Solution to "HP are physical"

There are two sides to this debate. Those that think hit points represent completely physical injuries, and those that think that you don't take a real hurtful injury until you hit 0 hit points.

Here is a solution that would bring us together:

Hit points represent luck stamina and turning a big blown into a scratch or near miss. When you reach 0 hit points you take a physical injury strong enough to drop you and you begin to bleed out (like it currently is now). Now assuming that when you take hit point damage you can opt to trade out the damage for an injury.

So when Jozan gets hit by the Orcs axe for 13 points of damage they can look at a chart and instead of taking that damage they can lose 10' of movement until they receive magical healing or use a healing kit or taking an extended rest.

What do you think does it solve the problem?Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
Not really.  It adds an injury mechanic that complicates the issue.  Now D&D could probably use an optional injury mechanic, but I don't think it needs to be shoved into making HP physical when they already can be.  The only suggestion I would really make is to create an option for those who need to tie HP mechanically to being just physical harm.  For example, creating a division between physical and non-physical hps.  Just out of thin air, make the option half physical and half not.  Then damage can be applied as appropriate.  A good rule of thumb for injury in general would be apply half the damage to each half.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Interesting example.  In this scenario, does martial healing heal non-physical and magical healing heal physical?  Meaning you'd need both in the party to heal to full? ...
There are actually three sides. Those who think hp are health, those who think it's fatigue/ skill/ luck, and those who think it's a mixture. 

What you're suggesting is a lasting wound system. Which can be problematic. They tend to leave parties weaker over time, so by the time they reach a boss fight they're crippled by penalties.  It's also largely distinct from interpretations of hitpoints.
Charts are also problematic and slow. 

5 Minute WorkdayMy Webcomic Updated Tue & Thur

The compilation of my Worldbuilding blog series is now available: 

Jester David's How-To Guide to Fantasy Worldbuilding.

Interesting example.  In this scenario, does martial healing heal non-physical and magical healing heal physical?  Meaning you'd need both in the party to heal to full? ...


I would say that it's table dependent.  This would solve the martial healing issue some people have if martial healing could only heal the non-physical.  Whether magic worked for both or only for physical could certainly be 2 different sub-options.  However, I'd say the default sub option would be that magic could heal both.  And I'd say that mostly because the proponents of magic healing are either ok with, or are ignoring, the double standard (i.e. that there is as little justification for magic that says it heals "wounds" restoring one's luck as there is for martial healing healing physical damage) that gets created when one tries to subdivide HPs.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

They really need to just define hit points more explicitly. They can remain an abstraction, but they need to be a lucid abstraction of x, y, z factors; period.

Then, they really need to just define healing more explicitly -- does it abstractly contribute to regaining hit points, or does it specifically address x, y, z factors?

At which point, we can all more coherently discuss the issue without the odd and open-ended points forcing us into circular 'yes, no, but yes, wrong, right, bleh' discussions that get us nowhere. We disagree because the abstraction is too encompassing.

Throw us a bone, WotC!

Danny

We disagree because the abstraction is too encompassing.


Which it has to be to support a variety of playstyles.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

We disagree because the abstraction is too encompassing.


Which it has to be to support a variety of playstyles.

It needs to be encompassing enough, yes -- but my point is that it is too encompassing of things the game doesn't imply it wishes to address (i.e. morale).

If the game doesn't intend to encompass anything and everything we could conceivably wish to throw at it with the hit point abstraction, then make clear exactly what it intends to encompass.

Danny

We disagree because the abstraction is too encompassing.


Which it has to be to support a variety of playstyles.

It needs to be encompassing enough, yes -- but my point is that it is too encompassing of things the game doesn't imply it wishes to address (i.e. morale).

If the game doesn't intend to encompass anything and everything we could conceivably wish to throw at it with the hit point abstraction, then make clear exactly what it intends to encompass.


You're not making a great deal of sense to me, so I may need clarification.  It sounds like your asking for HP to remain an abstraction but for them to narrow the range of the abstraction.  If that's what you're saying, then I whole-heartedly disagree.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

You're not making a great deal of sense to me, so I may need clarification.  It sounds like your asking for HP to remain an abstraction but for them to narrow the range of the abstraction.  If that's what you're saying, then I whole-heartedly disagree.

That's exactly what I'm saying.

Why do you disagree?

