Say I have these weapons, both with a +1 bonus to hit (the number doesn't matter, just that they are exactly the same in all other respects but damage):
5 damage on hit
1d10 damage on hit
IMHO all numbers in an RPG need to translate into a characteristic or feature of something in the game world. But I'm having trouble trying to figure out exactly what randomization in a weapon's potential damage represent. The weapons are off equal power and will average essentially the same amount of damage (If the 5 vs. 5.5 difference bothers you, just assume we're using the statistical equivalent of a d9), but what's really the difference we'd see if we were a weapons-master critically observing them in the game world?
-
Would a club perhaps have a large potential range of damage to indicate its dependence on whether it hits a critical area or was swung well? This seems to be the easier situation to understand, as it simulates the potential range between an axe hit barely scraping someone's ankle vs. slicing deep into their neck or another critical area.
-
How does that compare to a weapon without randomization in its damage calculation, or just with less randomness? Perhaps a dagger might have a fixed amount of damage to indicate that it can't really make a critical hit, but can't really make a weak hit? This just doesn't seem to line up to anything in the game world as its highly unlikely that a weapon would always do the exact same damage on a hit.
The issue doesn't just turn up in weapons either; it's also present in monster attacks. If a goblin does 4 damage on a hit, does it mean that it's incapable of making an inept hit that doesn't hurt the target much but also incapable of making a masterful hit that does more damage than normal?
I'm probably just looking too deeply into this. I suppose static damage values can be used to simplify the damage process, and they really do make things easier than having to roll dice all the time. But I still thought I'd ask to see if there's a deeper meaning behind constant weapon damage. 😀
Best Answer
I'm shamelessly quoting from 4e here, but I think the following applies in most (non-mechanized) RPG's at least to some extent.
If Hit Points are abstracted in this way, then damage must be too. Static damage doesn't necessarily mean the same exact slice or the same exact bruise inflicted on the target. The first 5 damage might be a club swing that bounced off the fighter's shield, but weakened his arm a little bit. The next 5 damage could be an actual connecting blow that left a mark. Really, 5 damage could even be a complete miss. The fighter could avoid a swing altogether, but got a stitch in his side as he wrenched out of the way. So even "inept hits" can do "damage".
Again, I'm using 4e here, but the issue of randomization is covered in which dice are used for the damage roll. Two dagger wounds aren't going to vary much from one another, hence a 1d4 is used. Two greataxe wounds could be very different, and thus we have the 1d12 for greater variance.
I guess what I'm saying here is that static damage doesn't really differ from variable damage in terms of what you'd see happening in the game world. It's just a rule difference to make combat go more smoothly for certain repetitive attacks, and more exciting for those important hits.
EDIT: I was thinking back to my time playing AD&D. I don't know how many RPG's use this model, but AD&D used 1 minute rounds. This also abstracts how static damage would be perceived in the game world, though in a different way. We can remove the Hit Point abstraction altogether and assume that 5 damage really means 5 "points" worth of physical harm to your body.
So sure, the critter might do the same amount of bodily harm to you each round (on average), but we are dealing with minutes here. That indicates that it wasn't from just one blow, but rather a series of glancing blows, solid hits, and misses. The weapon properties don't necessarily have anything to do with it. It's just the cumulative amount of punishment that went out over the minute.