Let's Talk About Health, Damage, Wounds, Death and Related Mechanics

[Thomas Shey]

For one thing, I'm not sure why you decided to speak for the community, and not just yourself. IMO, you can't speak for other people.

Funny, I guess I can't say things people have said to me dozens of times over the years. You're not required to like hearing hearsay, but I'm not going to ignore it just because it makes you soggy.

For another thing, the kind of fictional examples D&D has used has been done for the game's entire history. I'm particular talking about the first half of that history when the mechanics didn't particularly support the kind of character-focused narrative you claim most folks want and expect now. If people had a problem with this supposed mismatch of expectations back in the day, how did the early game have enough success to lead to this new mechanical paradigm? If this was a real problem, wouldn't the game have faltered early on?

Why do you think it gradually changed? Because the designers were getting clear signs of the mismatch, and frequently people houseruling around it. When you find out serious parts of your player base are changing the rules of your game because they don't like the consequence of the extent ones, if you care about your game's success, you don't ignore that.

Note OD&D rode a lot of novelty benefit, because of first adopter benefit. By the time it was starting to really ride hard, you were hitting the Dragonlance period which was very much when the changes you deride were first starting to come in strongly.

 

[Thomas Shey]

But what justify your appointing yourself as a representative for the supposed majority?

50 years of talking to people in the hobby. If that's not good enough for you, again, learn to be disappointed in me.

 

[Micah Sweet]

And you would be incorrect.

To add to what Jian noted, it's listed as a choice to include it a pool as rolling a 1 (called a Hitch) on a die in your pool opens up possibilities for Complications. And so if you have a lot of dice already, it may be less risky to not add in your opponent's Stress d6 and/or Insecure d8, even if they apply.

Fair enough. I read the book once but that's it, and that's just because I like Smallville. The mechanics turned me off quickly.

 

[Thomas Shey]

You can't reasonably speak for "the tide" without some kind of authority or evidence.

I absolutely can and I've explained why now. I shan't do it a third time.

 

[Thomas Shey]

No Death Spiral, because your defenses are never impacted. But your offense and mobility are impacted, in a general way that doesn't require tracking.

That's still a death spiral, just a weaker one; the reduced offense slows down how long it takes you to put down the opposition, which opens you up to more attacks.

 

[Thomas Shey]

And you would be incorrect.

To add to what Jian noted, it's listed as a choice to include it a pool as rolling a 1 (called a Hitch) on a die in your pool opens up possibilities for Complications. And so if you have a lot of dice already, it may be less risky to not add in your opponent's Stress d6 and/or Insecure d8, even if they apply.

There are metacurrencies in Cortex, but the condition dice are not part of that.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Funny, I guess I can't say things people have said to me dozens of times over the years. You're not required to like hearing hearsay, but I'm not going to ignore it just because it makes you soggy.



Why do you think it gradually changed? Because the designers were getting clear signs of the mismatch, and frequently people houseruling around it. When you find out serious parts of your player base are changing the rules of your game because they don't like the consequence of the extent ones, if you care about your game's success, you don't ignore that.

Note OD&D rode a lot of novelty benefit, because of first adopter benefit. By the time it was starting to really ride hard, you were hitting the Dragonlance period which was very much when the changes you deride were first starting to come in strongly.

Maybe call it hearsay then, and not present it as fact?

And the mechanics didn't really start to move more towards the "my special PC and their story" side (let alone the narrative end) for a very long time. How did the game survive until then, if so many people were dissatisfied with how it worked?

 

[Micah Sweet]

50 years of talking to people in the hobby. If that's not good enough for you, again, learn to be disappointed in me.

Your opinion may be informed, but it's still your opinion.

 

[Piperken]

In this context, folks are talking about specific mechanical effects under the broad label of "consequences" not just the general "what happens" standard of play.

I'd add, if the word consequence pops up, it tends to orbit bad or negative effects.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Your opinion may be informed, but it's still your opinion.

I've made my position clear.