Why do we really need HP to represent things other than physical injuries?

[Li Shenron]

Mine is a very naive and honest question. Why can't we just live with HP representing only a creature's ability to take physical damage and injuries before dropping? What are the bad things that will happen to the game if we do that?

 

[Grydan]

The thing is that HP always have been and always will be a very poor model of physical damage and injuries.

With occasional racial or class exceptions across various editions, your character doesn't function differently at 1 HP (on the verge of death or unconsciousness) than it does at 82 billion HP.

There's no qualitative aspect of HP, no ability to distinguish between a flesh wound, a broken bone, an amputated limb, a sword through the gut, or a decapitation.

There's no penalties attached to losing HP, other than being closer to being out of the fight. Whereas if it was truly injuries, one would expect it to hinder you in some manner.

 

[Li Shenron]

The thing is that HP always have been and always will be a very poor model of physical damage and injuries.

With occasional racial or class exceptions across various editions, your character doesn't function differently at 1 HP (on the verge of death or unconsciousness) than it does at 82 billion HP.

There's no qualitative aspect of HP, no ability to distinguish between a flesh wound, a broken bone, an amputated limb, a sword through the gut, or a decapitation.

There's no penalties attached to losing HP, other than being closer to being out of the fight. Whereas if it was truly injuries, one would expect it to hinder you in some manner.

That's good thoughts but not relevant to my question because the same issue exists if you treat HP to represent other things such as fatigue, morale etc.

Also, "poor" model is relative to your expectations. The HP model is in fact "good" for a lot of people who aren't interested in higher details, but are content enough with an on/off model. Being a simple model does not mean being a poor model.

 

[Minigiant]

Mine is a very naive and honest question. Why can't we just live with HP representing only a creature's ability to take physical damage and injuries before dropping? What are the bad things that will happen to the game if we do that?

Because then...

1) HP would never increase higher than 4 for most humaniods and D&D would have to introduce injury penalties

OR

2) D&D's humanoids would be able to to take take multiple stabs in the heart and stand unaffected.

Hit Points represents stamina used to dodge and parry, morale to keep fighting, combat knowledge used to turn make blow misses and grazing hits, luck, divine intervention, and other factors used to make attacks not hit; for a reason. Weapon attacks are rather lethal in D&D. So the game assumes most beings never take a good hit until you are killed to prevent OHKOs all the time or guys walking around with brain wounds.

 

[Danzauker]

Personally, I think after 4 editions D&D is ready for wound point/stun point system or whatever you want to call it in the core.

4e went close with that with heal surges, but it failed with having all of them get back at the end of the day instead of via healing, which angered a lot of people.

If they could make it an optional module, so that if you don't want it you can just use old style HPs, well I have no idea about how it could be done, but I really think that would be the first mark for me that it could be the "best edition evah".

 

[Bedrockgames]

I have always used hp to represent actual damage. The whole idea that hp represents your ability to turn lethal blows into less lethal ones and stamina never made much sense because the first one shouldn't diminish that much over time and if you are really losing stamina, then your hp shoukd go down when you attack not just when you get hit.to me using it for anything other than damage introduces all kinds of believability issues. There are problems with the simple hp system for damage as well (no woundpenalties), but it is adequate for that.

 

[steeldragons]

The short answer, Li, is that there really isn't any.

I've never deducted hit points from people because they "feel weak" or lose HP the longer they are in a fight/a battle goes because of exhaustion.

If they are, say, struck by a shadow or wraith or something and saps Str. or Con. points, that's not taking away HP, per se, but it can just as easily lead to death.

In extreme environments (arctic cold, desert heat, three days of forced march) then there is ongoing sapping HP damage to enforce the fatigue and bodily strain of spending time in such areas/making such effort. But, say, climbing a mountain all afternoon, yeah the lesser Str/Con folks are probably winded, sore, etc. for story "realism" but not taking actual HP damage from it...and when the ogre jumps out of the cave ahead of them, they can fight just fine...adrenalin and all that.

My players, in general, are pretty good about RPing the damage they take. The Fighter with 3 HP left is likely to opt for the "I heroically push through the pain to renew my assault". The mage or cleric (if not well-armored) with 3 HP is likely to remove themselves or at least back away from the combat and try to hide or help with spells from afar. They know their character is close to death and play it up accordingly.

"Glancing blows", "minor scratches/flesh wounds", a blow that does a lot of damage but doesn't take you down is likely in the shoulder or in the thigh or slices through your abdomen but miraculously does not do immense organ damage that stops you in your tracks (narratively speaking), and bumps and bruises are the nom de guerre for my games. At least until you hit that magic "0 HP" and fall over unconscious/finally "give" in to the pains and wounds.

