Uh... since when was this an issue.

pemerton

Legend
How can one have a gritty game, for example, if fighters can heal themselves in the middle of combat without even taking two seconds pause to bandage themselves? That massive blow that landed squarely on your chest, that the DM just narrated happened to your character, didn't suddenly stop having happened if you use Second Wind on your next turn, does it. Some people are tolerant (or ignorant) of narrative contradictions, and others aren't. At which point the discussion digresses into "you viewpoint is absurd", vs "no it's just a game it doesn't have to make sense"
The thing that doesn't make sense to me is how a "massive blow that landed squarely on your chest" is so severe that a fighter can't shrug it off with a second wind, yet not sufficiently severe to impede that fighter's performance in any way.

There are games that do "gritty" well. Runequest is one. For various reaons unrelated to its degree of grittiness, I prefer Rolemaster. But D&D isn't really one of these games, because no PC ever takes a non-fatal yet debilitating injury.* The narrative contradiction, therefore, is in narating non-debilitating injuries in a way that implies that they are, in fact, debilitating.


*[size=-2]With the exception of some magical effects (eg withering, cause blindness) and some ultra-magical weapons (eg swords of sharpness). Being non-fatally debilitated only by powerful magic is basically the opposite of gritty. It's gonzo.[/size]
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

That massive blow that landed squarely on your chest, that the DM just narrated happened to your character, didn't suddenly stop having happened if you use Second Wind on your next turn, does it. Some people are tolerant (or ignorant) of narrative contradictions, and others aren't. At which point the discussion digresses into "you viewpoint is absurd", vs "no it's just a game it doesn't have to make sense".

The thing that doesn't make sense to me is how a "massive blow that landed squarely on your chest" is so severe that a fighter can't shrug it off with a second wind, yet not sufficiently severe to impede that fighter's performance in any way.

There are games that do "gritty" well. Runequest is one. For various reaons unrelated to its degree of grittiness, I prefer Rolemaster. But D&D isn't really one of these games, because no PC ever takes a non-fatal yet debilitating injury.* The narrative contradiction, therefore, is in narating non-debilitating injuries in a way that implies that they are, in fact, debilitating.


*[SIZE=-2]With the exception of some magical effects (eg withering, cause blindness) and some ultra-magical weapons (eg swords of sharpness). Being non-fatally debilitated only by powerful magic is basically the opposite of gritty. It's gonzo.[/SIZE]

There is that giant, gaping hole in the D&D as process simulation contention, of course, and then there is the "lesser one" of stamina. I've outlined the biomechanics and the biology of it multiple times now. Every martial exchange in real life depletes the actors involved such that they are more potentially susceptible to failure (primarily due to muscle and mental overiding the capacity to concentrate and thus to make the immediate, subconscious permutations required to coordinate a response; mostly the Orient and Decide but also the Act portions of the OODA Loop) in the subsequent exchanges. That is, until they, oh I don't know, "get their second wind"! Which just so happens to be a very real thing in martial endeavors (real both mentally and physically)!

But I guess fantasy worlds don't have OODA Loops, nor vasovagal responses, nor creatures with biology similar to our own and thus aerobic and anaerobic metabolism (and their exchanges, interfaces with other systems, and fallout)...because that would be unrealistic (?) and filled with "narrative contradictions."
 

DDNFan

Banned
Banned
There is that giant, gaping hole in the D&D as process simulation contention, of course, and then there is the "lesser one" of stamina. I've outlined the biomechanics and the biology of it multiple times now. Every martial exchange in real life depletes the actors involved such that they are more potentially susceptible to failure (primarily due to muscle and mental overiding the capacity to concentrate and thus to make the immediate, subconscious permutations required to coordinate a response; mostly the Orient and Decide but also the Act portions of the OODA Loop) in the subsequent exchanges. That is, until they, oh I don't know, "get their second wind"! Which just so happens to be a very real thing in martial endeavors (real both mentally and physically)!

But I guess fantasy worlds don't have OODA Loops, nor vasovagal responses, nor creatures with biology similar to our own and thus aerobic and anaerobic metabolism (and their exchanges, interfaces with other systems, and fallout)...because that would be unrealistic (?) and filled with "narrative contradictions."

