Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 4543722" data-attributes="member: 18280">No surprise at all.  The hp discussion in the DMG is a direct result of that debate, which certainly predated 1e.I ran my first game on Christmas Day, 1979.Please note that I said "I believe that the 1e model holds up to scrutiny quite well.", not "I believe that the 1e model holds up to scrutiny absolutely.Overall, I have argued that the 1e and the 4e hp paradigms are different, not that one is better than the other.  However, that said, I do believe that the 1e hp paradigm is superior to the 4e one, if only because the 4e system consistently leads to absurd results.  IOW, while I agree (to a point) that they "all can be shown to be absurd and unrealistic and just flat out not to model anything very well depending on how closely you examine them", it takes little more than casual examination to see the problems with the 4e paradigm.This seems, IFAICT, to be the general consensus -- never have I been advised to "just not think about it" so often as with the 4e hp/healing system.  Even the most ardent defenders of the system....people who are really happy with how the mechanics work.....seem willing to admit that the hp system is glitchy if (1) thought about, (2) damage is described before it is healed, or (3) both.Even so, there are things that I like about the 4e hp paradigm.  If the designers had given it more thought, it might seem less like Monty Python & the Holy Grail and more like what the designers (presumably) had in mind.  As I have said earlier, a previous thread offered several improvements to the 4e hp system that would have been nice to have as a codified product if the GSL allowed it.Perhaps the new GSL (should it ever appear) will allow it.Perhaps 5th edition will sweep away the problems by fully embracing the new hp paradigm.....I would be willing to concede that many of the problems 4e has re: damage and healing are based on a schitzophrenic attitude toward the old and new paradigms.It is, if anything, a testament to the strength of the 1e hp system (and Vancian magic) that, as "the most common mechanic that was changed by games created in response to D&D", it is also one of the most enduring.  And, it is equally telling that, repeatedly, changing that system causes unexpected problems in the game's design.Finally, it is also telling that, although many 4e supporters are willing to concede the point that the 4e hp paradigm requires a willingness to retcon/an acceptance of the absurd/choosing not to describe/etc., the diehard "There is no problem" folks tend to be the same diehard "There was no problem" folks when 3e problems were discussed.  And they tended to change their mind when 4e was announced, and WotC started talking about the same problems.If 4e hp work for you and your group, that's great.  I don't want to take your game away from you.  Reworked and fully committed to, the 4e hp paradigm might prove equal to or better than the 1e paradigm.  But I don't want to see the current 4e hp paradigm through the rose-coloured glasses some would like to force others to wear, either.(And by "some", I most emphatically do not mean you, SteveC.)RC</blockquote>

Verification