They've narrowed the abstraction to physical durability and overall health, speed and agility to avoid harm, overall level of energy, luck, divine favor, and other mystic phenomena, so why not clarify explicitly that this is the entirety of the abstraction and things like morale, etc. are not a part of the assumption?

I think it would really serve to generate a different conversation with regard to mundane healing, warlords, and the like.


Danny

the easiest way to do it is to have a seperate stamina pool then when its all gone you get into physical damage. however when i run games its all physical damage and since i dont run 3rd or 4th it works the issue is newer editions have mechanics where my method wouldnt work well.
How about each character when their 'hit points' which are defined in game as not physical (we can even rename them to endurance or something) at all are dropped to 0 start taking constitution damage which is purely physical. When their constitution hits 0 they go down and start bleeding out when they hit negative constitution they are dead...Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
You're not making a great deal of sense to me, so I may need clarification.  It sounds like your asking for HP to remain an abstraction but for them to narrow the range of the abstraction.  If that's what you're saying, then I whole-heartedly disagree.

That's exactly what I'm saying.

Why do you disagree?

They've narrowed the abstraction to physical durability and overall health, speed and agility to avoid harm, overall level of energy, luck, divine favor, and other mystic phenomena, so why not clarify explicitly that this is the entirety of the abstraction and things like morale, etc. are not a part of the assumption?

I think it would really serve to generate a different conversation with regard to mundane healing, warlords, and the like.


At least in part, I disagree because I don't think their list was intended to be an exhaustive list.  Generally speaking, as long as HPs are abstract, they should be abstract in such a way that they can accommodate the largest number of playstyles and options.  If that means some groups see morale as part of HP, then so be it.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Not really.  It adds an injury mechanic that complicates the issue.  Now D&D could probably use an optional injury mechanic, but I don't think it needs to be shoved into making HP physical when they already can be.



  A "wound check" penalty or simple "injured" and "critically injured" status when you reach a certain percentage of your hit points would not be that complicated in comparison to all the buffs, debuffs, stances, and other status effects going on in your average D&D combat encounter.
How about each character when their 'hit points' which are defined in game as not physical (we can even rename them to endurance or something) at all are dropped to 0 start taking constitution damage which is purely physical. When their constitution hits 0 they go down and start bleeding out when they hit negative constitution they are dead...

Compelling opportuntities here... 


At least in part, I disagree because I don't think their list was intended to be an exhaustive list.  Generally speaking, as long as HPs are abstract, they should be abstract in such a way that they can accommodate the largest number of playstyles and options.  If that means some groups see morale as part of HP, then so be it.

I agree with the premise of accommodating playstyles, but the ambiguity of 'abstraction' seems to be doing more harm than good at present.

Danny

At least in part, I disagree because I don't think their list was intended to be an exhaustive list.  Generally speaking, as long as HPs are abstract, they should be abstract in such a way that they can accommodate the largest number of playstyles and options.  If that means some groups see morale as part of HP, then so be it.

I agree with the premise of accommodating playstyles, but the ambiguity of 'abstraction' seems to be doing more harm than good at present.


I don't see any harm coming from the abstraction.  I see harm from people telling others that they're having wrongbadfun.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

Not really.  It adds an injury mechanic that complicates the issue.  Now D&D could probably use an optional injury mechanic, but I don't think it needs to be shoved into making HP physical when they already can be.



  A "wound check" penalty or simple "injured" and "critically injured" status when you reach a certain percentage of your hit points would not be that complicated in comparison to all the buffs, debuffs, stances, and other status effects going on in your average D&D combat encounter.


Not in comparison to that, no.  But the OP's suggestion seems like it would layer over top of that.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.

I don't see any harm coming from the abstraction.  I see harm from people telling others that they're having wrongbadfun.

This 'badwrongfun' thing is getting played out already. 

Danny

I don't see any harm coming from the abstraction.  I see harm from people telling others that they're having wrongbadfun.

This 'badwrongfun' thing is getting played out already. 


If I were using it to describe a single opinion, I would agree.  But I mean it more generally, and from both sides.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.


...What you're suggesting is a lasting wound system. Which can be problematic. They tend to leave parties weaker over time, so by the time they reach a boss fight they're crippled by penalties.  It's also largely distinct from interpretations of hitpoints.



  Considering the fact that most parties won't knowingly face a boss without being fully healed and buffed, I wouldn't worry about this too much.

  The concern for wounds wouldn't usually come up until the fight has started.  Players get wounded, but don't have the time/resources to immediately care for the wound, resulting in them fighting at a handicap which causes them to take even more wounds, so on and so forth.

