Ruin Explorer
Legend
Ooof, that's brutal but I'm looking at both now and I agree - they'd still be behind the 1D&D Lore Bard subclass for my money.
D&D (2024) Bard Playtest discussion
Levistus's_Leviathan
5e Freelancer
Because you have to do certain things to avoid different damage types. And while Hit Points aren't just "Meat Points" and healing isn't just physical healing, some of those two things are. Red Dragons don't have to worry about Fire Damage because they will never have to dodge/power through fire/lava, because they're literally immune. Damage types matter even if you take into account that hit points aren't always "Meat Points".
Ruin Explorer
Legend
I mean, dude, do you really want to have this discussion? We'd need a time machine or necromancy to get hold of Gary to ask him in detail what he meant by HP and why damage types matter, if, as he himself repeatedly indicated, HP weren't always physical damage.
Yaarel
He Mage
In the 1e DMs Guide, Gygax describes what he means by hit points. Heh. He is the source of all of the later conflicts about how to interpret hit points.
Essentially, there is a doublestandard.
• For player characters, hit points are almost entirely nonphysical.
• But for monsters, hit points are almost entirely physical.
This doublethink allows players to ignore the inconveniences of actual wounds. At the same time, the DM can go into gory detail about hacking up a monster for its visceral entertainment value.
Unsurprisingly, there are some further inconsistencies. Despite describing the player character damage as nonphysical, the amount of time it takes to heal might imply the healing of actual wounds. When Gygax describes the Constitution bonus to hit points, his example (Rasputin) goes into graphic violence to describe the ability to survive many death-dealing physical injuries. His main point seems to be, some individuals have high Constitution, while others dont. But by extension, at least the hit points that come from Constitution seem to refer to physical trauma. That said, Constitution is also responsibility for avoiding fatigue, so that implies buffing the nonphysical hit points too.
Anyway, we happen to know what Gygax thinks about hit points, and it is complex and inconsistent, depending on which context one is describing when referring to hit points.
In my view, 4e and 5e have the best systematization of the conflictive D&D traditions about hit points.
From max hit points until half hit points is strictly nonphysical, except for allowing some glancing contact if dealing poison or similar contact effect.
At half hit points, the creature becomes "bloodied". The damage is still mostly nonphysical, but there is cosmetic superficial physical damage, the kind that leaves bruises and requires bandages.
Only at zero hit points, can there actually be a deadly wound − the proverbial sword thru the gut.
Last edited:
Micah Sweet
Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
I know hit points aren't all, or even mostly, meat. I'm saying that if any part of them are, that part has to be addressed by any healing effect, since none of them distinguish healing meat from healing fatigue/spirit/what have you mechanically.
shadowoflameth
Adventurer
That's not all correct. All bards in 5e get 2 spells in Magical Secrets at 10th again at 14th and again at 18th. Only the Lore Bard gets 2 Additional Magical Secrets at 6th. The playtest replaces this with a different ability, Cunning Inspiration which is nowhere near as potent, IMHO.
My bad though, the base bard gets it 3 times, not twice but the Lore bard gets it earlier and gets more instances than the others.
The playtest does fundamentally change how it works since you get to choose different spells after a long rest instead of the Magical Secrets being the ones you have.
Yaarel
He Mage
I agree with this.
For example, the "Warlord" and other "morale" methods to heal should work normally while at non-zero hit points. But then, such methods should become ineffective if a character reaches zero hit points, thus vulnerably open, and the attacker chooses to inflict a death-dealing injury.
Mechanically: if a character begins making death saves morale can no longer benefit the character.
At this point, the nonmagical healer must resort to the Medicine Wisdom check, while treating physical trauma.
I recognize the reallife trope of the "stay with us!" morale boost while someone is going into shock and dying. But this seems more like the context of something during a Short Rest and an extensive investment of time. It is different from the brief assistance of "watch out for the guy behind you!" or "keep at it!" that in fact can boost nonphysical hit points.
Depending on the exact mechanics, I would enjoy a distinction between Fresh versus Bloodied. Where Bloodied actually does require bandages, and does leave a notable blackeye or similar. It is somewhat entertaining to remind the player during later social encounters, when NPCs ask why the blackeye? "What happened?" Or "What did you do?"
Levistus's_Leviathan
5e Freelancer
Okay. What if "inspirational healing" like what the Bards get can't heal you if you're Bloodied. Because you start showing signs of physical damage once you're below half your hit point maximum. You could make a rule saying that Warlords/Bards can nonmagically heal with words/speeches, but that it doesn't work once the character has shown signs of physical damage (in order to prevent a situation where a character stops bleeding from a bullet-wound because a Warlord told them to shake it off).
Would something like that suffice?
Yaarel
He Mage
The Bard is full-on magic. Magical healing is appropriate.
Regarding nonmagical healing and the "Bloodied" condition, nonphysical healing still makes sense.
For example, say someone gets a shaving cut, a "bleeder", or a blackeye. One might have lost hit points at that moment. But after a short rest sotospeak, one can completely ignore it. The person is back to full hit points, even if wearing a bandaid, or it hurts to touch it.
Even a person with a broken arm, as long as the arm safely secure, is back to full hit points, even while currently unable to use the arm.
The death saves mechanic implies a deadly injury has incurred. If a person reduces an opponent to zero hit points (such as in a fightsport), the damage can be nonlethal. Thus it is possible to be at zero hit points without incurring death saves.
There are Irish folktales of Bards causing people that mistreated them to die from hearing their satire on them. If their words can kill then they surely can sure.
