Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Wolfwood2" data-source="post: 4036973" data-attributes="member: 39394">I just had to respond to this one.The same principle that allows a 20th level NPC off-screen to fall from a horse and break his neck logically also allows a dragon to kill him with a single bite, without whittling away at his hitpoints.&nbsp; It also allows him to die from an arrow through the eye fired by a Commoner 1.&nbsp; It also allows him to die by having a heart attack or choking on a fish bone.&nbsp; (Though certainly his 20th level cleric friend could bring him back.)Conversely, a dragon might die from a single arrow fired through a gap in its scales.Basically, adventuring-&nbsp; heck, being alive is always a dangerous business.&nbsp; Falling from a horse is an example, not the only point where the rules and the world don't agree.Now I agree that in many ways, it is hard to make the 3.5 hitpoint model work for this.&nbsp; It strides an uncomfortable divide between hitpoints as physical ability to absorb damage and narrative protection.&nbsp; Again, there's a reason this is posted in the 4E forum.&nbsp; From everything we've heard, 4E will do a much better job of presenting hitpoints as narrative protection and determination/luck/skill rather than as physical damage.Otherwise warlords wouldn't be able to heal people by giving them pep talks.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Wolfwood2, post: 4036973, member: 39394"] I just had to respond to this one. The same principle that allows a 20th level NPC off-screen to fall from a horse and break his neck logically also allows a dragon to kill him with a single bite, without whittling away at his hitpoints. It also allows him to die from an arrow through the eye fired by a Commoner 1. It also allows him to die by having a heart attack or choking on a fish bone. (Though certainly his 20th level cleric friend could bring him back.) Conversely, a dragon might die from a single arrow fired through a gap in its scales. Basically, adventuring- heck, being alive is always a dangerous business. Falling from a horse is an example, not the only point where the rules and the world don't agree. Now I agree that in many ways, it is hard to make the 3.5 hitpoint model work for this. It strides an uncomfortable divide between hitpoints as physical ability to absorb damage and narrative protection. Again, there's a reason this is posted in the 4E forum. From everything we've heard, 4E will do a much better job of presenting hitpoints as narrative protection and determination/luck/skill rather than as physical damage. Otherwise warlords wouldn't be able to heal people by giving them pep talks. [/QUOTE]

Verification