Ability damage,should it be in the game???

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I don't like ability damage. I may be willing to deal with it if the ability damage is very simplified. I don't want to recalculate ability modifiers mid-combat.

I am okay with tracking n points of ability damage, but I want that only to mean tha tsomething happens at n = ability score value, and that once an ability is damaged, I suffer some kind of drawback/penalty, say -2 to checks involving the ability, or maybe I take damage when I roll a 1 on a check on that abilit or whatever. But definitely not "5 points of Strength damage means my Strength is reduced from 16 to 11 and so my attack bonus is reduced by 3, and I lose 4 points of damage on melee attacks, also my max encumbrance is reduced and my full plate is wearing me down, so I lose 10 ft movement, and I no longer qualify for the following feats."

 

[GX.Sigma]

I don't like ability damage. I may be willing to deal with it if the ability damage is very simplified. I don't want to recalculate ability modifiers mid-combat.

I am okay with tracking n points of ability damage, but I want that only to mean tha tsomething happens at n = ability score value, and that once an ability is damaged, I suffer some kind of drawback/penalty, say -2 to checks involving the ability, or maybe I take damage when I roll a 1 on a check on that abilit or whatever. But definitely not "5 points of Strength damage means my Strength is reduced from 16 to 11 and so my attack bonus is reduced by 3, and I lose 4 points of damage on melee attacks, also my max encumbrance is reduced and my full plate is wearing me down, so I lose 10 ft movement, and I no longer qualify for the following feats."

It should be noted that the playtest rules' approach to ability drain (aligning with the goal of not having to add up lots of little bonuses and penalties all the time) is to simply give the victim disadvantage on all checks based on that ability score.

 

[Lanefan]

The current playtest rules seem to make ability score changes easier to deal with. I'm less sure about level drain--I cannot imagine a way to do it that isn't a major pain. I've never played a game with it, but 3.x's negative level system seems OK; can you explain why you don't like it? To me it seems a lot easier than opening the book and re-calculating everything about your character (or keeping de-leveled character sheets on hand).

Well, I've always assumed it to be SOP to keep a running track of by-level things such as h.p. - when you gain a level you put a line through the old total and write down the new one*, and if you get busted you just go back to the old one. Easy enough to back out spell slots - just look at what the lost level gave you and delete. As for feats and powers etc., all you need to do is write them in order of acquisition; if you lose a level that carried a feat/power gain you just knock off the last one on the list. Ditto for level-based ability gain in games that use such.

But negative levels didn't do that - they just applied minuses to what you already had, thus adding yet another modifier.

* - example: a 9th-level character's h.p. track might look like 7 13 18 26 28 35 40 48 51 with all but the '51' struck through; if she gets busted back to 8th her max. h.p. becomes 48 - easy!

Also, a rule around here is that if you re-write a character sheet the old one must be kept with it, if only to help catch the inevitable transcription errors later.

Lanefan

 

[GX.Sigma]

* - example: a 9th-level character's h.p. track might look like 7 13 18 26 28 35 40 48 51 with all but the '51' struck through; if she gets busted back to 8th her max. h.p. becomes 48 - easy!

I'm not intimately familiar with various editions' character sheets, but how do you have enough space to keep a running total of a character's max hit points?

 

[Frostmarrow]

Don't bypass hitpoints. Tag damage. Once at 0 hp the tag applies, otherwise it's moot.

Compare

Slashing: Once defeated by slashing damage you bleed to death in 5 rounds unless attended to medically. In heavy amor this period is prolonged to 10 rounds.

Fire: Once defeated by fire you burst into flames and die in 3 rounds unless doused. You are permanently burn scarred.

Drain: Once defeated by drain damage you collapse on the floor and become paralyzed for three days. Plenty of time for the monster to consume your soul.

Laughter: Once defeated by laugh damage you collapse on the floor cackling hysterically for one minute. No additional effect.

