I don't get the dislike of healing surges

[JamesonCourage]

Exactly. You're picking one completely absurd thing to accept as possible, and one other completely absurd thing as not possible.

So, accepting mechanics that reflect standard genre tropes means you should accept other mechanics by the same people, just because they made the game, even if you feel they don't adequately reflect genre tropes? That doesn't seem right to me.

Hussar is right. It's a narrative issue. You can definitely wait until a point where a wound is definitively decided before describing it. It very much goes against the linear timeline I want to see in combat, since part of immersion is having a feeling of dread when you see your best friend take a claw through his chest and poke out the other side, before he coughs a little blood and falls to the ground. Having to say, "he hits you for 18 damage... that puts you in the negatives. So, you're down, I guess..." would really throw me off my game, and really draw my group out of immersion.

It's like rolling dice behind a screen. It pulls me out of immersion when a GM does it (not that I'd ever tell one not to, if that's their preference). I always wonder if they're fudging to help the party out. They may not fudge at all, but I always wonder, and it yanks my focus away from the game and thinking in-character. When you have a narrative that isn't resolved, it'd do the same thing to me. I'd want to know, in-character, does my friend look hurt? Does he have a hole through his left shoulder, or does he look winded? Should I rush over to help him, or should I fight on, even if I think my allies can handle it? And, as a GM, I want my players to know these things, too, so that they can make informed decisions in-character.

This is just a play style difference. Neither is objectively right or wrong, but I see big issues with it ever being able to fit my play style. And that's fine. It'd work well enough in my homebrewed RPG if it was limited to the THP pool, and I think that's an overall better model for the game, as I think it represents different kinds of play more easily, as well as allowing healing surges (or disallowing them) just as easily. It promotes a linear timeline in combat with descriptions, but allows for cinematic feel with surges for those who want them, while remaining easily abstract enough for many different descriptions. It also addresses falling damage, being on fire, being immersed in acid, and other such things that make hit points seem weird some of the time. But hey, that's just me and my group, and our preference.

In the end, it comes down to preference. The OP asked why some people don't like healing surges. I think there have been very clear, valid, and subjectively justifiable reasons why people dislike healing surges. He also asked what people would do to fix it, and some have given answers (myself included). Why's there's a debate when the question was about the opinions of other people I'm not sure (other than debating is fun), but I'll continue to enjoy this thread as long as it's civil. As always, play what you like

 

[Aaron]

Exactly. You're picking one completely absurd thing to accept as possible, and one other completely absurd thing as not possible.

I understand why... we all cling to absurdities every day while discounting other just as absurd things. But for my money, as someone who sees himself as a logical person... if I'm going accept absurdity and suspension of disbelief as part of playing a game... then I'll accept ALL the absurdity and suspend all my disbelief as just the requirement for making the rules of a game enjoyable to play. I'll have fun playing with the rules and just not worry about it.

I don't understand your point.

What is "absurd" in having an heroic character sustain a high amount of damage?

While no one can deny that the Schrödinger issue created by the HS is illogical at best, there's nothing illogical if you accept a fantasy world where heroic characters fight with supernatural stamina.
But fantasy doesn't mean illogical or lacking internal consistency.

There's nothing incongruous inside a fantasy world where heroic characters get grievously wounded and fight on.

But there is a glaring incongruity, even in a fantasy world, with the Schrödinger issue.

 

[Imaro]

Given the way an AD&D character with enough levels can get smacked around by a giant, blown up, and dropped off a cliff and still get up and run around (possibly while making a hooting sound), ie, given they way they resemble Daffy Duck, you could say we've been playing Toon in fantasy-drag all along!

Well numerous posters have addressed the "hp's do not all equal damage, only some are actual physical damage thing"... which kinda dismisses all of your arguments above concerning damage and Daffy.

what I'm saying is don't notch the default absurdity level up to the point where the default is my character being flattened by a hammer and then picking himself up, blowing on his thumb until he's normal shape again and being all better in a few minutes. YMMV of course.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Unless, of course, you are running a high-magic setting like Eberron, Planescape, Forgotten Realms, Spelljammer, or Mystara where the trade in magic items, especially lower-end items like healing wands and potions, low-end magic weapons, or scrolls, is logical and common if not outright expected.

