Flavour First vs Game First - a comparison

[Mallus]

While it may look the same as long as the total damage taken doesn't exceed the character's hp, we differ as soon as the character would have dropped below 0 or even died without healing surges. Wounds that would have dropped him are not as serious thanks to the healing surge - and they stay that way, all day long, and during the next day. That sort of "will to fight" is too permanent for my taste.

The way I look at it, your character's real hit point total includes the amount from all his Healing Surges. The difference in 4e is that characters don't receive one big bag of hit points; they receive one relatively large bag and several smaller ones that they -- or others-- can open and use when certain conditions are met.

 

[Fenes]

The way I look at it, your character's real hit point total includes the amount from all his Healing Surges. The difference in 4e is that characters don't receive one big bag of hit points; they receive one relatively large bag and several smaller ones that they -- or others-- can open and use when certain conditions are met.

I think that's too needlessly complicated for my game. It seems to stem from the need to allow multiple challenging encounters per day, which leads to dividing the total hitpoints into encounter-hit point pools that refresh in a limited manner between or during the encounter.

I do not need nor want that. I could use some "second wind" mechanic, for those "getting up despite being battered" moments and scenes, but I don't want to have the uncertainity and permanence the 4E mechanic brings with them. So, temporary hitpoints that fade after a time, like the hp gains from a barbarian's rage, would suit me much better.

The question is, how best to implement that.

In the terms of the OP, I want a certain flavor - the "get up with a second wind/on adrenalin, fight on, then collapse after the fight ends" scene. I don't want the "get up with a second wind, and keep going all day after the fight ends" mechanic since that would ruin the flavor I want. So I need a different mechanic to capture the flavor I want.

 

[apoptosis]

I

All of these options are available. None involves retconning. Option 1 seems to be GlaziusF's preference. Options 2 & 3 are the HeroWars way - there is a degree of narrative indeterminacy while the conflict is still awaiting resolution, of the sort that many fortune-in-the-middle systems require. (Note, by the way, that there is no indeterminacy in the gameworld - only in the metagame, where the narration has not firmed up yet. This is pretty common in RPGs - many a GM has introduced a mysterious stranger in the inn, without as yet having fully determined the narrative surrounding that stranger. And sometime this indeterminacy is something that would not be in doubt for the PCs - eg the GM may not choose the colour of the NPC's shoes until a player asks some time down the track, even though the PCs would have know that from the get-go.)

And what about option 4: the player narrates an injury at the time of taking the damage, and then narrates an Inigo Montoya moment when the Second Wind is used? This is what Hypersmurf and Lost Soul are suggesting.
.

What if the conflict is over (we killed the monster) and wow it looks like you killed the beast before he killed you (you had 1 hp left) he did some some vicious damage to you though (ie you had 1 hp left). Given that you had only 1 hp left you and the DM narrate it as a gaping deadly chest wound.

An hour later you decide to use the second wind. Now that vicious damage is no longer existent.

So your choices in narrative are (if hp map to physical injury):

The damage wasn't that bad you just thought it was. Which means the original narration was not correct, so you are retconning the narration.

Second wind magically healed the damage.


EDIT
Actually it was not an ideal example as you could say that in the hour a team member stitched him up. If he did during a LONG battle maybe that would be a better example.

Other narrative actions further uncouple hp from physical injury.

The IM moment permanently cures the damage. Which is not that same as soldiering on (which is continuing while still having the damage). You go to sleep at night and the next day you are undamaged.

The narrative resolutions you came up with (which I think are absolutely fine when I play) still do not get by one of these objections if you want a tighther coupling of hp and physical damage.

Once again, maybe i am missing something from what you are saying and will gladly give up my argument if it becomes evidently faulty.

 

[apoptosis]

But is that really a problem? At what point do you know a wound is fatal or not? Sometimes (at least in movies ) people die after they have been stabilized while in intensive care. How well could you judge a wound on the battle-field, covered in dirt and blood.

One example for a dying character to avoid death is that someone spends an action to make a Heal Check - if the check succeeds, he is stabilized, and can expend his second wind (not merely a healing surge). The check DC is only 10 (IIRC). Maybe we should interpret this not as trying to staunch any wounds (though we could), maybe it is just looking at the wound and saying "hey, it's just superficial - no major arteries hit! You should be fine."

Some issue with this though is the question about the veracity of in-game narration.

