Design principles of healing - no mechanics allowed

[Frostmarrow]

Since most creatures are squishy and only one well placed shot is enough to kill just about anything we need a buffer of something, call it plot immunity, to keep interesting characters alive even though realistically they would die pretty quickly when faced with the dangers the game presents. One hammer blow to the head kills anything that relies on a functioning head. Mind you, the size of the hammer may vary.
We also need to prolong combat somewhat from what is realistic since combat in RPGs is entertainment and not lifethreatening. So, in order to have combat last longer than it takes for a hammer to fall we need a plot immunity function. The exact size of this plot immunity should not be confused with the size of the creature. It should be measured out of the need for plot immunity. A dragon should last longer in combat than a goblin, but not because of the dragon's overwhelming size but rather due to the dragon's superior awesomeness.
It's only the killing blow that is interesting. The fighting that goes on up until this moment is just entertaining water treading.
Given this, healing is only useful once a creature has been struck by the hammer. Once a character is defeated will we need to know what injury the character has suffered and what healing techniques to employ. Also, since plot immunity has nothing to do with morale or courage it is illogical to think that encouraging words from a third party would do anything to extend that immunity. Encouraging words need to find another function in the game (such as pure role-playing thank you very much).

 

[Dausuul]

Please define what you mean by "healing." Are you talking about the closing of fictional wounds? Or are you talking about recovery of a "survival buffer" which may or may not map onto a defined concept in the fiction?

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Please define what you mean by "healing." Are you talking about the closing of fictional wounds? Or are you talking about recovery of a "survival buffer" which may or may not map onto a defined concept in the fiction?

The latter--though I guess with the implication that at least some of the options map onto the fiction as closing of wounds, thus the term "healing".

I was thinking yesterday about how "damage" in D&D often sits astride the gap of fiction and mechanics, and was wondering if I could safely use it when I go to collate all the responses? I'd prefer to use "damage" loosely as "brings creature closer to not being able to function in some way" and "healing" as "removes some damage." There's a problem in that definition with things like temporarily magical impairment and the like, but I hope it makes sense enough.

 

[jrowland]

Please define what you mean by "healing." Are you talking about the closing of fictional wounds? Or are you talking about recovery of a "survival buffer" which may or may not map onto a defined concept in the fiction?

I think the idea of the thread is for you to tell us, or rather, what you want it to be.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

I think the idea of the thread is for you to tell us, or rather, what you want it to be.

That, too.

 

[jrowland]

I was thinking yesterday about how "damage" in D&D often sits astride the gap of fiction and mechanics, and was wondering if I could safely use it when I go to collate all the responses? I'd prefer to use "damage" loosely as "brings creature closer to not being able to function in some way" and "healing" as "removes some damage." There's a problem in that definition with things like temporarily magical impairment and the like, but I hope it makes sense enough.

It does make sense. I like the terms "plot immunity", "fate" etc, but in terms of D&D, "Healing and Damage" are going to stick, regardless if its meat, plot, or both, so its good to keep using them as "keywords" and not literal words.

I am with frostmarrow on this: In a realistic sense, a "significant" blow to the head takes you out of the fight. A "significant" blow to the arm, leg, etc renders that limb useless. This is HP as meat, and should be rare given the pulp fiction nature of D&D. Warhammer treats HP this way. You NEVER want to get hit in Warhammer, you can take a few hits, but even then it persists meaning you can take less hits in subsequent combats. The gritty gamers love this (and I love warhammer for it) but the epic/super-hero playstyle finds it too restrictive.

Many see the solution in 2 "health" pools, 1 meat and 1 fate. 4E did 2 pools: HP and Surges. One could say HP is fate and surges were meat in 4E. Unfortunately, what makes 4E not good is the surges become HP: ie meat becomes fate...too weird. Same for the HD mechanic in D&D Next, HD (meat?) becomes HP (fate). I think you could keep that basic two pool split, but require separate "healing" paths.

