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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5874743" data-attributes="member: 6668292">This is true if you assume that hits are ruptured lungs. The game supports it no better than 4e. However, if you assume a bad flesh wound that is mostly bruised or deeply scratched (as it wont to happen in fantasy), 3.X comes out ahead of 4e, modeling the wound taking a week or two to heal.You'd think that it'd be clear after these posts by the poster you're replying to:You'd think that after these replies over the past two pages, it'd be a little clearer by now.Like healing surges? Pushing people around the battlefield? The AEDU power scheme? That's kind of why I don't find the "it's never been done before in D&D!" argument compelling at all. When 3e came it, it was full of new things that changed how things were done (Fort, Ref, and Will saves, etc.). When 4e came out, it was full of new things that changed how things were done. When 5e comes out, I expect it to be full of new things that change how things are done.Honestly, I'm not advocating for gritty rules in the assumed core rules. Then again, neither is Bedrockgames, from the sounds of it. He just wants slower recovery time, which would allow for exactly the same narrative wounds you use now to be given (bruises, shallow cuts, etc.). And, if you have a healer -be he mundane or otherwise- you can recover faster, too, just as you can now, by pushing through it, healing up wounds, or whatever else makes sense to you and your group. As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification