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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 7350523" data-attributes="member: 29398">The losing of hit points from taking damage in whatever ways works fine while being at least a tiny bit realistic - it's narratable in ways that make sense to (pretty much) all.The recovery is the problem - it's way too fast; and the believability and narrativity issues get worse the closer you get to dead before being right as rain the next morning.Hence, my comment about the problem being with the recovery and resting rules, not the hit point mechanic itself.Absolutely.  But you're talking about the losing-hit-points part, which I've already said works fine, and ignoring the recovering-hit-points bit, which doesn't work worth a hill o' beans.Perhaps, though there's also the option of striving to correct these mis-perceptions at every opportunity (e.g. make Rangers more like Tolkein Rangers again and never utter the name Drizz't; rename Druids to Nature Clerics as that's what they really are, etc.).The latest edition and the one before that, I think; and in neither instance was this the right direction to go IMO as it discourages immersion and - following on from a bad side effect of how 3e played - encourages a more mechanics-first approach.That, and even in the various fantasy books on which the game is in theory based the heroes sometimes get beat to ratguano and have to spend some time recovering; though this sort of thing is admittedly seen more in more recent fiction than the '50s and '60s pulp.I think 5e's aesthetic is better than the two editions before it (i.e. 3e and 4e), but there's still loads of room for improvement.Lanefan</blockquote>

Verification