Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5691770" data-attributes="member: 82106">What is a 'hit point'? When you take 8 points of damage because someone attacked you with a sword do you have sword stuck through your body? Hit points are abstract. They've always been abstract, and we all know that. Given an opportunity to rest up, bind a few 'flesh wounds' and maybe even employ some genuine healing magic you're able to go on, but not without having tapped into your ultimate reserves. I look at it like HS are more the gauge of how you're doing. Hit points means someone who can hammer on you enough quickly can kill you outright, but over time you can do a lot. That's cool. The most annoying thing I found in the old days in AD&amp;D was just how fast your average party pooped out, hit them with a 5 or 6 attacks and off they ran to heal up.I never thought the whole gulping potions and running to the cleric was terribly heroic or matches much with the idea I have in my mind of most fantasy either. Eh, it is a very new design of game, and it isn't like the old monsters were exactly that bad. We played a lot of 4e before the damage increase. The new damage numbers ARE better, but it isn't like it is a matter of the game was 'wrong' before, it was just possible to improve it. In terms of other errata, I'm not really sure 4e has more errors than any other edition, nor more things that deserved to be fixed. They just are actually willing to fix them. Eh, well, obviously a lot of it is matter of taste. I find that 4e works better than previous editions in most respects. I just don't share your dislike for the new mechanics. The game seems to me to be more fun than AD&amp;D was. I can imagine some things being improved still, but there will never be a perfect game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AbdulAlhazred, post: 5691770, member: 82106"] What is a 'hit point'? When you take 8 points of damage because someone attacked you with a sword do you have sword stuck through your body? Hit points are abstract. They've always been abstract, and we all know that. Given an opportunity to rest up, bind a few 'flesh wounds' and maybe even employ some genuine healing magic you're able to go on, but not without having tapped into your ultimate reserves. I look at it like HS are more the gauge of how you're doing. Hit points means someone who can hammer on you enough quickly can kill you outright, but over time you can do a lot. That's cool. The most annoying thing I found in the old days in AD&D was just how fast your average party pooped out, hit them with a 5 or 6 attacks and off they ran to heal up. I never thought the whole gulping potions and running to the cleric was terribly heroic or matches much with the idea I have in my mind of most fantasy either. Eh, it is a very new design of game, and it isn't like the old monsters were exactly that bad. We played a lot of 4e before the damage increase. The new damage numbers ARE better, but it isn't like it is a matter of the game was 'wrong' before, it was just possible to improve it. In terms of other errata, I'm not really sure 4e has more errors than any other edition, nor more things that deserved to be fixed. They just are actually willing to fix them. Eh, well, obviously a lot of it is matter of taste. I find that 4e works better than previous editions in most respects. I just don't share your dislike for the new mechanics. The game seems to me to be more fun than AD&D was. I can imagine some things being improved still, but there will never be a perfect game. [/QUOTE]

Verification