I don't get the dislike of healing surges

[Wiseblood]

When Conan gets nailed to a cross, he takes months to heal. How long does Frodo take to recover in Rivendell, even with magical healing?

After being nailed to the Tree of Woe Conan recieved magical healing. It was a few days IIRC. Frodo was stabbed by a Ringwraith wich was a supernatural being wielding a magically corrupted weapon.

In D&D natural healing is used as a way to recover, without expending resources, other than time. 4E suffers from a 24 hour non-magical total recuperation without the need for first aid. Earlier editions suffer from an unrealistic recovery time. 4e all but negates recovery time and resource management. This is like create water going from 4th level spell to 0-level.

Some people think the game is more immersive if the fantasy world at least pretends to acknowledge reality. I do not want a simulator. I do not want it to be easier to ignore the shared fantasy world in favor of mechanics.

 

[LostSoul]

That's fine, but I don't see how the narrative changes based on my example, which could have been used in 1E, 2E, 3E, 3.5E, PF or 4E. The only difference is that a cleric casts Cure Critical to heal 20 points in earlier editions, instead of having a leader use a power to heal 20 points in 4E.

Keep in mind that you can narrate whatever you feel like - even if it's nothing. I could narrate that my PC brained a stone golem on a miss if I felt like it. What's important is if the people that I'm playing with accept that into the game's fiction or not. Different people (and different games) have different standards for what's acceptable to allow into the game's fiction, and how what's narrated figures into future choices/mechanical effects.

 

[Nagol]

In 3e it's not that simple though. 3e, as you say, gives you "days of bed rest". Again, name me a potentially lethal wound that I can narrate that I can recover from in a matter of days.

1e I'll totally give you. That was certainly believable. But 3e?

Never minding the fact that in no edition could I ever do any actually debilitating injury since even after a few weeks of bedrest (I cannot remember exactly how long 1e and 2e forced bedrest after going negative, and as I recall, 2e didn't enforce it at all) I should not be recovered from any realistically narrated wound.

Concussion, simple blood loss (pint or more), intestinal bruising/bleeding, ruptured spleen, bruised lung, bruised kidneys, cracked/broken mobile rib, nasty flesh wound in the thigh, upper arm, or above the ribs... I could go on. Besides who said I was looking for terrific realism? I JUST WANT SOME DESCRIPTIVE OPTION OF THE POTENTIAL DEATH INJURY THAT DOESN'T SHATTER MY IMMERSION BY HEALING WITHIN THE SAME DAY WITHOUT TREATMENT.

Also, again, I never said 3e was my preferred solution, just that it fits somewhat better than the 5 minute healing surge mechanic.

Here's my list of injuries that can both kill a character and be recovered from in a 5 minute span {} -- oh look! it's the null set.

 

[Eric Tolle]

No. You don't like HP=wounds. That makes your opinion uninteresting when it comes down to the impact of healing surges on HP=wounds. We've made an educated choice to choose HP=wounds, no matter how much you dislike it; telling us that HP=wounds sucks so much that healing surges are irrelevant isn't an interesting argument.

That's OK, as long as you acknowledge that characters have radically non-human, in fact non-vertebrate physiology. Animals don't take damage by being whittled away like a piece of wood; either the wound is minor, or something vital is hit, and the animal shuts down or is dying. The thing is, it has nothing to do with the number of wounds taken; the same person could walk away from being shot 20 times, or die from being stuck with a pencil. This is a situation that hit points in no ways resemble at all.

Myself, I tend too think of hit points as pure luck; characters die when their luck runs out. It works because it's a completely abstract measure. On the other hand, If hit points are physical damage, then characters most likely have no discrete internal anatomy- probably they ar luck-you only die if your luck runs out.e more similar to slime molds, or fleshy versions of warforged.

Of course both concepts of hit points conflicts with the idea of handing out crippling or permanent injuries. I have no problem with that, because in my 33 years of playing D&D I've never seen such critical hit systems used as anything other than as an exercise in sadism and DM power, and to punish players. It's always been some variation on the DM grinning and saying "He hits you and severs your sword arm. You run? Ok, in the next room is an ogre with a greataxe- he hours and chops off your other arm. So now you're running around screaming and bleading everywhere, then an orc pokes out your right eye...". I have no problem with calling the use of crippling injuries badwronggaming, because I've never seen it used in any other context. I see no benefit in screwing over D&D characters that way, and a lot of abusive DMing.

