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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7880745" data-attributes="member: 996">Not really, at least, not with exactly those options, as presented, because the 3rd option really is no different from the 2nd in kind, just in degree.  You change the meaning of hps and change the rules to reflect that change.  Also, 3.1 and 3.2 prettymuch contradict eachother.    I might break down 1 & 2 more like this:1. You don't change the hp system.a. You ignore what hp mean or represent, describing or visualizing the results of combat however you see fit in the moment, and not worrying about possibly needing to revise or ret-con it mid-narrative to make sense of it.b. You think about what hp mean or represent, and try to describe or visualize them consistently, and live with the fact you probably won't always succeed.2. You change the system.a. Tweak it slightly: change the length or timing of rests, change recovery of HD.b. Add significantly:  add exhaustion or lingering wounds for coming back from 0 or for crits or whatever.c. Break it to fix it:  radically change the rate of healing, but not other things recovered on a rest, do away with HD, etc.  d. Overhaul from the ground up:  possibly choose something other than hps.Personally, I'd go for (1.a), with a rule of thumb something like:  anything that brings you closer to defeat could be modeled as losing hp, anything that brings you back from that precipice could be modeled as restoring them.  Restoring hps needn't map to un-doing the source of hp loss, it could merely be compensating for it.</blockquote>

Verification