Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6604873" data-attributes="member: 22779">Ok, question for those who think that 4e is irrational in its approach to HP, how do you feel about 5e?&nbsp; Because every single issue that 4e has with HP appears in 5e.&nbsp; Every single one.Which is what really baffles me.&nbsp; The whole HP debate thing raged throughout 4e's run.&nbsp; It was a BIG DEAL.&nbsp; There are dozens or more threads on the forum discussing this, thousands of posts.&nbsp; Yet, 5e gets a pass.&nbsp; Other than a couple of hold outs, no one seems to get too wound up about how 5e deals with HP.&nbsp; I mean, good grief, 5e specifically says that HP work exactly the way they did in 4e.&nbsp; I meaan, this is the quote from the 5e Basic rules:which is lifted, virtually verbatim from 4e.&nbsp; There's no broken bones, no gouges, not stabbing.&nbsp; You have cuts and bruises - ie. minor, largely ignorable damage.&nbsp; I get cuts and bruises when I go on a rather strenuous hike.&nbsp; I don't get cuts and bruises when someone assaults me with a sword.&nbsp; I get massive wounds, internal bleeding, gouges and whatnot.&nbsp; Mostly because I'm a big wussy and someone would carve me up like a Thanksgiving Turkey if they had a sword.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin&nbsp; &nbsp; :D"&nbsp; data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />&nbsp;[MENTION=85870]innerdude[/MENTION] above is at least consistent here.&nbsp; He has a problem with HP, so uses a different system that doesn't use HP.&nbsp; 4e maybe makes the problem worse, I don't know.&nbsp; But, he's also said that it's HP, not any specific iteration of them that's the issue.&nbsp; But, if you accept 5e's HP, why is 4e such a bridge too far?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 6604873, member: 22779"] Ok, question for those who think that 4e is irrational in its approach to HP, how do you feel about 5e? Because every single issue that 4e has with HP appears in 5e. Every single one. Which is what really baffles me. The whole HP debate thing raged throughout 4e's run. It was a BIG DEAL. There are dozens or more threads on the forum discussing this, thousands of posts. Yet, 5e gets a pass. Other than a couple of hold outs, no one seems to get too wound up about how 5e deals with HP. I mean, good grief, 5e specifically says that HP work exactly the way they did in 4e. I meaan, this is the quote from the 5e Basic rules: which is lifted, virtually verbatim from 4e. There's no broken bones, no gouges, not stabbing. You have cuts and bruises - ie. minor, largely ignorable damage. I get cuts and bruises when I go on a rather strenuous hike. I don't get cuts and bruises when someone assaults me with a sword. I get massive wounds, internal bleeding, gouges and whatnot. Mostly because I'm a big wussy and someone would carve me up like a Thanksgiving Turkey if they had a sword. :D [MENTION=85870]innerdude[/MENTION] above is at least consistent here. He has a problem with HP, so uses a different system that doesn't use HP. 4e maybe makes the problem worse, I don't know. But, he's also said that it's HP, not any specific iteration of them that's the issue. But, if you accept 5e's HP, why is 4e such a bridge too far? [/QUOTE]

Verification