I don't get the dislike of healing surges

[Mercurius]

In regards to Hit Points - I have always assumed that they are a hold over from D&D's wargaming roots - a man at arms had one hit point, a character model had more.

In D&D the assumption remains kind of the same - a man at arms has D8 Hit Points, and a longsword does D8 Damage.

They then modified up and down from there - a wizard is twice as likely to die from a hit by a longsword than a man at arms is. A fighting man somewhat less.

It is also why a combat round used to be a full minute - trying to correlate a tabletop wargames passage of time with that of a role playing game.

So, consider the Hit Point a wavicle - it behaves as an abstract unless you are observing it, then it behaves as a concrete.... The concept is abstract, but the game effects need to be empirical.

In other words, they are both abstract and concrete, so game mechanics on some level echo quantum mechanics.

The Auld Grump

Interesting thinking here, although the problem is that it starts falling apart the higher level you go, or at least the more abstract hit points become. A 1st level character can be slain by a single weapon strike from an opponent of any level; a 10th level cannot, unless it is from a very powerful opponent. But what happens when an orc scores a critical hit on a 10th level character? They lose HP, but not a devastating amount. What then is a "critical hit"? In the rules as written--in pretty much any edition, afaict--an orc can never deal a death-blow to a high level character. It just isn't possible with some sort of house rule. Why? Because hit points don't represent merely physical damage capacity, and this becomes even more so the case at higher levels.

I don't have a problem with hit points not being realistic--it fits the epic feeling of D&D. The 3rd edition of Talislanta was re-designed by none other than Jonathan Tweet, one of the main designers on 3E D&D. Talislanta, especially 3e (and later editions) has a very similar basic structure to D&D 3E and d20 games in general. But in Talislanta, characters have armor points, and less hit points, and HP represent actually bodily damage capacity.

I would suggest that HP-as-body points requires something akin to armor points or damage reduction. In a sense, damage reduction and HP as they are, are redundant--might as well just give a creature more HP. But if we want HP to represent the body and the body only, then we would need to tease out skill (via increased defense), damage reduction (perhaps armor points or an armor protection value to reduces damage), and perhaps even some kind of X-Factor, like a fate/karma/luck mechanism that allows a PC to ignore damage of a given attack once-every-so-often.

Just thinking aloud here.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I miss the simplicity of hit points without healing surges.

As far as their abstract nature...

I had a discussion with a player about hit points years ago, I forget the edition. I explained that I felt that hit points represented more than just damage taken, it was also exhaustion and luck. The DMG at the time backed me up on that. His reply was that "Well, then if that poisoned blade didn't actually hit me, why do I need to Save vs Poison?"

I didn't have a good response to that, and I still don't.

He has to save because some unspecified portion of the damage is ALWAYS an actual physical wound. Luck, skill, divine providence may be involved, as well, but there is always an injury involved.

 

[Aberzanzorax]

To clear up the fuzzy memory of yours, second wind more represents getting an adrenaline rush and finding the fortitude to recover. It's not that hard to visualize. You see it all the time when someone has been presented with a crisis. There are times where you just feel like you cannot give anymore but you somehow find a way to push yourself and you get a second wind. Runners find it, hikers find it, and people who play sports find a second wind.

Ok, I'm not picking on Naszir, here, it's just the most recent example of what I'm addressing.


Second wind causes the character to heal themself of wounds.

The 4e phb quotes I've provided slightly upthread seem to disagree with our common sense view of it, and state (pretty clearly, actually) that it's closing of wounds.


Now, I agree with everyone else who is claiming that it makes more sense if healing surges represent adrenaline or whatever else, rather than actually healing wounds....but that is not what it is spelled out as in the 4e phb.

I'm asking: Can anyone provide an actual WotC source that says what healing surges represent other than the closing of wounds/healing?



So, there's the challenge...is it just people making sense of it in their own way, or does WotC ever actually say anywhere that it represents something other than healing?

 

[blargney the second]

Healing surges are reserve hit points.

They just come in discrete packages and can sometimes be triggered during combat.
-blarg

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Then, forgive me for saying this, you were not paying attention.

Heh, Nerd arguments go a long way back... I remember arguing whether balrogs had wings or if the shadows were being described as wings in a metaphor, back in the early '70s.... (I am of the 'no wing' persuasion.)

From a discussion on the Dumnestor's Heroes webcomic:


Wingless by TheAuldGrump, on Flickr

Nerds argue, it's what we do.

There were indeed arguments as to the nature of the Hit Point... as often? I don't know.

The Auld Grump, way down here they have a name for shadow, pain, and fire. They call the balrog Durin's Bane, in this hole they call Moria.
Moria, Moria, they call this mine Moria....

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Your posts on second wind make it look like you're opposed to the idea completely rather than opposed to it happening with a high frequency. At least that's how they appeared to me. If it turns out we're closer to being on the same page, then I'm spiff.

As I said, I have no problem with Randy the Ranger getting his 'Second Wind' (once!) if he can back away from the combat for a round or two, he needs time to get that second wind.

Bob the Barbarian on the other hand is closer to the Incredible Hulk - as he gets more pissed off he is able to shrug off more of his pain and weariness, so he wouldn't necessarily need to back away from combat.

Wally the Wizard takes damage and starts complaining, he never does get to shake off the damage while in combat, even if he leans against the wall wheezing for a round or two. (He really could stand to lose about twenty pounds, you know?)

As for a battle with a single dragon taking two hours... (the other combat that I mentioned - I was only in two and both were boring as water soup without salt) the Healing Surges made it painfully obvious that we were going to win, but that it was going to take forever to get there. It became very predictable, very repetitious, and lasted way too long.

The Auld Grump

 

[The Shaman]

[MENTION=26473]The Shaman[/MENTION] - I'm sorry that you were offended by my suggestions 1E and 2E were imperfect games . . .

Thanks for implying that I'm offended, but of course that's just a rhetorical duck-and-weave with no basis in fact; you're talking to a guy who has no dog in the hunt.

. . . but I am not interested in the semantic game of "You're putting forth your personal opinion as if it is fact." That must be the most out-worn, over-used debate on the internet. Not interested in rehashing that for the umpteenth time.

What you dismiss as a "semantic game" I consider basic good manners, which is something I consider neither "out-worn" nor "over-used."

Tell me, what exactly does it get you to be dismissive of others' preferences? What do you stand to gain?

 

[The Shaman]

A level one fighter gets hit by a poisoned sword and take 8 points of damage from the slashing gash the orc just opened from his hip to his armpit. He then needs to make a saving throw vs poison.

A level 10 fighter gets hit by a poisoned sword and gets nicked in the arm for 8 points of damage. However, since he was hit, he still has to make a save vs poison.

The difference is a huge gash on a level 1 fighter, vs a nick on a level 10 fighter, even though both attacks did the same damage.

Yup. The blow that the high-level fighter blocks with his shield, or takes on the armor, or luckily dodges, or narrowly nicks him, is the same blow that would lay him out for the angels at low level.

Hit points are pretty damn elegant when you think about it.

 

[danbuter1]

I'm not a huge fan of 4e, but I think Healing Surges was a good idea. It made clerics viable as something other than walking healing potions.

 

[Aaron]

I apologize in advance if I missed it, but I haven't found a response to this excellent post, that elegantly summarizes what many feel is wrong with the HS.

The only answer I have found doesn't address at all the "Schrödinger" issue.