Saturday 5 March 2016

Hit points and abstraction. A flexible narrative device, or unhelpful meta-gaming?


The situation as it is

So, I quite like D&D as a system, but one of the things I really would rather do without is the hit points. I feel like it does a couple of things which I would argue are detrimental. As follows.

One- it encourages too much in the way of the 'reduce to zero' kind of thinking prevalent in RPGs and games. It's a whole mentality. Imagine the scene. You're in Skyrim and you see a wolf in the woods. It just fucking COMES AT you and WILL NOT STOP until you've battered it to death. Even if you land a solid hit to its nose with a war hammer or set its pelt on fire it just won't leave you alone. It won't run skulking off into the woods never to bother you again. It hasn't learned its lesson not to bother heavily armed travelers on lonely roads through the wilderness. Even if it does run the other way, it will regroup and COME BACK. The idiot. Either that or you'll be compelled to run after it and continue to batter it until it can't run anymore, then you steal its fur and for some reason a gold coin it was carrying (where??).
I mean, the specific gripe I have here is enemy AI in games but in the context of player-game mentality, it reinforces the idea that they have to kill everything. This way, killing means a neat and tidy job of reducing things to zero hit points whereafter they pose no threat and can be conveniently looted.
It's an endangered species you dick. Just leave it alone.
But really, things can take quite a long time to die. For me, reaching zero hit points and lapsing straight into unconsciousness fails to reflect that brutal but necessary moment when you beat an opponent into the floor after inflicting upon them a series of increasingly grievous injuries and, once they're lying helpless on the floor, begging and blubbering for mercy or defiantly cursing your name, you run them through and finish the job. Or you could just leave them to die. It's more unsavoury. More realistic.

I feel it would be a little like this.


Two- I get that it can represent an abstract system of fatigue, bruising, and whatnot, but it's not ... fun. I can't look at hit points on a character sheet and get an accurate depiction of what state my character is in. Maybe it's because I'm more of a visual person and I really like the idea of cards detailing abilities, equipment, and effects arrayed in front of me in picture form rather than scrawled on a character sheet in an incomprehensible list, complete with smudgy eraser marks. It makes for an easier and more enjoyable game (in my opinion) if you can give a card to a player and it has the effect right there on it, complete with a neat little picture.


Another way

So, the alternative? Something a little less abstract, perhaps. I haven't really had a chance to test this, but I feel like it could work. It could be fun. Though I can't figure out if it would make combat more deadly, or less so. I'm always in favour of upping the deadly.

Injury- There are already plenty of injury-based systems around, but I'd rather like to create my own. I'm not very well read when it comes to RPG systems specifically (it's more the lore and story I'm interested in, to be honest) but I'm wanting to come up with something at least fun if not workable.
So, AC can still come into play, and to-hit mechanics would have to overcome the AC of their target, but if a hit is made, no hit points are lost because there are none to lose. Instead, the player rolls an injury die. Depending on their toughness, or their evasiveness, or their training, they roll. A d4 reflects a squishy character without toughness, instinct, or training (perhaps a magic-user), whereas a 10 represents someone almost untouchable. I mean, this is a putative mechanic at the moment. It feels a little unbalanced, but it can be changed, of course.

On a roll of 1, or maybe even a 1 or 2, the player sustains an injury, determined at random by drawing a card. Could be anything, from getting a lacerated artery to merely a flesh wound. Preferably, the nastier the better. Some early ideas include...


  • Lacerated artery (time): Something hit just the wrong spot. -1 con and a fortitude save per turn. On a roll of 0 or less, you fall unconscious and continue to lose con until dead. A successful heal check will staunch the bleeding and limit further con loss.
  • Gouged eye: Some bastard got you right in the eye. The injury could be permanent, but only time will tell. -1d6 wis and half any perception roll.
  • Torso stab: Your core strength has been seriously compromised. -1d4 str, -1d4 con.
  • Bashed in the head: -1d6 int, wis, and/or cha. Fortitude save or fall prone.
  • Ear-whack: Momentarily disorientated. Left with a ringing and a rattling. Might need a sit down.
  • Fractured arm: One or more bones in your arm seem ... crunchy. -1d6 str and -1d6 dex.
  • Fractured leg: One or more bones in your leg seem ... scrape, scrape. Crunch. Oooargh... -1d6 dex, 50% movement, no dex to AC.
  • Missing chunk: Something took a big bite. -1d6 con.
  • Gored: Something pointy has ripped you open. It really hurts. -1d6 str, dex, and con.
  • Just a flesh wound: But it still really hurts. -1d4 str, dex, or con.
  • Bleeding: Something in you is gushing quite a lot of blood. -1d4 con per turn until staunched.
  • Fatigued or Exhausted: Not necessarily an injury, but an effect that could come into play once too many minor injuries are sustained. Perhaps.