  
Just...no.

HPs are enough by themselves.

Instead of waiting to 0 I would suggest using a crit chart with injuries on it or requiring a con save vs a crit. In addition to that you could divide hp in three thirds. This would give you a bloody and a fatigued condition.




Hit points become specific when someone wants to argue a preference, but hit points are better off as asbtract or loosely defined concept to support as many ideas as possible, like level draining as hit point loss, illusions damaging a character, barbarian rages allowing regeneration, monk ki being able to heal, a character wasting away from a disease, or psionic attacks causing mental damage. It can be everything to everyone to support a wide variety of concepts. For all the arguments to strictly define it, you would think we are playing a modern setting, versus fantasy.

Maybe if they could modularize HPs...

In theory, I liked the VP/WP system of Star Wars, though it became a bit of a headache in actual play, between having to remember the penalties from having WP damage and taking a crit that dropped a character who still had full VPs.  I also liked the healing system in the Wheel of Time RPG, where channelers merely converted WP damage into VP damage.  Combined, I think this could make an excellent way to handle health for some groups if they are willing to do the bookkeeping.  The only problem is keeping balance with those extra health points.  Perhaps they should just go back to the HP generation system in an earlier packet (which I didn't get to see, but heard about), where base HPs are CON score (though I'd add a HD to that, then HP/level were just the HD with a minimum of CON modifier.  Then, for those groups that wanted, all those HPs are abstract, and for other groups the CON score derived HPs are physical health, while the others are more abstract.  Or they could all be physical, if that's what you prefer.

Would this idea please most players?
We have tried the Wp/Vp system and the additional math does slow the game down, We tried Armor as DR and it slows the game down. Trying to make real world sense of a fantasy game slows down the fast paced fun we crave in our games. I allow the players to describe how HP loss affects them until they reach 0 HP. I am surprised by some of what they come up with. This is a game of storytelling so use the abstraction to tell a better story.

mrpopstar-
what do HP mean to you?
(your answer here)
great idea, then that's what they mean!

Mechapilot-
at what point does your character take a physical wound
(your answer here)
that's cool!

As far as a Wounded Condition, I am using a method where when you reach 0 HP you are Wounded. You suffer Disadvantage on appropriate checks and saves until you take a long rest. I say appropriate checks because there are so many ways to lose HP. If you were dropped by an Axe then it would be Str, Dex, and Con, if it was Psychic damage then it might be Dex, Int, and Wis. Death save is excluded from this. 

Disclaimer: Wizards of the Coast is not responsible for the consequences of any failed saving throw, including but not limited to petrification, poison, death magic, dragon breath, spells, or vorpal sword-related decapitations.

AC and HPs are indivisible. None of them credibly represent defense or resistance, but the two together simulate the two concepts.

HPs as pure physical wounds is a nonsense. Levelling PCs gaining liters of blood to sustain bleedings longer or growing harder flesh to take more axe hit is totally crazy, unless they are mutants or things like that.

HPs as purely represention of defense in conjunction with the skill DC called AC also doesn't work, as the creatures die at 0 HPs, and PCs are agonizing after this point.

It's not new that HPs are an abstraction, and a good one IMO from a roleplay perspective.
A barabarian PC can describe his resilience as beeing able to sustain a lot of beating, and set that he his always covered with bruises and cuts after any damaging confrontation.
A swashbuckler PC can describe his resilience as beeing able to dodge all attacks, and set that bruises and small cuts are the worst things happening to him during any damaging confrontation, until he is too exhausted to save his life.
Note that it's more credible for an heavy armored fighter to describe most of the loss of HPs as an effect of fatigue, lowering the defense of the armor weak points.

HP/AC as a representation of defense with Rules to handle wounds at zero HP or less (meaning that 0 HP doesn't mean being out of combat) wouldn't be a perfect system, as it would cause problem regarding poison attacks for exaple, and it would stop to make sense as a daily ressource.

HPs/AC as an abstraction is an old thing I like for D&D. Even if I would be okay to make a part of them a ressource renewed with short rests.
There are two sides to this debate. Those that think hit points represent completely physical injuries, and those that think that you don't take a real hurtful injury until you hit 0 hit points.

