Uh... since when was this an issue.

[Tony Vargas]

You obviously didn't read what I wrote. I said that REGARDLESS of my definition, the game defines HP a certain way and then this one specific rule defines it a different and conflicting way. That makes for a bad rule.

The 5e definition of hps - like all prior eds of D&D - includes a lot of possible non-physical sources of hps.

While a 'miss' (failure to make contact & penetrate armor) might well do even a tiny amount of meat damage in spite of the armor, the existence of non-physical hps leaves plenty of room for a miss to do a small amount of (likely) non-physical damage.

So there's no contradiction, and it's not a bad rule by that criteria. Only if you insist that /all/ hps are meat, all the time, in all circumstances, no exceptions, is there any possible problem with DoaM - and the problems with PCs gaining hps as they level would positively overwhelm them.

Two major things. First, just because I believe that HP equals meat doesn't mean I think that ALL HP ("purely represented") are meat. Some must be, or else poison wouldn't work

Well, D&D has never had all-non-physical hps (well, except for non-corporeal creatures, I guess). And it still doesn't. And DoaM doesn't imply it does. So, you've clearly got no problem with DoaM.

And, it's interesting you mention poison, because the 1e DMG gives an example, under a Gygaxian treatise explaining the rationale of the poison save, of attacks doing no physical damage /on a hit/.

 

[Emerikol]

Tony I pretty much reject and disagree with everything you've said.

First you can hate DoaM because it guarantees that a sword swing is always effective. So even if a person disagreed with me on everything else about hit points this is still a totally valid viewpoint.

The proportional hit point model fits the rules of 1e through 3e fine. If that is your take then you could reject DoaM.

If just for the sake of argument we said 50% of hit points were meat and the rest narrative, a person could still argue against DoaM. When 50% are meat, then any hit in theory must be explainable given it did meat damage. The same for recovery. If any part of hit points are meat then they require magic to heal because any hit could in theory involve meat. You only have to have the possibility to eliminate the validity of any healing that can't close a real wound.

 

[evileeyore]

If any part of hit points are meat then they require magic to heal because any hit could in theory involve meat.

No they don't. Plenty of non-magical means to heal up.

Time, Short Term Heal Checks (First Aid), Long Term Heal Checks (Critical Care, Surgery), Non-Magical Supernatural Healing (Psionics), Alchemy (Science!), etc.

Besides only 1 HP needs to be meat. The Last One.

 

[Emerikol]

No they don't. Plenty of non-magical means to heal up.

Time, Short Term Heal Checks (First Aid), Long Term Heal Checks (Critical Care, Surgery), Non-Magical Supernatural Healing (Psionics), Alchemy (Science!), etc.

Besides only 1 HP needs to be meat. The Last One.

The last one theory is not what the guy said. And my use of the term magic was meant to include all forms of other worldly power. Psionics, Alchemy, and so forth are such things.

When you say time (including first aid and medicine), I think you are being deliberately obtuse. I was talking about healing beyond what we would consider natural healing. If you really didn't get my focus then fine but I find that pretty amazing. I think instead it's deliberate obtuseness just to play gotcha.


My main point which his likely something you missed is that once you've lost some meat, no amount of kind words is bringing it back. For those that want to play the shell game and say the kind words add on another type of hit point then I ask why you don't just add those up front since they are unrelated to what was lost. Maybe we can all just start at max + 20 or something.

 

[Bawylie]

Edit : I'd rather not have said anything.

 

[evileeyore]

The last one theory is not what the guy said.

And "Proportional HP Theory" is also not what he was arguing. Your point?

And my use of the term magic was meant to include all forms of other worldly power. Psionics, Alchemy, and so forth are such things.

And mine doesn't. Magic is magic, supernatural != magic. Dragons can still fly in an anti-magic field and that makes the laws of physics cry.

When you say time (including first aid and medicine), I think you are being deliberately obtuse.

