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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 6324653" data-attributes="member: 957">This works for me, so long as it is not mandatory to the point that a character can never be beat up to the point that it takes some time to be beat up that same amount again.  I want the narrative option of the character being beat up enough they need some true healing to be supported by the mechanics.Obviously at some point anyone playing D&D must accept that there is some truth to your description because the "full effectiveness" at 1 HP left issue.  A fully healed 100 HP fighter gets hit for 70 HP you can't call that a "serious" damage causing wound (ignoring "massive damage", if you go there) because the fighter's capabilities are in no way effected other than his ability to survive future attacks.  If HP are permitted to be a mix of "hurts" and abstract then both models work.  If the 30 HP fighter is a 40 the next morning, I can describe it as still having notable bumps and bruises and you can describe him as being good as new (expect that his abstract ability to keeps serious wounds from being more than minor physical damage is less than it was the day before).  Neither description of a 100 hp fighter at 40 current HP is "wrong".  And we can obviously both choose any other blend of leftover minor damage and lost abstract potential.The fact that it works for you from a narrative perspective obviously doesn't mean that produces the most satisfactory game experience for you.  So you could want full healing every day for that reason.For me, full healing every day means that the game becomes substandard in supporting the narrative result I desire.So, a game designer needs to pick a side, or offer alternatives to cover both.  No option is wrong except an option that leaves you without enough fans.</blockquote>

Verification