You don't need to man-splain biology to us, dude. We know D&D HP and damage isn't realistic. But HP isn't reduced when you do strenuous tasks, and you shouldn't have powers that undo the effects of damage by retconning the damage you took previously as being mere loss of combat effectiveness. HP is not defined as combat effectiveness in this game, and even if it were (which it isn't), there is no rules or mechanical support for it. Damage is damaging, not tiring. You can say it's wrong that being damaged doesn't reduce your to-hit, but you can't then turn around and say being damaged is the same as being tired, where both actually don't reduce your combat effectiveness over your entire HP range.

No character ever died of being too tired. We're going to go around in circles here becaise there is nothing you can do to rationalize HP being stamina for Second Wind only, where if Second Wind isn't used to restore the HP but a healing potion or Cure Wounds spell or rest, makes it mean stamina where damage is concerned. Damage isn't tiring, it's damaging. Those words mean different things. Forcing a false equality on incompatible concepts is irrational. If the damage you took was described as a wound, it shouldn't be negated by adrenalin.

This is why Second Wind made sense as Temp HP which goes away after 5 minutes (adrenalin keeping you going despite a serious injury, not actually negating that injury. See the difference? I'm not sure you do), but doesn't make sense at all for HP.

Show one other example of HP being treated as stamina. This is the outlier. 99.99999% of all HP reduction in D&D is caused by some kind of injury or "damage" trauma, and never due to your character becoming tired. If you wanted to actually model character's effectiveness diminishing as they get worn out from combat, one should reduce their to-hit and damage, not just their current HP total. Since neither to-hit, damage, or HP are reduced as you do activity in this game, you can't pretend like Second Wind restoring HP makes any sense because it does not.
 
Last edited:

pemerton

Legend
Second Wind made sense as Temp HP which goes away after 5 minutes (adrenalin keeping you going despite a serious injury, not actually negating that injury
This is not correct.

Temp hp which are actually ablated by damage are no more temporary than "real" hp.

To get an effect of the sort that you describe you don't want temp hp - you want something like a 3E-style temp CON boost. In D&Dnext it would be something like "When you use Second Wind, heal 1d10 hp. At the end of the combat, take 1d10 damage."

We know D&D HP and damage isn't realistic.

<snip>

you can't pretend like Second Wind restoring HP makes any sense because it does not.
If the first sentence is true, then how can the second sentence matter? Ie if hp are not realistic, then how can non-realism be an objection to Second Wind?

Show one other example of HP being treated as stamina. T

<snip>

Since neither to-hit, damage, or HP are reduced as you do activity in this game
I don't know D&Dnext well enough (and haven't seen the final rules). In 4e, which is the edition that leaned most heavily on Second Wind and related mechanics, hit point depletion is a completely standard feature of the resolution of non-combat physical activity (via skill challenges).

No character ever died of being too tired.
Huh? People die because, being tired, they can't dodge/parry. Or to flip it around - you win a fight by wearing down your enemy and rendering the opponent unable to respond to your attacks.
 

Tovec

Explorer
Bah!

I've stayed out of the conversation (about second wind) thus far because I think it only relates to DoaM tangentially, but now it seems we've hit the actual topic of this board and so....

Huh? People die because, being tired, they can't dodge/parry. Or to flip it around - you win a fight by wearing down your enemy and rendering the opponent unable to respond to your attacks.
Except this isn't what DoaM is..

It is wearing down your opponent... in a single round and killing them through sheer "wearing down" aka "tiring" without ever actually landing a solid blow. That doesn't make any sense. No one, and I mean NO ONE, dies in a single round against a relatively equal opponent through sheer exhaustion on the FIRST ROUND without actually being hit. That is just insane on the face of it - but it is what you want us to buy with DoaM and "tiredness."

Regardless of that, a fight between two opponents who are wearing eachother down would not be: (a) solely one sided - the fighter with the two handed weapon is able to wear you down, but not the guy with a longsword; (b) equal to that person's STR instead of your own CON - I'm being worn down.. but that wearing has nothing to do with my own physical stamina; (c) IS NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF HOW HP ACTUALLY WORK OTHERWISE!

