Looking at how many of the responses were talking about damage using a hit points model, I think I've realized at least part of where my problems specifically are coming from: Part of the reason I was trying to err away from single fatal hits in combat, specifically, was because in a number of the systems I'm working on, I've adopted a character design and development model which doesn't allow PC capacity to take damage to improve at the same rate as enemies' abilities to inflict it, as is the case for most level-based HP-using systems.

As a result I think I may have fallen into the GURPS trap, where the only way to face or survive (even for long enough to find an escape) opponents who can deal out superhuman quantities of damage is to have explicitly superhuman capacities to resist damage, rather than making HPs available as "plot armour" to every PC. (I find myself remembering the early editions of GURPS Supers, where a specific rule patch granting all PCs a number of "Stun" points equal to 5x their base HPs was needed to allow combat to start feeling like it did in the comic books.)

I am now trying to decide between adding some form of "plot armour/HP" mechanic, or build in "max damage" limits in other areas. To quote Spike Jones' "None But The Lonely Heart", "I must go away somewhere and figure this thing out."

Is this for a superheroes game?

Isn't there a fundamental tension between superheroes and dying? They don't die very often in the fiction, IIRC.

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 07, 2022, 04:17:35 PM
Is this for a superheroes game?

Isn't there a fundamental tension between superheroes and dying? They don't die very often in the fiction, IIRC.

It's for a universal system which was designed to have some sliding bars to adjust for play style; there is a way to upgrade damage tolerance between "Grittily Realistic" and "Wildly Cinematic", but even at the top level it was turning out that a Mortal Wound was easier to inflict in one blow than I wanted, once base damage got beyond a certain point.

My current working solution defines the "Titanism" (superstrength) Power so that hand-to-hand damage is capped at a flat rate no matter how much weight the Titan can lift, but I've always felt that to be a little clunky.

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 06, 2022, 11:40:42 AM
I've got a module in front of me that has a 50 ft. deep open pit hidden by an illusionary cave floor. Unless a PC knows and also suddenly decides to cast detect illusion, it's save or die as written.

I always carry a 10' foot pole.

Quote from: DocJones on October 07, 2022, 08:41:41 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 06, 2022, 11:40:42 AM
I've got a module in front of me that has a 50 ft. deep open pit hidden by an illusionary cave floor. Unless a PC knows and also suddenly decides to cast detect illusion, it's save or die as written.

I always carry a 10' foot pole.

Indeed! That is a tried and true solution. But when I imagine a party of adventurers walking through a tomb complex tapping everything they see, I can't help but think it's a bit ridiculous. It's what a group of paranoid noobs would do. Best to tap every brick in the room to be safe. The experienced group would know don't waste time tap-tapping that, tap-tap this over here.

If the default is tapping everywhere, then this pit trap would be easily discovered. So why is it there? To punish those who don't tap everywhere? It feels like a cheap "gotcha" trap. You failed your save and fell to your death. That'll learn you to tap everywhere you go!

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 08, 2022, 10:27:32 AM

Quote from: DocJones on October 07, 2022, 08:41:41 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 06, 2022, 11:40:42 AM
I've got a module in front of me that has a 50 ft. deep open pit hidden by an illusionary cave floor. Unless a PC knows and also suddenly decides to cast detect illusion, it's save or die as written.

I always carry a 10' foot pole.

Indeed! That is a tried and true solution. But when I imagine a party of adventurers walking through a tomb complex tapping everything they see, I can't help but think it's a bit ridiculous. It's what a group of paranoid noobs would do. Best to tap every brick in the room to be safe. The experienced group would know don't waste time tap-tapping that, tap-tap this over here.

If the default is tapping everywhere, then this pit trap would be easily discovered. So why is it there? To punish those who don't tap everywhere? It feels like a cheap "gotcha" trap. You failed your save and fell to your death. That'll learn you to tap everywhere you go!

I'd deal with this by allowing some kind of perception check

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 08, 2022, 10:27:32 AM

Quote from: DocJones on October 07, 2022, 08:41:41 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 06, 2022, 11:40:42 AM
I've got a module in front of me that has a 50 ft. deep open pit hidden by an illusionary cave floor. Unless a PC knows and also suddenly decides to cast detect illusion, it's save or die as written.

I always carry a 10' foot pole.

Indeed! That is a tried and true solution. But when I imagine a party of adventurers walking through a tomb complex tapping everything they see, I can't help but think it's a bit ridiculous. It's what a group of paranoid noobs would do. Best to tap every brick in the room to be safe. The experienced group would know don't waste time tap-tapping that, tap-tap this over here.

