|
5 years ago ::
Mar 07, 2008 - 11:36AM
#51
|
Date Joined:
Jul 15, 2005
|
It sounds like you guys are just apologists. If it is an Adrelinne Surge - then WHY isn't it CALLED adrelinne surge. They have named it Healing Surge - and we know what Healing means. If they MEANT something else - they should have named it something else. Why purposely confuse us?
If a hero "shrugs off" 6 hit points..... I'm OK with that, but please do not imbue him with some magical self-healing and name it Healing Surge as if he just injected himself with a drug. When the cleric "administers" to a mate - it Should be healing.... not an adrelinne surge. It would be difficult to find a name to accomodate both.
In game terms it shouldn't matter, but in "fluff" it makes a lot of difference. It makes you feel stupid - having to accept these absurd rationalizations.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Mar 07, 2008 - 12:09PM
#52
|
Date Joined:
Aug 10, 2007
|
That makes for good drama in an action scene, but the problem with that is that realistically sometimes the first strike is actually the deadly one. Being forced to whittle down until Bloodied-or-so takes away that possibility of just landing a good first strike. I love the game overall, but I guess I just prefer more realistic ruling.
Such "first strikes" are crits on daily powers or sneak attacks. Yes, they happen, but not nearly as often as the "wear you down" combats.
They happen when you get the jump on someone and decide to go in with the big guns right away.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Mar 07, 2008 - 4:24PM
#53
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2002
|
That makes for good drama in an action scene, but the problem with that is that realistically sometimes the first strike is actually the deadly one. Being forced to whittle down until Bloodied-or-so takes away that possibility of just landing a good first strike. I love the game overall, but I guess I just prefer more realistic ruling.
I hate to say it, but if it's one thing D&D does really poorly, that's realistic. I agree that the first strike can be a deadly one, especially since you can kill a man with a lucky or well placed blow. Adding that type of realism to D&D though, could bog it down, not to mention be lethal to the players. Also, hit points don't necessarily mean getting hit.
It sounds like you guys are just apologists. If it is an Adrelinne Surge - then WHY isn't it CALLED adrelinne surge. They have named it Healing Surge - and we know what Healing means. If they MEANT something else - they should have named it something else. Why purposely confuse us?
Well, as I mentioned earlier, hit points don't mean how much physical damage you sustain.
If a hero "shrugs off" 6 hit points..... I'm OK with that, but please do not imbue him with some magical self-healing and name it Healing Surge as if he just injected himself with a drug. When the cleric "administers" to a mate - it Should be healing.... not an adrelinne surge. It would be difficult to find a name to accomodate both.
In game terms it shouldn't matter, but in "fluff" it makes a lot of difference. It makes you feel stupid - having to accept these absurd rationalizations.
I don't feel stupid when I read the idea of healing surges, any more than when dealing with hit points, as I said above, doesn't mean physical hits all the time. Nor do I feel stupid when a sword only does 1d6+x damage, when it should kill something outright. Of course to avoid all this you could have hit points and adrenaline points, healing surges and adrenaline surges, and have to keep track over what is an actual hit, and what was a near miss, but still tires you out, and a whole lot more book keeping. Or just take everything with a grain of salt, and think of it as being all part of cinematic/thematic storytelling.
This applies to both of the people I've quoted above, if you put too much realism in a game, you might as well watch the news, or read a history book than play an RPG, which is an interactive story, which generally deals with myths, legends, and larger than life heroes. But that's just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Mar 07, 2008 - 4:41PM
#54
|
Date Joined:
Jun 24, 2002
|
It sounds like you guys are just apologists. If it is an Adrelinne Surge - then WHY isn't it CALLED adrelinne surge. They have named it Healing Surge - and we know what Healing means. If they MEANT something else - they should have named it something else. Why purposely confuse us?
If a hero "shrugs off" 6 hit points..... I'm OK with that, but please do not imbue him with some magical self-healing and name it Healing Surge as if he just injected himself with a drug. When the cleric "administers" to a mate - it Should be healing.... not an adrelinne surge. It would be difficult to find a name to accomodate both.
In game terms it shouldn't matter, but in "fluff" it makes a lot of difference. It makes you feel stupid - having to accept these absurd rationalizations.
Ok. Perhaps you can explain to me how hit points work in 1st, 2nd and 3rd Ed then.
How is it that you can be down at 1 hp and fighting as effectively as if you were not injured at all?
It's clearly not realistic at all!
Yet people go on about healing surges as if they are in some way less realistic than the whole way that hitpoints work!
Hit points are an abstraction. Always have been - always will be. That's how games work.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Mar 07, 2008 - 5:01PM
#55
|
Date Joined:
Mar 15, 2007
|
A healing surge is catching your breath and adrenaline if its activated with a second wind, healing if activated by a healing spell.
And I think that I will only allow my players to recover 1 healing surge per nights rest so it still takes a couple days to get back up to full strength from nothing.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Mar 07, 2008 - 5:02PM
#56
|
|
|
Accept this one simple fact please: Gameplay trumps Realism. This is a game not a simulator. Hit Points has never been 1 to 1 with how much actually damage you can take... otherwise explain being able to withstand more stabs than it takes to down an elephant. You can't because it's a game and HPs are an abstract game concept much like healing surges. Get over it. 
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Mar 07, 2008 - 10:11PM
#57
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2004
|
And I think that I will only allow my players to recover 1 healing surge per nights rest so it still takes a couple days to get back up to full strength from nothing.
Did you ban wands/potions of cure light wounds from 3E? Because drastically limiting healing surges is doing exactly the same thing in 4E.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Mar 07, 2008 - 11:40PM
#58
|
Date Joined:
Jan 20, 2002
|
This will be the "wound/vitality" confusion all over again.
Folks, it seems some people are mixing up their terms.
Second Wind is a 1/encounter ability that allows you to expend a healing surge to gain a number of hit points based on your healing surge amount.
A Healing Surge is the amount of times you can be healed in a single day. Out of combat, during a 5 minute rest, you may active as many healing surges as you want in order to heal up after a fight; this is not using the Second Wind ability every 5 minutes, it is all in 5 minutes.
A cleric's Healing Word is 1/encounter as well; it activates a Healing Surge, healing you your healing surge amount plus a bonus from the Cleric; a party with a cleric can heal up more efficiently after combat.
So, Healing Surge shouldn't be called Adrenaline Surge because it is not an ability; Second Wind is the ability that is an adrenaline surge. Healing Surge is the amount of times you can be healed in a single day.
Additionally, I am under the strong impression that being Bloodied does not penalize you in any way. There are certain abilities certain characters/monsters have that can only be used against bloodied creatures, and there will probably be abilities that only work while you are bloodied (rage, I'm looking at you). Bloodied is a descriptive term there to give players an aid to know when those they are fighting are more hurt than not. Being as the term is Bloodied, I will describe that as when physical injuries become visible.
I like the reference of cinematic sword fights. D&D does not seek to be grim and gritty; I am sure there will be variant rules for such a scenario, but that doesn't really fit into the standard D&D world.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Mar 08, 2008 - 1:51AM
#59
|
|
|
I think most people have said it best, that "Hit points do NOT equal physical damage."
If hit points were actually equal to damage taken, then even a level 20 fighter would only have somewhere along 10 hp, but a ridiculously high Ac (to account for his ability to not be hit... But think about you're favorite fantasy stories of all time (LoTR has been used so I'll stick to that):
Boromir is a champion of his people, fantastically strong and capable of amazing feats, but let's face it, if someone gets a lucky shot and hits him in the throat with an arrow, he's dead, flat out dead...
So let's take a level 20 fighter assuming that hit points actually are equal to damage taken... It doesn't matter if he's strong enough to move a boulder the size of a small house with one hand, if he were to actually be hit with a bastard sword he would die...
So, to officially beat this dead horse with a stick: Hit points do NOT equal physical damage taken
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Mar 08, 2008 - 5:36AM
#60
|
Date Joined:
Jun 15, 2002
|
So, to officially beat this dead horse with a stick: Hit points do NOT equal physical damage taken
Which of course would be easier if hp DID equal physical damage. :P
|
|
|
