Healing Surges innate Blessed band aids

[med stud]

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.

Have they really explicitly taken that part out? I don't remember reading it. Besides, read my post above on realistic healing times. A couple of days is as unrealistic, when it comes to real wounds, as six hours. Especially since you always heal in the same time from 0 HP to full, every time you go to 0.

 

[D'karr]

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.

The HP rules are finally matching the text that has ALWAYS described them. They are an abstraction for simulating HEROIC FANTASY combat. For that purpose they are very well suited and simulate it very well.

If on the other hand, you want them to simulate any of a myriad of injuries including contussions, abrasions, lacerations, trauma and shock they have POORLY done that for 30+ years. Only the creativity of DMs and players everywhere could make the HP system do so. Because the rules never supported that. If you are saying that 4th Edition is the only edition of D&D that has done those things in a poor way, then you are lying to yourself.

I'm counting on the same creative DMs and players to use that same creativity to still play awesome games. No matter what Hit Points do or do not represent.

Just like there were tons of people playing D&D before and having fun, I'm sure that will continue to be the case.

 

[Lacyon]

The old rules state that hit points were skill, luck, and actual wounds. 4E drops the actual wounds part.

No, hong drops the actual wounds part (except when he doesn't). A lot of 4E crusaders drop the actual wounds part. I've never seen an actual developer state that they've dropped 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.

In all editions of D&D, hit points have represented what I call 'The Greatsword Tax'. Specific powers, feats, and special abilties aside, no greatsword hit described as being an arm wound ever decreased your chance to hit. No greatsword hit described as a hit to the face ever resulted in a chance of blindness. No greatsword hit described as a hit to the leg ever reduced a character's movement speed. In terms of actual rules, the only thing that mattered when you were hit with a greatsword was whether or not it dropped you.

None of this ever stopped us from pretending that a character had been hit in the arm, leg, or face if we wanted.

The Greatsword Tax means, essentially, that even though a weapon got through your ordinary defenses (by which I mean, everything that goes into your character's AC - armor, dexterity, certain kinds of magical protection), and was prevented from killing you by some kind of extraordinary defense. These are the blows that make your character go 'oh crap, I nearly died just there'. Maybe your great skill allowed you take the blow on your arm. Maybe you caught the blow badly on your shield - it didn't pierce your skin, but it hurt like hell. Maybe you had to twist suddenly and badly to get out of the way. Maybe you took the greatsword to the chest and you're just so badass that this isn't a killing blow to you like it would be to anyone else.

Fundamentally though, no matter how you describe it, the only in-game effect it has is whether or not the next greatsword hit is going to kill you. That's what HP represent. And once you realize that, a whole lot of 'problems' disappear. 3E's 'healing' rates don't bother you - you just rationalize that a character who's survived a whole lot of danger shouldn't push his luck with too much more.

Likewise, 4E's healing rates cease to be a problem - the only thing you're recovering when you spend a healing surge is the ability to not die to the next n things that get past your normal defensive measures - the ability to take deflect that next killing blow to a less important organ, or twist out of the way one or two more times, or continue catching them on the shield even when you're off-balance. If you were badass enough to take one swordblow directly to the chest, the only reason we can't suspend disbelief when you survive the second one is if it happens too many times in rapid succession.

Once you get to this point, a whole new realm of possibilities open up. One of your players wants to play an regenerating God-blooded PC? Okay. Describe him (or allow the PC to describe himself) as happily running up his opponent's sword and lopping their heads off, and his wounds close themselves after the fight. Another PC wants to play a hauled-himself-up-by-the-bootstraps warrior, who wins fights through sheer skill? Fine, he's deflecting blows at the last second, dodging out of the way on an adrenaline kick, and taking 'hero wounds'. Another player wants to play the tough guy who just takes the hits and keeps on coming, no problem. After a hard fight, he stuffs his guts back in his stomach, ties the bandage tight, and presses on.

You don't have to change any of the rules to do this. You can let all these characters play together without worrying about balance. All you have to do is let go.

 

[Zil]

In all editions of D&D, hit points have represented what I call 'The Greatsword Tax'. Specific powers, feats, and special abilties aside, no greatsword hit described as being an arm wound ever decreased your chance to hit. No greatsword hit described as a hit to the face ever resulted in a chance of blindness. No greatsword hit described as a hit to the leg ever reduced a character's movement speed. In terms of actual rules, the only thing that mattered when you were hit with a greatsword was whether or not it dropped you.

