Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5704352" data-attributes="member: 6668292">Oh, I doubt that's true.Only if he had complete bed rest, which I never said was the case.In reality, yep. Then again, I've seen people recover from very serious wounds in a relatively short period of time (a few days to a few weeks) in the fantasy genre time and again. Which is what the game is based on.The fantasy genre follows reality, but breaks at certain points; healing in 4e breaks from reality, and follows certain narrative paths within the fantasy genre. I dislike that it narrows my options substantially by doing so.No, my example was 14 days.No, he'd heal it in 7 days, and that's if he still only had 6 hit points at level 2.In reality? Yes. In the fantasy genre? No. Wounds that pierce the flesh, cause massive pain and significant blood loss, but miss vital organs and can be recovered from in record time? Right up the fantasy genre's ally. Wounds that only ever cause minor wounds, bruises, and sprains, or kill you outright? That's within the realm of some fantasy, but getting rid of serious injury or debilitating injury completely is shutting down potential narratives that are common to the genre.People hear "it doesn't let me tell the story I want it too, because you heal too quickly" and tie it to realism. Yes, it's affected by realism, but that's because the modern fantasy genre is very much tied to it. Having wounds that are serious, take a little while to heal, but leave no lasting injuries is common enough within the genre (the wounds might leave scars that characters can absentmindedly rub while thinking, but they often won't leave lasting injuries).I'm not sure why people are trying to make me defend pure realism; it's not what I want. I want to see a game reflect and mechanically support a range of fantasy genre narratives, and the healing mechanic we've been discussing limits it. This whole "name me a wound" thing isn't recognizing the problem that's being put forward. That's not touching on the issue.I feel like there's a movement to refute what people are saying in this thread by shifting their arguments, and I'm personally trying to not do the same thing to others. I'm trying to be clear on my objections, so that we can have clarity within the discussion. I hope nobody thinks I'm speaking for them, or if they think I am, I hope they know I'm not trying to misrepresent them, and they're free to correct me. I hope people can see what I'm trying to communicate. As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification