|
4 years ago ::
Dec 17, 2008 - 5:28PM
#41
|
|
|
While 4e does explicitly define HP as an abstraction, it would have done wonders if the term had been changed to one that doesn't instantly conjure images of bodily harm every time a combatant hits another combatant, resulting in a loss of hit points. Given 4e's emphasis on cinematic action, I think Fate Points or Fatigue Points would be a better term.
Maybe in 5e.
TS
As long as you realize that this has applied to every edition. HP damage has never been taking 50 sword strikes directly to the head.
EVERY DAY IS HORRIBLE POST DAY ON THE D&D FORUMS.
Everything makes me ANGRY (ESPECIALLY you, reader)
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 17, 2008 - 5:30PM
#42
|
|
|
I find somewhat hilarius that you say it is ilogicall becouse real life humans do not heal at will, and as a proof you say you have played videogames and in those videogames people healed with rations, chickens and powerpacks 
EVERY DAY IS HORRIBLE POST DAY ON THE D&D FORUMS.
Everything makes me ANGRY (ESPECIALLY you, reader)
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 17, 2008 - 5:35PM
#43
|
Date Joined:
Apr 12, 2008
|
So...I should stop trying to heal my head-wounds with chickens?
In fond memory of Mark "Wrecan" Monack.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 17, 2008 - 5:44PM
#44
|
Date Joined:
Oct 15, 2002
|
The simulationist can focus on the combat rules...the minis, maps, grids, and so on.
Actually, enjoying the mechanical workings of the system despite their various leaps from realism would likely be more a gamist enterprise than a simulationist one. In fact, the OP's problem with the healing system is precisely a simulationist vs. gamist. That is, the simulationist wants a system that is accurate for the actions being taken, even if some genres make it difficult to set a standard for what 'real' ought to be like. D&D has always been on a weird battle of sorts as to how accurate it needs to be. AD&D is especially interesting to view in this light, as there were competing themes for getting systematic mechanics while still having a lot of unique systems in place for the 'special' things. 3E and 4E have each gone more with the former route, cropping off the special in favor of streamlining.
At this point, I think everyone has basically come in to state the notion that HP does not equal pure physical damage, which makes sense. That there is a 'bloodied' point suggests that after a certain point, some amount of visible damage ought to be occurring when appropriate (e.g., 'dustied' for skeleton warriors, to use a joking example from one of my games). If someone cannot accept something as sensible in a game, it's their right. I can only hope that the idea of movie logic regarding how HP works can hope to show what trope D&D is going for regarding that.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 17, 2008 - 5:51PM
#45
|
Date Joined:
Apr 12, 2008
|
At this point, I think everyone has basically come in to state the notion that HP does not equal pure physical damage, which makes sense. That there is a 'bloodied' point suggests that after a certain point, some amount of visible damage ought to be occurring when appropriate (e.g., 'dustied' for skeleton warriors, to use a joking example from one of my games). If someone cannot accept something as sensible in a game, it's their right. I can only hope that the idea of movie logic regarding how HP works can hope to show what trope D&D is going for regarding that.
Naming it "bloodied" didn't really help anything, either. One player asked me:
"If HPs are abstract, and have nothing to do with wounds and stuff, why do they call it bloodied?"
I didn't really have a good answer for him. Honestly, I had not thought about it, and he kind of put me on the spot. I told him it was simply a term in the game...nothing more. I had long, long since let go of the notion that HP = wounds, so the term "bloodied" meant no more to me than just a game term.
In fond memory of Mark "Wrecan" Monack.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 17, 2008 - 6:12PM
#46
|
|
|
Bloodied to me means that one or more visible wounds have been inflicted on the opposition, if the fight is fought with lethal weapons (as in 99% of all cases).
Doesn't stick so good with skeletons, but if your players are no idiots, they'll understand the term without much of a thought.
If you have questions about 4th Edition - don't hesitate to ask me via PMs. Join the Community Monster Manual Group and help to collect a mass of monsters which will make your life as DM easier, and your life as Player pure hell!  I am a cartographer. You can find some of my maps in my profile, free for non-commercial use. Also, if you happen to like maps or make them yourselves, join into the Cartographers Group!
