Hit Points & Healing Surges Finally Explained!

[Jack99]

Hit points and healing are the only thing in 4e that bugged me and my group. While I understand the reasoning behind healing surges and hit points, someone resting for 6-8 hours and getting up fine bothered us. 4e had no way of implementing long-term injuries or severe bodily damage. Plus, the abstraction of the cleric/paladin vs. warlord healing bugged us.

So we implemented a SIMPLE fix that allowed for a distinction between magical vs nonmagical healing, and didn't require us to monkey with established hit point values, the bloodied condition, and which satisfied our simulationist AND narrativist gaming styles. Here it is:

As an example, per 4e rules, a 1st level fighter has 15 + Con score hit points, and gains 6 hit points per level after that. Our system says a 1st level fighter with a 16 Con has 15 hit points, and 16 wound points. A 10th level fighter with a 20 Con would have 69 hit points, and 20 wound points.

1. When damaged, hit points are shaved off first, and when they are depleted, wound points are deducted.
2. When a character hits 0 wound points, he is unconscious.
3. Characters die at their negative Con score, or on three failed death saves.
4. As a character gains levels, he gains hit points, but only gains wound points if is Con score increases.
5. Hit points can be cured by a warlord or cleric, but only magical healing can quickly restore wound points (equal to the healing surge value). Hit points can be regained by healing surges with a short rest, but natural healing only allows one wound point healed per day of bedrest with a successful DC 10 + 1/2 level Endurance check. (If a trained healer is looking after a recovering character (DC 10 + wound point damage Heal check to treat), he can regain two wound points per day with a DC 10 Endurance check).
6. Finally, while suffering from wound point damage, a character can be at their bloodied value at best.

Hit points in our system represent luck, adrenaline, divine fortune, willpower, minor bruises, scrapes, pain tolerance, etc. Wound points represent actual physical injury, which takes time to recover from. A character still has the same total number of "hit points" as the core rules, and the bloodied value is the same, but some of those points represent real physical damage that take time to recover from.

So far, this system has worked really well for us, with almost no rules tweaking. It satisfies our simulationist tastes, and makes getting severely wounded have consequences that take time to recover from.

Has it affected how much people want to play warlords? Or have you given them something else to compensate? Or maybe you do not use them at all?

Cheers

 

[Oni]

For what it's worth, this is Schoedinger's Wounding that they are trying to sell -- you don't know what the hit point loss was caused by until you know how it was restored.

Of all of the various options outlined in the previous thread on this topic, SW is perhaps the one that I find least satsifying.

I also recall, on the other thread, being told that SW wasn't how the system was intended to be used. At least this podcast clears that up. SW is not a misreading of the system.


RC

This schoedinger's wounding is basically you don't know the damage done until you find out how it's healed, no?

Aren't they saying that if you have a good idea that they won't be able to receive magical healing not to describe anything over the top, not that it shouldn't be described at all until you know the source of healing?

Aren't those two different things, since in the second you know what happened to your character before you receive the healing?

 

[Sir Brennen]

I like Gothmog's fix. It's a bit of a hassle, but it's better than trying to be crazily uncertain about the damage.

I actually kinda like it, though it brings back requiring a cleric, unless groups are OK with frequently going into combat with some members at 1/2 hit points. In that case, the difficulty of encounters becomes altered quite a bit, and not in a consistent manner.

Though if there *is* a cleric, then it becomes exactly like the existing rules, as all wounds and hit points can easily be healed between encounters through the cleric powers.

I'd also be curious if there's any intended difference between different level healing powers under his system. (Cure Light vs. Cure Serious, for example)

I also think Dead at Neg Con is a bit too gritty, as going from alive to No Save Dead becomes much more likely at higher levels, with monsters dishing out increased damage. The Con value isn't scaling to keep up. It also makes the emphasis on Con as an uber stat increase, as each point adds *two* to your margin of not-being-dead - one for wounds, and one for max neg value.

Personally, if I used that system, I'd stick with neg Bloodied as No Save Dead.

Perversely, I'd also nerf Wound Points regained from healing magic, because within a few levels, a character's Healing Surge value is going to quickly exceed their CON score, making any single use of low level curing magic automatically remove all wounds. If you want gritty, reduce the amount of wounds that can be healed at once. I'd probably use the HP gained per level value of the target's character class, perhaps adding in the number of healing surges the power allows the target to spend (so Cure Light is +1, Cure Serious is +2.)

 

[Sir Brennen]

For what it's worth, this is Schoedinger's Wounding that they are trying to sell -- you don't know what the hit point loss was caused by until you know how it was restored.

Do you need to know, though? An orc's axe takes down a PC. Describe it as bloodily as you like. Just don't assume that it's 100% physical. Or do. If a warlord brings the PC back up on his feet, he could be restoring non-physical damage suffered prior to the axe hit. Nothing says he's restoring the points done by that specific blow.

All damage is a mix of physical/non-physical. Not getting hung up on how much is which is the key. Schrodinger's Wounding only becomes an issue if the assumption is a specific attack was 100% of a specific type, and the healing method is restoring damage caused by that specific attack. These are all questionable assumptions.

 

[Gothmog]

Has it affected how much people want to play warlords? Or have you given them something else to compensate? Or maybe you do not use them at all?

Cheers

Yep, both groups I DM have warlords, and both groups love them. While the warlord can't heal wound points, the bonuses he gives for tactical combat are still huge, and even if you've taken wound point damage, the warlord can still restore HP up to your bloodied value, which would again get shaved off first. Neither of the warlord players had complained, and in fact one of the warlord players is the one who suggested we do something like this!

