D&D General 4e Healing was the best D&D healing

[Fanaelialae]

If that's what you got out of our conversation, then I guess we were talking past each other all along.

One point of damage represents something that should never be fatal to a healthy adult human, by itself; but which could be fatal if repeated a finite number of times. If a healthy adult ogre can't possibly die from falling ten feet when represented in the standard model, but it does die from falling ten feet when represented as a minion, then something has gone horribly wrong. That's the sort of modeling error which gets a system ridiculed for decades after the game is discontinued.

What do we mean by a healthy adult human?

Is a human who can run a marathon healthy? Is a human who can win a weight lifting competition healthy? Both of those things are perfectly possible for a character with 1 hit point.

Heck, it wasn't at all unusual in earlier editions for characters (even fighters) to start with 1 hit point. Constitution bonuses required higher scores back then, and starting hit points were rolled. Were they in some way unhealthy that was not elsewise reflected in the rules?

1 hit point is a potentially lethal amount of damage.

However, that amount of depletion on a regular Ogre would be obvious to any observer as the Ogre would look beat to hell, thus an attacker could surmise one good hit might finish it off. But a minion can't be visually distinguished from a fully-healthy regular, so once again consistency falls apart.

When interacting with the rest of the world - say, it's Ogre buddies over breakfast that morning, how many hit points does the minion Ogre have?

I venture the answer will be a number higher than one.

So between breakfast and now, where did those hit points go; and if the minion really is down to one h.p. why doesn't it look beat-up?

(I had a long reply in progress to your earlier post but my computer crashed, sorry)

It might look beat to hell if you treat HP as meat. Otherwise, it might simply look a little worse for wear. Not at 100% perhaps, but ultimately capable of completing a marathon (assuming they could complete a marathon when at full hit points).

How many hit points the ogre has during breakfast is up to the DM. Tough people who've won real fights have died in freak accidents that, in typical D&D terms, would only be worth a few hit points of damage. The fights would suggest that they had plenty of hit points, but the freak accidents suggest they didn't, so which is it? Or might the abstraction of hit points be variable according to the needs of the game?

It doesn't look beat up because it hasn't been beat up. In what (significant way) does getting beat up have to do with someone breaking their neck falling 10 feet? Little to nothing. People have broken their necks falling without getting beat up first. And I'm sure that people who have gotten seriously beat up have fallen and been no worse for wear.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

What do we mean by a healthy adult human?

Does not possess a significantly below-average Constitution score, and has not previously been injured (without those injuries having healed). At maximum HP, where maximum HP is some number above 1.

Is a human who can run a marathon healthy? Is a human who can win a weight lifting competition healthy? Both of those things are perfectly possible for a character with 1 hit point.

Being that both events are significantly outside the context of typical gameplay, there are no rules for such situations. Any rule you make up for your table is no more or less valid than any rule used at another table; but if you decide that both activities are possible for someone with 1hp, then the consequences are entirely on you. Personally, I would not consider such a ruling to represent the work of a fair or reasonable DM.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Does not possess a significantly below-average Constitution score, and has not previously been injured (without those injuries having healed). At maximum HP, where maximum HP is some number above 1.


Being that both events are significantly outside the context of typical gameplay, there are no rules for such situations. Any rule you make up for your table is no more or less valid than any rule used at another table; but if you decide that both activities are possible for someone with 1hp, then the consequences are entirely on you. Personally, I would not consider such a ruling to represent the work of a fair or reasonable DM.

Why? As I already pointed out, in many editions of D&D a perfectly healthy 1st level character might only have 1 hit point. Are these characters somehow banned from marathons or weight lifting competitions in your games?

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Why? As I already pointed out, in many editions of D&D a perfectly healthy 1st level character might only have 1 hit point. Are these characters somehow banned from marathons or weight lifting competitions in your games?

In some editions of D&D, it is possible for a level 1 character to have only 1hp at maximum. That doesn't mean they're perfectly healthy, though, as even a cursory examination would reveal. (Claims to the contrary, whether from you or from any book, are factually and demonstrably incorrect.) A character with 1hp is exceptionally prone to sudden death, and highly unlikely to survive for any great period of time. A "perfectly healthy" character doesn't die from sustaining the minimum possible quanta of damage; only a frail or injured character would.

This bears out in practice, as well as in theory. If you actually played such a character through an extended marathon or weight lifting sequence, rather than abstracting the whole thing as a single die roll, then there's a good chance that they would die before the end of it. Playing such a character through any extended sequence, with 1hp (and death occurring at 0), has a good chance of resulting in death.

 

[Fanaelialae]

In some editions of D&D, it is possible for a level 1 character to have only 1hp at maximum. That doesn't mean they're perfectly healthy, though, as even a cursory examination would reveal. (Claims to the contrary, whether from you or from any book, are factually and demonstrably incorrect.) A character with 1hp is exceptionally prone to sudden death, and highly unlikely to survive for any great period of time. A "perfectly healthy" character doesn't die from sustaining the minimum possible quanta of damage; only a frail or injured character would.

This bears out in practice, as well as in theory. If you actually played such a character through an extended marathon or weight lifting sequence, rather than abstracting the whole thing as a single die roll, then there's a good chance that they would die before the end of it. Playing such a character through any extended sequence, with 1hp (and death occurring at 0), has a good chance of resulting in death.

How so? I've seen rules in D&D for competitions. I can't recall any rules for competitions that caused damage, barring the nature of the competition being the lethal variety.

