NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Alzrius" data-source="post: 9216974" data-attributes="member: 8461">The semantics bother me less than the underlying issue, in that the problem is that we have a single operation (i.e. hit point loss/restoration) being defined as two different things from an in-character perspective, in a way that makes it harder to model what's going on in the game world. As you noted, it's a semiotic problem, so what we call it is less important than the fact that we can all recognize it and discuss it; as it is right now, there's a vocal minority who keep insisting that it's not even real!D&D is not a reality simulator, and never has been, so this isn't a super helpful observation. If we can all agree that 4E's hit point loss/restoration mechanics have more than one in-game presentation, and that it would be easier to figure out what it's representing in the game world if it just had one, that's where we should start from.Again, the nomenclature is a digression more than anything. Attaching multiple in-game representations to the same mechanic not only requires the players to keep track of which one is being used at a given time (and how they interact in trying to map out the course of play over time), but doesn't have to be that way, as we've seen in previous editions.The fact that you think I'm claiming any sort of moral high ground suggests that you're not reading what I'm saying, so much as reading into it. At this point, I'm more interested in being able to call a spade a spade, in that having one meta-mechanic be two different in-game things is more complicated than having it be one in-game thing. But even that seems to be a bridge too far for most people, many of whom keep trying to make it into a moral argument for reasons beyond my understanding.That's the traditional stated definition, but not how the game actually employed the operation, take note. If you find that easier to parse, then good for you, but make note that it's still something that has to be parsed on your end, and that you wouldn't need to do so if hit point loss/restoration only represented one thing.</blockquote>

Verification