While fighters traditionally have more hit points than wizards maybe AC is a less effective defense than Will saves to a balancing degree.

 

[the Jester]

Why is there no "I would like to see it" option to this poll that doesn't have the word "necessary" in it?

No good option to vote for.

 

[nightwyrm]

* - example: a 9th-level character's h.p. track might look like 7 13 18 26 28 35 40 48 51 with all but the '51' struck through; if she gets busted back to 8th her max. h.p. becomes 48 - easy!

But what else am I going to be using my erasers for.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

I'm all for an optional ability damage module, if it has the following characteristics:

• Meaningful, but slow to accumulate, slow to heal (otherwise, it's just another form of hit points).
• Does not readily affect derived values.

A key change in a game to evaluate in this regard is the Power (POW) ability in RuneQuest. For those that don't know it, in early RQ, POW is basically a combination Will/Presence (but not charisma) stat used to power magic attacks as well as resist them. So every time you cast certain spells, your POW went down (temporarily), making it more difficult to resist hostile magic. This was a key balance point for early RQ's otherwise more open system of magic than the D&D of its day. It was always wonky, though, not only in the magic, but because the more "impressive" you were in POW, the harder it was to sneak! (So the more magically exhausted you are, the sneakier you become?)

Later, this was changed to POW/Derived POW--or POW --> Magic Points. Now, your POW stat doesn't change much, but your Magic Points get used to power spells. You lose the flavor and limit of "casting spells makes you magically vulnerable" but you also drop a lot of annoying side effects. On the whole, I'd say it is a good trade.

So the kind of system that I wouldn't mind seeing for D&D ability score damage is that optional wound module where certain situations (e.g. injuries) or magic--relatively rare but there--can do trace damage to a derived track from each stat, but not affect the derived values per normal.

For example, you've got Str 12. You also start with a Str Damage Track of 12. If you take ability damage, it goes to that track, representing a wound. It doesn't affect you until you hit somewhere relevant on the track--say at the halfway mark and at zero. There, it has defined effects. Hit the halfway mark, suffer -2 to all Str checks and melee damage rolls, or something similar. (This is worse than straight Str damage for those with low Str, better for those with high Str.)

I'd have damage effects rarely do more than 1 point of damage, with the worst one doing 1d2, 1d3, or 1d4--and each one would randomly affect several possible ability tracks. A level drain from a wight might do 1d2, and you'd roll 1d6 for each such point done, to determine which stat. Falling damage might do 1 point per 30 feet falling (up to some limit), affecting Str, Dex, Con, or Cha. Yep, you can fall into that spiked pit, come out feeling ok (minor hit point damage), but mess up your face a little.

Technically, I suppose a cleaner way to implement such a system is to make the ability score tracks "core" but make the penalty nature and frequency the options, including an option of "no penalties but whatever flavor the DM cares to impose, including nothing." So then if you want a penalty system that mirrors what a more involved, derived value system would do, that's easy--make your penalties be -1 to all relevant checks and modifiers for every two points of ability damage.

 

[delericho]

Ability damage was one of those 3e mechanics that read really well, but played incredibly poorly - because changing an ability score meant there was a cascade of changes right across the character sheet (and, worse, a 1-point reduction in the score might or might not have any effect), even very low-level effects weren't as easy to apply as they should be.

IMO, these effects should be handled as conditions instead.

If and when we reach a point where everyone uses some sort of smartphone/tablet app to track their character, and so cascading changes can be applied quickly by the computer, they can consider bringing back ability damage. Until that time, they should leave it out.

 

[Li Shenron]

Necessary.

If you don't want to deal with calculations (but I think in 5e they will be simpler than in 3e), maybe the rules can provide a replacement effect based on HP damage but for things such as poison, disease etc it would be a terribly poor model. In fact, I'd probably like ability damage to become a model for real wounds, while keeping HP as the model for scratches, fatigue and whatever.

Ability damage/drain is as close to a deal-breaker as can be for me.