Absolutely not. If you take 0hp, or below 0hp as "death's door" then D&D's 'natural healing' has always been supernatural or magical. Heroes go from "damn near dead" to "fully healed" in astonishing rates of time in all versions of D&D. D&D has never come close to accurately modeling real healing rates.

I was talking about healing beyond what we would consider natural healing.

As I just pointed out I consider all D&D healing to be atleast 'supernatural' (in that it is not realistic at all, not that it requires the 'supernatural' power set).


It boils down to the core of why I like DoaM. It allows the "I never miss" swordsman of myth, which like everything in D&D is not an accurate reflection of reality, but a reflection of myth and fantasy.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Tony I pretty much reject and disagree with everything you've said.

I'm not shocked.

First you can hate DoaM because it guarantees that a sword swing is always effective. So even if a person disagreed with me on everything else about hit points this is still a totally valid viewpoint.

The degree of effectiveness is pretty substantially different on a hit vs a miss, though. Lots of things in the game are 'always effective' in the sense that they always do /something/, not in the sense that they always succeed in what they try to do (you could argue the sword-swing is only successful when it drops the target, for instance, meaning, even with DoaM, it's very often un-successful). Examples include auto-damage (magic missile) and damage on a successful save (which'll include/at-will, single-target/ cantrips once the PH is out).

The proportional hit point model fits the rules of 1e through 3e fine. If that is your take then you could reject DoaM.

You could also accept DoaM, since the proportion of physical damage in a 1 or 2 hp wound could easily fall below the threashold of a single hp - and/or be explained by the impact-on-armor rationale.

If just for the sake of argument we said 50% of hit points were meat and the rest narrative, a person could still argue against DoaM.

At that ratio, they could also argue against gaining hps with level!

If any part of hit points are meat then they require magic to heal because any hit could in theory involve meat. You only have to have the possibility to eliminate the validity of any healing that can't close a real wound.

Not really. 'Restored' hps could be all-non-meat, the ratio would just change. Y'know, just like it does when you level.

 

[Tovec]

Absolutely not. If you take 0hp, or below 0hp as "death's door" then D&D's 'natural healing' has always been supernatural or magical. Heroes go from "damn near dead" to "fully healed" in astonishing rates of time in all versions of D&D. D&D has never come close to accurately modeling real healing rates.

I don't know why people keep insisting that because we believe that HP relates to meat that we must fully buy into death spirals. I'll come out and say it I'm 100% okay with going from 'still standing, not big deal' to 'help me I'm almost dead.' That is because I HATE death spirals. I find it unfun. If that is your same objection to disliking HP as meat that is fine but let's not pretend that it has anything to do with the in-world explanation. DoaM is poorly written, poorly balanced, poorly explained, poorly related to HP and AC. None of these issues are cleared up by liking DoaM. Liking it is completely sideways to the point and as far as I'm seeing that is the brunt of what you are giving me.

As I just pointed out I consider all D&D healing to be atleast 'supernatural' (in that it is not realistic at all, not that it requires the 'supernatural' power set).

As I have repeatedly pointed out. I consider HP to require magic to heal and a good solid blow to remove. If you are okay with inspirational words (non-magic) altering the HP value then that is great. But your preference isn't going to impact me one way or another. Simply put all I've seen from you evileeyore is opinion and not fact.

It boils down to the core of why I like DoaM. It allows the "I never miss" swordsman of myth, which like everything in D&D is not an accurate reflection of reality, but a reflection of myth and fantasy.

And yet that isn't really what DoaM is modeling. If it were then more archetypes would have it. I believe that is probably what sneak attack is primarily based on. Certainly most precision damage. No, DoaM has been described as a "blow so brutal that--" and that explanation does not fly with me. It is false on the face of what they are saying to be true. No one else works that way. Dragons can smack you across the room - IF they hit. If they don't then surprisingly a 12000lb dragon doesn't deal secondary damage in he terms of his STR mod.

It is okay with wanting to model things differently but this is inconsistent.

Either way, evileeyore, I too am tired of your "obtuseness" and shall have to be blocking you following this reply.

ps. Tony, you've been blocked since years back - my first on this forum - so I have no idea what you're saying.