If the default is tapping everywhere, then this pit trap would be easily discovered. So why is it there? To punish those who don't tap everywhere? It feels like a cheap "gotcha" trap. You failed your save and fell to your death. That'll learn you to tap everywhere you go!

That is why there exists wandering monster checks.

If you have infinite time, it makes sense to tap everything. After all, why not? Your lives are on the line, it pays to be safe. But the wandering monster checks (as well as dwindling resources like torches) creates a timer. It forces you to prioritize. Sure, you COULD spend all your time (and this requires time tracking) tapping everything, but you'll end up getting attacked by monsters and getting depleted of hit points and resources before you've even gone ten feet into the dungeon. So to make any real progress, you have to prioritize and make your best judgment about what actually needs investigating. With all of that, a dungeon crawl is more like a time trial -- seeing how far and how fast you can get deep into the dungeon.

This only works if you have wandering monsters, resources, and tracked time -- all things modern D&D removed, so it naturally creates the situation where super tedious activities become the default rewarded activity and as a result people end up thinking dungeon crawls are no good and boring, when in reality it's because they took out all the things that make them work.

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 08, 2022, 10:27:32 AM

Quote from: DocJones on October 07, 2022, 08:41:41 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 06, 2022, 11:40:42 AM
I've got a module in front of me that has a 50 ft. deep open pit hidden by an illusionary cave floor. Unless a PC knows and also suddenly decides to cast detect illusion, it's save or die as written.

I always carry a 10' foot pole.

Indeed! That is a tried and true solution. But when I imagine a party of adventurers walking through a tomb complex tapping everything they see, I can't help but think it's a bit ridiculous. It's what a group of paranoid noobs would do. Best to tap every brick in the room to be safe. The experienced group would know don't waste time tap-tapping that, tap-tap this over here.

If the default is tapping everywhere, then this pit trap would be easily discovered. So why is it there? To punish those who don't tap everywhere? It feels like a cheap "gotcha" trap. You failed your save and fell to your death. That'll learn you to tap everywhere you go!

There's also the meta-issue that players get tired of having to say "I check all the floors with my ten foot pole" for every room of the dungeon they go into, and if the DM just assumes it, all those traps become pointless.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic on October 08, 2022, 03:37:05 PM
This only works if you have wandering monsters, resources, and tracked time -- all things modern D&D removed, so it naturally creates the situation where super tedious activities become the default rewarded activity and as a result people end up thinking dungeon crawls are no good and boring, when in reality it's because they took out all the things that make them work.

It's too bad this isn't on topic, because this paragraph here needs to be circled, bolded, highlighted, and tattooed to the insides of gamers eyelids. It's strange to watch from a thousand feet up. And it's not just dungeon crawls. You could be doing a story-driven adventure, and it still requires a time element and sense of urgency in order to actually be good and exciting. And I'm sure you can point at examples of grotesquely contrived story elements just to establish that urgency. But meanwhile, this entire time, you had these things that gave you ready-made time elements. They were given to you, made sense, and never contrived.

And the arrogance with which gamers strip these things out of the game. "Well, muh opinion." Or "stupid old-timers, we know better now," or "we've moved past the wargaming roots." It's like watching a living example of the bike fall meme.

As a fan of dead comedians, George Carlin being way up high on the list, I can't help but think some of the fault lies in some of the soft language we've adopted that makes you sound smart but strips away a lot of the meaning.

Like "resource management." Yeah. I have to admit. It sounds boring when you put it like that. So stop calling it resource management. Because it's not. That's the wrong abstraction. And that's what makes people miss what's going on. What if I started referring to the category of things that include torches, oil, ammunition, and rations as "time elements" instead. I'm sure some of the same people who don't think twice about saying, "I don't like RPGs with resource management" would not be saying, "I don't like RPGs with time elements." And even if they did, if they suddenly found their games slowing to a crawl, how much more likely do you think they'd be to correctly link it to their dismissal of time elements?

One thing I've seen happen quite a bit is players getting burned out on campaign-length story-driven adventures. Because plot urgency can be difficult to switch off some time.


In an attempt to circle back to something that is on topic, "plot armor" is an even worse term. It's got to go. It doesn't simply miss something or misunderstand the concept. It was intentionally a creative departure. And one that isn't even at all accurate as far as D&D goes. Or really any RPG I've played. Because there are other ways to stop someone aside from reducing them to zero hit points. Hit points provide no plot immunity to such things. Something like Fate Points of whathaveyou. THAT could be accurately termed plot armor. Hit points are not.

