A GMing telling the players about the gameworld is not like real life

1e was a different beast than 5e, and the 5e definition is what I was discussing with [MENTION=6972053]Numidius[/MENTION]. Personally, if you do something in my game that gives up hit points, like deliberately stepping off of a cliff or standing still for a sword strike, the PC is going to die or at least be down and dying.

I have played 5e, and read through a good chunk of it, but I am not really intimately familiar with all of the nuances of how it describes things. The one 5e campaign I played in was run basically as a system update to a setting that was mostly developed under 2e and then 3e, and the players were basically just using 5e as a 'better 3e' from what I could see. We experimented with the 'story based' background/traits/inspiration system a little bit, but I wouldn't even be able to tell you how it envisages hit points. I would expect that the concept is pretty similar in spirit to what was prevalent in 1e, hit points are a blend of toughness, luck, skill, and 'plot armor' which is meant to express your character's 'plot significance' and thus resistance to being taken out, more than anything else. Personally I think this is the best way to envisage hit points in all 'classic' D&D editions, and 3.x as well, and really isn't all that challenged in 4e and 5e either. In 4e there's more of an explicit acknowledgement of this fact baked into the rules, but it really has always been there. This is why many, maybe most, tables in all forms of D&D will simply allocate damage to the character in all situations, because it comports with the idea of hit points as a measure of plot significance of the character.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Ovinomancer

No flips for you!
1e was a different beast than 5e, and the 5e definition is what I was discussing with [MENTION=6972053]Numidius[/MENTION]. Personally, if you do something in my game that gives up hit points, like deliberately stepping off of a cliff or standing still for a sword strike, the PC is going to die or at least be down and dying.
So, a character thrown off a 50 ft cliff likely survives, but a character that considers it and then willingly jumps off the same cliff automatically dies (or is dying)?

Huh, and this avoids metagaming?
 


Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
I have played 5e, and read through a good chunk of it, but I am not really intimately familiar with all of the nuances of how it describes things. The one 5e campaign I played in was run basically as a system update to a setting that was mostly developed under 2e and then 3e, and the players were basically just using 5e as a 'better 3e' from what I could see. We experimented with the 'story based' background/traits/inspiration system a little bit, but I wouldn't even be able to tell you how it envisages hit points. I would expect that the concept is pretty similar in spirit to what was prevalent in 1e, hit points are a blend of toughness, luck, skill, and 'plot armor' which is meant to express your character's 'plot significance' and thus resistance to being taken out, more than anything else. Personally I think this is the best way to envisage hit points in all 'classic' D&D editions, and 3.x as well, and really isn't all that challenged in 4e and 5e either. In 4e there's more of an explicit acknowledgement of this fact baked into the rules, but it really has always been there. This is why many, maybe most, tables in all forms of D&D will simply allocate damage to the character in all situations, because it comports with the idea of hit points as a measure of plot significance of the character.

In 5e a PC with 200 hit points won't even suffer a scratch until he takes his 101st point of damage in the fight, and he won't take more than scratches or bruises until the one hit that lands solidly and puts him down. At least per RAW. And there are some specific beats general exceptions, like if you are fighting a giant spider or something that has to break the skin to poison you and bites you while you are at max hit points.
 

Satyrn

First Post
I don’t suppose that it occurred to you that “most people” that might disagree with either your positions or your terminology long ago abandoned the thread, and that spending countless posts quoting an essay at each other that would not be accepted by many people is, perhaps, simply engaging in an echo chamber as opposed to usefully communicating?

I dunno man; this slightly slow golden retriever assumed that one of the purposes of communication was to get your argument (in the classic sense) across to your audience; to the extent that you’re communicating to the converted, why bother, and to the extent you’re attemting to convince someone of a point, it is better to use accepted terms than jargon which obfuscates (see also the difference between “actor stance” and “acting”).

But what do I know; LOOK A BALL!!!!

I'm boggling at why Max has spent sooooo much effort trying to get through to people who aren't even listening to him-

A BALL!


Edit- oh. I see he's found someone who's actually listening. That took a long time.
 
Last edited:

Not likely survives. Luckily survives. PCs don't fall off cliffs often. It's rare, really.

Heh, true, but I remember Cargorn (14th? level ranger lord in 1e) doing exactly that, leaping off a 200' cliff in order to engage his enemies. At that level the damage was relatively inconsequential (well, he did have vampiric regeneration, so the demons at the bottom of the cliff were just more 'juice'). I think the consequences of absorbing a few 1000 hit points from demons was far more significant than the fall...

So, yeah, its rare. I think that's why the abstraction survives. Within the paradigm of the original D&D game hit points were not really that problematic, and realism wasn't high on the agenda, beyond a sort of basic correspondence with reality that let players reason. In more modern games this is not so, and most post-D&D games with a story focus either use some kind of system which doesn't produce these odd results, or moves the focus entirely away from whether or not you live or die.

You can see this in 4e, where hit points are clearly separated to a larger degree from the narrative than in previous editions (at least explicitly). You basically have some hit points, then you have an injury state (bloodied) and then some more hit points, and then you become incapacitated (but that simply involves a mechanical set of game states, how it is narrated is really up to the participants, the game simply provides some adjectives which establish a baseline default approach). The "non-lethal attack" rule makes this even more clear, as there is no distinction of 'stun points' or something like that vs 'real' damage. Only the intent of the final 'killing' blow matters. Note how even a fireball can be 'non-lethal'.

This is part of the general movement of 4e away from strictly traditional play structure and concepts. Healing Surges add another layer such that hit points really are more of a plot device than anything else. Once the fight finishes up everyone gets patched up and is good to go again, much like the way a Bruce Willis or Sylvester Stallone gets a bandage slapped on that gunshot or whatever and then theatrically winces a bit now and then but isn't really disabled in any plot-significant sense (so, you could skin something like being dazed or slowed in a future combat as something like "the enemy grabs hold of your wounded arm and your vision goes red as you scream in agony" if you wanted, though few players are really interested in that level of detail).

HoML gives you extra options, you can trade out some of those points for extra power uses, or pay them to gain successes via use of practices in a challenge, etc. You could even spin this kind of thing as wounds reopening or something like that in some situations.
 



Satyrn

First Post
I'm boggling why you are rudely insinuating here like a bad dog that we aren't listening to him. :erm:

I'm trying to encourage him to leave this thread and spend his time in more friendly conversation, instead of wasting his time defending the way he plays.

The 5e forum has been slow lately. I miss Max.
 

Numidius

Adventurer
HoML gives you extra options, you can trade out some of those points for extra power uses, or pay them to gain successes via use of practices in a challenge, etc. You could even spin this kind of thing as wounds reopening or something like that in some situations.

Mad arab, HoTL is acronym for? Did you post a document of your 4e hack game? I'd like to read it.
 

Remove ads

Top