|
8 months ago ::
Sep 25, 2012 - 7:11PM
#81
|
Date Joined:
Feb 18, 2010
|
I think the system does need a way for Frodo to have his long term injury, dont think using the same mechanism for short term progression of a fight works worth beans for it though.
I agree. One of the things I have re-discovered since starting the 5N playtest is that I don't like the pacing of the game when players can heal up to full each day. In 4E we didn't play as much "day to day", especially when we were playing LFR - so I didn't notice it as much.
But what I found with the caves of chaos (and more importantly the stuff going on in the Keep on the Borderlands) was that I had plots percolating and developing in town - but the players heading out day after day into the caves moved things along too quickly for those plots to mature.
I would have rather had them be occasionally forced to spend a day or two in town to recover from their injuries just so some actual time could pass. Rather than have them completely eradicate the caves occupants over the course of a week or two, I would rather that had taken a month or more so that the events going on around them would have had time to develop and affect the game.
As it was I had to speed up the development of these plots just so things could happen on their time scale.
My current though is that most encounters should be easily healed with a spell or a short rest. Or a long rest if they were particularly unlucky. But there should always be the chance that something could happen which would force the group to take some time off to recover.
Maybe if a character is dropped negative by a critical hit, it means they sustained a real injury and need to go rest and recover or something like that.
Not all critical hits and not all instances where they fall negative - but maybe if both happen at once.
Something to introduce a bit of pacing and the passage of time into the game - short of simple DM fiat.
Sometimes Frodo does have to stop and rest a bit.
Carl
This.
This is exactly what my proposed idea was trying to achieve.
While this has somewhat turned into a discussion about the nature of martial vs divine healing, ultimately the discussion of the points above was what I was trying to introduce. I too feel that magically coming back from the brink of death (literally) after a nights sleep breaks the immersion.
So this is my view. Taking a long time to heal after battle that takes its toll feels like D&D to me - I understand this may not for some people. However, slow hitpoint recovery can stiffle game momentum and lead to less fun. What I was looking to propose was a system where you have quick recovery between fights, in order to keep going as well as significant consequences to physical injury.
The point is that there are two rates of HP recovery. One replaces rapidly, whereas the other takes a long time. This has been expressed well with the idea normal HP + Temp HP with the temp HP recharges with a short rest. While I don't argue that the idea that I put forward can be expressed more elegantly (such as the temp HP system, reducing the need for a new Energy) what I was trying to establish is whether people like the idea of the two systems to clarify what the hell is going in the maelstrom of concepts and ideas that is HP (while aslo having quick and slow recovering HP). For this reason I'm gonna keep using Energy and Wounds. I agree there are better words or ways to express these concepts but I want to be able to address these discrete concepts individually so I'll keep the names. Anyway, I'll try to clarify my intentions so that hopefully people can get a better idea of what I mean, whether they like the idea or not.
So under this system, Warlord-style healing does not heal Wounds, it heal Energy. Lets say your fighter has 30HP. This breaks down to 15 Energy (or Temp HP, or fatigue or stamina) and 15 Wounds (Static HP or whatever). This assumes Warlords and Warlord-style healing are in Next.
Orcs attack your fighter, hitting and dealing 8 damage. It means the fighter has blocked the attack or has been shaken by a heavy hit to the shield or helm - no physical slicing of flesh. The orc attacks again dealing 9 damage. The fighter doesn't have it in him to get out of the way completely and takes a minor flesh wound (Energy expended, dealing 2 wound damage). The fighter takes a light hit (3 wound damage) but is tired and sluggish to defend himself properly. The Warlord sees his companion is in trouble. He delivers an inspiring word or something like it, restoring 8 Energy. His wounds are still there but now the fighter now has the grit and focus to try and dodge and block. The fighter takes another hit for 5, which takes a bite out of his newly granted Energy.
The orcs are slain. At this point, the fighters hit points break down to 10 Wounds, 3 Energy. At the end of the fight, the fighter takes a short break, restoring himself to 10 wounds, 15 energy. Since the party does not have a cleric, the Warlord tries to administer a healers kit but fails the check, meaning the fighter does not recover any of his wounds until an extended rest, where he may only recover 1/HD or 1/Level (or something slow like that).
If the party did not have a Warlord to grant the inspiring word, the Fighter would still be on 5 wounds and 15 energy, automatically after the fight. Still enough to keep going and comfortably have a few easy fights also enoough to start worrying, also enough that it will take some time holed up in an inn to recover completely - definitely not good as new in the morning. Or a trip to the temple to speed the process up. A local Paladin uses his lay on hands ability to heal 5 Wounds. In combat, said Paladin's lay on hands would not have healed the Fighers Energy (or might have, whatever, the specifics are not the point).
