More "realistic" advancement in D&D?

[Lanefan]

For a roleplaying game, where we want to keep the PCs alive

We do??!?

I think I missed that class...

hit points have the not-necessarily-obvious advantage of keeping combat predictable and safe, but they're not at all realistic -- and they don't offer as much plot-protection as they should either.

The party as an entity sometimes needs some plot protection. Individual characters within said party do not. They can be replaced, as long as one character (and thus, the party entity) survives.

Lan-"everything dies, baby, that's a fact - B. Springsteen"-efan

 

[S'mon]

We all know that IRL heroes die, but increasingly in Western entertainment they do not.

I haven't seen any trend that way - in "Gladiator" Russell Crowe dies, in very Roman fashion. By contrast in the old movie it was based on, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire", the hero survives the final battle and goes off with the girl!

The obvious trend in movie heroes is towards increased power, where Roger Moore's James Bond might fight a tense railway track battle with a couple of Soviet soldiers, Pierce Brosnan's James Bond would wade through scores of Russian mooks without breaking sweat. Gladiator encapsulated this trend in two scenes: in the first, Crowe heroically organises and motivates his novice gladiator team to defeat a more experienced squad. In the very next scene Crowe superheroically takes on and wipes out a similar squad all on his own, making the previous scene pointless!

 

[Snoweel]

I haven't seen any trend that way - in "Gladiator" Russell Crowe dies, in very Roman fashion. By contrast in the old movie it was based on, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire", the hero survives the final battle and goes off with the girl!

Firstly, Gladiator isn't exaclty a new movie - in a few hours it will be ten years old.

Secondly, two examples don't make a trend.

The obvious trend in movie heroes is towards increased power, where Roger Moore's James Bond might fight a tense railway track battle with a couple of Soviet soldiers, Pierce Brosnan's James Bond would wade through scores of Russian mooks without breaking sweat. Gladiator encapsulated this trend in two scenes: in the first, Crowe heroically organises and motivates his novice gladiator team to defeat a more experienced squad. In the very next scene Crowe superheroically takes on and wipes out a similar squad all on his own, making the previous scene pointless!

While I agree with you, and James Bond seems to support the trend (as do the Die Hard films), comic books would appear to defy this trend, if it does exist.

 

[Starfox]

Why not just break it down challenge by challenge, as follows: [Snip]

Looks good to me.

I must also say that the "insert time" methods works well in a story-driven campaign, but less so in a Sandbox campaign. In a story campaign, the DM controls the pacing by introducing new chapters. In a Sandbox, pacing is pretty much left to the players. A player character can participate in as much adventure as he can squeeze into his day.

The problem in a sandbox is, of course, to determine what kind of activity is merit-worthy. One player slays dragons, another trains an army, a third raises the young prince to take over the kingdom, and a fourth builds a mercantile empire. Which one is the most merited? Which one deserves the most xp? This is ultimately up to the DM, and the DMs sensibilities and prejudices will sett he mood of the campaign. It also depends on what kind of activities the game has rules for, what direction character development takes. In DnD, with its level structure, the only way to become a better merchant or caretaker also makes you better at combat. Level represents your heroic stature; class represents how your stature manifests in the world.

 

[Garthanos]

I remember back in the day. I thought the progression from level 1 to 2 in AD&D even was hyper fast, the amount of gain for hit points alone made a character effectively twice as capable in 1 level (and the fighter doubled the number of attacks he could launch against a level 0 too.) A beginning character in 4e goes how many levels before doubling hit points?

my level 1 swordmage has 28 hit points and will double that by level 5 he also has at level 5 twice the feats he started and about twice the number of battle magics

... "rate" of and "meaning of" advancement is very much an illusion and the narrative has a major impact on it.

 

[Snoweel]

I remember back in the day. I thought the progression from level 1 to 2 in AD&D even was hyper fast, the amount of gain for hit points alone made a character effectively twice as capable in 1 level (and the fighter doubled the number of attacks he could launch against a level 0 too.) A beginning character in 4e goes how many levels before doubling hit points?

my level 1 swordmage has 28 hit points and will double that by level 5 he also has at level 5 twice the feats he started and about twice the number of battle magics

... "rate" of and "meaning of" advancement is very much an illusion and the narrative has a major impact on it.

