The system that probably comes closest to modelling realistic injury is Synergy v2, used in Blue Planet, IMO, though Traveller and Harn come close, all without "soaking insane amounts of punishment".

Also, there's a difference between the experience of a medic and the experience of people who have been fighting more than the average. The former have lots of stories about how much a minor injury can spoil your day, and tell you about the long-term consequences for someone's health, the latter are full of stories about people who took insane amounts of injury and kept coming at them and tell you how often injury fails to immediately stop an attacker;).

Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser;936072I'd venture a guess that that's largely because most players don't like the idea of the dice making the decision for them about whether they should keep fighting or not, which is basically what morale rules that affect individual PCs boil down to.

Whereas morale should affect the enemy so that every fucking fight with orcs or bandits doesn't turn into slaughtering each and every living thing.

Quote from: rgrove0172;935964Ive been gaming for decades and spent the last two and a half as a Paramedic in the field, instructor and EMS Coordinator. One thing that has always amazed me is how completely unrealistic damage application is in most RPGs. Ive played plenty and read countless more sets of rules and none, NONE of them get it even close to right. (the conventional HP being the absolute worst)

Actually, I'd argue that hit points, properly contextualized is among the MOST REALISTIC damage systems out there.

The problem is that way too many people associate hit points with meat points... so when you get 'hit' with an axe its not;

"You twist at the last second and the axe glances off your armor, costing you 5 hit points."
-its-
"The axe hits you squarely in the gut for 5 hit points."

If you use the former, where hit points represent a mixture of skill, endurance and luck then hit points are very realistic with, as you say, "trauma leaning towards the extremes." Lost hit points are fatigue and the very minor injuries (scrapes, grazes, superficial cuts, bruising, etc.) while dropping to 0 hit points is when the combatant suffers "pretty damned serious" trauma (i.e. you take a sword to the gut, the mace shatters your arm, you go into shock).

As to the annoying effects of minor injuries you cite, as a paramedic I'm sure you're also aware that the human body is quite literally designed to ignore pain and most of those other problems in fight-or-flight situations. As such, applying penalties in the midst of combat for minor scrapes, bruises, etc. is probably LESS realistic than ignoring said penalties (at least until the fight is over).

The guys with hit points left after the fight are those "finished the day with nothing more than superficial injuries." Those who dropped to 0 hit points are the ones who are hurt and out (either dead due to lack of treatment or stable but incapacitated without magical healing).

One thing that I find can help avoid the Hit Points = Meat Points syndrome is to use some clearer terms. You SPEND hit points to avoid serious damage. You REGAIN hit points with rest/inspiration/etc.

It helps that in my preferred system most creatures, even fairly large critters like horses, have just 1 hit point (only skilled combatants have multiple hit points) and there's an automatic "catch yourself" rule for situations that would be fatal if you actuallly ended up in them where you instead end up disadvantaged on the edge of hazard unless the hazard's "damage" would drop you to 0 hit points (ex. you end up hanging by your fingers from the edge of the cliff if you have hit points left after spending hit points to avoid the falling damage or fall to your death if you don't have enough hit points left to avoid dropping to 0 hit points).

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;936101Whereas morale should affect the enemy so that every fucking fight with orcs or bandits doesn't turn into slaughtering each and every living thing.

When I run game store sessions or conventions, I always get a look of surprise from around the table when I start dicing for morale for the NPC opposition. It appears to be "not a thing" among contemporary referees they know.

The surprise ranges from "I didn't know that was a thing", to "Wow a referee is actually using morale". I explain to people it not that hard. If they take half, start making rolls, wisdom rolls, will save, whatever. If the leader is alive factor his charisma in. If they are down to a quarter to it again. For special cases look at it as if you are there and ask yourself what I would do. The answer is likely run but there are exceptions.

One huge issue with hitpoints as abstract representations of avoiding getting hurt, is that dodging and avoiding hurt does not operate (in reality) as a resource that gets used up on a linear scale.

It's used in many game designs to allow players to have enough hitpoints that they can expect not to get taken out right away, and so players can manage risks in ways that risk cannot be managed in reality.

Now, if you stick to a single hit-die and/or include mechanics for critical hits that can overcome a pile of hit points, you could mitigate that somewhat. But still, it's not realistic to have a system basically saying a hero has a pile of successful dodges that get used up, before which they can't actually be hurt and after which they do.

And, most hitpoint games I've seen very much do NOT do that. They're designed to bet PCs and "boss" NPCs to the point where combat is about grinding through a pile of hitpoints.

