need consequences besides "living and fine" and "dead".

I'm pretty sure that's why I said: "Pure death spiral IMO is only appropriate to...extremely gritty games where PC survival is not an expectation of the session - such as horror games or realistic crime, military or espionage sims (but those might be redundant categories)."

But interestingly, classic CoC is almost a bog standard TTB system with the only real twist being that your starting hit points basically never go up and are fairly low compared to the potential damage you face and return at a fairly slow rate. While there are a few twists similar to what I described for my D&D game with consciousness and dying and traumatic damage inflicting temporary conditions on you, by and large it's not that different from D&D and it's definitely not a 'Death Spiral' game (sanity spiral is another story).
 

Derren

Hero
Another side effect of TTB systems is, if healing is possible, you have situations where someone goes below the "bad" threshold, gets healed, and is fully functional again which is especially prevalent in 5E.
So for anything but the most simplistic "it moves, chaerrrrrge!!!!!!" settings the death spiral mechanic is better.
 

5ekyu

Hero
Forgot damage save systems where each hit produces a chance of effect - (often temporary at first) and a small save penalty so that the next hit is more likely a KO.

Much different than either and very reflective of a lot of cinematic fight scenes where you can suffer noticable but transient effects on a big hit that can be varied.
 

AriochQ

Adventurer
Another side effect of TTB systems is, if healing is possible, you have situations where someone goes below the "bad" threshold, gets healed, and is fully functional again which is especially prevalent in 5E.
So for anything but the most simplistic "it moves, chaerrrrrge!!!!!!" settings the death spiral mechanic is better.

On the flip side, you had Twilight 2000. If your character took a serious wound, it would take them months to recover. If they were lucky, you left them in a friendly village. In a combat heavy campaign, you ended up playing your way through an entire platoon!
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
My rules you get staggered when you have less than 10% of your maximum hit points remaining.
That's certainly one way to do it...and works fine once 10% becomes a meaningful number. Just not sure how to work it at very low level when most PCs still have single-digit h.p. - maybe the staggered point is the greater of 10% or a flat number... 2? 3?

I don't really think this is a functional answer. I mean it's a very Old Skool and Traditional answer, and it is functional for games that maintain the full list of tropes, rituals and methodologies of play that where part of Old Skool gaming. But it is not and has not been a functional answer for every table even going back to the 'old days' when we weren't actually cognizant enough to even realize we actually had completely different methodologies of play governing how we played. It took me until the early 2000's to really understand Gygax's writing in the 1e DMG, because only then did I get inside Gygax's head and realize what unspoken assumptions were governing his play and how - at least for those assumptions - the advice he was giving was actually very functional and well thought out. It had to that point only seemed weird because I wasn't playing the same game he was, even when I was using the same rules to do it.

In brief, that old school model is this:

1) There is a dungeon that is the focus of play.
2) There is a nearby Haven that the party can retreat to.
Agreed up to here, I think; though the "Haven" could simply be a cleared-out part of the dungeon, or a camp on the surface.

3) There are such a large number of players that it is not functional for the gaming group to insist that everyone be present in order to game.
This has nothing to do with anything I'm saying.

From those assumptions arise all sorts of wonders.

But you can remove those assumptions and end up with a game were the stopping to allow the injured a chance to recover doesn't really work.
Why doesn't this work even without all three of those assumptions? Replace dungeon with city or wilderness or ocean or foreign plane. Replace Haven with inn room or hidden campsite or ship or wherever. Replace the rotating gang of players with the same stable weekly group of 4 or 5 plus a DM. None of this prevents stopping and resting while the injured recover.

The only things that can prevent injury recovery are:

in-game: a severe time crunch in the plotline, where the PCs just don't have time to recover and still beat the deadline (an overused trope IMO)
out-of-game: impatient players and-or DM.

As such, assuming that the game can accommodate that and so having a rule set that requires it very much limits the sort of game you can play. In fact, even Old School gaming can't accommodate that model in the strictest sense, which is one of the reasons that they never even attempted to model injury realistically.

Imagine the situation in play. You've shown up at Gygax's house as one of the 15 players for that evening. You elect a party leader/caller because otherwise it would be bedlam, and your well organized group spends about 15 minutes pouring over the collection of maps made by the map makers before planning a well organized raid on some sublevel of the vast Castle Greyhawk. In essence, you are playing a game not that dissimilar from the early Raids on a game like World of Warcraft, you are just doing it on paper. Now imagine mechanically if you have a Death Spiral injury system and your character is now down for the count. Socially what you are asking those other 14 players to do is abandon the 'raid' and take you back to town to recover. If they do, the night's gaming is basically over. There is no 'waiting for a week' to let you get better because per the DMG real time is basically game time. Waiting for a week means no one at the table can use this character again for one week real time. You will have ruined every one at the table's evening, including that guy who hasn't been able to play for two weeks and was really looking forward to this. There is a strong social impetus to just abandon you, and suddenly you have table tension between the Chaotics who are OK with that, and the lawfuls who are mechanically forced to not be OK with that. So forget it. TTB is the way to go; slap a cure moderate wounds on it and move him off the front line. That way everyone continues to have fun.
Did anybody other than Gygax ever in fact play the game this way after about 1980?

And did anyone other than Gygax ever in fact follow his suggestion that real time = game time when away from the table? For that matter, did he?

IME the game-story-party picks up next session exactly where it left off this session, with no in-game time having passed at all. Waiting a week in-game can be done in 5 minutes real time unless a) wandering monsters are an issue and-or b) the PCs find something else to do (which usually involves internal bickering) in the meantime.

Also, in true old-school gaming you'd always have a hench or three with you anyway, so you could - if your PC really was down for the count - play one of those. Same thing you'd do if your PC died a half-hour in.

Lan-"going back to town to recover is just the same as going back to town to recruit, only without the funeral expenses"-efan
 

I think TTB is exceptionally a problem in systems where your HP grows as you level, especially if it grows at a significant rate. I was really excited about the idea of "bounded accuracy" in 5th edition (and still am, really) but was hoping a similar system would exist for HP. I'd prefer a system where even the toughest of creatures don't have HP that passes double-digits. Dungeon World did a pretty decent job at this. Your HP still grew but not at the rate it does in most games with TTB.

I'd hoped for that too. I'd love if the differences were much less between levels. It'd make running pcs of varying level a possibility and make combat encounter design much easier overall
 

Another method that hasn't been mentioned here is a kind of reverse death spiral.

That is, when the PC approaches some threshold on the way to death, they start getting a bonus, representing an adrenaline surge or some other thing.

I don't know any rpg that has this system, but I heard they exist.

In theory it sounds gimmicky and awful, but in play I would imagine that it would push players to make their characters into heroes that fight right down to the wire. I also imagine it would create more situations where it seems that all is lost for the group, but they manage to survive against all odds.

Certainly wouldn't work for horror or grim campaigns, but for heroic high fantasy I think it would work quite well.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top