Simply put, HP doesn't currently measure "wearing down" or tiring out. It doesn't. It could, but it doesn't. Every hit is meat, that is why poison weapons work. How badly is up for debate (the old "everything after the first point is abstraction" argument), but the fact that poison works means it isn't a wearing factor as much as it is a DAMAGING factor .. thus why it is called damage.

And as to why we "simulationists" are okay with not having penalties for being worn down even though it is more realistic. I think that has to do with it being less fun. Basically, "death spirals," while perhaps more realistic, generally don't make the game more enjoyable and so they are ignored. Though if you really want to make the argument that they should be included that is fine - but it isn't the argument you are making right now. That of course ignores that certain amounts of death spiraling does exist, though it is usually a optional module instead of the primary rules - where it belongs IMHO - and where DoaM belongs too.

If instituting DoaM why not make lopping off limbs mandatory for a certain style of weapon too? So, let's say anyone with a greataxe now has a 100% chance of taking off somebody's head on a successful hit. That is certainly a better deal than being "worn down" on misses constantly, since you aren't guaranteed to actually hit for the head-cutting attack - unlike DoaM. And mine is actually LESS deadly to that kobold on the first round of combat. But no, I suggest BOTH of these tactics which don't make a whole lot of sense be relegated to modules to be added on for groups/DMs that like them - instead of being the automatic default for the entire game.
 

pemerton

Legend
Except this isn't what DoaM is..

It is wearing down your opponent... in a single round and killing them through sheer "wearing down" aka "tiring" without ever actually landing a solid blow.
I wasn't talking about DoaM - I was responding to [MENTION=6776483]DDNFan[/MENTION]'s comments about second wind.

Obviously if you kill someone via DoaM that person has suffered a solid blow (from your weapon, from tripping over and hitting their head on a rock, from . . . - D&D leaves the range of narrative options pretty open in this respect). "Miss" in the phrase "DoaM" doesn't mean "character missed opponent"; it means "player missed target number". DoaM is a rule that allows players of certain characters to have their PCs be (modestly) successful even when rolling poorly; it's not a rule about fighters being able to bizarrely "tire" their enemies to death.
 

You don't need to man-splain biology to us, dude.

No idea what man-splain is.

We know D&D HP and damage isn't realistic.

Yet, then the rest of the post (and several others in other areas) begs the question that HP are indeed traumatic soft tissue injuries and then asserts what they are not. Better yet, the "what they are not" you assert is precisely what they are and truly the only consistent thing they've ever been; "heroic staying power" and, by proxy of that, "the measure of a character's ability to sustain combat effectiveness". HP are the deepest of abstractions possible to facilitate TTRPG play that doesn't require considerable mental overhead, intentionally not equating to anything remotely resembling/acting as a representation of a biological system. As "heroic vitality", in the genre sense, it does the trick well enough if you squint and treat the narrative with a fortune in the middle coat of paint as you play out your scenes. And those are its intentions.

As has been done dozens and dozens and dozens of times before, we can go through the history of the game and the designer statements. From the fact that its inception is as the unit representing a ships' staying power in naval wargaming, which then was ported to Chainmail for miniature/combat unit wargaming. From its porting over to D&D and Gygax's mockery of the interpretation of HP as anything resembling the ablation of soft tissue rather than the measure of "heroic staying power" as was intended...and telling you that there are "competing" systems out there attempting these sorts of things so go to them if that is what you're looking for (which people did). From Dragon 39 which took a (I believe 1st) shot at visceral crits and silly fumbles (because the HP system doesn't try to support anything like it). From AD&D Combat and Tactics by Rich Baker and Skip William, where in their introductory and later, they again restate that "At its most basic level, the AD&D combat system is a contest of attrition that all boils down to who runs out of hit points first." Then they go about speaking as to how the idea of wounds by themselves in the system as written are absurd...but here is lesser wobbly crit hit and wound module to tack on to the system to supplant the much more wobbly one provided by Dragon! To 3.x, trying to tighten it up and break out a few components (such as "nonlethal damage" and some component parts of AC) but still (mostly) holding to the same old squishy definitions of HP and HP damage. To 3.x Unearthed Arcana realizing the system doesn't remotely even attempt legitimate process simulation or HP as meat so it gives you a WP/VP and armor as DR module. To 4e again reiterating that HPs are all the squishy, low-resolution bits of "heroic staying power" that Gygax and the rest asserted they were (and how they interact with the system), allowing each table to figure out what that meant in the fiction.

