Massive Damage...as a Reflex Check?

[Hrothgar Rannúlfr]

Take a first level fighter, then, with 9 hit points. He's shot by 2 arrows in a fight, taking off 8 hit points.

We look at how long it takes the wound to heal: 8 days (healing 1 pt. per day) for two arrow hits....getting better, but still not long enough healing time, I would think, unless they were superficial wounds. A deep scratch on Monday heals by next Sunday, that sort of thing.

And, I think that is really the best way to describe all wounds a character suffers while over zero hit points. They are superficial wounds. Not much more than a scratch from a house cat, at most. And, not a serious scratch, at that.

 

[Hrothgar Rannúlfr]

However, for a game without much magical healing, that can't really be the case unless you want your character to take a couple of weeks off between every foray into the dungeon (or against what ever other enemy you like).

So, I see how some games NEED hit points to represent nearly 100% pure dodging ability. However, I don't think it can be treated as 100% dodging ability with the problem imposed by dealing with poisoned weapons (as mentioned above).

 

[Hrothgar Rannúlfr]

We look at wound effects: Even with the two arrow hits, the character is not barred from doing any activity. His move stat is the same. He can run, jump, climb. He can carry the same amount of weight. Does that sound like a wounded character to you?

No. Nor should it. In D&D, those two arrow hits are very minor and didn't actually stick anything vital. As above, they probably didn't do more to our brave 1st level fighter than a couple of non-serious scratches from a house cat.*

* Note: The D&D housecat of the Monster Manual is likely a much more vicious predator than its more common modern cousins.

 

[Hrothgar Rannúlfr]

But, if we think of hit points using what Gygax said (and my interpertation), then it starts to make sense. The character is a hero in a fantasy [g]ame, so he's not really impeded by those two near-misses. But, he strained his foot getting out of the way, doding those things. So, now, it takes a week for his foot to stop being sore.

That makes a lot more sense to me than what Justin is saying--that the arrow hits are actual wounds.

I see what you're saying, but I don't think we can honestly conclude that Gygax had the idea that hits were "near misses." I think what he's actually saying is that each deduction in hit points that a character suffers is partially physical and partially metaphysical. And, the higher level the character, the greater portion is metaphysical. However, every hit is really a hit. Just not a truly serious wound until the character is dropped to zero or fewer hit points.

Consider a character who is a 10th level fighter with an 18 constitution. This character would have an average of 5½ hit points per die, plus a constitution bonus of 4 hit points, per level, or 95 hit points! Each hit scored upon the character does only a small amount of actual physical harm --- the sword thrust that would have run a first level fighter through the heart merely grazes the character due to the fighter’s exceptional skill, luck, and sixth sense ability which caused movement to avoid the attack at just the right moment. However, having sustained 40 or 50 hit points of damage, our lordly fighter will be covered with a number of nicks, scratches, cuts, and bruises. It will require a long period of rest and recuperation to regain the physical and metaphysical peak of 95 hit points.

I don't think we can fairly conclude that Gygax had the idea that a hit was really a complete miss. Rather, the seriousness of a hit is dependent on whether or not it drops a character to zero or fewer hit points.

 

[Water Bob]

Echoing one of Justin's arguments...

What if one of the arrows is poisoned?

Why have a fort save v. poison if it's not actually a hit?

Well, we're not really keeping track of each hit. It's an abstract system. I'm saying that some of the successful attack throws means the arrow did not contact the target. But, on others, there is a graze.

As a game mechanic, we have to assume the poisoned arrow is one of the ones that scratched the character.

And, if the character actually makes the save vs. poison, then we can even go back to assuming that the arrow never made contact in the first place! (Since there's not extra poison damage if the save was made.)

I don't think we can fairly conclude that Gygax had the idea that a hit was really a complete miss.

I think that we can easily assume that he meant that because of the term "metaphysical". This means abstractly physical. It's something other than physical. Which can mean that the character twisted his ankle while ducking out of the way of the arrow volley.

 

[Water Bob]

I can also think that some successful attack throws represent a complete miss because the reverse is true for unsuccessful attack throws.

What is an attack throw? Is it simply a test to see if one character hit another character? No. Because AC includes protection--armor. Therefore, an attack throw is a test to see if a character hits and damages his target.

Logically, there will be times when the character hits but does not damage his target. And, this is represented by a non-successful attack throw--or, in other words, a miss.

So, not all successful attacks that do damage to the target represent actual hits. And, not all unsuccessful attacks represent pure misses.

 

[Hrothgar Rannúlfr]

I think 4E took that route when ruling that some powers did damage on a miss. It makes sense from the perspective that hit points don't really represent physical damage.

Is there any sort of attack that deals damage on a miss in the Conan RPG? An example of when an unsuccessful attack throw represents a complete hit (and therefore actually causes damage)?

 

[Water Bob]

I think 4E took that route when ruling that some powers did damage on a miss. It makes sense from the perspective that hit points don't really represent physical damage.

As I said, it has to be true even from the first issue of the game.

A person is basicaly hit by hitting an AC 10 (there are natural defense modifiers, like DEX, but let's leave those out of the discussion for a moment for simplicity. It won't change the point.) That's the way it was in 1st edition AD&D, and that's the way it is in 3.5 d20.

Any number rolled higher than that is really "penetraion" against armor.

So, if a character is hit by rolling against AC 10, he's hit at that number no matter what. Armor might make him AC 15, but the AC 10 roll still hits him. It takes a roll of 15+, though, to avoid/penetrate the target's armor. Therefore, attack throws of 10-14 are hits that do no damage.

Or, you can call them "misses", even though they hit.

Is there any sort of attack that deals damage on a miss in the Conan RPG?

No, it operates like 3.5 d20.

An example of when an unsuccessful attack throw represents a complete hit (and therefore actually causes damage)?

What we need to do is define what a "hit" is and what a "miss" is.

1. Hit - a successful attack throw that does damage.

2. Hit - the character is physically struck by his enemy.

3. miss - a non-successful attack throw that does not do damage.

4. miss - an attack on the PC that does not do damage.

Let's use definitions 2 and 4.

So, there are hits that clang off the character's armor (a successful hit that does no damage--represented by a failed (or miss) attack throw.