D&D (2024) 5.5/6e - Is it time for Wounds/Vitality?

[jmartkdr2]

The idea has been around for a long time but never seems to catch on, despite being re-introduced every few years.

I’d play in a game like that, but wouldn’t request it.

 

[J.Quondam]

Did I turn over two pages at once or something?

Because what I see is:

1) Someone else entirely mocked people for pointing out the issue of possible death spirals and accused them of not saying what they meant.

2) I said people are actually just saying they don't want death spirals.

3) You made a joke.

4) I made a joke back

5) You accused me of badwrongfunning.

What in the seven interlocking hells happened between 4 and 5?

I took it too personal, and I apologize.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I took it too personal, and I apologize.

S'cool.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

The reverse of a Death spiral could be built into choices for some classes... like a fighter that if they are at vitality equal to or less then double there level they gain fast healing of vitality equal to there wis mod.
Or a rogue that when they are at half or less vitality they gain new uses of canny action

 

[Oofta]

I think you're right, but I also think you can change the tone without completely decoupling for D&D with V/WP system. D&D is always going to feature a majority of combat, the rules are mostly about resolving combat, so a wound system needs to be minorly punishing or at least recoverable. We are not talking WHF-level limb removal and blinding. Vitality Points are basically hit points in the abstract, but wounds are a new level to show the wear of an entire adventure or chapter. Careful play can avoid wounds altogether, but you can push eyond heroically and bear the weight of a wound

But the whole point of D&D for a lot of groups is to practically go out of their way to engage in combat because it's fun for them. On the other hand if I want to make combat, and recovering from combat, so dangerous that it should be avoided when possible I can already do that.

Want a heavy combat game? Let people rest (short or long) whenever they want. Short rest, spend HD (hit die) to get back your HP, long rest recover without spending HD. Want them to avoid it? Remind your players that you only get half your HD back from a long rest. Then use the optional rule that you always have to spend HD to recover HP even during a long rest. For that matter, change a short rest to overnight and long rests to a week or more. Carefully tracking HD and limiting it's recovery covers a lot of the same ground without the overhead.

I guess I just don't see what a split would buy that we don't already have rules for. In addition, how does magic fit into all of this? How does this not just punish front line fighters who tend to take the brunt of the damage in most combats?

 

[Mort]

A "death spiral" isn't actually a thing in the game.

The exhaustion mechanic is a 5e mechanic that causes a death spiral. That's one reason exhaustion is relatively rare. And why the Frenzy barbarian is dinged for having such a brutal mechanic.

But yes, it still exists in 5e.

There is no reason mechanically or story-wise that a death spiral should occur. I interpret death spiral to mean "I don't want anything in the game that might limit my character from doing whatever I want." Heaven forbid we lost hit points, heaven forbid we have any kind of lasting effects (nope, spells re-save every round), injuries? Pfft. As good as gold at 1hp as at 156hp.

But that's not what it means at all. A death spiral (defined above, but I'll reiterate) occurs with a mechanic that imposes cumulative penalties as you take damage. The more damage you take, the less effective you become.

This dramatically affects both the style of play and the type of characters selected for play. The more severe the death spiral mechanic the more combat should be avoided. And the more severe the death spiral mechanic the less frontliners you will see - as they are the most affected.

The wounds/vitality discussion is more about taking something abstract, ie HP, and making them more specific: meat and "luck". If that level of specificity grates on you, then don't use it. Some of us might want that included in the rules (optional or otherwise), because it makes the game more interesting to us.

And that's great. But it's 100% worth noting the repercussions and consequences of changing to that kind of system. Depending on how it's done it can dramatically affect everything from the pace of play to the PCs involved in the game - and completely change the adventures had.

Death Spiral is a conversation/discussion killer. Its abstract, isn't actually a "thing" in the game, just a buzzword that gets thrown about when someone doesn't agree with something having to do with introducing more challenge to the game.

It is a 100% actual thing and imposed by certain mechanics. The worry of implementing a wounds/vitality system is, deliberately or not, ending up with a death spiral mechanic that completely changes the experience at the table.

 

[beancounter]

Whatever WoTC ends up changing in 5.5/6E, it will likely be a move toward the simplification of the rules.

 

[Lanefan]

Sure, lets punish front line fighters more and further incentivize ranged characters.

Every system I've seen with this screws the folks out front taking hits to protect their allies. This gets a hard pass from me.

We've used a vaguely-similar system* for 40 years now and our number-crunching shows the front-liners are roughly just as mortal as everyone else. I fail to see how giving all characters, in effect, a few more hit points screws over anyone.

* - body-fatigue points: BP are rolled once ever, on a small die the size of which varies by species; most PCs have 2-5 BP and that number is locked in pretty much for life. FP are the normal hit points you get from levelling, and go on top of BP. BP are harder to cure or rest back than are FP. Death is at -10 and the 0 to -9 range is also BP. BP are all meat, FP are mostly non-meat with a small meat component to allow poison weapons etc. to work as intended.

Edit to add:

Yes I'm fully in favour of a WP/VP or BP/FP system as long as the number of WP or BP is kept a) small and b) never changes through a character's career. @Steampunkette hits on a pretty damn good 5e-based compromise idea upthread.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I use the Exhaustion table at 0 HP instead of 3 Death Saves. This is essentially my "Wound Points" table at play. Only difference is that all PCs have "six Wound Points", as I don't change the Exhaustion table based on CON scores or whatnot.

I'm curious about this, if you dont mind explaining a little more.

When a PC hits 0 hp, he drops to the floor and gain a level of exhaustion. Right.
Then what happens? Does he keep making death saves and gain other level each time they fail? Or are they automatically stable?

 

[DND_Reborn]

I use the Exhaustion table at 0 HP instead of 3 Death Saves. This is essentially my "Wound Points" table at play. Only difference is that all PCs have "six Wound Points", as I don't change the Exhaustion table based on CON scores or whatnot.

And the benefit of course is that a loss of a "wound points" actually reduces the PCs effectiveness, as the Exhaustion table has penalties that take effect at each level.

The plethora of mechanics we've explored/played with/etc. have been:

CON as Wounds (standard)
CON as Exhaustion (when your CON drops to 6, that is the first level of exhaustion)
Exhaustion at 0 HP as Wounds (like you suggest)
HP Maximum as Wounds (see the other thread LOL!)
And variants of the above...

So, with your system @DEFCON 1 does damage reducing you to 0 HP overflow into levels of Exhaustion??? Or, do you do you gain one level of exhaustion when you hit 0 HP, and more levels as you would normally via Death Saves (so, a roll of 1 = two levels of exhaustion, etc.)?