I also like this system because it lets things like fatigue (not taking an extended rest or overreaching your endurance) affect your ability to recover between fights. E.g. you only recover half of your Energy between fights.
It also means that falling from a great height or slitting a giant's throat while it sleeps goes straight for the vitals. Which makes sense if the assumption in 5e is that 50% of your HP is force of will. I'm not 100% behind this last point as things start getting overly complicated when you have certain situations affecting Energy and not Wounds (e.g. Fear affect has 2x the damage on Energy and none on Wounds - while this kinda cool it is maybe too complex).
I like the idea. Perhaps you could have the bloodied condition (for those that like it) if your Wounds weren't at maximum.Using the example above, after the fighter takes 2 hits his wounds are at 13 out of 15, the attacks against him have drawn blood. Even after he gains Energy from the warlord or resting, he is still bloody.
And you could have the bloodied condition effect gameplay, e.g. Disadvatage on saves against disease (open wounds and such)
Just a thought
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 25, 2012 - 7:38PM
#82
|
Date Joined:
Jun 11, 2012
|
Wizards actually has a decent system for this: the Vitality and Wounds system from Revised Star Wars. There, wounds were based on con score and vitality progressed the way HP did in 3.x, and force based healing affected them differently, you had penalties if you had taken wound damage, etc. It was quite realistic (I even mentioned it in threads here from time to time but no one ever commented on it). My only issue was that critical hits ignored vitality and went right to wounds instead of doing multiples of damage. It makes sense from a versimillitude standpoint, but it more or less meant one lucky crit and your character died. Also, it meant that having more attacks was always favored over having fewer, strong attacks since getting the crit was all-important. Still, all systems have their flaws, and WotC could just as easily say "a crit just takes more out of you" and have it act as normal. Could even call it Wounds and Hit points to keep some familiar terms and to continue the idea of HP being the abstract way characters avoid dying.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 25, 2012 - 8:25PM
#83
|
Date Joined:
Sep 11, 2008
|
Original Thread in Packet Discussion but wanted more feedback. Seems everyone moved to General. What does everybody think about a model for healing like this:
- Players have a pool of hit dice (a larger number, closer to the number of healing surges available in 4E), say somewhere between 5 and 7 d10s for an average fighter.
- At the end of 8 hours of rest you can spend any number of your hit dice. If you do, roll them and add them to your hit point total. You can't gain hit points greater than your maximum hit point total this way.
- At the end of 7 days of rest in a safe place (basically, in between adventures) you may regain your all of your hit dice.
Obviously the starting number of hit-dice/healing surges can be shuffled around. I want to know if people like the idea of shifting the emphasis to a finite amount of hit dice that can only be recovered "back in town". Using this system, you can't sit down on a tree stump for five minutes and repair your massive head wound. But you can bind it up and keep going if you have a chance to sleep. However, you can only push yourself so far like this before you need a long period of recovery in a safe place.
Thoughts?
I really like the idea that "Healing Surges" (for lack of a better term) are a resource you must manage over the course of days. Are you suggesting natural healing only happens when they rest for at least 8 hours? I tend to like that personally, but I think a lot of people still want to use first aide during short rests to restore a little bit of HP. Maybe you can spend it now for a small benefit (1d4) or hold on to it till later for a bigger reward
(2d4 with sleep)?
I think the whole idea of ability scores begs for a system where those abilities, body and mind, can be injured or destroyed. I know players hate penalties and will do anything to get around them but why can't this be included somewhere? The whole trend to minimize the benefits of ability modifiers on combat and spells is eliminating the potential of this option. They say it is for simplicity but I don't believe it is simpler.
The whole idea of traps is that if your adversary isn't killed by it, at least you have some king of advantage once they get to you. The 4e healing surge system totally made traps seem like silly time wasters that consume a resource and send you on your way. If there is no natural way to heal characters in a reasonable amount of time the players will hunker down and rest the healer until all the characters are topped off. The DM can over-rule this strategy at any time but doesn't want to upset the players or make them feel it is hopeless.
I think the solution is to include a system of injury that can only be healed by advance care in a non-hostile environment. The injury will gradually decrease the characters effectiveness in very small increments but it demonstrates a higher level of realism that I think can be managed reasonably.
How about this:
When a character is reduced to 1/10th of their mac hit points they role 2d6's. The ability score that is associated with the number that come up will be reduced by one. If the same number comes up, re-roll the second die until another number is reached.
1 Str
2 Dex
3 Sta
4 Cha
5 Int
6 Wis
These wounds require an elaborate ritual or advanced mundane care in a non-hostile environment. This could be over the course of 7 days as per Jackofallparades suggestion.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 25, 2012 - 9:31PM
#84
|
Date Joined:
May 27, 2012
|
Whenever I see a designer use the word, "abstraction," or describe HP/AC/damage as "a combination of many factors," I read it as, "None of this actually means anything. You might as well play a round of poker to determine the results, for as little as we care about painting an accurate picture of what's really happening. Just make something up, because we're too afraid of offending anyone to actually do our job and pick a consistent reality to model." That's just me, though  I think my best hope, at this point, is if they put they hide the definition of Hit Points within the healing module. If you're using the super slow healing model, then it's because Hit Points represent meat damage. If you're using the long-rest full-heal model, then it's because Hit Points are mostly fatigue.
The metagame is not the game.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 25, 2012 - 9:31PM
#85
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
Warlords didn't close wounds. Loss of HP does not automatically mean physical injury, and regaining of HP does not mean physical injuries go away. How this fallacy continues, I have no idea.
Please quote me the name of the Logical Fallacy that he was guilty of with his suggestion on how to change hit points. I didn't know that one. Is it Argument from Abstraction? Reducto Hit Pointo?
It could be a Loaded Question Fallacy since they are starting from the assumption that hit points are equal to wounds when in fact this is a house rule and in all editions of D&D some component of hit points has always been, luck, endurance, or focus.
Maybe, except for that pesky little fact that OP didn't do that.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 25, 2012 - 9:32PM
#86
|
Date Joined:
Aug 10, 2012
|
Paladium had a similar mechanic. they had SDC and HP but both were wound based.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 25, 2012 - 9:34PM
#87
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
The rules are are clear about it.
Under 50hp, just few cuts and bruises.
The character at 1hp is basically unharmed, and doesn't feel enough pain to hinder him in any way.
Ar 1hp the foes start to strike directly at you if they hit.
If I have to think about hit points this way I think I'll just seek fun elsewhere. In the past hit points could be thought of in any way. You could think of them one way and someone else could think of them in a different way. They were abstract so it worked. In 4e, they forced a way of thinking on everyone that a lot of us didn't like. I'm for keeping hit points open ended and not forcing one way of thinking onto them.
If they keep the warlord isolated and the healing system modularized then all can be good. I can just ban the warlord from my games and adopt the healing system that suits my playstyle. If though they get arrogant and say my way is #badwrongfun then I'll find a game with designers that are not so judgmental.
Hit points were never deadly wounds in any edition. Any attempt to portray them as such were house rules...
This is false. If you go through the monster manuals, you will find attacks that only deal physical damage. Those attacks MUST deal physical damage, even if hit points are full or otherwise. Hit points are what you need them to be for any given attack. 5e is the first edition to spell out that the first 50% of hit points are not physical at all.
As a side note. What is with all the smiley faces the last few days? They seem to be in every other post of yours 
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 25, 2012 - 9:35PM
#88
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
Warlords didn't close wounds. Loss of HP does not automatically mean physical injury, and regaining of HP does not mean physical injuries go away. How this fallacy continues, I have no idea.
Please quote me the name of the Logical Fallacy that he was guilty of with his suggestion on how to change hit points. I didn't know that one. Is it Argument from Abstraction? Reducto Hit Pointo?
It could be a Loaded Question Fallacy since they are starting from the assumption that hit points are equal to wounds when in fact this is a house rule and in all editions of D&D some component of hit points has always been, luck, endurance, or focus.
Not true in the 2E PHB is specificly says that
Hit points - a number representing: 1) how much damage a character can suffer before being killed, determined by hit dice. the hit points lost to injury can usually be regained by rest of healing; 2) how much damage a specific attack does, determined by weapons of monster statistics, and subtracted from a players total.
It has been just wounds in the past. so it is not a Loaded Question Fallacy.
Elsewhere in the 2E PHB and DMG its described as luck, fatigue, or stamina. The books contradicted themselves...
No, they don't contradict themselves. Hit points in previous editions can be physical, luck, fatique or whatever, from 100% to 0%. It's up to the DM to decide what is what with his descriptions.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 25, 2012 - 9:58PM
#89
|
Date Joined:
Aug 10, 2012
|
Well after looking in the 2E dmg I can not find any place where it does not refer to loss of HP as anything other than physical damage. It says the same thing in the third edition PHB.
I can not find any place where it says they are an abstract untill I look in the 4th edition PHB.
|
|
|
|
8 months ago ::
Sep 25, 2012 - 11:34PM
#90
|
Date Joined:
Jun 21, 2012
|
I wonder if there would be less contention over the "bloodied" concept if it was refferred to as "winded" or "fatigued" instead of "bloodied".
Definately. Most people get used to 'bloodied' - but there is often a moment when you first hear of the concept when you have to ask "Just how is that skeleton 'bloodied' after all".
hehe for that matter, how does one make a skeleton fatigued or winded? What about an ooze? oh and to echo many comments: please leave hp alone and make the disctinction you're talking about exist in the description. We've got enough to keep track of.
|
|
|
