April 3rd, Rule of 3

[Andor]

Sigh - back to the old saw of "magic should be more powerful than not-magic" again...

When was magic ever not more powerful than not magic? Especially in healing where non-magical healing amounts to bed rest and magic can bring back the dead.

Never mind power for second. Non-magic has to be believable. Magic does not have to corrospond to our real world expreience, it merely has to be imaginable.

Aren't all hit points temporary? I'm not looking for a scientific break-down of what the healing does - just an instinctive, non-rational understanding of what it represents.

No, when you are at full hit points you are not going to suddenly be closer to death in 5 minutes. If you are running on pure adrenaline and ignoring a cobra bite, a slashed thigh and a spear through your lung you are going to drop dead when your adrenaline surge/temporary hit points go away. This happens in reality. Often with a posthumous award for valor.

Wounds are wounds. Healing heals them. Temporary points do not heal wounds, they just keep you that much further from death while you have them. Beowulf in the 13th warrior finished the last fight scene on temporary hit points. Then he sat down and died because they were no clerics handy.

"Gaping wounds" are things that only dead adventurers and NPCs have in D&D.

In "real world" terms it doesn't "make sense" that faith healing can close gaping wounds, but in D&D we aren't in the "real world". Who knows what magic is inherent in the body of a Hero?

Given that this is the same "faith based" power than can cast Earthquake or Flame Strike I completely fail to see what you mean. Clerical magic can accomplish the impossible. Including fixing a boo-boo or stitching your liver back together. The gods don't care if you believe in them or not, they can still squish you or heal you at will.

Hurt adventurers are wounded. I'm with order of the stick on this one.

 

[variant]

It is of my opinion that 4e needs to be completely purged from Dungeons & Dragons before the game design can advance.

 

[Essenti]

It is of my opinion that 4e needs to be completely purged from Dungeons & Dragons before the game design can advance.

With what you posted, there is virtually nothing to discuss, but I assume you want your voice heard, otherwise you would not have posted here. Could you elaborate? Making a blanket negative statement that offers no entry point for discourse could be construed as trolling.

A complete purge appears completely backwards facing to me. Although there is some wisdom to what you've said. However, I don't see why it has to stop with only 4e, we could purge all the way back to 1e or OD&D and claim that the game can't advance until we do so. But I fail see how that will help unify the fractured player base.

There are those of us who actually play every edition of D&D and enjoy playing them all. Not having the necessary modules to add on to make the game feel like 4e would be anathema to the design goals of DDN and would likely engender a new round of edition warring.

 

[FireLance]

It is of my opinion that 4e needs to be completely purged from Dungeons & Dragons before the game design can advance.

The irony of the user name made me snigger.

 

[FireLance]

Anyway, I was just thinking about the hp issue, and thought about a simple approach to model a hp system with the following assumptions:

1. Hit points are composed of physical hit points and intangible hit points (vigor, morale, luck, divine favor, etc.).

2. Physical hit points can only be recovered through magic or time. Intangible hit points can be recovered quickly, through a short rest, being inspired by a warlord, etc.

3. A 1st-level character has only physical hit points (based on Constitution). From 2nd level onward, a character's increases in hit points are solely due to intangible factors.

4. When a character loses hit points, he loses physical and intangible hit points roughly in proportion to his current physical and intangible hit point values, with a bias in favor of losing intangible hit points. For example, if a character has 10 physical hit points and 20 intangible hit points, and he loses 9 hp, he loses 3 physical hp and 6 intangible hp. If he loses 11 hp instead, he loses 3 physical hp and 8 intangible hp.

Now, assuming a typical character has a Constitution of 12 and gains 5 hit points per level after 1st, a character's intangible hit points would have overtaken his physical hit points around level 4 (12 physical, 15 intangible). So, a 4th-level character who has been reduced to less than half his hit points ("bloodied" in 4e) would have lost at least half his intangible hit points, and since his intangible hit points are more than half his total hit points, the intangible hit points lost would be more than one-quarter his total hit points. This means that when a 4th-level character has lost half his total hit points, we can restore one-quarter of his total hit points and quite safely attribute it entirely to the recovery of intangible hit points.

