Based on what I know I already have a few potential houserules to deal with campaigns that require more lethal combat. Its not too hard to come up with something easy that works
BlackZero
Based on what I know I already have a few potential houserules to deal with campaigns that require more lethal combat. Its not too hard to come up with something easy that worksBlackZero
You are both absolutely correct. Since there is no penalty until your character drops that means there is no such thing as an injury in the rules.
That's not a defense for the new healing surge system, but a sign of poorly written rules. The D&D damage and healing rules have always been nonsense. That's why some people are still posting their suggestions. They would like a better system.
I like the healing surge rules, but I would like to see some sort of condition track for physical injuries. A combination of abstract hp and a condition track would keep the heroic fantasy and add a little realism for the people who want it.
Any suggestions here are for house rules. Even if the designers were reading these forums the books are already being printed. It's too late for changes. Who knows, since we haven't seen the books yet there maybe sidebars with optional rules that already cover these issues.
And that's totally fine. It's easier to houserule in than out, as they say.
As for me, I've been discussing mechanic philosophy, not trying to pin down a house ruled injury system. Since the books ARE being printed, and we know roughly how the HP system is going to look this time around, you're right that there's really nothing to do but hammer out what the system as printed best looks like, and to me it looks like superficial nicks, bruises, fatigue, and windedness because anything more would be glaringly [s]unrealistic at odds with the mechanics of it. (Almost put my foot in it there!) . I would certainly agree that injury should be in a separate system from HP (e.g. condition track), which seems like the best way to go for everyone.
And that's totally fine. It's easier to houserule in than out, as they say.As for me, I've been discussing mechanic philosophy, not trying to pin down a house ruled injury system. Since the books ARE being printed, and we know roughly how the HP sy
That's why I'm suggesting there should be optional rules for people who want to use them. For the vast majority of players the rules as written work fine.
Whatever works in your game is great, but should I be forced to play by RAW or do I have to play a different game because I disagree? What's wrong about discussing the rules? If some of us come up with a house rule we like you don't have to use it.
Obviously, marketing data is important to WotC and they have done a good job writing the rules for their core customers. That doesn't mean that everyone will agree with their decisions, just most of them.
I think you're missing the very fundamental fact that the HP system is core to the balance of the game; if you make a game with a different sort of injury system, particularly one where being injured penalizes you, you have to completely alter the balance of the game to accommodate it. "Optional rules" do not cut it; they just aren't going to work well. You have to build your system from the ground up with certain systems, and it really will not work well if you futz with it.
You are not FORCED to play by the RAW, but the game is balanced around the extant HP system and screwing around with that will unbalance the game and probably decrease your overall fun level. If you want a much more realistic game (and are having less fun because you find D&D too abstract), then I'd recommend using an entirely different system, not futzing with D&D, because D&D simply does not do "realistic damage system" well.
I think you're missing the very fundamental fact that the HP system is core to the balance of the game; if you make a game with a different sort of injury system, particularly one where being injured penalizes you, you have to completely alter the ba
I think you're missing the very fundamental fact that the HP system is core to the balance of the game; if you make a game with a different sort of injury system, particularly one where being injured penalizes you, you have to completely alter the balance of the game to accommodate it. "Optional rules" do not cut it; they just aren't going to work well. You have to build your system from the ground up with certain systems, and it really will not work well if you futz with it.
You are not FORCED to play by the RAW, but the game is balanced around the extant HP system and screwing around with that will unbalance the game and probably decrease your overall fun level. If you want a much more realistic game (and are having less fun because you find D&D too abstract), then I'd recommend using an entirely different system, not futzing with D&D, because D&D simply does not do "realistic damage system" well.
Um, no. If you change the system to accomodate injuries and you balance it(not hard), then it is perfectly balanced and everyone can have plenty of fun.
Um, no. If you change the system to accomodate injuries and you balance it(not hard), then it is perfectly balanced and everyone can have plenty of fun.
Um, no. If you change the system to accomodate injuries and you balance it(not hard), then it is perfectly balanced and everyone can have plenty of fun.
Not necessarily.
Remember that, typically, the PCs are the only ones who are present for each encounter... which means that typically, they'll be the only ones showing up to a fight with injuries (whether you're doing this with some sort of persistent condition track like in the thread I posted, or with something simple like "you take a -2 to attacks when you're below half HP.") How often do you start an encounter where the DM decides to deplete some of the NPCs/monsters' hitpoints? I'm not saying it never happens, but it's very rare.
This means that, on average, a given encounter in the injury system will be harder - the best that can happen is that the party will enter a fight with full health and no injuries, and then progressive fights will be harder not just because of fewer HP, but because of the penalties from injury. Meanwhile, any random NPC or monster in a fight is only going to be injured for a very short while, because the PCs will presumably kill it or at least force it to retreat.
Not to mention that injuries can make the game more swingy - whoever manages to injure their opponent first becomes even more likely to win.
Obviously I'm not opposed to the idea of an injury system, otherwise I wouldn't have posted that thread. But I do think it's important to realize that such a system would almost invariably make the game harder for the players in the long run than for the NPCs.... i.e., imbalance.
Not necessarily.Remember that, typically, the PCs are the only ones who are present for each encounter... which means that typically, they'll be the only ones showing up to a fight with injuries (whether you're doing this with some sort of persistent
Regardless of all this; DND 4e is going into the direction of making those god-aweful combat scenarios go quicker. Why bog the game down with anything more complicated than the previous system if you are trying to make combat quicker? Don't like it? Houserule it (though I won't be your player) or don't play dungeons and dragons. If you like condition tracks so much, play the Saga, which has condition tracks balanced into its game.
Regardless of all this; DND 4e is going into the direction of making those god-aweful combat scenarios go quicker. Why bog the game down with anything more complicated than the previous system if you are trying to make combat quicker? Don't like it
Regardless of all this; DND 4e is going into the direction of making those god-aweful combat scenarios go quicker. Why bog the game down with anything more complicated than the previous system if you are trying to make combat quicker? Don't like it? Houserule it (though I won't be your player) or don't play dungeons and dragons.
Or simply keep playing 3.5 or 2e... It is working pretty well right now..
Or simply keep playing 3.5 or 2e... It is working pretty well right now..
Like them or don't like them, HPs are a simple and effective way of determining how close to death a character is.
If you don't like HPs, then work out a different system where characters are killed by any max damage attack and have fun. After all, if I do maximum damage with a dagger, and since a dagger can kill a man, then the most damage a dagger can do is kill you, thus any max damage roll must equal death. If someone can imagine an ogre, a demon, and a fireball spell, to name very little, I have an incredibly difficult time understanding how abstract HPs are such an issue.
Like them or don't like them, HPs are a simple and effective way of determining how close to death a character is.If you don't like HPs, then work out a different system where characters are killed by any max damage attack and have fun. After all, i
If you don't like HPs, then work out a different system where characters are killed by any max damage attack and have fun. After all, if I do maximum damage with a dagger, and since a dagger can kill a man, then the most damage a dagger can do is kill you, thus any max damage roll must equal death.
The Grim'n'Gritty system is nice like that. All humans have 20 hp, and to all damage is added the difference between the to-hit roll and the defense roll, meaning any attack could do in exess of 20 points of damage against an unlucky target.
But it makes for, well, grim and gritty playing styles, none of this silly over-the-top heroism present in all editions of D&D that we have come to love
The Grim'n'Gritty system is nice like that. All humans have 20 hp, and to all damage is added the difference between the to-hit roll and the defense roll, meaning any attack could do in exess of 20 points of damage against an unlucky target.But it m
Oh yeah. I played Warhammer Fantasy several years ago. I thought it had an interesting character generation system. But characters die. A lot. And honestly, the character generation system wasn't so interesting that I enjoyed going through it as often as I did, no matter which side of the screen I was on.
I figure if other people want grim and griity, then good for them. I will continue playing my D&D character while they are making yet another for their games.
Oh yeah. I played Warhammer Fantasy several years ago. I thought it had an interesting character generation system.But characters die. A lot.And honestly, the character generation system wasn't so interesting that I enjoyed going through it as oft
So far all I hear is that healing is starting to look like a video game. Heal yourself with surges and full health after extended rest? I guess the first house rule will have to fix this.
So far all I hear is that healing is starting to look like a video game. Heal yourself with surges and full health after extended rest? I guess the first house rule will have to fix this.
So now the rules for healing for PCs are different from NPCs.
This already violates a rule that I use to make sure games are absolutely on the level. NPCs get the same advantages as PCs and vice versa.
It's one of the reasons I have players who still give me a call and say my games were the best they played for any amount of time. It was gritty and ugly and players had to fight for their lives.
Here's where these things make no sense: players can initiate encounters, under the 4e rules, in order to get a healing surge after the fight to gain more hit points than they had going into the fight.
Party Paladin speaking in best John Cleese: "Excuse me, mr guard who is now way, way out matched, but I'm guessing you're about 3rd lvl since all the other guards here have been 3rd."
Guard:... um, what?
Party Paladin: "I'm very sorry about all his, but we're going to kill you now, I know you weren't doing anything and you aren't particularly evil; your'e just a pawn to a corrupt oligarchy, but I really, really, need the Hit Points." STAB, STAB, STAB.
Guard: ..."but, but you're a paladin. I can SEE your holy order of knights insignia RIGHT there on your armor." draws sword.
Party Paladin: "Yes, yes, I know. Glory and battle and all that great stuff." STAB, Parry, STAB.
Guard: Oh gods, there's so much blood, I'm gonna die and I can't be raised from the dead because i'm an NPC!! How can you do something so terrible and EVIL to somebody you just met?!?!
Party Paladin: "Aw suck it up you pansy. I'm a 4e Paladin and technically, this is not really evil. I'm an outlaw here, so I'm a wanted man. you're in service of the Evil Duke who is after me, you might have raised the alarm if you'd have recognized me so really you see, we were destined to do mortal combat.
Guard: "But... you just approached me. I failed my spot check!!"
Party Paladin: Silence curr, you collect a paycheck on the backs of teh bruised.. or something. I'm a 4e Paladin so I'm now Chaotic/good and you're in service of a real tyrant who sometimes kills subjects for personal gain, so by virtue of the law of transitive alignment properties you are technically an evil doer and I'm fighting the freedom of... whatever town this is." WOOSH, DECAPITATE!
DM: "FATALITY!"
Party Paladin: Wow, nary a scratch from that. Gimme them heals so I can go find another one. Wait, loot the body first, then I'll go take a breather over by those bushes.
Retarded.
and healing surges are freaking retarded.So now the rules for healing for PCs are different from NPCs. This already violates a rule that I use to make sure games are absolutely on the level. NPCs get the same advantages as PCs and vice versa.It's on
The only thing in that last post that was retarded was the poster.
You completely blew a scenario out of proportion that no DM would allow to happen just to prove how much of an ***hat you are?
You really have that much free time?
Geesh, get a hobby.
All you managed to prove was illiteracy.
The only thing in that last post that was retarded was the poster. You completely blew a scenario out of proportion that no DM would allow to happen just to prove how much of an ***hat you are?You really have that much free time?Geesh, get a hobby.Al
Healing Surges are not just something attainable in-combat.
Healing Surges showcase the number of times per-day you can push yourself further, and keep going before not being able to do so anymore. They show how much stress you can put on your body, before it begins to give up.
The only "in-combat" Healing abilities would be Second Wind. Which is how it sounds, you getting a second wind, being able to push yourself just a little bit more in that fight.
You can use up Healing Surges out-of-combat to heal yourself, but it doesn't mean your at full health. HP is how badly your doing in that fight, what your current fighting potential you have before you begin to suffer from it.
Healing Surges are a better example of your actual Health, because the less you have the less you can recover from those wounds you have received and the more your suffering/be less able to fight at full potential.
Umm... Yeah no.Healing Surges are not just something attainable in-combat.Healing Surges showcase the number of times per-day you can push yourself further, and keep going before not being able to do so anymore. They show how much stress you can put
You are wrong and right, yes after a fight you can rest and regain health (though in my eyes it is less health and more ability to fight at full capacity, but anyways) but it doesn't have to be after a fight.
It can be whenever you have the capabilities to rest you can regain some HP. An encounter is not simply combat, an encounter is a dramatic-scene a plot-point, etc. Rest-time is between these periods of dramatic-scenes.
So after walking in to town and kicking your legs up at a tavern, and patching up some old-wounds, etc. would count.
You are wrong and right, yes after a fight you can rest and regain health (though in my eyes it is less health and more ability to fight at full capacity, but anyways) but it doesn't have to be after a fight.It can be whenever you have the capabiliti
So I'm totally wrong to say that after an encounter you get to take a 5 minute rest and regain 1/4 of HP? Am i right or wrong here?
Actually, your wrong, but on the right track. You can, during a 5 minute rest, burn as many healing surges as you need to bring your HPs to whatever level you would like for the next encounter. This puts in a sort of "timer" that tells you when is a good time to rest overnight (extended rest). That time being when the group thinks they are running short of healing surges. You do not regain healing surges by engaging in combat, which your post implied. You have a set number of them per day.
Actually, your wrong, but on the right track. You can, during a 5 minute rest, burn as many healing surges as you need to bring your HPs to whatever level you would like for the next encounter. This puts in a sort of "timer" that tells you when is
...(though in my eyes it is less health and more ability to fight at full capacity, but anyways)...
