I don't get the dislike of healing surges

[gamerprinter]

For me, hit points cannot be completely physical because if a sword thrust deals 8 hp of damage and kills a normal man, and the same sword thrust barely slows down a 10th-level fighter, either the 10th-level fighter survived something that would have killed a normal man (decapitation, stabbed through the heart, sword in the gut) and just kept going, or he somehow managed to turn the 8 hp wound into something less significant for himself than it would be for a normal man. If the former, it feels unnatural to me. If the latter, then hit points cannot be completely physical.

A couple things, your examples of decapitation, stabbed through the heart and sword in the gut all seem to be special attacks either by vorpal weapons, special monster attacks or class features for possible classes. These things bypass hit points altogether working like Assassinate - if your opponent fails his save, he's slain, no matter if he has 8 hit points or 1800 hit points.

And does it seem realistic that a 1st level character might have 8 HP, while a 10th level might have 80 HP of real damage taking capability? Of course it's not realistic, but it always been part of the mechanic of progressing in level, since 1e. I completely accept this with a suspension of disbelieve - it's D&D, it works as long as you don't put too much real world physics (or biology) into it.

Since I see every HP as real damage and not the combination of adrenaline, perseverance and real damage, healing surges feel 'wrong' to me from a player perspective. I realize this is solely based on my perceptions of hit point damage, which obviously differs from yours and perhaps even the designer's intent. It is how I see it though, and have accepted that way for over 30 years. I'm comfortable with it.

Nothing wrong with healing surges in 4e, that's the way things work, and if I were playing, I'd probably have to give the same suspension of disbelief that that is how things are. I'd accept, but since I don't play that edition, its unnecessary for me to change my point of view.

Mechanically it works out the same a negative hp total of my Con, I'm dead, no matter how I want to perceive how Hit Points work.

Your way is not wrong, it just feels wrong for my personal games, so I don't care for it for that reason only. In D&D PCs aren't normal men, they are heroes and the higher level they are the more heroic they become from abilities to hit points.

 

[prosfilaes]

he somehow managed to turn the 8 hp wound into something less significant for himself than it would be for a normal man. If the former, it feels unnatural to me. If the latter, then hit points cannot be completely physical.

That's semantics. We know that a HP on a 1st level character doesn't mean the same thing an HP on a 10th level character does. But it's completely physical in that it's a measure of physical damage in both cases.

 

[FireLance]

A couple things, your examples of decapitation, stabbed through the heart and sword in the gut all seem to be special attacks either by vorpal weapons, special monster attacks or class features for possible classes.

And to me, these are plausible narrative descriptions for what happens when a "normal man" with 3 hp takes 8 hp of damage from a sword.

I'm actually quite curious. How would you describe a normal man with 3 hp taking 8 hp of damage from a sword in your system? How would you describe a 10th-level fighter with 80 hp taking the same 8 hp of damage from a sword?

 

[gamerprinter]

And to me, these are plausible narrative descriptions for what happens when a "normal man" with 3 hp takes 8 hp of damage from a sword.

I'm actually quite curious. How would you describe a normal man with 3 hp taking 8 hp of damage from a sword in your system? How would you describe a 10th-level fighter with 80 hp taking the same 8 hp of damage from a sword?

Sorry, I edited my previous post with what basically answers this. A normal man is a 0 level commoner. Any PC is not a normal man, rather a hero - something completely different and unique set apart from normal men. Whether its the power of the gods that grants this, but the more experience you gain, the more heroic you become. With D&D heroism you gain the ability to sustain more hit points of damage.

And in our games heroes don't attack people that are 4 or more levels beneath them (if they are in the way, they will die, but never sought as an intended target) that is reserved for equals and real challenges. As a GM I don't face PCs against insurmountable odds, challenging odds only, so a 1st level character would never face a 10th level character or CR9 monster - that would be an unfair encounter. It just wouldn't happen in my games.

So the damage dealt and received is appropriate for the level.

I don't need to scientifically dissertate on how this is realistic. For my group's games such a discussion is meaningless - we wouldn't go there.

Edit: and no doubt a decapitation might seem equivalent to 8 points of damage to somebody with 8 hit points total, however in game, decapitation is a mechanic that falls under vorpal and has a definite place in the game, that is not related to your hit point total. Assassinate has existed in one form or another since 1e (not 2e) and whether by assassination table or by PrC ability it confers Death on a failed save having nothing at all to do with hit points. So though the same first level character is dead, he still has his head, unless vorpal came up in play.

And while a gut shot may not be specifically a given mechanic, it could be, especially for some kind of monster whose special gore attack that goes for your intestines.

Although hit points are real damage to me, I don't use hit location tables so your hit points of loss are across your entire body, and none mortal by themselves until you're actually out of hit points. Mortal damage as from something as specific as a gut shot, neck break, decapitation, heart stab are not the same kind of damage from normal combat.

