Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ruleslawyer" data-source="post: 6470242" data-attributes="member: 1757">1e clearly doesn't, as pemerton's DMG quotes expressly show. 3e Unearthed Arcana also discusses the difference between "meat" hp and skill, luck etc in presenting the vitality and wounds variant.The point that natural healing makes no sense if you assume that hp loss directly correlates to physical wounds is another problem. There isn't a single word in editions 1-3 about an implied setting feature whereby people heal injuries faster than in the real world. Moreover, unlike other RPGs, d&d has never imposed injury penalties for hp loss. In fact, certain 1e modules have traps that separately inflict injury penalties and are described as slicing tendons, severing fingers and whatnot.In short, the hp as meat concept is simply unsupported except in your own minds. That's fine; there's no right or wrong way to adjudicate it. But until someone can provide at least one or two pieces of evidence to show that this is what hp represents, I'm not buying the contention that the game supports any definition other than "hp are part meat and part luck, skill, plot immunity, and metaphysical strength, and the ratio heavily favors the latter factors as characters acquire class levels." Moreover, were I to get properly lawyerly, I would point out that the 1e DMG sets forth an affirmative definition that is never contradicted or amended in subsequent material.</blockquote>