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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 4108002" data-attributes="member: 4937"><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=":)" />I just like to argue.  Though, I do think your second explanation was better. This is somewhat off topic, so I'm going to leave it alone.The original sentense was composed with an introduction that implied to me that these were the changes between 4E and prior editions.  If this isn't a big change, then there must have been some changes you left off your list.Feeling is mutual.  No, I don't think it realistic that mostly superficial injuries are made better by a single night's rest.  If anything, mostly superficial injuries usually worse after a nights rest because the adrenalyn and other short term resources you body uses to keep you going have worn off.  Sprains are almost always worse the next day.  Pulled or overexerted muscles tend to hurt worse after the second nights rest.  A strained thumb might be perfectly good after a week, but won't be better after a nights rest.  Cuts and bruises tend to take days to heal.  And so forth.  It might be useful in game terms for injuries to go away after one nights rest, but it isn't more realistic.It's more realistic that it takes a couple of nights to fully recover, with occassional serious injuries taking longer. Hit points aren't realistic to begin with.  The notion that you can fall 30' safely, but then certainly die if you fell 30' again is unrealistic regardless of what sort of healing subsystem we have.  The notion that wounds - even minor and non-life threatening ones - rarely cause degridation of your abilities is not realistic regardless of what healing subsystem we have.  So the only way that 4e healing subsystem is more realistic is if wounds represent no physical injury at all - not even superficial ones.  And that is itself not realistic, even for 'heroes'.  Moreover, its something that will get conceptually broken all the time, as witness the Goblin Picador.  That is to say, even if supposedly none of your hitpoints represent the ability to withstand wounds, mechanically damage will be treated as some level of wounds over and over again in the rules.Whether D&D has ever been realistic or not isn't the point.  The point is that it doesn't become more realistic in 4E.  In fact, the mere fact that lots of people are having thier suspension of disbelief blown out of the water indicates that it probably isn't.  Moreover, I'm not sure I knew any DM that described hit point loss of a high level character as injuries consistant with what would kill a low level character many times over.  The whole, 'Isn't it great that D&D is finally admitting that hit points don't represent phsyical damage" is a total strawman, and a partial deception.  Noone had to believe that Barbarians could withstand being ran through with a sword 30 times in order to have thier suspension of disbelief blown by 4E's changes in the healing subsystem.That's fine.  I do.Yes, that's true.  But the fact that D&D has always been silly one way to avoid (totally realistic) death spirals, doesn't in and of itself justify sillyness elsewhere.Because you wouldn't.  You'd still have a hole in you.  Small one, but it would be there, and likely sore in a way that it wasn't when it was bleeding, new, and you were filled with endorphins.  Plus you'd be wearied from your harrowing fight and long climb up the mountain.  One short rest wouldn't do it for you.</blockquote>

Verification