Yeah, I agree. That's the idea that I'm getting about Hit Points. I'm fine with that if they want to define (or redefine) them that way - however - I absolutely loathe the term "healing surge", especially if it isn't actually healing anything!
Any other term like "catch your breath" or "stamina points" or "recovery points" but not "healing surges" Gahhh!
Yeah, I agree. That's the idea that I'm getting about Hit Points. I'm fine with that if they want to define (or redefine) them that way - however - I absolutely loathe the term "healing surge", especially if it isn't actually healing anything! Any o
Alright, so what would make a combat scene an encounter? If it was a predetermined fight or plot advancing fight? A new fight, seems like a new encounter to me. Especially if you have a pro-active party.
The encounter definition seems rather vague to me. I read the enworld threads, and still don't have a definition that would clearly delineate the difference between what I posted as an encounter and what you said counts as an encounter.
As for healing surge, they can happen any time, once per encounter or any time you are out of combat.
So it wouldn't be necessary to initiate an encounter to get to heal. You could pretty much just do it any time out of combat and only once in combat. Gotcha.
But from what I saw, Clerics can renew healing spells if they go into a new encounter? Which means people playing clerics could conceivably initiate encounters with the added benefit of getting access to renewable healing magic?
Unless there's something about what constitutes an encounter that I haven't read yet.
These kinds of things are good to work out in advance. If you think I'm just looking for holes in the game for fun, you'd be wrong. If I can find a loophole before I even read the book, players will definitely find them once they read the books.
Playing against the spirit of the rules for the game is always a problem with players, it's one of the primary things that drives DM's insane. Not every player does, just like not every person lies on their taxes.
But a simple fight isn't considered an encounter? Alright, so what would make a combat scene an encounter? If it was a predetermined fight or plot advancing fight? A new fight, seems like a new encounter to me. Especially if you have a pro-active
A fight is considered an encounter, but what I mean is that you don't need to get into a FIGHTING encounter to be able to rest.
You can rest after each fight if you wish, but like with normal resting. You got to make sure that it won't be interrupted, and that the encounter is done. Say you runaway from a fight, you won't just be able to heal since your out of combat. You would need to wait till you reach a position where that sequence of events has played out, ie: you have found a safe place to hide out.
Clerics do have per-encounter spells yes that heal. But outside of an encounter such as resting, those are considered simply active, so he can heal others and himself with that power without having to initiate an encounter.
Though you still got to remember to pace your healing surges, since once their gone you can't regain them till you have an extended rest (which you can only do once every 24 hours).
A fight is considered an encounter, but what I mean is that you don't need to get into a FIGHTING encounter to be able to rest.You can rest after each fight if you wish, but like with normal resting. You got to make sure that it won't be interrupted,
so does a cleric get healing spells that refresh per encounter?
Or does he just get a limited number of per encounter spells per day?
Like does he wake up with say 10 per encounter spells that he can use only twice per encounter or does he get an unlimited number of per encounter spells but can't use any more than 2 between encounters?
Or a third option, the cleric can heal infinitely outside of encounters and only twice per encounter during encounters?
so does a cleric get healing spells that refresh per encounter?Or does he just get a limited number of per encounter spells per day?Like does he wake up with say 10 per encounter spells that he can use only twice per encounter or does he get an unlim
A per-encounter spell can be used once per-encounter, for as many encounters as there are.
As for out-of-combat, I am not sure if there is a definite answer but I believe it is assumed that it is simply unlimited. Though it doesn't make much difference since a Cleric's spell still uses up either the person being healed own Healing Surges or the Clerics.
So you cannot heal a person indefinable, since once the Healing Surges are up thats it. Till you have an extended rest.
A per-encounter spell can be used once per-encounter, for as many encounters as there are.As for out-of-combat, I am not sure if there is a definite answer but I believe it is assumed that it is simply unlimited. Though it doesn't make much differenc
so does a cleric get healing spells that refresh per encounter?
Or does he just get a limited number of per encounter spells per day?
Like does he wake up with say 10 per encounter spells that he can use only twice per encounter or does he get an unlimited number of per encounter spells but can't use any more than 2 between encounters?
Or a third option, the cleric can heal infinitely outside of encounters and only twice per encounter during encounters?
Here is the exact wording of the only healing spell we have seen so far, from DDXP;
Healing Word You whisper a brief prayer as divine light washes over your target, helping to mend its wounds.
Encounter (Special) Divine, Healing
Special: You can use this power twice per encounter, but only once per round
Minor Action Close Burst 5
Target: You or one ally
Effect: The target can spend a healing surge and regain an additional 16d+ CHA bonus hit points.
They have said this can be used outside of combat during short rests to try to make surges go further, but each casting requires another short rest to recover the power for the next encounter. Also note that each casting still burns a healing surge from the person being healed.
Here is the exact wording of the only healing spell we have seen so far, from DDXP;Healing WordYou whisper a brief prayer as divine light washes over your target, helping to mend its wounds.Encounter (Special) Divine, HealingSpecial: You can use thi
So the cleric doesn't really heal people, he just enhances the natural healing of other people.
So this begs the question, do NPCs get healing surges?
I'm surprised. You said you've been to EN World. A Designer of 4.0 went there and told them that NPCs do ghave healig surges and the number is easy to remember. He wouldn't comment on what they number is (unless it is a formula).
But yes, you can heal NPCS.
I'm surprised. You said you've been to EN World. A Designer of 4.0 went there and told them that NPCs do ghave healig surges and the number is easy to remember. He wouldn't comment on what they number is (unless it is a formula).But yes, you can heal
1) Each Character gets a certain # of healing surges based on class and con mod. Level may or may not affect this. 2) Each Surge heals 25% of your hit points. If you are below zero, set hit points to zero before applying the effects of a surge. 3) During a "short rest" (described as roughly 5 minutes, but no official definition has yet been seen), you can spend as many surges as you want. 4) Once per encounter, you may spend a Standard action to activate a surge. 5) The Cleric's Healing Word activates one of the target's surges, and adds some additional healing. This is an encounter power. 6) Encounter powers can be used outside of an encounter about "once every 5 minutes". 7) The Paladin's Lay on Hands ability uses one of the Paladin's surges. it is an x/day power.
BeerMan5000 - Here is what we know:1) Each Character gets a certain # of healing surges based on class and con mod. Level may or may not affect this.2) Each Surge heals 25% of your hit points. If you are below zero, set hit points to zero before ap
OK, so damage has become even more of an abstract number.
rather than just getting a few HP from over night rest, everyone gets everything back. So, if you were at 0 HP the day before and dying, and somebody gave you the equivalent of a Cure Minor wounds spell and brought you back up to 2 HP out of 100, you could just go to sleep and heal right back up to 100 instantly without need of magical healing.
NPC's get healing surges that they can use to heal 1/4 of damage recieved, meaning that no matter how badly they were damaged on one day, as long as they survived they'd be able to heal everything by either just sleeping for 6 hours or using 4 healing surges.
So, if some random NPC is stabbed in the head for 99% of their HP total, they can just walk it off in 5 minutes regardless of being within a hair's breadth of dying just a few minutes ago? nobody see's a loss of suspension of disbelief for even a second? even for a fantasy setting that makes no sense.
Fantasy healing magic relies on the understanding that a person was healed by "magic". What is it we were supposed to believe healed this person in this instance? It only looked worse than it was? It was just a flesh wound all along and they just thought they were gonna freaking die? They just needed to catch their breath and close the giant gash in their head by virtue of a leisurely stroll?
I've played a lot of Pencil and Paper RPG's before, but can anybody point out another RPG that had such a liberal definition of damage?
OK, so damage has become even more of an abstract number.rather than just getting a few HP from over night rest, everyone gets everything back. So, if you were at 0 HP the day before and dying, and somebody gave you the equivalent of a Cure Minor wo
go to beginning of thread. Read 1st post. Read all of the arguments for and against the mechanics as presented. Come back with an awareness of what has gone before and why some people agree with your take on things and others do not. This very thread has been there.
all previous editions of D&D. . .go to beginning of thread. Read 1st post. Read all of the arguments for and against the mechanics as presented. Come back with an awareness of what has gone before and why some people agree with your take on things
I'll give you a reason why I'm not going to read all 13 pages of posts: it's 13 pages of posts.
As for use of the word liberal, from the dictionary it means, characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor; given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation; not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.
So I mean to say, that the interpretation of damage and capacity to absorb damage is extremely generous IMO.
I'll give you a reason why I'm not going to read all 13 pages of posts: it's 13 pages of posts. As for use of the word liberal, from the dictionary it means, characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor; given
So I mean to say, that the interpretation of damage and capacity to absorb damage is extremely generous IMO.
Oh then you are looking for Twilight 2000 (the WW3 game) - the amount of gunshots to the head you could take was pretty darn impressive. The only "normal" weapon you needed to worry about was the shotgun, everything else was laughable.
Oh then you are looking for Twilight 2000 (the WW3 game) - the amount of gunshots to the head you could take was pretty darn impressive. The only "normal" weapon you needed to worry about was the shotgun, everything else was laughable.
OK, so damage has become even more of an abstract number.
rather than just getting a few HP from over night rest, everyone gets everything back. So, if you were at 0 HP the day before and dying, and somebody gave you the equivalent of a Cure Minor wounds spell and brought you back up to 2 HP out of 100, you could just go to sleep and heal right back up to 100 instantly without need of magical healing.
NPC's get healing surges that they can use to heal 1/4 of damage recieved, meaning that no matter how badly they were damaged on one day, as long as they survived they'd be able to heal everything by either just sleeping for 6 hours or using 4 healing surges.
So, if some random NPC is stabbed in the head for 99% of their HP total, they can just walk it off in 5 minutes regardless of being within a hair's breadth of dying just a few minutes ago? nobody see's a loss of suspension of disbelief for even a second? even for a fantasy setting that makes no sense.
Fantasy healing magic relies on the understanding that a person was healed by "magic". What is it we were supposed to believe healed this person in this instance? It only looked worse than it was? It was just a flesh wound all along and they just thought they were gonna freaking die? They just needed to catch their breath and close the giant gash in their head by virtue of a leisurely stroll?
I've played a lot of Pencil and Paper RPG's before, but can anybody point out another RPG that had such a liberal definition of damage?
Not gonna get dragged into another "What do hit points actually represent conversation" Sorry, 4e is probably not 4u.
Not gonna get dragged into another "What do hit points actually represent conversation" Sorry, 4e is probably not 4u.
NPC's get healing surges that they can use to heal 1/4 of damage recieved, meaning that no matter how badly they were damaged on one day, as long as they survived they'd be able to heal everything by either just sleeping for 6 hours or using 4 healing surges.
works for PCs, too.
So, if some random NPC is stabbed in the head for 99% of their HP total, they can just walk it off in 5 minutes regardless of being within a hair's breadth of dying just a few minutes ago? nobody see's a loss of suspension of disbelief for even a second? even for a fantasy setting that makes no sense.
As long as they have a single Hit Point remaining, they have not been "stabbed in the head". They have not taken any significant physical damage: they have lost hit points - do not conflate the two, they are not the same thing.
Besides, in D&D, you cannot "be" stabbed-in-the-head.
So there is nothing miraculous about their recovery - the attend to their scrapes and bruises, bandage any cuts and move on.
Hit
works for PCs, too.As long as they have a single Hit Point remaining, they have not been "stabbed in the head". They have not taken any significant physical damage: they have lost hit points - do not conflate the two, they are not the same thing.Bes
I'll give you a reason why I'm not going to read all 13 pages of posts: it's 13 pages of posts.
As for use of the word liberal, from the dictionary it means, characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor; given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation; not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.
So I mean to say, that the interpretation of damage and capacity to absorb damage is extremely generous IMO.
Despite Thyrwyn's claim, all previous editions of D&D were not as liberal as 4ed. Healing surges, second winds, and a full heal in 6 hours show a far, far, far more generous and liberal application of what hit points are, and make them nonsensical. I've already had to come up with a house rule to explain away healing surges as something else(yet the same mechanic) in order for it to make sense.
Despite Thyrwyn's claim, all previous editions of D&D were not as liberal as 4ed. Healing surges, second winds, and a full heal in 6 hours show a far, far, far more generous and liberal application of what hit points are, and make them nonsensical.
Oh then you are looking for Twilight 2000 (the WW3 game) - the amount of gunshots to the head you could take was pretty darn impressive. The only "normal" weapon you needed to worry about was the shotgun, everything else was laughable.
In the game Champions, a typical human would reliably survive a 10 or 20 story fall(can't remember which). Of course, games with aburd hit point rules don't justify 4ed's hit point rules.
In the game Champions, a typical human would reliably survive a 10 or 20 story fall(can't remember which). Of course, games with aburd hit point rules don't justify 4ed's hit point rules.
So, if some random NPC is stabbed in the head for 99% of their HP total, they can just walk it off in 5 minutes regardless of being within a hair's breadth of dying just a few minutes ago? nobody see's a loss of suspension of disbelief for even a second? even for a fantasy setting that makes no sense.
Yep. In 4ed, characters a characters are 100% invulnerable until they get to their last hit point. A character with 200 hit point can take absolutely no damage other than maybe a scrape or bruise until he reaches 1. At that point, suddenly that last ONE hit point represents the totality of his physical fitness and he will be down and dying if an ant bites him. It's absolutely ludicrous, and we have healing surges and full rest in 6 hours to blame for it.
My choices with 4ed are these.
1) Don't play it and keep using 3ed.
2) Get rid of surges and full healing in 6 hours. Of course, this means I have to rewrite combat, character classes, AND every creature.
3) Change how surges and healing comes about. I've already decided that full healing for a nights rest is gone from my game. Character's will heal at 3ed rates and recover "surges" as normal. Surges, though, have been redefined by me. In order for both surges AND hit points to make sense in my 4ed game, I've pretty much decided that surges are not a part of any character. Instead, they come from some sort of rare object(yet to be determined) that links with the life force of its owner to cause healing. The stronger the life force, the more he heals and he heals more often. The objects will attune themselves to the lifeforce of the first individual to use them while they are blank. If someone who has one dies, his object blanks out. This will allow hit points to inflict some physical damage as combat wears on and make more sense, like they did in previous editions.
Now I'm going to sit back and wait for the NEXT person to come by and accuse me of saying that hit points are all physical due to their inability to read what I say.
Yep. In 4ed, characters a characters are 100% invulnerable until they get to their last hit point. A character with 200 hit point can take absolutely no damage other than maybe a scrape or bruise until he reaches 1. At that point, suddenly that la
So now the rules for healing for PCs are different from NPCs.
This already violates a rule that I use to make sure games are absolutely on the level. NPCs get the same advantages as PCs and vice versa.
On paper, this looks like a great idea, and 3.5 implemented it pretty well.
In practice, it's out of touch with reality. Except for "henchman" NPCs, but you can treat them mechanically as PCs anyway.
This idea is exactly analogous to saying that, in a TV show or movie, an extra who appears for a single scene should get exactly the same treatment as the lead characters (not the actors, the characters). It doesn't take much thinking to see that this is rather silly. The extra buys a cup of coffee, smiles at the barista, and walks off. We, the audience, don't really care why he was buying that coffee, what he had for breakfast that morning, or the current state of his love life. He's just living scenery, in the same way that the coffee machine is static scenery. We don't expect to see him on posters or trailers, and the scriptwriter doesn't put much effort into detailing him. All he has is what is needed for his walk on, walk off appearance.
And that is why PCs and NPCs operate under different mechanics.
Sure, there are a lot of similarities. If your PCs are all asian monks then it will be rather noticeable if all your NPCs are africans speaking Swahili. But while the in-flight mechanics should be as similar as possible, the NPCs don't need the same amount of scaffolding; its perfectly acceptable for them to be cardboard cut-outs. Using a system designed to support the development of a PC over several months of gameplay for a character whose lifespan is about 1 hour of game time is a massive waste of effort.
In general, if an NPC survives the fight, he should be considered completely "healed". If not, it doesn't matter anyway. On the balance of probability, the NPC won't survive the fight, since the whole game system is deliberately skewed in favour of the PCs. The real skill is skewing it by the correct amount, you don't want fair fights (or fewer than 10% of campaigns will make it past 4 encounters), but you don't want walkovers either.
On paper, this looks like a great idea, and 3.5 implemented it pretty well.In practice, it's out of touch with reality. Except for "henchman" NPCs, but you can treat them mechanically as PCs anyway.This idea is exactly analogous to saying that, in a
Despite Thyrwyn's claim, all previous editions of D&D were not as liberal as 4ed. Healing surges, second winds, and a full heal in 6 hours show a far, far, far more generous and liberal application of what hit points are, and make them nonsensical. I've already had to come up with a house rule to explain away healing surges as something else(yet the same mechanic) in order for it to make sense.
Despite Maxperson's implication, hitpoints have always been nonsensical. 4E's more liberal application of them has more to do with their division across all classes than their defintion.
"Stabbed in the head" has never be equatable to losing 99% of your hps. Show me someone who is "stabbed in the head" that still has complete motor control to fight, swim, climb, travel, etc. as if they were not "stabbed in the head".
I will agree that calling healing surges "healing surges" does break suspension more than a better term would when they don't necessarily relate to healing.
3) Change how surges and healing comes about. I've already decided that full healing for a nights rest is gone from my game. Character's will heal at 3ed rates and recover "surges" as normal. Surges, though, have been redefined by me. In order for both surges AND hit points to make sense in my 4ed game, I've pretty much decided that surges are not a part of any character. Instead, they come from some sort of rare object(yet to be determined) that links with the life force of its owner to cause healing. The stronger the life force, the more he heals and he heals more often. The objects will attune themselves to the lifeforce of the first individual to use them while they are blank. If someone who has one dies, his object blanks out. This will allow hit points to inflict some physical damage as combat wears on and make more sense, like they did in previous editions.
So basically you'd make surges magical healing in nature via an object? I think that's an interesting way to rectify your opinion with the mechanics. Innovative.
Despite Maxperson's implication, hitpoints have always been nonsensical. 4E's more liberal application of them has more to do with their division across all classes than their defintion."Stabbed in the head" has never be equatable to losing 99% of y
Yep. In 4ed, characters a characters are 100% invulnerable until they get to their last hit point. A character with 200 hit point can take absolutely no damage other than maybe a scrape or bruise until he reaches 1. At that point, suddenly that last ONE hit point represents the totality of his physical fitness and he will be down and dying if an ant bites him. It's absolutely ludicrous, and we have healing surges and full rest in 6 hours to blame for it.
My choices with 4ed are these.
1) Don't play it and keep using 3ed.
2) Get rid of surges and full healing in 6 hours. Of course, this means I have to rewrite combat, character classes, AND every creature.
3) Change how surges and healing comes about. I've already decided that full healing for a nights rest is gone from my game. Character's will heal at 3ed rates and recover "surges" as normal. Surges, though, have been redefined by me. In order for both surges AND hit points to make sense in my 4ed game, I've pretty much decided that surges are not a part of any character. Instead, they come from some sort of rare object(yet to be determined) that links with the life force of its owner to cause healing. The stronger the life force, the more he heals and he heals more often. The objects will attune themselves to the lifeforce of the first individual to use them while they are blank. If someone who has one dies, his object blanks out. This will allow hit points to inflict some physical damage as combat wears on and make more sense, like they did in previous editions.
Now I'm going to sit back and wait for the NEXT person to come by and accuse me of saying that hit points are all physical due to their inability to read what I say.
Why do you think that hit points are all physical when they clearly are not? Gosh! Idiot!
Seriously though, hit points didn't make any more sense in previous editions. How come if you had two characters of the same class and level, both reduced to 0HP, the one with the higher CON score took longer to heal? 4e is finally creating healing mechanics that recognize that hit points are an abstraction instead of attempting to model real world healing with rules that actually made hit points less realistic.
Now that doesn't mean I don't think they couldn't have done better, but it's still a step forward from previous editions, IMO of course.
Why do you think that hit points are all physical when they clearly are not? Gosh! Idiot!Seriously though, hit points didn't make any more sense in previous editions. How come if you had two characters of the same class and level, both reduced to 0HP
I will agree that calling healing surges "healing surges" does break suspension more than a better term would when they don't necessarily relate to healing.
So basically you'd make surges magical healing in nature via an object? I think that's an interesting way to rectify your opinion with the mechanics. Innovative.
Yeah. I really don't have a problem with many, or even most hit points being bumps, bruises, and close calls, but I just can't reconcile going from fully healthy at 1 hit point to dead and dying at 0/-1. There has to be a good portion of physical damage prior to that. That damage wouldn't heal from surges/6 hour rest as currently listed. Making them magical in nature remedies that issue for me.
Yeah. I really don't have a problem with many, or even most hit points being bumps, bruises, and close calls, but I just can't reconcile going from fully healthy at 1 hit point to dead and dying at 0/-1. There has to be a good portion of physical d
Why do you think that hit points are all physical when they clearly are not? Gosh! Idiot!
Seriously though, hit points didn't make any more sense in previous editions. How come if you had two characters of the same class and level, both reduced to 0HP, the one with the higher CON score took longer to heal? 4e is finally creating healing mechanics that recognize that hit points are an abstraction instead of attempting to model real world healing with rules that actually made hit points less realistic.
Now that doesn't mean I don't think they couldn't have done better, but it's still a step forward from previous editions, IMO of course.
Note, I didn't say they were completely realistic or made total sense, just that they made MORE sense than 4ed. That leaves a lot of room. :::grin:::
To me, the fact that they required a significant amount of rest to heal, gave them more realism and sense than 4ed does.
Note, I didn't say they were completely realistic or made total sense, just that they made MORE sense than 4ed. That leaves a lot of room. :::grin:::To me, the fact that they required a significant amount of rest to heal, gave them more realism and
Okay.. the healing in 4e is not realistic.. it's not meant to be. We're talking about fantasy superheroes here. Even at first level a character is a hero in classical and mythical terms.
You want to know what the definition of a hero is in realistic terms? A hero is someone who gets other people killed. You can look it up later.
All this arguing about D&D not being gritty enough and such.. really. I hate to say this, but there are hundreds of game systems out there. Some do better in different settings. D&D is not about realism, and if you want a realistic sword and sorcery system 4e is NOT for you. However, there may be a system that is perfect for what you are looking for.
I'm not saying don't play D&D, but just try to accept it for what it is. Maybe it's not what you want, but like I said there are, I'm sure, a hundred different rpg rulesets, and one will be a better fit for what you are looking for. Why not give them a try? You may just like it. D&D is just a name. If you are playing something besides D&D there's really no stigma to it.
Okay.. the healing in 4e is not realistic.. it's not meant to be. We're talking about fantasy superheroes here. Even at first level a character is a hero in classical and mythical terms.You want to know what the definition of a hero is in realisti
3) Change how surges and healing comes about. I've already decided that full healing for a nights rest is gone from my game. Character's will heal at 3ed rates and recover "surges" as normal. Surges, though, have been redefined by me. In order for both surges AND hit points to make sense in my 4ed game, I've pretty much decided that surges are not a part of any character. Instead, they come from some sort of rare object(yet to be determined) that links with the life force of its owner to cause healing. The stronger the life force, the more he heals and he heals more often. The objects will attune themselves to the lifeforce of the first individual to use them while they are blank. If someone who has one dies, his object blanks out. This will allow hit points to inflict some physical damage as combat wears on and make more sense, like they did in previous editions.
Personally, I'd go with a parasite. Why? Parasites are cool, mostly. Besides, then the players won't even have to know about it. I know that knocks out the whole "stolen" idea (though they could still be suppressed) but it also means that you could still explain a warlord's ability to heal (assuming warlords/clerics can still heal the players when they lose their objects.)
But mostly it's because parasites are always fun. Maybe the players could even find out they have parasites, try to get rid of them, and suddenly find themselves screwed out of healing. That would be darn funny, particularly the scene where they're trying to shove the parasite back into wherever they took it out of
Personally, I'd go with a parasite. Why? Parasites are cool, mostly. Besides, then the players won't even have to know about it. I know that knocks out the whole "stolen" idea (though they could still be suppressed) but it also means that you cou
Okay.. the healing in 4e is not realistic.. it's not meant to be. We're talking about fantasy superheroes here. Even at first level a character is a hero in classical and mythical terms
And classical heroes got hurt badly all the time. What's your point?
You want to know what the definition of a hero is in realistic terms? A hero is someone who gets other people killed. You can look it up later
They also got themselves killed fairly often as well.
All this arguing about D&D not being gritty enough and such.. really. I hate to say this, but there are hundreds of game systems out there. Some do better in different settings. D&D is not about realism, and if you want a realistic sword and sorcery system 4e is NOT for you. However, there may be a system that is perfect for what you are looking for.
D&D is about realism. All fantasy games are about realism. That's why they have gravity, and characters can't move 100 miles in a second on foot. They add fantasy elements into the mix, but realism is a HUGE part of every fantasy game, including D&D.
I'm not saying don't play D&D, but just try to accept it for what it is. Maybe it's not what you want, but like I said there are, I'm sure, a hundred different rpg rulesets, and one will be a better fit for what you are looking for. Why not give them a try? You may just like it. D&D is just a name. If you are playing something besides D&D there's really no stigma to it.
I will never accept ANY edition of D&D(or any other RPG) for what it is. All RPG are flawed, and they always will be. Whenever I come across a flaw, I'm going to fix it.
And classical heroes got hurt badly all the time. What's your point?They also got themselves killed fairly often as well.D&D is about realism. All fantasy games are about realism. That's why they have gravity, and characters can't move 100 miles i
Meh, don't mind the system since mechanically it is sound. Also in-game it works out quite well in my head.
HP = Your fighting capacity, and ability to be physically able to fight and survive a conflict. Thus why there is bloodied mechanics to show when ability to fight has grown limited and finally when you become incapacitated and when in this state of near death, the prospect of death is more real, because this final major incapacitation can potentially cause life-threatening injuries.
Healing Surges = Your actual health, this represents how well your body, mind and the level of physical capabilities you are able to endure and press onward with. The more healing surges you use, showcases you placing extra stress on your body to push on and work at fuller capacities, as well as make minor injuries patched up.
As you use up your Healing Surges it means it is harder too reach your full fighting potential because your injuries and sheer stress on your body has begun to build up. When all your Healing Surges are gone, this is when you have reached the end of the line and your body is suffering too much to continue working at full capacity.
Meh, don't mind the system since mechanically it is sound. Also in-game it works out quite well in my head.HP = Your fighting capacity, and ability to be physically able to fight and survive a conflict. Thus why there is bloodied mechanics to show wh
And that is why PCs and NPCs operate under different mechanics.
You are making the assumption that all NPCs are unimportant to the storyline when in fact, in many scenarios they are vital to the story line. Typically stories follow three paradigms: man vs nature (we'll assume in fantasy genre that gelatinous cubes and wights fall under "nature"), man vs. self, and man vs. man.
In a story where other characters are not central to the plot or even part of it, then keeping track of wounds is not necessary. In a story where specific NPCs with real names are central-front in the plot and are featured as the primary antagonists, then keeping track of wounds recieved between battles becomes a good idea.
In general, if an NPC survives the fight, he should be considered completely "healed".
I see holes in this explaination.
I'll give an example: i'm chasing an evil mage through the forest. I catch up to him and hit him with a couple of arrows reducing him to almost zero, with a third arrow, I could kill him. He casts invisibility and flee's the scene. Now, I have to track him again and find him. I start tracking him and by the time I catch up, he's healed all his wounds because the DM assumed he's completely healed between encounters.
I hit him with two more arrows. He casts invis, and I have to track him again.
I catch up to him again, hit him with two more arrows. he casts invis and now i have to track him again.
I catch up with him again, i hit him with another arrow, he casts invis and now I have to track him again.
If that goes on, I'll have run out of arrows before he ran out of HP because they've all been shot into his body totaling up more hit points than a small dragon would have had. He now has an infinite supply of HP in a day but can only use a small amount of them at any given encounter before he dies. I however, probably don't have an infinite supply of arrows.
If not, it doesn't matter anyway. On the balance of probability, the NPC won't survive the fight, since the whole game system is deliberately skewed in favour of the PCs.
Assuming his survival or death isn't crucial to story development and additionally labors under the assumption that the fight was ever really in the favor of the PCs as sometimes players deliberately bite off way more than they can chew, but that's not really important to the discussion at hand.
The real skill is skewing it by the correct amount, you don't want fair fights (or fewer than 10% of campaigns will make it past 4 encounters), but you don't want walkovers either.
I define fair fight as both parties playing by the same rules.
Which I admit, not all fights in 4e are going to be "fair" but I'm willing to make allowances for players using Action Points. That only makes sense to me in a kind of karmic fashion: after all, if something bad is going to happen to somebody in game in a random small town or forest or in the middle of the desert its probably going to happen to a player. So things have to go their way sometime right?
All in all, a person could make the argument that in a good game, nothing that happens to the players in the grand scheme is really fair. To that end, my popular recurring NPCs follow the same rules; granted, I don't exactly keep track of their bank accounts, but I quarter inch their HP totals in and out of combat because I know the players are doing the same thing.
Most GMs are either partial towards the players or partial towards their NPCs. Granted the second kind are alot worse than the first, but why the heck should players want the DM to do them favors when it doesn't make logical sense or fit into the storyline? Because too many players are conditioned to accept handouts from DMs. I've taken some of the worst cheating, monty haul players and turned them into
Relying on DM fiat or Deus Ex Machina to get past a problem is just like typing in a cheat code on a game. It's lame and it's a short cut. Getting XP awards for something you needed help from the DM to accomplish is like getting a medal of valor for an act of god.
The only time I ever go out of my way to help the players in a game is when I, as DM, have made a big mistake like an absent minded math mistake during a battle that gives a monster or NPC a huge advantage they shouldn't have had (everybody makes mistakes).
You are making the assumption that all NPCs are unimportant to the storyline when in fact, in many scenarios they are vital to the story line. Typically stories follow three paradigms: man vs nature (we'll assume in fantasy genre that gelatinous cub
You are making the assumption that all NPCs are unimportant to the storyline when in fact, in many scenarios they are vital to the story line. Typically stories follow three paradigms: man vs nature (we'll assume in fantasy genre that gelatinous cubes and wights fall under "nature"), man vs. self, and man vs. man.
In a story where other characters are not central to the plot or even part of it, then keeping track of wounds is not necessary. In a story where specific NPCs with real names are central-front in the plot and are featured as the primary antagonists, then keeping track of wounds recieved between battles becomes a good idea.
I see holes in this explaination.
I'll give an example: i'm chasing an evil mage through the forest. I catch up to him and hit him with a couple of arrows reducing him to almost zero, with a third arrow, I could kill him. He casts invisibility and flee's the scene. Now, I have to track him again and find him. I start tracking him and by the time I catch up, he's healed all his wounds because the DM assumed he's completely healed between encounters.
I hit him with two more arrows. He casts invis, and I have to track him again.
I catch up to him again, hit him with two more arrows. he casts invis and now i have to track him again.
I catch up with him again, i hit him with another arrow, he casts invis and now I have to track him again.
If that goes on, I'll have run out of arrows before he ran out of HP because they've all been shot into his body totaling up more hit points than a small dragon would have had. He now has an infinite supply of HP in a day but can only use a small amount of them at any given encounter before he dies. I however, probably don't have an infinite supply of arrows.
Assuming his survival or death isn't crucial to story development and additionally labors under the assumption that the fight was ever really in the favor of the PCs as sometimes players deliberately bite off way more than they can chew, but that's not really important to the discussion at hand.
I define fair fight as both parties playing by the same rules.
Which I admit, not all fights in 4e are going to be "fair" but I'm willing to make allowances for players using Action Points. That only makes sense to me in a kind of karmic fashion: after all, if something bad is going to happen to somebody in game in a random small town or forest or in the middle of the desert its probably going to happen to a player. So things have to go their way sometime right?
All in all, a person could make the argument that in a good game, nothing that happens to the players in the grand scheme is really fair. To that end, my popular recurring NPCs follow the same rules; granted, I don't exactly keep track of their bank accounts, but I quarter inch their HP totals in and out of combat because I know the players are doing the same thing.
Most GMs are either partial towards the players or partial towards their NPCs. Granted the second kind are alot worse than the first, but why the heck should players want the DM to do them favors when it doesn't make logical sense or fit into the storyline? Because too many players are conditioned to accept handouts from DMs. I've taken some of the worst cheating, monty haul players and turned them into
Relying on DM fiat or Deus Ex Machina to get past a problem is just like typing in a cheat code on a game. It's lame and it's a short cut. Getting XP awards for something you needed help from the DM to accomplish is like getting a medal of valor for an act of god.
The only time I ever go out of my way to help the players in a game is when I, as DM, have made a big mistake like an absent minded math mistake during a battle that gives a monster or NPC a huge advantage they shouldn't have had (everybody makes mistakes).
There is NOTHING in 4e that keeps you from playing this way. They won't even come to your house and take your books.
There is NOTHING in 4e that keeps you from playing this way. They won't even come to your house and take your books.
And classical heroes got hurt badly all the time. What's your point?
That the developers of 4e have designed the game so that at 1st level, your character is a heroic figure. They are more than the average farmer that gets swept into the action - they are special (at least that's what their mothers say) There are people that want to play such games where the pc's are all just average people. 4e, while not specifically invalidating this idea, has said that the pc's are not average the are better than most people, that's why they are being played.
They also got themselves killed fairly often as well.
And thus a quote from Serenity was wasted... :P
D&D is about realism. All fantasy games are about realism. That's why they have gravity, and characters can't move 100 miles in a second on foot. They add fantasy elements into the mix, but realism is a HUGE part of every fantasy game, including D&D.
The gravity and such is probably, at least how I see it, more of constants so that people can understand the game, as the human mindset, for the most part, doesn't think outside certain parameters. This is one of the reasons most races in fantasy and science fiction are generally humanoid, the reader can relate to the character better, and the mindset of such races is generally, very human. While some writers have taken different morality and mindsets into account, I have found that many do not, because if you risk a chance of alienating the audience - no pun intended - and they may not understand the motivations of the enemy and lose interest. So, like I said some things are constants for comprehension more, for the ease of understanding of the majority.
But D&D is far from realistic. If you get hit by a sword in real life, chances are you will die. In D&D not so much, depending on how you define hp, but that's a different argument. If you get hit with a ball of fire in real life, chances are you might be going to a burn ward, even if you only get blasted by the heat from such. In D&D, once again, not so much. You don't roll for infection or get broken bones from a fall in D&D and I'm sure there are countless other examples. But, most of these are purposefully left out of the game, because getting hurt like that, at least as far as I can see in the developers eyes, would slow down the game. And that's not what 4e is about. Are there RPG's that do take stuff like that into account? Yes. But not D&D, if you want those 'realistic' factors go play another RPG, but don't come here and say that D&D is wrong because you want that in YOUR game.
I will never accept ANY edition of D&D(or any other RPG) for what it is. All RPG are flawed, and they always will be. Whenever I come across a flaw, I'm going to fix it.
But what you see as a flaw, may not be what I see is a flaw. Who is right? Both of us, actually. So when people come on here, or in real life say that something is wrong - really it's wrong for them, not everyone.
All I was trying to say is that, if you don't like what 4e is doing don't play. The constant whining and bickering does nothing. I know people like to whine about things -especially online- but there comes a point when, I think, people should realize that the game is not for them and rather than try to change it to better suit their needs, they shouldn't be afraid to look somewhere else and possibly give something else a try. They may just like it, and it may be a better suit for what they want out of a game.
To use another analogy, think of an RPG system (in this case) D&D as a woman* you are attracted to her initially, but as time goes on you see that there are many things that you don't like about her, but you've been with her a long time. Trying to change her is just going to cause problems and conflict, so why not look inwards on what you really want and act on it. Sure it may be hard to leave her, but in the long run it may be for the best. If you leave on good terms, you hopefully, can look back with fond memories of how things were fun for a time, but you have to move on because it's the right time. If you stayed, you'd only end up hurting her and yourselves because of it. Trying to change someone else seems like the easier solution, but it isn't. It's easier, in the long run, to change yourself. But people don't like to admit they are wrong, and they stay together and be miserable where they should have parted ways amicably and found another that was right for them.
*I did not use a relationship with a woman as an example because I hate women, or for any other reason other than I'm a heterosexual man, and the analogy makes sense to me. I'm not going to pander to any sense of political correctness just to please people. If I write something I will say he, instead of them, because I'm a guy. If you don't like that. Tough. It's your problem not mine. If what I write bugs you so much, just replace woman with man, her with he or person and them if you're really picky but don't whine to me about it because, frankly, I don't care.
That the developers of 4e have designed the game so that at 1st level, your character is a heroic figure. They are more than the average farmer that gets swept into the action - they are special (at least that's what their mothers say) There are peo
That the developers of 4e have designed the game so that at 1st level, your character is a heroic figure. They are more than the average farmer that gets swept into the action - they are special (at least that's what their mothers say) There are people that want to play such games where the pc's are all just average people. 4e, while not specifically invalidating this idea, has said that the pc's are not average the are better than most people, that's why they are being played.
And still, heroic figures, first level or higher, still get injured.
The gravity and such is probably, at least how I see it, more of constants so that people can understand the game, as the human mindset, for the most part, doesn't think outside certain parameters. This is one of the reasons most races in fantasy and science fiction are generally humanoid, the reader can relate to the character better, and the mindset of such races is generally, very human. While some writers have taken different morality and mindsets into account, I have found that many do not, because if you risk a chance of alienating the audience - no pun intended - and they may not understand the motivations of the enemy and lose interest. So, like I said some things are constants for comprehension more, for the ease of understanding of the majority.
But D&D is far from realistic. If you get hit by a sword in real life, chances are you will die. In D&D not so much, depending on how you define hp, but that's a different argument. If you get hit with a ball of fire in real life, chances are you might be going to a burn ward, even if you only get blasted by the heat from such. In D&D, once again, not so much. You don't roll for infection or get broken bones from a fall in D&D and I'm sure there are countless other examples. But, most of these are purposefully left out of the game, because getting hurt like that, at least as far as I can see in the developers eyes, would slow down the game. And that's not what 4e is about. Are there RPG's that do take stuff like that into account? Yes. But not D&D, if you want those 'realistic' factors go play another RPG, but don't come here and say that D&D is wrong because you want that in YOUR game.
Hello. Did you even read what I said? I stated quite clearly that TOO MUCH REALISM IS BAD. However, some is good. Most of where D&D breaks realism, is through magic. Healing surges and hit points are NOT magic, at least not as written.
All I was trying to say is that, if you don't like what 4e is doing don't play.
Or change it.
And still, heroic figures, first level or higher, still get injured.The gravity and such is probably, at least how I see it, more of constants so that people can understand the game, as the human mindset, for the most part, doesn't think outside cert
And still, heroic figures, first level or higher, still get injured.
Depends, like I said, how you define injury. Isn't a broken arm or leg, sucking chest wound, or having an arrow lodged in ones lung an injury? D&D is not designed, at least by WotC, to have injuries such as this. They have made the concious decision to make HP not an actual measure of physical damage. Hence, we don't have sucking chest wounds, and collapsed lungs in the game. A PC is more likely, for whatever reason, able to survive combat, where I'm sure a commoner should die by being stabbed. WotC has decided to make 1st level characters superheros. Not, Superman level superheroes, but more like Batman Year One superheroes.
