D&D 5E Those who come from earlier editions, why are you okay with 5E healing (or are you)?

[billd91]

This pattently not true.

Depends on what edition you're playing and how you're playing it.

 

[Azzy]

Depends on what edition you're playing and how you're playing it.

Your admission that it doesn't apply to some editions proves my point.

 

[billd91]

I hate to break it to you, but even if you take every game rule as representing the setting... you've got an inconsistent mess.

The big one for me recently is slot levels in magic. They make no coherent sense. They are entirely a fabrication of the game.

But, they make the game easier to play, and it is far more trouble to fix than it is to just leave alone and ignore. (Spell points don't neccesarily help, just move the problem around)

No coherent sense... compared to what? There’s no reality being simulated, so all magic systems are arbitrary. That pretty much gives the game designers free rein to use whatever game construct is convenient to their design and vision and be just as ‘realistic’ as every other magic system.

 

[Lanefan]

As I’ve said before, it doesn’t need to heal completely, just enough that the character is able to continue fighting.

Though we come from different sides on this issue, I've got to agree with Charlaquin on this one.

A half-decent real-world analogy is a hockey team that has to play on back to back nights, particularly on the road. They're banged up and fatigued from the first game, then further fatigued from travel, yet they still have to play the second game and try to win it.

That said, there's enough attrition involved that most leagues won't schedule (or allow) a team to play on three consecutive nights; which is where this analogy kind of falls down in that D&D characters can to a large extent keep doing it for as many consecutive days as they need.

 

[Tony Vargas]

No coherent sense... compared to what? There’s no reality being simulated, so all magic systems are arbitrary.

Genre conventions, mythology, RL traditions and beliefs.

Oh, and, y'know, maybe even itself - internal consistency or the lack thereof.

 

[Tony Vargas]

which is where this analogy kind of falls down in that D&D characters can to a large extent keep doing it for as many consecutive days as they need.

The slower recovery of HD should impact that.

 

[Chaosmancer]

No coherent sense... compared to what? There’s no reality being simulated, so all magic systems are arbitrary. That pretty much gives the game designers free rein to use whatever game construct is convenient to their design and vision and be just as ‘realistic’ as every other magic system.

This is off-topic, so I'll put the rant in spoilers so as to try and not derail too much. I will say to your first point that no, not all magic systems are created equally. Brandon Sanderson is my favorite example of a coherent magic system. Even if his choices are somewhat arbitrary, you can predict how input effects output. Avatar the Last Airbender is another good example, where you can follow a logic and see where things usually fall.

Spoiler: Rant

DnD magic is does not work predictably like this.

The smallest unit of magic is the 1st level spell slot. Unless you are talking about Cantrips, but we are going to set those aside as having a negligible cost.

So, what is a 1st level spell slot? Well, as close as we can tell it is a unit of magical energy. It has no form, being able to be used in multiple different ways to effect the world, but once they run out you can't use magic anymore, so it has to be energy.

And, we can explain away not being able to cast a higher level spell with a lower level slot because you don't have the minimum energy required. And, you can use a higher level slot to cast, because you can put in more energy and "overcast" the spell.

But, what you cannot do is combine two 1st level slots into a 2nd level slot. In fact, within infinite 1st level slots you could never cast a 2nd level spell. You have infinite energy, but you can't combine this energy in any way to achieve a higher energy amount. You also cannot take a 3rd level spell slot and break it into three 1st level slots. Slots cannot be altered in that way.

Okay, so maybe "slot" is the energy unit. One Slot is one slot and magic is measured in slots, with the "level" of the spot representing an energy state. Could potentially work it seems, but you don't gain slots in a logical manner. Why do you sometimes gain a single slot and other times gain two slots of a higher level?

And, it seems weird to consider it works that way, because every time they show magic in an item, or if you go with spell points, it represents a slot by a number of points, and a higher level slot is simply more points. Using a staff of fire to cast burning hands takes 1 charge, using it for fireball is 3 charges. So, we are back to spell slot level being the amount of energy we are talking about.

And, like I said, going to spell points seems to solve the slot issue. X number of points compared to Y number of points... until you get to 6th level. Then, casting a sixth level spell prevents you from casting another 6th level spell (until higher levels) it can't be strain from the number of points you just spent, because you can still cast a 7th, an 8th, a 9th, ect. Locking each on afterwards. And you can spend an infinite amount of points as long as the slot level ends up being 5th or lower. You can cast ten or twenty times a sixth level slot and have no issues.