 

[JamesonCourage]

Of course both concepts of hit points conflicts with the idea of handing out crippling or permanent injuries. I have no problem with that, because in my 33 years of playing D&D I've never seen such critical hit systems used as anything other than as an exercise in sadism and DM power, and to punish players. It's always been some variation on the DM grinning and saying "He hits you and severs your sword arm. You run? Ok, in the next room is an ogre with a greataxe- he hours and chops off your other arm. So now you're running around screaming and bleading everywhere, then an orc pokes out your right eye...". I have no problem with calling the use of crippling injuries badwronggaming, because I've never seen it used in any other context. I see no benefit in screwing over D&D characters that way, and a lot of abusive DMing.

I find this pretty amusing. My system has a wound system built-in as the default. I don't do it to torment my players, nor do I follow them around needlessly hacking limbs off. I've had a player bleed out when he had half his hit points left, and I've had a player kill enemies by taking them out in pretty violent ways from a lucky hit. It cuts both ways. In these scenarios, the system wasn't implemented to make players pay, or so that I can abuse them, or so that I can use them as an excuse to "exercise sadism", or the like.

I like every fight to be dangerous. I like that a lucky hit could lose the fight for you... or win it. The players appreciate the added variety, narrative paths that chance could take them down, nod to reality, and tension added in each and every fight (indeed, on each and every attack roll). The players can protect themselves by not getting hit, or having armor (which gives pretty impressive damage reduction), or by forcing me to reroll (Luck Point system, special abilities that they can purchase that force me to reroll, etc.).

It might be wrong for you, but it's definitely not badwrongfun or any variation of it. I'm not sadistically trying to torture PCs and abuse players by having a wound system in place. The idea that it is badwrongfun is, as I said, quite amusing to me. As always, play what you like

 

[Pentius]

I feel like the fantasy genre is being applied sometimes but not others in this conversation.

"It's fantasy, and you're a hero, so your character can use a second wind to push himself when others would falter."

"No, you can't model long term wounds without significant impairment and permanent injuries, because that's not realistic."

Okay, I get the first one. The second one baffles me.

I don't think a wound system necessarily needs to be super realistic, I just don't see how the HP system is such a wound system. I can see thinking that the non lethal damage impairments at very low hp are maybe, maybe a nod to the idea, but even then a character with a wound doesn't have any identifiable part of their body wounded, and they aren't being impaired in any way that isn't mirrored simply by having less max HP(say, from being lower level or having less con).

I don't have a problem with a wounds system that isn't terribly realistic, but wouldn't it have to, you know, model being wounded?


As an aside, I feel like a large bit of this has moved away from surges themselves and into just the rate of HP recovery, which, though related, is at least tangential.

 

[JamesonCourage]

I don't think a wound system necessarily needs to be super realistic, I just don't see how the HP system is such a wound system. I can see thinking that the non lethal damage impairments at very low hp are maybe, maybe a nod to the idea, but even then a character with a wound doesn't have any identifiable part of their body wounded, and they aren't being impaired in any way that isn't mirrored simply by having less max HP(say, from being lower level or having less con).

I don't have a problem with a wounds system that isn't terribly realistic, but wouldn't it have to, you know, model being wounded?

Again, you're picking and choosing what it applies to. Shouldn't a bad hit be disabling? No, just hindering? Why? Shouldn't it take months to recover? No, weeks? Days? Only with magic?

You can model long term wounds without giving a nod to all realistic aspects of it. However, making it an option would be nice. If that means that the hit points take longer to heal, okay. If that means you take a penalty, okay. If that means you're disabled, okay. I can work with something.

However, a wound that could've killed you that you can heal with an extended rest? That bugs me. I don't need all realistic bases covered for a long term wound to be modeled. Again, that's something that one side is putting forward while also supporting the idea of "working through it because you're a hero" when it comes to healing surges. That's a disconnect that I don't get.

As an aside, I feel like a large bit of this has moved away from surges themselves and into just the rate of HP recovery, which, though related, is at least tangential.

This doesn't bug me in the least. It's very tied to the healing surge implementation, which, as I've stated, is the part the bugs me the most. I like the idea of a second wind, or rising up when others wouldn't be able to. It's very fantasy-genre. I like it. I dislike how strongly healing is tied to healing surges (that is, most of the time I can only heal you if you have a surge left). I dislike that an extended rest recovers all of your healing surges, which lets you heal all of your wounds immediately following the rest. Yeah, the topic right now is about HP recovery rate, but healing surges have an incredibly noticeable effect on that with the current implementation. So, in regards to the implementation of healing surges, the topic at hand is very relevant to me.