 

[Ahglock]

Has it affected how much people want to play warlords? Or have you given them something else to compensate? Or maybe you do not use them at all?

Cheers

You could always earthdawn it and say there is some magic in all of the powers.

 

[Gothmog]

I actually kinda like it, though it brings back requiring a cleric, unless groups are OK with frequently going into combat with some members at 1/2 hit points. In that case, the difficulty of encounters becomes altered quite a bit, and not in a consistent manner.

Though if there *is* a cleric, then it becomes exactly like the existing rules, as all wounds and hit points can easily be healed between encounters through the cleric powers.

I'd also be curious if there's any intended difference between different level healing powers under his system. (Cure Light vs. Cure Serious, for example)

I also think Dead at Neg Con is a bit too gritty, as going from alive to No Save Dead becomes much more likely at higher levels, with monsters dishing out increased damage. The Con value isn't scaling to keep up. It also makes the emphasis on Con as an uber stat increase, as each point adds *two* to your margin of not-being-dead - one for wounds, and one for max neg value.

Personally, if I used that system, I'd stick with neg Bloodied as No Save Dead.

Perversely, I'd also nerf Wound Points regained from healing magic, because within a few levels, a character's Healing Surge value is going to quickly exceed their CON score, making any single use of low level curing magic automatically remove all wounds. If you want gritty, reduce the amount of wounds that can be healed at once. I'd probably use the HP gained per level value of the target's character class, perhaps adding in the number of healing surges the power allows the target to spend (so Cure Light is +1, Cure Serious is +2.)

Dang, I knew I forgot to put something in. Yes, CLW and CSW are different. Basically if any magical power would allow the use of one healing surge, the character gets back 1d6 wound points. If two healing surges are used, its 2d6 wound points, and so on. If a power (like Healing Word) gives back 1d6 extra hit points, then it can heal wounds (in this case 1 HS=1d6 WP) AND restore 1d6 HP. I hadn't considered your idea of HP per level + HS used- thats not bad either. I'll put it to the group and see what they think.

Oddly enough, only one group I DM has a cleric. The other group has a paladin, who isn't as good at healing as a cleric would be. While the magical healing is nice to have, we haven't found it to be absolutely necessary yet. This is mostly due to our playstyle (see below).

You're right that the -Con is more gritty, but thats the sort of game we like. I don't see there would be any problem with going -bloodied if thats what you wanted. So far, we've only had one death from -Con, and the PCs are 8th level now.

Finally, as for some PCs going into combat bloodied, we've found it requires the players to use slightly different tactics. PCs in my games tend to "buddy up" during combats, and work in groups of 2 or 3 PCs, with the PC on the most offensive duty the one who is least badly injured. The more injured ones guard the flanks and support him, as well as try some crazy stunts. What I've noticed in practice is that if one or two PCs are into their wound points, the party as a whole operates at about 1 level lower than average. 3-4 PCs = 2 levels lower, and 5-6 PC = 3 levels lower (as the group only has 6 PCs, I don't know what happens past this point). While it can make a difference when multiple PCs are wounded, what I've noticed in practice is that after 3-5 combats, most of the PCs are pretty beat up, and they tend to retreat to a safe haven and heal. Thats fine with us, because I don't tend to run long strings of combats back-to-back (I think the most in 4e has been 5, and some of those were 1 or 2 levels below the party level), which is where our playstyle differs from the core rules. If your group is all about combat and having multiple combats in short order, then this might not be a good fix for you, but for us, it works perfectly.

 

[maddman75]

I urge you to consider whether this character concept will have the same short half life of the character archetypes of the anti-social anti-hero and the jackass half-orc barbarian, which, in my experience, are amusing at real tables for 1-3 sessions. At the very least, you should run this past your DM and fellow players. I know that I'd have little patience for such a character type. Being told regularly that my hero is a wuss is not something I want in my DnD experience. YMMV.

I'm funny enough to make this work.

As for the Schrodinger's Damage, I'd think that you don't *know* how bad a wound is until you're going to heal it anyway. Minor wounds might bleed quite a bit, but really be not more than a scratch. What seems like a bump might have damaged some muscles or bones deeper in the body. I can't see having a problem with describing a solid hit that sends blood flying being healed with a healing surge, because obviously it wasn't as bad as it looked and you just need to stop your whining and get up. Princess.

 

[Jack99]

Yep, both groups I DM have warlords, and both groups love them. While the warlord can't heal wound points, the bonuses he gives for tactical combat are still huge, and even if you've taken wound point damage, the warlord can still restore HP up to your bloodied value, which would again get shaved off first. Neither of the warlord players had complained, and in fact one of the warlord players is the one who suggested we do something like this!

Interesting. I am going to yoink your idea, and if we ever feel like more verisimilitude with regards to our healing, it will surely be considered. Looks solid.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Dang, I knew I forgot to put something in. Yes, CLW and CSW are different. Basically if any magical power would allow the use of one healing surge, the character gets back 1d6 wound points. If two healing surges are used, its 2d6 wound points, and so on. If a power (like Healing Word) gives back 1d6 extra hit points, then it can heal wounds (in this case 1 HS=1d6 WP) AND restore 1d6 HP. I hadn't considered your idea of HP per level + HS used- thats not bad either. I'll put it to the group and see what they think.

What about the powers that don't actually use a healing surge up, but heal you "as if" you had used a healing surge?

Cheers