After we have done so, the character now has proportionately more intangible hit points and so will lose proportionately more intangible hit points each time he loses hit points. The next time he drops to half his total normal hit points, we can again restore one-quarter of his total hit points and quite safely attribute it to the recovery of intangible hit points.

This allows you to set the following relatively simple rule:
At 4th level, a character who is below half his total normal hit points may take a short rest to recover one-quarter his total normal hit points. In combat, he may do the same by spending a standard action to take a second wind (and a warlord or other non-magical "healer" may allow a character to take a second wind without the need to spend any actions). He may do so a total of X times per day (where X is some number which may be dependent on class or Constitution, or may be set by the DM depending on his preferred game style).

Under this system, an extended rest (or a day's rest) restores 1 hit point (assumed to be physical) and resets the number of times the character can take short rests and second wind actions. This means that while the character is on an adventure, he will normally be operating between 25% and 75% of his full normal hit points without magical healing. He can only recover all his hit points (non-magically) by taking a full rest, which is defined as a week (or more, at the DM's preference) of rest (no strenuous activity, so no adventuring!) in a comfortable environment.

The advantage to this approach is that players only need to track one hit point total while ensuring that non-magical hit point recovery is due to intangible factors.

What happens to characters who drop below 0 hit points and who do not have access to magical healing will depend on the DM and the style of campaign he wishes to run. A DM who wants to run a more realistic campaign may require the character to have a full rest before he can regain any hit points. One who wants to run a more heroic campaign may allow the character to continue adventuring without penalty. A more middle of the road approach could be to allow the character to continue adventuring, but at a penalty to indicate that he is operating at 0 physical hit points. This penalty disappears after he has taken a full rest.

 

[pemerton]

Pre-4e non-physical damage is usually a status effect. Stat damage/drain, stunned, fatigued, shaken. These are not healed with cure spells.

Non-magical, morale based hp effects were also frequently done through temporary ht points. So the Sarge might give you a pep-talk that get you through the fight, but it doesn't last all day.

Which editions do you have in mind as "pre-4e"? In AD&D/Basic, one way to take non-physical "damage" was to lose hit points (as Gygax talks about in the DMG).

Pre-4E?? Pre-3E there were no such things as stat damage or statuses except 'petrified'. For most of D&D's history, damage, be it physical or non-physical, does = hit points.

This is what I was thinking.

If you are running on pure adrenaline and ignoring a cobra bite, a slashed thigh and a spear through your lung you are going to drop dead when your adrenaline surge/temporary hit points go away.

My view is that D&D has never had, as part of its combat resolution mechanics, some mechanicism for producing a character who is slowed by a spear through his/her leg, though not actually unconscious and dying. (Contrast Rolemaster, Runequest, Burning Wheel etc.)

So you are describing a scenario that can't arise via the mechanics. It's therefore not an issue that the mechanics (for 4e, or for any other edition) don't tell us how to handle it.

Conversely, for the sorts of injuries that can be produced via the combat resolution mechanics, there is no reason to think that magical healing is per se more powerful. Aragorn was very inspirational, for example, and so was Faramir, though neither was a magician.

Non-magic has to be believable.

Says who? The chase of the three companions after the orcs, their feats at Helm's Deep and on the Pelennor Field, there travel through the Paths of the Dead - believability is not a key element to whether or not these are worth having in my fantasy RPG.

Well, they wouldn't close gaping wounds. The wounds would still be there and bleeding. But a fighter who uses his second wind ability just keeps on fighting (think Boromir).

Yes.

 

[Lanefan]

OK, I'll put it another way: game time is only as meaningful as the players (including the GM) make it - and that is all. Moreover, it is only relevant in the ways that the players want it to be relevant. If that way doesn't specifically feed into the strategic importance of resources and healing then linking healing and resource replenishment to game time won't help add strategic elements.

It doesn't have to be just reactive - it has to be specifically set up to demand action constantly as a tension to the time taken to heal. If the tension isn't constant, the game time is, for our purposes, meaningless. To get that tension needs some sort of invented reason for hurry.

Whether there's a hurry or not, I still think it's vitally important to track in-game time just on principle.

Pre-4E?? Pre-3E there were no such things as stat damage or statuses except 'petrified'. For most of D&D's history, damage, be it physical or non-physical, does = hit points.

We-ell, in 1e there were a few things that did what later became defined as ability damage; some examples: Shadows, Ropers, the spell Ray of Enfeeblement all drained Strength; Feeblemind clobbered your Int.; etc.

As for statuses, while not as cut-and-dried as 3e (or 4e); in 1e you could be petrified, paralysed (or held), charmed, unconscious (or asleep), confused, and some other things I forget right now - all usually leading to the more common status of dead.

Lan-"probably feebleminded but not smart enough to realize it"-efan

 

[JamesonCourage]

Basically, a fighter with 27 hit points and 5 healing surges is only different than a fighter with 57 hit points and no surge mechanic by the fact that 30 of their 57 hit points need a special action to become available.

I kind of wish this happened at a later point in the game, though. I'm not 100%, but doesn't a Fighter with a 14 Constitution have 29 hit points and 11 surges at 1st level (I could be really, really wrong here)? Isn't that, according to you, equivalent to 106 hit points? That's pretty high level in prior editions.

While they adjusted monster HP and damage to help with this change, it's presentation really hurt the game for a lot of people, I think. There's nothing wrong with having 106 hit points at level 1, but it's really not what many people were expecting out of the Fighter, I think. Especially not the oldschool players, who still roll for HP at level 1.

I've said it before, and I think it's very important to keep in mind: presentation for 5e is the key. If players want a gritter game than 4e gives them (or 3.X, for that matter!), they won't want someone with over 100 hit points at level 1. I hope the designers keep that in mind (especially since they're going for flatter math), or the whole thing might just fizzle out because of it. Even if they go for a game mechanic that works similarly, deflating the numbers will work wonders. As always, play what you like

 

[Incenjucar]

4E could absolutely have used some WotC-designed mods to change the "grit" level. I feel that 4E's relative survival range is a great start, but introducing super-easy-to-apply rules to that survival range in 5E would go a long way.

Assuming they kept healing surges, a blanket reduction of healing surges or surge values would do a lot to up the danger level. Limiting how many healing surges you can use during an encounter or a rest would also do a lot. Slowing how quickly you can regain healing surges would do plenty, as well. Creating situations where you slowly lost your access to healing surges (dungeon floors are uncomfortable, etc) would do a lot.

It's one of those "dials" things WotC likes to go on about.

 

[GX.Sigma]

I really don't understand how people think healing surges are a bonus ability, or that having healing surges means the character basically has more hit points. These people must have never read a 4e book, because that's not what healing surges are.

Healing surges are a daily limit to the number of times a character can be healed. The purpose is to make it impossible for a character to be healed indefinitely. In other words, the healing surge mechanic is objectively a drawback.

If you have a problem with the Second Wind ability, that's a problem with Second Wind. If you have a problem with healing between encounters, that's a problem with the short rest/encounter resources system. Not a problem with healing surges.

The only thing the surge system does on its own, is to make sure you can't chug potions and use Wand of CLW all day... and doesn't that fix one of the big complaints about 3e? If the infamous wand of CLW used the healing surge mechanic, it would not be too broken, because healing someone drains a daily resource off them.

But whenever anyone mentions healing surges, the grognards go overboard and yell about how much they hate healing surges, and won't buy 5e if it has healing surges. I think there's a miscommunication here.

Mod Edit: Clean language is preferred. ~Umbran