Hit Point Narration

Nytmare · Jun 5, 2012

How frequently do you narrate, or describe hit point loss in terms other than "lose X hitpoints"?

The current rehash of the hitpoint discussion over in the 5th Ed threads, made me start to wonder where I fit into the DM spectrum.

I personally am at the end of the spectrum where I describe the attack or action somewhere in the 80-90% range, but drop to somewhere around "rarely" when trying to translate hitpoint gains and losses into words.

Viking Bastard · Jun 5, 2012

Nytmare said:
How frequently do you narrate, or describe hit point loss in terms other than "lose X hitpoints"?

That is highly dependant on the rate of which the combatants are losing HP. If it's turn-after-turn of multiple "You hit; roll damage. He hits; rolling damage." then only the heavy and important hits are going to receive in-depth narration after a few rounds. If only to keep things going.

Otherwise, every blow, including misses.

Hand of Evil · Jun 5, 2012

have a list of descriptive adjectives and words I use, break down hit points into three groups. Each group have the words I use. Color code the groups, green / yellow / red

1st group GREEN: nick, scratches, pinches, bangs, etc.
2nd group YELLOW: slices, cuts, smashes, fractures, etc.
3rd group RED: pounds, crushes, dissect, dismember, etc.

So, the player that takes more damage will keep hearing the more graphic words.

Note: Synonyms are your friends.

Mercutio01 · Jun 5, 2012

I said "frequently." I can't say "always" because that's too definitive, but most of the time a loss of hit points is narrated, and almost always as an actual hit that leaves a mark.

Tovec · Jun 5, 2012

I have to say I rarely narrate the actual effect of HP loss. I assume you aren't talking about making sure people know they lost HP but instead the effect of "a cut in simon's arm" kind of narration.

I do if it is important, if it is the last gasp of a character, sometimes if it is a crit or other important hit. Otherwise it is just much simpler to allow the game to keep going.

I think this evolved due to necessity. When I started playing and when I first started DMing we often had 7-8 players during games. When the average fight lasted 5 rounds that would get quite lengthy to narrate every hit from every character.

Now that I'm running a heavily modified (hoping to make it officially OGL) game I am trying to narrate things more than I used to. In my variation hits are actually hits, as opposed to hits absorbed by armor or avoided by dodge. I like the feeling I provoke when the fighter is hit by a crit and has a wound in his side, between the plates, that just keeps bleeding.

I think the other problem is that with armor and AC working the way it does, along with HP being as high as it is - that HP loss is hard to narrate. How do you describe that the fighter got hit hard (let's say 20 damage - enough to kill lower level characters) but is still fine and able to keep going? How do you do it routinely. Do those attacks just become less and less effective.. that a 20 HP hit (from 100) is the same as a 2 HP hit when he has 10? Or that he is able to exercise more skill and control, opening himself up for less of an attack.

My problem with either explanation is that it lacks consistency. It can be narrated that he avoids the attack the first time, but half as much damage can drop him later and you have to narrate it differently. That is part of the benefit in my system, where if it is a recurring wound that I can narrate it as such and if it is a hard hit that it remains a hard hit even if he is still standing.

Kind of nonsensical, I know, but that's what I do.

Jacob Marley · Jun 5, 2012

Good poll question. This is something I have often wondered about.

I don't narrate. To me an attack is either a hit or a miss; nothing more, nothing less. Damage is damage. It is purely an abstraction.

AeroDm · Jun 5, 2012

It stars with significant narration and trails into none. The first few rounds I try to set the cinematic scene with an abundance of narration. After that I try to keep combat moving briskly to keep interest high, and that means less narration.

Blood & Bones · Jun 6, 2012

Good poll, Nytmare. I voted "Frequently." I feel it helps players become immersed in the game.

Ratskinner · Jun 6, 2012

I voted rarely, but that's because I'm not sure I'd want to count "Ooh! He whacks you good!" as narration.

Gods, I hate this mechanic for engendering all these tail-chasing arguments.