Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Why do we really need HP to represent things other than physical injuries?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dausuul" data-source="post: 5827891" data-attributes="member: 58197"><p>It's a very legitimate question and worth discussing.</p><p></p><p>The purpose of hit points is to be limited but reliable protection versus death. As long as you have a decent amount of hit points left, your character is safe from being wiped out by a single lucky hit. However, that protection is exhaustible, so you <em>can</em> still die if you get in over your head. D&D expects player characters to get in a lot of fights, and the hit point system is a nice way to balance "PCs should live longer than half a session" against "PCs should not be invulnerable."</p><p></p><p>What this means is you need to have enough hit points that one hit can't kill you. For many people, this introduces believability issues, since in real life one hit can quite easily be fatal. Those issues get worse as characters advance and their hp increase*; as others have noted, you get to the point where fighters routinely take dozens of stab wounds without going down. Gary Gygax addressed those issues with the very first <em>Hit Points Are Not Physical Toughness Paragraph.</em> Every edition includes a version of this paragraph somewhere in the core rulebooks, and every edition except 4E totally ignores it throughout the rest of the system.</p><p></p><p>I do think that every hit which deals damage should be narrated as <em>connecting</em>, for a whole bunch of reasons--for example, many attacks have "rider" effects such as poison or weakness, and those don't make any sense if the attack didn't inflict some kind of injury. But an attack which inflicts 10 points of damage has to be narrated differently depending on the target's hit point total. To the high-level fighter with 100 hit points, it's a grazing cut. To the apprentice wizard with 5 hit points, it's a critical and possibly mortal wound.</p><p></p><p>Myself, I would like to see D&D move to a wound/vit system where "physical toughness" and "defensive skill" are split out into their own pools. It addresses this concern as well as several others. I don't expect it to be the default system in 5E, but perhaps it can be an optional module in the core.</p><p></p><p>[SIZE=-2]*The need for hit points to increase with level is a separate issue. There are reasons why I think it's a good idea, but I won't get into that just now.[/SIZE]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dausuul, post: 5827891, member: 58197"] It's a very legitimate question and worth discussing. The purpose of hit points is to be limited but reliable protection versus death. As long as you have a decent amount of hit points left, your character is safe from being wiped out by a single lucky hit. However, that protection is exhaustible, so you [I]can[/I] still die if you get in over your head. D&D expects player characters to get in a lot of fights, and the hit point system is a nice way to balance "PCs should live longer than half a session" against "PCs should not be invulnerable." What this means is you need to have enough hit points that one hit can't kill you. For many people, this introduces believability issues, since in real life one hit can quite easily be fatal. Those issues get worse as characters advance and their hp increase*; as others have noted, you get to the point where fighters routinely take dozens of stab wounds without going down. Gary Gygax addressed those issues with the very first [I]Hit Points Are Not Physical Toughness Paragraph.[/I] Every edition includes a version of this paragraph somewhere in the core rulebooks, and every edition except 4E totally ignores it throughout the rest of the system. I do think that every hit which deals damage should be narrated as [I]connecting[/I], for a whole bunch of reasons--for example, many attacks have "rider" effects such as poison or weakness, and those don't make any sense if the attack didn't inflict some kind of injury. But an attack which inflicts 10 points of damage has to be narrated differently depending on the target's hit point total. To the high-level fighter with 100 hit points, it's a grazing cut. To the apprentice wizard with 5 hit points, it's a critical and possibly mortal wound. Myself, I would like to see D&D move to a wound/vit system where "physical toughness" and "defensive skill" are split out into their own pools. It addresses this concern as well as several others. I don't expect it to be the default system in 5E, but perhaps it can be an optional module in the core. [SIZE=-2]*The need for hit points to increase with level is a separate issue. There are reasons why I think it's a good idea, but I won't get into that just now.[/SIZE] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Why do we really need HP to represent things other than physical injuries?
Top