Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5955936" data-attributes="member: 42582">I described the BW approach upthread. It's an interesting approach. But it rests on a pretty different mechanical substrate than the one that D&amp;D offers.I don't see why those who like 4e or Gygaxian hp are &quot;myopic&quot;. Maybe they just have different preferences in gaming from yours.Up until 4e, D&amp;D has had uniform recovery rates. Once you decide that the &quot;CON&quot; component of hp is wounds, whereas the &quot;+X&quot; component is something else (luck, or [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION]'s fatigue), then you probably don't want uniform recovery rates. Hence the scope for a variant rule - a departure from the traditional uniform recovery rate.I think that you suggested something similar in the OP.(4e is a more complex implementation of non-uniform recovery rates. I suggested that as another possible option a bit further upthread.)Well, except that I'm treating a D&amp;D's traditinal single pool with a uniform recovery rate as core, and making both the explicit &quot;tier-ing&quot; of hp (as per wound/vitality and the like) an option, and the inclusion of inspirational healing an option.I'm therefore leaving space for an approach to play in which any given lost hp is narrated as a lucky dodge, or a bit of meat damage, or a bit of both, as context and preference suggest. Any &quot;tier-ing&quot; approach precludes that narrative flexibilty. Which is why I don't think &quot;tier-ing&quot; should be a core presupposition, whatever the scope of the dial that governs the balance between the tiers.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5955936, member: 42582"] I described the BW approach upthread. It's an interesting approach. But it rests on a pretty different mechanical substrate than the one that D&D offers. I don't see why those who like 4e or Gygaxian hp are "myopic". Maybe they just have different preferences in gaming from yours. Up until 4e, D&D has had uniform recovery rates. Once you decide that the "CON" component of hp is wounds, whereas the "+X" component is something else (luck, or [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION]'s fatigue), then you probably don't want uniform recovery rates. Hence the scope for a variant rule - a departure from the traditional uniform recovery rate. I think that you suggested something similar in the OP. (4e is a more complex implementation of non-uniform recovery rates. I suggested that as another possible option a bit further upthread.) Well, except that I'm treating a D&D's traditinal single pool with a uniform recovery rate as core, and making both the explicit "tier-ing" of hp (as per wound/vitality and the like) an option, and the inclusion of inspirational healing an option. I'm therefore leaving space for an approach to play in which any given lost hp is narrated as a lucky dodge, or a bit of meat damage, or a bit of both, as context and preference suggest. Any "tier-ing" approach precludes that narrative flexibilty. Which is why I don't think "tier-ing" should be a core presupposition, whatever the scope of the dial that governs the balance between the tiers. [/QUOTE]

Verification