Hit points & long rests: please consider?

[Walking Dad]

...

Most importantly, now it's time to playtest which means play the damn thing Of course some speculation of long-range consequences of these rule drafts is inevitable, but we are thousands of playtesting groups running the same adventure with the same pregens, so we'd better just stick with our test results and provide feedback based on direct experience.

Which means to me... let's play and gouge our feelings rather than think too much.

Happy playtesting!

I would, but I got no RL players who want to sign in. My kids are to young to sign up. Online is forbidden.

So, by the OTA, the only thing I may do is complaining without getting into the actual mechanics.

 

[Li Shenron]

I would, but I got no RL players who want to sign in. My kids are to young to sign up. Online is forbidden.

So, by the OTA, the only thing I may do is complaining without getting into the actual mechanics.

You can complain but after playing

If you don't have even one player, playtest the combat rules by setting up the fights between the PCs and the monsters in the adventure. As long as you play the battle fair, I don't even think you need players to test the combat rules... it is mostly the exploration and interaction phases which require the players to be unaware of what awaits them.

Of course it's possible that WotC won't officially accept your feedback in such case... but you can still write in their forums and columns. What I mean is, that now it's not the time to voice against something in the draft rules unless we've actually tested them in practice.

 

[Walking Dad]

Can I complain that the Greataxe of the fighter and the one in the guide use a different dice? I hate to such mechanical failures of a company that doesn't allow me to play with my kids

 

[Li Shenron]

Can I complain that the Greataxe of the fighter and the one in the guide use a different dice? I hate to such mechanical failures of a company that doesn't allow me to play with my kids

Yes. I think that complaining about the playtesting material is in order

BTW I didn't notice that...

 

[seregil]

Sorry, but no.

I do NOT like that a full nights rest means you regain all your hit points.

It makes no sense and it breaks the game.

It makes no sense because...

if I am at 1 hp, it is safe to assume that I am covered in cuts, bruises and various other wounds. In 4E, the condition was called 'bloody' and in my mind, it means EXACTLY that: you were covered in blood. Yours.

The first half of you HP might be 'luck, skill, near misses' and whatever, but eventually, HP also meant PHYSICAL damage. Surely, we don't only have 1 HP of physical 'life' (at any level) and everything else is 'luck, skill, near misses'?

So, no, nothing short of magical healing should restore you to full hp without a LONG wait. You will NOT heal a three inch gash on your arm in 24 hours, sorry, In fact, you will PROBABLY die of infection within a couple weeks unless you DO something other than sitting around and waiting.


It breaks the game because ...

there is no longer any consequence to screwing up. The sense of danger isn't there anymore. One of my favorite aspects of previous editions was the feeling that my PC was being hunted, that he needed to be careful or he would be squished like the insignificant bug that he was. With this rule, he somehow heals up to full every night, thereby loosing that 'hunted' feeling. He's not scared anymore. He heals his sucking chest wounds in 24 hours.

If anything goes wrong, he just needs to hole up and wait until the next day.

So, no, sorry. My feedback will clearly state that this mechanic should be removed.

If you think otherwise, say so in your feedback and let the designers work it out. That is the entire POINT of the playtest.

 

[Walking Dad]

Great how people discuss getting back to fully operational after some cuts and bruises (that is HP between half max and 1) is totally unrealistic, even than using fantasy herb medicine and a healer's kit, but regaining all magical might to throw balls of flames or resurrect the dead should be regained on daily base...

 

[Herremann the Wise]

On the one hand, you are correct. If you view damage leaving a character unbloodied as near misses, luck or skill to avoid or turn, and damage leading to the bloodied state as a gash, deep bruise or similar, then it makes perfect sense to recover this quickly; the wounds are still there a day later but they are not going to affect your character's performance. We're not talking being in prime footballing form, we're talking fit enough to survive. Bandage up that nasty gash and you'll be fine. As explained and as given, this is all fair and reasonable if you follow the interpretation we are given (and not the one or ones we may have used previously).

However, where the problem arises is when a character hits zero or below. This is the sword in the gut, the broken leg or such forth. And this damage should not be quickly healed except through magic. I'm still working out exactly what happens here but I'm sensing the rules allow an easy progression from stabilized to 1hp and THIS is where the real issue lies for me; and where I will be looking for an advanced module to pick up the slack.

My preference would be for a wound to be incurred that has an effect upon the character until it is healed (disadvantage for all dex checks, -4 to strength checks, movement capped at 10 ft. etc.). The wound may still allow for hit points to be fully restored (or it may cap it at half hit points if somewhat nastier). The important thing here is that the character can still adventure but with a particular penalty until healed or until the party uses precious magical healing resources on the character. They will have enough hit points to keep them going but they are going to have to be cautious; the group encouraged to be smart first rather than swords first. Of course a wound may be serious enough that hit points cannot be restored until it is healed to a particular point.

I think the important point here is that there is lots of room to bolt on the desired mechanics to suit my style of game (and yours too). From this perspective, I think I'm happy with the core they are providing.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Holy Bovine]

That's fair. But is it really the right impression that characters can suffer horrific, debilitating injuries, taking them to the very edge of death, and then bounce back overnight as if nothing had ever happened?

Since when does losing hit points lead to 'horrific, debilitating injuries'? Not in any version of the game I've played in the last 30 years.

The problem is with the edge case, specifically where a character was reduced to 0 hit points, and so takes a serious injury, is then healed to 1 hit point through mundane means (so he doesn't die), and then sleeps overnight and is absolutely fine.

Now, I haven't yet seen the playtest materials, so it's possible that they've introduced some sort of persistent "Wounded" condition that debilitates such a character for a time. In which case, fair enough. But without it, I'll remain opposed to the notion that an overnight rest heals all damage.

Again none of this is in any edition of the game I've read or played - not even 1E. Where are these persistent wounds/serious injuries you keep mentioning?

 

[Holy Bovine]

Can I complain that the Greataxe of the fighter and the one in the guide use a different dice? I hate to such mechanical failures of a company that doesn't allow me to play with my kids

I will bet that this is a 'hidden' feature of the 'Slayer' build the fighter is based on. It wouldn't surprise me if he gets to up the damage die of any one weapon he chooses (in this case 1d12 goes to 2d6 upping average damage from 6.5 to 7)

 

[IronWolf]

I do think a long rest should be longer than a single night. I am good with a more rapid return of hit points for a single night of long rest, but as the amount of hit points increase I guess I have a harder time buying that one is going to recover all of their hit points in a single night of rest without magical aide.