Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Doctor Shaft" data-source="post: 2037194" data-attributes="member: 25737">Good point. However, while hitpoints is more like a vigor, it's still a rather "poor" abstract mechanism.  We can argue that HP's don't involve my character getting stabbed through, etc., until I finally hit the ground, with negative hitpoints, or even just one.  And the big thing is that healing spells then turn around and simply "wisk away" all kinds of damage, and then I start fighting again.So it almost isn't really vigor at all. And if it is... then why don't the deities, and everyone else, stop working on "Fireball spells" and learn how to make more and more potent "Vigor spells" so that they could conceivably keep fighting forever?  Removing healing doesn't ruin the game so much as it changes how the game would be played. Its like looking at the base classes and deciding what you want in your game. If you don't like monks, you ban them. This doesn' destroy balance at all. It might change it depending on how heavily you used em in your last campaign. Same with the original four classes. No campaign needs wizards or fighters... but if the DM totally scraps them for something totally different, the game type changes.  Healing as it is now is like "Machine gun healing".  I still play that way, even now in the campaign I am involved in.  I guess HP's have always bothered me, just the same as "Magic Points" or MP always bothered me in CRPGs like Final Fantasy.   I still play em, I just never liked em.I prefer systems where I get to make some semblance of tactical decisions as to how I will defend or fight in a combat situation, and if I happen to fail, I have to be prepared for whatever heavy consequences that brings. Obviously, the DM would have to tailor the game around that though. You can't change the core book like that, and then send core monsters, as is, after a party.</blockquote>

Verification