Good Morning Fellow Gamers,
I have a few ideas I would like to implement. I would like your opinions on design, effectiveness, and sense.
Damage: When a character suffers an amount of damage that reduces his hit point total to less than their Hit Dice, they are treated as fatigued until their hit point total is raised to above their Hit Dice.
Armor Durability: Whenever a character suffers a critical hit, their armor takes an amount of damage equal to the minimum damage the attack could deal after hardness (or equal to the critical multiplier but not factoring hardness)
Very Respectfully,
--Bacon
The former, while realistic, makes for downward spirals. Heavily wounded PCs and NPCs will be much more likely to die, or at best, be ineffective. If you want PCs to worry about their HP even more or make combat healing more necessary, go ahead if your players don't mind. I find that my PCs already pay enough attention to their health and heal in combat when needed. It feels unnecessary and complicates things more.
The latter I oppose for the same reason most tables have gentlemen's agreements not to use Sunder. Damaging or destroying your PCs' gear or loot isn't the way to go. If it doesn't destroy the armor, it's easily fixed with spamming the mending cantrip and serves no purpose other than to take up a few extra seconds of play time. If you destroy their armor, you just ate a significant chunk of their WBL. If you already had the kind of table that didn't mind sundering things, go ahead. If not, I'd avoid it.
Summary: Both of these feel like they're meant to bring more realism into the game. I feel that the majority of players already consider staggered at 0 HP and unconscious below realistic enough for HP and the Sunder rules realistic enough for item damage.