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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="D'karr" data-source="post: 5713531" data-attributes="member: 336">I don't feel like answering a bunch of separate posts so I'll include them all in one post if I can.Inigo: "You like using that word strawman a lot, I do not think it means what you think it means."I never used the "narrative" serious wound, you made that assumption.  But let's look at this.  If a little more than 10% of a fighters "wounds" are not significant enough to call it a "wound", what would be?  The rules don't say.Then again Roguey McRouge is not a fighter.  He's a rogue.  According to very generous calculations he'd have between 49 to 69 hit points.  So that hit will do a little over 20% of his hit points, if he's got poor constitution, and almost 15% of his hit points, if he's got above average constitution (+2 bonus). Just on that single hit.If he'd been a wizard he'd be really screwed.  From 27 to 47 hit points on the very high end.  So if he got hit for 37% of his hit points, or for 21% of his hit points that's still not "serious" enough?See it doesn't matter what the amount of the hit is, because the rules NEVER say anything about the "narrative" of the "wound".Since the rules NEVER actually say what percentage of the "hit" is physical it is entirely left to the DM. I've already explained that SPENT healing surges can be considered your "wound" if you so choose. Nothing in the rules prevent you from doing that. The rules are silent in ALL respects of it. I've given more than ample examples of how to use the "existing" rules to make your narrative still make sense. It is only the selective reasoning that affects this, because once again the rules are silent.I'm not trying to quickly sidestep anything. I've clearly delineated plausible, even in fiction, examples of how you can use the existing rules to support your narrative. You think I'm just painting over it and saying there is no physical damage, when I've clearly shown that with 4e, I finally have a way to represent both within the framework of hit points with no issue. Healing surges allow me to describe the "wound" and its effects. Like I've already said multiple times the rules don't say anything about the "narrative". That is all up to the DM. I've even shown ways to make this more permanent, if the DM wants to.Assumptions, assumptions, assumptions, and false statement.I think that I already provided a clear enough example that uses both 3.x and 4e to answer this round of questioning.Show me in the rules what damage is physical damage, and what damage is metaphysical....................... ..............................I guess I'll go on as the rules NEVER define any particular damage as either. Damage reduces HIT POINTS, period. The DM can choose to describe in whatever manner floats his boat.  And I've already shown ways of how the mechanics of 4e still support that.You like using the word "wrong" a lot. Maybe you should actually re-read the examples I've provided before you keep using it.In a previous post someone, it might have been you, mentioned medical treatment, and how in TV shows it's mostly a background narrative.  It is so common that no one even bats an eye towards it.Since its a background thing and it might have been missed in my previous post, let me reiterate.During an Extended Rest the DM and players can narrate whatever the heck they want to. Prayers by the Cleric, rousing speeches by the Warlord, bandaging wounds, suturing open skin, cauterizing deep wounds, splinting bones, cleaning out infection, getting some healthy food, and getting a deep rest, does that not sound like treating "wounds" to you? If the "narrative" of the "wound" was so important to the group, then I'd venture to say that at least a modicum of acknowledgement would be put in, by the same group, to supplement THEIR "narrative" when they are healing their "wounds".What part of the short rest and the extended rest that I've already described does not address what you are asking here?The only one giving labels is you. I understand that your main purpose is being in the story.What story is your character in, the one where you get to battle the dragon and save the princess after much toil and suffering, or the one where the dragon hits you a couple of times, you go unconscious and spend several weeks on bed rest?I've already explained how I can use the "narrative" and use the rules to accomplish the first story.  The fact that the rules are silent on how to achieve the second story does not bother me one bit.  If I want to include that story, I do so with the "narrative", the same way the "wound" is not in the rules but in the "narrative". Now you're just wasting my time. Thanks, but I'm not playing that game.When someone extends the "narrative" in their games to include X, because the rules are silent on the matter.  It is a little ridiculous to then tell others they are WRONG when they show how to extended the "narrative" to include X in the game that seems not to have it.Play and enjoy what you like. Just don't ascribe something to others and particularly to the rules that is not there.</blockquote>

Verification