Healing Surges innate Blessed band aids

Y'know, I remember reading in my old Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Dungeon Master's Guide (or was it my blue D&D booklet?) that the game assumed that all hp losses were superficial "until the last one". That's the way D&D has always been. The book then went on to explain, among other things, that this was why D&D didn't track hit locations, because there wasn't a direct "attack roll = individual wound" relationship.

It ain't new, folks! Whatever beefs I may have with 4E, this isn't one of them.

-The Gneech :cool:
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Goreg Skullcrusher said:
Right, the problem occurs precisely when there is no desicription that fits the mechanics.

Hmm. I've never had that problem. I've had situations where it's more difficult than others to create descriptions, but never EVER where there's NO description to fit the mechanics.

I mentioned earlier that I was surprised at the lack of creativity in gamers, but I've realized that the creativity is being used to create problems rather than avoid them. Very creative indeed.

Fitz
 

Preface all of this with "I think." and "It seems to me." and "In my opinion."

One of the reasons that people argue that gamism is more fun then simulationism is that simulationism is about suspension of disbelief while gamism is about how the game actually plays.

I played a cyberpunk (I think) game where the group had a limited amount of time to stop somebody from doing something. One of the players got shot up badly and lost a leg. Very simulationist, it's what happens when you don't take cover well enough and catch 30 M16 rounds to the leg. Unfortuneately it meant that the character was out for weeks while he healed and legless until the party could put together the 8 grand or whatever to buy a replacement leg. This is gamistly terrible, it's going to suck to be that guy for the rest of the adventure.

Most groups I've played with want to avoid that situation, the "gamist is more fun" mantra comes from people being willing to just suck it up and go "yeah, that doesn't make total sense but it means that Jim is going to be able to play his character instead of not showing up for the next 6 weeks of gaming."

I totally don't get how people could enjoy gaming like that. When an unlucky die roll makes that headshot blind your character, reduces mental attributes to 1d3 each and will require months of in game time to heal. What do you do?
 

Rakor said:
When an unlucky die roll makes that headshot blind your character, reduces mental attributes to 1d3 each and will require months of in game time to heal. What do you do?

Roll 4d6, drop lowest. Roll six times, get character sheet... Etc. :lol:
 


D'karr said:
Roll 4d6, drop lowest. Roll six times, get character sheet... Etc. :lol:
;)

- But I liked my old character! I want to continue playing him! He still is searching for the murderer of his father!
- Look, just play this new character until the other is healed.
- But the party will be several levels further by then. If he plays again the, he'll probably killed in the first round of combat!
- Ah, you off course get the neccessary XP to catch up!
- Huh? But I thought this was a realistic campaign? How am I getting XP for staying in bed for 6 months?
- Damn you, gamist! I get it. Here are the 4E rulebooks. Knock yourself out and run a game. I'll be happy to play for a while, and see how you fare with whiney players.!
...
- But I just wanted to play my character ... :(
 

Brown Jenkin said:
The thing is some people like a game where weapons do real damage and people are injured. I for one am not interested in a game that is all about combat where all the action is described as almost hitting things and people and monsters just getting tired. I want a game where blood and guts are spilled, not were people get winded.
In that case, how have you managed to play D&D all these years?? HP in D&D have never even tried to be a simulation of real injuries all the way. As gneech says above, even the old AD&D DMG says that HP doesn't simulate your physical health. A level 9 fighter has always been immune to death from a 20 ft fall (barring absolutely lousy luck when rolling HP).
 

Thyrwyn said:
There is no "no-injury" model. There is a model where HP damage "does not necessarilly represent injuries which have a measureable affect" upon other aspects of the game mechanics. Except when it does (this being exception based design). The Picador ability is one such case - it is an exception.

It's one of the more sensible interpretations of the 4E healing system. The fact that you can be "hit" with a weapon (an arrow, for instance) and then promptly use a healing surge to restore your state to your status prior to being hit, all without the use of any magic implies that you weren't actually hit at all -- no injury occured (you might have expended a lot of effort in barely dodging it, used up your luck, etc). This model adequately describes most scenarios (barring falling damage and the like). It's the only interpretation I've heard which doesn't amount to "You have your arm chopped off (take 3 damage). You're injured, but because you're so oozing with machismo you can keep on fighting like nothing happened" This of course falls apart horribly when trying to figure out how the Picador's mechanic works.

Mustrum Ridcully said:
Well, it is a Roleplaying Game. The game part is important. A game should give me fun.