You clearly never played using the 2E Combat & Tactics (C&T) rules. The critical hit rules in there were more than just a little bit brutal with players crawling back to down with broken limbs, missing hands, etc. Of all versions of D&D, this is the version where the regenerate spell/power proved to be most valuable.

The biggest drawback to C&T was speed of play. Combat could really drag if you had a lot of opponents with different types of weapons. So if we were to put 4E and C&T on the simulation vs abstraction scale, they would be at opposite ends of the scale (so far as D&D is concerned).

I personally liked the switch to 3E from C&T because it sped up the games quite a bit and still preserved enough of the simulation that you could easily immerse yourself despite the mechanical abstractions. With 4E, I worry that it has gone too far and it will be much harder to really immerse myself just because the mechanics are so much farther away from what I perceive as reality. Perhaps younger generations who have grown up on Anime, WoW, and Magic : The Gathering won't have this problem.

I think that is the gamble that WoTC has taken - that the game will appeal more to younger generations of gamer who are more interested in a fast MMORPG like game. They might not have a problem with such blatant (and unintuitive) mechanical things as "healing surges". If they lose us old timers, it is sad, but we are a dying breed. The young gamers are the future. We shall see if their gamble pays off.

 

[Goreg Skullcrusher]

The HP rules are finally matching the text that has ALWAYS described them. They are an abstraction for simulating HEROIC FANTASY combat. For that purpose they are very well suited and simulate it very well.

I don't understand what you mean by 4E's HP mechanic following it's text better than previous editions. HP were always an abstraction of damage. It's just that now the damage part isn't even necessarily involved anymore. You can "heal" yourself non-magically mid-battle, and to complete full fighting capacity within 6 hours.

If on the other hand, you want them to simulate any of a myriad of injuries including contussions, abrasions, lacerations, trauma and shock they have POORLY done that for 30+ years. Only the creativity of DMs and players everywhere could make the HP system do so. Because the rules never supported that. If you are saying that 4th Edition is the only edition of D&D that has done those things in a poor way, then you are lying to yourself.

I put in specific verbiage to avoid exactly this type of accusation. I don't want to play D20 Reality. All I ask is for some semblance of simulationism fixed within the rules (i.e. PC's need to take some time out of adventuring to heal if magic isn't present, even if it isn't completely realistic. All pre-4E editions did this to some extent). As is, you can receive a spear to the face, be peppered with arrows, be crushed by stampeding elephants, etc. etc. and be in top fighting condition within a few hours that same day.

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.

I mostly accept this bit. A small cut, aching arm, twisted ankle, etc. I would classify as no (real) injury. The type of thing you can just "walk off" in real life.

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.

This is where I draw the line. If I envision someone getting a harpoon impaled into their body, I see that as a severe injury. A giant spear-shaped wound in your thigh or shoulder will severely hinder mobility or combat prowess. Saying that my character suffers a major injury like this but is actually fine and dandy imposes cognitive dissonance.

I can accept the no-injury model, because there is no cognitive dissonance, nothing causing my brain to crash and require rebooting. The Picador's ability is explicitly predicated on some sort of injury, however. I don't buy the explanation of the spear getting hooked on clothing/gear -- if I run a character with minimal clothing, shirtless or what have you, the explanation fails. I'm also curious as to how many other monsters have an ability that makes these kinds of assumptions.

The latter usually recovers from his injuries with nothing more than a martini and a night with a hot girl.

Put this explicitly in the rules and I'll shut up about realism.

 

[JohnSnow]

I don't buy the explanation of the spear getting hooked on clothing/gear -- if I run a character with minimal clothing, shirtless or what have you, the explanation fails.

Only if you want it to fail. Maybe the character's skin is leathery enough from exposure to weather that it resists easy penetration. Basically, the PC spends so much time shirtless, that, like the 3e Barbarian, he has a certain degree of resistance to penetrating cuts. So the harpoon can snag on his skin without actually puncturing his flesh severely.

Such a thing is decidedly unrealistic (albeit plausible) except that for a character who constantly goes around with no shirt, a certain amount of "skin-toughening" from exposure to the elements is realistic - especially in that "Conan the Barbarian" sense. Before people start claiming that human skin doesn't work like that, I'll mention that I saw a shao-lin monk put a spear point to his throat and bend the haft to almost a 90 degree angle by leaning against it, without taking any injury. Then he did it with 6 spears, so be a little careful when you make pronouncements about what kind of punishment the human body can withstand...

