|
6 months ago ::
Jan 11, 2013 - 11:17PM
#71
|
Date Joined:
Sep 26, 2001
|
The "dying" zone functions best as a buffer that penalizes the player (removing him from combat and putting him in bleed-out peril) without always killing him. With the current mechanic, "dying" is an invitation to coup-de-grace by any intelligent foe.
If that was somehow fixed, I would have no problem with heal-from-zero.
No more so than it ever was.... Sure, in other editions a foe could leave you to bleed out. But if they're intelligent? Why would they if they know you've got a healer close by on your side? Better to kill you & just be done with you.
So, how would you "fix" that?
Maybe it's the "nobody could have survived that!" effect.  If PCs can go to negatives and get healed back from the brink a dozen times in a row, but 'normal' people, exceptional people, and even monsters, die at 0 and can't be healed more than once in a given day (and that very rarely), then ignoring dropped foes /is/ the intelligent thing, until you actually experience the crazy that is heroes who get up from death's door and fight on.
Love 4e? Concerned about its future? Join the Old Guard of 4e"You want The Tooth? You can't handle The Tooth!" - Dahlver-Nar. "If magic is unrestrained in the campaign, D&D quickly degenerates into a weird wizard show where players get bored quickly" - E. Gary Gygax
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 11, 2013 - 11:19PM
#72
|
Date Joined:
Sep 25, 2007
|
negative hitpoints have been in the game since AD&D 1e.
Citation needed.
Careful, man. That much logic might be illegal on the internet. - Salla
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 12, 2013 - 2:35AM
#73
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
Yeah, I was surprised too.
My guess is that most DMs aren't playing up thier NPCs logically and having them go for Coup De Grace.
Well the problem I guess is that there are three considerations which are in tension with one another:
a) Knowing you're going to sit out the rest of the fight isn't fun
b) Having your character die isn't fun
c) Having the DM not make the monsters do what they "ought" to do isn't fun because players feel like punches are being pulled
If players are non-combatants once they're unconscious, they tend to lose interest in the game (in my experience anyway). At the same time, any system which allows characters to awake from unconsciousness should generally result in intelligent monsters trying to kill downed players while they are defenseless. You have to choose one of the three things to discard. It's a matter of opinion, of course, but I think for most people (c) is the easiest to get dispense with, or at least handwave away (in a real fight, you probably would be more worried about someone hitting you with a sword than someone lying on the ground, even if intellectually you know that the person lying on the ground will be able to get back up and keep hitting you with a sword if he's still alive).
(Note that the 4e DMG explicitly recommended that you not CdG downed players because it isn't very fun. In addition, the way the math worked out in 4e, it actually usually wasn't a good idea to attack unconscious players, because -bloodied is a really high number relative to monster damage at any given level and if there's healing to go around then attacking someone below zero hit points is actually a waste of an action when you probably aren't going to kill them).
<Ioun> they're apparently making a MolIsCool pp
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 12, 2013 - 2:58AM
#74
|
Date Joined:
Apr 15, 2007
|
negative hitpoints have been in the game since AD&D 1e.
Citation needed.
Advanced D&D Dungeon Master's Guide, page 82
Hit Points
Zero Hit Points: When any creature is brought to 0 hit poinis (optionally as low as -3 hit points if from the same blow which brought the total to 0), it is unconscious. In each of the next succeeding rounds 1 additional (negative) point will be lost until -10 is reached and the creature dies. Such loss and death are caused from bleeding, shock, convulsions, non-respiration, and similar causes. It ceases immediately on any round a friendly creature administers aid to the unconscious one. Aid consists of binding wounds, starting respiration, administering a draught (spirits, healing potion, etc.), or otherwise doing whatever is necessary to restore life. Any character brought to 0 (or fewer) hit points and then revived will remain in a corna far 1-6 turns. Thereafter, he or she must rest for a full week, minimum. He or she will be incapable of any activity other than that necessary to move slowly to a place of rest and eat and sleep when there. The character cannot attack, defend, cast spells, use magic devices, carry burdens, run, study, research, or do anything else. This is true even if cure spells and/or healing potions are given to him or her, although if a heal spell is bestowed the prohibition no longer applies. If any creature reaches a state of -6 or greater negative paints before being revived, this could indicate scarring or the loss of some member, if you so choose. For example, a character struck by a fireball and then treated when at -9 might have horrible scar tissue on exposed areas of flesh - hands, arms, neck, face.
