D&D 4E 4e Heal info in new Confessions article

[pemerton]

In older editions, rules always seemed "natural" to me, in the sense that they would describe imaginary scenes that play in the players' minds.

<snip>

Yet, in 4th edition, I see more and more rules that seem to be nothing but abstract rules; that is, rules that do not translate well into the imagination.

<snip>

I am sure it is possible to make monsters and combats interesting without having to resort to such unrealistic tricks that do not translate well into the "realistic imagination" world

<snip>

I have a problem with integrating tricks/abstract mechanisms like Second Wind or getting healed because you manage to strike an opponent (or worse, getting healed because one of your friends managed to hit a foe) though. I also have a problem with the cinematic interpretation you suggest, that seems to be that damage later healed by a Second Wind-like ability actually never happened in the first place, but was "cinematically" avoided.

Good rules are simple rules that are easy to apply. Rules that are based on interpreting hit points on something much more complex than just physical integrity are thus bad to the game.

It is true that D&D is moving from (pseudo-)simulationist rules to a different sort of rule. But it doesn't therefore mean that the rules are purely abstract or technical and have no in-game meaning. Rather, part of what playing involves (both for players and GMs) is explaining, in in-game terms, what has happened to cause the change which ensues from application of the game mechanics.

To look at your Second Wind example: the problem there begins not with the rules, but with the GM telling the player that his/her PC has suffered terrible damage. Given that the PC has a usage of Second Wind left, both GM and player know that the damage dice don't necessarily represent actually physical harm, but perhaps only exhaustion or minor scrapes as the PC narrowly avoids being skewered. And it therefore becomes incumbent on the GM (and the player, who also can take on this narrative role, presumably) to give an in-game description that fits with this.

Then, when the player triggers his/her PC's Second Wind, s/he can narrate what it is in-game that restores the PC's energy and gets him/her back into the fray. Or when the PC is inspired by the Warlord ally, the player can again narrate what it is that brings his/her PC back to life.

My problem here is that those abstract hit points rules convey the following message: "Don't bother about what's happening practically, just follow the rules mechanically, add up and substract numbers, and don't worry". That is not really the kind of message I would expect from a roleplaying game, where I'm supposed to play a role. My character is both someone who lives in my "realistic imagination" world and a set of numbers defining it; and I actually think good rules should make it easy for me to match those two aspects rather than set them apart.

I think the message conveyed is quite different: it's one of treating the mechanics as a sort of metagame device for distributing control over the narration of the in-game reality. Instead of the dice rolls telling us what is happening in the gameworld, they set parameters within which GMs and players have the freedom to create their own descriptions of what is going on.

Hence the call by Chris Sims's to abandon a perception of the rules as straightforwardly modelling the gameworld, and his reference to "roleplaying cues". It's about more support for and freedom to roleplay, not less.

 

[Pale Jackal]

If they reduce PC death, but also reduce PC resurrection I'll be pretty happy. Nothing is more ridiculous, IMO, than people talking about how death is always a present danger in their campaigns, then talk about how the affected characters were just carted off to the church to be raised. If you can come back, that's not death, that's a temporary inconvenience and the most "video-gamey" part of D&D. From designer notes, it sounds as though resurrection won't be common even for adventurers until Epic levels.

Indeed, raise dead spells are lame.

Currently I'm playing in a game with "the death flag" (and without rez spells, since we're playing E6), basically you won't die unless you've raised the death flag (which gives you 6 d20 re-rolls in the scene.) Of course, if the party is all knocked out, bad stuff will happen to us, or we'll fail in our mission. Our fights are also pretty tough: many times, 2 or 3 of our party have been KO'd by the end of the fight.

Is the battle relevant to the plot? Are you invested in its success? Then raise your death flag.

Are you fighting a random encounter? Then don't.

 

[Greg K]

oops hit the wrong button

 

[Greg K]

Have you played any recent Final Fantasy game or MMO like WoW?.

I haven't. I have seen them and have no interest.

Characters drop frequently, but resurrection magic brings them back up. Far from taking away strategy, it actually ADDS tactical depth, because you can play a bit more like a game of chess, making strategic sacrifices of assorted team members in order to win the overall scenario. So it makes sense from a tactical sense..

That to me is not a good thing. Taking a more gamist approach, imo, is a horrible decision and is ruining the game (my opinion of course).

.

And cinematically, how many times have we seen a character fall to the ground, seemingly defeated, only to pick himself up and return to the fight? It works quite well as a dramatic device. Heck, it's the basic action-movie template: the guy getting his butt kicked for the first five minutes is the guy who'll eventually win the fight.

I suppose if I wanted a more cinematic.action movie approach, this would sound like a good thing. However, I don't want more cinematic over the top action.

 

[Greg K]

I think that this outlook is confusing the player and the PC in an unhelpful way. Of course, in the gameworld, the PC is taking risks which could result in death - s/he is fighting, jumping chasms, etc. The question is whether, in the real world the game is most fun when the player has a random chance of missing out on the next hour or ten of play as his/her only vehicle for participation - the PC - is suddenly killed off. There is nothing heroic about playing a game where a bad roll can make you lose - its just a way to ruin a Sunday afternoon.

There is no confusion. I might not be a happy when a character dies. However, provided the DM is not gunning to kill characters, I am bored and considerer my time wasted if I don't believe there there to be a decent risk of the character dying due to combat, failing to jump some deep divide. I'd rather have the character die, sit out and either make a new character or run an NPC while watcing the game continue until I can bring in the new character or the other PCs can get my character resurrected (provided it is possible) .

