Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Alzrius" data-source="post: 9216722" data-attributes="member: 8461">So sometimes the damage on a miss wasn't a miss, and caused hit point loss from injury, whereas other times (I think you're implying) it was a miss, and the hit point loss was something else? Because that's what the "on a miss" seems to imply for most instances when it comes into play.You're reiterating what's already been established, in that we know that 4E actually went and presented hit point loss/restoration as actually being what Gary Gygax previously said it was (but never had it mechanically be), which is a measurement of being able to continue acting in combat...and also personal injury. Therein is the problem, because actually having that double-duty take place in the game's operations is what led to the double-standard that so many people found objectionable.They are not "exactly" the same. They use very similar mechanics, in that they both have the attacker making a roll against a static number of the defender's, but what they represent is different, which is why the values are calculated differently. Different operations are different, even if they both use a metric of "die roll plus bonuses versus target number." It's why wound and vitality points are two different operations, and do a much better job of what 4E wanted to represent with hit points.</blockquote>