D&D General Hit Points. Did 3.0 Or 3.5 Get it Right?

[Pedantic]

The truth though is all game systems are designed around situations where the 'bonus' to a roll is significantly smaller than span of fortune available from the fortune mechanic. In D20 this means the design is built around situations where your bonus on the D20 check is rather smaller than 19, and probably not larger than 10 or so. Any game system starts breaking down when the fortune is a rather small input to adjudication or where the range between bonuses of participants becomes large. It's not just a D&D thing. It has to do with the mechanics of playing well together and having reasonable expectations of failure or success.

That's really only true if that fortune is going to be evaluated as a direct comparison between the parties involved, or if both parties are making a comparison against a static obstacle. Attack vs. AC breaks down if the characters can't hit or be hit, and a wall that must be climbed, a rogue can definitely climb and a cleric definitely can't, for example.

Ideally the game design task should be using fortune in a more interesting way than those direct comparisons. It's not a problem if wall climbing is an ability only in one character's skill set, if the situation at hand has more points of interaction and could be solved in multiple ways (and especially if climbing is only one step in a broader set of necessary actions). The worst possible use of randomness is "roll high enough to win." Ideally the gameplay should exist above that, with the fortune representing a risk for players to evaluate in their declared move, instead of the inevitable arbiter of success.

 

[Micah Sweet]

But a class isn't a profession. If you were a professional you'd cross-train and learn from your team mates (which admittedly you do in 4e). Hrothgar the Bold should be learning something from watching Milcax the Sneaky at work and from campfire conversations. Class is far more restrictive.

Meanwhile Solos are obvious, Elites are an in universe designation, so are regulars - and Minions are outclassed. Makes far more in universe sense.

Cross-training isn't and shouldn't be a given, but I'll admit I prefer a better way to learn outside of the class buckets (and my version of D&D has such).

As far as the other issue goes, solo/elite/regular/minion makes far more sense than what? What are you fighting against?

 

[Pedantic]

I know this. But people still want the mechanics to also serve as an analog to naturalistic fact in-universe.

Goodness, have you tried telling them to stop? I'm sure if you ask nicely, they'll just adjust their preferences to make the game design task easier.

 

[Neonchameleon]

As far as the other issue goes, solo/elite/regular/minion makes far more sense than what? What are you fighting against?

One-size-fits-all (which is what you have without multiple baselines) or, worse, "everyone should be built like an adventurer" as in 3.x

 

[Vaalingrade]

Goodness, have you tried telling them to stop? I'm sure if you ask nicely, they'll just adjust their preferences to make the game design task easier.

I'm just answering someone else's question of why.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I know this. But people still want the mechanics to also serve as an analog to naturalistic fact in-universe.

GURPS was the first system I really got because it does this. So do many, many other systems including those used for the WoD.

I just don't understand why people try to fold, spindle, and mutilate a system with hit points, classes, and levels. The goal is one I'm sympathetic to.

 

[Micah Sweet]

One-size-fits-all (which is what you have without multiple baselines) or, worse, "everyone should be built like an adventurer" as in 3.x

Pre-WotC editions used population levels in communities to indicate the presence of more powerful and/or exceptional individuals. I see no problem with that method.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Pre-WotC editions used population levels in communities to indicate the presence of more powerful and/or exceptional individuals. I see no problem with that method.

On a setting by setting basis, possibly.

 

[Micah Sweet]

GURPS was the first system I really got because it does this. So do many, many other systems including those used for the WoD.

I just don't understand why people try to fold, spindle, and mutilate a system with hit points, classes, and levels. The goal is one I'm sympathetic to.

You don't have to understand it, no more than I have to understand others passion for storygames and games that use narrative mechanics. We just both have to accept it.

 

[Micah Sweet]

On a setting by setting basis, possibly.

In what setting would that not make sense?