I think whatever mechanic (next thread) we work on, this split should be maintained, and we should keep the HD/HP terminology, but make sure their relationship is defined in accordance to what we learn form this thread.

(I so want to propose a mechanic right now...damn you Crazy Jerome and your OP thread boundaries!)

 

[Dausuul]

I think the idea of the thread is for you to tell us, or rather, what you want it to be.

Well, I want the term "healing" to refer to the closing of fictional wounds. But if we are going to have a survival buffer (as every edition of D&D has done), there will obviously need to be a way to replenish it, and it's probably worth having a word for that. I'll call it "recovery."

Anyway, since Crazy Jerome has clarified that he's talking about buffer-restoration, here are my principles, which are partly aesthetic and partly functional:

• Some form of rapid recovery can take place without the use of magic, so that a party without a cleric is not crippled.
• Recovery that is fictionally described as "healing" must be mechanically distinct from that described as "restoring morale" or "catching your breath" or what have you. (That doesn't mean we need a separate buffer, but healing-recovery and resting-recovery should work in slightly different ways.)
• Rapid recovery has limits. At some point, characters can push beyond those limits and suffer long-term consequences that cannot be shrugged off with a few minutes of rest. Ideally, the limits should be "soft limits," so that the long-term consequences are mild at first and get worse if you keep pushing.
• Whatever terms are used for recovery, the buffer, and so forth, the mechanics should mostly conform to the fiction implied by the terms used. If recovery is called "healing," then it should work like healing. If loss of buffer is triggered by a "hit," that should imply that the character was struck by an attack. There will inevitably be corner cases where fiction and mechanics part ways, but those should be the exception (e.g., falling damage) rather than the rule.

That last bit is quite important IMO, because rules terminology is one of the most powerful devices in the game for shaping the fiction. Whatever those terms imply about the fiction, those implications are getting constant reinforcement. You can talk till you're blue in the face about how a "hit" could be a near miss, but the word "hit" is telling a different story, and it's telling it every round of every fight of every gaming session, drumming it into the players' minds through endless repetition. A paragraph or two in the rulebook doesn't have nearly the same impact.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

(I so want to propose a mechanic right now...damn you Crazy Jerome and your OP thread boundaries!)

Well, you can think about it.

I was a little surprised at how fast we got so many great responses, and thus wasn't prepared to follow through early this week. As soon as I can, I'll get the first collation done and start the sister mechanics thread. I want the mechanics to all work off of the same collation, so that we are all talking the same language.

(For those of you interested in such things, the parameters of this topic are loosely based on Agile scenarios. The next one will delve into Agile requirements and tasks.)

 

[Frostmarrow]

Well, I want the term "healing" to refer to the closing of fictional wounds. But if we are going to have a survival buffer (as every edition of D&D has done), there will obviously need to be a way to replenish it, and it's probably worth having a word for that. I'll call it "recovery".

I'm not convinced replenishing the "survival buffer" is necessary during combat or elsewhere. We could just as well say that the survival buffer is topped up at the beginning of every session and that you restore some of it while having a food break.
The survival buffer might be all you have during an entire session and it's your job to stay alive for as long as possible. If you die you die.
Bet you hadn't though of this before.

I was going to erase this but I'll let it stay. It's too far out.

 

[Dausuul]

I'm not convinced replenishing the "survival buffer" is necessary during combat or elsewhere. We could just as well say that the survival buffer is topped up at the beginning of every session and that you restore some of it while having a food break.
The survival buffer might be all you have during an entire session and it's your job to stay alive for as long as possible. If you die you die.
Bet you hadn't though of this before.

I was going to erase this but I'll let it stay. It's too far out.

*shrug* You have to be able to replenish the buffer somehow. In your example, you replenish it by starting a new gaming session. It's an unconventional recovery mechanic, but hardly unheard-of. The Luck advantage in GURPS works* on the basis of real play time; every hour of real time, you get X uses of Luck.

[size=-2]*Or used to, back in the old days. I haven't seen how the latest edition handles it. Been quite a while since I played GURPS.[/size]