Hit Points & Healing Surges Finally Explained!

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Except when it's morale (warlord "healing" powers)

Why not? All it takes to overcome a grievous wound is the determination to go on in action-land. Morale certainly helps.

(OH, and be careful with that link. It is highly addictive and a few hours later you notice that you don't remember which article you originally wanted to read. )

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

So the "feel" of it would bother you?

Maybe. Usually it's a playability issue - It's not papers & paycheck, but it is still accounting for too many things that I am not interested in,, distracting me from things like the story or kicking butt. Especially stuff like degrading armor sounds like a nightmare to me. Unless I can handwave it away with a skil or fixed money expenditure, and then I wonder why bother?

Remember complaints about managing abilty damage in the middle of combat? It's like that. I spend time calculating things instead of making decisions that affect the game.


*) Decision-Making. I think I have to mentally note this down. I think that might be a key element of RPGs, aside from just enjoying the story that unfolds.

 

[Kzach]

I look at hp and healing surges in reverse. Your healing surges are your "real" hp. It's how much strain you can take for the entire day, with some resting and breaks during the day. Your hp value is the amount of punishment you can take in a short period of time.

I like the cut of your jib, dear sir, and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

Or at the very least, have you as a player so I don't have to put up with whiny realists in a fantasy simulation game.

Put another way, I and my enemy are dueling with poison blades. Wence are we poisoned?

The problem you have is a binary thought process. It doesn't have to be an either/or situation. Possible grey areas are the threat of the poison, or the poison doesn't have to be deadly just because it's hit the bloodstream. It could just represent an amount by which it weakens the character for a short period before their kidneys process it.

Whatever. Point is, use a little imagination.

I doubt that *another* discourse over abstract hit points is going to change anyone's opinion of healing surges.

Not really the point of the thread.

I'm tired of players arguing or making fun of my efforts in game to be creative and interpret 'damage' in a variety of different and interesting ways to accommodate the abstraction.

So the fact that a D&D designer, nay, Mr. Mike Mearls himself, the man, the legend, the icon of D&D design, has officially stated in a podcast that hit points and damage and healing surges aren't meant to be taken literally and that one should use a bit of imagination to interpret them, goes a long way towards backing up my efforts in games I run.

This makes me happy.

 

[lutecius]

Closest thing I've seen matching this is Palladium's armour system. […] I'm not familiar with the Palladium system in terms of performance, so I can't tell you if it works out, but you're still going to do a fair bit of rebalancing which includes figuring out how much punishment your armours are going to be able to take.

Note this is not a house rule, just how I would have done 4e. I'm not familiar with palladium either. My idea looks similar thematically, only simpler. Mechanically it's really closer to dnd hit points.

And for the enhanced natural HP, how does it differ from normal 'real wounds' HP?

Maybe it doesn't. This particular archetype is on par with armored warriors thanks to his incredible brawn and resilience. He would actually last longer in the vat of acid, which borders on superheroic and doesn’t fit every character concept. It may have disadvantages, like not being able to mend his armor.

Why not? All it takes to overcome a grievous wound is the determination to go on in action-land. Morale certainly helps.

But then we’re back to abstract hit points

Ah, I see, that would be a more combat simulation approach. Not the direction I would want my game to go.

Maybe. Usually it's a playability issue - It's not papers & paycheck, but it is still accounting for too many things that I am not interested in,, distracting me from things like the story or kicking butt. Especially stuff like degrading armor sounds like a nightmare to me. Unless I can handwave it away with a skil or fixed money expenditure, and then I wonder why bother?

Remember complaints about managing abilty damage in the middle of combat? It's like that. I spend time calculating things instead of making decisions that affect the game.