So, that's the ultimate arbiter of a game's quality - Do I have fun with it.

Why can "gamismn" be more fun then "simulation"?
Gamismn is all about the game parts. And as we said, a good game means fun.

Simulation isn't about the game parts. It's about simulating/modelling a (fictional) world. A fictional world probably contains a lot of elements that aren't really fun, since even fictional worlds usually have a lot of unfun stuff, just like the real world.

Forgive me if I'm misunderstanding you, but to me this seems like the same argument -- gamism is fun, simulationism isn't. My group enjoys both, with a good amount of emphasis on the latter. Previous editions of DnD were less gamist than the current one, and people had tons of fun back then too. Simulationism, at the level DnD has traditionally allowed is fun for lots of people. Scrapping it to make the game more fun is a contradiction to me, and I know I'm not alone in this.
 
Last edited:

med stud said:
In that case, how have you managed to play D&D all these years?? HP in D&D have never even tried to be a simulation of real injuries all the way. As gneech says above, even the old AD&D DMG says that HP doesn't simulate your physical health. A level 9 fighter has always been immune to death from a 20 ft fall (barring absolutely lousy luck when rolling HP).

The old rules state that hit points were skill, luck, and actual wounds. 4E drops the actual wounds part. Even in 3.x with its reduced healing rates, hit points took days to come back without magic healing, in 4E it takes 5 minutes. With 3.5 I can believe that part of the hit point damage was the sword to the stomach that drew blood, in 4E that is not the case. Hence in 3.5 or earlier I can have descriptions where someone is cut open by my sword strike, where in 4E even if I hit I am only missing and winding him.
 

Goreg Skullcrusher said:
The fact that you can be "hit" with a weapon (an arrow, for instance) and then promptly use a healing surge to restore your state to your status prior to being hit, all without the use of any magic implies that you weren't actually hit at all -- no injury occured (you might have expended a lot of effort in barely dodging it, used up your luck, etc). This model adequately describes most scenarios (barring falling damage and the like). It's the only interpretation I've heard which doesn't amount to "You have your arm chopped off (take 3 damage). You're injured, but because you're so oozing with machismo you can keep on fighting like nothing happened" This of course falls apart horribly when trying to figure out how the Picador's mechanic works.

Emphasis mine.

Well, I disagree (partially) with this interpretation. IMO, it isn't that you weren't actually hit at all, it's that you weren't injured in a major way. A character who loses a few hit points might have become winded or fatigued (because he had trouble dodging); gotten bruised; taken a small cut, scrape, or scratch; twisted his ankle; pulled a muscle; had the wind knocked out of him; or all kinds of other non-major injuries.

In the parlance, he has what I'd call "action hero injuries." He's dirty, breathing hard, and maybe bruised or suffering from some minor (but potentially showy) flesh wounds.

And like any good action hero, if he gets "harpooned" by that goblin picador, lots of interpretations are possible.

1) The harpoon snagged in his clothing or armor, but the point was nicking his flesh (or close to doing so), causing him to go along to avoid injury.

2) The harpoon was "hooked" and the hook caught on his back or arm, forcing him to go along to keep it from gouging him deeply.

3) The harpoon went through his shoulder/leg/arm, but missed doing major damage. It's like the bullet that passes "clean through" in a movie. The harpoon might still be lodged in the character, but if so, it likely passes "clean through" his leg. He goes along to prevent it from causing major injury. After he kills the goblin picador, he can snap the head off the harpoon, and then yank the smooth shaft out. Then after the battle, he tears off a bit of his shirt (or pulls out some bandages), binds the wound shut, and he's good to go.

Yes, it requires that the game operate under the cinematic reality of an action movie, rather than how "the real world" works. To me, that falls under the category of "willing suspension of disbelief."

Personally, to me, the textbook example of this is the "bloodied" condition. In Fourth Edition, there's a decent mechanic in place to represent the notion of a fight to "first blood." If two duelists are fighting to first blood, the first to be "bloodied" loses. Everything until then is just fatigue and blunt trama.

The emphasis here is that it isn't "no injuries" - it's "no serious injuries" or "no injuries that really impair the character." Scrapes, scratches, and bruises are fine, as are any "flesh wounds" characters can take in movies that don't actually hurt your brain.

For those who don't like John McClane (or are getting tired of the reference), Indiana Jones and James Bond are perfectly valid secondary examples. The latter usually recovers from his injuries with nothing more than a martini and a night with a hot girl.
 
Last edited:

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top