Lanefan
Victoria Rules
In the hands of your PCs? Time for a new campaign world, is it?
Lan-"wishing he'd heard of or thought of this a couple of campaigns ago"-efan
Salvageable Innovations from 4e for Nonenthusiasts
- Thread starter Redbadge
- Start date
Lan-"wishing he'd heard of or thought of this a couple of campaigns ago"-efan
pawsplay
Hero
It's just you.
Just kidding. It's that guy over there, too.
Who said that?
How is that unconventional? DR is present in D&D 3e. Things have hit points; when they run out, they die.
Hit points work well, period. They work for Star Wars, they work for Batman, they work for Conan, they just work. They're not the best at everything, but I've seen a lot of different things done, and in certain cases, I think hit points are the way to go. Even GURPS uses hit points.
AD&D is not so hot for running a Lord of the Rings campaign. Is anyone surprised? But it's not a problem in GURPs (hit points), Pathfinder (hit points), Conan (hit points), BESM d20 (hit points), LOTR (hit points), or Warhammer Fantasy 2e (hit points). True20 does a lot of things well, but I don't think it handles nigh-invulnerable dragons as well as any of those games. Those games also have no problem handling platoons of orc mooks.
The only "gymnastics" I see is trying to argue that if AD&D can't handle the death of Smaug, then hit points don't work. SWSE can't handle Sidious versus Kit Fisto; that doesn't mean hit points don't work, it just means SWSE is substandard for emulating the source material. I've already given you an off-the-cuff answer how Smaug could be handled. As I've already said, Bard could probably make the shot straight-up in Pathfinder, if you assume he's a decently high level and he crits (which seems like a good supposition). Star Wars d20 RCR has no problem handling Sidious versus Kit Fisto.
The whole argument started with an assertion that a small number of hit points was inferior to 4e "minions." I disagree. Hit point systems can do everything 4e minions can do, and more. You can always assign a D&D 3e critter 1 hit point if you want. But it's sufficient that high level Pathfinder/3e characters can carve up number 1st through 4th level orcs. 3e does not want or need a minion rule. I think the way minions are implemented in 4e is ill-considered. I'm not a big fan of scaling minions with low durability, but of such systems, I think Fantasy Craft does it far better than D&D 4e.
So, yeah, I think the idea of minions is something worth porting over from 4e. But the implementation? No, I'd rather use a 3e-based solution. In fact, I think the 4e rules could be improved.
Krensky
First Post
Then don't use the mook quality. Use standard Standard NPCs. If you want them to go down even more quickly give them low Health values.
I've never used the mook quality myself, but then I've never needed hordes of henchmen or whatever for the heroes to mow through. I've found low to mid Health standards to work quite well. Usually one or two hits, although some have lasted to they've accumulated enough damage to push their damage save past what they could make even rolling a 20.
Gygax did not disagree with my suggestion that players would want to emulate Tolkien in D&D. As you admit, he included elements of Tolkien in D&D to attract the many potential players who would want them in a fantasy role-playing game.
And what holds for Tolkien holds for Howard, Leiber, Vance, etc., when it comes to one-shot kills of tough opponents.
Except that he'd have to use a non-light weapon from surprise for that to work, and no one would doubt Conan's ability to drive a knife into a wizard's heart even without the element of surprise.
What this is demonstrating is that "vanilla" hit points require a hodge-podge of additional complications to kind of, sort of let someone "tough" (high-level) die in one shot.
I'm not arguing that tough characters should be less tough and have fewer hit points so they last for fewer rounds of combat, just that other mechanics can do that without providing plot protection to everyone tough.
Again, we need lots of extra rules to make this work. Either Bard has special powers -- which he could presumably call on with some regularity -- or his Black Arrow has special powers -- which, again, he could presumably call on with some confidence.
I don't get the impression that he knew he could take out Smaug with his super-archery skills, and I'm pretty sure he didn't know his Black Arrow was guaranteed to slay any dragon with one hit.
If you want a great warrior or monster to be able to survive roughly eight sword, spear, or arrow hits, you have a few choices of game mechanics to handle that. The traditional D&D answer is to give a superhero eight hit dice.
The numbers have moved around a bit over the editions, but a character with 36 hit points can take roughly eight 1d8 attacks before succumbing. Without extra rules for critical hits, such a character cannot succumb to fewer than five hits. Even with crits in play, he can take multiple perfect shots -- crits rolling max damage.
This is fine for characters with plot protection, but not for anyone and everyone who might be tough.
Another way to make characters tough enough to take, say, eight arrows, is to give them a one-in-eight chance of succumbing to any one arrow. Then they're just as tough, but they have no guarantee that they'll shrug off the first five spears or arrows -- or that they'll succumb to the first dozen.
pawsplay
Hero
A level 1 orc barbarian could take him out in one hit with a crit, actually, in 3e.
The argument seems to be that hit points make things too tough. In every case that's true, just reduce the hit points. That is the essence of simulation, to create attributes that behave in the expected way.
"Emulate" is a key word, alongside "vanilla" used later.
Gygax took inspiration from a lot of sources, and created a "vanilla" system that let him emulate all of them...but isn't a particularly good sim of any of them.
While most of the time a one-shot kill isn't possible, there are all kinds of items- arrows of slaying, vorpal and disruption weapons, etc.- and some special rules (like the old 1/2 HD rule for warriors) that let you do one on occasion.
pawsplay
Hero
Killing a Level 6 magic-user (6d4 hit points) with one hit is in the realm of possibility for a barbarian with 18/50 strength using a longsword.