 

[evileeyore]

I don't know why people keep insisting that because we believe that HP relates to meat that we must fully buy into death spirals.

My post had nothing to do with death spiral. I was stating that going from "0hp and less than 0hp" to "fully healed in a few days" through "natural healing" was not at all releastic. Thus all D&D healing is at best supernatural or magic compared to real healing rates.

DoaM is poorly written, poorly balanced, poorly explained, poorly related to HP and AC.

Your opinion. I think it's written fine, balances, fine, is completely related to gaining and healing of hp, and fits AC themes like a glove.

I consider HP to require magic to heal and a good solid blow to remove. If you are okay with inspirational words (non-magic) altering the HP value then that is great. But your preference isn't going to impact me one way or another.

It will impact you if DoaM is in the PHB. Fact.

Simply put all I've seen from you evileeyore is opinion and not fact.

Right back at ya.

And yet that isn't really what DoaM is modeling. If it were then more archetypes would have it.

You mean more than just the Fighter? The best of the best of the best at non-Magical combat?

Also, note: Clerics and Wizards have DoaM. It's called "Damage on a Save" and "Weak Auto-hit Spells" in their cases though. Now before you say "BUt that's Magic!", I know it is - doesn;t change the point.

Either way, evileeyore, I too am tired of your "obtuseness" and shall have to be blocking you following this reply.

ps. Tony, you've been blocked since years back - my first on this forum - so I have no idea what you're saying.

:shrug: Won't stop the grownups from talking.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I don't know why people keep insisting that because we believe that HP relates to meat that we must fully buy into death spirals.

It's pretty simple, really. If hps do equate directly to the severity of physical wounds, then at some point, those wounds would be severe enough to inflict a penalty.

D&D doesn't have wound penalties, so hps can't be as heavily 'meat' as you'd like them to be. Ergo, you must want wound penalties - and systems that have them do tend to fall into death spirals. It's one of the down-sides of such systems. For you, the upside would be that wound severity is 'associated,' I guess you might say, with the magnitude of hp damage.

I'll come out and say it I'm 100% okay with going from 'still standing, not big deal' to 'help me I'm almost dead.' That is because I HATE death spirals.

You've got a problem, then, if you also want to inflict gruesome, impossible-to-heal-or-even-stabilize-overnight wounds.

DoaM is poorly written, poorly balanced, poorly explained, poorly related to HP and AC.

DoaM is mathematically identical to damage on a successful save. Any problem with DoaM would necessarily also be a problem with DoaSS. Since I've heard no complaints about the latter from people complaining about the former, it's clearly not the mechanic that's the issue.

I consider HP to require magic to heal and a good solid blow to remove.

This is at odds with the way hps are defined in all editions of D&D. You're free to change the rules, of course - and, as long as you're changing hps for your campaign, you can also change DoaM and or DoaSS to suit your new version of hps.

And yet that isn't really what DoaM is modeling. If it were then more archetypes would have it.

I get that there's a temptation to give anything the benighted fighter gets to everyone else, and I generally frown on that impulse, as it makes it hard to keep the fighter balanced and interesting, but, in this case, sure. DoaM is a mechanic that could be used to model a range of things. A cantrip might do damage on a miss, for instance, or quite a variety of monster attacks. The mechanic an also be used to consolidate attacks and saving throws into a single, simpler system. So it's certainly reasonable to think it can and should pop up in more places than just one fighter option.

No, DoaM has been described as a "blow so brutal that--" and that explanation does not fly with me.

Interesting, given that you say, above, that hps shoud take a solid blow to remove. That rationale would seem to fit even with your narrow and unsupported-in-any-version-of-D&D concept of hps.

No one else works that way. Dragons can smack you across the room - IF they hit. If they don't then surprisingly a 12000lb dragon doesn't deal secondary damage in he terms of his STR mod.

No reason some monsters couldn't do so. And, of course, every spell and monster attack (and 'powerful' but still at-will cantrip) that inflicts damage on a successful save /does/ work the 'same' way.