4e Hit Points and pre-4e Hit Points: A Comparison

[FireLance]

I posted this to the Disappointed in 4e thread, but I thought I'd pull it out into a separate thread to get views from people who might avoid the other one because it's hit 14+ pages.

The key similarity between 4e hit points and pre-4e hit points is that any hit that does not reduce a character to 0 hit points or less is a non-threatening wound that does not hamper the character's ability to fight.

A high-level character who is low on hit points will look pretty much the same regardless of edition: covered with nicks, scratches and bruises, out of breath, and probably low on luck as well. The process of getting him to that point will also look pretty much the same, regardless of edition: due to skill, luck, and other factors, attacks that would have killed a normal man have been evaded and/or turned into minor injuries. In addition, the next time he gets hit, the same thing will happen regardless of edition: he will sustain a life-threatening wound that will kill him if he is unlucky or if he does not get help.

The first key difference between 4e hit points and pre-4e hit points is that the only way to recover hit points quickly pre-4e was to use magic. 4e hit points are more like vitality points in that they can be recovered quickly without magical assistance, e.g. being affected by a warlord's inspiring word, spending healing surges during a short rest, or recovering all healing surges after an extended rest. Pre-4e, a character's ability to convert a serious wound into a minor injury can only be regained slowly without the use of magic. In 4e, a character can replenish his skill, luck and the other "intangible" aspects of hit points more quickly without magical assistance. A 4e character who has been brought down to low hit points and then recovers all his hit points after a rest is still covered in nicks, scratches and bruises, but his ability to convert future serious wounds into minor injuries has been regained.

The second key difference between 4e hit points and pre-4e hit points happens when a character has been brought to 0 hit points or less. It is actually a subset of the first key difference. Pre-4e, a character who has been brought to 0 hit points or less was either automatically dead or dying (in 3e, or if you used the dying optional rule pre-3e). If magical healing was available, a dying character that was restored to 1 hp or more continued to function normally. Whatever serious, life-threatening injury he sustained was either healed or converted to a minor, non-threatening wound that does not hamper his ability to fight. If magical healing was not available, bed rest could achieve the same effect, but more slowly. Even so, for 3.5e characters of 10th level or higher, eight hours of rest was all that was necessary for them to go from almost dead (-9 hp) to functioning normally (1 hp or more). And at this point, we are back to the first key difference between 4e hit points and pre-4e hit points.

So, what happens when a 4e character has been brought to 0 hit points or less and then gets his hit points restored in a non-magical fashion? Somehow, that serious wound that he sustained is no longer life-threatening and no longer hampers his ability to fight. During a fight, this could be explained by a rush of adrenaline or being so inspired by an ally that the character functions normally despite his wounds. After a short or extended rest, it could be explained by treating and binding the character's injuries so that he functions normally despite his wounds. Alternatively, the character could be made of such stern stuff that after a short period of gritting his teeth, he just functions normally despite his wounds. Non-magical healing doesn't make a wound go away. It just allows a character to function normally despite his wounds.

Now, not liking that non-magical healing can allow a character to function normally despite his wounds is a valid complaint, and there are a number of possible sub-systems that can address it, e.g. lingering wounds (using the disease track mechanic), temporary reduction in the number of healing surges per day, temporary limits to the character's maximum hit points, etc.

However, I do believe that 4e hit points and pre-4e hit points handle damage to the character in pretty much the same way. The two key changes that 4e has made to hit points are that the "intangible" aspect of hit points that allow a character to turn a serious wound into a minor injury are recovered more quickly in 4e, and that 4e characters who have not received magical healing are still able to function normally despite their wounds.

What do you think?

 

[Mort]

I agree with your observations.

And I'm definitely in the "like the new way" camp. It always bothered me to no end that prior editions of D&D required a cleric in the party unless some serious considerations (usually by the DM) were made.

Further I like the swing toward the cinematic as default. Characters getting into fights etc. and then being fighting ready again shortly, may not be realistic - but it agrees with many of the movie and novel tropes I happen to like.

 

[Lanefan]

By and large, your analysis is about right; except the main difference between 4e and pre-4e is the *amount* of h.p. a very low level character has rather than how those h.p. behave or what they represent.

That said, you hit the biggest problems - shared by all editions - bang on the head: the massive difference between +1 and -1 h.p., and the fact that someone who was on the brink of death a moment ago (-8) is now rarin' to go (+15 after a couple of cures/heal surges). Completely unrealistic.

