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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="HeavenShallBurn" data-source="post: 4014484" data-attributes="member: 39593">Now that I'm back I can give the proper attention to responding.This is probably your best argument.  The mechanics allow it to be interpreted to support either you or Darsuul without creating contradiction or internal conflict.  This is a nice assertion but where does it come from, what in the system supports this claim?  Whereas the contrary position that HP are not relative is highly supported via two mechanics, environmental damage and weapon damage.  Weapons do a set amount of damage before external modifiers and feats are factored in.  A longsword wielded by a character with 10 strength and no feats to modify this will always do 1d8 damage, regardless of the level of character holding the sword or the level of the character being struck.  In order to get more damage the strength of the character wielding it must increase or skill must increase via a feat.  The sword in and of itself is entirely static.  Strong indication that hp are a static measure as well.  Now environmental damage.  Lava,   Note the bold parts there can be no argument here.  It specifically details that damage is dealt on contact as a result of exposure and ends with exposure.  Lava doesn't swing at you or leap or move around it just sits there and burns, it also can't be waved away via the near miss rule.  Either you were in contact in which case you suffer damage, or you weren't and thus don't.  Lava doesn't get hotter or cooler based on what level character touches it, always 2d6 damage for contact.  An objective static amount of damage that affects all characters the same regardless of levelBut this is directly in contravention of your second point that damage should be measured by percentage of total hitpoints.  In fact lets go directly to the example.  Medium Monstrous Spider 1d6 plus poison, one first level character with 10hp and one 20th level with 200hp(d10 max hp no mods)  Assuming the spider does min 1 damage to each that's 10% of one but only .5% of the other.  The minimum possible attack that can still inflict poison, so it has to have connected at least some.  But if damage is proportional that's a problem because the injury to the 1st level is already small, and the injury done to the 20th level is only 1/20th of that bad.  Going by percentage that's the equivalent of a near miss still poisoning you.This is what kills abstract hp entirely.  A held person may not take ANY ACTION AT ALL, they may not make any motion whatsoever.  Your assertion is that avoid damage through lessening the impact of a blow, but here that is totally impossible.  Yet attacks against them deal exactly the same damage as against those who you assert are capable of doing so.  A direct and unambiguous contradiction.  Again where is the reflection of this in the system, as flavor there's nothing wrong with it.  But it's also entirely unsupported by the mechanics of the game.  See first and second parts especially the part about lava.  But just to put this in perspective via an extreme example full immersion in Lava 20d6 damage (avg about 75pts).  There's not question here the damage requires full submersion whether you're 1st or twentieth level.  Difference 1st level char dies immediately, as should be expected of a mundane character.  20th level char survives at least one round, potentially several based on the roll and their hp, while fully submerged in burning lava.  This can't be abstracted.That much at least is a valid contention, all the way up to 3e there has been a gap, a mis-match between the mechanic and the text fluff describing it.  If 4e changes things rather extensively it could make hitpoints truly abstract.  But until the books that won't be known.Overall, I think hit points are an excellent abstraction of damage, and it looks like 4E might be cleaning up some of the anomalies in the system.</blockquote>[/QUOTE]

Verification