Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
In the heat of battle, is hit point loss a wound?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dannager" data-source="post: 5934953" data-attributes="member: 73683"><p>That's not what I'm saying at all, and it's <strong><em>weird</em></strong> that you've decided to see it that way.</p><p></p><p>What I'm saying is that the game of D&D defines - and <strong><em>has</em></strong> defined, for literally <strong><em>decades</em></strong> now - certain terms according to certain guidelines. If you choose to <strong><em>reject</em></strong> those definitions, as you have clearly been doing, it seems silly to imagine that the game will continue to function optimally. In other words, you've been told what the game assumes in terms of how hit points work. You have rejected those assumptions, and then complain that in that rejection you have lost immersion. Well of course you have.</p><p></p><p>D&D is not a magic box that can be anything you want it to be equally well. It is a game, and it has its strong points, its not-so-strong points, its focuses, its areas that are glossed over, and it actually takes stands on some important gameplay issues. The idea that D&D can be all things to all people is a <strong><em>bad idea</em></strong>, and one that is not grounded in reality. It isn't possible to play D&D <strong><em>wrong</em></strong> (since right and wrong are issues of morality and really have no place here) but it is <em><strong>very</strong></em> possible to play D&D in a way that is contrary to the stated intentions of its design.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That's not what the rules say. The rules say that hit points can represent any of those things, but it says nothing about every hit point representing every one of those simultaneously, and it <strong><em>certainly</em></strong> doesn't say that every hit point must represent a physical injury of some sort. That's <strong><em>your</em></strong> personal take on hit points, and it is not reflected in the game's design or in the game's evolving explanation of what hit points are.</p><p></p><p>Now, you're free to argue that hit points <strong><em>should</em></strong> be physical wounds, but that's a harder argument because there's really no support for it as far as I can tell; it's just an opinion, with nothing concrete in terms of value-added to gameplay that isn't just as adequately applied in the opposite direction.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dannager, post: 5934953, member: 73683"] That's not what I'm saying at all, and it's [B][I]weird[/I][/B] that you've decided to see it that way. What I'm saying is that the game of D&D defines - and [B][I]has[/I][/B] defined, for literally [B][I]decades[/I][/B] now - certain terms according to certain guidelines. If you choose to [B][I]reject[/I][/B] those definitions, as you have clearly been doing, it seems silly to imagine that the game will continue to function optimally. In other words, you've been told what the game assumes in terms of how hit points work. You have rejected those assumptions, and then complain that in that rejection you have lost immersion. Well of course you have. D&D is not a magic box that can be anything you want it to be equally well. It is a game, and it has its strong points, its not-so-strong points, its focuses, its areas that are glossed over, and it actually takes stands on some important gameplay issues. The idea that D&D can be all things to all people is a [B][I]bad idea[/I][/B], and one that is not grounded in reality. It isn't possible to play D&D [B][I]wrong[/I][/B] (since right and wrong are issues of morality and really have no place here) but it is [I][B]very[/B][/I] possible to play D&D in a way that is contrary to the stated intentions of its design. That's not what the rules say. The rules say that hit points can represent any of those things, but it says nothing about every hit point representing every one of those simultaneously, and it [B][I]certainly[/I][/B] doesn't say that every hit point must represent a physical injury of some sort. That's [B][I]your[/I][/B] personal take on hit points, and it is not reflected in the game's design or in the game's evolving explanation of what hit points are. Now, you're free to argue that hit points [B][I]should[/I][/B] be physical wounds, but that's a harder argument because there's really no support for it as far as I can tell; it's just an opinion, with nothing concrete in terms of value-added to gameplay that isn't just as adequately applied in the opposite direction. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
In the heat of battle, is hit point loss a wound?
Top