There's a solution, sort of, but it does add complication: a variant of SW's wound points. These points (we call them "body points") are something everyone has, over and above whatever ordinary hit points ("fatigue points") you get from your class etc. Body points are rolled by race and just about everyone has between 2-5 b.p. including commoners (they just don't have any f.p., or extremely few). When you get hurt you lose f.p. first, when you run out of those you go into b.p., and anything between 0 and your game's death point (traditionally, -10) is also considered b.p. damage.

Mechanically - and here's where the complexity arises - body points and fatigue points cure differently. A cure spell does a smaller die, with no '+' for level in 3e; 4e healing surges would work the same way. Also, if you go below 0 and survive, you cannot normally be cured above full b.p. until you've had some rest...how much is determined by how far below 0 you went...we call this status "incurable".

For recovery times, in 1e we have roughly one full 8-hour rest period being required for each point below 0 you went to, with a bit of a J-curve making it even longer if you went below about -6. Each cure spell dumped in to an incurable character reduces the required rest by one hour but does nothing else. In 4e, with its hyper-fast recovery rates, maybe make it an extra extended rest required if you went below 0 with a further one required for each 5 point below you went...thus if you went to -15 you need a total of 4 extended rests to be back to full health; 3 to become curable and the 4th being the one you'd have needed anyway to get your h.p. back.

Does it slow things down? Of course. Someone who is incurable isn't likely to want to take much risk, so the party has to decide whether to press on regardless or wait for the incurables to rest and recover. But it adds at least a few shreds of realism and grit to the game, never a bad thing in my books.

Lanefan

 

[SableWyvern]

That said, you hit the biggest problems - shared by all editions - bang on the head: the massive difference between +1 and -1 h.p., and the fact that someone who was on the brink of death a moment ago (-8) is now rarin' to go (+15 after a couple of cures/heal surges). Completely unrealistic.

I'd just like to point out that in 1E, by the book, magical healing would not bring a character back from dying to perfectly ok.

Any character brought to 0 (or fewer) hit points and then revived will remain in a coma for 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. ... 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.

Other than that, I think the comparisons are fairly accurate.

The crux of the matter, I think, is that in 4E, long-term character health is measured in healing surges, rather than hit points. HP are purely a tactical, rather than strategic, resource.

 

[FireLance]

By and large, your analysis is about right; except the main difference between 4e and pre-4e is the *amount* of h.p. a very low level character has rather than how those h.p. behave or what they represent.

Personally, I see that more as an issue of the power level of 1st level characters in 4e - which is closer to that of 3rd or 4th level characters pre-4e - rather than an issue of hit points as such.

 

[FireLance]

I'd just like to point out that in 1E, by the book, magical healing would not bring a character back from dying to perfectly ok.

pemerton also pointed out in the other thread.

I guess it shows that it's been a long time since I played 1e.

 

[Delta]

A high-level character who is low on hit points will look pretty much the same regardless of edition: covered with nicks, scratches and bruises, out of breath, and probably low on luck as well.

Does everyone agree with this? (Does it say explicitly this in the 4E books?)

It seems like I see a lot of 4E players saying that hp represent anything you like -- possibly disassociated from all physical injury, possibly reduced by Intimidate checks, etc. I suppose that could be a poll question.

 

[Hussar]

Does everyone agree with this? (Does it say explicitly this in the 4E books?)

It seems like I see a lot of 4E players saying that hp represent anything you like -- possibly disassociated from all physical injury, possibly reduced by Intimidate checks, etc. I suppose that could be a poll question.

Pretty much I think. For me, SOMETIMES it will be nicks and scratches, and other times it won't be. It depends on what's going on in the game. I think the point that needs to be stressed is that "whatever makes sense" at the time is what HP's represent.

So, yes, sometimes it could be completely disassociated from physical injury, if it makes sense at the time.

Good grief, Sable Wyvern, did anyone ACTUALLY use those rules? I know we certainly didn't.

 

[Delta]

Good grief, Sable Wyvern, did anyone ACTUALLY use those rules? I know we certainly didn't.

We certainly did (and still do). I would never have thought not to -- actually, it looked like an enormous "gimme" when the prior alternative (OD&D, Basic, etc.) was to be simply dead at 0 hp.

 

[SableWyvern]

Good grief, Sable Wyvern, did anyone ACTUALLY use those rules? I know we certainly didn't.

Quite aside from the fact that I'm sure many people did in fact use those rules, I think that if you're going to compare what HP mean in each edition, it's only fair to base your arguments on how HP were actually presented, and make it clear when you are in fact discussing house rules (not a swipe at FireLance, who clearly just forgot or never used the specific rule being discussed).