 

[FireLance]

That's semantics. We know that a HP on a 1st level character doesn't mean the same thing an HP on a 10th level character does. But it's completely physical in that it's a measure of physical damage in both cases.

Same thing. Describe what happens when a "normal man" with 3 hp takes 8 hp of damage from a sword. Describe what happens when a 10th-level fighter with 80 hp takes 8 hp of damage from a sword.

Bonus questions: Describe what happens when a 10th-level fighter who normally has 80 hp but has already taken 77 hp of damage (so that he has 3 hp left) takes 8 hp of damage from a sword. Is the type of physical damage he takes at this point different from the 8 hp of physical damage he took when he was at full hit points? If so, why?

 

[Bluenose]

While I agree that it can be done badly, it can also be done well.

RQ2 had pretty much fixed hp (and hp per location), hp were always associated with real damage, injuries would impact your ability and yet there were no death spirals as such, and plenty of heroic combats. In fact when I started with RQ2 everyone noticed how much MORE heroic the combat seemed at every point.

A game that was designed in the late 70's, which was fast, furious and fun while also having more of a nod towards realism in combat. I think it is funny that in 40 years since then so many RPGs have struggled to meet the bar it set.

Cheers

I wouldn't say RQ2 was particularly fast, to be honest. Attack roll, parry roll, location roll, damage roll from which you then subtract armour points. I mean, I agree that combat feels more "heroic" or at least more deadly, and I always enjoy the game, but I wouldn't say it was always fast.

Sorry, I consider them part and parcel. I do not like the mechanic, not because it is 'unrealistic' but because it is boring. It makes for boring combats in boring encounters that make up boring adventures.

Are they really more boring than Cure Light Wounds wands or potions of healing?

 

[Oryan77]

In other words, not completely physical.

So, even in real life, hit points are not entirely physical?

I'm sorry for wasting your time by responding to your previous post.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

So Mercurius, have you gotten a satisfactory answer?

There are lots of different reasons, most boiling down to someone's personal taste.

 

[FireLance]

Sorry, I edited my previous post with what basically answers this. A normal man is a 0 level commoner. Any PC is not a normal man, rather a hero - something completely different and unique set apart from normal men. Whether its the power of the gods that grants this, but the more experience you gain, the more heroic you become. With D&D heroism you gain the ability to sustain more hit points of damage.

I'm probably coming across as pedantic or stubborn, but to me, that looks like divine or magical protection/toughness and is therefore not completely physical. Oh well, as another poster said recently, that's semantics.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

It's a fine difference, but I see the Second Wind action as something that allows you to heal yourself in combat. The fact that in the 4E rules, the healing is accomplished by spending a healing surge is irrelevant - a Second Wind type action can be used even in game systems that do not have the concept of healing surges: Star Wars Saga Edition, for example.

Me, I try to boil them down into their basic concepts in order to distinguish the effect that they have. To me, the essence of Second Wind is that anyone can spend an action to recover hit points in a fight. The essence of a healing surge is that healing generally becomes a daily resource and is proportional to the maximum hit points of the character.

Well, your complaining about combat length and posting stuff like "A 'once per day' Healing Surge might be more palatable to me, but as they are currently written.... " did give me the impression that your key problem was with Second Wind. As it is, I still think that the rate of hit point recovery (especially in-combat hit point recovery) is more an issue for you than healing surges, although the fact that 4E allows you to recover one-quarter your maximum hit points by spending a healing surge is probably a contributing factor.

If Second Wind was the only way to use HS in combat then maybe, but it isn't - so you have something that looks, sounds, and quacks like a duck. Guess what? It's a duck.

While in theory HS gets used after combat, in the game I played they were pretty much used in combat.

So it is still Healing Surge, and it still makes for long boring combats. No thanks, I'll take a cleric slinging spells over the HS any day of the week, and twice on Saturdays.

There are a lot of other things that I didn't like about 4e - but the Grind topped the list, and HS and all its cousins are most definitely part of the Grind.

Wanna guess why I don't play MORPGs? Contrary to a lot of folks I don't think that 4e plays like a MORPG, but they share the Grind, and I don't like the Grind in them, either.

Rather than trying to convince me that Healing Surges don't suck, or that if they sucked then it wasn't Healing Surges, just accept that I really did not have fun with 4e, that Healing Surges were a big part of why I didn't have fun, and leave it at that. I have literally had more fun watching paint dry. (I am cheating with that comparison - I like painting miniatures.)

The best fantasy game in the D20 architecture for avoiding the Grind is not Pathfinder, but Fantasy Craft, I hate the Gear system in FC, but the combat is a lot of fun, at least for me.

The Auld Grump