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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 4633919" data-attributes="member: 18280">Sure, and this was all parsed out in the previous thread on SW.  There are some ways in which the contradiction can be avoided, but those methods have their own drawbacks.  IMHO, those drawbacks are just as severe.Again, this has been all parsed out pretty thoroughly.This is true only in those cases where the means of healing is considered unimportant.  For example, one parsed option is that PCs really are like Wolverine and simply regenerate the damage taken.  So, it doesn't matter that the damage is from an axe wound, healed by a guy yelling "C'mon ya pansy!  Get up and fight!"It is also true, for example, in the parsed option that hp damage doesn't actually track to injury at all.  Thus, your shoulder is still seperated, but a guy yelling "C'mon ya pansy!  Get up and fight!" heals your hit points.  The wound -- no matter what it is, no matter how severe -- simply has no game effect.Another example where it was true is in the case that no hit point loss actually tracks to any kind of injury because the PCs simply never get injured unless they are killed.Each of these has its own problems, but in none of these cases can damage be narrated the same way that it can in 3e or earlier editions, with anything approaching the same consistancy.  When the designer's advice is, in effect, "know how it will be healed to know how to describe it", I would say that the case is fairly well closed here.1e specifically allowed for a severed arm (Sword of Sharpness).  It didn't tell the DM what the effects of that would be, specifically, however.  I don't know about you, but when I was playing 1e, description was king.  If the DM said your injury reduced your movement rate, your injury reduced your movement rate.  He was allowed -- nay, encouraged -- to determine the effects situationally.But even were this not the case, losing 4 hit points that remain lost for days is far more of a game effect than popping up after a short nap to have everything recovered. No, as parsed out to death in the previous thread, you can adjust all you want without eliminating the problem.  If you attempt to use the "All Previous Editions" method in 4e, contradictions will occur. No.  On a scale of 1 to 10, where 10 is more of a given colour, one shade of colour might be "5" on the red scale, and another "10".  Saying that the sample which is 10 on the scale is more red does not in any way, shape, or form imply that the other is "anything but red".The sting of a scorpion can be fatal regardless of the hp total of the character?  Who woulda thunk it?  I'd have imagined that an instrument delivering poison had to leave at least a 12-inch diameter hole to be effective......Lycanthropy is contracted at 50% hp, IIRC?  Yes, I can see how that would prevent you from describing injuries.A vampire "hits" you on every hit?  Well, imagine that!  It almost seems as though the word "hit" means "hit".  Huh.  I can see why you think this makes no sense.The only time you seem to "bleed" in any substantial way is when I'm hit with a sword of wounding?  I think you should go back and read the 1e rules.  Every combat in 1e assumes that 10 minutes are spent at a minimum, due to the need to bandage wounds.  Not only that, but if you drop to 0, you continue to decline until attended to.My sympathies.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Well, my sympathies if that is really the case.RC</blockquote>

Verification