A Little Perspective

[Korgoth]

Yes, but 4e throws it in your face. In previous editions, that 10 point blow that would have killed your first level fighter, is just a deep scratch, a superficial wound at 10th level. Your skill, luck, whatever helped you to dodge, or partially parry the blow. But it's still damage. At 4e, that blow or even a MISS, deals um, what, exactly?

Lots of blokes in previous editions were walking around with 1 hit point. And a fair number of blokes (high level ones) had many times that number.

Really, having thought it over from an aggressively skeptical position, I don't see that things have really changed on the hit point front.

In fact, the notion of a guy with minimum hit points but advanced attack skills isn't new, either. There's an adventure (a tourney) in the back of the Companion Set DM's book that has several peasant archers who, despite counting as normal men, have bow attacks at 7th level because they're skilled archers. There's not even an explanation of why this is so... that's just what these guys do.

I think hit points are still pretty much the same as they always were.

 

[JRRNeiklot]

I have always described - and heard described in every game I've played in since 1981 - hit points as some kind of phsical damage.

1st level - the orc's mighty swing cleaves across your thigh, leaving a huge gash in your leg, it's bleeding profusely. Take 8 points of damage.

10th level - You manage to deflect the orc's swing, it glances away, but still manages to nick you across the ribs, leaving a painful, but superficial cut. Take 8 points of damage.

Exact same effect, but the first is a serious wound, the second barely needs a bandaid. Enough of the latter, though, and you'll eventually bleed to death.

This is the way I have ALWAYS seen D&D hits described, so when a "miss" deals damage it just seems wrong.