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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 6469633" data-attributes="member: 42582">If you think there are relevant passages in Gygax's rulebooks that I haven't quoted, then by all means quote them.I don't see how these destroy my reading at all.Gygax says that "hit points are not actually a measure of physical damage, by and large" and also that "A certain amount of these hit points represent the actual physical punishment which can be sustained." The "certain amount" is not the bulk of hit points which are, "by and large", not about physical punishment.Gygax is particularly trying to deal with the issue of hit point increase with level. He is addressing the question, Do characters get meatier as they gain levels? And his answer is, No. Character don't get significantly meatier is they gain levels; rather, they become more skilled and luckier.This has the logical consequence that the "nicks, scratches, cuts and bruises" that a high level fighter has suffered when 50 hit points have been lost must be much the same as the "nicks, scratches, cuts and bruises" that a 1st level fighter has suffered after taking 3 hp damage from falling down a pit. Which in turn means that it shouldn't take any longer for the high level fighter to heal those injuries than the 3 days that it takes the low level fighter. The rest of the healing must be "metaphysical" recovery, as Gygax himself alludes to ("physical and metaphysical peak").But that requires ignoring the reference to hit point loss, "by and large", not correlating to physical punishment.Taken in isolation, yes. But Gygax had a preferred interpretation. As I quoted, he said that constitution includes "the immeasurabe areas which involve the sixth sense and luck".I'm not talking about mechanics. I'm talking about the interpretation that Gygax suggested. I've quoted upthread (and requoted above) the passages where he says that the constitution bonus to hit points includes luck, and that hit point loss, by and large, does not correspond to physical punishment.Anyone who wants to can interpret hit points in any version of D&D as "meat", ie physical integrity. And can embrace the absurdity that gaining levels layers on meat, so that it takes more chops of a sword to whittle away all of a high level fighter's flesh. If you find that verisimilitudinous, but find healing surges unverisimiitudinous, well there's no acounting for taste. Personally I find the whole picture absurd, and I have no sense as to why "meat gain with level" is deemed reasonable, but "meat recovery in hours rather than days" is deemed unreasonable. The whole picture makes no sense to me.If you think that a 1st level fighter who drops takes 7 hp damage, dropping from 10 to 3 hp, has taken a major injury, which can then be recovered in a week's rest even without medical treatment, or (in 3E) with two day's rest with nursing care, again there's no accounting for taste. Once again, I find that absurd.In no edition of D&D can a 1st level character sustain hit point loss that is both (i) not potentially fatal, and (ii) takes more than a week or so to heal, regardless of medical attention. My sense of verisimilitude therefore tells me that none of that hit point loss correlates to any very serious injuries. My sense of verisimiitude furthermore tells me that, as that character gains levels, the basic pattern doesn't change. Hit point loss that does not reduce someone to 0 hp or below does not correlate to serious injury.As to whether it takes a day or a week to get back your verve after a near brush with death, that is a matter of pacing and genre preference. Verisimilitude has no work to do.I agree that that's an obvious empirical truth! My issue is with the claim that AD&D supported a different approach from later editions.</blockquote>

Verification