Hello. Did you even read what I said? I stated quite clearly that TOO MUCH REALISM IS BAD. However, some is good. Most of where D&D breaks realism, is through magic. Healing surges and hit points are NOT magic, at least not as written.
A couple of things. One. Please leave try to the antagonistic attitude out of this, I'm not trying to attack you or how you feel about things. While I have no problem with you disagreeing with me, I don't take kindly to people being rude. You may not have intended this, but regardless that's how it comes off to me.
Now, to quote this:
Maxperson wrote:
D&D is about realism. All fantasy games are about realism. That's why they have gravity, and characters can't move 100 miles in a second on foot. They add fantasy elements into the mix, but realism is a HUGE part of every fantasy game, including D&D.
I highlighted the one part, but I don't believe anywhere in there was anything about too much realism being bad. Two. How do you know that there isn't some magic behind healing surges? Maybe we haven't read anything in any previews or such, but since the books aren't out, there may be such a passage in them that states that Players have some fate or special characteristic that makes them heal faster. After all, WotC has said that 1st level characters are better than average people. While npc's and monsters do have healing surges, they don't have as many as player characters.
Or change it.
Fine, change it. But don't come here, or wherever else and tell everyone that it's wrong, just because you* think it is. If you have the time and you want to spend it re-writing the game to better suit you, fine. Personally, I'd try a different system that may be more what I'm looking for. And I've done this very thing. Sometimes it hasn't worked out, but sometimes it has. Broadening your horizons is never a bad thing IMHO, but I fine that far to many are more than willing to change what they liked before, that is different than what they remember or they don't see the full picture because the rules aren't out yet, to suit them than to take a step and try something new. I've seen lots of people on this very forum that have said that 4e is NOT D&D in anything other than name. Okay, fine. But you don't have to play D&D. It's not the only RPG out there.
* when I say you, I don't mean you as to centre out a specific individual, but as a generalization for people reading this.
Depends, like I said, how you define injury. Isn't a broken arm or leg, sucking chest wound, or having an arrow lodged in ones lung an injury? D&D is not designed, at least by WotC, to have injuries such as this. They have made the concious decisi
You are making the assumption that all NPCs are unimportant to the storyline when in fact
(1) "important to storyline" is not the same thing as "needs PC-level statistical detail". The captive boy-prince may be vital to the story, but if he's never required to make a skill check or engage in combat then his mechanical stats are irrelevant. In contrast, we don't give two hoots about Owlbear #3's background, but we do want to know what he can do in this combat right now.
(2) I specifically mentioned that a few characters will have PC-level mechanical detail.
BeerMan5000 wrote:
In a story where specific NPCs with real names are central-front in the plot and are featured as the primary antagonists, then keeping track of wounds recieved between battles becomes a good idea.
Just like one does for PCs. Oh, wait, PCs recover any meaningful expendable resources every day. Any ongoing wounds are flavour.
BeerMan5000 wrote:
I see holes in this explaination.
(snip series of skirmishes with opponent)
(1) This sort of extended multi-encounter is the exception, rather than the norm. Attempting to design specific mechanics for every exception that you can think of leads to bloated and unuseable rulesets.
(2) You're assuming that there isn't some guideline given for non-PC characters about how many healing surges an opponent can spend. I'm not arguing that such a mechanic shouldn't or doesn't exist, merely that for the most part it's extraneous.
Some of the current idiocy with packet labelling is the assumption that we should spell out explicitly for 0.01% of the population what the remaining 99.99% considers bleedingly obvious. At some point, the system has to say "we've taken you far enough; extrapolate the exceptions for yourself".
(1) "important to storyline" is not the same thing as "needs PC-level statistical detail". The captive boy-prince may be vital to the story, but if he's never required to make a skill check or engage in combat then his mechanical stats are irrelevan
Note, I didn't say they were completely realistic or made total sense, just that they made MORE sense than 4ed. That leaves a lot of room. :::grin:::
To me, the fact that they required a significant amount of rest to heal, gave them more realism and sense than 4ed does.
Requiring time to heal is only realistic if HP represents purely physical damage, which it clearly does not, even in the current editions. Requiring a month to recover abstract concepts such as luck, skill (turning a serious blow into a lesser one), divine favor, etc., doesn't make any more sense than if 4e introduced a specific injury system and allowed characters with broken bones to heal after a 5 minute rest.
The healing surges make sense when viewed through the context of what HP really represent. In fact, this would be better termed "recovery" than healing, since healing implies physical damage (not to say HP don't represent some physical damage, but it can't be mostly physical, otherwise PC death would be a lot more common).
I believe that the best HP and healing surge explanation (can't remember who posted it) described it as "plot armor". The PCs can survive all kinds of crazy things, just like heroes in a book or movie, but eventually so much crap happens that it breaks suspension of disbelief. By this point, the characters are like the heroes at the end of the movie, where they finally start to look hurt and tired. They can no longer recover from falls off of buildings (no more healing surges), and they are in real danger of dying.
Requiring time to heal is only realistic if HP represents purely physical damage, which it clearly does not, even in the current editions. Requiring a month to recover abstract concepts such as luck, skill (turning a serious blow into a lesser one),
(1) This sort of extended multi-encounter is the exception, rather than the norm. Attempting to design specific mechanics for every exception that you can think of leads to bloated and unuseable rulesets.
I would also point out that in this extended multi-encounter example that the opponent would not be likely to have the 5 minutes to sit down and rest that he needed to spend healing surges to heal himself up.
I would also point out that in this extended multi-encounter example that the opponent would not be likely to have the 5 minutes to sit down and rest that he needed to spend healing surges to heal himself up.
The ability for a PC to heal himself innately through no magic or mundane talent is really odd and jarring to me.
To those who argue that hit points don't reflect health...
Here's what the 3.5 PHB says about hit points:
PHB135]Hit Points Hit points represent how much damage a character can take before falling unconscious or dying.
The SRD has this to say:
Hit Points Hit points represent how much damage a character can take before falling unconscious or dying.[/quote] The SRD has this to say:
SRD]When your hit point total reaches 0, you’ wrote:
When your hit point total reaches 0, you’re disabled. When it reaches -1, you’re dying. When it gets to -10, you’re dead.
That's pretty much it. Weapons do damage, which reduces hit points. Lose enough hit points and you die.
You may not think of hit points as a measure of health, but that's what they are. Rationalizations about how a Healing Surge is just gritting your teeth doesn't really hold water when you consider that the PC isn't just dealing with the pain of the damage he currently has -- he is actually restoring hit points so he can take even more damage. And he's using something called a "Healing Surge" to do it.
So it is healing taking place. Spontaneous, regenerative healing. Well, it requires a short break I think. To be fair.
It's just odd to me that's all. I think I could like it when it's used in-game. But the *idea* of it seems hard to believe. I want the party to heal, so they just spontaneously do? I know, we're all Bruce Willis now. Bruce Willis is the new Chuck Norris.
The ability for a PC to heal himself innately through no magic or mundane talent is really odd and jarring to me. To those who argue that hit points don't reflect health...Here's what the 3.5 PHB says about hit points:The SRD has this to say:That's p
Well, this changes slightly your idea of HP, but still deals with PCs being injured, so what you think of this idea (I posted it on previous page):
HP = Your fighting capacity, and ability to be physically able to fight and survive a conflict. Thus why there is bloodied mechanics to show when ability to fight has grown limited and finally when you become incapacitated and when in this state of near death, the prospect of death is more real, because this final major incapacitation can potentially cause life-threatening injuries.
Healing Surges = Your actual health, this represents how well your body, mind and the level of physical capabilities you are able to endure and press onward with. The more healing surges you use, showcases you placing extra stress on your body to push on and work at fuller capacities, as well as make minor injuries patched up.
As you use up your Healing Surges it means it is harder too reach your full fighting potential because your injuries and sheer stress on your body has begun to build up. When all your Healing Surges are gone, this is when you have reached the end of the line and your body is suffering too much to continue working at full capacity.
Also, the death rules... Don't really account for much now, since well... The death rules are so much different now.
Well, this changes slightly your idea of HP, but still deals with PCs being injured, so what you think of this idea (I posted it on previous page):Also, the death rules... Don't really account for much now, since well... The death rules are so much d
Healing surges seems like a neat-o thing but do they make any sense? I mean, take this for example:
DM: "The goblin kicks over the table and stabs Kodos in the thigh with his sword! The wound is deep and blood pours down your leg, splashing onto the floor."
Kodos: "Ouch! That hurts! I'm almost dead! I'll.... clench my teeth real hard and have a heal surge."
DM: "Uh... okay... The wound in your thigh suddenly closes and the bleeding stops and you feel better..."
The mechanic is convenient but really leaves me scratching my head as to how it can be explained. If it were magic, no problem. Miracles from the gods? Sure. But how a whole party of adventurers who just had the crap beat out of them with claws, swords, fire and hammers can just rest under a tree for six hours and then be totally healed and smiles is a bit much.
keep in mind hit points are not really how much actual damage a person can take in a physical sense, so much as how good the charicters plot shields are.
keep in mind hit points are not really how much actual damage a person can take in a physical sense, so much as how good the charicters plot shields are.
keep in mind hit points are not really how much actual damage a person can take in a physical sense, so much as how good the charicters plot shields are.
Hmmm I really dislike even the idea of "plot armour/shield" outside of a novel or a movie/tv series
Hmmm I really dislike even the idea of "plot armour/shield" outside of a novel or a movie/tv series
(1) This sort of extended multi-encounter is the exception, rather than the norm. Attempting to design specific mechanics for every exception that you can think of leads to bloated and unuseable rulesets.
You mean like 3.5 and every edition before that was unuseable?
Simpler, is not always better. Why not just play things like larpers do and play rocks, paper scissors for everything? I'll answer that, because it's lame. Granted healing surges aren't lame on the same magnitude, but they are lame in much the same way the basic DND boxed sets were lame.
(2) You're assuming that there isn't some guideline given for non-PC characters about how many healing surges an opponent can spend. I'm not arguing that such a mechanic shouldn't or doesn't exist, merely that for the most part it's extraneous.
You said that it wasn't important. I was arguing from the standpoint that it is important.
Some of the current idiocy with packet labelling is the assumption that we should spell out explicitly for 0.01% of the population what the remaining 99.99% considers bleedingly obvious. At some point, the system has to say "we've taken you far enough; extrapolate the exceptions for yourself".
I plan on it, but it bothers me that such obvious issues as this are going unaddressed in the name of creating a new edition of the game. These "exceptions" will be addressed in further editions and errata; i'm sure of that.
More rules will be piled on, number of and events allowing "healing surges" will probably be changed eventually. Hopefully, the name will be the first thing changed, because it just sounds dumb; like the whole party going into some Dragon Ball Z screaming fest while they harness their "chi" between battles.
While humorous, it's still pretty lame.
Here are some things that sound better than "Healing Surge" to describe recovering hit points naturally:
as well as any conjugation or form of the words one can think of; including "corn nuts" if indeed it can be conjugated.
You mean like 3.5 and every edition before that was unuseable?Simpler, is not always better. Why not just play things like larpers do and play rocks, paper scissors for everything? I'll answer that, because it's lame. Granted healing surges aren't
Depends, like I said, how you define injury. Isn't a broken arm or leg, sucking chest wound, or having an arrow lodged in ones lung an injury? D&D is not designed, at least by WotC, to have injuries such as this. They have made the concious decision to make HP not an actual measure of physical damage. Hence, we don't have sucking chest wounds, and collapsed lungs in the game. A PC is more likely, for whatever reason, able to survive combat, where I'm sure a commoner should die by being stabbed. WotC has decided to make 1st level characters superheros. Not, Superman level superheroes, but more like Batman Year One superheroes.
Batman has been laid out and often has to rest to recover from his injuries. Note, I'm not suggesting sucking chest wounds, only injuries that are more than a scrape that when combined WITH those hit points that are no physical, would result in a reason why a PC would be down and dying at 0/-1. Some deep cuts that bleed profusely, but on areas that don't affect the PC from doing his actions. Eventually, bleeding cuts slow down and cause someone to lose conciousness(down and dying), but sometimes, they slow or stop on their own(stabilization), and baring magic, they always require time to heal(hit point recover over days, not 6 hours). These all make for a system that makes a lot more sense than the one 4ed has put out.
One. Please leave try to the antagonistic attitude out of this, I'm not trying to attack you or how you feel about things. While I have no problem with you disagreeing with me, I don't take kindly to people being rude. You may not have intended this, but regardless that's how it comes off to me.
I appologize. It looked to me like you were simply ignoring what I said ,and answering your own idea of what you wanted my words to mean.
I highlighted the one part, but I don't believe anywhere in there was anything about too much realism being bad.
This I also appologize for. I've had this discussion in so many threads, and pointed out how too much realism was bad, that it can be hard to remember where I said what.
Two. How do you know that there isn't some magic behind healing surges? Maybe we haven't read anything in any previews or such, but since the books aren't out, there may be such a passage in them that states that Players have some fate or special characteristic that makes them heal faster. After all, WotC has said that 1st level characters are better than average people. While npc's and monsters do have healing surges, they don't have as many as player characters.
I wouldn't make sense for them to be magic in the format that they have been presented. Rogues, warriors, and other classes with healing surges, are completely non-magical classes. Further, they are based off of constitution, implying that physical(not magical) health is the key. If they were magical in nature, I'd expect wisdom, long equated with will power and divine healing magic, to be the key stat.
