Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Hit Points: Hitting the Wall
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="GM Dave" data-source="post: 5883332" data-attributes="member: 6687992"><p>I think this is really a Sport vs Realism question.</p><p></p><p>If the majority of encounters that players face are based on them having 'full resources' (hit points, access to spells, supply of 1 shot resources like potions) then this is sport play.</p><p></p><p>In Sport play, it makes sense for the players to want to 'top up' their health because the encounters are built for them to fight that way. If they could not do this then the group would be more cautious and retreat (It is basic min-max game theory where people don't play aggressive when they are at a disadvantage).</p><p></p><p>Rules that change the ability to get back to full hit points won't help play but will hurt play. The reason it will hurt play is that players will stop more often to recover or retreat to recover elsewhere. Down time or non-hacking time wastes more time (wasting time here is in reference to Sport style play where the emphasis is usually on combat).</p><p></p><p>Realism play allows for more unequal contests and encourages people to think more on what their actions might be. Some contests are clearly unequal but clever play can help equalize play. For example, on Saturday, I had the players take the roles of a group of level 1 NPC PF characters they have and fight a modified Beholder (I reduced the hit points and ability some as it was an old beholder working as a head jailer described as Old Six Eyes). The players had a few ways to 'blind' the Beholder (smoke bombs and flash powder) and they had an ally they could free (a flesh golem that they did free). The players could also have tried to use stealth to avoid the Beholder (6 out of 7 players made their stealth roles).</p><p></p><p>Realism play does not always make for a 'fair' contest which means the players maximum hit points means less to the success of game play. It doesn't matter if you have 200 hit points if each tough of a wight is going to remove a level off your character or two levels if it is a vampire. It doesn't matter that you have DR 30 if one gaze and a failed roll can turn you to stone.</p><p></p><p>If the game features troubles like these then you will have player's less worried on their maximum hit points because they are a nice buffer against physical damage but do nothing against other types of effects.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="GM Dave, post: 5883332, member: 6687992"] I think this is really a Sport vs Realism question. If the majority of encounters that players face are based on them having 'full resources' (hit points, access to spells, supply of 1 shot resources like potions) then this is sport play. In Sport play, it makes sense for the players to want to 'top up' their health because the encounters are built for them to fight that way. If they could not do this then the group would be more cautious and retreat (It is basic min-max game theory where people don't play aggressive when they are at a disadvantage). Rules that change the ability to get back to full hit points won't help play but will hurt play. The reason it will hurt play is that players will stop more often to recover or retreat to recover elsewhere. Down time or non-hacking time wastes more time (wasting time here is in reference to Sport style play where the emphasis is usually on combat). Realism play allows for more unequal contests and encourages people to think more on what their actions might be. Some contests are clearly unequal but clever play can help equalize play. For example, on Saturday, I had the players take the roles of a group of level 1 NPC PF characters they have and fight a modified Beholder (I reduced the hit points and ability some as it was an old beholder working as a head jailer described as Old Six Eyes). The players had a few ways to 'blind' the Beholder (smoke bombs and flash powder) and they had an ally they could free (a flesh golem that they did free). The players could also have tried to use stealth to avoid the Beholder (6 out of 7 players made their stealth roles). Realism play does not always make for a 'fair' contest which means the players maximum hit points means less to the success of game play. It doesn't matter if you have 200 hit points if each tough of a wight is going to remove a level off your character or two levels if it is a vampire. It doesn't matter that you have DR 30 if one gaze and a failed roll can turn you to stone. If the game features troubles like these then you will have player's less worried on their maximum hit points because they are a nice buffer against physical damage but do nothing against other types of effects. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Hit Points: Hitting the Wall
Top