"You can always judge a man by the quality of his enemies." -The Doctor, Remembrance of the Daleks
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 12, 2013 - 3:19AM
#75
|
- Here be Dragons next 100 km
|
(Note that the 4e DMG explicitly recommended that you not CdG downed players because it isn't very fun. In addition, the way the math worked out in 4e, it actually usually wasn't a good idea to attack unconscious players, because -bloodied is a really high number relative to monster damage at any given level and if there's healing to go around then attacking someone below zero hit points is actually a waste of an action when you probably aren't going to kill them).
It's also worth noting that 4e used "Heroes are Exceptional" as its default assumption. NPCs and monsters generally have no more than one or occasionally two healing surges and there are very few monsters capable of triggering an ally to spend a surge, so generally speaking battlefield healing is extremely rare and very limited when it does occur.
As a result, most monsters won't be prepared for it and don't develop tactics to counter it, unless they're familiar with the PCs' fighting capabilities.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 12, 2013 - 6:25AM
#76
|
Date Joined:
Sep 25, 2007
|
Advanced D&D Dungeon Master's Guide, page 82
Thank you, I had overlooked that rule previously on account of starting with AD&D 2nd edition - where negative hit points were an optional rule - and assuming, apparently incorrectly for all these years, that there were no significant differences in HP and dying rules between 1st and 2nd edition.
Careful, man. That much logic might be illegal on the internet. - Salla
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 12, 2013 - 9:06AM
#77
|
Date Joined:
Oct 25, 2010
|
(Note that the 4e DMG explicitly recommended that you not CdG downed players because it isn't very fun. In addition, the way the math worked out in 4e, it actually usually wasn't a good idea to attack unconscious players, because -bloodied is a really high number relative to monster damage at any given level and if there's healing to go around then attacking someone below zero hit points is actually a waste of an action when you probably aren't going to kill them).
4E was kind of an exception because sitting out a battle in 4E was a huge problem, because battles took 1-2 hours. So I understand why the design decision was made that you generally can't eliminate people from combat.
D&DN is a different issue becasue you're sitting out like 10-15 minutes minutes at most. I've been able to run combats in D&DN where the party was split, and some characters were miss the whole battle, and problems didn't occur, because things went fast enough. I wouldn't ever even think about doing that in 4E.
Overall I feel like the "player sits out" just isn't a big deal in this edition. It was certainly a 4E thing, but it's just not in this edition.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 12, 2013 - 9:09AM
#78
|
Date Joined:
Jul 29, 2012
|
(Note that the 4e DMG explicitly recommended that you not CdG downed players because it isn't very fun. In addition, the way the math worked out in 4e, it actually usually wasn't a good idea to attack unconscious players, because -bloodied is a really high number relative to monster damage at any given level and if there's healing to go around then attacking someone below zero hit points is actually a waste of an action when you probably aren't going to kill them).
4E was kind of an exception because sitting out a battle in 4E was a huge problem, because battles took 1-2 hours. So I understand why the design decision was made that you generally can't eliminate people from combat.
D&DN is a different issue becasue you're sitting out like 10-15 minutes minutes at most. I've been able to run combats in D&DN where the party was split, and some characters were miss the whole battle, and problems didn't occur, because things went fast enough. I wouldn't ever even think about doing that in 4E.
Overall I feel like the "player sits out" just isn't a big deal in this edition. It was certainly a 4E thing, but it's just not in this edition.
Yes, adventure-based not encounter-based really helps with the narrative.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 12, 2013 - 11:22AM
#79
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
Overall I feel like the "player sits out" just isn't a big deal in this edition. It was certainly a 4E thing, but it's just not in this edition.
Well, I definitely agree it's *less* of an issue based on my experience with Next. I don't know if it's a total non-issue for every table though. I think I'd still rather have non-optimal monster tactics than force people to sit out a whole fight, but I guess I should try it the other way before I complain.
<Ioun> they're apparently making a MolIsCool pp
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Jan 12, 2013 - 11:30AM
#80
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
4e introduced the 'heal from zero' math exception. It seemed unintuitive to me (considering how many times I had to remind players about it)... so I was a bit surprised that the majority liked the exception.
Yeah, I was surprised too.
My guess is that most DMs aren't playing up thier NPCs logically and having them go for Coup De Grace.
Nothing logical about it.. npcs should go for the active enemies somebody down in the real world doesnt often surge to there feet and become active like a hero in an action movie... are all these npcs fighting against PCs constantly?seems unlikely.
|
|
|
