does hit point loss = damage

[Kahuna Burger]

OK, once in a while I'll hear someone maintain that hit points don't always represent damage capacity - that when you lose hit points due to being "hit" maybe you weren't really hit, you dodged, and the loss of hit points just means that you had a close call and might not evade the next one, etc etc... As characters increase in level, they aren't neccassarily able to take more hits, they are more able to turn a lethal blow into a less serious one, yadda yadda.

I'm curious how many people conceptualize it this way, and how many envision hp as actual physical damage. I can't reconcile that hit point damage doesn't equal (at least some degree of) physical damage with rules such as poisons, and others have pointed out that it makes cure spells kind of odd to consider. Additionally it makes hit point damamge sound somewhat like subdual damage, but we have a whole other catagory for that.

 

[WayneLigon]

I'm curious how many people conceptualize it this way, and how many envision hp as actual physical damage.

It's just something I let fly over my head and not worry about. Sometimes we'll talk about it as physical damage, sometimes not. As the alternative (going to a wound/vitality, or static hit points - I had one DM who liked 'your Con is your hit points. Forever. Each level you get one more hit point') just means either too much bookkeeping or too frequent character death.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

I see it as a form of subdual damage even though there's a seperate category for it. I mean, come on. An orc hits a halfing with a battlexe and the halfing lives? Come on. Sure you could make an arguement that the orc just grazed the halfling, but what about a critical hit? Here's an experiment you can do at home: hit a midget with a sledgehammer. Now, before the cops come over and arrest you, examine the midget. Note the broken bones and profuse bleeding. This isn't just because the midget is 1st level or whatever, it's because when you hit somebody with a sledgehammer it really, really hurts. It doesn't matter if you're a 3rd term Navy SEAL, ribs are going to get broken and that's a long term injury.

I don't bother with detailed injury descriptions until the PC gets down to about 2 or 3 hit points. It's just a game mechanic.

 

[Crothian]

hit point lose is not always physical damage

 

[kiznit]

You know, this is one of those things that I feel is better left abstract. For the most part, IMC hit point loss does equate to damage taken. But I don't have any exact measurement of what equals what, I'm usually just trying to add flavor to the combat.

"You manage to raise your staff to block the blow, but it hits you with sufficient force to get the wind knocked out of you."

"You see the hobgoblin taking careful aim and are shocked to suddenly see your shoulder sprout a crossbow bolt. You can't help but give a cry out in pain."

"The thief managed to dart around you, and you suddenly realize you're being attacked from both sides. You hold your own briefly, but he manages to hit you with a vicious stab to the leg."

"Despite your breastplate, when the ogre's viciously spiked club hits you in the midsection, you're pretty sure you felt a couple of ribs crack."

These wounds are almost always flesh wounds, but the descriptions give the better roleplayers in my group something to work off of. You'd be surprised how many players actually like the idea of emerging from a fight bruised, battered and bloody.

If a player gets a finishing kill, I usually invite them to describe what they do. If a player every gets knocked below minus ten, there's that dreadful sucking in of breath and glances traded around the table. It happens and so far no one's flipped off the handle, so I feel pretty safe after I've gauged the emotional reaction to describe what happened. This actually seems to be a little cathartic, both for me and the player, and gives the other player emotional reason to get even more engaged.

 

[ThirdWizard]

I always describe it as some kind of physical injury, whether extremely small or crippling. It's just more exciting this way, and its less confusing. "The sword barely misses you. You take 3 points of damge," just doesn't work for me. Even if its just cutting off a few hairs from your head or hitting you in the chest with the pommel of his sword as he brings it back, it makes for better descriptions, IMO.

 

[lukelightning]

Though it's supposed to be more abstract, I actually see it as the "soulcalibre" option. The D&D rules seem to support this, in things like hitpoint-draining effects (a mouse hitpoint is equal to a dragon hitpoint, etc.) and healing; if D&D damage was supposed to be more "realistic" then cure wounds spells should be proportional to the target; Cure Light Wounds is anything but "light" to a 3hp farmer.

 

[Teemu]

It's like Soul Calibur. With the crackling effects and charge attacks.

 

[Peter Gibbons]

OK, once in a while I'll hear someone maintain that hit points don't always represent damage capacity - that when you lose hit points due to being "hit" maybe you weren't really hit, you dodged, and the loss of hit points just means that you had a close call and might not evade the next one, etc etc...

This is incorrect. A "hit" is always an actual hit. If it wasn't, poison (to name just one thing) wouldn't work the way it does--as you recognized.

As characters increase in level, they aren't neccassarily able to take more hits, they are more able to turn a lethal blow into a less serious one, yadda yadda.

This is correct, however.

The essential thing to understand is that any hit that doesn't take you to negative hp (or kill you outright via massive damage) results in a non-life-threatening injury. Just exactly how that potentially deadly attack is mitigated into a non-life-threatening result is an abstract concept that can be rationalized any number of ways.

 

[The Shaman]

In melee combat this is relatively easy to handle: "You parry the blow and feel the shock down your arm - take 3 points of damage."

Where it gets tricky is ranged combat, especially with firearms - this is one of the aspects of d20 Modern, which uses the same hit point conventions as D&D, that seems to hang-up a number of players as "unrealistic." With an arrow or a crossbow bolt, "deflected by your armor" or "stuck in your shield" can usually serve, but that gets much harder with a .50-cal bullet "hitting" a guy in a business suit - there are only so many "grazes" you can get away with before credulity becomes strained.

That's why, for me, a hit isn't always a "hit." It can be a near miss that showers the character with bits of masonry or glass, a ball that passes through a flap of clothing or hits a piece of equipment instead, or simply the hot kiss of air from a round passing where the character's head was a moment before.