JamesonCourage
Adventurer
It's just you.
Just kidding. It's that guy over there, too.
At least I'm not alone
Nobody said that. However, people are using hit points in unconventional ways. Or talking about using them as such. More to come on this.
Damage reduction isn't unconventional. 15 hit points for a dragon of such power is. That's the unconventional use of hit points I was referring to, especially if you're talking about 3.X edition rules (which you've indicated you prefer to 4e minions, in this very post I'm replying to).
When you say something like this:
... I feel you're talking in terms of 3.X. Within that rule set, you're not going to have a dragon that has 15 hit points when it's as old and as powerful as Smaug without using hit points in an unconventional way. And I'm all for unconventional uses when it comes to game play or mechanics. However, talking about house-ruled critical hit tables or 15 hit point dragons within the context of 3.X or Pathfinder seems very unconventional when we're talking about a powerful, old dragon.
I prefer hit points. Like I said. I even use two different forms of hit points
You can definitely simulate a certain type of minion with hit points, but again, I hold that it's an unconventional use of them within certain contexts. If you're talking about having a 15 hit point dragon in a 3.X game, it's unconventional.
Additionally, like I pointed out, critical hit charts and slaying arrows that can potentially bypass the hit point mechanic do not help the assertion that hit points are simulating what they're supposed to correctly. If it's necessary to have a slaying weapon or a critical hit chart explain away a creature dying, then it's not based on hit points any more. To that end, hit points aren't simulating the effect anymore.
Also, keep in mind that my post was not solely in response to you. Certain other statements in the thread seem to be doing some mental gymnastics in my mind.
In a quote like this, there is the assertion that Smaug is being hit and injured mechanically, even though he is described as the following: "As with most dragons, Smaug's scaly hide is nigh invulnerable, yet his softer underside is more vulnerable to attack. However, centuries spent sleeping atop his gold hoard has caused gold and gemstones to become embedded in his flesh, creating essentially an impenetrable armour."
Bard, who defeated Smaug, is also described firing his bow at Smaug prior to the black arrow, in addition to all the other archers that Bard is rallying, and their arrows seemingly have no effect:
The Hobbit said:
It's apparent that the arrows are not damaging Smaug in the least. They are not whittling him down in any way, since he's taking the time to dive through an "arrow-storm" with no mention of injuries (in fact, "no arrow hindered Smaug or hurt him more than a fly from the marshes").
Thus, when people begin to talk about other mechanics dealing with someone like Smaug (slaying arrow, critical hit chart), it seems like they're trying to bypass the hit point mechanic in an attempt to show that the hit point mechanic simulates something, which is kind of baffling to me.
As I quoted earlier, you said, "Further, you can perfectly simulate the death of Smaug by simply assuming he only has 15 hit points." You also upped his hit points later, but not by much: "You could say he has 30 hit points and DR 10/magic." While it's true that a very small pool of hit points can simulate his death, it doesn't mean that it's conventional. In fact, especially since you're mentioning Pathfinder, it's pretty unconventional (based on how hit die and Constitution works in relation to hit points).
Again, if you're assigning a D&D 3.X edition critter 1 hit point, but it's not a 1/4 hit die critter with a 10 Constitution, then it's an unconventional usage of hit points within that system.
I'm not advocating minion rules. I am actually very opposed to minion rules. I'm not advocating changing away from hit points. I very much like hit points. However, when people are talking about using hit points in ways they aren't normally used in systems, adding homebrew critical hit charts and/or slaying arrows or magic weapons to bypass hit points, then it feels like mental gymnastics to me to say that it's still the hit point system that's simulating what you want.
Yes, hit points can simulate many things. Yes, they're flexible. No, I don't think they're enough by themselves in many cases.
I'm against the idea of minions just in general, so we're not quite aligned here. However, I'd rather see a 3.X solution, too, as it's farther from a minion rule when compared to 4e (since 4e specifically has minion rules).
Yep, you can certainly do that (in fact, I did that in my game). I think that's a great way to go.
I just see a lot of justification in this thread for hit points as an exceptional simulation tool, when in reality, it's merely good. Only my opinion, of course. I'm not speaking for anyone else, or claiming they're wrong.
As always, play what you like
Yes, a monster with a large strength bonus, wielding the largest weapon with the widest damage range and a x3 crit multiplier, can do 36 points of damage.
My point is that a character who expects to survive roughly eight sword, spear, or arrow hits cannot succumb to one. Or two. Or three, or four -- until we add in critical hits. That's the nature of hit points.
I thought I was clear about this. I don't want tough characters to be less tough. I don't want to see hit points reduced.
The nature of hit points is that they're a buffer. If you're able to survive roughly eight sword, spear, or arrow hits -- with 36 hit points it's a 50/50 proposition -- then you won't survive ten -- it drops to 10/90 -- and you have nothing to fear from six -- 93/7.
Other mechanics work differently. If you're able to survive roughly eight sword, spear, or arrow hits because each hit has a one-in-eight chance of taking you out, then your probability of surviving six hits isn't 93 percent; it's just 45 percent. Your chance of surviving eight isn't 50 percent; it's 34 percent. Your chance of surviving ten isn't just 10 percent; it's 26 percent.
Last edited:
