Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="gizmo33" data-source="post: 3772250" data-attributes="member: 30001">There are no hitpoints in novels.  I just said tired because there is a correlation between the tired concept in novels and the hitpoints concept in DnD.  The example that RC gives from the Mars books IMO is a pretty good example of what DnD means by the concept of hitpoints.Remember, this conversation started with a claim by a poster that blinked in and said that heroes being able to fight all day without rest or consideration for resources was common in novels and movies.This is an example of why I said that the "4 encounters per day" thing was misleading.  In order to translate that into novel/movie terms, you'd have to know something about the APL and CRs you're dealing with.  In the one example we talked about, I could suggest rough values for Gimli vs. the orcs.  But as far as finding exactly 4 per day - first of all that doesn't happen in DnD because of the variables.  Secondly, it would be hard to seek it out in a novel because of the uncertainty of translation between the two systems.  But that uncertainty also makes it possible that the number of orcs that Gimli and Legolas killed during a battle was *exactly* equal to 4 encounters of APL=EL.  And it wouldn't have to anyway because the 4 encounters thing does not take into account APL <> EL or how lucky your dice rolls are.It's sufficient to show existence - the example was not chosen for popularity.  On the subject of popularity:  We've analyzed the subject of "magic in novels" before.  There are relatively few instances where stories attempt to present the "magic system" of their world in any degree of detail that would be suitable for a roleplaying game.  Remember, the magic system is something that players have to understand well enough to make meaningful decisions in.  Or, at least IMO, you can't have a magic system that runs off of DM fiat.Yea, this is a story teller style.  I don't run my games this way.  My players are the ones that decide what they do.  My job is to come up with reasonable consequences.  "You feel tired." is not something I say without some basis in the rules.  In all of your examples the DM is forcing important strategic choices on to the players (which may be an acceptable part of that gaming style).What source material?  Helm's Deep?  I don't know what "distort the functionality of the ruleset" means.The "answer of few syllables" to this is "read 90% of the posts by me, RC, and Imaro".  I think it comes down to the intersection of our preferred gaming style and other things.  In my case, I just don't see my "source material" (like the Battle of Maldon or even Helm's Deep) justifying the "all per-encounter resources" model.The novels aren't going to use game terminology so it's a matter of imprecise translation.  In any case, I was starting off answering a rather hyperbolic attack of "ludicrous" to my burden of explanation wasn't that high.  If you want me to now make the case that there is an interpretation of a bulk of fantasy literature that *mandates* a resource system like the one that 3E uses, that's tougher.In this particular case, the fact that Gimli is dealing with daily resources is implicit in the decisions being made.  It's implicit in the fact that the army at Helm's Deep doesn't simply march on to Gondor two minutes after their fight ends.  Resource management is not typically of interest to readers of a fantasy narrative, but I think it's existence is implied by the way the character's act.</blockquote>

Verification