Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Realism vs. Believability and the Design of HPs, Powers and Other Things
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="fenriswolf456" data-source="post: 5879421" data-attributes="member: 6687664"><p>It can and has been explained by others, in that it doesn't _need_ to heal the physical part. Gritting your teeth and bearing the pain. Summoning the mental fortitude to outright ignore the physcial 'wound'. It's often the immediate pain and shock to the system from physical wounds that hit us, but our minds and bodies soon adapt to the pain. Think of hitting your thumb with a hammer, it hurts like hell. You're hopping around, possibly cursing up a storm, and certainly not up for more hammering. Then your SO comes over and gives you a comforting pat and some soothing words and it suddenly becomes more bearable. It's not like your bruised thumb is suddenly healed. But you can go right back to hammering.</p><p> </p><p>It's fair if it breaks your believability scale, everyone has their own thoughts on how things work for them. Similarly, a vast pool of purely physical HPs that gets bigger and bigger as you level breaks things for me and others. Why should a sword that nearly gutted me at first level suddenly not do that as soon as I gain a few levels? If HP are all meat with no intangible qualities associated with it, then even mundane weapon damage should scale with character level.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Except, at least in 4E, there are non-physical damage sources now. Heck, Bard's specifically attack by doing morale damage. Star pact warlocks attack sanity. Psionic classes attack emotions. It's not like a bandage can fix that. And it's not a dichotomy, physical and morale, but is also meant to encompass skill, luck, fate, endurance, and so on.</p><p> </p><p>And countless heroes have been brought back from the brink of death by words and emotions and other non-magical means. Why is it suddenly impossible to believe in a game, and a fantasy game at that?</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Perhaps, but for me, I'm happy with surges and how they function. Recovery of surges, well, that's more an issue.</p><p> </p><p>And it's a lot easier to take something out than to stick something in. But I can see surges being completely optional. Turn them off and bang, you have pre-4E HP. I don't see how it can get much easier than that. Can't abide martial healing, then don't use the Warlord. But why make it so that for those who like Warlords, can't play them because they're not part of the game any more?</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>If the system is going to be modular as planned, I would think all of this could be achieved. Healing Surges could be entirely optional. Powers can also be an optional on or off module. The same for Feats and Skills and so on. In fact, they'd have to be if the design intent is to be able to emulate the various editions. </p><p> </p><p>But I believe it should be in the core, so that the players who do want to use whichever parts, can. And if it doesn't suit the playstyle for you and/or your group, turn off the stuff that doesn't work for you. Personally, having options and then limiting them is more preferrable than not having the option in the first place.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>All the time? My current playgroup has a Warlord for a leader and our only source of healing. So for prolonged short rests, we make multiple use of Inspiring Word.</p><p> </p><p>Am I okay with that? Sure am. Especially as I'm playing a Swordmage who is a devoted soldier of Bahamut, trained in Endurance and is totally in tune with pushing herself beyond limits to get the job done.</p><p> </p><p>Is martial healing in practice everywhere? No, given all the other leaders, the bulk of parties probably never even see a warlord, much less be healed by one.</p><p> </p><p>But I agree with your thoughts on this. If a class doesn't work for a group, it's not going to be played, and so is really a moot point. </p><p> </p><p>I don't understand refusing a game outright based on one particular element of it, like a race or class. I can see how people could balk at more underlying structural component, like HP being more explicitly a combination of physical and non-physical elements, especially combined with the rapid return of healing surges. It can give the game a different feel.</p><p> </p><p>Hopefully with the modularity of 5E, it will end up being possible to dial in the type of gamestyle you want to play.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="fenriswolf456, post: 5879421, member: 6687664"] It can and has been explained by others, in that it doesn't _need_ to heal the physical part. Gritting your teeth and bearing the pain. Summoning the mental fortitude to outright ignore the physcial 'wound'. It's often the immediate pain and shock to the system from physical wounds that hit us, but our minds and bodies soon adapt to the pain. Think of hitting your thumb with a hammer, it hurts like hell. You're hopping around, possibly cursing up a storm, and certainly not up for more hammering. Then your SO comes over and gives you a comforting pat and some soothing words and it suddenly becomes more bearable. It's not like your bruised thumb is suddenly healed. But you can go right back to hammering. It's fair if it breaks your believability scale, everyone has their own thoughts on how things work for them. Similarly, a vast pool of purely physical HPs that gets bigger and bigger as you level breaks things for me and others. Why should a sword that nearly gutted me at first level suddenly not do that as soon as I gain a few levels? If HP are all meat with no intangible qualities associated with it, then even mundane weapon damage should scale with character level. Except, at least in 4E, there are non-physical damage sources now. Heck, Bard's specifically attack by doing morale damage. Star pact warlocks attack sanity. Psionic classes attack emotions. It's not like a bandage can fix that. And it's not a dichotomy, physical and morale, but is also meant to encompass skill, luck, fate, endurance, and so on. And countless heroes have been brought back from the brink of death by words and emotions and other non-magical means. Why is it suddenly impossible to believe in a game, and a fantasy game at that? Perhaps, but for me, I'm happy with surges and how they function. Recovery of surges, well, that's more an issue. And it's a lot easier to take something out than to stick something in. But I can see surges being completely optional. Turn them off and bang, you have pre-4E HP. I don't see how it can get much easier than that. Can't abide martial healing, then don't use the Warlord. But why make it so that for those who like Warlords, can't play them because they're not part of the game any more? If the system is going to be modular as planned, I would think all of this could be achieved. Healing Surges could be entirely optional. Powers can also be an optional on or off module. The same for Feats and Skills and so on. In fact, they'd have to be if the design intent is to be able to emulate the various editions. But I believe it should be in the core, so that the players who do want to use whichever parts, can. And if it doesn't suit the playstyle for you and/or your group, turn off the stuff that doesn't work for you. Personally, having options and then limiting them is more preferrable than not having the option in the first place. All the time? My current playgroup has a Warlord for a leader and our only source of healing. So for prolonged short rests, we make multiple use of Inspiring Word. Am I okay with that? Sure am. Especially as I'm playing a Swordmage who is a devoted soldier of Bahamut, trained in Endurance and is totally in tune with pushing herself beyond limits to get the job done. Is martial healing in practice everywhere? No, given all the other leaders, the bulk of parties probably never even see a warlord, much less be healed by one. But I agree with your thoughts on this. If a class doesn't work for a group, it's not going to be played, and so is really a moot point. I don't understand refusing a game outright based on one particular element of it, like a race or class. I can see how people could balk at more underlying structural component, like HP being more explicitly a combination of physical and non-physical elements, especially combined with the rapid return of healing surges. It can give the game a different feel. Hopefully with the modularity of 5E, it will end up being possible to dial in the type of gamestyle you want to play. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Realism vs. Believability and the Design of HPs, Powers and Other Things
Top