Plane Sailing
Astral Admin - Mwahahaha!
And you two guys are out of the thread. Krensky gave a legitimate response, and then two people make personal attacks? Not allowed. Don't do it.
Thanks.
Last edited:
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
How Hit Points Ruin SoD
- Thread starter Tequila Sunrise
- Start date
And you two guys are out of the thread. Krensky gave a legitimate response, and then two people make personal attacks? Not allowed. Don't do it.
Thanks.
Sonny
Adventurer
I just use Gygax's explanations in the 1st Edition 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. With respect to most monsters such damage
is, in fact, more physically substantial although as with adjustments in
armor class rating for speed and agility, there are also similar additions in
hit points.
A full discussion of Hit Points starts on page 82. But I'm not gonna type all that out
Both are good reads and the explanations he's used has never given me problems in game, no matter if it was 1st edition, 2nd, 3rd, 4th or basic.
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. With respect to most monsters such damage
is, in fact, more physically substantial although as with adjustments in
armor class rating for speed and agility, there are also similar additions in
hit points.
A full discussion of Hit Points starts on page 82. But I'm not gonna type all that out
Both are good reads and the explanations he's used has never given me problems in game, no matter if it was 1st edition, 2nd, 3rd, 4th or basic.
JRRNeiklot
First Post
That's a flaw of the falling damage mechanic, not of hit points. The original falling damage of 1e was supposed to be cumulative. Ie., 1d6 per 10 feet, cumulative, thus a 30 foot fall was 5d6 damage (1d6 +2d6 +3d6) Damage capped at 100 feet.. It was misunderstood by an editor or somesuch as Gary told it. Using it as intended, few will survive falls of any magnitude, though it's possible. A 100 foot drop could come up all ones. I use this in all my D&D games, regardless of edition.
underthumb
First Post
If the HP situation bothers you, you might have more fun playing with different mechanics.
Siran Dunmorgan
First Post
Since ancient days, I have understood hit points to be something of a useful legacy of miniatures games in which each figure physically present on the game table represented more than one actual creature in play.
To wit, the example of a simple Norman infantryman, wearing a conical helm with nose-piece, a long coat of chain mail, and carrying a shield and spear. In the old days, a single metal figure of such would represent perhaps ten men. However, only two of these men would actually be considered to be on the line of battle at any given time. If the figure takes a hit, one of the men in the front rank is assumed to have been removed from the battle, and a man from the next rank is assumed to step up to take his place. Only after nine men have been removed from the battle, i.e. the figure has taken nine hits, will the combat effectiveness of the figure be impaired, and it will, of course, be eliminated entirely after it has taken ten hits. Figures representing more men required correspondingly more hits to be removed from battle.
This system was carried through, intact, when dealing with figures that represented a single individual. In such cases, the figure was assumed to be somehow tougher, stronger, and better able to "shrug off" damage than other men, but this was simply a gloss to explain why such a figure could, of itself, take multiple hits, where each hit was normally sufficient to drop a normal soldier.
The modern concept of hit points is a legacy of this system.
Rationalizing the effect of this in-game has never been an issue at our table: we take Gygax' word for it as quoted above. Warlord healing—most healing, in fact, including bard and cleric—is normally rationalized as the healer's encouragement allowing us to realize that our wounds weren't really as bad as we'd originally thought, e.g. it looks like a bloody mess, and had us worried for a bit, but the cut itself turned out not to be that deep.
—Siran Dunmorgan
To wit, the example of a simple Norman infantryman, wearing a conical helm with nose-piece, a long coat of chain mail, and carrying a shield and spear. In the old days, a single metal figure of such would represent perhaps ten men. However, only two of these men would actually be considered to be on the line of battle at any given time. If the figure takes a hit, one of the men in the front rank is assumed to have been removed from the battle, and a man from the next rank is assumed to step up to take his place. Only after nine men have been removed from the battle, i.e. the figure has taken nine hits, will the combat effectiveness of the figure be impaired, and it will, of course, be eliminated entirely after it has taken ten hits. Figures representing more men required correspondingly more hits to be removed from battle.
This system was carried through, intact, when dealing with figures that represented a single individual. In such cases, the figure was assumed to be somehow tougher, stronger, and better able to "shrug off" damage than other men, but this was simply a gloss to explain why such a figure could, of itself, take multiple hits, where each hit was normally sufficient to drop a normal soldier.
The modern concept of hit points is a legacy of this system.
Rationalizing the effect of this in-game has never been an issue at our table: we take Gygax' word for it as quoted above. Warlord healing—most healing, in fact, including bard and cleric—is normally rationalized as the healer's encouragement allowing us to realize that our wounds weren't really as bad as we'd originally thought, e.g. it looks like a bloody mess, and had us worried for a bit, but the cut itself turned out not to be that deep.
—Siran Dunmorgan
Similar Threads