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 17, 2008 - 6:31PM
#47
|
|
|
Blood is produced by marrow. Now Ghosts... What, they're black and blue now?
D&D 4E Herald and M:tG Rules Advisor I expect posters to follow the Code of Conduct, use Basic Etiquette, and avoid Poor Logic. If you don't follow these guidelines, I consider you to be disrespectful to everyone on these forums. If you respond to me without following these guidelines, I consider it a personal attack. I grew up in a bilingual household, which means I am familiar with the difficulties in adopting a different vocabulary and grammar. That doesn't bother me. Persistent use of bad capitalization, affirming the consequent, and flaming bother me a great deal. Rule that I would change: 204.1b
Show
204.1b Some effects change an object’s card type, supertype, or subtype but specify that the object retains a prior card type, supertype, or subtype. In such cases, all the object’s prior card types, supertypes, and subtypes are retained. This rule applies to effects that use the phrase “in addition to its types” or that state that something is “still a [card type].” Some effects state that an object becomes an “artifact creature”; these effects also allow the object to retain all of its prior card types and subtypes.
"Eight Edition Rules Update"
We eventually decided not to change this template, because players are used to “becomes an artifact creature,” and like it much better. Players were used to Combat on the Stack, but you got rid of that because it was unintuitive. The only phrase needed is "in addition to its types"; the others are misleading and unintuitive.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 17, 2008 - 6:32PM
#48
|
|
|
Naming it "bloodied" didn't really help anything, either. One player asked me:
"If HPs are abstract, and have nothing to do with wounds and stuff, why do they call it bloodied?"
I didn't really have a good answer for him. Honestly, I had not thought about it, and he kind of put me on the spot. I told him it was simply a term in the game...nothing more. I had long, long since let go of the notion that HP = wounds, so the term "bloodied" meant no more to me than just a game term.
I'm going to start with this part:
"If HPs are abstract, and have nothing to do with wounds and stuff, why do they call it bloodied?"
The reason that you did not have a good answer is that the notion that hitpoints have nothing to do with blood and such is nonsem=nse.
Anyone who says otherwise does not know what he (or she...) is talking about. It is that simple.
To show this, I will use a PHB quote which was illustrated earlier to prove that it is not wounds:
Originally Posted by 4th Edition Player's Handbook, p.293
Over the course of a battle, you take damage from attacks. Hit points (hp) measure your ability to stand up to punishment, turn deadly strikes into glancing blows, and stay on your feet throughout a battle. Hit points represent more than physical endurance. They represent your character’s skill, luck, and resolve—all the factors that combine to help you stay alive in a combat situation.
Note: The passage states that hitpoints represent more than physical Endurance. It does not state that they represent something other than physical endurance as I read the previous quotes to imply. (Yes, there were some who stated injuries were taken into account...)
But, to bring this back to the OP: I used to play a game called Earthdawn which was originally created by FASA and later produced by a company called Living Room Games.
In Earthdawn, there were Adepts and wizards of differing types that were analogous to the character classes of D&D. All used differing forms of magic where D&D has different 'power sources'. Instead of levels, a character progressed through 'circles' and picked only a power or two from each level/circle. Very similar to 4th ed. power choice. There were also monsters with a variety of powers.
A characters vitality determined the number of times it could heal in a day. These healing surges, so to speak, were said to be a function of earthmagic that adepts and some monsters had.
There were also non-adepts who were very similar to minions. They had few hitpoints and had to use mere skills instead of powers.
My point to all this is the following:
1. There have been other roleplaying games (actually pretty good ones) that have used similar healing methods.
2. You should think of this ability to heal as what separates the characters from the nobodies. It is their ability to tap into this power reserve and actually heal wounds as well as all the nicks, scratches and bruises that allows them to progress as heroes.
But to repeat, when you take hitpoint damage, you are really ( in game :P ) getting wounded.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 17, 2008 - 6:35PM
#49
|
|
|
But to repeat, when you take hitpoint damage, you are really ( in game :P ) getting wounded.
Color Spray.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Dec 17, 2008 - 6:41PM
#50
|
Date Joined:
Jun 28, 2008
|
I took ten points of Psychic damage just reading this thread....
|
|
|
