The Gaming Den

Been thinking about damage types for games. Damage types are there for immersion and mechanics, knowing what damage types you have also gives you an idea of what NPC's and PC's should be able to handle (or run away from).

A list I've whipped up for a Shadowrun, D&D sort of game...

ENERGY
Fire: burns, melts, ignites
Cold: freezes, enervate
Electric: disrupts electric signals, internal burns
Radiation- alters/breaks down molecular bonds, DNA damage

'PHYSICAL'
Force/Kinetic: Depending on the game you can go into subtypes like...
-concussive: falling, punch, hammer, etc.
-piercing: sometimes not as bad until a vital organ is pierced
-tearing: sliced, ripped open, tends to have less penetrating ability
Corrosion: Acids and caustic bases, break down stuff, some toxins do this to your insides

Fatigue/Death: starvation, necrosis. Toxin's the physical version and magic death rays the energy version.

MENTAL: More vague and varies with setting. Perhaps have mental hitboxes too and when they get filled effects settle in
Fear/Stress: Makes you want to run away, paralyze with fear
Charm/Relax: Makes you trust, follow, fall asleep
Illusion: Obscures true nature of something to you

Can you give an example of a damage system that has Illusion damage? (And where damage isn't so completely abstract that it has just as much support for "being forced to herd ducks"-damage, like Nobilis or something?)

Schleiermacher wrote:Can you give an example of a damage system that has Illusion damage? (And where damage isn't so completely abstract that it has just as much support for "being forced to herd ducks"-damage, like Nobilis or something?)

If I were going to use a system like this, I'd probably track this all against one counter. Instead of calling it "Hit Points", I'd call it something like "Resolve". Physical injuries would just be various conditions, similar to "blinded", "shaken", or "stunned".

I'd track the different types to handle resistances, immunities, and vulnerabilities.

As for Illusion itself, I could see you losing Resolve for things like Color Spray or Maze.

"Illusion" damage would be pretty bullshit but I wouldn't disapprove of "hallucinogenic" damage. It is an impairment I have personally incurred by several variations and find it completely reasonable that stacking a couple such effects could push a person from zero through moderate, major, and total disability.

You can convert save-or-dies into damage-based attacks. Flesh To Stone says "2d6 damage, and if another 4d6 damage would kill the target, they're turned to stone." There's a meaningful risk-reward tradeoff with using it over a 4d6 fireball, and it interacts better with damage mechanics. You can give those rolls damage types and let people resist transmutations the same way they'd resist fire.

I never found a good way to phrase it as a standard mechanic though. It'd be nice to let someone pick up a feat that makes their "if another $FOO damage" abilities deal more $FOO.

Replacing saves with HP makes squishy classes more vulnerable to save-or-lose effects regardless of source. So doubtless you mean to leave saves in existence while replacing "literal save or die" with "you take 2d6 damage and then die if below 30 HP, on a save make that 1d6 damage and die if below 15".

Is the concept "You have X or less HP remaining" complicated enough to justify a keyword that could reduce the surface complexity of sentences involving it? My money's on no. Could be noted on the damage profile as 2d6(+30) instead of 2d6+30, or maybe "2d6 damage, petrification (30)"

If you replace saves with HP, you make squishy classes have either more HP or resistance to the sorts of damage types used by save-like things.

The concept of "You have X or less HP remaining" is not complicated enough to justify a keyword on its own, but complexity isn't the only reason you'd introduce a keyword. Keywords also allow you to reference concepts from elsewhere.

Illusion could be taken out or handled another way, just stuck it there for discussion potential.

Another way to look at it is separating attack vectors from attack effects, like an illusion is the vector but the effect could be to cause flight/fight/fucc feelings

With a physical example, the attack vector is a venomous stinger, but the effect is melting your cells (corrosion) or neurotoxin (paralyzes)

Yeah I'm down for a person's grip on objective reality to slip along a status meter just like moving from shaken to panicked or chilled to ice-cube'd, but the notion of hard-wiring it to illusion spells, specifically and exhaustively, instead of being the result of direct mental impairment (and leaving most of the qualitative features of illusions intact) just smacks of artificiality.

jt wrote:If you replace saves with HP, you make squishy classes have either more HP or resistance to the sorts of damage types used by save-like things.

This is exactly how you'd handle it. Give everyone the same HP, and you use differing resistances to describe how "squishy" they are. So, the berserker with high Physical and Fortitude defenses is "tough". It will take more sword thrusts or poisons to drop him. Conversely, the wizard has better Will and Illusion (or whatever) defenses, so he's harder to take out of the fight with mental stuff.

You work off identical "Hit Point" (or "Resolve" or whatever) pools, but some attacks drain faster based on what defense they target.

Don't forget that "acid" in RPGs tends to cover both base and acid, you know, the kinds that corrode metals and the kinds that melt flesh.

High and low pH.

I call one "fleshmelter" and the other "corroder"

JonSetanta wrote:Don't forget that "acid" in RPGs tends to cover both base and acid, you know, the kinds that corrode metals and the kinds that melt flesh.

High and low pH.

I call one "fleshmelter" and the other "corroder"

Nitpick, but that's just wrong. Acid etching of metal has been a key industry for centuries, while soap is basic and we use it precisely because it'll melt nasty bacterias and other organic dirt in our hands.

It just happens that the surface of our skin is actually basic (as a first defense against bacteria), so we basically have a natural resistance to bases (pun not intended). But a strong base will still mess you up. Actually a lot of cleaning products are basic, like oven cleaners, and will damage if you touch them directly, that's why you want to use gloves when handling them. Do notice however they'll not corrode your oven, quite in the contrary.

Most acids/bases are plain more effective for certain substances, but that's pretty much a case by case basis and you can never just say "this good against all metals but won't harm any flesh." nor the other way around. Gold for example can shrugg off most corrosion, that's why it stays shiny.

So basically there's nothing wrong with saying that a really strong acid will melt both flesh and metal. Because they'll do so in real life. The really strong stuff needs to be held in containers of special materials because they'll melt pretty much everything else.

Indeed. Thinking flesh has some sort of immunity to alkali (base) burns is not just wrong, it's backwards wrong. At my work most of the chemical burns we deal with are from alkali burns, cleaning solutions that get on the eye and fuck it up.

Just call them all corrosives.

maglag wrote:soap is basic and we use it precisely because it'll melt nasty bacterias and other organic dirt in our hands.

Strong alkalines are used to turn fatty acids into soap, but the cleansing mechanism of soap itself is not significantly predicated on pH.

Soap is a polar hyrophile attached to a long, lipophillic tail. The latter attaches to detritus that wouldn't otherwise dissolve in water. Eventually this oily detritus is bristling with water-soluble nodes and becomes easy to rinse away.

Dude, the skin's ph-level is below 6 (7 is neutral btw). That's acidic.

I always thought that that stuff about balancing blood's ph using crystals sounds like something a wizard would do to their enemies.