Are Hitpoints an encouter based resource? Should the be one?

[brehobit]

I found in 1e and 2e they were not an encounter-based resource. In 3e they certainly are (wands of CLW being the main reason).

Mark

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

I think hit points should not explicitly be a per-encounter resource. I think choosing to use a shorter-term resource on hit points should be a choice the character has available, but it should be designed with carefully considered cost.

This is why I've loved Vp/Wp type systems since DragonQuest in the early 80s. With no magical healing, it created a dynamic where the party wouldn't just rush in and start swinging till everything was dead. There was a real incentive to break away/fight defensively/etc when you were out of fatigue, as healing the real 'endurance' wounds took time.

And not everyone plays 3.x with crates of CLW. I sure don't. I sincerely dislike the concept of per-encounter balancing when applied to everything.

 

[SiderisAnon]

Before reading this thread, I would not have thought of hit points as an encounter-based resources. Now, though, I can see the point that the really could be considered such.

At low levels, I find hit points to be a resources that determines when the day is over. Once the party can't heal anymore and some of the PCs are getting low, it's time to go home. This could be after one fight or seven. Once you run out, you're dead, so it's a good thing to know when to fall back and rest.

Once you get a little higher, maybe 4th-5th level, this model stops applying. Hit points do become an encounter-based resource. It's a question of whether the big fighter(s) can last out the combat better than the monsters. What starts determining the day is the level of magic. Once the casters are out of magic, they want to fall back, unless they're sure the adventure is almost over and/or that they can take out any remaining opposition without magic.

The only way I have found to avoid this latter model is to set up situations where the party has to complete a certain task right away to accomplish a goal or where they know that if they don't finish off the opponents now, they will either be more prepared, have called in reinforcements, or will have left for parts unknown by the time the party returns. (I tend to run half-way intelligent bad guys.) When a party knows they have to push on through, they're willing to ration their magic more and so continue through the whole thing. They're also willing to expend more magic items, either potions or wand charges, in order to accomplish their goals.

In general, however, my players prefer to see wands and potions as a resource to be used only when you don't have another choice, so that you have them when you really do need them. They would rather fall back, rest, and come back when they are more capable.



So, as to the original question: I think that after a few levels, hit points do become an encounter-based resource. In a lot of ways, I think the game would be more like heroic fantasy movies if more abilities were this way. You have a few really big bangs that you save for the right occasion and everything else you can keep using as you go along. After all, in the movies, the hero can work his way through numerous groups of mooks and still seem fresh every time, but he really has to use up everything he has for the big bad.

 

[GlassJaw]

And not everyone plays 3.x with crates of CLW. I sure don't. I sincerely dislike the concept of per-encounter balancing when applied to everything.

But if you are playing 3ed at the "standard" power and wealth levels, there's no reason hit points shouldn't be a per encounter resource. The value of CLW wands is very high. Since wands go up exponentially in cost, 1st level wands are the best bang for the buck. And again, assuming you are using the standard wealth guidelines, it's actually a mistake if a group doesn't decide to pool their resources and buy some.

The only limiting factor is in-game time. If the DM has an issue with the party spamming CLW charges after every battle, the only way around it is a) removing magic item shops completely or b) reducing the amount of time the party has in-between battles.

Option a is very heavy-handed, especially in a standard wealth campaign (and if the group is already used to it). Option b is possible but not really viable, at least long-term.

If the playstyle already lends itself to hit points being per encounter, why not just make that the default?

As a side note, this seems to be one of the design philosophies for 4ed: create a system that supports how people actually play the game.

 

[ThirdWizard]

This is what I did with my Iron Heroes game. With all the encounter based abilities everywhere it only made sense. Now, its not explicitly "encounter based", but in Iron Heroes there's an HP pool and a Reserve pool, with the Reserve moving to HP at a slow rate. The Heal skill normally replenishes the Reserve pool only once per day. I merely allowed it to be used as much as the PCs have time for. So given several minutes between encounters, all Reserve can be replenished, then over several more minutes, the HP is slowly replenished from Reserve. Nice and neat, and it works great.

In my D&D game (which is now level 14), the PCs never, ever, move on without healing to full. Enemies just do too much damage at this level.

 

[billd91]

I can sort of see the OP point, but hp only look like an encounter-based resource because the players are burning other resources to make it appear so. If they choose to do so, more power to them. In fact, I hope that's something 4e includes, burning longer term resources to regenerate some of your shorter-term resources.

