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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="WeyrleaderZor" data-source="post: 4580723" data-attributes="member: 60785">Sounds a lot like the Vitality Point system in Star Wars and other "Modern" d20 games, frankly. And, while I like that to some extent, you do run the risk of a single critical hit killing a character outright (under the Vit. Pts. rules) even at higher levels simply because the hit points are pretty much fixed at their maximum level at level 1 (barring any CON increases or bonuses from Feat(ure)s from either class or character levels).The downside to doing this, aside from the critical strikes, is also that you'll create yet another fluid stat that the player has to keep track of compared to the current (and I am talking from 3.5 player experience here, having tried, disliked (disgusted by, actually), and rejected 4e) "less precise" hit point system as it was presented simply to be quick and easy. There's some merits to that too. As for the "power" of characters and certain classes being "unrealistic" or just plain silly with the amount of damage they can take at higher levels (especially then), you could always augment hit points with a "Durability" scale where a character reaches certain stages and takes on certain penalties and difficulties due to injury and/or fatigue from battle - this would allow for the "quick and easy" hp rules as they exist currently in 3.5 & 4e, while still making the loss of hit points more serious and dangerous. For example: We'll say a fighter at level 5 has 40 hit points (just making up numbers here), you could make your Durability Scale (or "Condition Status" or whatever you want to call it) step down from 100% in 15% starting at 80% (that way the first 20% of your hit points you're unaffected and still being unhindered by the relatively minor combat injuries since the character is likely to be in a state where pure adrenaline has them going pedal-to-the-floor with little to no regard or realization of how hurt they are yet (you can reduce this to 10% or 15% but I think 15-20% would be best - at low levels the 10% could wind up being as low as 1hp!)). So our scale could look like this: 100-80% Uninjured/Bruises/Scratches (act as normal)79-65% Minor Injuries (-2 to all attacks, skill checks, etc)64-50% - Slightly Significant Injuries (-4 to all attacks, saves, skills, etc; can't move more than a double move; must make concentration check to cast spells/powers; no multiple attacks (you could allow Barbarian's abilities to bypass pain and act normal to negate this last part still)).49-35% - Serious Injuries (-6 to all attacks, skills, saves, etc; Standard action or a move action only (one or the other); can't run (at all); no multiple attacks)34-20% - Potentially lethal Injuries (-8...; no casting spells or using abilities requiring mental focus/concentration (including class features like "sniper" classes "aimed shot" type things); otherwise same as the previous step).19-0% - Fatal injuries (-10...; same as prior, movement speed -50%; character in dire need of aid and at risk of death (you're in the last few hp remaining).Something like that... you could always shorten that and cut out some steps (maybe a 20% step increment instead of my 15% (It'd be cleaner and faster for players to figure out their hp "break points")), but you get the idea. That way, players who want the more realistic and the more lethal type game can use it, while the game could be played with the revised and improved rules (5e) with their familiar old safety net if they feel they need/want that instead. It's a win-win and allows for both sides of that particular argument to feel like the new rules were made with them in mind and to suit their desired way of playing/running the game. Can't fail to do well if you can suit both sides of those kinds of debates equally well, as long as this can be made to work cleanly and easily (I am a HUGE proponent of simplicity in the rules department - the easier and faster the game moves, the better. IMHO, of course).</blockquote>

Verification