Furthermore, there could be a list of grievous injuries that a player might sustain if something gets them really bad (critical hit or something really, really big). They could come with a suite of their own regular injuries as standard.

  • Cracked skull: Fort save every turn or fall unconscious, -1d6 int, wis.
  • Loss of limb: Lose use of limb, Bleeding
  • Disembowelment: Organs are spilling. Hold them in or you might snuff it pretty quickly.
  • Crushed bones: Not just a simple fracture
  • Impaled: Cannot move. -1d6 dex and con. If removed, apply Bleeding.
  • Cut throat: -1d6 con per turn. Save fort or fall unconscious.

You get the idea. They would of course come with fully articulated effects and a nice hand-drawn illustration.


Mandatory illustrative diagram
This would mean players who have taken a bit of a beating would be able to continue the adventure, probably. Healing ability loss as a result of broken bones etc would take longer than the average gaming session, so it might make players choose their fights a little more carefully, and role-play their way out of potentially deadly combat encounters. I don't want to force players to do things, though. I just think it would be more fun, and encourage more creative thinking.

Further implications for game mechanics could come into play. New feats could allow players to shrug off one injury per day, or per encounter, or up their injury die to the next level.


  • Tough: +1 injury die type
  • Really tough: A further +1
  • Huge and tough: Another +1
  • Canny: +1
  • Really canny: +1
  • Foxy bastard: +1
  • Combat Training: +1 die type
  • Deadly: Allows player to reduce opponent die type by 1. But that seems a little powerful.

Different injury die- Gregor might have a d10, poor Oberyn might be stuck on a d6.

Barbarian rage could allow the player to temporarily ignore the effects of any injury, making it possible to sustain a lot of damage until it wears off, at which point they might immediately drop down dead. Hmmm... Many possibilities.


Anyway, I feel like a system of this sort could have positive effects on gameplay, in making character sheets simpler and more streamlined. And although this system is more complex than hit points, it can be implemented in a way that makes it more interesting. Far more interesting.

I'll follow up on this in the future. A more concrete system, and some nice little injury cards to download.


4 comments:

  1. I certainly agree with the sentiment this post expresses, the way injury is represented in role play games does seem create players that are simply number crunching sword arms. The proposed system no doubt would birth an alternative in typical gameplay and encourage actual roleplaying as opposed to running for the d20's and seeing who can role the bigger numbers today. I wonder if instead of creating a much richer gaming experience it would result in much more time spent on character creation when someone hastily gets themselves crippled and has to roll up a replacement character. I'd like to see this idea in action and how it effects character creation and decision making.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do definitely take your point. There's a balance that needs to be struck between treating characters as untouchable and somehow above dying, and chucking them headlong into certain death with such frequency that it makes players unable to engage with them on a certain, slightly more emotional, level. Of course, there would be a way to heal more or less completely from most injuries, given time. But it would be interesting from a roleplay standpoint, in my opinion, if players occasionally actually had to retire their characters from active adventuring but could use them in non-combat situations. Effectively they could have multiple characters working together in different locations... Hmmmm...

      Delete
  2. Mmm, I like that page. It's an interestingly different and more ... I suppose realistic way of looking at hitpoints. I think the most important points for me about the scale-hitpoint-systemic thing are, for one, the comment that you make near the beginning of the article, that 'Hit points are not in fact increased! Damage is minimized' and also that hitpoints, however abstracted, are represented on a scale from positive to zero and often further down into negative numbers.

    I think what I was trying to suggest above, without perhaps being succinct enough to actually say it, is that this proposed system works in a scale-less way, more focused on statuses and effects that affect the ability of characters to do things. I do agree that there are crossovers, in that accumulation of injuries and effects in a way represents a scale of severity, and also that hitpoints could be looked at as the accumulation of injury. However, I'd like to explore further the option of an almost totally hitpoint-free system of combat. But I think I need to develop my ideas further before splurging yet more half-formed thoughts onto the internet for everyone to see. I don't want to make people think they waste their time reading only partially digested ramblings. But anyway, that's my own issue.

    ReplyDelete