My group is less numbers and more narrative. I look at the base number and see just how many hits from my team it'll take to put them in the ground and then do what feels right for storytelling. So when my group goes up against a big bad guy it sounds a bit more epic and less "Dave used Stab, It's Super Effective! Deals 10 Damage". I don't do that with other Roleplaying games that are more mechanics focused, but since EotE, AoR, and FaD are all narrative focused, I can fudge some stats to make a better story.

I think it's important to note that using the numbers doesn't eschew a narrative.

"I hit her for 10 damage"

vs.

"I level my blaster on the gangster from behind the crate and loose a few shots - one of which that lands squarely in her torso for 10 damage."

I sometimes wonder if people think that narrating a result requires a 5-minute monologue, but no, it's just a description. When I start with a group unaccustomed to this, I often ask, "what does that look like?" or "can you describe that for me?"

Of course I try to lead by example whether I am the GM or the player, and oftentimes people pick up on it. I like to imagine there's a an audience listening who has never played the game and doesn't care about numbers, but they want to hear the story. Sure, the audience is us but at the end of the day, few remember what the numbers were but they always remember the cool description.

2 minutes ago, themensch said:

I think it's important to note that using the numbers doesn't eschew a narrative.

"I hit her for 10 damage"

vs.

"I level my blaster on the gangster from behind the crate and loose a few shots - one of which that lands squarely in her torso for 10 damage."

I sometimes wonder if people think that narrating a result requires a 5-minute monologue, but no, it's just a description. When I start with a group unaccustomed to this, I often ask, "what does that look like?" or "can you describe that for me?"

Of course I try to lead by example whether I am the GM or the player, and oftentimes people pick up on it. I like to imagine there's a an audience listening who has never played the game and doesn't care about numbers, but they want to hear the story. Sure, the audience is us but at the end of the day, few remember what the numbers were but they always remember the cool description.

I think the important take away from this tread should be that although something like tracking, or describing hits seems mundane or single-faceted, it can actually be really dynamic and engaging.

Clearly however one decides to track damage or build narrative is going to depend on both GM and players, as there is really no one-size-fits-all solution.

Just now, LonelyElephant said:

Clearly however one decides to track damage or build narrative is going to depend on both GM and players, as there is really no one-size-fits-all solution.

That's it right there: the rule of cool, rule zero, or "if you're all having fun, you're doing it right."

4 hours ago, themensch said:

"I hit her for 10 damage"

vs.

"I level my blaster on the gangster from behind the crate and loose a few shots - one of which that lands squarely in her torso."

Yeah I agree you don't have to write novel, but I changed your second response to omit the numbers to reflect what it would look like with Blind Wounds/Strain. The game doesn't have random base damage so the hits are somewhat predictable as far as what amount is done, but not having the numbers allows the story to shine. Story being that which happens because of play.

2P51 if you can hear me, have you ever tried this with the ships and vehicles? Blind Hull Trauma and System Strain?

I do the same sort of, but with SysS it's harder because they use it directly, particularly in my Star Trek conversion, so I can't really keep that from them. Of course in my home brew crits will likely be a ship's undoing long before they exhaust HT.

I don't mind it being crunchier in ship combat since it's one pool and it requires collaboration on their part and makes them work more like a crew, or not......

On 10/1/2018 at 11:44 AM, themensch said:

I sometimes wonder if people think that narrating a result requires a 5-minute monologue, but no, it's just a description.

What I personally do is try to match my description level to the fight that's going on. Examples: (I love to give examples if that's not already apparent)

My team made it to the big climactic fight with an armored warrior wielding a large vibrosword. "He fades to the left as you fire and miss, rearing back to swing at (PC1). *roll* Dodging expertly to the side, the blade comes within inches of your arm, and you feel the shockwave of air pushed aside by the weapon. *roll* From behind him, (PC2) is able to crack off a shot. He sees it as it flies through the air and dances out of its way as it smashes into the wall on the far side of the room. *roll* (PC3) dives into the fray, his own sword held aloft, sounding his battle cry. You bring the sword down hard and are met with the warrior's shoulder as your blade digs into the small gap in his armor. He roars in pain as he smacks the blade away and grabs his wound, blood beginning to slowly trickle down his chest."

My team got into a bar fight: You swing for his face and connect with his jaw. *roll* He kicks, not managing to hit you, but knocking you off balance *roll* you regain your balance and punch him again.

Of course, it also depends on what your players like. I've got a character who practically drools when his double-bladed murder droid gets a descriptive hit on an enemy. Likewise, I have another player who just wants to see how high he can get his numbers (I've talked to him, so it's not to anyone's detriment) so he is satisfied with a simple "Your shot rings out and you hit him square in the chest for 11 damage".

So my final word on combat is to gauge description in accordance with 2 things: The players and the plot.