Quote from: estar;936116When I run game store sessions or conventions, I always get a look of surprise from around the table when I start dicing for morale for the NPC opposition. It appears to be "not a thing" among contemporary referees they know.

The surprise ranges from "I didn't know that was a thing", to "Wow a referee is actually using morale". I explain to people it not that hard. If they take half, start making rolls, wisdom rolls, will save, whatever. If the leader is alive factor his charisma in. If they are down to a quarter to it again. For special cases look at it as if you are there and ask yourself what I would do. The answer is likely run but there are exceptions.

I use the parley option pretty often. Surrender puts the enemies at a great disadvantage. Giving up your weapons, for example, can just get everyone slaughtered. Running means taking back attacks and runs the risk of being chased and dying tired.
In a parley, they might be able to give up a bit of treasure, or at least negotiate a withdrawl.
Assuming skirmish scale fights, of course.

I don't mind trauma systems, but the reason they don't get used much is that they're unheroic.

Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;935991Tangental: But this is one of the reasons I love Classic Traveller's combat system so much, in conjunction with the free-wheeling Throw system to resolve any other action. If you get into a firefight in Traveller, it means something has probably has gone wrong -- because who would want to end up in a firefight?

The combat system encourages Players to come up with schemes that will avoid fights, sneak around, blackmail, bribe, retreat and come back another day, search out weak points and exploit them, strike from unexpected directions, make alliance to acquire overwhelming forces, set up ambushes to take out the enemy before he can fire back, and so on.

I love the system for that.

This. Oh, so very much this.

One of the problems with the a couple of Top Secret modules - Operation: Rapidstrike and Lady in Distress - is that they are commando missions in a system that makes gunfights potentially very deadly. Later modules reward stealth and guile, which is something the system rewards as well through the Contact rules.

And Top Secret's combat system borrows heavily from 2e Boot Hill. You get into too many gunfights in rapid succession after suffering even a light wound in a BH fight and your character's chance of getting killed go up, a little at first, then a lot. Losing a single Strength point reduces your character's Speed and Accuracy; lose 50% or more of your Strength, and both Speed and Accuracy drop precipitously. And the kicker is that healing takes weeks, so you're carrying those penalties for a long time if the wound comes from a bullet or blade. It means you think strategically about the risks you're willing to take.

My character's fucked this up a couple of times. In the first, Eladio was both drunk and wounded when he was dry-gulched by a 'friend' and the only thing that saved his ass was that two of Bad-nose Bannerman's shots missed and the third resulted in a light wound of his off-arm. Only one of Eladio's return shots hit, but it caught the killer between the eyes and ended the fight. In the second, he suffered two light stab wounds - that still take three weeks to heal - and while he's recovering decides to show how tough he is by breaking mustangs. After getting thrown a couple of times and taking brawling damage - which heals in hours with rest that Eladio didn't take - he runs into Shotgun Sally, a rustler and outlaw whom Eladio had shot in a previous encounter. Eladio's well below half his hit points - some from the stab wounds, the rest from getting thrown - and Sally can blast his ass before he ever gets his Shopkeeper clear of his shoulder holster, but though he shot her once before, Eladio also spared her and a friend when he could've killed them both, so he gets a reaction roll bonus, and what coulda turned into a fatal case of lead poisoning for my character instead resulted in a short and slightly tense conversation between the two as she smoked her cigarette.

Persistent wounds and death spirals make you think twice about choosing the ground on which you're willing to fight. In Boot Hill, it's the unwritten rule which influences in- and out-of-character behavior: it rewards lying low, gathering intelligence, which in turn moderates the pace of the game such that campaign turns become significant.

Quote from: Chris24601;936109Actually, I'd argue that hit points, properly contextualized is among the MOST REALISTIC damage systems out there.

The problem is that way too many people associate hit points with meat points... so when you get 'hit' with an axe its not;

"You twist at the last second and the axe glances off your armor, costing you 5 hit points."
-its-
"The axe hits you squarely in the gut for 5 hit points."

If you use the former, where hit points represent a mixture of skill, endurance and luck then hit points are very realistic with, as you say, "trauma leaning towards the extremes." Lost hit points are fatigue and the very minor injuries (scrapes, grazes, superficial cuts, bruising, etc.) while dropping to 0 hit points is when the combatant suffers "pretty damned serious" trauma (i.e. you take a sword to the gut, the mace shatters your arm, you go into shock).

As to the annoying effects of minor injuries you cite, as a paramedic I'm sure you're also aware that the human body is quite literally designed to ignore pain and most of those other problems in fight-or-flight situations. As such, applying penalties in the midst of combat for minor scrapes, bruises, etc. is probably LESS realistic than ignoring said penalties (at least until the fight is over).

