Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5602309" data-attributes="member: 4937">Well, of course it is subjective.&nbsp; That's not a particularly powerful observation.&nbsp;&nbsp; Of course there are some people who prefer M&amp;M style damage tracks to hit points, and for some genera's I feel that a damage track works better than a hit point system.&nbsp;&nbsp; In highly gritty campaigns, you might want one hit to put you out of a fight - even if it didn't kill you - and perhaps every hit to be felt mechically.&nbsp;&nbsp; A damage track agruably does that better than hit points do.&nbsp;&nbsp; Likewise, in a lighter hearted campaign based on a genera where death is essentially unknown, a damage track can be a good way of measuring defeat without every getting to death.&nbsp;&nbsp; But the point is that of the several different sorts of wound tracking systems that have been used, hit points have proven to be the most popular and the most widely adopted.&nbsp;&nbsp; To suggest that that is done out of ignorance on the part of the designers because they are too uncreative to think of something better, or because they are too hard headed to adopt this amazing alternative that you prefer is I think to be a bit arrogant.&nbsp; God knows I was back in the day as a 17 year old kid.&nbsp; I could recite chapter and verse about what was wrong with hit points.&nbsp;&nbsp; It took me a while of actually experimenting with other ideas before I started considering (or being even able to consider) what was right about hit points.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 5602309, member: 4937"] Well, of course it is subjective. That's not a particularly powerful observation. Of course there are some people who prefer M&M style damage tracks to hit points, and for some genera's I feel that a damage track works better than a hit point system. In highly gritty campaigns, you might want one hit to put you out of a fight - even if it didn't kill you - and perhaps every hit to be felt mechically. A damage track agruably does that better than hit points do. Likewise, in a lighter hearted campaign based on a genera where death is essentially unknown, a damage track can be a good way of measuring defeat without every getting to death. But the point is that of the several different sorts of wound tracking systems that have been used, hit points have proven to be the most popular and the most widely adopted. To suggest that that is done out of ignorance on the part of the designers because they are too uncreative to think of something better, or because they are too hard headed to adopt this amazing alternative that you prefer is I think to be a bit arrogant. God knows I was back in the day as a 17 year old kid. I could recite chapter and verse about what was wrong with hit points. It took me a while of actually experimenting with other ideas before I started considering (or being even able to consider) what was right about hit points. [/QUOTE]

Verification