Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 5923622" data-attributes="member: 87792">Pray tell, which part of the following is ambiguous?Originally Posted by AD&D 1e DMG, page 61 Damage scored to characters or certain monsters is actually not substantially physical   - a mere nick or scratch until the last handful of hit points are   considered - it is a matter of wearing away the endurance, the luck, the   magical protections. But they don't.  They say that physical damage is one component of hit points.  This is not the same as hit points = physical damage.  And when you use the p61 text I am quoting for the third time in this thread, what you get to is that the physical damage component is the final component of hit points.  You take the physical damage after you run out of skill, luck, and fatigue.Well you've just clearly illustrated one of the many reasons I consider 2e to be a weak edition that coasts through on the work of Gygax and not understanding how it works.  2e changed the definition of hit points from 1e - and many other little details (such as relegating XP for GP).  I hadn't seen that one before, thanks.The rest of those quotes are either ambiguous or (as in the case of the AD&D PHB quotes) irrelevant about whether hit points are raw physcial damage or a mix of damage, fatigue, luck, etc.  And yes, you need a long period of rest to recover fatigue - see my quote about runners.I keep insisting that hit points are ultimately if you want any degree of realism in your game at all the way E. Gary Gygax defined them and I have quoted above in this post.  Barely parried scratches until the last one or two hits.  Either that or the whole thing runs under Holywood Physics and you take damage like John McClane.  In which case I don't see why you strain at the lack of resting.And you still haven't answered my orc example - how anyone can survive the actual direct damage done by an orc rolling maximum damage or a critical hit with an axe without being incapacitated.And once more you are point blank lying about what I am saying and doing.  PC Hit points are, as defined very clearly by Gygax, a mixture of things including damage, fatigue, luck.  And as equally clearly defined by Gygax it's only the finishing blows that are fully taken as physical damage - the rest are "a mere nick or scratch".1e was very clearly the way I'm describing it.  2e changed the rationale without changing the mechanics, leaving fighters who make John McClane look fragile.  3e fudged between the two - taking something close to the Gygaxian definition but never producing anything that quantified what was what.  And 4e embraced holywood physics rather than pretending it was a dirty secret.</blockquote>

Verification