Moreover, such a character could have a perfectly respectable Constitution of 11, which would strongly counter indicate that they are unhealthy. They are about as healthy as the average person, neither healthy nor unhealthy.

A fighter who is "exceptionally prone to sudden death" seems like an oxymoron to me. How does someone like that survive the training to become a fighter in the first place?

I think the simple and straightforward answer is because things like training and athletic competitions don't involve hit point damage, and someone with even a single hit point is perfectly capable of participating in them.

Characters with low hit points (even just a single HP) are called upon by circumstance to undertake difficult and challenging trials during the course of adventure. This is an expected part of the game, and has been since the game's infancy. If a character with 1 hit point cannot be expected to complete a race at a faire, how can he be expected to run away from a monster that is chasing him?

Either lifting weights and running races deals damage to perfectly healthy people, or it doesn't deal damage to people with 1 hit point. Otherwise, you're being arbitrary and inconsistent.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Minions having 1 hp is an abstract simplification designed to make running them at the table easier for the DM. Noting something as either just alive or dead is easier then keeping track of HP; especially when there is a large number of creatures to keep track of.

If managing the HP totals of a dozen different monsters at the same time doesn't annoy you, then the minion "module" will hold less appeal to you.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

How so? I've seen rules in D&D for competitions. I can't recall any rules for competitions that caused damage, barring the nature of the competition being the lethal variety.

Then those rules aren't very good. Injury is not a foreign concept in physical competition, nor is death. If any ruleset was designed to adequately address the topic, rather than pass over it quickly so that we can move on to more interesting things, then it would include rules for taking damage.

Moreover, such a character could have a perfectly respectable Constitution of 11, which would strongly counter indicate that they are unhealthy. They are about as healthy as the average person, neither healthy nor unhealthy.

If a character has 1hp, in spite of their Constitution of 11, then they are factually and demonstrably not healthy. Healthy people don't die from the sorts of things that cause exactly 1 damage; they die some of the time, from the sorts of things that cause 1-6 damage.

A fighter who is "exceptionally prone to sudden death" seems like an oxymoron to me. How does someone like that survive the training to become a fighter in the first place?

Yes, and any rule which is likely to generate such a result is a bad rule. Old D&D was full of bad rules, and the possibility of a fighter having 1hp is an example of that, which was fixed in 3E.

Either lifting weights and running races deals damage to perfectly healthy people, or it doesn't deal damage to people with 1 hit point. Otherwise, you're being arbitrary and inconsistent.

Yes, with a caveat. If the competition is taking place outside of an adventure, then whether or not anyone takes non-fatal damage is largely irrelevant. If you take 1 damage from tripping over a rock, or straining to lift a weight, then there's no point in tracking that damage since it will be gone by the time it would matter. Someone who gets injured, and thus performs poorly, can be modeled sufficiently with just a bad result on the relevant checks. Adding damage to the model does not change the outcome at all, in circumstances where it would normally apply - unless someone is trying to compete while they only have 1hp.

 

[Lanefan]

If you actually played such a character through an extended marathon or weight lifting sequence, rather than abstracting the whole thing as a single die roll, then there's a good chance that they would die before the end of it. Playing such a character through any extended sequence, with 1hp (and death occurring at 0), has a good chance of resulting in death.

In fairness, this is where death-at-minus-10 really helps a lot in many ways both gamist and realist.

The character with 1 hit point might knock itself out during competition but would be far less likely to kill itself, and would of course recover if tended.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

In fairness, this is where death-at-minus-10 really helps a lot in many ways both gamist and realist.

The character with 1 hit point might knock itself out during competition but would be far less likely to kill itself, and would of course recover if tended.

It also greatly increases the chance that they would survive to adulthood, and to their first class level.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Then those rules aren't very good. Injury is not a foreign concept in physical competition, nor is death. If any ruleset was designed to adequately address the topic, rather than pass over it quickly so that we can move on to more interesting things, then it would include rules for taking damage.

If a character has 1hp, in spite of their Constitution of 11, then they are factually and demonstrably not healthy. Healthy people don't die from the sorts of things that cause exactly 1 damage; they die some of the time, from the sorts of things that cause 1-6 damage.

Yes, and any rule which is likely to generate such a result is a bad rule. Old D&D was full of bad rules, and the possibility of a fighter having 1hp is an example of that, which was fixed in 3E.

Yes, with a caveat. If the competition is taking place outside of an adventure, then whether or not anyone takes non-fatal damage is largely irrelevant. If you take 1 damage from tripping over a rock, or straining to lift a weight, then there's no point in tracking that damage since it will be gone by the time it would matter. Someone who gets injured, and thus performs poorly, can be modeled sufficiently with just a bad result on the relevant checks. Adding damage to the model does not change the outcome at all, in circumstances where it would normally apply - unless someone is trying to compete while they only have 1hp.

No, injury is not uncommon. However, no one dies just because of pulling a muscle. Death is possible, but very rare. However, on average, if 10 first level fighters level fighters have an athletic competition, odds are that one of those fighters will have 1 HP. You're suggesting that having death be a likely outcome for that fighter is a reasonable outcome? I don't think so.

What about the fighter who is reduced to 1 HP in combat? Does he drop dead from cardiac arrest if he tries to flee from the creatures attacking him?

What about commoners, who have very few HP and for whom each day may bring rigors equal to an athletic competition. Shouldn't they be dropping dead left and right as well?

All of this effort to avoid the far more straightforward idea that a point of damage to someone with 1 hit point remaining should be different within the fiction of the game from a point of damage to someone with 2 or more hit points remaining.