Let's Talk About Health, Damage, Wounds, Death and Related Mechanics

[Reynard]

To me, those things are still "consequences of damage". If you have a twisted ankle (damage), you're slower, more likely to trip rushing down stairs, and may have to leave behind a wounded friend or heavy treasure in order to escape -- no special resource is typically required to make those things true in my games.

The reason I personally like metacurrency is because it involves less GM fiat. I can in fact be meaner and more of a RBDM if it costs me a limited resource. A good example is Fear in Daggerheart: I have found that players accept the horrible things the GM does to them better when the GM has to spend fear to do them.

 

[SableWyvern]

The reason I personally like metacurrency is because it involves less GM fiat. I can in fact be meaner and more of a RBDM if it costs me a limited resource. A good example is Fear in Daggerheart: I have found that players accept the horrible things the GM does to them better when the GM has to spend fear to do them.

That's entirely fair. I'm certainly not meaning to challenge you -- plenty of people love their metacurrencies, and it's not for me to say they're wrong. Do what works for you.

 

[BenjaminPey]

If these are things people want or expect as consequences of or within combat (as opposed to as consequences of specific chains of events, in or outside of combat, logically leading to these outcomes), we're certainly playing very different styles of game.

It's exactly how things work in PbtA, though (as in many other games, again, like Legend in the mist)

There's no difference between combat and any other activities. If your actions lead to a roll of the dice, you should expect consequences, and these can be of any type. For instance, you beat they guy all right, he's quite dead now, but your little brother that you were protecting? He's not there anymore. Success + Consequences.

 

[SableWyvern]

It's exactly how things work in PbtA, though (as in many other games, again, like Legend in the mist)

There's no difference between combat and any other activities. If your actions lead to a roll of the dice, you should expect consequences, and these can be of any type. For instance, you beat they guy all right, he's quite dead now, but your little brother that you were protecting? He's not there anymore. Success + Consequences.

OK, well, if you're assuming the brother was there at the start of the fight, but is now gone, that makes more logical sense and is connected to what's going on. There's a big difference to me, between, "If you start a fight, any consequence is possible; you might even find out your brother (who you thought was at home baking bread) is actually missing," and, "If you enter a fight with your brother nearby, he might not still be there when the fight ends."

The latter makes perfect sense, whether it's the result of a specific challenge resolution method or just part of a chain of events in a finer-grained task resolution or traditional combat system. For me, those types of consequences are always possible, in pretty much any game, just because logic and the reality of the gameworld dictate they're possible outcomes of events. Not being a PbtA person, I don't expect those sorts of consequences to be directly linked to the resolution system, though.

 

[BenjaminPey]

For me, those types of consequences are always possible, in pretty much any game, just because logic and the reality of the gameworld dictate they're possible outcomes of events.

Everything is always possible in any game, but some games will lead you faster and with more ease to these kind of narrative beats, rather than towards a mere loss of ressource, simply by taking them into account in their system of resolution (maybe with the very simple distinction between soft and hard GM's moves, maybe with something more intricate), which most trad games don't, especially in their combat mechanics, where everything is encapsulated and it's quite hard to go seamlessly in and out of this sub-system.

 

[SableWyvern]

Everything is always possible in any game, but some games will lead you faster and with more ease to these kind of narrative beats, rather than towards a mere loss of ressource, simply by taking them into account in their system of resolution (maybe with the very simple distinction between soft and hard GM's moves, maybe with something more intricate), which most trad games don't, especially in their combat mechanics, where everything is encapsulated and it's quite hard to go seamlessly in and out of this sub-system.

Sounds like you're a big fan and I'm glad you've found something that works for you.

For myself, I don't want my game system to lead or direct. I am also not looking to arrive faster at "narrative beats", nor do I have a surfeit of "mere loss of resource", so whatever problem you're solving isn't one I experience.

 

[BenjaminPey]

I am a big fan of many trad games, too. I am a big fan of a great many things. It's simply a different way to play and I simply pointed it out because it's an easier way to dish out consequences outside the usual scope of hit points (and other combat or health-related ressources).

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sounds like you're a big fan and I'm glad you've found something that works for you.

For myself, I don't want my game system to lead or direct. I am also not looking to arrive faster at "narrative beats", nor do I have a surfeit of "mere loss of resource", so whatever problem you're solving isn't one I experience.

Agreed. I very much do not want any mechanics to interact with "story". We do that ourselves through emergent gameplay IMO.

 

[SableWyvern]

I am a big fan of many trad games, too. I am a big fan of a great many things. It's simply a different way to play and I simply pointed it out because it's an easier way to dish out consequences outside the usual scope of hit points (and other combat or health-related ressources).

I'll agree it may be easier in some ways, but I find it far less fulfiling. But that's just me -- it's a matter of taste, and that's fine. I wasn't been facetious when I said I'm glad you've found something you liked; I get the impression that this is something you feel passionate about, which isn't a bad thing.

 

[Reynard]

Let's try and pull this back on topic a little bit if we can.

Consequences, as they relate to "health and damage" in and out of combat, can be as simple as penalties (in trad games, "conditions" are just consequences, after all) or more interesting depending on how "narrative" the game is intended to be (tags and aspects, for example). What I find interesting is when those consequences derive from the rules but then are interacted with by the players and GM.

That aside, there is something to be said for the simplicity of hit points without the worry of consequences, critical charts, or wound level death spirals. When I am running Shadowdark, HP are perfectly fine. I would not introduce too many other elements (although I will "attack the light" as a part of criticals or failed rolls).