D&D 5E Capping Hit Points

[Jd Smith1]

I should point out that I'm not recommending this house rule; house rules are the spice of a game system, and every GM must season to taste.

 

[CubicsRube]

What if you rebranded hit points as shock and saved some of them as blood? So initial hits cause shock to the PC but can be restored on a rest.

Blood loss takes longer to heal and when at 0 the PC falls unconscious and is bleeding out.

 

[Jd Smith1]

What if you rebranded hit points as shock and saved some of them as blood? So initial hits cause shock to the PC but can be restored on a rest.

Blood loss takes longer to heal and when at 0 the PC falls unconscious and is bleeding out.

You've read my mind. Only the time & effort to write it up properly has kept me from working it all up. My concept is blood, structure (bones, connective tissue), and shock, each tracked separately. It doesn't matter how tough you think you are, for example, you're not walking far on a compound fracture.

I might throw in organ damage to entertain the healers, but that would be a post-combat issue. Basically, to beat someone you would would have to break his ability to function, bleed him out, or batter him into helplessness. Or some combination of the three, which is my sticking point: how would the three interact?

 

[dave2008]

I'm not as interested in quick and easy as I am in logical and grounded in realism.

If your solution involves HP then it is bound to fail. If you really want realism you need to introduce some type of wounds points. Also, if you are going for realism, I agree that much lower HP is needed, but you really need to lean into a wound mechanic as HP are not good a representing meat / flesh in a realistic manner.

 

[Scott Christian]

You are right, tolerances differ. In my thirty plus years as a police officer I've seen people shrug off OC pepper, TASERs, CS gas, and other techniques. And that's before you factor in drugs and extreme emotional disorders.

But those are all less-than-lethal approaches.

Pain isn't the danger in lethal encounters, shock is, and that cannot be fought through. Drugs will help with it, but that's about it.

In fact, some studies suggest that athletes may be more susceptible to the effects of lethal force shock due to their optimized cardio system.

If I ever sat down to develop the perfect combat system, it would be based upon blood loss and structural damage only.

Fair enough, I will definitely concede to your experience. I am sure you have seen some things and have much more training in the matter. I may be just looking at extreme examples.

As for adding realism, I always though Rolemaster 1st edition did a pretty good job with their crit tables. They were based on damage type versus armor type, and if you were to get a strong hit, it could be brutal.

 

[CubicsRube]

You've read my mind. Only the time & effort to write it up properly has kept me from working it all up. My concept is blood, structure (bones, connective tissue), and shock, each tracked separately. It doesn't matter how tough you think you are, for example, you're not walking far on a compound fracture.

I might throw in organ damage to entertain the healers, but that would be a post-combat issue. Basically, to beat someone you would would have to break his ability to function, bleed him out, or batter him into helplessness. Or some combination of the three, which is my sticking point: how would the three interact?

Well let's take a hack at it.

Structure = CON score
Blood = CON score
Shock = hitpoints

Piercing/slashing and most elemental damage types can be elected to do damage as shock, or damage/10 to blood (non lethal vs lethal)

Bludgeoning, force, thunder and poison can elect to do damage as shock or damage/10 to structure.

If structure = 0 roll for lingering injury or dm choice

If blood = 0 PC is up but rolling for death saves and everything they do is at disadvantage

If shock = 0, PC is incapactiated and collapses to the floor.

If you wanted more complicated you could for example have peiecing and slashong weapons do structural damage, but be less effective then at causing blood loss and vice versa for bludgeoning etc. You could also write up armor types as providing some level of damage resistance for blood and structural damage.

 

[Jd Smith1]

Fair enough, I will definitely concede to your experience. I am sure you have seen some things and have much more training in the matter. I may be just looking at extreme examples.

As for adding realism, I always though Rolemaster 1st edition did a pretty good job with their crit tables. They were based on damage type versus armor type, and if you were to get a strong hit, it could be brutal.

I used RM for years. It really was ground-breaking when it came out.

 

[Jd Smith1]

Well let's take a hack at it.

Structure = CON score
Blood = CON score
Shock = hitpoints

Piercing/slashing and most elemental damage types can be elected to do damage as shock, or damage/10 to blood (non lethal vs lethal)

Bludgeoning, force, thunder and poison can elect to do damage as shock or damage/10 to structure.

If structure = 0 roll for lingering injury or dm choice

If blood = 0 PC is up but rolling for death saves and everything they do is at disadvantage

If shock = 0, PC is incapactiated and collapses to the floor.

If you wanted more complicated you could for example have peiecing and slashong weapons do structural damage, but be less effective then at causing blood loss and vice versa for bludgeoning etc. You could also write up armor types as providing some level of damage resistance for blood and structural damage.

The way I see it, you would track blood loss, plus structural damage to each limb, plus overall shock.

Slashing wounds would create blood loss, and structural damage.

Piercing wounds would produce heavy shock, low-moderate bleeding.

Blunt attacks would produce high shock, good structure damage.

The issue I am stuck at is this: tying blood & shock together. A PC with increasing blood loss would be vulnerable to shock, and vice versa.

Right now I'm using the Battle Brothers crit system, where crits produce bleeding, broken bones, Stun, and similar effects. It is doing well because more hits equals a better chance of a crits, so getting mobbed holds real dangers.

 

[Lanefan]

The way I see it, you would track blood loss, plus structural damage to each limb, plus overall shock.

Slashing wounds would create blood loss, and structural damage.

Piercing wounds would produce heavy shock, low-moderate bleeding.

Blunt attacks would produce high shock, good structure damage.

The issue I am stuck at is this: tying blood & shock together. A PC with increasing blood loss would be vulnerable to shock, and vice versa.

Right now I'm using the Battle Brothers crit system, where crits produce bleeding, broken bones, Stun, and similar effects. It is doing well because more hits equals a better chance of a crits, so getting mobbed holds real dangers.

Fine for a player tracking for a single human-ish character but this would be an absolute bee-yotch for a DM trying to track multiple monsters each of whom may or may not a) bleed and-or b) feel shock the way a typical human does and each of whom may or may not have less-the same-more limbs and appendages than a humanoid.

 

[Jd Smith1]

Fine for a player tracking for a single human-ish character but this would be an absolute bee-yotch for a DM trying to track multiple monsters each of whom may or may not a) bleed and-or b) feel shock the way a typical human does and each of whom may or may not have less-the same-more limbs and appendages than a humanoid.

Yep. Which is why I am forced to settle for abstractions such as hit points.

But we can dream.