Why rename HP & Saves?

[FitzTheRuke]

I've just read Morrus'(?) 4E review, and I'm struck with a thought:

Why rename Hit Points and Saving Throws?

It's not really an issue of the fact that they are sacred cows, it's that the names still perfectly represent what they are.

Hit Points are, and always have been, magical little points representing general attrician. They are called "Hit Points" because they are removed when an opponent scores a rules-approved "Hit" agianst your character. It has NOTHING to do with wether the story involves the character being struck for physical damage, weakened with fatigue, or running out of luck. A successful "Hit" (defined variously in different editions, but always based on a high-enough D20 roll to succeed against your defenses) against your character causes a loss in Hit Points - Hense, the name.

Saving Throws have always been "Throw this die, it may save your character's life." This is why they are called "Saving Throws" The Saving Throws of 3.x (far superior to earlier editions) were so ingrained in the actions of the character, that they were clearly ways the characters were defending themselve, and so, the change to Defenses. The method by which the character is saving themselves with a Saving Throw has in other editions been less clear, and 4E is a return to that. Story-wise what's happening is dependent on what effect you're saving against, what caused the effect, the cercumstances at the time, character shtick, and the whim of the player or DM. IMO there SHOULD be a good story behind what the character is doing, and this Saving Throw mechanic leaves it open for me to consider all the factors above.

So the names are fine, as they always have been. The only change is in how narrowly some have viewed the concepts. Expand your view and it's easy to see how they work in the new system.

Fitz

 

[Moon-Lancer]

I was under the impression that hit points were always abstract. think about it like this. If hit points were literally the damage a character can take and receive, does that mean having more hit points allows a character to receive more stabs to the heart or that they are harder to decapitate? When you think about it, hit points as a means to have the ability to receive multiple deadly and fatal attacks or blows rather then avoid the blow nearly missing the heart or instead of taking a sword to the neck taking it to the shoulder, gets kind of silly. hence why hit points work better as an abstract means.

sorry for the run on sentience.

 

[Torchlyte]

The question does not concern original intent, but popular interpretation.

 

[mmadsen]

Since hit points are really meant to be plot-protection points, they should (a) have a different name, like fate points, and (b) be useful for more than enduring "hits" from physical attacks.

I'm a bit surprised that the 4E designers didn't go this route, since they were clearly concerned about save-or-die spells. If you let fate points be used against to-hit rolls and to boost saving throws, everything just makes sense. (Actually hurting someone would probably be a Fort-like Damage Save, which fate points could of course boost.)

 

[TerraDave]

But that perception will switch as people play 4E.

And moon-lancer is right. Charecters in D&D never got bigger or gained body mass through leveling. 8 points of damage has always meant something very different to a 10th level charecter than a 1st level one.

 

[D'karr]

The question does not concern original intent, but popular interpretation.

If popular interpretation is wrong, don't change the original intent.

 

[Torchlyte]

If popular interpretation is wrong, don't change the original intent.

Unless, of course, you're selling a product.

To be clear, I'm not saying that they should necessarily change hit points to ___ points. I'm just saying that one of the points in favor of doing so is valid.

 

[mmadsen]

The question does not concern original intent, but popular interpretation.

Well, it's not just intent and subjective interpretation but what the game mechanics model. After all, you lose hit points after being hit, and the amount of hit points you lose is a function of the amount of damage done, and that amount of damage depends on the size of the weapon and the strength of its wielder. Further, the amount of hit points you get is increased by increased Constitution, not increased Dexterity or Wisdom. Further, these hit points are ablative and used up, but they can be recovered via healing magic. And so on.

Hit points aren't particularly abstract -- but to make them work we have to hand-wave a lot of things that don't make sense.

 

[Rex Blunder]

A run on sentience is always trouble at the brain bank.

I think hit points haven't changed fundamentally since 1e: they were always a conceptual nightmare that happened to work well in gameplay.

Saving throws have definitely changed meaning. It will take a little getting used to in gameplay.

 

[D'karr]

Saving throws have definitely changed meaning. It will take a little getting used to in gameplay.

Well, they still do save you from an ongoing effect.