The guys with hit points left after the fight are those "finished the day with nothing more than superficial injuries." Those who dropped to 0 hit points are the ones who are hurt and out (either dead due to lack of treatment or stable but incapacitated without magical healing).

One thing that I find can help avoid the Hit Points = Meat Points syndrome is to use some clearer terms. You SPEND hit points to avoid serious damage. You REGAIN hit points with rest/inspiration/etc.

It helps that in my preferred system most creatures, even fairly large critters like horses, have just 1 hit point (only skilled combatants have multiple hit points) and there's an automatic "catch yourself" rule for situations that would be fatal if you actuallly ended up in them where you instead end up disadvantaged on the edge of hazard unless the hazard's "damage" would drop you to 0 hit points (ex. you end up hanging by your fingers from the edge of the cliff if you have hit points left after spending hit points to avoid the falling damage or fall to your death if you don't have enough hit points left to avoid dropping to 0 hit points).

The problem is that there are better systems that achieve the "I negated the hit by spending resources" thing while making it clear that it's what they're doing.
Usagi Yojimbo by Sanguine is actually pretty good on that front. And I suspect that the results of wounds you didn't avoid would please the OP without being too detailed,you just need to know that getting slashed is bad for yourcontinued adventuring!

Quote from: rgrove0172;935964For starters, and this is just a blurted out opinion here - trauma tends to lean towards the extremes. In addition, almost anything but the most minor of injuries SERIOUSLY inhibits the activity of the host. Minor injuries almost always have  annoying effects too, causing limping, pain upon movement of a limb, shaking, difficulty concentrating, blurred vision, shock effects leading to loss of consciousness, etc.

In my game there are only Minor or Serious injuries. The only effect Minor injuries give you is penalties, making you easier to hit and to injure, and to increase the chance of a Serious injury. Serious injuries take you out of the action. I hadn't intended it to be a serious model of trauma, just a fun abstraction!

To go off on a tangent, what version of Traveler would people recommend? Haven't done much with it besides make some characters with Mongoose Traveler...

Quote from: Chris24601;936109Actually, I'd argue that hit points, properly contextualized is among the MOST REALISTIC damage systems out there.

The problem is that way too many people associate hit points with meat points... so when you get 'hit' with an axe its not;

"You twist at the last second and the axe glances off your armor, costing you 5 hit points."
-its-
"The axe hits you squarely in the gut for 5 hit points."

If you use the former, where hit points represent a mixture of skill, endurance and luck then hit points are very realistic with, as you say, "trauma leaning towards the extremes." Lost hit points are fatigue and the very minor injuries (scrapes, grazes, superficial cuts, bruising, etc.) while dropping to 0 hit points is when the combatant suffers "pretty damned serious" trauma (i.e. you take a sword to the gut, the mace shatters your arm, you go into shock)

The problem with this view of Hit Points is that when it comes to Healing, D&D Shits the Bed like Linda Blair after chugging a case of creamed corn.  Everything about the Healing and Recovery systems, prior to 4e, whether natural or magical, directly points to Hit Points being "Meat Points".

Classic Hit Points have always needed adjustments to things like Falling Damage (which Gary fixed in Dragon) and Healing to really have the whole underpinnings of the system, namely that Hit Points aren't meat, make sense.

Quote from: Daztur;936146To go off on a tangent, what version of Traveler would people recommend? Haven't done much with it besides make some characters with Mongoose Traveler...

Mongoose Traveller 1st edition or Classic Traveller. Mongoose Traveller 2nd edition is OK as well.

GURPS does a pretty good job at moderate point totals if you avoid the cinematic rules and use the bleeding rules. The main thing that is needed to focus on wounds as injuries rather than just hit point loss is the separation of defensive skill from body/toughness. The questions, have you been struck? If so where, with what, and with how much force? These all have to be answered clearly without abstraction for trauma tracking to be worthwhile.

Such systems can be frustrating for players who like engaging in constant combat without suffering the gruesome consequences that such activity leads to.

Quote from: Xanther;936047Gronan, since you were there did Dave ever use the hit location stuff that is in the Blackmoor supplement?  If s,o how did it work out?

If I may jump in, here; in my gaming with Dave the answer was 'yes'. We'd swing, he'd roll quickly, and tell us if we hit and where and what damage (very 'Narrativist' of him, I suppose) we do - and then we'd have the same thing done back to us on the return blows. We got more then a little risk-averse after our first skirmish in Blackmoor.