Hit points & long rests: please consider?

[Kzach]

Except when he magically Wolverine's himself completely healed after sleeping one night.

Healed from what?

Again, nobody seems to be able to understand that the character simply never got injured significantly. Going below zero does not mean the character's guts were strewn all over the floor. It means that the chest wound ended up being a minor graze despite the scare it gave everyone at the outset after the fighter initially collapsed.

Stop describing every 'hit' as a hit and stop describing being knocked unconscious (0 or below) as a devastatingly massive injury and the problem is solved. Everyone seems to like making it hard for themselves by describing such 'injuries' as being severe and life-threatening when the system clearly says that's not the case. People create this problem for themselves and then blame the system for it.

 

[Mercutio01]

So....where do most people play? Do people commonly have their characters rest normally....or are they almost entirely relying on magical healing? If its the latter, than the baseline should be stronger nonmagical healing....and let those who want their gritty game tweak to taste.

Why is "relying on magical healing" equate to "stronger non-magical healing"? What is the rationale there?

Healed from what?

Again, nobody seems to be able to understand that the character simply never got injured significantly. Going below zero does not mean the character's guts were strewn all over the floor. It means that the chest wound ended up being a minor graze despite the scare it gave everyone at the outset after the fighter initially collapsed.

Stop describing every 'hit' as a hit and stop describing being knocked unconscious (0 or below) as a devastatingly massive injury and the problem is solved. Everyone seems to like making it hard for themselves by describing such 'injuries' as being severe and life-threatening when the system clearly says that's not the case. People create this problem for themselves and then blame the system for it.

So, the answer is for me to play the game I've been playing for 30 years in a different manner? Why not just tell me to go play a different game?

What do you mean don't describe every hit as a "hit"? WTF is a "hit" then when I roll an attack check that "hits"?

The SYSTEM itself describes hits as "hits" and says that hit points represent physical damage. And when you roll an attack that hits, you do "damage." EVEN the lead designer and the creator of D&D have said that hit points represent some portion of physical damage.

You mean to tell me you don't ever play a game where a hit roll actually hits a character? If that's the case, then your game is the outlier, even among the natural healing fanatics I've seen here and everywhere else.

What you're telling me is that I need to ignore the system, the system's rules, and the system's advice and house rule everything to run a game the way you prefer, and not in accordance with the actual text of every edition of the game, including 4E?

Take that advice and keep it to yourself, because it's neither helpful nor correct. Keep your "BADWRONGFUN" crap in your own head.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Why is it that everyone so in favor of Hit Points representing luck always ignores these parts?

Because hit points to me do not and have never felt like physical damage. I cut my RP teeth on GURPS. In GURPS when I get hit by an orc with an axe, I know about it. I'm taking shock penalties. Where he hits matters even if I'm a pretty powerful adventurer.

In D&D if I'm a fifth level fighter in any edition, an orc can hit me as hard as he likes with an axe. I might say ow. I might play up the hit professional-wrestling style. But ultimately, despite the strength of the orc I am not even slowed. I'm just going to smack the orc back. If the orc had critted me in an even slightly realistic system like GURPS or Rolemaster (and that was my second RPG - Rolemaster or rather its lite version MERP) I'd be looking at brains coming out of the ruins of my head.

There is literally no way I can understand an orc attacking an unarmoured or lightly armoured man with an axe, doing the maximum possible physical damage he can, and that man being still standing. Unless hit points are largely a meta-resource.

Literally the only hit point loss that to me feels like serious damage as a PC in D&D is a hit that knocks me the wrong side of 0hp. The rest might be nasty bruises, but they certainly aren't being hit by an orc with an axe.

I therefore can't reconcile the combination of "Hit points as physical damage" with the intentionally cinematic system set up by gygax for swashbuckling fights and greater endurance. So I consider the luck to be the overwhelmingly dominant part until it goes below 0hp

Hit points cut both ways, but healing does not. The insistence on non-magical healing invariably points only to the luck part of the HP. It never addresses, or even acknowledges the legitimate point of view, that hit points ALSO represent physical damage.

