Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kevtar" data-source="post: 5870923" data-attributes="member: 27098">I disagree with you on your first point. I believe it does stand up to inspection, even though such a thing didn't exist in 1e - but we can disagree and that's cool.My point in referencing HPs in 1e is that many people seem suspicious of the concept of HP in 4e when it has always been representative of more than damage. However, when healing surges are added to the mix, then some people outright rejected the 4e concept. This wasn't a problem for me, and I guess it comes down to personal interpretation and taste. I don't really see healing surges as a departure from prior editions as much as an enlargement upon the concept. If HP is representative of more than physical damage, then healing surges can be a representation of revivification of more than physical damage.That said, I'm not 100% stuck on surges. If 5e provides a meaningful way for non-magical healing to occur (hopefully better than the mechanics in previous editions, like your reference to 3.0), then great!. My stance is simply, if the concept of HP is large enough to include physical damage, skill, luck, etc... then "healing" should be large enough to accommodate ways to revive the PC without relying on magical means.</blockquote>