Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5891825" data-attributes="member: 54877">&quot;Built around&quot; and &quot;default&quot; are not the same thing, in a well-defined modular system. For example, they could decide that there are two concepts that the full, modular system should be able to support:<ul>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">&quot;Hit points&quot; - a rather large running total, that works like traditional D&amp;D hit points, and might be, depending on the options used, reflavored as &quot;fatigue&quot;, &quot;luck&quot;, or any number of such things. The main idea is that until you lose all of them, it doesn't change much in how you can act.</li>
<li data-xf-list-type="ul">&quot;Wounds&quot; - a much smaller thing, which might be &quot;points&quot; but could also be discrete wounds, which are somewhat less likely to happen, harder to &quot;heal&quot;, and can be flavored as any major impediment that you think should affect your ability to act--perhaps &quot;extreme exhaustion&quot; for some groups.</li>
</ul>That's what the system is built around. For example, there's language in the weapon and/or combat sections that explains how a longsword or a battleaxe might inflict wounds.&nbsp;However, the default is that &quot;Wounds&quot; are turned completely off. Sure, if each weapon or weapon type does something specific (not unlike the BECMI weapon mastery tables), then that information is still there. But if you are using wounds, then it doesn't apply--anymore than those weapon mastery tables applied if you weren't using weapon mastery.&nbsp;&quot;In but turned off by default&quot; is the best core state for any widely popular (in raw numbers) but still minority taste. &nbsp;As a happy accident of such design, people who want to do different things with hit points or wounds now have a more robust place to anchor their alternatives. Maybe your &quot;wounds&quot; system is &quot;DM narrates some wound that you attach to your character until you achieve the means to get rid of it, which has an effect as detailed by the ad hoc judgment of the DM at the time.&quot; Perhaps, you are ignoring most of the specified system, but using the broad outlines of it as a rough guide for when wounds might happen.&nbsp;I usually don't care for &quot;wounds&quot; systems, and would rarely use one in any D&amp;D I run. That doesn't mean the system can't accommodate it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5891825, member: 54877"] "Built around" and "default" are not the same thing, in a well-defined modular system. For example, they could decide that there are two concepts that the full, modular system should be able to support: [LIST] [*]"Hit points" - a rather large running total, that works like traditional D&D hit points, and might be, depending on the options used, reflavored as "fatigue", "luck", or any number of such things. The main idea is that until you lose all of them, it doesn't change much in how you can act. [*]"Wounds" - a much smaller thing, which might be "points" but could also be discrete wounds, which are somewhat less likely to happen, harder to "heal", and can be flavored as any major impediment that you think should affect your ability to act--perhaps "extreme exhaustion" for some groups. [/LIST]That's what the system is built around. For example, there's language in the weapon and/or combat sections that explains how a longsword or a battleaxe might inflict wounds. However, the default is that "Wounds" are turned completely off. Sure, if each weapon or weapon type does something specific (not unlike the BECMI weapon mastery tables), then that information is still there. But if you are using wounds, then it doesn't apply--anymore than those weapon mastery tables applied if you weren't using weapon mastery. "In but turned off by default" is the best core state for any widely popular (in raw numbers) but still minority taste. As a happy accident of such design, people who want to do different things with hit points or wounds now have a more robust place to anchor their alternatives. Maybe your "wounds" system is "DM narrates some wound that you attach to your character until you achieve the means to get rid of it, which has an effect as detailed by the ad hoc judgment of the DM at the time." Perhaps, you are ignoring most of the specified system, but using the broad outlines of it as a rough guide for when wounds might happen. I usually don't care for "wounds" systems, and would rarely use one in any D&D I run. That doesn't mean the system can't accommodate it. [/QUOTE]

Verification