Batman has been laid out and often has to rest to recover from his injuries. Note, I'm not suggesting sucking chest wounds, only injuries that are more than a scrape that when combined WITH those hit points that are no physical, would result in a re
Requiring time to heal is only realistic if HP represents purely physical damage, which it clearly does not, even in the current editions. Requiring a month to recover abstract concepts such as luck, skill (turning a serious blow into a lesser one), divine favor, etc., doesn't make any more sense than if 4e introduced a specific injury system and allowed characters with broken bones to heal after a 5 minute rest.
No, time to heal is realistic if ANY of the damage is physical(more than scrapes and bruises). That part of it is physical makes even more sense when you consider that it took a week(if that) to heal fully.
The healing surges make sense when viewed through the context of what HP really represent. In fact, this would be better termed "recovery" than healing, since healing implies physical damage (not to say HP don't represent some physical damage, but it can't be mostly physical, otherwise PC death would be a lot more common).
ONLY if you then add some pure physical body points or something for when you reach 0 hit points. It makes ZERO sense for every PC to have only 1 physical hit point, and start dying if an ant bites them too hard. The way 4ed is currently written, hit points and healing surges make no sense.
I believe that the best HP and healing surge explanation (can't remember who posted it) described it as "plot armor". The PCs can survive all kinds of crazy things, just like heroes in a book or movie, but eventually so much crap happens that it breaks suspension of disbelief. By this point, the characters are like the heroes at the end of the movie, where they finally start to look hurt and tired. They can no longer recover from falls off of buildings (no more healing surges), and they are in real danger of dying.
No amount of plot armor justification can explain away the fact that heroes are so pathetically weak, that they all will start dying with a single hit point of damage.
No, time to heal is realistic if ANY of the damage is physical(more than scrapes and bruises). That part of it is physical makes even more sense when you consider that it took a week(if that) to heal fully.ONLY if you then add some pure physical bod
Batman has been laid out and often has to rest to recover from his injuries. Note, I'm not suggesting sucking chest wounds, only injuries that are more than a scrape that when combined WITH those hit points that are no physical, would result in a reason why a PC would be down and dying at 0/-1. Some deep cuts that bleed profusely, but on areas that don't affect the PC from doing his actions. Eventually, bleeding cuts slow down and cause someone to lose conciousness(down and dying), but sometimes, they slow or stop on their own(stabilization), and baring magic, they always require time to heal(hit point recover over days, not 6 hours). These all make for a system that makes a lot more sense than the one 4ed has put out.
Batman is a fair example. However, I have read some issues where Batman just fights through the pain, pretty much ignoring it -even with broken bones. While, I can agree that an individual should take time to heal, perhaps, such healing is best left to in between adventures. I also think that the characters in 4e are a bit more exceptional than even Batman.
I appologize. It looked to me like you were simply ignoring what I said ,and answering your own idea of what you wanted my words to mean.
This I also appologize for. I've had this discussion in so many threads, and pointed out how too much realism was bad, that it can be hard to remember where I said what.
Apology accepted, and thank you.
I wouldn't make sense for them to be magic in the format that they have been presented. Rogues, warriors, and other classes with healing surges, are completely non-magical classes. Further, they are based off of constitution, implying that physical(not magical) health is the key. If they were magical in nature, I'd expect wisdom, long equated with will power and divine healing magic, to be the key stat.
I was just putting a theory out there. We know that Epic characters have some powers that can be activated when they die. So, I think PC's are ones that have a destiny even before they get to epic levels. So, while a form of magic that we are accustomed to doesn't fit with the healing, perhaps the developers have put forth something new.
As to the plot armour idea, I don't think it's that unrealistic that someone could be killed with a single point of damage from a weapon designed to kill you. While I think that is a bit too extreme, I think the problem with the HP system boils down to the names of the abilities - Healing Surges, Hit Points, Second wind, etc. Perhaps if instead of these titles, hit points was called Fate or Karma, healing surges/second wind was called tempting fate or something similar. If names such as these were used, I think many of the debates wouldn't be around. But, then again changing the names of these abilities (and ipso facto, their meaning) would be a far deviation from D&D as we know it. Killing a sacred cow, as it were.
Batman is a fair example. However, I have read some issues where Batman just fights through the pain, pretty much ignoring it -even with broken bones. While, I can agree that an individual should take time to heal, perhaps, such healing is best lef
Batman is a fair example. However, I have read some issues where Batman just fights through the pain, pretty much ignoring it -even with broken bones. While, I can agree that an individual should take time to heal, perhaps, such healing is best left to in between adventures. I also think that the characters in 4e are a bit more exceptional than even Batman.
Heh. Can't agree with you there. Batman may be the finest example of a normal human achieving the most(epic levels) that a human can achieve.
I was just putting a theory out there. We know that Epic characters have some powers that can be activated when they die. So, I think PC's are ones that have a destiny even before they get to epic levels. So, while a form of magic that we are accustomed to doesn't fit with the healing, perhaps the developers have put forth something new.
As to the plot armour idea, I don't think it's that unrealistic that someone could be killed with a single point of damage from a weapon designed to kill you. While I think that is a bit too extreme, I think the problem with the HP system boils down to the names of the abilities - Healing Surges, Hit Points, Second wind, etc. Perhaps if instead of these titles, hit points was called Fate or Karma, healing surges/second wind was called tempting fate or something similar. If names such as these were used, I think many of the debates wouldn't be around. But, then again changing the names of these abilities (and ipso facto, their meaning) would be a far deviation from D&D as we know it. Killing a sacred cow, as it were.
I decided to create an object that would be used to surge, essentially making surges magical healing. It fixes all my issues.
Heh. Can't agree with you there. Batman may be the finest example of a normal human achieving the most(epic levels) that a human can achieve.I decided to create an object that would be used to surge, essentially making surges magical healing. It f
Heh. Can't agree with you there. Batman may be the finest example of a normal human achieving the most(epic levels) that a human can achieve.
Uumm.. no? Batman might be sniffing at Paragon levels, or sometimes he's almost epic, but he'll always be second to Superman.
Judge Dredd - he's gone epic by sheer force of will.. but he's only been laid out once..
Uumm.. no? Batman might be sniffing at Paragon levels, or sometimes he's almost epic, but he'll always be second to Superman.Judge Dredd - he's gone epic by sheer force of will.. but he's only been laid out once.. ;)
Uumm.. no? Batman might be sniffing at Paragon levels, or sometimes he's almost epic, but he'll always be second to Superman.
Not even close, man. Batman has achieved what he did through pure skill and willpower. Superman was born with his powers, and never had to do anything for them. Superman is the one who is not epic.
Not even close, man. Batman has achieved what he did through pure skill and willpower. Superman was born with his powers, and never had to do anything for them. Superman is the one who is not epic.
Not even close, man. Batman has achieved what he did through pure skill and willpower. Superman was born with his powers, and never had to do anything for them. Superman is the one who is not epic.
Rather that Superman has the Monty Haul DM and got to start as level 20-21, while Batman has one of those DMs that forces you to work hard for your levels
Rather that Superman has the Monty Haul DM and got to start as level 20-21, while Batman has one of those DMs that forces you to work hard for your levels ;)
In 3.5 the amount of damage required to kill you was the same wheter it was done in one round, one encounter, or spread out over the whole day.
In 4E if you get one amount of damage, 100% HP, in one round, then you go down.
If you get another amount, 125% HP, in one encounter, you go down.
If you get a third much higher amount over the whole day, 350% HP (for a lvl 1 fighter with 12con), then you finally go down.
This is much more analogus to real life. If you slap me 50 times in 15 minutes, then I go down. If you slap me inttermittenly over the day, it will take a lot more to put me down.
Healing Surges make D&D much more realistic.In 3.5 the amount of damage required to kill you was the same wheter it was done in one round, one encounter, or spread out over the whole day.In 4E if you get one amount of damage, 100% HP, in one round, t
In 3.5 the amount of damage required to kill you was the same wheter it was done in one round, one encounter, or spread out over the whole day.
In 4E if you get one amount of damage, 100% HP, in one round, then you go down.
If you get another amount, 125% HP, in one encounter, you go down.
If you get a third much higher amount over the whole day, 350% HP (for a lvl 1 fighter with 12con), then you finally go down.
This is much more analogus to real life. If you slap me 50 times in 15 minutes, then I go down. If you slap me inttermittenly over the day, it will take a lot more to put me down.
That's all fine and dandy, but monsters don't run around slapping people.
That's all fine and dandy, but monsters don't run around slapping people.
Heh. Can't agree with you there. Batman may be the finest example of a normal human achieving the most(epic levels) that a human can achieve.
Well, we'll have to wait till d20 modern 2.0 comes out to see if that's the case. After all, in D&D you can come back to life in Epic. Batman has yet to do that. Unless you count relaunching the character as that.. more of a reincarnation as I see it.
I decided to create an object that would be used to surge, essentially making surges magical healing. It fixes all my issues.
Fair enough. Though, I can't coerce you to do otherwise, I would suggest before you run a game read the rules and fluff, it may acceptable. My whole point is that the healing that characters do is not meant to be realistic, it's meant to keep the character alive so they player doesn't have to roll up a new character every session. :P
Ztyx wrote:
Rather that Superman has the Monty Haul DM and got to start as level 20-21, while Batman has one of those DMs that forces you to work hard for your levels
As to Batman/Superman, I totally disagree with the above. Superman and Batman are roughly equal in terms of power. In fact, I'd say that Batman will 99% of the time have the upper hand. In a stand up head-to-head fight, sure Supes is gonna win, but if Batman has time to prepare, which he almost always does, he's going find a piece of Kryptonite and carry it in a lead pouch until he needs it. Hell, in the current chronology, I believe Batman does just that. In another continuity, Batman beat Superman (with the help of a one armed Green Arrow)
See, whiles Supes has many powers, there is also a readily available source of weakness - Kryptonite. Everyone seems to be able to find some. Batman on the other hand, has money, equipment that are almost unlimited, really only what he can carry at the time. Not to mention his impressive intelligence and skills. Batman will think things through, Supes just smashes his way in.
The hit point system will work fine depending on how the DM describes a hit. If a hit is described as piercing your skin, cutting major arteries the system doesn't stand up, because there are no penalties for such injuries. Maybe in an optional rule, but such is not provided. In fact, it was left out on purpose because the characters are meant to be action heroes and larger than life, not realistic and fragile as a human really is.
I've said before, use those long healing times and crippling injuries after the adventure, during the down time - it becomes plot more than anything. During the adventure, the hero fights through his pain, and continues on because that's what they are meant to do.
Well, we'll have to wait till d20 modern 2.0 comes out to see if that's the case. After all, in D&D you can come back to life in Epic. Batman has yet to do that. Unless you count relaunching the character as that.. more of a reincarnation as I see
I don't know how anyone took the old DnD rules for hp and healing seriously anyway. Here's some examples of the kind of idiocies you get with any abstracted idea of hitpoints, as we can see in 3.5
1) A 100hp fighter (int 8) and a wizard 30hp (int 20) get into a fight with an immortal psion. The psion giggles and mindthrusts the two until each is at 1hp. A) The fighter took more mindthrusts than the wizard. Huh? B) The wizard and the fighter try to run away, slip and fall down a 10ft ledge. They die.
A is funny, but B is rather odd considering hp as...well anything. They each took a bunch of brain melting blasts, and then died to a source of physical damage that would be completely mundane to them normally (2d6 on a 100hp fighter? lol) ???
C) The wizard is rested and recovered in x days and the fighter is rested in 5x days. How does it make sense that strong, physically trained fighter who excels in body, is lying wounded for weeks when the frail pasty wizard who was in a similar state, takes a few days?
Healing surges work as a game mechanic. They make sense if you think of your tasty little hp as a fatigue and damage abstraction, rather than a raw damage abstraction. You have to. HP as pure physical harm makes no sense. Because then you have to explain exactly how the same greatsword cleave (2d6) damage that kills the peasant, the 100hp fighter, can take to the chest 33 times and be fine. Yeah - Healing Surges are Bruce Willis in Die Hard-esque. Yeah, they probably shouldn't be called healing surges. Second wind might be better. Recuperate. W/e. The point is not to squabble over the name and understand the mechanic - a mechanic that can keep a party fighting when they are roughed up a bit.
But srsly - enough with the hp as damage, if you imagined that, pleased roleplay your 300hp epic knight, tied up, and being stabbed by a 6 strength kobold. See how that works out. Kobold Coup de Graces your Knight upwards of a hundred times before he dies. His neck really really thick? Hmmm . . .
I don't know how anyone took the old DnD rules for hp and healing seriously anyway. Here's some examples of the kind of idiocies you get with any abstracted idea of hitpoints, as we can see in 3.51) A 100hp fighter (int 8) and a wizard 30hp (int 20)
As to Batman/Superman, I totally disagree with the above. Superman and Batman are roughly equal in terms of power. In fact, I'd say that Batman will 99% of the time have the upper hand. In a stand up head-to-head fight, sure Supes is gonna win, but if Batman has time to prepare, which he almost always does, he's going find a piece of Kryptonite and carry it in a lead pouch until he needs it. Hell, in the current chronology, I believe Batman does just that. In another continuity, Batman beat Superman (with the help of a one armed Green Arrow)
He said that Batman had to work for his levels - he didn't say he was lower level than Superman.