Just because something exists doesn't mean it is available. Nor does it mean that it is desirable. I live in Dallas, Tx. There is no Skoda dealership here. And if there were, it would doubtlessly fail- the only Skodas around here are used or imported directly for particular buyers.

The only CLW wands I've seen in play of 30+ years were those found in troves. Even when PCs went into "M-Mart", they unfailingly purchased healing potions instead of wands.

 

[DEFCON 1]

I don't understand your point.

What is "absurd" in having an heroic character sustain a high amount of damage?

As I've mentioned above... it is absurd if this damage requires magical healing to recover from it. Because that implies it's a real physical injury. Which then implies that since a heroic character can take three to fifteen of these damaging attacks during a combat before dropping below 0 HPs and "falling unconscious"... they are sustaining three to fifteen REAL PHYSICAL INJURIES THAT REQUIRE MAGICAL HEALING and somehow are still fighting.

So tell me what those are? Name me fifteen injuries a hand-to-hand combatant could sustain that would require magical healing (or if we want to make it even more understandable... 'surgery') but yet still allow him to keep fighting even after sustaining each and every one.

And to make it even more interesting for you... put that combatant in full plate mail armor, and the guy doing the attacking wields a longsword. Now what are those fifteen injuries?

Please remember, these fifteen injuries cannot include minor cuts and bruises... because those do not require surgery (i.e. magical healing), and thus can get recovered from just by taking a little while to regain your strength and perhaps some small stitching and patching after the battle (i.e. spending a healing surge).

 

[DEFCON 1]

What I'm saying is don't notch the default absurdity level up to the point where the default is my character being flattened by a hammer and then picking himself up, blowing on his thumb until he's normal shape again and being all better in a few minutes. YMMV of course.

So instead we should keep the absurdity level down at the point where someone can stand in a room and get engulfed by six separate fireballs before finally falling unconscious from it. Because that level is easier to narratively explain away. YMMV of course.

 

[BryonD]

The orc attacks you and does X damage. That's all that's known. Until the combat is over anyway, and THEN, and only then, can you pin down the narrative.

Does this mean that once combat is over and a "wound" is described, no later surge may remove that damage?

 

[Imaro]

So instead we should keep the absurdity level down at the point where someone can stand in a room and get engulfed by six separate fireballs before finally falling unconscious from it. Because that level is easier to narratively explain away. YMMV of course.

I'm not sure what your point is? They went down because they no longer had the ability to minimize the damage through non-physical hit points (which we've already established mean numerous things from knowing how to crouch so as to take minimum damage to divine intervention or pure luck.) and the rest of the damage not counteracted from the fireballs exceeded their own physical hit points.

Now what would be amazing to me (in either a superhero or cartoon sense) is if they went down from said fireballs and then 5 minutes later without medical aid, magical aid or even the shout of a Warlord... stood up dusted the ash of their clothes and were totally unhurt and ready to fight at full capacity. But maybe that's just me.

 

[BryonD]

As I've mentioned above... it is absurd if this damage requires magical healing to recover from it. Because that implies it's a real physical injury.

I don't agree with that at all.

If we can accept that HP damage is a combination of wounds and luck/karma/fate, why can't restoration of HP, through any means physical, magical, whatever, also be a combination of wounds and luck/karma/fate?

 

[GSHamster]

Being unable to accurately narrate a combat in real-time because it's too abstract is yet another thing that detractors (myself among them) will point to and say it is like a video game.

I really wish I knew what video games you guys are playing that have systems like this.

Most games are stricter on linear time than D&D has ever been. That's the entire point of "real-time" games.

Sorry to keep beating a dead horse, but using 'video games' as a derogatory term is unfair if video games don't exhibit the behavior you are criticizing.