How does striking an opponent heal your allies?

[Midknightsun]

Too funny,


Rogues open doors by killing enemies

"I needed a skeleton key . . . his skeleton."

Bards inspire others by killing enemies

"Don't make me sing sweet home Alabama."

Clerics heal allies by killing enemies

"I found that kidney you needed"

Druids talk to animals by killing enemies

"Talk, Rover, or your master gets it."

Rangers track by killing enemies

"The stink of the corpses will drive them out of hiding . . ."

Wizard learn spells by killing enemies

"What? I ran out of tea leaves, so sue me."

 

[JohnSnow]

I mean, I've seen this mechanic a lot lately. They say it started with the Crusader but I haven't read the whole ToB. I know that you probably need to balance things with this "roles" stuff, so a Cleric doesn't lose actions to heal his buddies, but... How does a hit to my enemy heal my friends? Probably a force comes from within me and stuff, but... Maybe as a necromantic effect you could heal yourself by hitting a foe, but an ally? I don't know.... It doesn't make much sense.

(I'm really exited about 4E, don't get me wrong. I haven't complained much before. But This bothers me)

Assuming we're talking about the cleric class, I have an easy answer. With the Warlord, it's a bit more complicated, but still justifiable with a little bit of mental gymnastics.

First off the cleric. Let's say the cleric channels healing energy whenever he rolls a natural 20. This reflects the cleric "having his deity's favor." The precedent for this is that in Saga, a character who rolls a 20 on his "use the force" check gets his used powers back, because said roll means "the force is with him." To reflect the mercurial nature of a cleric having his god's favor, they could institute a similar mechanic.

Alternatively, the cleric could be totally driven by the power of his god, and so when he strikes a blow against the enemies of his god, divine energy flows forth from him. That's a little more predictable than waiting for a good roll...and just as justifiable.

With the Warlord, it's a pretty similar logic, but it relies on the Warlord's fellows being "revived" when he strikes a mighty blow. This relies heavily on the "second wind" or "morale" nature of hit points, and so bothers some people's suspension of disbelief. Personally, I find it easier to believe that hit points only reflect "one's ability to survive attacks." And until the character is at (or below) 0 hit points, he just hasn't sustained any serious injuries.

Of course, that would require the names of the healing spells to be changed, which I think is happening anyway. Magical healing, especially regarding low-level characters (heroic or otherwise) and the efficacy of "Cure Light Wounds," is the only thing that doesn't easily fit the notion of "hit points as abstract damage." As such, IMO, it's the magic that should be changed.

 

[rkwoodard]

The answer is

I mean, I've seen this mechanic a lot lately. They say it started with the Crusader but I haven't read the whole ToB. I know that you probably need to balance things with this "roles" stuff, so a Cleric doesn't lose actions to heal his buddies, but... How does a hit to my enemy heal my friends? Probably a force comes from within me and stuff, but... Maybe as a necromantic effect you could heal yourself by hitting a foe, but an ally? I don't know.... It doesn't make much sense.

(I'm really exited about 4E, don't get me wrong. I haven't complained much before. But This bothers me)

Chuck Norris. They are mimicing Chuck Norris's ability to round-house kick hitpoints from one person to another.

RK

 

[Dave Turner]

Imagine the years of argument and confusion that could have been avoided if Gygax hadn't called them "hit points." The term suggests that you lose them when you're hit. So an attack, which reduces hit points, is thought to "hit" the opponent, rather than simply "succeeding" against the opponent.

 

[Zogmo]

Naw, I think they're finally going to pretty much own up to the fact that HP's are entirely abstract and have very, very little to do with the actual health of your PC. So, seeing Mr Battleaxe totally splat the baddie makes you feel just a bit better about yourself.

No magic needed.

Absolutely.

I believe that it would be a very interesting gaming environment if WotC finally followed up on the abstract HP idea with some actual in-game examples.

 

[Wepwawet]

In all that abstract view of hit points, where does "Bloodied" comes in?

It's something directly connected to hit points, and I'm sure it has something to do with blood, right?...
So you take a lot of damage and you are bloodied. A warlord comes in and says "don't be such a sissy", lifts your morale and what, you stop bleeding?

These concepts must be consistent...
Anyway, I prefer to wait to see the real mechanics

EDIT: There's a new thread about this exact theme With interesting answers also

 

[CleverNickName]

Welcome to the age of "boost/reduction."

Yuck. If it damages a creature, call it "damage." If it heals a creature, call it "healing." It doesn't have to be complicated.

It's unreasonable to rewrite the entire PHB or slaughter a barnyard of sacred cows, just to explain an ability that doesn't make sense in the first place. Thwacking an enemy with a sword has nothing to do with repairing your comrades' wounds, period. If you are an accomplished necromancer or the high priest of a war god, we can fudge things a bit in the name of "magic," but it takes more than a pep talk to stop bleeding and mend bones.

 

[Nikosandros]

Imagine the years of argument and confusion that could have been avoided if Gygax hadn't called them "hit points." The term suggests that you lose them when you're hit. So an attack, which reduces hit points, is thought to "hit" the opponent, rather than simply "succeeding" against the opponent.

But why is the opponent affected by poison if he actually dodged the attack? Such effects inly that the attacker did in fact physically hit the opponent.

 

[Counterspin]

It could be a surface wound that didn't do much tissue damage but did inject the poison. Easy.

 

[Jedi_Solo]

The weapon itself missed (the PC had the actively dodge - thus the hp loss) but some of the poison (flying off because of the swing) landed on bare skin.