Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hypersmurf" data-source="post: 4466973" data-attributes="member: 1656">No, I'm arguing that since someone in 3E could adventure on 1 hit point out of 80 for three weeks in the Underdark, with little chance to rest and no access to healing, and be just as effective in every way as someone on 80 out of 80 for as long as they don't lose that last hit point, the cinematic depiction of wounds is a flavour conceit, not a mechanical one.In 3E and 4E, someone falls over when their hit points drop below a threshold... and until that threshold is reached, the number doesn't need to correlate exactly to the cinematic description, because the cinematic description has no in-game effect.One person might argue that the 80-hit-point fighter taking a 40-damage critical from the orc's greataxe must have a deep gaping wound, because he just lost half his hit points in a single hit!&nbsp; Another person might argue that it's just a scratch, because the fighter still has ten times as many hit points as the average commoner.&nbsp; Does it matter which we pick, since either way, his combat capability is unimpaired, and whether we describe him as soldiering on through the red haze of agony from the vicious laceration, or laughing off a flesh wound, the next round will still play out identically from a mechanics perspective?-Hyp.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hypersmurf, post: 4466973, member: 1656"] No, I'm arguing that since someone in 3E could adventure on 1 hit point out of 80 for three weeks in the Underdark, with little chance to rest and no access to healing, and be [i]just as effective in every way[/i] as someone on 80 out of 80 for as long as they don't lose that last hit point, the cinematic depiction of wounds is a flavour conceit, not a mechanical one. In 3E and 4E, someone falls over when their hit points drop below a threshold... and until that threshold is reached, the number doesn't need to correlate exactly to the cinematic description, because the cinematic description has no in-game effect. One person might argue that the 80-hit-point fighter taking a 40-damage critical from the orc's greataxe must have a deep gaping wound, because he just lost half his hit points in a single hit! Another person might argue that it's just a scratch, because the fighter still has ten times as many hit points as the average commoner. Does it matter which we pick, since either way, his combat capability is unimpaired, and whether we describe him as soldiering on through the red haze of agony from the vicious laceration, or laughing off a flesh wound, the next round will still play out identically from a mechanics perspective? -Hyp. [/QUOTE]

Verification