Then again, I am not playing to play some uber powerful godly invincible character. I am playing simply to see how events unfold and the story that results from it. Characters don't know whether or not they are NPCs and characters die (Boromir, Obi-wan, Sturm Brightblade, Samuel L. Jacksons' character in Deep Blue Sea) . I don't see any reason to assume that my character is any more special than any other character (other than possibly the use of action points which run out), because they are a PC and I control them.

 

[Warbringer]

If you want a simple house rule, here's mine based on bloodied (50%)

If your hero is not bloodied during an encounter they recover all hits points before the next encounter.

If they were bloodied but did not go below 0, they recover 1/2 all damage taken before the next encounter

If they go below 0 they recover 1/4 of damage once they are conscious

No need for second wind and second wind of a second wind...

 

[Colmarr]

I personally think that some people are reading more into Shelley's article than is justified.

If we make a (reasonable IMO) assumption that second wind(s) can only be used by conscious creatures, all this article suggests is that the first-aid-style use of the Heal check returns an unconscious creature to consciousness.

Occam's razor and all that...

 

[The Little Raven]

(Boromir, Obi-wan, Sturm Brightblade, Samuel L. Jacksons' character in Deep Blue Sea)

Boromir was protecting two hobbits from a warband of Uruks.
Obi-Wan sacrificed his life in order to become one with the Force.
Sturm Brightblade died, spitting his defiance into the face of a Dragon Highlord.
Samuel L's dude made some super dramatic heroic speech before getting munched.

Heroic/dramatic death is quite different from a goblin getting a crit and killing you in a ditch.

I don't see any reason to assume that my character is any more special than any other character (other than possibly the use of action points which run out), because they are a PC and I control them.

Because you're not special in real life, and the game should strive to present you with an escape from your mundaneness? Maybe you like playing games just to be unimportant Joe Schmoe, able to choke on a hard biscuit, but most of us play games so we can be something special.

 

[Warbringer]

... but most of us play games so we can be something special.

As a DM this is exactly what I strive for in session... but the threat of death is an important element in that tension....the below is a written repewsentation of the tension that actually happened in game, the player of Kat was getting nervous as the scene unravelled, frantic that the 'dragon' would attack and proceeded to roll a '1' on her skill check. Sorry this is long... but the tension of death is important

Kateria stared into the pitch black of pit below, the smell of tarnished metal and old bones drifting up from the darkness. The elf opened her hand and dropped one of the gnome’s alchemical lights down into the dark, its magical orange flames bringing light to the ancient vault.

The cold stone walls that enclosed the large room seemed to spring to life, scrawled draconic glyphs pulsing with their own blood red flame in response to the magical flare. Her attention was drawn neither to the pulsing glyphs, nor to the glinting mound of tarnished precious coins and dusty gems, but to the blood bathed bones of the long dead dragon that sat upon its hidden treasure, an eyeless skull staring back up at her.

Her hands started to sweat once again, the air about her seemingly colder. Be brave, Valenar warrior, she chided herself. Tearing her eyes from black voids of the dragon’s skull, she focused on the draconic writings; the ancient etchings seemed to shift in the flickering light. She was too high, the lettering too small to read.

‘We’ll have to go down,’ she whispered, her throat now dry.

‘I’ll go first,’ Mithros said, taking the secured rope, lowering it over the ledge, carefully measuring the rope so it did not disturb the resting bones.

Confidently, he descended, the rope entwined between his ankles as he lowered himself hand over hand. As reached close to the dragon, he signaled Tzzt to swing the rope to the left and letting go, landed in a roll away from the dragon.

Kateria took the rope next, wiping her hands dry on her tunic, and lowered herself nervously down the rope. Her hands quickly began to dampen again as she descended, becoming wetter the closer she came to the dragon, still some twenty feet away.

Mithros watched Katiera’s descent with growing trepidation. She was climbing the rope like a child, all her training forgotten.

Kateria looked down at the dragon, her pulse suddenly quickening. Her brow was drenched in perspiration, an unwarranted fear growing in heart. This is ridiculous, she chided herself.

Calm yourself. You need to relax, what are you going to do, runaway?

‘Run,’ a voice whispered to Kateria. ‘Run if you can.’

She screamed, the rope slipping from her grasp, plummeting to the floor.

She landed awkwardly, sprawled on the dragon’s ancient hoard, but thankfully, completely missed the dragon. Lying there, winded she almost wanted to laugh; she had been so childish.

‘Katiera,’ Mithros called all thoughts of causing an alarm gone from his mind. ‘Are you okay?’

She started to answer but the words caught in her throat. All she could do was stare as the dragon moved, as its great skeletal head turning towards her, it eyes now burning red with the fires of Khyber itself.

She wanted to scream; she wanted to run. She did neither.

 

[MerricB]

As a DM this is exactly what I strive for in session... but the threat of death is an important element in that tension....

One of the interesting elements that the "bloodied" mechanic adds to the game is giving the player more of a choice about how brave their character is.

A character that is bloodied is under threat of imminent death. Thus, they can choose whether to retreat or fight on and have it as a more meaningful choice. 3e really failed in this aspect, as there were many effects (such as criticals) that could eliminate a character on full health. That's not heroic - it's just random.

Cheers!