Some people have issues if in game narration is false. That what is said at the table (not character speech but the words of the universe so to speak) is not true.

Obviously this can happen when illusions or trickery is involved int he scenario but in general some types of gamers really want in-game narration to be truthful.

 

[apoptosis]

Now this is a good point. I think it's possible to have lots of fights, with therefore many Inigo Montoya moments, without going gonzo (or without going intolerably gonzo). My evidence for this (other than my own RPGing experience, which is not public evidence) is mostly literary and cinematic: superhero comics are mostly a sequence of fight scenes, but (at least in the better versions of them) don't collapse into intolerable gonzo; Conan stories are chock-full of fight scenes, including scenes with recovery from inhuman levels of punishment, without going intolerably gonzo; the best John Woo movies (Hardboild, The Killer, Bullet in the Head) are full of fight scenes and incredible recoveries, without going intolerably gonzo; etc.

.

You are correct there are definitely enough literary serial versions of IM moments (and since i really like Conan stories should have thought this through more). Though it would seem to lose its punch if it keeps happening (it is big deal in Princess Bride, it is more ho-hum in Conan)

 

[Hussar]

Some issue with this though is the question about the veracity of in-game narration.

Some people have issues if in game narration is false. That what is said at the table (not character speech but the words of the universe so to speak) is not true.

Obviously this can happen when illusions or trickery is involved int he scenario but in general some types of gamers really want in-game narration to be truthful.

The problem with that being, very few of us actually have any real experience with sucking chest wounds or fighting with swords against really big lizards. We narrate the scene based on what we know, and, generally, what we know is about as scientific as Star Trek.

I can understand not wanting narration to suddenly undergo radical reversal after the fact. So, wouldn't the solution be to not describe the scene in such a way that you cannot later change it? In other words, since hit points are abstract (in any edition), what good is it to try to ascribe concrete descriptions to combat wounds?

Fenes - I realize that you have a specific playstyle. But, since your playstyle is pretty much 90 degrees to most people's game, don't you think assuming that the game should cater to your style is a bit much? I mean, 3e certainly doesn't support the one fight/day thing either. You've just made casters absolutely king in that scenario. I have no reason not to blow every spell at my disposal if I know that I'm only going to face one fight per day.

How do you keep non-casters relavent?

 

[Mallus]

I think that's too needlessly complicated for my game.

Needlessly complicated?! It's just, you know, a conceptual thing. You don't need to do anything with it during play.

It seems to stem from the need to allow multiple challenging encounters per day, which leads to dividing the total hitpoints into encounter-hit point pools that refresh in a limited manner between or during the encounter.

That's a part of it, though I think the Healing Surge mechanic has more to do with locating the source of most healing in the injured characters themselves. Now all classes have some control over their own healing, former 'medic' classes are can now perform other actions while still filling the medic role, and healing can now come from an assorted of in-game triggers, which increases the number of tactical choices involved in healing the PC's.

So, temporary hitpoints that fade after a time, like the hp gains from a barbarian's rage, would suit me much better.

Now this seems needlessly complicated to me.

I don't want the "get up with a second wind, and keep going all day after the fight ends" mechanic since that would ruin the flavor I want.

See, this is no different for me than the situation in the previous editions where character took supposedly massive physical wounds then kept going all day like the Engergizer Bunny -- until they finally went below 0 HP.

 

[LostSoul]

This is an example of how, given a bit more thought, the 4e rule books could have been better written. Of course, finding the will to go on usually doesn't knit wounds; Inigo still needs medical attention later.

That's what happens after the encounter. They give him some medical attention so that he doesn't keel over and die. They bind that gash in his head. Maybe this represents more Healing Surges being used; maybe not.

 

[Fenes]

That's a part of it, though I think the Healing Surge mechanic has more to do with locating the source of most healing in the injured characters themselves. Now all classes have some control over their own healing, former 'medic' classes are can now perform other actions while still filling the medic role, and healing can now come from an assorted of in-game triggers, which increases the number of tactical choices involved in healing the PC's.

I should mention that I hate the idea of healing in mid-fight.

 

[gizmo33]

So a character with 50 hitpoints and 10 healing surges gets hit by a sword for 4 points of damage. So what if I say "you have a cut on your arm now." Who cares? He uses a healing surge and gets all of his hitpoints back, the cut is still there. I don't know how a cut on his arm would affect him, but I didn't know that in 1E either.