I really don't think we can have a serious conversation about this topic using the term "plot armor." As I understand the OP, he's okay with there being one-hit-kills as long as its reasonably foreseeable and you've got some alternative. We're not talking about universal insulation of the plot. And that also doing so much damage that hit points go from max to zero on a grazing blow is also a thing and a thing we want to avoid. Well, if it's a thing that we have to find a work around to, clearly hit points are not working as plot armor.

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 07, 2022, 04:17:35 PM
Is this for a superheroes game?

Isn't there a fundamental tension between superheroes and dying? They don't die very often in the fiction, IIRC.

They actually fo die relatively often its just they don't stay dead.

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 08, 2022, 10:27:32 AM

Quote from: DocJones on October 07, 2022, 08:41:41 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 06, 2022, 11:40:42 AM
I've got a module in front of me that has a 50 ft. deep open pit hidden by an illusionary cave floor. Unless a PC knows and also suddenly decides to cast detect illusion, it's save or die as written.

I always carry a 10' foot pole.

Indeed! That is a tried and true solution. But when I imagine a party of adventurers walking through a tomb complex tapping everything they see, I can't help but think it's a bit ridiculous. It's what a group of paranoid noobs would do. Best to tap every brick in the room to be safe. The experienced group would know don't waste time tap-tapping that, tap-tap this over here.

If the default is tapping everywhere, then this pit trap would be easily discovered. So why is it there? To punish those who don't tap everywhere? It feels like a cheap "gotcha" trap. You failed your save and fell to your death. That'll learn you to tap everywhere you go!

You could also tie a rope to the waist of your scout, or toss a stone ahead of you. 
Of course 10 foot poles and the like are all last century (1970s) technology. 
It's 2022 and we now have passive perception, danger sense, and true sight now.

Quote from: Lunamancer on October 08, 2022, 05:54:40 PM

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic on October 08, 2022, 03:37:05 PM
This only works if you have wandering monsters, resources, and tracked time -- all things modern D&D removed, so it naturally creates the situation where super tedious activities become the default rewarded activity and as a result people end up thinking dungeon crawls are no good and boring, when in reality it's because they took out all the things that make them work.

It's too bad this isn't on topic, because this paragraph here needs to be circled, bolded, highlighted, and tattooed to the insides of gamers eyelids. It's strange to watch from a thousand feet up. And it's not just dungeon crawls. You could be doing a story-driven adventure, and it still requires a time element and sense of urgency in order to actually be good and exciting.

Agreed. Part of the problem with current game philosophy is resistance to all the things that remind the players that what they're doing is playing a game. Dungeon crawls are boring stories because they aren't designed to be stories, they can't be built to rely on a dramatic character arc that intertwines with the plot.

QuoteI can't help but think some of the fault lies in some of the soft language we've adopted.... Like "resource management." ...What if I started referring to the category of things that include torches, oil, ammunition, and rations as "time elements" instead.

Well, the thing about resource management is that its most important aspect is the management, the players' decisions: the time taken to run out of a resource is directly related to how profligately the PCs spend it, and PC willingness to spend the resource is directly related to the time and effort required to replenish it. A "time element" would be more appropriate for expenditures on which the PCs have much less room for relevant decision -- e.g. if you go through two torches in an hour of exploration and you carry twenty-four torches, you have twelve hours in the dungeon, period; you can't speed up the rate at which a torch burns. So there's room for both ideas.

QuoteIn an attempt to circle back to something that is on topic, "plot armor" is an even worse term (for hit points). ...there are other ways to stop someone aside from reducing them to zero hit points. Hit points provide no plot immunity to such things.

...As I understand the OP, he's okay with there being one-hit-kills as long as its reasonably foreseeable and you've got some alternative. We're not talking about universal insulation of the plot. And that also doing so much damage that hit points go from max to zero on a grazing blow is also a thing ... we want to avoid. Well, if it's a thing that we have to find a work around to, clearly hit points are not working as plot armor.

Well, I did note above that part of the reason I was having problems was that my current game doesn't use a hit point model for measuring physical injury, which means PC capacity to take damage doesn't naturally and universally increase nearly as fast as the game's capacity to dole it out.

That said, I would say the term "plot armour" is still applicable as a term for any game-rule factor (hit points, Fate points, Drama Dice, etc.) that protects PCs from dying which isn't a direct representative simulation of an in-setting reality. Not all factors have to protect against all threats with the same applicability for that to still be apt, I'd say.