As always, play what you like

 

[Hussar]

Concussion, simple blood loss (pint or more), intestinal bruising/bleeding, ruptured spleen, bruised lung, bruised kidneys, cracked/broken mobile rib, nasty flesh wound in the thigh, upper arm, or above the ribs... I could go on. Besides who said I was looking for terrific realism? I JUST WANT SOME DESCRIPTIVE OPTION OF THE POTENTIAL DEATH INJURY THAT DOESN'T SHATTER MY IMMERSION BY HEALING WITHIN THE SAME DAY WITHOUT TREATMENT.

Also, again, I never said 3e was my preferred solution, just that it fits somewhat better than the 5 minute healing surge mechanic.

Here's my list of injuries that can both kill a character and be recovered from in a 5 minute span {} -- oh look! it's the null set.

Just out of curiousity, how would you narratively describe a ruptured spleen, a bruised lung or bruised kidneys?

The problem I'm having is that the list of injuries that can both kill a character and be recovered from in a span of days is ALSO an null set.

A cut to the thigh that is deep enough to be life threatening can't be healed in a matter of days AND will have to have some debilitating effect. The fact that you ignored that and found it believable doesn't really matter does it? You're still applying narrative that is just as unbelievable as 4e's is.

The only difference is, you're saying that it's believable that someone can heal completely from life threatening blood loss (which is a HELL of a lot more than a pint - they take a pint when you give blood and that still takes a MONTH to recover from) and then trying to say that that level of "realism" is better than what 4e offers you.

Jameson Courage - the reason that there seems to be two levels of criticism being applied is because there is. 4e is unbelievable because people heal too quickly. But, apparently, 3e is perfectly believable, despite the fact that the people heal WAY too quickly.

The problem that I see is that people are taking a purely gamist concept - HP and healing and trying to apply some level of simulationist concept to it. HP are, and always were a gamist concept with a very, very bare nod to realism.

But, at the end of the day, I like 4e Healing surges because Healing surges allow me to narrate both of my favorite genre fight scenes from the same movie:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adVOWBDM-_8&t=1m55s]Inigo Montoya find the six fingered man - YouTube[/ame]

and

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-66KBi_NM0&t=18s]Inigo Montoya vs Dread Pirate Roberts.wmv - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Pentius]

Again, you're picking and choosing what it applies to.

Given that I just stated I don't care how realistic or fantastic a wound system is, I can only see one thing I am picking and choosing what it applies to. That thing is "Modeling being wounded" and I am saying that it need only apply to systems intending to model wounds. I don't think this is an unreasonable divergence in expectations.

Shouldn't a bad hit be disabling? No, just hindering? Why? Shouldn't it take months to recover? No, weeks? Days? Only with magic?

Any of the above, sure. Any of those goes along with an attempt to model wounds, which is more than the HP system does.

You can model long term wounds without giving a nod to all realistic aspects of it. However, making it an option would be nice. If that means that the hit points take longer to heal, okay. If that means you take a penalty, okay. If that means you're disabled, okay. I can work with something.

However, a wound that could've killed you that you can heal with an extended rest? That bugs me. I don't need all realistic bases covered for a long term wound to be modeled. Again, that's something that one side is putting forward while also supporting the idea of "working through it because you're a hero" when it comes to healing surges. That's a disconnect that I don't get.

Basically, I'm fine with saying and/or playing with the idea that HP system either does not give wounds, or does not give wounds that are not heroically ignored. That is how I play. But that is not a wound system in any meaningful way, as it does not include a state of being wound matter.

As I've said, I don't need all or even most realistic bases covered for a wound system. But it needs to be trying to be a wound system. Something as simple and patently unrealistic as "Wound: if you go under X% of your maximum HP, roll on the Wound Table. You are Wounded until your HP goes over X%." where each result on the table applied some sort of penalty tied to a region of the body(ex: "Leg Wound: Your leg is hurt. Reduce speed by X for Y period of time." Well, that would be a wound system. And that's possibly one or two steps further than I'd need a wound system to go to call it such. Heck, the 4e disease tracks and 3e ability score damage could be easily modified to be rudimentary wound systems. But, as HP stands, the only penalties it gives for being low on HP are "Dead or Dying" and "Less likely to survive your next potentially lethal event."