He said that Batman had to work for his levels - he didn't say he was lower level than Superman. :)
Not exactly. Yes they are heroes, but they are not indespensible. They can die, and their death won't truly ruin the movie(D&D world), only change it on occasion. There is no reason for them to be made invulnerable by plot armor.
Not exactly. Yes they are heroes, but they are not indespensible. They can die, and their death won't truly ruin the movie(D&D world), only change it on occasion. There is no reason for them to be made invulnerable by plot armor.
He said that Batman had to work for his levels - he didn't say he was lower level than Superman.
Well, to be completely honest I did imply that Superman was of a higher level than Batman.. but yes, I didn't mean by many levels. And given that Batman's probably a striker and Superman a defender, Batman would probably win if he gets to use all his abilities
Anyway, back to topic: Maxperson trying to dodge LostDM's post by focusing on one single aspect of it is pretty poor, but at least it shows that LostDM was smart and on the ball
Well, to be completely honest I did imply that Superman was of a higher level than Batman.. but yes, I didn't mean by many levels. And given that Batman's probably a striker and Superman a defender, Batman would probably win if he gets to use all his
The problem D&D comes into is that it only has a single pool of HP. Healing surges work toward allieviating that oversight in a way that is fast and easy to use (though not necessarily better.)
For comparison, concider Hero system: two types of 'hp': STUN and BODY. Each hit normally does damage to both, roughly 3 times as much STUN as BODY. Both totals then have defenses subtracted from them, which will often negate BODY damage for most hits (particularly against a tough target), leaving a few here and there slipping in, while most hits will do noticeable amounts of STUN damage. STUN knocks you out, BODY kills you. STUN damage recovers a certain amount per 12 seconds, BODY recovers the same amount per month. If you take a breather you get back some STUN but not BODY.
Up shots: the system puts limits to how much you can take in a short time, while allowing you to take more than that over a longer period of time. It's quite possible to knock someone out without outright killing them. Since STUN is the main way people are taken out of a fight, PCs can generally enter every combat the same distance from being taken out of the fight, but there is a type of damage (BODY) that accumulates over the course of several battles.
Down shots: unless there is some supernatural healing involved, PCs typically have to spend months of downtime to fully recover from grievous injuries. This is good for realism, but bad for plot: do you really want to write a plot that involves that much downtime? Supernatural healing in the game, by contrast, can get stupidly efficient. My current character can go from virge of death to full health in 7 minutes through regeneration. Another character can generally heal anyone to full health in minutes if they took a bunch of small injuries, or over the course of perhaps a week if they were nearly killed by a single huge hit, etc. The point is that supernatural healing powers reshape the timeline for the game probably more than any other ability in the game.
Compare with 3.x: As above, supernatural healing powers reshape the timeline for the game probably more than any other ability in the game. A high con barbarian could look at as much as a week or so of full bed rest to heal back naturally, or a few minutes or less to be healed by a cleric. A cleric with a day to spend acquiring and using healing spells can generally bring a party up to full health and then re-prepare combat/utility spells in those slots to go off the next day. That's assuming he was too low on spells to do so before resting/praying/etc and didn't want to burn up a wand. But unlike Hero, 3.x has no reflection of the ability to take more damage over time than in a short period.
Compare with 4e: There is a short term/long term damage distinction. However, because of the unified mechanics, short term damage is potentially deadly. Long term damage is given a scale of one day rather than one or more months. This makes sense if you look at it as hp referring to system shock, stress, etc. while real physical damage is an underlying issue that is only referenced abstractly. After taking some damage, you're on the virge of passing out from pain/stress/shock/etc, but you can grit your teeth and refocus your mind and be able to press on a bit more. If you take five minutes to rest, recover, clear your mind, let the stress hormones wear off, etc. you'll be much better off. HP more directly represents STUN in Hero system, but there's an underlying assumption that there's hidden BODY damage going on. If you fall unconcious, maybe you took enough BODY that it will end up killing you? Nobody knows, because BODY isn't being tracked, it's being abstracted. You roll some dice. If you don't end up dying then obviously not. Healing surges place a limiter that Hero doesn't have on how many times in a day you can bounce back from the stress, pain, shock, etc. and be able to endure some more blows without passing out. It's like the STUN recovery in Hero, but without being able to do it all day without limit. Also, 4e downplays the importance of supernatural healing. This again plays into the fact that the 'BODY' damage isn't being tracked, it's being abstracted. If you don't have magical healing floating around in your party, you probably should roleplay still having half healed wounds, pains from your broken ribs, etc. when you wake up after an 'extended rest', it just doesn't put you any closer to being knocked out than if you didn't have those injuries (and therefore because of the abstraction doesn't put you any closer to those rolls that determine if your untracked 'BODY' damage really is enough to kill you off yet). And if there is magical healing floating around in your party, why would anyone object to being fully healed by that overnight when it happens in other systems anyways (including 3.5)?
The problem D&D comes into is that it only has a single pool of HP. Healing surges work toward allieviating that oversight in a way that is fast and easy to use (though not necessarily better.)For comparison, concider Hero system:two types of 'hp': S
Not exactly. Yes they are heroes, but they are not indespensible. They can die, and their death won't truly ruin the movie(D&D world), only change it on occasion. There is no reason for them to be made invulnerable by plot armor.
And you'll notice that just like plot armor doesn't make characters in a story/book/movie invulnerable, HP doesn't make characters invulnerable. Plenty of characters die in both media and games even with HP/plot armor. They're just harder to kill than Random Mook #35476863.
Beyond that, "HP is plot armor" is not the same as "characters should have HP/plot armor". It simply means that claiming HP mechanics as they currently work aren't realistic and should therefore be changed is invalid, because the current mechanics aren't supposed to be realistic on any level whatsoever. They're a construct that exist solely for narrative/gaming reasons, and as long as they work on that level they're serving their intended purpose. You may disagree with that purpose, but that's an arguement to get rid of HP entirely and go with a wound chart or whatever, not to change HP mechanics.
And you'll notice that just like plot armor doesn't make characters in a story/book/movie invulnerable, HP doesn't make characters invulnerable. Plenty of characters die in both media and games even with HP/plot armor. They're just harder to kill tha
If Hit Points are not a measure of total physical damage (and I agree with this), how do you explain to your players as a DM "being hit by an arrow and taking 7 damage"
How about the possibility that getting hit is only part of the HP loss? The arrow may cause 1 or 2 points, but the shot to your ego may be worth more. I don't think anyone's suggesting that getting hit by a +2 vorpal blade can really hurt your feelings, and you could defeat and opponent by browbeating them to death.
How about the possibility that getting hit is only part of the HP loss? The arrow may cause 1 or 2 points, but the shot to your ego may be worth more. I don't think anyone's suggesting that getting hit by a +2 vorpal blade can really hurt your feel
How about the possibility that getting hit is only part of the HP loss? The arrow may cause 1 or 2 points, but the shot to your ego may be worth more. I don't think anyone's suggesting that getting hit by a +2 vorpal blade can really hurt your feelings, and you could defeat and opponent by browbeating them to death.
The whole "shot to your ego" and "the attacks depress the characters" arguments are flat and fairly worthless. How heroic is a character that has been depressed into submission by three kobolds?
Hit points are partly physical, and partly "other". The other in this case would be close calls, forced movements such as ducking out of the way, jolting blocks, etc.
The whole "shot to your ego" and "the attacks depress the characters" arguments are flat and fairly worthless. How heroic is a character that has been depressed into submission by three kobolds? Hit points are partly physical, and partly "other".
The whole "shot to your ego" and "the attacks depress the characters" arguments are flat and fairly worthless. How heroic is a character that has been depressed into submission by three kobolds?
Hit points are partly physical, and partly "other". The other in this case would be close calls, forced movements such as ducking out of the way, jolting blocks, etc.
Heh, I think I can see the "shot to the ego" bit working for certain characters. Not as a general rule, of course, but more as a comical effect - the PC who thinks of him/herself as "untouchable" and just gets frustrated when the enemies get too close. What was the line I saw on these forums a few weeks ago? "The arrow misses you, but it carries away the martini in your hand."
Heh, I think I can see the "shot to the ego" bit working for certain characters. Not as a general rule, of course, but more as a comical effect - the PC who thinks of him/herself as "untouchable" and just gets frustrated when the enemies get too clos
OK, but take into account the notion that you could get hit and emotionally (queer as it sounds) beat up by a bunch of kobolds to the point where they can move in for the kill. A few things:
1) They keep hitting. Your character feels a pass across his mind, like how do they keep getting at me? Before long, they're upon him, and all he can do is brace himself, and face it head on. There's your healing surge.
2) Realistically, by my experience, kobolds are really the redheaded stepchildren of any encounter, unless they have character levels. I know this idea is changing, but, nonetheless, it will continue that kobolds are significantly weaker. I saw it in the demo I played.
I think, on some level, we'll have to accept that part of the beating a character takes is to his or her willpower.
OK, but take into account the notion that you could get hit and emotionally (queer as it sounds) beat up by a bunch of kobolds to the point where they can move in for the kill. A few things:1) They keep hitting. Your character feels a pass across
OK, but take into account the notion that you could get hit and emotionally (queer as it sounds) beat up by a bunch of kobolds to the point where they can move in for the kill. A few things:
1) They keep hitting. Your character feels a pass across his mind, like how do they keep getting at me? Before long, they're upon him, and all he can do is brace himself, and face it head on. There's your healing surge.
2) Realistically, by my experience, kobolds are really the redheaded stepchildren of any encounter, unless they have character levels. I know this idea is changing, but, nonetheless, it will continue that kobolds are significantly weaker. I saw it in the demo I played.
I think, on some level, we'll have to accept that part of the beating a character takes is to his or her willpower.
You can accept that, I really don't have to at all. Sure overwhelming odds or a SERIES of defeats can be demoralizing to a party, but that isn't hit point damage. I can go through 10,000,000,000 campaigns and never need to force depression and/or emotional helplessness on my PCs(baring magic/powers) when I describe hit point loss.
You can accept that, I really don't have to at all. Sure overwhelming odds or a SERIES of defeats can be demoralizing to a party, but that isn't hit point damage. I can go through 10,000,000,000 campaigns and never need to force depression and/or e
2) Realistically, by my experience, kobolds are really the redheaded stepchildren of any encounter, unless they have character levels. I know this idea is changing, but, nonetheless, it will continue that kobolds are significantly weaker. I saw it in the demo I played.
In 3.x, from level 3-4 onward characters would be totally healed after each encounter that's to a little item called the wand of cure light wounds. 4th Ed just removes the wand.
This makes more sense if you envision hp loss as luck, fatigue, injury and a bunch of other factors rather than just raw physical health.
man that would be a waste... ya anyways the best thing to do was to see how much healing spells all the character had left, use them then sleep. I had no idea there was even a rule that says you can rest for 6hours and get all your hp back. The rules ive read it 3rd edition say that you get 1+your con bonus back. which makes a lot of sence, ever cut yourself badly in real life? it hurts for days and if you bump it it will bleed again. i can see anything without magic healing lots of damage it meer hours im still going to use the 1+con bonus rule cause hey after that you get all your spells back then you cast them all then sleep again.... i can see anyone being down for more that 16hours but atleast this make it makes alot more sence and keeps the picker people happy...
man that would be a waste... ya anyways the best thing to do was to see how much healing spells all the character had left, use them then sleep. I had no idea there was even a rule that says you can rest for 6hours and get all your hp back. The rul
OK, but take into account the notion that you could get hit and emotionally (queer as it sounds) beat up by a bunch of kobolds to the point where they can move in for the kill. A few things:
1) They keep hitting. Your character feels a pass across his mind, like how do they keep getting at me? Before long, they're upon him, and all he can do is brace himself, and face it head on. There's your healing surge.
2) Realistically, by my experience, kobolds are really the redheaded stepchildren of any encounter, unless they have character levels. I know this idea is changing, but, nonetheless, it will continue that kobolds are significantly weaker. I saw it in the demo I played.
I think, on some level, we'll have to accept that part of the beating a character takes is to his or her willpower.
Alright, I guess I can kind of buy the brace-yourself-and-face-it way of rationalizing healing surges. And if they give you back HP, then it seems like HP has got to be something other than just raw physical health. Because otherwise, your body is spontaneously regenerating and the only way to explain 4e is if all characters have troll heritage.
Anyway...
The disconnect for me comes in comparing the rationalization for Healing Surge to the effects of combat, or HP loss. The main way to lose HP is through combat, specifically, Attack (Success) + Damage = HP Loss. There is no mechanic on the attacker's side to support the notion that he is demoralizing you or anything except cutting you with his claw attack.
For some reason, when I read this stuff about kobolds, I started thinking about the scene in Jurrassic Park where the two kids are in the kitchen getting hunted by the raptors. They ran all around that kitchen, and each time the raptors attacked, they failed. But I could see the kids maybe getting "worn down." If HP represent something more than health, more like your spirit or energy or something, than these kids probably would have been losing HP. But they weren't because they never got hit by the raptors. Damage is the only thing that makes you lose HP.
