Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Giltonio_Santos" data-source="post: 5932183" data-attributes="member: 36874">I was thinking about this today. Back in the 90s, oWoD used to separate nonlethal from lethal damage, just like D&D, but it also had a category called aggravated damage, which happened to be what could kill a vampire or werewolf, and was also somehow very difficult to heal or even soak during a combat scene. I believe D&D could benefit from a mechanic like that: I’ll call it “true damage”, for the sake of this suggestion.The advantages:Differently from vitality/wound points, you should only have to track one resource. Your character has hit points, which fully replenish after an extended rest, with the exception of the damage taken as true damage, in which case you should only be able to heal a small amount each day (or more, with the help of magic).The module associated is pretty simple. Don’t like it? Just ignore every entry on the game that describes something as true damage (which only happens to be two words, easy to include on sourcebooks and adventures, for example). Also, if you believe that the current natural healing on D&D is just too easy, you can say all HP damage is true damage, and you’re good to go.The disadvantages:You should have to pay attention on your character sheet to assign damage as normal damage or true damage, but you should already be doing that with nonlethal. I’m posting here because, to be honest, I could not think of any real disadvantage in this method of tracking damage and the healing needs of characters.What would cause true damage?I’d suggest the following, as food for thought:- Fang and claws from supernatural creatures (such as demons, devils and lycanthropes)- +2 or better magic weapons- Fire- Falling from heights greater than 10 feet.- Anything else the DM wants to include.Any thoughts about that?Cheers,</blockquote>

Verification