So, it is mechanical, game-like. You have slots, you can use them, but there is no concern to make it make sense in how energy works, how these things might combine or function. You can't combine spells, you can't combine slots, you can't break them apart. Knowing one type of fire magic doesn't let you figure out other types, ect ect ect.

It works as a game system. IT does not work as a logical system for a world.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

But HP loss doesn’t need to be the way to represent that narrative mechanically.

D&D represents a simplified model. There needs to be a way to mechanically represent the narrative of physical injury, and Hit Points are the only mechanic in the book that are remotely relevant. Either HP damage represents physical injury, or there are no rules for physical injury.

What we don't need are rules to model vague whatever, short-term exhaustion, or plot armor. Those aren't things that happen frequently within a fantasy narrative. If physical injury isn't important enough to warrant a major game mechanic, then those things certainly don't either.

In order for the narrative to accurately line up with the mechanics of 5e, the loss of HP must be represented narratively by something other than serious injury. Minor cuts and bruises, along with general fatigue, fits that bill well.

Minor cuts and bruises, along with general fatigue, do not accurately reflect the outcome of catching three arrows in the back; or of falling thirty feet into poisoned spikes. It certainly doesn't reflect a state where you are twelve seconds from bleeding out.

There is no consistent narrative which describes a condition where you are both twelve seconds from bleeding out, but also fine after taking a nap. You have to choose one or the other. And the narrative where you are slightly fatigued, with minor cuts and bruises, is not useful at all. There's no benefit to choosing that one, over the narrative of physical injury which demands representation.

...What are you even talking about here?

Meta-gaming (in the common context) is the use of out-of-character information when making an in-character decision. When you decide whether Bill the Knight would pursue the fleeing ogre, or retreat to check on the villagers, you can't use information that Bill wouldn't have.

The out-of-game fact, that Bill is being played by the Anna rather than Charles, is information that Bill doesn't have it. It doesn't matter who the DM is.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

True! If success is never getting published, then we have winners in the millions.
The unfortunate fate of most RPGs.

If success is allowing players to have fun, by giving them an efficient way to model an interesting speculative setting, then we also have a lot of winners.

 

[Charlaquin]

D&D represents a simplified model. There needs to be a way to mechanically represent the narrative of physical injury, and Hit Points are the only mechanic in the book that are remotely relevant. Either HP damage represents physical injury, or there are no rules for physical injury.

I have several times now called out mechanics that better represent physical injury than HP loss: failed death saves, exhaustion and other negative conditions, long-term injuries from the DMG, flaws, and effects that prevent you from regaining HP are all better options, take your pick.

What we don't need are rules to model vague whatever, short-term exhaustion, or plot armor. Those aren't things that happen frequently within a fantasy narrative. If physical injury isn't important enough to warrant a major game mechanic, then those things certainly don't either.

You’ve got it backwards. What the game needs is a resource that the players must manage over the course of an adventuring day is taxed by combat and various out of combat hazzards. Since it doesn’t make narrative sense for such a resource to represent physical injury, another narrative explanation is required. An abstract quality that roughly measure’s the character’s ability to keep fighting is suitable for this purpose.

Minor cuts and bruises, along with general fatigue, do not accurately reflect the outcome of catching three arrows in the back; or of falling thirty feet into poisoned spikes.

Which is why those things should not cause HP loss. They should cause
It certainly doesn't reflect a state where you are twelve seconds from bleeding out. failed death saves, exhaustion or other negative conditions, long-term injuries from the DMG, flaws, or effects that prevent the character from regaining HP.

There is no consistent narrative which describes a condition where you are both twelve seconds from bleeding out, but also fine after taking a nap.

And so a character survives being reduced to 0 HP and falling unconscious, then they must not have been 12 seconds from bleeding out.

And the narrative where you are slightly fatigued, with minor cuts and bruises, is not useful at all.

It absolutely is. It’s useful for narrating the effects of the hit point mechanic.

There's no benefit to choosing that one, over the narrative of physical injury which demands representation.

This is a false dichotomy. The game can, and does, have mechanics that represent both narratives.

Meta-gaming (in the common context) is the use of out-of-character information when making an in-character decision. When you decide whether Bill the Knight would pursue the fleeing ogre, or retreat to check on the villagers, you can't use information that Bill wouldn't have.

The out-of-game fact, that Bill is being played by the Anna rather than Charles, is information that Bill doesn't have it. It doesn't matter who the DM is.

What on earth does any of this have to do with HP and healing?