Yes, if you are at 1 HP, there is no real mechanical reason you can't attack "as effectively" as at full or half. It's just part of playing a fantasy RpG like D&D. That's that last "I've got one more breath left in me and I'm going to use it!" knowing full well that if you don't kill whatever you are attacking, you are probably going to die when its their attack. It's part of the "heroic" narrative and I've had a great many "show stopping" scenes and moments with characters making that "final charge"...some succeed. Some don't. But that's the nature of the game.

I have experienced no disruption of play by considering HP nothing more than physical damage. But, again, that my games and the players I've had the fortune of playing with. Someone who is looking for the books/rules and numbers to tell them everything that can/can't happen in the game is likely not going to be happy with such a style of play.

To each their own...long as they're having fun.

If anything, just bring it up with the players. Explain that you're not goign to penalize them for making attacks with 2 HP, but your characters aren't stupid or suicidal (or maybe they are! haha). They KNOW they're hurt. They know they're on their last legs...and need some healing BAD! How they play it is up to them. Make the last ditch effort to win the battle or try to hide or run away, I don't care. Do what your character would do.

But I make it very clear out of game and maintain it narratively in game, that you are not just struttin' along completely up to snuff and then, POOF, you're unconscious (or dead). Unless, of course, its some massive fireball, dragon breath, surprise ambush crit/natural 20, a boulder landing on you or a 50' fall, etc. that does enough damage to take you from full HP to 0 in a single blow, obviously. But for a normal eroding of HP, trading blows, throughout a battle, no.

But no, I've never had any significant instances where treating HP purely as physical damage of varying degrees was a problem.

Naturally, other player's/DM's experiences may vary.
--SD

 

[Li Shenron]

1) HP would never increase higher than 4 for most humaniods and D&D would have to introduce injury penalties

Ok for this comment about the limit!

2) D&D's humanoids would be able to to take take multiple stabs in the heart and stand unaffected.

Hit Points represents stamina used to dodge and parry, morale to keep fighting, combat knowledge used to turn make blow misses and grazing hits, luck, divine intervention, and other factors used to make attacks not hit; for a reason. Weapon attacks are rather lethal in D&D. So the game assumes most beings never take a good hit until you are killed to prevent OHKOs all the time or guys walking around with brain wounds.

Not ok for this second point.

First, called shots and targeting areas need not be part of the core rules. Most gaming groups don't use them, probably it's too much a level of detail for average gamers. If you're not using such additional rules, a character doesn't get a stab in the heart until the DM says so, thus there's no need to explain or know more.

About the second sentence... I know what are the common explanations, and they all carry more questions or need for explanation (which in turn make some group want more rules, and add design complexity). The equally common counterargument to those is that most of them shouldn't apply if the victim of the attack is unconscious, unaware or unable to react: all that's left as an explanation is luck (which is already in the dice rolls) and divine intervention which is not really a better explanation than "it just happens" or "it's magic". So then back to my question I could say... why aren't we content enough to say "it just happens" that HP are simply physical damage?

 

[Hassassin]

Because then...

1) HP would never increase higher than 4 for most humaniods and D&D would have to introduce injury penalties

This isn't a problem if you interpret HP as physical damage, but 1 HP as different for different targets. 10 damage to an uninjured 10th level fighter is a minor flesh wound, while 10 damage to a 1st level fighter is a serious wound that will take a week to heal.

 

[Minigiant]

Ok for this comment about the limit!



Not ok for this second point.

First, called shots and targeting areas need not be part of the core rules. Most gaming groups don't use them, probably it's too much a level of detail for average gamers. If you're not using such additional rules, a character doesn't get a stab in the heart until the DM says so, thus there's no need to explain or know more.

About the second sentence... I know what are the common explanations, and they all carry more questions or need for explanation (which in turn make some group want more rules, and add design complexity). The equally common counterargument to those is that most of them shouldn't apply if the victim of the attack is unconscious, unaware or unable to react: all that's left as an explanation is luck (which is already in the dice rolls) and divine intervention which is not really a better explanation than "it just happens" or "it's magic". So then back to my question I could say... why aren't we content enough to say "it just happens" that HP are simply physical damage?

I'm not taking about called shot. I'm taking about a kobold's 15 5-damage hit on a 75 HP fighter. Currently he parries some of those attacks at the last second, some are bruises, some are reactionary dodges.

But if they are all are physical hits, the fighter took fifteen stab wounds before falling unconscious.

This isn't a problem if you interpret HP as physical damage, but 1 HP as different for different targets. 10 damage to an uninjured 10th level fighter is a minor flesh wound, while 10 damage to a 1st level fighter is a serious wound that will take a week to heal.

You have a 10th level fighter should survived 15 short sword attacks.

If they are all hit him and caused damage, he has over a dozen wounds. You know have to describe all those wounds as paper cuts to make sense.

This is why the game assumes some of those "hits" never actually hit. Some are real hits, some are just touches of the weapon, and some are actually misses forced by the defender.