(Now the idea of boiling all forms of PC harm, impairment or survivability down to one reserve of points, and implementing all threats as deductions to this reserve -- cf. the idea suggested above which replaces "saving throws" with effects that do "virtual" HP damage and take effect if they reduce HP to 0 but have no effect if they don't -- sounds like it might make for an interesting game.)

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic on October 08, 2022, 03:37:05 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 08, 2022, 10:27:32 AM

Quote from: DocJones on October 07, 2022, 08:41:41 PM

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 06, 2022, 11:40:42 AM
I've got a module in front of me that has a 50 ft. deep open pit hidden by an illusionary cave floor. Unless a PC knows and also suddenly decides to cast detect illusion, it's save or die as written.

I always carry a 10' foot pole.

Indeed! That is a tried and true solution. But when I imagine a party of adventurers walking through a tomb complex tapping everything they see, I can't help but think it's a bit ridiculous. It's what a group of paranoid noobs would do. Best to tap every brick in the room to be safe. The experienced group would know don't waste time tap-tapping that, tap-tap this over here.

If the default is tapping everywhere, then this pit trap would be easily discovered. So why is it there? To punish those who don't tap everywhere? It feels like a cheap "gotcha" trap. You failed your save and fell to your death. That'll learn you to tap everywhere you go!

That is why there exists wandering monster checks.

If you have infinite time, it makes sense to tap everything. After all, why not? Your lives are on the line, it pays to be safe. But the wandering monster checks (as well as dwindling resources like torches) creates a timer. It forces you to prioritize. Sure, you COULD spend all your time (and this requires time tracking) tapping everything, but you'll end up getting attacked by monsters and getting depleted of hit points and resources before you've even gone ten feet into the dungeon. So to make any real progress, you have to prioritize and make your best judgment about what actually needs investigating. With all of that, a dungeon crawl is more like a time trial -- seeing how far and how fast you can get deep into the dungeon.

This only works if you have wandering monsters, resources, and tracked time -- all things modern D&D removed, so it naturally creates the situation where super tedious activities become the default rewarded activity and as a result people end up thinking dungeon crawls are no good and boring, when in reality it's because they took out all the things that make them work.

Oh, I agree. The issue I have is traps that don't allow you to "prioritize and make your best judgment about what actually needs investigating." It's just a pit covered with an illusion of cave floor, in my example. There are many bad traps like that. Why would I pull out the 10 foot pole right now?

Quote from: rytrasmi on October 09, 2022, 09:41:32 AM
Oh, I agree. The issue I have is traps that don't allow you to "prioritize and make your best judgment about what actually needs investigating." It's just a pit covered with an illusion of cave floor, in my example. There are many bad traps like that. Why would I pull out the 10 foot pole right now?

Passive perception. Something odd about the trapped area catches the character's attention. Infer what the threat might be and how to approach it from there. Conversely, roll for trap followed roll vs trap is nothing more than a press X to move forward with chance of resource loss.

Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on October 08, 2022, 09:49:09 PM
Agreed. Part of the problem with current game philosophy is resistance to all the things that remind the players that what they're doing is playing a game. Dungeon crawls are boring stories because they aren't designed to be stories, they can't be built to rely on a dramatic character arc that intertwines with the plot.

Wait. What?

You start in the ordinary world. There's a call to adventure. You find out about the dungeon (perhaps from an actual mentor, or perhaps just someone filling the mentor role in this instance). You prepare--buy equipment. You step through the dungeon entrance crossing over into the underworld. You go through a series of trials that test your wits. As you do so, you learn how this strange new place works. If you don't give up, you face the dragon or whatever other thing that stands between you and the prize. If you succeed, you get the prize. Then you have the return journey to bring it back to the village.

In what bizarro realm is this not a story? It's the Hero's Journey in spades. Not only is the dungeon crawl a story. It is so on point in that capacity that you only have to fill in a few blanks and you're ready to go. And the game system itself even helps you fill in a lot of those blanks. The Dungeon Crawl the literal conception of the most dramatic symbolism and expressions of the most iconic of stories. Why do you think of all the board games, war games, Braunsteins, and improv games that existed the time, why did Dungeons & Dragons blow up the way it did? It hit all the right spots. It resonated. And the game's name set the tone.

There are a lot of things you could tell me that explains why the current game philosophy is resistant to the dungeon crawl.