Think "the harpoon hooked over his shoulder and the barb is digging into his scapula" - unpleasant to be sure, but far from a lethal injury.

Injuries, for the most part, don't leave holes in the human body. Major organs deflect (to the extent that they can), minor tissue is damaged and the wound seals shut. If an arrow can go through your leg without leaving a gaping hole in it (a common fantasy trope), so can a harpoon.

It's possible that this is a case of a little knowledge being a dangerous thing. Medical professionals accept that D&D's system is patently unrealistic, and they're okay with that, 'cuz realism sucks. Somewhere near the med students, you have people like me, who know something about injury, realize the system is unrealistic, and are okay with it because we prefer the cinematic reality to the real reality. At the other end of the spectrum are the people who don't realize the system is unrealistic, and wonder what people's problem is. Then there are people who aren't medical experts but believe you can come up with a more "realistic" system for tracking injuries - thinking that such a thing will be more believable, without really wanting true "reality."

"Long-term injury with no performance penalties in the interim" is one example of the latter attempt to inject an absurd kind of "realism" that isn't the slightest bit realistic. Thinking of a wound that heals fully in three days as a "long-term injury" is another.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

I think that is the gamble that WoTC has taken - that the game will appeal more to younger generations of gamer who are more interested in a fast MMORPG like game. They might not have a problem with such blatant (and unintuitive) mechanical things as "healing surges". If they lose us old timers, it is sad, but we are a dying breed. The young gamers are the future. We shall see if their gamble pays off.

I don't think it is a younger person vs older person problem. I do not think that healing surges are unintuitive at all.

I ran 4e all weekend long at DDXP, and I can tell you that not a single person made a comment at any of my tables about them not making any sense or had a problem understanding them at all. In fact, they were rather easy to understand: "You hitpoints go down when you get hit, you can spend a standard action to take a second wind which triggers a healing surge. Whenever something triggers a healing surge, get back a quarter of your hitpoints."

Everyone pretty much said "Ok, cool...let's play."

I had a lot of older people play at my tables and no a single one of them complained about it at all. In fact, until I got home from the con and got online I didn't even consider that some people would have a problems with spending an action to get back some hitpoints.

 

[Ktulu]

This is where I draw the line. If I envision someone getting a harpoon impaled into their body, I see that as a severe injury. A giant spear-shaped wound in your thigh or shoulder will severely hinder mobility or combat prowess. Saying that my character suffers a major injury like this but is actually fine and dandy imposes cognitive dissonance.
.

In the movie serenity, for example, Jayne Cobb is harpooned by the Reavers in a chase scene and yanked off of the hovercraft they're flying on.

Though he is shown to limp slightly the following scene with some exposition, he does not appear to suffer from the wound through the rest of the movie, or the major combat at the end.

Sure, this is movie logic, but that's the same logic D&D is using. After the battle the ranger looks you over and says, "wow, I don't know how you survived that, but the wound appears to be superficial. Let me sew up the opening, I think you'll live."

Seems to work for me.

 

[baberg]

In the movie serenity, for example, Jayne Cobb is harpooned by the Reavers in a chase scene and yanked off of the hovercraft they're flying on.

Though he is shown to limp slightly the following scene with some exposition, he does not appear to suffer from the wound through the rest of the movie, or the major combat at the end.

During that exposition it was also implied that the doctor would "patch up the crew" so I'm assuming he got a bandage. But you're right - the injury wasn't life-threatening, or even life-altering. Jayne was up and fighting in a bar within a few scenes.

At this point, there's really no use in arguing about the harpooning anymore. Several explanations have been floated which are perfectly reasonable as to why a harpoon could keep the PC within 5 squares of the Picadoor without causing wounds. If all of these "fail" for any given person, then I believe they won't ever be convinced.

I'm all about informed debate, but when the debaters just end up arguing the same points over and over and neither side gives an inch, it gets boring - and I'm accusing both sides of that. If you want HP to represent real life wounds, houserule it or find another game. D&D 4th does not consider HP to be wounds, with the possible exception of the killing blow.

 

[hong]

No, hong drops the actual wounds part (except when he doesn't).

I do?

Oh, yeah, wait, I do.