But HP isn't reduced when you do strenuous tasks...

No character ever died of being too tired...

What? This cannot be serious. My guess is that you started playing the game at 3.x but even there, the exploration rules of the system are rife with "HP reduced due to strenuous tasks" and "characters dying of being too tired."

Environmental exposure charges nonlethal damage galore. Nonlethal damage added to a character doesn't subtract directly from HP pool but it 100 % does reduce the available HP pool (and thus their heroic staying power) for heroes (so basically reducing it by proxy) when they have to deal with subsequent dangers. When those nonlethal HPs exceed your current, you're unconscious and helpless. Suffocation eats away HP. Environmental exposure to heat and cold accrue nonlethal and then lethal damage after they're out. Psychic damage eats away HP. Drowning eats away HP. Starvation and Thirst renders unrecoverable nonlethal damage and triggers the fatigued condition (which is triggered by several other environmental aspects).

Lets talk about the fatigued condition that doesn't kill you. Fatigued hampers your ability to survive the environment and win in battle. Exhausted utterly cripples it.

People in real life die from "being too tired" all the bleedin time. Character's in a 3.x game die from "being too tired."

Historically, Evasion and Pursuit rules are lethal. From Gygax's squishy section which basically amounts to "you must figure this out yourself but it should slow movement and reduce combat effectiveness in proportion to your fatigue/exposure", all the way to 5e's Exhaustion rules which (a) render disadvantage, (b) inhibit > utterly end movement, (c) HP loss > to 0 (d) death.

Show one other example of HP being treated as stamina.

I've shown several. They're everywhere in the history of D&D. 4e treats this as Healing Surge ablation (and then HPs when you're out of Surges). All HP are is "metagame stamina" and, by extension, whatever you want them to be (including real stamina) in the fiction at your table. I've run it for almost 6 years and the number of Healing Surges (and then HPs after they're tapped out of HS) my players have lost over the years due to environmental exposure, emotional hits to morale, and/or mental and physical stamina is in the thousands.

I've killed players in all editions from the rigours, hazards and exposure of perilous journeys in every single edition, taxing them HP, having them accrue nonlethal HP, and rendering fatigue and exhaustion (including the AD&D C&T rules for fatigue and exhaustion) unto them and basically making encounters unmanagable by proxy; hence dead PCs.

My only point above was that it is morbidly absurd to try to shoehorn HPs as soft tissue damage and then decry people (and a system) for being irrational when they assume that a Fighter can recover his HP due to the sheer weight of his own grit and indomitable will (Second Wind) in the classic rally or heroic comeback (real life and genre).

And I've never been confused about what "to hit" means (it is metagame jargon meaning "to hit target number") and, given that + the incoherency of AC, I've never thought that when an Elder Air Elemental and the Tarrasque (or an unarmored, nimble swashbuckler and a heavily armored knight) are tangled in a deadly martial exchange, that every time the Tarrasque successfully achieves his target number "to hit", that a collision between the Tarrasque's exoskeletal fists/class/horns (whatever) and the Elder Air Elemental's "as dextrous as the very wind" "whatever its form is made of" is ocurring and thus being "hacked away" (whatever that would mean). Especially given that the outrageously slow/plodding Tarrasque would "hit" the very incarnation of fast/nimble several times over more often than the Elder Air Elemental would "hit" the Tarrasque.

TLDR; 5e Fighter Second WInd is just fine, especially when compared to the, self-admitted, abstract/incoherent (but awesome!) legacy that is the D&D mechanical chassis.
 
Last edited:

DDNFan

Banned
Banned
I've stayed out of the conversation (about second wind) thus far because I think it only relates to DoaM tangentially, but now it seems we've hit the actual topic of this board and so....


Except this isn't what DoaM is..

It is wearing down your opponent... in a single round and killing them through sheer "wearing down" aka "tiring" without ever actually landing a solid blow. That doesn't make any sense. No one, and I mean NO ONE, dies in a single round against a relatively equal opponent through sheer exhaustion on the FIRST ROUND without actually being hit. That is just insane on the face of it - but it is what you want us to buy with DoaM and "tiredness."

