New tidbit about spells and hit points.

[F4NBOY]

Hey F4nboy. I notice your joindate is Aug 2007. Where you a member here before? If so, what was you handle?

Just curious

Yeah, I access EnWorld since before 3E when it was eric's scoop site.
I regiester in the Forums in 2004, but never was much of a poster, more of a reader really.
I think my previous nick had 20 posts I or so.
You probably never saw it

 

[Li Shenron]

So basically people are happy that lots of stuff is removed from the game to make it simple, and happy that we have one more condition to keep track of? :\

I think that extra complications could be fun, but should better be considered as variants to put in the DMG rather than making it mandatory for every game.

 

[Gargoyle]

Nah, I don't like that. As far as Okay/Not Okay thresholds go, 0 is pretty much the best and most obvious value.

That said, I think dead at -10 is a bad idea, too.

Here's what I would have done: when a character reaches 0 hit points, he must immediately make a Fort save (DC 10 + damage done in that last attack) or die. If he succeeds, he remains at 0 hit points and is incapacitated. Thereafter, the character must periodically make Fort saves to remain alive. Any further damage suffered by the character requires a new save (but leaves the character at 0 hit points). A coup de grace is automatic death.

This would get rid of the problem that -10 is basically a trivial buffer at high level. It would mean that a character who is dropped to the equivalent of -9 might not bleed out before the Cleric has any chance to get to him. Conversely, it also means that the Cleric can't just leave a colleague who dropped to -1 for a few rounds because he has more pressing matters to attend to - his friend might die at any time.

Yeah, your method is better, and I'm sure there are lots of ways to do it... mine was just something off the cuff. I just don't like negative hit points for the same reason I don't like negative AC...it feels clunky.

 

[Simplicity]

So basically people are happy that lots of stuff is removed from the game to make it simple, and happy that we have one more condition to keep track of? :\

I think that extra complications could be fun, but should better be considered as variants to put in the DMG rather than making it mandatory for every game.

Yeah, I'm not sure ADDING something to keep track of in addition to hitpoints is a great idea. But, whatever. I can't judge it until I see it all.

 

[psionotic]

Yeah how am I supposed to keep track of which of my 20 goblins are bloodied? Oh I know, mook rules. They never get bloodied. That's only for a single monster versus many PCs.

This is almost certainly the way it will work. DMs will only have to pay attention to specific HP percentages for important / 'named' creatures, but players will have to for their own character.

I love the idea of the condition track adding some minuses as it progresses, so long as there are cool offensive and defensive abilities that players (and monsters, where appropriate) can use that makes them mean something other than the Death Spiral o Doom.

 

[Aloïsius]

I'm not sure I'm happy with that. If I understand correctly, it means that "desintegration" does not disintegrate anybody. It means that "slay living" becomes "slay dying". Baneful polymorph won't work unless your target is bleeding and dominate or hold person are usefull only if you first have blanketed the area with fireballs...

No, it looks too silly to be true, so I think powerfull spells should still be something else than finishing moves... Gaming is great, but this game is about story happening in fantasy settings. You can't remove the specificity of magic in the name of balance ! What else ? Invisibility only gives you +5 to discretion (so that the rogue is not screwed), fly does not allow you to fly more than 5 ft from the ground (so that the fighter can still use his sword against you ?) and teleport stop if there is a monster or a trap between you and your target ?


The road to Hell Is paved with good intentions. I hope WotC does not confound an RPG with something else...

 

[Szatany]

Yeah, I'm not sure ADDING something to keep track of in addition to hitpoints is a great idea. But, whatever. I can't judge it until I see it all.

It's not, but they kinda have to do this, because they are promising many new fighter powers, rogue powers, a multitude of racial powers, racial/class combination powers, and so on. They have to introduce new variable for new abilities.
I'm not sure I like it, but if 4e plays visibly faster than 3e, and can accept it.

 

[chaotix42]

*snip*

Disintegrate just does a bucket of d6s in 3.5. I've slammed many PCs with green rays of death and rolled awful damage. Just a chunk of them disintegrated, even on a failed save.

Also, do not assume that any of the save or die attacks will return. If they're trying to move away from that, perhaps they're just being dropped entirely?

 

[Mercule]

I like the idea of minimizing the save-or-die effects, but I certainly hope a few select instances remain. I want medusas to turn you to stone.

 

[Zurai]

Death at -10 has always annoyed me. When they got rid of negative AC, they should have gotten rid of negative HP. Give player characters 10 bonus HP and make them go unconscious at 10 hp and die at zero.

Negative AC didn't make mathematical sense. Negative HP does - when you're above 0 HP, you're still functioning fine. When you're below 0 HP, you're not functioning. 0 is a logical break point for functioning/not functioning; 10, not so much.