Alternative names for "Hit Points"

[UngainlyTitan]

No. We don't. Leastways, not in the narrative of the game.

Heck, I'm not really a regular, but just on this site over the years I've seen approximately 70 or 80 threads expressly on the subject of what hit points mean, with everything from polite disagreement to the declaration of holy war against the infidels resulting from the conversation.

"Hit points" implies and the exact definition of an in-game "hit" are so nebulous it's amazing. I'm a "only the last hit and maybe crits get described as an actual wound" kind of guy, but I've seen DMs describe the loss of 1/10 of your total hit points from a normal attack as a sucking chest wound. Of course, how else do you describe a "hit" with a giant axe that causes you to lose "hit points" if you're being literal?

Oh! I was not talking about narrative, in narrative terms it is up there with Angels dancing on the head of a pin However, in practical terms it is plot protection. It is what allow the characters to do the mad insane risks of walking in to the lair of a mythical beastie with a pointy stick and walk out again, where as in any 'realistic' play out of that the hero would die or find another way out (flooding the cave, nuking from orbit or whatever)

 

[Mark Chance]

Ouchies? Owies? Boo-boos?

"The ogre swings wide, bringing its enormous club down with a thunderous roar. You try to deflect with your shield, but the strike is too powerful." *dice clatter* "Take 17 ouchies."

 

[El Mahdi]

deleted

 

[Desdichado]

No.


Perhaps this thread: Are Hit Points necessary? (linked in the OP)...

...this post: post_#59 of the above thread (also linked in the OP)...

...and this post from this thread post_#5 ...

...would explain it better.

Would have been even better if the actual OP had explained it well enough, but oh well. I've already voted, and it doesn't change my vote, as it turns out, anyway.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

I prefer hit points to represent - in part - an actual hit. So, the hit with a giant axe for 10 points of damage is a mortal wound at first level, but merely a scratch that was ALMOST avoided at 10th level. Hit points should always represent SOME physical damage.

While I'm not a simulation nut, I just can't get on board with that given how many "hits" a D&D character takes in combat. It's a bridge too far. Metal armor would be dented in ways that make it impossible to continue fighting. Other types of armor would be in need of repair or landfilling. Limbs would be shattered or severed. The dry cleaning bills would be insane.

And once your hit points are greater than the maximum damage of getting hit with a sword, you've turned into a superhero well above the level of the average fantasy or swords and sorcery character.

But I don't want to rant on this again. Happens every time these things come up.

 

[Bigwilly]

Luck

I chose don't change it as I have been calling them hit points for too damn long. However, if I was going to call them something else, then I might go for luck points.

Run out of luck and BOOM, that next blow kills ya.