Here is a solution that would bring us together:

Hit points represent luck stamina and turning a big blown into a scratch or near miss. When you reach 0 hit points you take a physical injury strong enough to drop you and you begin to bleed out (like it currently is now). Now assuming that when you take hit point damage you can opt to trade out the damage for an injury.

So when Jozan gets hit by the Orcs axe for 13 points of damage they can look at a chart and instead of taking that damage they can lose 10' of movement until they receive magical healing or use a healing kit or taking an extended rest.

What do you think does it solve the problem?



I like the grittiness of it all.  I would prefer the DM assign the injury via assigned or random roll.  Plus I like the idea of a player having an option to sacrifice an item or take the injury.  I see weapon parts flying around the room too with such options.  That really makes me get involved in the combat.

EDIT: Also, this may resolve the drop and pop dynamic. 

drop and pop=PC gets dropped below zero, Cleric heals PC and then the PC gets dropped again, and then the Cleric heals PC, ad nauseum.  A mild sympton of BA.

"The Apollo moon landing is off topic for this thread and this forum. Let's get back on topic." Crazy Monkey

HP : Representing ability to survive in combat/survival, being a mixture of health and experience.

In 3.X editions the health part was the CON mod you added per Hit Die, and 4th edition just simplified this further by adding your actual CON score during character creation.
The rest seems to be the luck & experience part, be it via HD or fixed additions per character level.

Makes sense for me, for your 20th level wizard shouldn't just gain 20 times more body mass that can shrug off that consistent meteor swarm damage from her evil twin. It's just that she learns how to better dodge and mitigate that bruising blow from that explosive projectile.
All dragonborn psions, unite!
As long as hp scale as much with levels and regenerate as fast as they do now, it makes no sense for them to be treated (exclusively) as physical injuries. I'd treat them as stamina, and only critical damage would inflict an actual wound, and hits that drop to below 0 a major wound.

Now if HP were not scaling as fast (for example started con score and increased like 1 per 3-5 levels) and their regeneration was low (1-2 per day without magic), then it would make sense for them to be treated as actual wounds.
Ok, how about the HP you have at first level is your 'physical' hit points and any hit points above that is luck, stamina, endurance, and skill.

So a Fighter has 12 hit points at 1st level (10+2 from con mod) and 20 at 2nd (6 +2 from con mod) but only the first 12 are physical. Some attacks could bypass the non-physical hit points like critical hits from weapons, poison, certain necromantic spells, etc...etc... So when you lose those 12 hit points lets say from a Goblin spear that got a critical, but you still had the rest of your hit points, you would go down and require magical healing or long term rest. Then the Cleric heals you for 12 hit points and you get back up with a full 20 (because you went down from your physical hit points dropping to 0, but your non-physical hit points weren't touched). Then say the Goblin hits you again for 5 points of damage, but because its not a crit, poison, or necromantic attack, it is taken from your 8 non-physical hit points. Then the Warlord shouts at you to push on through the pain and we almost have them and other encouraging phrases and heals you for 8 non-phyical hit points. I think that would work if WotC/Mearls indicated that 'here are your physical hit points and here are your non-physical hit points'...Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
Ok, how about the HP you have at first level is your 'physical' hit points and any hit points above that is luck, stamina, endurance, and skill.

So a Fighter has 12 hit points at 1st level (10+2 from con mod) and 20 at 2nd (6 +2 from con mod) but only the first 12 are physical. Some attacks could bypass the non-physical hit points like critical hits from weapons, poison, certain necromantic spells, etc...etc... So when you lose those 12 hit points lets say from a Goblin spear that got a critical, but you still had the rest of your hit points, you would go down and require magical healing or long term rest. Then the Cleric heals you for 12 hit points and you get back up with a full 20 (because you went down from your physical hit points dropping to 0, but your non-physical hit points weren't touched). Then say the Goblin hits you again for 5 points of damage, but because its not a crit, poison, or necromantic attack, it is taken from your 8 non-physical hit points. Then the Warlord shouts at you to push on through the pain and we almost have them and other encouraging phrases and heals you for 8 non-phyical hit points. I think that would work if WotC/Mearls indicated that 'here are your physical hit points and here are your non-physical hit points'...Smile





That is close to what Im doing. I bound the hell out of hp. You get your con score at 1 +2-6 depending on class then classes gain an average of 1 hp a level so the bottom third is close to starting hp but injuries can occur with any crit.

The reason HP have to have a physical component is that some attacks have an on-hit component that clearly implies making contact.

