NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sacrosanct" data-source="post: 7882699" data-attributes="member: 15700">I admit my perspective comes from TSR era D&D, where non magical rapid healing largely isn’t a thing.  yes, I am fully aware that the “hp can be abstract” exists back then in the PHB. But hp loss in combat also represented physical wounds because the mechanics supported that via slow or no non-magical healing options. It fit the verisimilitude.Somewhere along the line, fast non magical healing was introduced. And it feels like in order to justify that, the took the HP are abstract paragraph and took it to extremes where HP aren’t wounds at all. That’s what sort of runs me the wrong way. It wasn’t always like that, and wasn’t a good change IMO. The idea that if a four foot long spike in a pit can do a maximum 12 points of damage, that as long as a PC has 13+ hp, no matter how badly they fall into said spike, it doesn’t do any significant physical damage. Or that if a monster’s six inch long razor sharp teeth do a maximum of 15 points of damage, as long as the PC has 31+ hp, no matter how well the monsters hits, even with a critical hit, the PC doesn’t suffer any wounds from said monsters critical hit. Those don’t feel right to me. And others apparently.So while I don’t know exactly when this shift happened and rapid non magical healing was a common thing, I don’t think it’s unreasonable for people to associate hp loss with wounds, because there’s about at least 15 years of precedence of being so (and I’d argue the entire lifespan since that’s how it’s presented via language in the rules, and how it’s narrated in the actual games)</blockquote>

Verification