D&D 5E Hit Point Recovery Too Generous

[pemerton]

Inspiration is earned by playing in-character, and it's an entirely in-character decision for someone to act in accordance with their own goals.

Inspiration is earned by playing up certain specified character traits. A player chooses whether or not to play up those traits based on a range of considerations, of which earning Inspiration is one.

When the player then spends the Inspiration, what is happening in the gameworld? Are you positing that the world of 5e D&D is a type of fairy-tale land wear being true to yourself - even true to your flaws (whatever exactly that would mean) - makes you luckier?

Moreover, since it's only awarded by the DM, it's actually immune to meta-gaming.

Huh? It doesn't get more metagaming than playing up your PC traits to attract the GM's attention.

 

[SirAntoine]

I've never for one moment felt that the characters know how many hit points they have or how much they can recover. They have a vague sense of "I'm only slightly wounded" vs. "I'm about to die," but nothing remotely as mechanical or as granular as hp/hd. The decision to spend hit dice is the player choosing to represent the character recovering, not the character choosing whether or not to recover.

I mean, obviously, one doesn't have to play it that way. But neither is the reverse true, and the reverse certainly isn't required for the game to "really" be D&D.

I'd disagree. Characters could know their hit points, and even refer to them as such. Just as they could tell from practice that a +1 sword is significantly better, and a +2 so much better than a +1, they can name these differences. They know how to refer to their injuries and their capacity to take more. It's just that traditionally, no one asked how they do. With so many disagreements about what hit points mean and what they can do, the community is waking up to the possibilities.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

When the player then spends the Inspiration, what is happening in the gameworld? Are you positing that the world of 5e D&D is a type of fairy-tale land wear being true to yourself - even true to your flaws (whatever exactly that would mean) - makes you luckier?

Believe it or not, the read world does work somewhat like that. If you hesitate because you are uncertain in your choices, then you are more likely to fail than if you are acting in a manner that you feel confidently about.

Huh? It doesn't get more metagaming than playing up your PC traits to attract the GM's attention.

As a cunning player, I will trick my DM into giving me Inspiration, by acting entirely in-character.

Sorry, it doesn't work. If you try to act in-character for ulterior reasons, then you're still acting in-character. You can't have a character pretend to act like itself, because that's how the character would actually act.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

I've never for one moment felt that the characters know how many hit points they have or how much they can recover. They have a vague sense of "I'm only slightly wounded" vs. "I'm about to die," but nothing remotely as mechanical or as granular as hp/hd.

That must cause utter confusion when discussing which specific levels of Cure spell to cast. Or do your characters not know about spell levels, either?

The decision to spend hit dice is the player choosing to represent the character recovering, not the character choosing whether or not to recover.

I'm trying to imagine a situation where a player or character would choose to not recover, given the option. Maybe if the character has lost the will to live?

 

[Mouseferatu]

I'd disagree. Characters could know their hit points, and even refer to them as such. Just as they could tell from practice that a +1 sword is significantly better, and a +2 so much better than a +1, they can name these differences.

No, they really couldn't, but that discussion's happening in the "Renaming +1 etc." thread, and I have no interest in rehashing it. Suffice to say, hit points, hit dice, and magic plusses are variations of such fine degree that even if they existed, they wouldn't be countable by human beings. There's simply no solid basis from which to work; injury, health, and physics don't function that way. There's no "precise default amount of damage" a person can take before being "really" hurt. There's no wound exactly identical to any other, even if made by the same person and the same weapon.

But feel free to go ask a soldier or MMA fighter how many points of damage he can take, on an absolute scale. I'd love to hear how they respond.

 

[Mouseferatu]

That must cause utter confusion when discussing which specific levels of Cure spell to cast. Or do your characters not know about spell levels, either?
I'm trying to imagine a situation where a player or character would choose to not recover, given the option. Maybe if the character has lost the will to live?

"Light" vs. "Serious" is a general descriptor. That's the sort of thing a trained professional could notice. The difference between 12 and 13 hit points, not so much.

A character probably wouldn't choose not to recover, any more than a real human being can choose not to heal or catch his/her breath. The player, however, may worry about having the resources later, or just feel her character's not injured enough to be worth spending the hit die.

A D&D world is, obviously, different from the real one. But we're still dealing with human beings and--by default, when there's no magic--relatively familiar laws of biology and physics. AFAIAC, unless you can honestly see a real human being measuring his hit points--and on a scale that exactly matches every other living being--then it's not any more likely for a character to do such a thing.

Again, play how you want. But the suggestion that it's only "real" D&D if characters know how to tally up their hit points is ludicrous.

 

[SirAntoine]

No, they really couldn't, but that discussion's happening in the "Renaming +1 etc." thread, and I have no interest in rehashing it. Suffice to say, hit points, hit dice, and magic plusses are variations of such fine degree that even if they existed, they wouldn't be countable by human beings. There's simply no solid basis from which to work; injury, health, and physics don't function that way. There's no "precise default amount of damage" a person can take before being "really" hurt. There's no wound exactly identical to any other, even if made by the same person and the same weapon.

But feel free to go ask a soldier or MMA fighter how many points of damage he can take, on an absolute scale. I'd love to hear how they respond.

I thought you said it could at least be done if someone wanted to.

I think everyone should listen to Saelorn.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I thought you said it could at least be done if someone wanted to.

I think everyone should listen to Saelorn.

I said it might be possible, if someone was willing to average things out over thousands of examples, to figure out that a sword is 5% more damaging than another, identical sword. That's a far cry from it being something that anyone can do, or from making hit points--which would be even more subjective--into an in-character concept.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Anyway, it doesn't matter much. As I said, play how you like. I just find blanket statements of what "is" or "isn't" D&D to be irritating.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

"Light" vs. "Serious" is a general descriptor. That's the sort of thing a trained professional could notice. The difference between 12 and 13 hit points, not so much.

Exactly. There's not much of an in-game difference between 12 or 13 damage, and the descriptor for either will be almost identical, as will the response by anyone trying to heal that damage.

Characters understand their damage capacity at-least well-enough that they can come to the same decisions regarding them that players make regarding Hit Points. The numbers may not translate perfectly, but the entire process is analogous.