Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sunseeker" data-source="post: 5830639">True, but complexity by itself is not necessarily good or bad, whether a system is complex or simple, the goal is to be enjoyable.&nbsp; Bloodied added an enjoyable aspect to the game, it made people FEEL like their damage was actually affecting them.I do realize of course that more states=more bookkeeping, but that's why I think 4 states(aside from actually dying) is a reasonable number.&nbsp; Tracking if you were bloodied or not was pretty easy.&nbsp; 1/2 health or less?&nbsp; Okay bloodied.Perhaps deciding what happens in the bloodied state should be based on race, and when the bloodied happens should be based on class.&nbsp; IE:Dragonbon get +X/-Y @ bloodied level 1, but Fighter's don't become bloodied until they've lost 30 HP, while warlocks become bloodied after losing 20 HP.&nbsp; That way people wouldn't have to track percentages, but only fixed values.That's the issue though, getting weaker as you take damage is a death&nbsp; spiral.&nbsp; Hitting less means your enemies live longer.&nbsp; Enemies that live&nbsp; longer hit you more.&nbsp; If your AC is also lower while wounded, you're&nbsp; now getting hit by even more attacks, fast tracking you to worse&nbsp; conditions where you hit even less and get hit even more.That's why bloodied was awesome, you didn't JUST get penalized for being&nbsp; bloodied.&nbsp; I agree that there should be some penalty for being wounded,&nbsp; but a penalty shouldn't be the ONLY thing you get.&nbsp; You could achieve a&nbsp; &quot;penalty only&quot; system through providing bonuses when NOT in a specific&nbsp; state of Bloodied, +2 while not bloodied sounds a lot nicer than -2&nbsp; while bloodied.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sunseeker, post: 5830639"] True, but complexity by itself is not necessarily good or bad, whether a system is complex or simple, the goal is to be enjoyable. Bloodied added an enjoyable aspect to the game, it made people FEEL like their damage was actually affecting them. I do realize of course that more states=more bookkeeping, but that's why I think 4 states(aside from actually dying) is a reasonable number. Tracking if you were bloodied or not was pretty easy. 1/2 health or less? Okay bloodied. Perhaps deciding what happens in the bloodied state should be based on race, and when the bloodied happens should be based on class. IE: Dragonbon get +X/-Y @ bloodied level 1, but Fighter's don't become bloodied until they've lost 30 HP, while warlocks become bloodied after losing 20 HP. That way people wouldn't have to track percentages, but only fixed values. That's the issue though, getting weaker as you take damage is a death spiral. Hitting less means your enemies live longer. Enemies that live longer hit you more. If your AC is also lower while wounded, you're now getting hit by even more attacks, fast tracking you to worse conditions where you hit even less and get hit even more. That's why bloodied was awesome, you didn't JUST get penalized for being bloodied. I agree that there should be some penalty for being wounded, but a penalty shouldn't be the ONLY thing you get. You could achieve a "penalty only" system through providing bonuses when NOT in a specific state of Bloodied, +2 while not bloodied sounds a lot nicer than -2 while bloodied. [/QUOTE]

Verification