So a dual pool of hp would work? One that's depleted first and restores overnight?

You incessant chatter that hit points should always be able to be healed mundanely and that hits are not physical damage is every bit as much of a "house-rule" as you seem to think that physical damage is.

Talking about 'incessant chatter' works better when you aren't actually mischaracterising my position. Which is that D&D is a game that needs to be balanced. And one of the balance systems is that everyone should be on the same recharge - I want the wizards hit but will accept a boost to recovery for the really high magic worlds and wizards you want. You have continually evaded this point. Further I consider that the overwhelming majority of hp are luck and skill - see my orc for an illustration why. I don't think damage is just physical damage - but it only starts feeling like primarily physical damage the wrong side of 0hp. This is an interpretation of the rules that works and doesn't contradict them.

And long periods of recuperation is what I have in my games. However the balance point for this is apparently anathema to you. You want your magical people to be automatically infused with magic every day but it is somehow anathema to speed up recovery times for fighters when there is that much magic flying around and when fighter toughness is already magical - able to take a hit to the chest from an orc with an axe without slowing.

 

[the Jester]

I'll state it flat out: I am on the side that approves of a long rest regaining all hit points. I would ask that those reading this look at my arguments and try to view the matter from a holistic rather than personal viewpoint.

I completely understand people who say they dislike the mechanic. What I disagree with is on the fundamental nature of injury in D&D.

Sounds like you are arguing from your personal viewpoint to me.

I feel that those who oppose the mechanic don't agree with the statements made about injury and the goals of the injury system. Disagreeing with it is your prerogative, of course, and I wouldn't want to tell anyone how to run their games. What I'm asking people to consider is the way in which D&D has always MEANT to be run, from its very inception and throughout every edition.

First of all, you are arguing for the way healing was MEANT to be run in 4e only. No other edition- especially the versions of the game closest to its very inception- has ever promoted "full healing on rest" before 4e.

So before people say it's a horrible mechanic and they want to get rid of it, I'd propose that they consider that to change it is inconsequential to their own games. It's little more than a hand wave. But the tradition and impression of the game on new players is important and should be kept intact regardless of personal preference.

What, the tradition that old players have of recovering 1 hp per day? After all, that is the longest-standing traditional form of long-term healing by rest in D&D- it's the version that was official longest, that has been played longest and that strikes many, many gamers as least "gamist" and most "simulationist".

You say changing it is inconsequential. We're talking about a playtest to form the rules. Deciding that it sucks for my game during the playtest allows me to give feedback to the designer and development groups that I don't like that style of healing and that the game ought to include slower, more simulationist options for healing. I would say it's easier to handwave the full-heal-with-rest than it is to create a system for less-than-full-healing-with-rest, so why don't you make the change to your game and just say, "Every long rest, you're back to full" instead of making me come up with a "Every long rest, you regain... er... your con modifier plus a HD of hps? Wait, maybe just your level in hps? Or...."

The effects of full-heal-with-rest are most definitely not inconsequential for my game. The pace of the campaign is dramatically impacted by it.

What I meant was that hit points have always been 'luck, skill, near misses' until you got to 0 hit points.

That's factually incorrect. They've always represented luck, skill and near misses for some of your hit points, but every edition has made it explicitly clear that some part of your hp total also measures your phyiscal ability to take punishment.

Remember that taking a 'long rest' only works if you're already on at least 1 hit point. So if you're 0 or lower, it won't work. It requires 2d6 hours to get to 1 hit point from stabilised and it requires three successful death saves (irrespective of the fact that death saves are a low DC) to become stabilised. Either that, or you need magical or mundane healing of some type which burns a HD.

In other words, if you don't die in combat, you're pretty much always up to full by the next day. The "long rest only if at least 1 hp" clause is effectively meaningless except inasmuch as it dictates timing.

Healed from what?

Again, nobody seems to be able to understand that the character simply never got injured significantly.

