In the heat of battle, is hit point loss a wound?

[Herremann the Wise]

Shouldn't the game be designed to handle both methods effectively?

Yes.

For myself, I prefer to think of the modes of play and which is the most appropriate. If a situation needs to focus in on the specific order and interaction of finer actions, I think this is best handled in initiative although I see nothing wrong with a skill challenge for certain situations where the gaming lens does not need to be zoomed in quite as much. I suppose if there is a chance for loss of hit points, initiative is most appropriate.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Lanefan]

Quick roll to see whether the inkeeper dies or flees. Now what?

OK, does he die? Roll to hit. What's his AC? How many h.p. does he have (in case you roll poorly on damage)? What's his BAB/fight level/HD rating/whatever you use to determine his skill level at fighting back should he decide to do so? Is he unusually strong or weak? Etc.

Skill challenges based on the difficulty of what's being attempted. How well the Urchin knows the streets isn't in any statblock I'm aware of.

Assumes use of a skill challenge mechanic. The Urchin's street knowledge will only help her if she evades your attempt to grab; so what's her AC (and how does it get there)? How many h.p. does she have (in case you grab too hard)? Etc.

As for the mob scenarios, every pitchfork thrown at the target gets a roll to hit - luck is luck, after all; and in my game a PC died because of this - he pissed off a village so badly they came after him with pitchforks and torches, and he didn't run fast enough.

Athletics counts more than swordsmanship here.

Fistsmanship, swordsmanship - pretty much the same, really; only with different weapons. AC? Hit points? Etc.

Skill challenges.

Maybe, though if the guard raises an alarm and stands her ground (thus producing a combat) you need AC, h.p., etc. And a town guard can be - and often is - a 0th-level type or a commoner.

Is the farmer fighting?

Possibly, along with his family, the hired hands, and whoever else might be nearby... AC, h.p., etc. - I think by now you see the pattern.

Most of them require a represnetation of the mob or the city rather more than the individuals.

Perhaps, but the mob is made up of individuals; and particularly at very low level each of those individuals could pose a threat.

Lan-"commoner no more"-efan

 

[Hussar]

I'd point out that the whole point here is that our innkeeper was a 1st level commoner with 2 hp on average. He dies automatically if the fighter hits, and he has a 10 AC since he has no stats.

Anything else and he's no longer "Joe Commoner". And if the innkeeper is no longer Joe Commoner, then our PC's starting out stronger than Joe Commoner isn't really a big deal either.

Wait, what? Are you honestly trying to tell me that starting HP for a 1st level PC in 4E isn't vastly greater than in previous editions of D&D? You have got to be the first person who's ever argued that. The absolute maximum that a barbarian (with the largest hit die) could have, even in 3E (and spending a feat to get it) was 19. In 2E, the warrior had the highest hit die (d10) and the highest HP he could have at first level was 15.

Yup, about double HP. That sounds about right. Note, that your figher has SEVEN TIMES more HP than the commoner. Note, a "commoner" doesn't exist as a distinct entity in 4e. That's where the apples and oranges comment comes in. 3e tries to say that all commoners are identical, within a very narrow variance. 4e says, "Hey, what would make a more interesting game. It doesn't try to model the world. So, our commoner ISN'T a minion. He might be, or he might not be. Depends on the situation.

So, no, a 1st level character in 4e isn't that much stronger than a commoner, because that commoner's stats are not dictated by the system.

 

[Lanefan]

4e says, "Hey, what would make a more interesting game. It doesn't try to model the world.

Failing to at least try to model the world - even to model the internal game world to itself* - immediately makes it much less interesting.

* - evidenced by commoners not having stats where PC-type people do, among other things

So, no, a 1st level character in 4e isn't that much stronger than a commoner, because that commoner's stats are not dictated by the system.

All that tells me is the system has a leak.

I hope it gets fixed in 5e.

Lanefan

 

[pemerton]

Your PCs must be the best-behaved party in all of D&D in that case, as they have clearly never:

- attacked an innkeep after being shortchanged
- captured a street urchin picking pockets
- started (or tried to stop) a town riot
- been involved in (or, as happened in my game, been the quarry of) a torch-and-pitchfork brigade
- participated in a bar brawl with the locals
- needed to neutralize a town guard in order to sneak in
- needed to neutralize some prison guards in order to reach someone and free him
- been involved on either side as a local farm gets raided
- etc.

All of these require at least some mechanical representation of the commoners involved

With the attacks against random inhabitants (urchins, innkeeps etc) I would be likely to make success automatic: if the players want their PCs to kill such people, they succeed. In my game, what would make that scene interesting is not its mechanical resolution, but its downstream consequences in the story.

As far as neutralising single or even small groups of guards is concerned, I have (and would) resolve this as a skill check or skill challenge: on a successful check, the guard in question is "minionised", and a power can then be used to kill him/her. If the check fails, then a "real" combat is required - the logic of this is that, on a failed check, the player doesn't get what s/he wants - the guard has the opportunity, within the mechanics, to try and flee for help.

Riots and brigades sound to me like swarm rules. I have run a couple of recent encounters with hobgoblin phalanxes, statting up the phalanxes as swarms (that had the ability to "kill" adjacent hobgoblin minions in order to heal their damage).

Bar fights are not well modeled by rules that assume violent confrontations where you're trying to kill someone.

Agreed.

Skill challenges based on the difficulty of what's being attempted. How well the Urchin knows the streets isn't in any statblock I'm aware of.

<snip>

Most of them require a represnetation of the mob or the city rather more than the individuals.

More agreement.

Yeah, yeah, skill challenges, blah blah. But you're basically having to come up with all of those on the fly or otherwise putting the situation into your favored mechanic and setting the difficulty. Why not use the mechanic that's already there and been there since the beginning? Combat rules.

In my own case? Because the combat rules (in 4e, at least) are for running interesting combats, not the cutting down of urchins by heavily armed and armoured warriors! As I indicated above, the only reason for moving to tactical resolution would be to give the NPC a chance to escape, thus introducing some extra complexity into the situation.

As to your comment about making up stuff on the fly - running a skill challenge on the fly is no different from statting up an urchin on the fly. That's what the game has encounter build rules for, to support this sort of stuff!

Failing to at least try to model the world - even to model the internal game world to itself* - immediately makes it much less interesting.

That depends pretty heavily on what you play the game for.

Lots of other fictional products (books, movies, etc) don't try to model a world, but just use the world as a backdrop for their real narrative point. An RPG can be like that too, and still be pretty interesting.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Yeah, yeah, skill challenges, blah blah. But you're basically having to come up with all of those on the fly or otherwise putting the situation into your favored mechanic and setting the difficulty. Why not use the mechanic that's already there and been there since the beginning? Combat rules.

Shouldn't the game be designed to handle both methods effectively?

It can. But these aren't anything like ordinary combats so combat rules aren't very applicable.

OK, does he die? Roll to hit. What's his AC?

10. He's an inkeeper behind a bar and flat footed. He also gets killed automatically by the fighter because he's level 0.

How many h.p. does he have (in case you roll poorly on damage)?

1d4.

What's his BAB/fight level/HD rating/whatever you use to determine his skill level at fighting back should he decide to do so? Is he unusually strong or weak? Etc.

He's a level 0 character unless I've established him as otherwise.

Seriously, you really want to bother to roll that out? When there's no rolling needed in AD&D because a fighter can kill a number of level 0 characters up to their level?

If I've established him as a former adventurer, things will be different.

Assumes use of a skill challenge mechanic. The Urchin's street knowledge will only help her if she evades your attempt to grab; so what's her AC (and how does it get there)? How many h.p. does she have (in case you grab too hard)? Etc.