I think you didn’t get it. It’s more simulationist but in practice it’s almost identical to the existing system.
The armour degradation just means losing the additional hit points.
Starting to lose "real" hit points is akin to being bloodied.
Armour mending is similar to healing surges (you can do it in a dungeon, but only so many times before it needs more serious repair)

 

[RangerWickett]

So, what are you guys talking about? I assume there was a podcast of some sort talking about hit points and healing surges, but where? And since I'm at work today and can't listen to audio, what was the meat of their comments?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Note this is not a house rule, just how I would have done 4e. I'm not familiar with palladium either. My idea looks similar thematically, only simpler. Mechanically it's really closer to dnd hit points.
Maybe it doesn't. This particular archetype is on par with armored warriors thanks to his incredible brawn and resilience. He would actually last longer in the vat of acid, which borders on superheroic and doesn’t fit every character concept. It may have disadvantages, like not being able to mend his armor.

But then we’re back to abstract hit points


I think you didn’t get it. It’s more simulationist but in practice it’s almost identical to the existing system.
The armour degradation just means losing the additional hit points.
Starting to lose "real" hit points is akin to being bloodied.
Armour mending is similar to healing surges (you can do it in a dungeon, but only so many times before it needs more serious repair)

Well, if you keep it on a "fluff" level or "trying to explain the abstraction" level, okay. But once I have to go into town after every session to get my stuff repaired, I don't like it. (Wasn't it Diablo II that had items that would be damaged over time and needed repairs... Grrr. Hated that. )

 

[kibbitz]

Well, if you keep it on a "fluff" level or "trying to explain the abstraction" level, okay. But once I have to go into town after every session to get my stuff repaired, I don't like it. (Wasn't it Diablo II that had items that would be damaged over time and needed repairs... Grrr. Hated that. )

At least your items didn't break apart and disappear forever at zero durability like the first Diablo...

 

[roguerouge]

Aside: The warlord must one day be given a power called Suck it up Princess. The game demands it.

OT: I was going to let this slide, but since at least two other people praised it and continued the thread further off-topic, I have to say that I'd find that kind of label for a power just a bit sexist and off-putting.

ON topic: The great and mighty Mearls solves nothing. When you use a harpoon with a rope attached, you need to know if the damage you caused was due to hitting the person because you can yank them towards you in your next action. For injury poison to do damage, it has to cause an injury. If you're making a save vs. poison, it can't be paired with sword damage that's described as caused by muscle fatigue.

And if you've been bathed in acid, bull-rushed into lava, sliced with a poisoned knife, thrown off a cliff, and harpooned, you're not going to be better after a few hours of rest. You're not tired and bruised; you're burnt, poisoned, stabbed, exfoliated, and have broken bones. There needs to be a plausible narrative explanation for why you're better. Spells are that widget. A nap is not that widget.

 

[Halivar]

It's a schema thing. At my table, the ones who have the most trouble "getting" the new hit-points philosophy are the veterans. It's still hard for me, even, as a player. With new players first learning D&D with 4E, I explain the "new" way (the meta nature of hp and the physicality of the "bloodied" threshold, cinematic non-magical healing and "John McClane-ing it", etc.), and they get it, and much easier than the veterans do. I suppose it's because they are not fighting preconceived (and ingrained over almost a decade) notions of what hit-points are.

 

[Cadfan]

So, what are you guys talking about? I assume there was a podcast of some sort talking about hit points and healing surges, but where? And since I'm at work today and can't listen to audio, what was the meat of their comments?

WOTC podcast. Someone asked what a healing surge "was." The example the question gave was, "my wizard's at zero, he spends a healing surge, now he's up again, what happened? Why isn't he bothered by having been speared by a hobgoblin or whatever?"

The answer was, "don't oversell damage." They also added two things that I thought were neat- first, they contextualized the question by talking about how they, as DMs, had similar problems in earlier editions when they described damage as being incredibly severe, and yet the recipient kept on fighting. Second, they talked about how you, as a DM, can and should adjust your damage descriptions based on how you expect the PC to be healed. If you know a cleric's going to heal the character, you might have them impaled by the hobgoblin. But if the healing is going to come from a warlord, you might want them to get their bell wrung, and be able to shake off the worst of it with some encouragement to get back into the fight.

They also kept joking about the issue for the rest of the podcast. The best line was, when discussing a poison dart trap: "The poison dart RIPS RIGHT THROUGH YOUR EYE SOCKET! TWO DAMAGE! MUHAHA!"