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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Andor" data-source="post: 5872971" data-attributes="member: 1879">That's true, no edition of D&D could posibly model this situation. Oh wait, except for <a href="http://www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/barbarian.htm" target="_blank">this one</a>. Or <a href="http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#poison" target="_blank">this one</a>. Or bleeding damage. Or the diehard feat. And before someone says "Oh, but that's just 3e, it couldn't happen in 1e, just like they didn't have paralyis (ghouls), or slowing (gorgons) or other status effects." I remind you of the sword of wounding. Can we please stop pretending that a crit from a lance from a charging knight on horseback only does damage by scaring you? It does not. You are frickin' skewered. There is a spear in your lungs. If you still have 1 hp, then you are sufficiently Ramboed up enough to keep fighting with a spear through your lungs. This is why natural healing in any edition prior to 4th would take weeks to heal that wound. The only way to quickly fix a ruptured lung is Magic. You know, the same stuff that lets you fly, or glow, or walk through lava unharmed. Why is this the sticking point where suddenly spells that can move mountains should suddenly be no more effective than a medieval chiurgeon with his leeches and cauterizing irons? And why should that same chiurgeon be able to get you back on your feet in 5 minutes after you fell off a cliff, got knocked to -9hp and were 5 seconds away from death if he hadn't intervened?</blockquote>

Verification