Thirst, suffocation and hunger errata : why ???

[doctorhook]

Honestly, I think WotC severely overlooked the remarkable flexibility of their disease track mechanic. I would set up hunger, thirst, and suffocation in a similar manner, with eating, drinking, and taking a breath "instant cures." As for actual numbers, I'm not quite sure yet.

That's a really cool idea, cmbarona. If you come up with some numbers, don't hesitate to post them.

I'd be happy with just the replacement of the "after 3 weeks", "after 3 days", and "after 3 minutes" parts to something more realistic - a lot shorter. It's not like you instantly expire after those time limits are up, you just start losing healing surges.

I disagree with the sentiment that heroes should automatically be better than "average Joe", just because they're player characters. What about the level 1 guy with 8s in all his physical stats? He should be worse at physical stuff than "average Joe", including everything on this list. As he gains levels, his skills will increase to make him better than "average Joe", but he shouldn't just be handed stuff because he's a PC. (in this regard, in my opinion)

The main reason I suggest that PCs are better than the average Joe is because this is a fundamental concession of D&D. (4E in particular.) However, I can see you have a point; in a survival mechanic, a PC lasts longer than average Joe by virtue of his above average ability scores, skills, feats, powers, and equipment, (all advantages that PCs have over "regular" folk), and not because the survival mechanic is inherently skewed to the PCs favour.

Personally I think the space used for these rules is totally wasted; for games where supplies and survival is going to be an issue the DM will likely research the issues a bit more closely and come up with a ruleset which suits their game. For games where basic survival is not going to be an issue then the rules just won't be used. Waste of space; flesh out other rules or give us some other crunchy goodness. Sorry, that's probably not all that helpful, but I am left wondering "why?"

I think the main reason is that when a DM buys D&D books, he does so under the assumption that the rules he'll need are in them. Lots of DMs haven't got time to create their own rules subsystems. More importantly, even in games where survival isn't the primary theme of the campaign, survival situations still happen. For example, the Rogue gets imprisoned in the Baron's dungeon, where they don't feed her; the Fighter gets pulled into the water by a tentacle, then sinks like a stone thanks to his armor, beginning to drown; the Wizard accidentally teleports himself into a barren wasteland, dozens of miles from the magical citadel he was aiming for, without food, water, or the reagents to teleport away.

Survival happens; there's gotta be some rules.

 

[Aloïsius]

Honestly, I think WotC severely overlooked the remarkable flexibility of their disease track mechanic. I would set up hunger, thirst, and suffocation in a similar manner, with eating, drinking, and taking a breath "instant cures." As for actual numbers, I'm not quite sure yet.

That's just brillant, even if it's not the right forum.
This mechanic can be used for disease, hunger, thirst, starvation, crippling wounds, maybe even depression or madness (SAN)... It's just sad that, as you said, WotC did not realize they have a jewel here...

 

[doctorhook]

That's just brillant, even if it's not the right forum.
This mechanic can be used for disease, hunger, thirst, starvation, crippling wounds, maybe even depression or madness (SAN)... It's just sad that, as you said, WotC did not realize they have a jewel here...

Well, it's not necessarily the wrong forum, I don't think, since we're talking about potential solutions to an arguably flawed official rule.

 

[Andor]

Yes and no. The "moment of tension" is when you roll the dice. And the first dice you roll is considerably more difficult with the revision.
Of course, it means that your character can run under the sun, fight in the desert and cast spells without water for THREE days without even caring about it... And that lives my suspension of disbelief absolutely shattered. Just try to not eat for 24 hours. Then imagine adventuring for three weeks... That's simply absurd.

I think the rules assume a temperate climate, that being the baseline. It would be reasonable to require more water consumption if you're doing something stupid like running across the desert during daylight in full platemail, then feel free to speed up that timetable.

The description should have been changed, not the rules. The rules were nice, the description is silly. Painful hunger start after one day without eating, and the maximum pain is after 3 to 4 days. The death usually occurs after 7 to 14 days. Surviving 21 days is a miracle, and requires total inactivity).

Where did you get that idea? The 'rule of threes' is what I've always been taught about survival, and some quick web searching shows that people can survive much longer than that. Heck, just watch survivorman some time, that lunatic regularly goes a week without food in arctic conditions.

Water is serious buisness, you can get into big trouble without water if you need to be active in a hot climate, but you really can do without food for a remarkable period of time. Which is not to say you are going to be happy about it. As you say, fasting is no fun.

 

[cmbarona]

For those of you who are still interested:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/4e-fan...thirst-hunger-disease-tracks.html#post4549095

 

[LightPhoenix]

Yes people are throwing fireballs, but if you are going to make rules for deprivation at least take 10 minutes to google the reality of it, then make simple rules to approximate it.

The rule of threes is a pretty common survival/medical piece of information. Most people can live those lengths of time without food/water/air. There's no guarantee (is there ever?) there won't be some sort of physiological damage, but in the majority of cases people can recover fully.

 

[evilgenius8000]

I'm pretty sure the rule of threes describes the point at which a normal human dies, not begins to feel uncomfortable... This will be houseruled in my game.

 

[Bleoberis De Ganis]

Wouldn't it be better if not eating and drinking caused the semi-permanent loss of healing surges. Each day you do not eat/drink you lose a healing surge (each). They only return when you eat and drink. (1 each). When you have run out of surges you start taking damage and condition effects and ultimately die.

This could apply to other things such as freezing, over-heating, etc.

 

[nittanytbone]

It seems to me that the Disease track could work well for thirst and starvation.

Perhaps with more than one day between each check on the starvation chart, of course.

 

[Stalker0]

Heck, just watch survivorman some time, that lunatic regularly goes a week without food in arctic conditions.

Water is serious buisness, you can get into big trouble without water if you need to be active in a hot climate, but you really can do without food for a remarkable period of time. Which is not to say you are going to be happy about it. As you say, fasting is no fun.

Having watched survivorman, I would say that guy is trained in endurance

I don't have a problem with a hero being tougher than the normal guy, but I do think these rules go overboard. A guy whose only task is hunting and surviving (not saying that's easy!) surviving without food for 3 weeks. I'll buy that, but he'll be near death towards the end.

But a guy who is fighting every day, he's getting beat up and butchered, having to heal up a least superficial bruises going for 3 weeks before he even needs to make an endurance roll? That is way out there to me.