That is not how most of us run the game, nor is it how the game has actually been written, ever. The game has always assumed that hit points represent physical vitality as well as the other bits (luck etc). In fact, early versions suggest that a character knocked below 0 hps might come out of it with a horrible scar or other "this was a serious injury" reminder.

Again, I fear you are arguing from personal viewpoint rather than objectively from the way the game is actually written.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

Here is my counterpoint. I recognize that flavorwise, people like the idea of a gritty world where wounds take a while to heal or at least are somewhat realistic.

My question though: how often does it come up in a typical game? I can tell you that the parties I DMed and played in under 3e had no issues guzzling healing points and hitting themselves with Lesser Vigor Wands (because really, CLW wands are so last season).

But you have mentioned the main thing that people want. Sure you get to heal fast with the above but you have to spend magic resources to do it. I would rather stock up on potions than to have a built in mechanic that makes me either seem like Wolverine or the idea of combat not actually landing a blow until you are at 0 hp.

Also, I don't want my PC to be like the main character out of a movie. I want to be Conan but without the plot armor and super regeneration, unless I get it from an ability or a spell.

 

[Stalker0]

Sounds like you are arguing from your personal viewpoint to me.

Unfortunately that is what makes this issue so difficult....we all are.

We all have preconceptions on how the mechanic should work flavorwise, and we want the mechanics that represent that flavor. And there is no cake and eat it too scenario here, unless we bring a lot of cakes.

Which is why I think WOTC ultimate solution is their dial system.


The first step which they have already done is completely split the nonmagical healing from the magical healing bits. That way we can tweak the nonmagical healing without affecting the rest of the system.

This is extremely important. Its easy to say "Just change the rule", but we want rules changes to be easy to do. The more integrated a rule is throughout the system....the greater the impact. In this case, since these rules only affect nonmagical recovery....and doesn't have any impact on combat itself....the rule is pretty self-contained.

Now they just need to offer the "standard" options:

1) High Fantasy: Can heal to full after each short and long rest.
2) Fantasy: The playtest version.
3) Gritty Fantasy: Can heal maximum 1/3 level HD per short rest (minimum 1).
4) Dark Gritty Fantasy: Heals 1 HD per long rest (no short rest recovery).


Not every mechanic in 5e is as divisive as healing and requires this kind of dial treatment. But there are a few where the only way for everyone to win is for everyone to get their slice of the pie.

 

[Mercutio01]

Unfortunately that is what makes this issue so difficult....we all are.

We all have preconceptions on how the mechanic should work flavorwise, and we want the mechanics that represent that flavor. And there is no cake and eat it too scenario here, unless we bring a lot of cakes.

Which is why I think WOTC ultimate solution is their dial system.

I think this really is the only answer. What I'd like to see lies somewhere between your 2 and 3. I have no problems with the hit dice mechanic (unlike the very real ones I had with healing surges). It's all to do with the mundane hit point refresh rate.

 

[Meophist]

I'm alright with having a bunch of effective non-magical healing. I do think, however, that the idea a dying person can go back to being at full health within 24 hours without any sort of help stretches believability. I like the idea of resource management, both in the short(in battle), medium(across a day), and long(adventure) term areas. As it is, it seems like the only real long-term resource is money/items. I prefer a bit more than that.

I think, a long rest should be something like, free use of your Hit Dice, and then recovery of Hit Dice equal to half your level rounded up.

At the current moment, the magic-classes only have so many spells a day, but it seems like the number can inflate quite a bit over time. I'm not against the idea of limiting the spell preparation if this happens; something like only being able to prepare four spells a day. That way, even magic classes may need several days to get to full strength. This can happen without losing effectiveness within a day.

The lack of long-term resources is my current concern.

 

[Stalker0]

One thing I haven't heard anyone mention is that the kept the 4e rule that any healing from negatives immediately puts you to 0 hp.

How do people generally feel about that rule?

 

[ForeverSlayer]

One thing I haven't heard anyone mention is that the kept the 4e rule that any healing from negatives immediately puts you to 0 hp.

How do people generally feel about that rule?

I think I actually mentioned that in my thread and I don't agree with it.