D&D 5E Assumptions on Hit Points and Armor Class...

[Hussar]

Would this be in the sidebar that starts with "Dungeon Masters describe hit point loss in different ways."?

Yup. See, this is why reading the book and not pulling single lines out of context makes conversation so much more productive. I love the fact that someone actually posrep'd you for that when the actual quote from the book reads:

Describing the Effects of Damage

Dungeon Masters describe hit point loss in different ways. When your current hit point total is half or more of your hit point maximum, you typically show no signs of injury. When you drop below half your hit point maximum, you show signs of wear, such as cuts and bruises. An attack that reduces you to 0 hit points strikes you directly, leaving a bleeding injury or other trauma or simply knocks you unconscious.

So, yup, right there, right in the sidebar, it tells you specifically, and fairly precisely, how hit point loss works in 5e. If you are describing cuts and bruises for the first half of HP loss, you are actually going against what the game tells you. Now, you can certainly do so. That's 100% groovy and up to you and if it works for your table, that's great. But, what you cannot do is argue that all hits MUST be physical injury. A hit can be physical injury, or it very well might not be.

Like I said, the HP=meat argument got lost in 5e. HP in 5e do not necessarily mean meat. It's right there in pretty clear English in the books. Someone with 100 HP who takes 10 points of damage does not necessarily show any signs of damage whatsoever. In fact, according to what's written here, that character could take 49 points of damage in a single hit and not show a single bruise.

Any other interpretation is simply projecting your own personal preferences onto the game.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Would this be in the sidebar that starts with "Dungeon Masters describe hit point loss in different ways."?

Exactly! This is the closest that 5E comes to taking an official position on the topic. First, they declare outright that this is going to vary from table to table. Then, they give a vague description about one way you could describe it, if you are (for whatever reason) using the default healing rules. If you use any of the other healing options - which is entirely expected - then it is also expected that you will describe damage in a corresponding manner.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Yup. See, this is why reading the book and not pulling single lines out of context makes conversation so much more productive. I love the fact that someone actually posrep'd you for that when the actual quote from the book reads:

Yep. I thought it best to make sure we're actually talking about the same thing before getting to the nitty-gritty. The PHB seems to cover some subjects more than once in different places.

So, yup, right there, right in the sidebar, it tells you specifically, and fairly precisely, how hit point loss works in 5e. If you are describing cuts and bruises for the first half of HP loss, you are actually going against what the game tells you.

I wouldn't go quite that far: it specifically calls out that this is the typical way of handling it, rather than the only way. It doesn't seem to give a value judgement on DMs who handle HP description in a way other than the typical manner.

Now, you can certainly do so. That's 100% groovy and up to you and if it works for your table, that's great. But, what you cannot do is argue that all hits MUST be physical injury. A hit can be physical injury, or it very well might not be.

Indeed. Even the "signs of wear" that show when you're below half HP might be exhaustion and fatigue rather than actual injuries.

Like I said, the HP=meat argument got lost in 5e. HP in 5e do not necessarily mean meat. It's right there in pretty clear English in the books. Someone with 100 HP who takes 10 points of damage does not necessarily show any signs of damage whatsoever. In fact, according to what's written here, that character could take 49 points of damage in a single hit and not show a single bruise.

One illustration I believe, of the non-physical nature of HP that people might be familiar with is in the Drizzt books. When he is fighting Entreri, they are described as fighting, trying to apply techniques, or gain the upper hand, generally without their weapons actually making contact with their opponent. In game terms, they are probably knocking each other's HP down quite a bit, but this is expressed in advantage and positioning for a final killing blow rather than actual injuries.

 

[schnee]

Yeah, if you lurch backwards to avoid a Frost Giant's sword a dozen times, and one blow kills you, then each dodge was HP damage. It's pretty crazy to think a 10' long sword literally hits you with glancing blows that scratch and bruise in the same way you'd get, for example, fighting an incredibly quick handling with a quarterstaff.

I can see where the confusion comes from due to the language of the game, though:

DM: And... the Frost Giant hits! Take 12 hit points.

It's a bit weird to say:

DM: And... the Frost Giant barely misses as you lurch out of the way! You get more fatigued. Take 12 points.

...

I've played all sorts of home-brew that tried to fix this.

On of the ones I was proudest of in my AD&D days was inspired by Champions.
(I'm pulling this from memory, so I'm making up some of the numbers on the fly.)

Your HP has two tracks: Body and Fatigue. At first level, your total HP is your actual 'physical body'. Each level you gain after that, your 'Body' increases by 1 point, and the rest of the HP you gain are considered 'Fatigue'. So, a Fighter with average CON has 10 Body HP, and at 5th level has 15 Body HP and (on average) 20hp Fatigue HP. This simulates long-term adventurers getting literally tougher due to the rigors of their career, but the vast majority of their HP are due to the 'luck and skill' in Gygaxian terms that gets worn down over time in a fight.

You then have separate 'Fatigue' vs. 'Body' rules: You function at 100% until your Fatigue HP are gone. Then, you can have penalties on your attacks and saves based on Body damage, like -1 at 1/4, -2 at 1/2, etc.