Basically, what I'm getting at is that with or without surges, if you want to roleplay having a wound greater than scrapes, bruises or being winded, so, any major or even moderate wound, and actually have the wound matter instead of being heroically ignored, the HP system isn't backing you up. In order to roleplay such a thing, you must go outside the mechanics and either houserule something, refuse to undertake tasks that you are mechanically capable of doing but would contradict your RP, or just paint the whole thing as flavor. And if one is already comfortable with ignoring the actual implications of the HP system to do it, then why does it matter so much how quickly the HP are restored?

This doesn't bug me in the least. It's very tied to the healing surge implementation, which, as I've stated, is the part the bugs me the most. I like the idea of a second wind, or rising up when others wouldn't be able to. It's very fantasy-genre. I like it. I dislike how strongly healing is tied to healing surges (that is, most of the time I can only heal you if you have a surge left). I dislike that an extended rest recovers all of your healing surges, which lets you heal all of your wounds immediately following the rest. Yeah, the topic right now is about HP recovery rate, but healing surges have an incredibly noticeable effect on that with the current implementation. So, in regards to the implementation of healing surges, the topic at hand is very relevant to me.

Healing and surges are strongly tied, to be sure. But if one were to take a scalpel and remove surges from 4e, HP would still come back entirely with an extended rest. That happens without the input of surges. By the same coin, as has been mentioned previously, to houserule in a change in the recovery rate of HP, surges or both would be easy, with few ripples in balance. Basically, if only the rate of HP/surge recovery is an issue, a hypothetical 5e could quite easily keep surges while reducing the recovery rate.

 

[JamesonCourage]

Jameson Courage - the reason that there seems to be two levels of criticism being applied is because there is. 4e is unbelievable because people heal too quickly. But, apparently, 3e is perfectly believable, despite the fact that the people heal WAY too quickly.

No, you don't have a bunch of people saying that 3.X is perfectly believable. I mean, people will make that claim, yes. But I'm also advocating splitting HP into two pools, physical and non-physical, and other people support a wound/vitality system, and other people have other solutions. It's not even about believability (to me), it's about possible fantasy-genre narratives being excluded.

People heal way too quickly in 3.X if you're looking at things purely realistically. Again, the argument is "in 4e, people are heroes and can persevere through it (second wind, etc.)" while if you ask for a nod to long term wounds, it's "but now you need to take forever to heal, and you'll need penalties, etc." Suddenly you're not heroic enough to persevere without taking penalties. Suddenly you're not heroic enough to get up after 10 days when you should still be resting (but you're a hero so you persevere anyways).

I'm not sure why you suddenly lose this heroic aspect of your character, or why it's being applied to one instance and not the other. And you linking The Princess Bride (good movie) kind of makes the point for me again. In 4e, you can heroically push through it. If you take a wound that takes 10 days to heal naturally, why can't you heroically push through it when it's done mechanically healing?

Yeah, you almost died, and you've mostly healed (flavor-wise), but you push yourself to your feet and decide to go back to helping people that need you. You still have cracked ribs, or bruised bones, or you're a little shaky when you stand, but you push on through it (you don't take penalties).

Remember, in The Princess Bride, Wesley gets a very long term wound when he's tortured. He's not able to take an extended rest and be good to go. I support having a mechanic that makes the fight with the Six-Fingered Man possible, but I want the mechanics to allow me to have a character who's out of it because of injury, too. This is common in fantasy, and there's very little reason to deny that point.

I'm asking for a way for that narrative to be represented in the game. I want more possible narratives. I like seeing how the story will unfold. To that end, full healing after an extended rest prevents certain common fantasy-genre narratives, and rather needlessly in my mind. I don't care if people get up earlier than they should -that's heroic. I want there to be a possibility of them staying down for a while, though.

The problem that I see is that people are taking a purely gamist concept - HP and healing and trying to apply some level of simulationist concept to it. HP are, and always were a gamist concept with a very, very bare nod to realism.

The mechanic has always been very abstract, yes. In 3.X, I felt like it could support a wide array of narratives because of just how abstract it was. It wasn't perfect for what I wanted, which is why I changed it in my RPG. However, I do feel like the current healing surge implementation limits narrative paths more than opens them up. It's not about how simulationist it is (to me), it's about limiting fantasy-genre narrative opportunities that would be really interesting to experience during a campaign.