Excellent point.

The power curve is at least as important as the rate of advancement.

 

[mmadsen]

In my view, players may put their characters in bad positions with poor decisions. The die roll (saving throw or combat roll) is actually an additional protection [that they may not deserve].

This ties into what RC has referred to as the lure to tempt players into making "unbalanced" decisions. "Superior play" is recognizing and avoiding/mitigating these "unbalanced" circumstances.

In real life, the winning side suffers casualties, and, if anything, the brave men leading the charge are most likely to be the ones taking lethal wounds before the enemy is routed.

In a game where our heroes fight a dozen small-unit skirmishes per level -- where they can't help but be in the thick of it -- do we really want them to have a "realistic" chance of getting killed or maimed? An 8% chance of "career-ending injury" per encounter would lead us to expect adventurers to make it to second level.

That would be fine for NPCs -- who presumably aren't demonstrating "superior play" -- but it would play havoc with a typical campaign. So, either the players need (subtle but effective) plot-protection, or PCs last, on average, one level.

 

[Gentlegamer]

I guess I see hit points as enough "plot protection" for the assumptions of gaming style built into D&D over the years. For the record, I don't want "realistic" wounds/body points for D&D. Hit points allow players to behave heroically while also being kept in check by a measurable and dwindling resourse of hit points over the course of an encounter/adventure.

 

[Garthanos]

It does not strain credibility that the greatest knight in all the land is worth more than 20 ordinary knights. It does strain credibility that he could, say, take 20 sword slashes on his unarmored body without dropping, or whatever.
.

Re-reading the definition of hit points ... might solve that perceptual problem ... you are the one narrating the results. Most hits on heros are paraphrasing -> "near misses due to lucky happenings and fatigue due to desperate last second effort minimizing the wounds, undermining confidence etc." . ..... unlike the minion your hero did not get a deep slash through his forearm inducing serious trauma and shock (and requiring a ritual or long amounts or time if you do survive) but rather <insert appropriate hitpoint defined narrative />
Perhaps the character stumbled at the last second and it in narrative missed entirely ... but basically cost 5 luck points err hit points.

Different heroes can even style there hit points differently.... after all the defensive skills applied desperately against an incoming attack are very different for the wizard versus the warrior? Furthere there are lucky heros and skilled heros and magical heros and tough heros (only the latter usual take physical damage and most is of the ... not as bad as it looks kind)

4e tells players to visualize there characters powers according to their own desires ... they could have said the same about hit points.

My halflings hit points are almost entirely luck and morale. His bloodied state is "visibly frazzled or distraught"

One way of thinking about it... in 4e your character recovers from the loss of hit points quickly because fatigue recovers fast and luck recovers as fast as we want it to.

Why can poets priests and politicians enable you to recover hit points ... magic isnt the answer ... they inspire heroes to reach for there reserves of perseverance restoring confidence and renewing faith etc.... ummm want to "heal a real physical wound" use a variant on remove affliction ritual.

 

[mmadsen]

I guess I see hit points as enough "plot protection" for the assumptions of gaming style built into D&D over the years. For the record, I don't want "realistic" wounds/body points for D&D. Hit points allow players to behave heroically while also being kept in check by a measurable and dwindling resourse of hit points over the course of an encounter/adventure.

I think we agree that hit points provide "plot protection" and all players to behave heroically, within limits. But they have numerous downsides too; otherwise they wouldn't be a source of decades of debate about how "unrealistic" they are.

People clearly like the "plot protection" element of hit points, whether they realize it or not, and people clearly do not like game mechanics that bypass this plot protection, like "save or die" spells. One way around this problem is to remove save-or-die by modifying formerly deadly spells and traps to do hit point damage, or to "nerf" them to save-or-inconvenience, or whatever.

Or we could go in the opposite direction and accept hit points as luck points -- and allow them to be used to improve saves, AC, etc. Then, getting hit would force a save vs. swords, spears, and arrows, but heroes and villains would have luck points to spend, while powerful characters without plot protection would have to accept their fate. And heroes could use those same luck points to avoid getting hit, etc., without creating odd situations of "hits" that are narrated not to be hits, but forcing poison saves, etc.