Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="glass" data-source="post: 4101458" data-attributes="member: 12251">Sorry, if you are saying that hp represent, amongst other things, superficial injury then noone in this thread (apart from Jeff) will have any argument with you. So I wasn't misrepresenting you, I was honestly confused by the fact that you were seemingly supporting Jeff even though his position and yours are apparently slightly different.Agreed on all counts.And this is where we part company. Despite your assertion above that I was misrepresenting you, you in fact are arguing that hp damage represented non-superficial injuries.Did you see my post above about how any injury that doesn't impair you in any way is, by definition, superficial?In terms of gameplay, they were indeed more of a 'per dungeon' resource. However, that didn't jibe with the lack of impairment. It was a verisimilitude problem.It isn't a matter of rules. It is a matter of in game effects.We all agree (I assume) on how hp worked as a mechanic; the difference is in what that represented in character.Whatever words you care to use to describe them, 'injuries' represented by hp in any edition of D&D do not impair the character in any way. Thus, no edition modelled long-term impairment with hp damage. QED.glass.</blockquote>