Regardless of that, a fight between two opponents who are wearing eachother down would not be: (a) solely one sided - the fighter with the two handed weapon is able to wear you down, but not the guy with a longsword; (b) equal to that person's STR instead of your own CON - I'm being worn down.. but that wearing has nothing to do with my own physical stamina; (c) IS NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF HOW HP ACTUALLY WORK OTHERWISE!

Simply put, HP doesn't currently measure "wearing down" or tiring out. It doesn't. It could, but it doesn't. Every hit is meat, that is why poison weapons work. How badly is up for debate (the old "everything after the first point is abstraction" argument), but the fact that poison works means it isn't a wearing factor as much as it is a DAMAGING factor .. thus why it is called damage.

And as to why we "simulationists" are okay with not having penalties for being worn down even though it is more realistic. I think that has to do with it being less fun. Basically, "death spirals," while perhaps more realistic, generally don't make the game more enjoyable and so they are ignored. Though if you really want to make the argument that they should be included that is fine - but it isn't the argument you are making right now. That of course ignores that certain amounts of death spiraling does exist, though it is usually a optional module instead of the primary rules - where it belongs IMHO - and where DoaM belongs too.

If instituting DoaM why not make lopping off limbs mandatory for a certain style of weapon too? So, let's say anyone with a greataxe now has a 100% chance of taking off somebody's head on a successful hit. That is certainly a better deal than being "worn down" on misses constantly, since you aren't guaranteed to actually hit for the head-cutting attack - unlike DoaM. And mine is actually LESS deadly to that kobold on the first round of combat. But no, I suggest BOTH of these tactics which don't make a whole lot of sense be relegated to modules to be added on for groups/DMs that like them - instead of being the automatic default for the entire game.

Agreed.

Damage on a miss is probably the single dumbest thing I've seen added to D&D rules ever.

If it exists in the Basic D&D rules as a fighting style I'm going to say thanks for saving me the trouble of paying for this. Even if the rest of the game is great, I just can't give them money if they put such blatant stupidity in there, in a non-optional, non-mutable, non-modular way, after years of people arguing about it. Especially after Mearls' joke about "we are removing damage on a hit". If they actually left damage on a miss after that, it means that wasn't a joke for levity, but actually a sign of real scorn and a direct insult to the people that Daom repulses. It means it was mocking people, not catering to different playstyles.

One size doesn't fit all, it's time people called them out on it. We participated in this game playtest to have our opinions heard. I will be voting with my wallet, a week and a half from now. If I see the Basic D&D has Daom on it, I'm cancelling all my orders, disbanding my groups, and switching to Pathfinder permanently. Minus things like grit and so forth. I don't see why I should pay for a new game edition when they are giving nothing but lip service to a set of rational and sensible game rules.
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
w. If I see the Basic D&D has Daom on it, I'm cancelling all my orders, disbanding my groups, and switching to Pathfinder permanently.

Really? Out of interest, how do you do that if you've "disbanded" all your groups? How many groups will be disbanded at your command? Can't you just leave all your groups? Or are they forbidden to play D&D after you've left? I curious about this nuclear disbanding option!
 
Last edited:

DDNFan

Banned
Banned
Huh? People die because, being tired, they can't dodge/parry. Or to flip it around - you win a fight by wearing down your enemy and rendering the opponent unable to respond to your attacks.

Characters and monsters die as a result of sustaining multiple wounds. That is how the game works. It is not only the last hit that kills your opponent, except maybe in your game where a handful of seconds of combat is sufficient to cause a heart attack or die of heat exhaustion due to sweating too much.

If I could draw a fat kobold and then one round later one who's shed all that weight in a puddle of sweat, you'd see how ridiculous your claim is. Being too tired and not being able to dodge is not how the game works.

You're making stuff up to rationalize an irrational view of the action. I suppose you think a 200 HP dragon is actually parrying all those attacks by the dozen of people attacking it, and it's only when it gets too tired that one guy kill steals it and delivers the killing blow on the dragon's otherwise pristine body.

If you imagine a 200 HP dragon at 10 HP the same as 100 HP, visually, you are in a very small minority and your viewpoint does not represent how most people play and imagine the game.
 

Remove ads

Top