Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Oofta" data-source="post: 8616969" data-attributes="member: 6801845">Two things.&nbsp; First, I don't really care if we have a simulation or emulation.&nbsp; To me D&amp;D feels like an action movie in more ways than one, so HP just fits into the theme.Second, yes I think tracking damage in a fight is far too varied to ever do a good job without encyclopedic set of rules.&nbsp; People talk about breaking up HP into physical and non-physical damage for example.&nbsp; But different individuals will have different ratios, any ratio we come up with will be just as arbitrary as HP.&nbsp; I gave my example a while back of two fighters that endured several rounds of a fight using completely different philosophies, and that didn't even mention different types of (potential) damage.&nbsp;&nbsp; It's not that we couldn't come up with alternatives (and I'm sure some work quite well for their game's goals), just that the alternatives aren't particularly better at simulation of the real world.&nbsp; In addition I don't think they add to D&amp;D as a game.Ultimately I guess I simply don't care about the philosophical underpinnings of HP.&nbsp; Any tracking of durability in a fight is going to be chock full of compromise.&nbsp; HP works reasonably well, simulates one type of real world injury, mimics action movie logic, and no one has presented options that are better for D&amp;D.&nbsp; It's not that I haven't thought about it, I simply haven't seen anything better.P.S. If you think a different system is better, it doesn't add to the conversation to just say Game System X does it better with no explanation of what the system or the goals are.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Oofta, post: 8616969, member: 6801845"] Two things. First, I don't really care if we have a simulation or emulation. To me D&D feels like an action movie in more ways than one, so HP just fits into the theme. Second, yes I think tracking damage in a fight is far too varied to ever do a good job without encyclopedic set of rules. People talk about breaking up HP into physical and non-physical damage for example. But different individuals will have different ratios, any ratio we come up with will be just as arbitrary as HP. I gave my example a while back of two fighters that endured several rounds of a fight using completely different philosophies, and that didn't even mention different types of (potential) damage. It's not that we [I]couldn't[/I] come up with alternatives (and I'm sure some work quite well for their game's goals), just that the alternatives aren't particularly better at simulation of the real world. In addition I don't think they add to D&D as a game. Ultimately I guess I simply don't care about the philosophical underpinnings of HP. Any tracking of durability in a fight is going to be chock full of compromise. HP works reasonably well, simulates one type of real world injury, mimics action movie logic, and no one has presented options that are better for D&D. It's not that I haven't thought about it, I simply haven't seen anything better. P.S. If you think a different system is better, it doesn't add to the conversation to just say Game System X does it better with no explanation of what the system or the goals are. [/QUOTE]

Verification