Ask a GM [06/09/2009]: Permanent Damage

[Doom Crow]

See? It's a conversation piece and a new hand all in one package!! Really though if you're broke, beggars can't be choosers, but they can remain stumped if they don't like it!

[XeroDrift]

The more detail in a character the better. Keeping track of age, long term and permanent effects, events that have occurred and people with whom they have interacted over the life of the character, etc... these things add to the depth of the experience and help to make the game world and the beings that populate it more engaging and real. Ultimately this responsibility falls to the player to maintain, and many people are into more of a visceral experience with the game, so its not for everyone. But I have found that keeping a sort of succinct journal unique and specific to each character is a great way to flesh that character out, and serves to create a more fulfilling experience for fans of the story, and the role playing aspect of gaming.

[TAROT]

This may be something that has an actual game mechanics effect, such as the character losing a hand, or it might be something that purely affects the image a player has of his character, such as a nasty battle scar. What are your thoughts for or against inflicting permanent damage on a player character?

It varies by system and setting and the tone and power level of the game.

There are systems like HERO which have (optional) rules for hit locations and crippling and dismembering injuries. If you're playing a game like this, then you know the risks before the fight starts. If the game uses a more abstract damage system, then it's hard to do without being arbitrary. Maiming a character might be something that I offer a player whose character has just been "fatally" wounded near the end of a campaign.

If there is plenty of readily available magical healing, then I have fewer objections, as it is only an inconvenience for a session or two. Games with cyber implants available are similar.

If the game is in the vein of a high-powered martial arts game, then it's really just cosmetic and up to the player. The secret kung fu of the blind, lame and one-armed master is still a match for any challenger.

Scars in pretty much any game are cosmetic. If a player wants to keep a war wound, then fine.

One other factor: If the PCs start roaming the land striking to wound, then I'm much more likely to have someone try to cripple them.

[Lord Captain Tobacco]

Running a particularly bloody covert ops game; of seven players, the usual result left three dead and two wounded. The wounded would show up as replacement characters after an appropriate amount of time. Often it was just time. Once in a while (if the injury was bad enough -based on location HKTs) a limb penalty (-1 to speed and dex actions after having kneecap surgury) and once this included robotic replacement (no penalty but the character coudn't hide the metal arm) so metal detectors were right out but the character did 'trick out' the arm...

[Arkham]

It depends on the game. If the players know going into a game that permanent mauling is possible, then they will be much more accepting of it than in a cinematic stylized game. I would expect it to be a real possibility in a Cyberpunk or low fantasy game, but for it to happen in Champions or Feng Shui, it would have to be a significant plot point previously discussed with the player.

[Fergusbarker]

I definitely feel that your system would affect it a lot. I know for example that in Rogue Trader a good crit can blow off your limb but you can get a bionic replacement pretty quickly. I guess as long as players are cool with it, it could be extremely cool!

I mean who wouldn't take an eye-patch for reduced perception?

[Sgt. Cookie]

Sometimes dismemberment can provide positive results, for instance if the PC gets stbed in the back with a small knife, there is a chance that it might sever a nerve cluster and it might have to be removed and attemps to manipulate the PC via that nerve cluster would fail instantly.

[EternalShadow]

What if this was a feature of the system and independant from the GM? D&D offers "critical" hits. What if it was a table or something that they rolled on that gave the dismemberment/disfigurement?

To me, if player characters are completely immune to any sort of risk in a real sense, it destroys the verisimilitude of the game.

I like playing with critical hits in d&d that can maim or dismember. After all a "critical hit" does indicate you managed to strike a critical area. I would like to find or develop a system that can quickly roll for a random hit location and determine critical effects based on the amount of damage done. I enjoy having visceral realism in my combat: if someone lands a 5hp critical sword slash on the arm of a 60hp creature it should not sever the arm, however if a hammer strikes that arm for a 45hp critical the arm should be pretty well mangled. The trick here is to keep the realism but not make the system so complicated that it slows the game down. I think I would limit it to only damage from critical hits to prevent limbs flying off every round.

I think PCs might accept the risk of a possible disfigurement to themselves for the fun of being able to hack their foes to pieces rather than simply dealing x damage. I suppose another point to consider would be the statistics for this to happen to a PC vs to a monster. Since a GM's supply of monsters is virtually limitless, a PC losing an appendage is significantly more serious than the average monster. Particularly for serious wounds (major dismemberment, etc) I would probably allow the PC a saving throw.

[templeorder]

Hit locations are nice if the system really supports it. Having tried a few ways in the last year, I tend to favor loss of attributes over permanent damage now for critical hits. Damage is more of a structural thing, so unless you are willing to sever an arm and lose HP that way, i favor losing stats. Shots to the torso effect constitution/health... hips and legs are dexterity, shots to the head intelligence, etc.