barsoomcore said:
Hit points are a game mechanic to measure a character's readiness for combat. The more hit points you have, the more ready you are to jump into a life-or-death struggle. The less hit points you have, the more wary you are.
Yes, I agree that's an accurate statement.
If a player thinks, "Hey, these clowns can't do any more than, say, 15 hp of damage if they hit me. There's four of them, so even if they all get me I'll take a maximum of 60 hp. I have 100, so there's no reason for me to be afraid. ATTACK!" -- this isn't "meta-gaming". This is a character realizing that they outclass their opposition so much that they will be able to withstand even the prepared, ready-to-go attacks of their enemies.
You're right. I guess my problem isn't with 'meta-gaming' per se.
There's no reason a naked 15th-level character shouldn't be able to take on 10 armored 1st-level fighters and win, even if they have the drop on them.
LOL! That would be amusing!
Of course, such a battle takes any sense of verisimilitude and throws it out the window, as events push on at "ludicrous speed", but you're right that this is not an impossible situation to imagine in D&D.
That's what, in D&D a 15th-level character is like. They are jaw-droppingly good. They are Conan, they are Jackie Chan, they are Aragorn against the orcs. They strike mortal fear into the hearts of their enemies and set entire crowds running away if they like.
I agree with you (Forgive me now as I allow my thoughts to meander in and out of this immediate point) Unfortunately, [WARNING: slight Topic Change] in my own campaigns this fact of power ascension has created a tendency toward supreme arrogance on the part of the player characters toward authority in the campaign world, no humility at all whatever the alignment may be. And yet, I am loathe to "drop them down a peg" by simply beating them senseless with a conveniently placed 25th level Justicar (or whatever). I really hate it when players force me to become heavy-handed...but what can a DM do when the characters bumptiously declare to their King that he has no authority over them and goes on to humiliate officials all over the land? I would rather have them captured and thrown in jail for a few days than to have them retributively attacked by a force that could actually kill them off! But, quite naturally, if I try to tame the mushrooming egos of the higher-level characters by confronting them with 1st level guards calling for their surrender...well, those guards will be mince-meat. I know what you may be thinking (your problem then, is your players), but hold off on that thought for a second.
[back onto topic] Think about those scenes in Star Wars when the heroes are surrounded and taken at gun point to meet Darth Vader, or when the hobbits are repeatedly captured by their foes. It is difficult to simulate situations like these in D&D unless the players happen to enjoy role-playing, or have a very strong feeling that they are totally outmatched. I won't simply declare, "they take you captive" because that violates every written and unwritten rule of DMing! Unfortunately, my own players, historically, would rather kill every last man in an good-aligned city than allow themselves to be apprehended by authorities, regardless of alignments.
Maybe I'm just slowly realizing I've had a bunch of really piss-poor players...
I humbly submit that any DM hoping for "realism" is PLAYING THE WRONG GAME! D&D is not realistic, nor is it meant to be.
You're right. This will frustrate DMs who want gritty and deadly games with intricate hit-location rules and specific damage to body parts...unless they alter the system (which is okay too).
[/b] There are ways to turn the D&D rules into something more "realistic", many of them posted here and there on this board (even in this thread). But this still sounds like complaining that D&D doesn't do something it wasn't designed to do.
[/b]
I'm not complaining!
I enjoy exchanging notes, and debating the finer points with fellow players, but I am not complaining. I DO think that DMs who hope to set up the classic "heroes are captured and suffer the speech of the arch-villain just before their heroic escape" will find it often very difficult to orchestrate the capture by means other than overwhelming force. Note that I use words like "often"...I don't mean to sound absolutist about all this. I would love to hear how DMs on this board set up ambushes where the villains intend to capture the PCs but do this without being too heavy-handed. What do I do? Well, I expect that PCs will not surrender in the first round unless confronted with something obviously superior (red dragon vs. 1st level party), and so count on subdual damage and other means like magic. I try not to stack the cards and never expect that the plans of the villains will be necessarily borne out. The PCs should always have a chance of escaping would-be captors.
High-level characters kick high levels of butt. If you don't want that, don't play the game.
Yep, and remember that this fact of D&D SHOULD extend also to NPCs. Called shots should not be allowed to bypass a foes hit-points. If a player insists that his character should be able to make a called shot to the head that beheads upon a successful strike, then I will extend that same courtesy to the monsters. But what's the point of that? It invalidates the whole dang spirit of the game.