You then tweak massive damage rules: If one single attack is strong enough, like '50% of your total HP in one blow' then some portion of it can go directly to Body.

You can then tweak critical hit rules and weapons: Each critical hit does 1 HP Body. Sword of Sharpness critical does 1d4 HP Body. Vorpal Sword critical does 2d6 HP Body.

You then tweak healing magic: Cure Body and Cure Fatigue are different things, so we can fix the weird issue of high level characters healing more slowly. So:
Cure Light: heals 1d4 Body, and 1d4 Fatigue for every character level
Cure Serious: heals 3d6 Body, and 1d8 Fatigue every character level

And so on.

...

Here's the deal: after getting that system really dialed in, we realized it added a significant burden to healing after every combat. The 'realism' and 'believability' it added was outweighed by the bookkeeping. It felt like scrupulous encumbrance, timekeeping with torches and rations, and by-the-book Wizard spell re-memorization times. Those are all good things if you want to play a logistics-heavy turn-based wargame, but we were skewing towards heroic fantasy. Stuff like that was meant to be the things you worry about at low levels, then once you get a certain level of magic, it just goes away.

We used it for one campaign and then didn't go back.

 

[Mercule]

As others have said, don't overthink it. If you want a certain amount of thought within your hand-waving, then here's how I deal with it:

AC represents your ability to avoid any injury/damage/consequence of an attack. Meaning that, if an attack misses, you might have dodged it, it may have bounced off your shield, or some variation/combination/alternative narration. Whatever the reason, there is no effect, lasting or transitory.

HP represents your ability to mitigate any injury/damage/consequence of an attack. You might almost dodge it, dodged it entirely but wrenched your shoulder, be tough enough to suffer a bruise instead of a broken bone, veteran enough to not flinch or be shocked, deflected it with your armor but it started to tire you out, lucky enough to have caught the flat of the blade instead of the edge, or any other narrative excuse for needing a kiss from Mommy instead of being skewered. There's an effect, but it's not serious (until it is). Resting overnight will generally restore you to a point where there's no real side effects.

Hit Dice represent more enduring effects of combat. You can still fight at full strength for a bit but wrenching your back, yesterday, means you'll get tired faster than normal.

When you start throwing in saving throws, falling damage, etc. it gets really wonky. This doesn't really provide a full explanation. At best, any model is only going to ease suspension of disbelief.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

This is D&D's wargame roots where ability to avoid and withstand damage are abstracted into AC and HP. An attack roll might not be one swing of a weapon, and other abstractions are present as well. Just go with it or rework the entire thing as you see fit. But the system works fine if you just go along with it.

 

[BookBarbarian]

It's a bit weird to say:

DM: And... the Frost Giant barely misses as you lurch out of the way! You get more fatigued. Take 12 points.

I almost always describe damage like this, unless the PC is reduced to 0 HP. I guess I'm just a bit weird.

 

[BookBarbarian]

but surely there's nothing wrong with poking the status quo with a big stick, right?

Heresy! Burn it with fire!

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Yeah, if you lurch backwards to avoid a Frost Giant's sword a dozen times, and one blow kills you, then each dodge was HP damage. It's pretty crazy to think a 10' long sword literally hits you with glancing blows that scratch and bruise in the same way you'd get, for example, fighting an incredibly quick handling with a quarterstaff.

But if you lurch backwards to avoid the giant sword, and you're calling that HP damage, then how are the characters aware of it? Why would your character think that they need to drink an incredibly expensive magical potion, when they don't even have a scratch on them? Why would a magical healing potion even be valuable at all, if it didn't have any tangible effect? There are too many ways that the world wouldn't make sense, if that was what was actually going on.

To contrast, we see the equivalent of people getting scratched by giant swords all the time. Thanos punches Iron Man, and he gets thrown back twenty feet and his armor is dented; inside the armor, he's getting battered and bruised. Practically speaking, every character who is capable of surviving a hit from a giant's sword is either armored or inherently magical or both, so you never have to deal with the absurdity of a "normal" human taking that kind of hit directly to the skin.

 

[BookBarbarian]

But if you lurch backwards to avoid the giant sword, and you're calling that HP damage, then how are the characters aware of it? Why would your character think that they need to drink an incredibly expensive magical potion, when they don't even have a scratch on them? Why would a magical healing potion even be valuable at all, if it didn't have any tangible effect? There are too many ways that the world wouldn't make sense, if that was what was actually going on.

To contrast, we see the equivalent of people getting scratched by giant swords all the time. Thanos punches Iron Man, and he gets thrown back twenty feet and his armor is dented; inside the armor, he's getting battered and bruised. Practically speaking, every character who is capable of surviving a hit from a giant's sword is either armored or inherently magical or both, so you never have to deal with the absurdity of a "normal" human taking that kind of hit directly to the skin.

Characters would certainly know when they are tired or running out of steam, and potions that restore that fatigue are supported in fiction like the Miruvor in the Lord of the Rings.

The game can be played in different ways. I like that hitpoints are abstract enough to support that.