Are Hit Points necessary?

[1Mac]

For an idea of what I'm driving at, check out any number of "dice pool" RPG's out there. Damage (or more general attrition) is not binary, but adding and removing dice from a pool is much easier and maintains a better sense of flow in-game than doing arithmetic on scratch paper.

 

[frankthedm]

If HPs don't escalate ridiculously (see 3e and 4e, for example) they work quite elegantly, IMO.

Yes, the amount of HP scaling in D20 is an issue. Keeping HP lower lets one avoid issues of tougher characters needing healing potions in beer helmets to get fully healed.

 

[Silvercat Moonpaw]

Defeat Points. That is what they measure, how hard it is to defeat you in a fight.

Except that name suggests they should accumulate rather than decrease as you build up toward a defeat.

 

[Garmorn]

For an idea of what I'm driving at, check out any number of "dice pool" RPG's out there. Damage (or more general attrition) is not binary, but adding and removing dice from a pool is much easier and maintains a better sense of flow in-game than doing arithmetic on scratch paper.

This is more of a mater of taste. I don't like dice pools because to me they are messing and difficult to use. On the other hand I have used Harmmaster combat system that uses both specific wounds and fatigue points. Most would find it a very difficult system.

 

[sellars]

Personally, I like the HP mechanism. I like the abstractness of the mechanism, with HPs representing nothing really other than "how long does it take before I drop down".

All attempts I have seen that try to make stuff more "realistic" do not have the feel and flair to me as HPs have.

 

[Dice4Hire]

I like hit points because they are a more reliable method of tracking damage. Saves can be very swingy, and many condition tracks, are just clunky and IMO are jsut as arbitrary as the hit point levels.

Yes, with hit point you get the silliness of something with 1 hit point fighting as well as something fully healthy, but in most cases, I am satisfied with this oddity, considering all the other odditeis present in rules systems.

That said, I am a fan of Deadland's wound system, as it approximates hit points pretty well, and is pretty simple, though of course it makes for far more deadly combat.

 

[Umbran]

For an idea of what I'm driving at, check out any number of "dice pool" RPG's out there. Damage (or more general attrition) is not binary, but adding and removing dice from a pool is much easier and maintains a better sense of flow in-game than doing arithmetic on scratch paper.

Well, you're still keeping track of a number - just using a physical representation rather than a pencil mark. You could use M&Ms for your hit points, you know...

Dice pool mechanics like that are pretty heavy on the "death spiral" - getting wounded = losing dice = losing ability to accomplish stuff. And, of course, with lots of dice meandering around the table, making sure dice don't accidentally wander in and out can be troublesome.

Which is mostly to say - nothing is perfect.

 

[Chronologist]

The hit point system works, but I think it would be nice if players got to choose whether it represented actual hits or more like plot armor. I don't like the idea of my level 5 character actually being stabbed eight times and still standing, I'd rather it was more like Plot Armor.

What if players had a method of choice involving the narration of hit point loss?

 

[Umbran]

What if players had a method of choice involving the narration of hit point loss?

So long as it is just narration, without mechanical impact, there's no reason why they cannot.

 

[Orius]

Yes, the amount of HP scaling in D20 is an issue. Keeping HP lower lets one avoid issues of tougher characters needing healing potions in beer helmets to get fully healed.

As an aside, I swear I remember a Dragonmirth cartoon somewhere along the way that had one of these.