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="JohnSnow" data-source="post: 5828296" data-attributes="member: 32164"><p>Just a random thought here...</p><p></p><p>Is it possible that in an effort to provide "balanced" encounters where death was a real risk, the designers changed the parameters of the system? In other words, each encounter was assumed to use such and such a percentage of your resources (including hit points). What that means is that there is no real risk of death until you get to that last encounter. That's consistent - old D&D was a little swingy at the low levels, but after you got past those, you were't really at risk until you'd gotten through a few combats.</p><p></p><p>3e started down the path to 4th by making wands of cure light wounds an available option. Suddenly, we could have people dropping to 0 hp in each and every encounter. Of course, you had to have serious magical healing available in order to play that way, but whatever. Thus originated the notion of someone who HAD to play the cleric (or the need to have "healing sticks").</p><p></p><p>Then Fourth Edition came along and "hit points" became entirely a per encounter resource. Which meant that you can now offer a real risk of dropping to 0 hp (and possible death!) in every single encounter. In other words, you've ratcheted up the tension of the game by raising the risk factor. The downside is that "hit points" have to come back much more quickly or you can't keep this high tension factor. Which means you have to either rely on magical healing, or make hit points even more "fatigue, luck and combat skill" than they have ever been before. And of course, coming back from 0 is even more problematic with that sort of system.</p><p></p><p>However, to keep some aspect of the traditional attrition-based side of adventuring alive, WotC came up with the concept of each character having a limited number of daily "healing surges."</p><p></p><p>Basically, I'm suggesting that the treatment of hit points has changed over the last two editions in order to raise the tension factor of the game. But the designers never actually decided what "dropping to 0" really means in the context of the new system that has evolved.</p><p></p><p>Thoughts?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JohnSnow, post: 5828296, member: 32164"] Just a random thought here... Is it possible that in an effort to provide "balanced" encounters where death was a real risk, the designers changed the parameters of the system? In other words, each encounter was assumed to use such and such a percentage of your resources (including hit points). What that means is that there is no real risk of death until you get to that last encounter. That's consistent - old D&D was a little swingy at the low levels, but after you got past those, you were't really at risk until you'd gotten through a few combats. 3e started down the path to 4th by making wands of cure light wounds an available option. Suddenly, we could have people dropping to 0 hp in each and every encounter. Of course, you had to have serious magical healing available in order to play that way, but whatever. Thus originated the notion of someone who HAD to play the cleric (or the need to have "healing sticks"). Then Fourth Edition came along and "hit points" became entirely a per encounter resource. Which meant that you can now offer a real risk of dropping to 0 hp (and possible death!) in every single encounter. In other words, you've ratcheted up the tension of the game by raising the risk factor. The downside is that "hit points" have to come back much more quickly or you can't keep this high tension factor. Which means you have to either rely on magical healing, or make hit points even more "fatigue, luck and combat skill" than they have ever been before. And of course, coming back from 0 is even more problematic with that sort of system. However, to keep some aspect of the traditional attrition-based side of adventuring alive, WotC came up with the concept of each character having a limited number of daily "healing surges." Basically, I'm suggesting that the treatment of hit points has changed over the last two editions in order to raise the tension factor of the game. But the designers never actually decided what "dropping to 0" really means in the context of the new system that has evolved. Thoughts? [/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