Tell me the kids these days have no idea what they're doing. I could buy that. Why would they? This is still new to them and they're still learning. No shame, no malice.

Tell me we've become a hobby of wankers. We spend more time thinking about, hypothesizing and theorizing about playing, and so we idealize what could be, sometimes oblivious to how the realities of actual play make our wildest dreams non-viable. That's plausible.

Tell me an uptight elitist mentality has seized the hobby. Hard to deny when you look back as far as Lorraine Williams right up today where the foremost game in the hobby is controlled by a soul-less corporation. Totally believable.

Tell me dungeon crawls have just been done to death. They were great for what they were. But the market now demands a fresh update to the hero's journey. I would say Great! Can't wait to see it!

Tell me that nobody knows how to write a good dungeon crawl anymore. Joseph Campbell is dead, along with all the original founders of Hollywood, and now the American film industry is a pale shadow of its formal self. Well, the Chieftain Giant of the RPG hobby died in 2008. And look at what the hottest releases today. All rehashes of decades old works.

But dungeon crawls not a story? Not credible. We have 100% lost our way if we can get to the point where we seriously utter those words.

QuoteWell, the thing about resource management is that its most important aspect is the management, the players' decisions:
the time taken to run out of a resource is directly related to how profligately the PCs spend it, and PC willingness to spend the resource is directly related to the time and effort required to replenish it.

Strongly disagree. In fact, this is the exact reason why I said what I said. I can totally appreciate that some people enjoy that sort of thing, and that's what the importance of tracking torches and rations to them. But I do not think that is the most significant function.

QuoteA "time element" would be more appropriate for expenditures on which the PCs have much less room for relevant decision -- e.g. if you go through two torches in an hour of exploration and you carry twenty-four torches, you have twelve hours in the dungeon, period; you can't speed up the rate at which a torch burns. So there's room for both ideas.

And I would say this right here is the more significant purpose. In D&D terms, you go in with 24 torches, it's like saying you have 72 turns to complete this quest. That instantly creates sense of urgency.

Technically you CAN speed up torch expenditure. You could lose a torch throwing it down a corridor to see what's down there, or a torch could get destroyed when using it as a weapon. If players understand it just cost them 3 turns, that's more impactful than crossing out yet another of many torches.

You can also double your burn time by lighting extra torches so the party can split up. There might be a good reason to split up. But if players are aware that while split up, they're going to burn 2 turns for every 1, then it's going to have to be a really good reason. Simply covering more ground like it's Scooby Doo isn't a good enough reason.

That's the problem with the term "resource management." It's too broad. Technically time itself is a resource. All time limits are an example of resource management. Not all examples of resource management are time limits. So when you say resource management when talking about a resource that governs a time limit, you think you're covering your bases, but you're actually losing information. You lose fidelity. You speak in imprecise terms. And worse still, imprecise terms that are off-putting to people who might not be off-put otherwise.

QuoteWell, I did note above that part of the reason I was having problems was that my current game doesn't use a hit point model for measuring physical injury, which means PC capacity to take damage doesn't naturally and universally increase nearly as fast as the game's capacity to dole it out.

Well, in that case I object to the term "hit point model." Actually, I usually find the term "model" objectionable for some technical reasons we don't need to get into. But I know of a lot of RPGs that use something like hit points. I know almost none of them that have the capacity to take damage--the growth of hit points--keeping up with or outpacing damage. It seems to mostly be a D&D and D&D knockoff kind of thing. And when I try to explain one of these other RPGs to players who don't know much beyond D&D, I say "this is like your hit points" and it's always understood and without any assumptions that they must skyrocket as the game goes on.

QuoteThat said, I would say the term "plot armour" is still applicable as a term for any game-rule factor (hit points, Fate points, Drama Dice, etc.) that protects PCs from dying which isn't a direct representative simulation of an in-setting reality. Not all factors have to protect against all threats with the same applicability for that to still be apt, I'd say.

I see what you're saying. I think where we got our signals crossed here is I think hit points DO represent in-setting reality. So I don't see them as a separate sort of meta-game mechanic that protects your character. So when you call them plot armor, I don't get the message that it refers to an out-of-setting thing. And the problem is that in-setting, your character is safe at least 99% of the time. Just because nothing is kissing your character right now doesn't mean something else could. And so I have to parse the meaning hinging on possibility. Not probability or actuality. Meaning plot armor rings to me as all-or-nothing thing. All because I don't interpret hit points the same way as you. So I would renew and revise my claim that the term is counter-productive. It's obscuring what perhaps we need to get to the bottom of.