damage type? i 'ardly know 'er (GLAUGUST 4)
Damage types. Oh, damage types. Yes, we the disciples of D&D have fantasy races, only one or two of which can breed, and yes, we have chromatic and metallic dragons, and yes, magic items are always of a handful of types, and of course, magic spells fall into a strict number of spell schools, and naturally, languages are unitary and unchanging with no overlaps or similarities. Weapons must be breathlessly separated into categories, and armor too. Heroes fall into classes, villains into monster categories, and damage? Well, damage comes in distinct flavors as well.
Your selection of physical damage types can't be called complete just because it covers slicing, stabbing, and clobbering. You're going to need straining, dislocating, and crushing, at least. Otherwise, you invite chaos! When someone slips on ice and twists their ankle, are you really going to deal bludgeoning damage to them?
Likewise, psychic damage is insufficient. When you get a headache worsened by bright lights, that isn't psychic damage, even though it's happening in your head. When you get cheated on, do you take psychic damage? I don't think so.
Maybe we can do better?
CHANGE AND DISRUPTION
If something would deal damage, consider what change it is threatening to inflict. If it can inflict that change without removing a player from the game, then it does so. Otherwise, it disrupts: It cuts off one angle of approach, or gives a cumulative -2 penalty on related actions.
If a trap would change a player character to dead, consider instead changing them to a ghost, or to bleeding and infected. If a monster would change a player character to dead, consider instead changing them to defenseless, or to captured. If these changes would remove a player from the game, then instead disrupt the player character.
Okay, that's kind of weak I think, and also it doesn't fit the prompt perfectly. But it's done. It has to be done, because I don't want to look at it anymore.