Since the modern era of gaming first began to emerge in the mid-20th century with the creation of simulation wargames, there's been a perpetual question: How do you measure injury? Many early games did not take into account the question of injury, as either a different method of scoring was used such as in traditional card games or pieces used a binary "in play" vs "out of play" system such as in chess. As more complex simulations began to emerge, we needed a way to track how much damage any given game piece had accumulated. Here, I'll be discussing the various methods used to gauge character/object health and the various pros and cons of each. I'll only be covering the basic systems rather than variations and hybrids of the different types, but those certainly exist.
Binary Health
Ex: Pac-Man, Checkers, Tag
The oldest way health has been utilized is as a binary with piece existing in one of two states: alive or dead. Once an alive object "takes damage", it then becomes dead. This system is incredibly simple for both players and designers, as clear win and loss conditions are created. However, Binary Health is severely limited by its simple nature, as you cannot have game pieces that must be damaged multiple times. This can make it ill-suited for slower, more methodical games that only utilize singular or few game pieces.
Overall, Binary Health is great for fast-paced games that utilize a single character or for slow games that utilize many characters. It's simple, easy to understand, and is great for accelerating game flow so players focus on the act of gameplay itself.
Ablative Health
Ex: Dungeons & Dragons 5e, Call of Duty, Street Fighter
The younger brother of Binary Health, Ablative Health takes the same binary states of alive and dead but adds a buffer before a game piece becomes dead. A character can take damage multiple times before dying, but until they die, what actions they can take do not change. This is most commonly used in the form of Hit Points, where as long as you have at least 1 Hit Point, that game piece is alive. While there can be a small intermediary stage between alive and dead with somewhat different rules, that does not occur until the ablative pool is gone. Ablative Health is not as simple as Binary Health, but is more forgiving to players, as they can make more mistakes before losing. It also encourages emergent gameplay involving getting as close to dying as possible for an advantage without actually dying. Whether this is a positive or a negative depends on the game itself.
There's a reason why this is the most common way to measure injury in games. It's a solid balance between simplicity, forgiveness, and simulation. Most gameplay genres can utilize Ablative Health, but it's not a good fit for survivalist, gritty, or lethal thematic genres.
Progressive Health
Ex: Super Mario Bros., Super Ghouls & Ghosts
Progressive Health takes the basic ideas of Binary Health, but uses three or more different character states that change with injury instead of just alive vs dead. These states not only track injury, but also change what actions are available to the player. For instance, Mario in the original Super Mario Bros has four basic health states: Fire Mario, Big Mario, Little Mario, and Dead Mario. Mario starts out as Little Mario, and if he takes damage, he becomes Dead Mario and the level restarts. However, he can pick up powerups that give him additional health as well as new abilities. Big Mario can break blocks that Little Mario cannot, and Fire Mario can shoot fireballs on top of the abilities that Big Mario has. This system maintains the clarity and simplicity of Binary Health but adds some extra character states for players to enjoy. Unfortunately, this can introduce what is called a Death Spiral, as a player who starts losing now has a harder time playing as they lose abilities.
This is a good health system to use if you want the pace-improving elements of Binary Health but want to add a bit of extra depth to the health system. Be wary of the Death Spiral, so be cautious when choosing what abilities get removed or weakened. It is possible to actually invert the ability progression, with improving player abilities as they get closer to dying. This can lead to some thematic issues, however, so make sure to temper it with proper narrative justification.
Status-Based Health
Ex: Mechwarrior, Bushido Blade, Torchbearer
While the previous health methods all follow a linear scale, Status-Based Health instead tracks injury by either inflicting status ailments (such as tired, sick, wounded, etc.) or damage to specific parts of a character (head, torso, legs, etc.). While the concepts behind these two types of Status-Based Health are different, both result in a variety of ways to be injured before dying without following a linear track. Depending on the game, death either occurs once enough conditions have been accumulated (such as in Torchbearer) or occurs when certain body parts have sustained enough damage (such as in Mechwarrior). What separates Status-Based Health from other systems that have status ailments on top of them is that Status-Based Health directly leads to character death in some way. The advantage of this system is that it's quite detailed, allowing for a wide variety of potential injury states. However, this also makes this the most complex way to handle health, so can be taxing on players. In addition, this system also induces Death Spirals like Progressive Health.
Status-Based Health can be cumbersome, but the additional detail it provides makes it excellent for games that desire a high level of fidelity such as simulators. In addition, multiplayer games that utilize Status-Based Health excel at creating emergent gameplay as well as emergent narrative. For a competitive shooter like Mechwarrior, there are a wide variety of strategies involving crippling certain parts of enemy mechs, and for a tabletop game like Torchbearer, the use of specific ailments instead of damage creates a compelling narrative. After all, it's more informative for roleplay to tell a player that they are exhausted rather than at 50% HP.
Hybrid Systems
While some games employ only a single way to measure health, many games nowadays actually hybridize these various health systems. For instance, Age of Sigmar: Soulbound utilizes both Ablative and Progressive Health systems in equal measure, with an ablative pool that, when emptied, causes progressive damage to a character in the form of Wounds. The more Wounds a character accumulates, the more their statistics are impacted. There are innumerable ways to combine the various different injury-tracking methods, so experiment to see what works for your game.
Concluding Thoughts
I recommend everyone to think about the health systems that exist in the games they play the most and how the designers "spice up" their chosen method. One of my favorite games, Dragon's Dogma, uses Ablative Health, but enhances it by including both "recoverable damage" and "non-recoverable damage." The former can be healed using magick, but the latter can only be healed by other means such as using items or resting. This maintains the simple design of Ablative Health while also adding a resource drain element to it to encourage players to plan ahead and take downtime.
Next time, I'll be covering dialogue mechanics in games, both virtual and tabletop.
Комментарии