Grabs do no damage as a default in 4e. As for the AC, small size and high dex. That's assuming you spotted in time. We're in skill challenge territory - which basically gives a list of numbers behind the DM screen that feel about right (the same thing DMs have always done as far as I can tell).

As for the mob scenarios, every pitchfork thrown at the target gets a roll to hit - luck is luck, after all; and in my game a PC died because of this - he pissed off a village so badly they came after him with pitchforks and torches, and he didn't run fast enough.

If the PCs fail the challenge to either calm the mob or escape, they are in combat with a swarm.

Fistsmanship, swordsmanship - pretty much the same, really; only with different weapons. AC? Hit points? Etc.

Very much not the same. In a bar brawl you don't actually want to kill anyone. It's about as similar as boxing for sport and a real fight - some things cross over but the assumptions are very different.

Maybe, though if the guard raises an alarm and stands her ground (thus producing a combat) you need AC, h.p., etc. And a town guard can be - and often is - a 0th-level type or a commoner.

Then I have a monster manual if things go that pear shaped.

Possibly, along with his family, the hired hands, and whoever else might be nearby... AC, h.p., etc. - I think by now you see the pattern.
Perhaps, but the mob is made up of individuals; and particularly at very low level each of those individuals could pose a threat.

Lan-"commoner no more"-efan

If the farmer is staying to fight then I need stats. In which case it's a good job I've the best monster manuals ever written for D&D. If the farmer is doing the sensible thing and taking potshots out of the window with his crossbow while the PCs fight I don't really.

Failing to at least try to model the world - even to model the internal game world to itself* - immediately makes it much less interesting.

* - evidenced by commoners not having stats where PC-type people do, among other things
All that tells me is the system has a leak.

I hope it gets fixed in 5e.

Lanefan

This is not a leak. This is a different assumption on how RPGs should work. What's important when I'm trying to bluff the princess for setting difficulty is not how likely she is to see through me (although that will be a factor) - it's how likely she is to do what I ask her to. NPC on NPC combat offstage is resolved by DM fiat and pretty much always has been.

 

[billd91]

It can. But these aren't anything like ordinary combats so combat rules aren't very applicable.

They are when the PCs are sufficiently low level.

 

[jadrax]

Bah, all Innkeepers in D&D are retired Fighters of at least 10th level.

 

[Dour-n-Taciturn]

35 pages and going; so excuse me if I reiterate any points made earlier:

The main issue I see with wound/special damage modules, is what effect those have on challenge ratings. Such a module or dial or switch, will have to apply across the board or risk altering challenges to a point where they may be too difficult (which some may like, but at what cost?).

I like healing to occur at a flat rate, roll your HD per # (say 4) of hours of light activity, and apply modifiers based on level of activity if more or less intense. Constant heavy activity such as a forced march or dungeon crawl may simply disallow recovery of HP at all, whilst bed rest may double or add a bonus, and so on. This is already in play by current play-test rules to some extent with rests.

So now you have a dial what affects HP recovery, based on how intense the adventure is, driven by the PCs, or possibly by plot devices that are time sensitive. Now if a group pushes itself too hard, their HP will be limited, but they can take a break or slow things down, preventing an immersion breaking retreat into town to kick back a few ales...

 

[pemerton]

The main issue I see with wound/special damage modules, is what effect those have on challenge ratings.

<snip>

So now you have a dial what affects HP recovery, based on how intense the adventure is, driven by the PCs, or possibly by plot devices that are time sensitive. Now if a group pushes itself too hard, their HP will be limited, but they can take a break or slow things down, preventing an immersion breaking retreat into town to kick back a few ales...[/quote [MENTION=22779]Hussar[/MENTION] discussed this upthread (or maybe on one of the hundred other related threads): for most groups it won't matter in practice, because gritty natural healing will be displaced by magic healing instead.

I think there will also be a degree of "If you chose the gritty module, you're looking for gritty adventures and so will be able to cope with the consequences of long healing times".

I don't think that's a complete response to your concern. But is it better than nothing?