The simplest example is a poisoned weapon versus a regular weapon.  When a poisoned attack scores a hit, it delivers its poison.  In order for it to have its effect and force a save, that poison must have entered its victim's bloodstream.

Perhaps there was a luck component as well: clearly, the man with 6 hit points and the one with 60 were not equally injured by a 3 damage + Poison attack: one was stabbed, the other was nicked.  But in either case blood was drawn, because otherwise the poison must have teleported.

You COULD argue that "poisoned attacks are different", but then what you get is an envenoed shortsword leaving its victims covered in tiny cuts while the normal one didn't draw a drop until the final stab-through-the-heart.  From the exact same rolls.  This makes far less sense than assuming things ought to visualize the same way across poison/no poison, and one of two ways makes sense.

Another example?  Damage types.  Right now slashing/piercing/bludgeoning is in the game, but even if you assume all that damage is balled up into "physical", there's still almost assuredly going to be typed fire damage, per say.  If you're running out of ephemeral luck until the last hit that brings you to 0, why would some things care about whether some of that luck was lost to dodging flames rather than a sword or a claw?  This only makes sense if at least some portion of the attack is connecting.  the "Damage Done : Max HP" ratio is a good rule of thumb for whether someone's been incinerated or singed, but there was still some, well, damage to their physical form even in the mildest case.  A creature with "Vulnerability to fnord" is no less capable of getting entirely out of the way of "Fnord" than a non "fnord" attack of the exact same size and skill, but IS more hurt by a hit of equal force.

Takeaway: A hit implies a hit.  Not necessarily a good one, but a hit.  HP do represent luck/skill in part (especially for PCs) because a more experienced hero won't tend to take great, mortal wounds as easily, but when you roll a hit, you actually hit what you were rolling at.

"Enjoy your screams, Sarpadia - they will soon be muffled beneath snow and ice."

 

Follow me to No Goblins Allowed

A M:tG/D&D message board with a good community and usable software

 


THE COALITION WAR GAME -Phyrexian Chief Praetor
Round 1: (4-1-2, 1 kill)
Round 2: (16-8-2, 4 kills)
Round 3: (18-9-2, 1 kill)
Round 4: (22-10-0, 2 kills)
Round 5: (56-16-3, 9 kills)
Round 6: (8-7-1)

Last Edited by Ralph on blank, 1920

The reason HP have to have a physical component is that some attacks have an on-hit component that clearly implies making contact.

The simplest example is a poisoned weapon versus a regular weapon.  When a poisoned attack scores a hit, it delivers its poison.  In order for it to have its effect and force a save, that poison must have entered its victim's bloodstream.

Perhaps there was a luck component as well: clearly, the man with 6 hit points and the one with 60 were not equally injured by a 3 damage + Poison attack: one was stabbed, the other was nicked.  But in either case blood was drawn, because otherwise the poison must have teleported.

You COULD argue that "poisoned attacks are different", but then what you get is an envenoed shortsword leaving its victims covered in tiny cuts while the normal one didn't draw a drop until the final stab-through-the-heart.  From the exact same rolls.  This makes far less sense than assuming things ought to visualize the same way across poison/no poison, and one of two ways makes sense.

Another example?  Damage types.  Right now slashing/piercing/bludgeoning is in the game, but even if you assume all that damage is balled up into "physical", there's still almost assuredly going to be typed fire damage, per say.  If you're running out of ephemeral luck until the last hit that brings you to 0, why would some things care about whether some of that luck was lost to dodging flames rather than a sword or a claw?  This only makes sense if at least some portion of the attack is connecting.  the "Damage Done : Max HP" ratio is a good rule of thumb for whether someone's been incinerated or singed, but there was still some, well, damage to their physical form even in the mildest case.  A creature with "Vulnerability to fnord" is no less capable of getting entirely out of the way of "Fnord" than a non "fnord" attack of the exact same size and skill, but IS more hurt by a hit of equal force.

Takeaway: A hit implies a hit.  Not necessarily a good one, but a hit.  HP do represent luck/skill in part (especially for PCs) because a more experienced hero won't tend to take great, mortal wounds as easily, but when you roll a hit, you actually hit what you were rolling at.




this
How 'bout "bounded injuries."  If you want hps to be all-physical, your character just gets his 1st level hps, full stop.  You get hit, you get hurt, case closed.



 

 

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!