Which takes us back to the idea that HP measures health. And if HP measures health, then Healing Surges are wacky. Of course, maybe there's some perfectly sensible explanation in the 4e PHB.
Maybe the combat section will say, "Combat is resolved in a blow-by-blow fashion, with each attack being rolled, followed by damage. However, these rolls and actions are abstractions and should not be taken literally. A successful attack and damage combination does not necessarily incur a physical wound. Instead, your "hit" may have just been a glancing blow. A target loses HP equal to the damage taken, but this does not necessarily represent physical wounds. Taking damage can mean mental anguish or a loss of will to live."
OK, that's pretty weak. But if they have a statement like that about attacks, damage, HP, etc. then it will at least be internally consistent.
Alright, I guess I can kind of buy the brace-yourself-and-face-it way of rationalizing healing surges. And if they give you back HP, then it seems like HP has got to be something other than just raw physical health. Because otherwise, your body is sp
In what way is HP actually being health any less wacky than it being a general sense of well-being and commitment to the fight? I mean, there seems to be this default assumption that hp as health makes perfect sense. Which, of course, it clearly does not. Unless you think that heroic figures stand around and get wacked by swords and scorched by fireballs and disintegration rays and who knows what with no disadvantage until, at some arbitrary point, they fall down.
If the argument is simply 'I am accustomed to X and not yet accustomed to Y' that's fine. But assigning one interpretation to logic instead of the other doesn't work very well.
In what way is HP actually being health any less wacky than it being a general sense of well-being and commitment to the fight? I mean, there seems to be this default assumption that hp as health makes perfect sense. Which, of course, it clearly do
there seems to be this default assumption that hp as health makes perfect sense. Which, of course, it clearly does not.
I think HP as health is the default assumption by most people who play D&D. That's how DMs describe damage dealt. It's how the 3.5 PHB describes HP. And in 4e, when you get to 1/2 your total HP, you reach a stage called "Bloodied." Plus, when you run out of HP, you die. I think the link between HP and health is well established.
What most people are trying to say, I think, is that HP is *more* than just health. It's your spirit, vigor, luck, and will to keep up the fight. You can use a Healing Surge to grit your teeth and bear through the pain to keep fighting. That's all well and good until you stop to think about how you lose those HP in the first place. You didn't lose your luck or spirit when you got stabbed -- you lost blood!
Scaramouce]If the argument is simply 'I am accustomed to X and not yet accustomed to Y' that's fine. But assigning one interpretation to logic instead of the other doesn't work very well.
That's not the argument at all.
Attacks deal damage, which reduces HP. Attacks almost always come from things like blades, claws, fiery magic. So when I get cut, ripped, and burnt, I am losing HP. I am taking damage. I am getting hurt. After a bit, I am bleeding, and if I get hurt much more, I will be *dead*.
So far, "HP as health" is sounding like a fine way to understand the system. If i was explaining the game to a new player, it would make sense for me to say, "So as I damage you with my longsword, you lose HP. Lose all your HP and you die." He's going to think of HP as his health.
But then I tell him he can pause mid-battle and regain a bunch of HP. Since the *loss* of HP was from battle wounds, then it seems like *regaining* HP should be from healing those wounds. In fact, the power itself is called Healing Surge! Even it admits it's a heal.
But other people want us to accept that it's not a heal at all. "It's regaining vigor, stamina, and fighting determination," they say. So when I *lose* HP, it's from getting hurt by blades and bites, but when I "regain* HP, it's my spirit and stick-to-it-iveness that's getting the boost? I want my HP to come back up the same elevator they went d wrote:
If the argument is simply 'I am accustomed to X and not yet accustomed to Y' that's fine. But assigning one interpretation to logic instead of the other doesn't work very well.[/quote] That's not the argument at all.
Attacks deal damage, which reduces HP. Attacks almost always come from things like blades, claws, fiery magic. So when I get cut, ripped, and burnt, I am losing HP. I am taking damage. I am getting hurt. After a bit, I am bleeding, and if I get hurt much more, I will be *dead*.
So far, "HP as health" is sounding like a fine way to understand the system. If i was explaining the game to a new player, it would make sense for me to say, "So as I damage you with my longsword, you lose HP. Lose all your HP and you die." He's going to think of HP as his health.
But then I tell him he can pause mid-battle and regain a bunch of HP. Since the *loss* of HP was from battle wounds, then it seems like *regaining* HP should be from healing those wounds. In fact, the power itself is called Healing Surge! Even it admits it's a heal.
But other people want us to accept that it's not a heal at all. "It's regaining vigor, stamina, and fighting determination," they say. So when I *lose* HP, it's from getting hurt by blades and bites, but when I "regain* HP, it's my spirit and stick-to-it-iveness that's getting the boost? I want my HP to come back up the same elevator they went down in.
I think HP as health is the default assumption by most people who play D&D. That's how DMs describe damage dealt. It's how the 3.5 PHB describes HP. And in 4e, when you get to 1/2 your total HP, you reach a stage called "Bloodied." Plus, when you run
I want my HP to come back up the same elevator they went down in.
This is something that I'm fine with not doing, actually. You take a few hits, such that you're bruised and bleeding a little, but then you find an inner surge of strength and are able to push yourself back up to full operating capacity (so to speak.) You're visibly wounded, but you've got some adrenaline going now, and the determination to not succumb to the pain.
To put it another way, I'm fine with a character being physically untouched at full HP, getting nicked and scarred as they drop to 75% HP, and then being at full HP post-surge despite the visible presence of some minor wounds. They're toughing it out now, rather than running on a fresh start.
If that bothers you, I suppose I can understand that, but I just wanted to point out that it's not a problem for me, and - I presume - for many of the other proponents of the Healing Surge mechanic.
This is something that I'm fine with not doing, actually. You take a few hits, such that you're bruised and bleeding a little, but then you find an inner surge of strength and are able to push yourself back up to full operating capacity (so to speak.
This is something that I'm fine with not doing, actually. You take a few hits, such that you're bruised and bleeding a little, but then you find an inner surge of strength and are able to push yourself back up to full operating capacity (so to speak.) You're visibly wounded, but you've got some adrenaline going now, and the determination to not succumb to the pain.
If you see it that way, Healing Surges should grant temporal hp. You get an extra boost of adrenaline, all right. But the adrenaline drains away after the fight, so you loose the extra hp.
I wouldn't have a problem with that. In fact, it would be easier to modify the system this way than get rid off Healing Surges entirely, which I planned to do at first.
If you see it that way, Healing Surges should grant temporal hp. You get an extra boost of adrenaline, all right. But the adrenaline drains away after the fight, so you loose the extra hp. I wouldn't have a problem with that. In fact, it would be eas
You know. Healing surges are an action. If you want to use that action with your fighter, to treat your wounds, that's more than okay with me. I'm reminded of playing football, when my teamates would cover their cuts and scrapes with sand from the feild as a quick fix. A fighter could tie off his shirt as a bandage, use a healing balm he always keeps on his person, break the arrows off. A ranger could do all sorts of stuff too, I imagine a leaf covered in goo. The cleric might just pray his personal devotion. Considering how few HP 4E charaters have, physically healing 25% of it in six seconds isn't really that far off.
You know. Healing surges are an action. If you want to use that action with your fighter, to treat your wounds, that's more than okay with me. I'm reminded of playing football, when my teamates would cover their cuts and scrapes with sand from the
You know. Healing surges are an action. If you want to use that action with your fighter, to treat your wounds, that's more than okay with me. I'm reminded of playing football, when my teamates would cover their cuts and scrapes with sand from the feild as a quick fix. A fighter could tie off his shirt as a bandage, use a healing balm he always keeps on his person, break the arrows off. A ranger could do all sorts of stuff too, I imagine a leaf covered in goo. The cleric might just pray his personal devotion. Considering how few HP 4E charaters have, physically healing 25% of it in six seconds isn't really that far off.
I'd probably be OK with that too, except what you describe would be a function of the Heal skill. Using bandages, covering cuts, applying a balm or leaf goo. These all seem like skillful acts. But Healing Surges are innate to everyone (at least to all PCs) regardless of their skills in medicine or first aid. The 'covering with sand' tactic is maybe the only case where no skill is required.
@NthDegree256: If I'm to get over this mental block that makes me go 'bleh' when I read about Healing Surges, I guess I'll have to adopt your viewpoint. And since Healing Surges are a pretty key feature to 4e, it's almost like a love it or leave it proposition. Ultimately, I think I can have fun with the system, healing surges and all, but I am still eager to see how the PHB couches its terms.
I'd probably be OK with that too, except what you describe would be a function of the Heal skill. Using bandages, covering cuts, applying a balm or leaf goo. These all seem like skillful acts. But Healing Surges are innate to everyone (at least to al
Healing Surges aren't actions. You can't "healing surge" in 4e.
You can use "Second Wind" which is an ability which uses a healing surge to get back into the fight. People don't have an innate capacity to magically heal themselves, they have a limit to the amount of healing/rousing their body can take, and they are capable of occasionally getting a second wind, which goes against that total.
A lot of the conceptual issues have is with the idea of healing surging", when healing surges are a resource, not an ability, and Second Wind, which makes complete sense, isn't brought up.
Healing Surges aren't actions. You can't "healing surge" in 4e.You can use "Second Wind" which is an ability which uses a healing surge to get back into the fight. People don't have an innate capacity to magically heal themselves, they have a limit
I don't know man. Even I can use Neosporin, and I have no training. Also, if I'm not mistaken, ever 4E charater esentially gets the heal skill. They might not get the +5, but I don't think any charater can't use it at all. And they all get better at it as they go up in level. Couldn't using a Second Wind just be a DC 0 use?
I don't know man. Even I can use Neosporin, and I have no training.Also, if I'm not mistaken, ever 4E charater esentially gets the heal skill. They might not get the +5, but I don't think any charater can't use it at all. And they all get better a
I don't know man. Even I can use Neosporin, and I have no training. Also, if I'm not mistaken, ever 4E charater esentially gets the heal skill. They might not get the +5, but I don't think any charater can't use it at all. And they all get better at it as they go up in level. Couldn't using a Second Wind just be a DC 0 use?
::shrug:: From a "technical" standpoint, it depends on what applications of Heal can be used untrained (characters in Saga Edition and - presumably - 4E do get better at untrained skills as they level, but there are still distinctions between trained and untrained uses of a skill.)
Flavor-wise, I plan on some of my Second Winds being described like that. They take a standard action, after all, which feels like enough time to "pull the arrow out of my upper arm," or "grit my teeth, rip off a piece of clothing, and quickly knot it around my leg."
::shrug:: From a "technical" standpoint, it depends on what applications of Heal can be used untrained (characters in Saga Edition and - presumably - 4E do get better at untrained skills as they level, but there are still distinctions between trained
If you see it that way, Healing Surges should grant temporal hp. You get an extra boost of adrenaline, all right. But the adrenaline drains away after the fight, so you loose the extra hp.
I wouldn't have a problem with that. In fact, it would be easier to modify the system this way than get rid off Healing Surges entirely, which I planned to do at first.
If that works for you, go for it. I personally would prefer to not track temporary HP separately from regular HP if I can avoid it, since it's just a little more overhead.
webrunner wrote:
Healing Surges aren't actions. You can't "healing surge" in 4e.
You can use "Second Wind" which is an ability which uses a healing surge to get back into the fight.
Excellent point. People forget this one quite a bit, it seems.
If that works for you, go for it. I personally would prefer to not track temporary HP separately from regular HP if I can avoid it, since it's just a little more overhead.Excellent point. People forget this one quite a bit, it seems.
Page 136 of the 3.5 PH says hit points tell you how much punishment you can take before dropping. Later, it describes the concept as being a measure of health. By the first definition, 'punishment' could mean just about anyhting.
Also, keep in mind that ability damage has been removed. That being the case, damage and healing need a much broader definition. This can include demoralization, among other things. If you start to look at it that way, healing surges make more sense. Liken demoralization to WIS or CHA damage. Granted, a sword can't do CHA damage (though it would be funky if it could), but when something hurts, different people feel it different ways at different times.
Think about two people. They both get identical cuts on their arms. One may go on, thinking it's no big deal. The other may stop, finding the pain unbearable. While the damage is virtually the same, there are intangibles that make the situation different to each person. Part of that is represented in the dice roll to randomize damage, but one can also say that the first person used a healing surge to shrug off the pain, while the other didn't.
Page 136 of the 3.5 PH says hit points tell you how much punishment you can take before dropping. Later, it describes the concept as being a measure of health. By the first definition, 'punishment' could mean just about anyhting.Also, keep in mind
Page 136 of the 3.5 PH says hit points tell you how much punishment you can take before dropping. Later, it describes the concept as being a measure of health. By the first definition, 'punishment' could mean just about anyhting.
And indeed, earlier editions were rather clear on the point of hit points being luck and skill at dodging. What has changed that is that people simply didn't enjoy "The ogre swings his club at you, rolling well enough to bypass your AC (which includes dex), but you dodge away. Loose 12 hp."
A solid "crunch" also ups the heroism feel, at cost of realism. Still, we don't want realism, as much as we say we do. We want heroism, only presented in a way that we can identify with it and pretend it is us..
And indeed, earlier editions were rather clear on the point of hit points being luck and skill at dodging. What has changed that is that people simply didn't enjoy "The ogre swings his club at you, rolling well enough to bypass your AC (which include