I can see having some portion of a PC's hit points be an encounter-based resource. But I would also want them to be a longer term resource as well, otherwise, barring actual death, what's different from one encounter to the next in an intense adventuring situation? PCs should be getting weakened by multiple encounters under a time pressure (if the campaign calls for it), not bouncing back completely between each encounter. They should be getting weakened until they actually take an appropriate amount of time or use other appropriate resources to recover their strength and energy.

 

[Rodrigo Istalindir]

This is what people mean when they refer to the 'MMOization' of D&D. It's probably what I hate most about MMOs -- everyone is so risk-averse that every encounter ends up being at full strength, and every encounter plays out almost identically because it's easy to develop highly optimized strategies when you have a concrete starting point and the players are omniscient in regards to monster abilities and tactics.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Thinking about it again, I think hit points weren't initially planned as "encounter based resource". The effects of Wands of Cure Light Wounds weren't understood when the game was designed, otherwise items like the Ring of Regeneration would be less expensive.
Even later (Savage Species, 3.5) it wasn't entirely understood or used, because Fast Healing and Regeneration cost a lot "Level Adjustment"-wise.
The encounter design / rules for XP as described in the DMG tells us that characters should gain one level after roughly 13 encounters against ELs equal to their level. Ultimately, I have seen few adventures that actually use this rule, and I certainly tend to ignore it most of the time, too. Such encounters are usually not that interesting, as the risks involved is low if hit points are regained between encounters. They are nice for letting the players have some fun with their new abilities, but not so great if that's everything they fight.



2Rodrigo Istalindir:
The "counter" to this in D&D and probably also MMO games is to crank up the difficulty of the combats. Wether this is actually a good counter is certainly questionable. (It certainly works in the way that the combat is still "balanced", but how does it affect the fun of the game?)
But I think there is also still a big difference in D&D and MMOs (WoW) or Action RPGs (Diablo II, Titan Quest) - most of these games feature healing and mana potions that work pretty effortless and instantly, but in D&D, healing during combat is very expensive (since it costs valuable actions)

I can sort of see the OP point, but hp only look like an encounter-based resource because the players are burning other resources to make it appear so.

That's true, to some extend. The comparative cost of healing is pretty low at higher levels, which means the resource cost is probably not well balanced against its usefulness.

How would D&D played without cheap healing magic?
Would Clerics and Druids be forced to heal the group to full health with their own spells after each combat (which would mean that the group rests even earlier, as the spells are through a lot quicker)?
Or Would the characters become more careful? Is it even possible in D&D to play "careful"? You can try retreating if an encounter turns out to difficult. But stealth and scouting is a pretty limited option due to the specialized nature of classes and skills. Running away is also not easy for everyone (Halfings, Gnomes, Dwarves, Heavy Armored characters).
If the only reaction of players is to rest earlier and more often, changing the rules regarding healing is useless, except in the few instances where the adventurers are under time constaints.

 

[Varianor Abroad]

However, how many times do the monsters start at full strength? Almost all the time? The real limiting factor in D&D, much more than hit points, has always been what higher level spells area available to the party. When the wizard and cleric run out, everyone stops for the day unless you engineer it otherwise.

That's a very insightful original post, and I appreciate it.

 

[mmadsen]

I can sort of see the OP point, but hp only look like an encounter-based resource because the players are burning other resources to make it appear so.

Yes, but the current rules yield a tremendously useful short-term resource for very little cost in long-term resources -- because a wand of cure light wound delivers so many hit points per gold piece.

I doubt that was an explicit design decision; it just happened.

I can see having some portion of a PC's hit points be an encounter-based resource. But I would also want them to be a longer term resource as well, otherwise, barring actual death, what's different from one encounter to the next in an intense adventuring situation? PCs should be getting weakened by multiple encounters under a time pressure (if the campaign calls for it), not bouncing back completely between each encounter. They should be getting weakened until they actually take an appropriate amount of time or use other appropriate resources to recover their strength and energy.

I hate to let Real Life intrude, but why is health an ablative resource at all? Soldiers certainly get fatigued, and they collect bumps and bruises, but most injuries either don't matter, because they are just bumps and bruises, or they take a guy out of the fight.

Why not make a typical hit into a Fort save vs. disabling, but allow hit points, maybe renamed, to work as a meta-game luck resource, like action points, for making those saves? (Then they could also work versus save-or-die spells.)