Lethal vs. Nonlethal

[Knight_Arothir]

Hello. Long-time Lurker, first time poster.

To start: I've more and more been finding myself rather dissatisfied with most published game settings. There's nothing inherently wrong with them, mind you. And I'll still enjoy a d20 game, a GURPS game, or a CODA game.

But for the setting I'm creating, I originally planned to just use one of those three systems with some houserules. Though the more houserules I added, the more I felt I wasn't really playing that game anymore. With that in mind, I've decided to simply start over and build a system that will fit my setting more to my liking.


My initial question is one of lethal vs. nonlethal damage. I'm curious as to what people here think about it - is it necessary?

It seems to me that nonlethal damage is superfluous. Damage is damage, isn't it? Is getting punched in the head repeatedly any less damaging than getting hit in the head with a bat? I was originally planning on differentiating between lethal damage and nonlethal damage.. but now I'm leaning towards the belief that all 'nonlethal' damage, such as a punch, is really just a small amount of bludgeoning/crushing damage.

Any opinions on this?

 

[Crothian]

non lethal has it uses, but rarely. I think I've seen it come up like three times in five years. A campaign can be cinstructed to make it more useful, but in the standard games you want to kill theenemy not Ko them. THe mechanic for it also really is not that good.

 

[Old One]

It really depends on the type of campaign you are running and what type of conventions you are using. I am a big fan of the Grim Tales rules and recently ran a Game Day 1-shot that married up GT with Black Company Spell rules. One of the GT variants is "armor as damage conversion" (which converts an armor's AC bonus from lethal to non-lethal damage) and the BCCS magic system spell drain is taken in non-lethal damage...so non-lethal figured prominently.

If you are running a low(er) magic campaign with limited magical healing, non-lethal conventions make sense. Protectives, healing and other items that convert lethal to non-lethal damage, then allow for the faster non-lethal healing rate (1/hp per level per hour). PCs will go down just as fast in combat, but are more likely to be knocked unconscious and will recover faster in-between combats. It also assumes, to a certain extent, that many opponents will have utility in capturing, as opposed to killing, the PCs after they are knocked unconscious.

Also, N-L models the effects of heat, cold and exhaustion better, IMO.

I also think there is a HUGE difference between getting pummeled in the head with a fist and getting beat over the head with a bat ! I boxed for several years in college (intramurals) and have been in my share of fistfights...and I would much rather be hit by a fist (padding or no padding) than by a club or baseball bat.

In a high(er) magic campaign...N-L could quickly become a book-keeping headache that doesn't make much sense.

~ OO

 

[ThirdWizard]

We use non-lethal damage every once in a while, not including home brewed magic and magical items that deal non-lethal damge to the user, those get used every session. The thing is, if you don't use non-lethal damage, how do you take somene alive? How do you knock someone out? If you remove it, all combat in the game becomes lethal and to the death. This will work 99% of the time for most people, but there are times when it is important to not kill someone for a variety of reasons.

 

[Knight_Arothir]

Thanks for the responses. Based on what you three have said - I think I'll keep nonlethal damage for your basic unarmed strike - as well as falling damage, constricting damage.. etc.

I also plan to rule that once you reach unconsciousness, any further damage you take is considered lethal - which will allow for the "brutally beating someone to death" kind of scenario.

Thanks much.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I also plan to rule that once you reach unconsciousness, any further damage you take is considered lethal - which will allow for the "brutally beating someone to death" kind of scenario.

I wouldn't rule that, myself.

What I would keep is the general rule, "Take a -4 penalty on to-hit rolls to make nonlethal into lethal damage."

So, you can beat someone into unconsciousness, take a -4 penalty on your to-hit rolls, and start doing lethal CdGs.

 

[Knight_Arothir]

Well remember that I'm not talking about the d20 system - I'm designing my own system to see if I can do it well. So I'm not sure there will be Cdg as an option. I'm not houseruling d20 - I'm designing a different system.

If I were using d20, I wouldn't have asked the question, as I don't have that much of a problem with simply allowing the current nonlethal rules that are in d20.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Well remember that I'm not talking about the d20 system - I'm designing my own system to see if I can do it well.

Right, I understand that.

I'm advising that you abstract the way d20 handles it to whichever way your system handles it. In other words, keep nonlethal separate from lethal, and provide a method for moving from one to the other. In D&D / d20, it's via a to-hit penalty (which can be ignored once your target is no longer fighting back).

Translate accordingly into your proposed system.

 

[Steverooo]

I'd do things a bit differently: Non-lethal attacks such as fists, kicks, and elbow-jabs, treat all odd points of damage as non-lethal, and all evens as blunt trauma... Thus, a 1D3 fist doing 1 HP damage is all NL, 2 HP is 1 NL/1 BT, and 3 HP is 2 NL/1 BT (and so on, if STR Bonus figures in).

A 0-level Cure Minor Wound spell will remove all the Non-lethal, but not the BT. That would be healed, normally. Thus, taking a beating would still be likely to leave some damage, the next day... Now how that applies to your homebrew, I don't know.