How 'bout "bounded injuries."  If you want hps to be all-physical, your character just gets his 1st level hps, full stop.  You get hit, you get hurt, case closed.







i use the hps are all real damage and give characters hps based on level. this level of metagaming is not needed just distracts from too much at the table and the players understand this and accept it and move on. if i wanted a 20 page section of rules on hps and what are real and what arent id play rollmaster or some other game.
i use the hps are all real damage and give characters hps based on level.

And just provide no rationale for why they can take more damage?  Why then, would you even worry about "all real damage" or not?

 

 

Oops, looks like this request tried to create an infinite loop. We do not allow such things here. We are a professional website!

i use the hps are all real damage and give characters hps based on level.

And just provide no rationale for why they can take more damage?  Why then, would you even worry about "all real damage" or not?





i dont because if i wanted to play a system with total realism i wouldnt be playing a fantasy rpg id be doing a modern game. you can bog your game down with all these rules, ill play my way and the players understand that hps arent the best way to show realism but that is a trade off to a fun and engaging game.

mrpopstar-
what do HP mean to you?
(your answer here)
great idea, then that's what they mean!

Mechapilot-
at what point does your character take a physical wound
(your answer here)
that's cool!


That's essentially my view as well.  That's why I am grateful for both the abstraction and its breadth.  One more example of breadth: I had a cleric character who was big on the religion part (lots of sacrifices, fasting, etc), and my DM at the time described his HPs as a kind of aura of divine protection.  A broad abstraction enables that kind of thing for people who want to use it, without requiring a separate mechanic, but also doesn't force it on those who don't want to see it that way.

There are a great many problems that can be circumvented by players and DMs having a mature discussion about what the game is going to be like before they ever sit down together to play.

 

The answer really does lie in more options, not in confining and segregating certain options.

 

You really shouldn't speak for others.  You can't hear what someone else is saying when you try to put your words in their mouth.

 

Fencing & Swashbuckling as Armor.

D20 Modern Toon PC Race.

Mecha Pilot's Skill Challenge Emporium.

 

Save the breasts.


mrpopstar-
what do HP mean to you?
(your answer here)
great idea, then that's what they mean!

Mechapilot-
at what point does your character take a physical wound
(your answer here)
that's cool!


That's essentially my view as well.  That's why I am grateful for both the abstraction and its breadth.  One more example of breadth: I had a cleric character who was big on the religion part (lots of sacrifices, fasting, etc), and my DM at the time described his HPs as a kind of aura of divine protection.  A broad abstraction enables that kind of thing for people who want to use it, without requiring a separate mechanic, but also doesn't force it on those who don't want to see it that way.



My rogues hit points are all ungodly luck... (umm litterally ungodly).
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

The reason HP have to have a physical component is that some attacks have an on-hit component that clearly implies making contact.

This, and the rest of your post too.

I think what you're hitting on is the fundamental issue: HP might be explained away as an abstraction, but attacks and effects are not. When confronted with effects that are described almost entirely as physical happenings, it becomes difficult to swallow that HP aren't physical.


In order for the system to remain consistent with the bulk of attacks and effects, HP needs to be mostly if not entirely physical and the relative amount of HP lost measured against the maximum amount of HP possible for that character to determine the severity of something. That relative adjustment is equally inconsistent... unless you do actually see HP as an abstraction that involves luck, stamina, and the character's general ability to take punishment, be it spiritual, mental or physical (which is why psychic attacks also deal physical damage).


So really, "hp as meat" doesn't really actually mean that HP are meat. It just means that HP damage is always some meat, same as HP healing is always some meat. The HP are not always meat.



And that makes sense, since basically people have argued about what HP are right from the dawn of D&D but really only became a thing folks started properly fighting over when someone introduced the idea of healing HP without actually closing wounds up.

I've already got my solution for this (see the Wounds module below), but I think much of this strife could be avoided if magic didn't truly heal wounds either. Magic could invigorate and revitalize and relieve pain and so on, but at the end of the day you'd still be just as physically wounded as the guy who got non-magical "healing" from his sergeant. Real wounds will only heal with time and rest and magic can't speed it up.

As for the line between "wound" damage and "morale" damage, I like making negative hit points and crits Wounds. For grittier damage, give everyone a wound threshold of, for example, 10% of HP. Any individual hit that does 10% or less damage just hurts morale while any overflow above the 10% mark would be counted as wounds. Wounds effectively lower max HP until they are healed naturally with time and rest.

Wounds Module [updated for Basic]

Proficiency Module