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

[JRRNeiklot]

Frankly, if there was ever a sacred cow that needed killing, hit points are it. It's just so hard to do. You drop them off a mountain and they still survive...

Does no one use the massive damage rule?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

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 it is exactly the opposite of what hp represent...

or how would you explain fighting at full strength until dropped below zero. You should instead think about a module, how you represent wounds. (Maybe doing something with constitution)

 

[JRRNeiklot]

And if everyone sees that the fighter just lost 50% of his hit points in a single hit of physical damage from the maw of a dragon he ... what ... I'm trying to figure out a way to describe this ... he was bitten badly but not badly enough that it broke any bones? He was just bitten by a dragon. The bite actually hit the fighter. Where's the wiggle room in the description of actual physical damage that the fighter took? A scrape isn't going to run the fighter down 50% of his hit points in a single shot.

He's got 3 broken ribs and a cracked sternum. But he's a FIGHTER. He sucks it up and fights on.

 

[Mattachine]

Does no one use the massive damage rule?

A lot of people never used it in 3e (which is the only edition that has it) for two reasons:

1. It adds another save-or-die effect into the mix, which lots of folks weren't happy with already.

2. Much of the time time, it added another "only fail on a 1" die roll that slowed combat.


Finally, that doesn't address the issue, but clouds it. If you character has 70 hit points, an attack hitting for 50 hp is a really big deal. If your character has 200 hp, why should a 50 hp attack cause you to save or die? I understand the reasoning for the massive damage rule, but it brings another inconsistency into the game.

 

[Herschel]

If HP were simply physical damage there would never be character "advancement" in being able to take on foes and foes would all be the same without constant TPKs. IOW, Kobolds would be just as dangerous as Dragons otherwise a single dragon hit kills a character and Magic Missile would be the most powerful spell needed.

 

[Minigiant]

Does no one use the massive damage rule?

If you can take 20d6 damage, you should be able to beat a 15 Fort DC.

If not, the character deserves to die.

 

[Li Shenron]

The discussion is not complicated enough...

...let's add coup the grace to the fray!

 

[Fanaelialae]

He's got 3 broken ribs and a cracked sternum. But he's a FIGHTER. He sucks it up and fights on.

Sounds like the fighters in your game break a lot of bones in their chests. Lucky that those ribs never puncture their lungs, and that hp loss never results in them breaking anything "mechanically important" (like an arm or a leg).

For me, this sort of thing is acceptable is small doses. It's certainly heroic for a fighter to still be fighting when lesser men couldn't. However, if it happens constantly (as is likely in high level D&D game) it stretches my sense of versimilitude to the point of incredulity.

I'd rather describe that as a deadly attack that was turned at the last possible moment by the fighter's great skill at arms. However, the effort thereof leaves him unsteady and more open to the next attack. Having the skill to avoid an attack that would have killed a lesser man is also heroic, but doesn't result in the same issues (as above) for me.

 

[JohnSnow]

Fun! Lessee...off the top of my head?

<Cut awesome description of a 50 hp hit that does minimal damage mostly due to luck and fatigue>

Look, let's deal with this honestly, shall we?

We, as human beings, know that a single sword thrust to a vital target will KILL your average human. I'll let Gary take over here...

"It is quite unreasonable to assume that as a character gains levels of ability in his or her class that a corresponding gain in actual ability to sustain physical damage takes place. It is preposterous to state such an assumption, for if we are to assume that a man is killed by a sword thrust which does 4 hit points of damage, we must similarly assume that a hero could on the average, withstand five such thrusts before being slain!"

Now, Gary didn't make them just straight luck and fatigue - there was some divine favor, sixth sense, and what-not wrapped up in "hit points." As a result, he assumed that considerable time would still be required to "regain (one's) physical and metaphysical peak" (basically, the "powers that be" are gonna take their sweet time restoring you - getting out before that is "pushing your luck"). However, I will point out that with all his fudging, Gary determined that any character (who didn't drop to 0 or less - see below) would still be fully healed in 4 weeks. From the standpoint of "real-world" healing of "real damage," that is REMARKABLY fast.

Now, as I said, Gary also had much different rules for dropping to 0 (or fewer) hit points. A character so inflicted would remain unconscious for 1-6 turns (10-60 minutes), and then would have to have complete rest for a full week minimum. No amount of magical healing short of the (6th-level!) spell Heal could speed this up (bear in mind that's a higher-level spell than Raise Dead). Gary also suggests that a character who dropped to -6 or lower hit points before receiving treatment of some kind (first aid or some form of magical healing) might incur considerable scarring or the loss of some member. There was no word on magical healing (shot of, I suspect heal or regeneration) fixing that.

Personally, I don't want a character that can take the equivalent of 20 sword thrusts or be pierced by dozens of arrows (or swim through lava) without being killed. That would shoot verisimilitude in the head for me.

No thanks.

 

[BobTheNob]

Wow, I havent heard this question asked for years.

Really, does it matter? Who cares if you cant in your mind imagine that HP is "stamina or luck when dodging" or its "actual wounds"?

Its an abstract model. It does exactly what its meant to do : represent damage in an abstract way.

I remember Long ago (Long Long Long ago, back 2e long ago) assuming in our arrogance that we could do better, so we came up with models for broken limbs and cuts this and bleeding that. We stood back and stared with pride at the charts we created and thought we were titans of game design. Then we started playing...

...and threw them out one month later. They complicated everything, slowed combat down, raised odd questions like "How can I break a bone when attacking an ooze?" and created imbalances that you wouldnt believe.

Is HP the best way to do it? Probably not. Does that matter? Hell no.

Coming into 5e one of the key concerns I have is that combat is faster. I want it to be a far lesser portion of play time and frankly, taking one of the simplist aspects of D&D design and assuming it can be done better and adding levels of complication to it is just completely the wrong direction to go. Been there, done that, and the grass is NOT greener on the other side.