From: bshsiung@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Bernard Hsiung)
Subject: Re: damage system for Steffan's SLUG
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor, MI
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 17:58:24 GMT

>>     Notice that when a character is Hurt (or Very Hurt) will depend on the
>>character and is left to the GM to decide.  Superman will probably be less
>>susceptible to injury than, say, a house cat.

>This is still something we need to quantify somehow.  I'm thinking along the
>lines of a contest of qualities, of course, since I want just one mechanism.
>So far, I've come up with:

     Actually, Hurt and Very Hurt was about the level of quantification I
wanted.  *smile*  This method of assessing damage assumes that when a character
succeeds, he or she succeeds to an average degree, as determined by the GM.
For example, if you succeed in using a knife to strike a normal human being,
he or she is very likely Hurt; if it was a cat, probably Very Hurt.  If it was
Superman, there would be no effect.  If you succeed in shooting somebody with
a gun, he is likely Very Hurt, if not Dead.  A cat would probably be Dead.
Superman, again, is unaffected.

     Of course, this begs the question of how one describes that one is
Superman.  Also, I can see where you might want a method that permits some
variation in damage.  After all, when one is shot, sometimes one is Dead or
Hurt rather than Very Hurt.  (I imagine.  I've never been shot.)

     Perhaps the GM could assess damage by the degree of success that a
character achieves when making a card draw.  Normally, if you succeed, you do
so with an Average success result.  Borrowing the Result Point idea from
another posting (see:  I do read the rest of the group!), when you succeed,
subtract the number on the card that you draw from your skill to get a number
of Result Points with which you can improve your result.  For example, if your
skill is Poor (3) and you draw a 3, then you succeed with 0 Result Points and
must have an Average result.  If you draw a 2, one lower, then you have 1
Result Point, and can purchase a Good result.  If you draw a 1, two lower, you
have 2 Result Points and can purchase a Superior result, which might cause
someone you struck with a knife to be Very Hurt, rather than Hurt.  Maybe you
can buy other "special effects", such as reduced damage from your opponent or
disarming, with your Result Points.  This is clearly generalizable to other
skills.  Negative Result Points can be used by the GM to purchase undesirable
effects, such as critical fumbles.  (Or give your opponent extra Result Points
to apply to *you*.)

     Unfortunately, implementing this would mean that we'd have to rescale the
Terrible, Inferior, Poor, Average, Good, Superior, and Excellent ratings for
skill resolution.  Also, the variation in success levels is too great (the
chance for getting any result that your skill level allows your character to
achieve is the same), unless you are willing to judge that an Average result is
sometimes (often?) about equal to a Good result.  Maybe you can fiddle with the
costs of various results:  suppose that a Good damage result costs 2 Result
Points, a Superior damage result 4 Result Points, and an Excellent damage
result 6 Result Points, or some other combination that you prefer.

     Armor, or more general forms of invincibility such as Superman possesses,
can be implemented by requiring a certain amount of Result Points to "buy off"
its protective effect, say at one Result Point per level of armor.  In fact, we
can also define an "opposed skill draw" as two (or more) people trying to buy
off each other's actions with their Result Points.  An alternative approach to
Armor is to consider it to be (perhaps included in?) some sort of "defense
skill" and combat to be the opposed draw of an offensive skill against a
defensive skill.  This approach works better than the simple combat skill vs.
combat skill opposed draw for simulating ranged combat, where the simultaneous
success of two participants is largely independent (unlike hand-to-hand).

     Personally, I would probably go largely with my original proposal and
leave the judgement of "not Hurt / Hurt / Very Hurt" up to the GM, after she
considers all factors, including armor.  I don't feel that there's very much to
gain by adding the finer resolution of damage points.  (After all, what does it
matter if you were shot by a big gun or a small gun, stuck with a small razor
blade or a large sword?  What matters is how badly hurt you were!  The GM can
use your combat draw with her common sense to figure this out, and its side
effects, if any.)

Bernie Hsiung (bshsiung@eecs.umich.edu)
"Don't wake me up for the end of the world unless it has really good special
effects." -- Merlin, Prince of Chaos (Roger Zelazny)