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
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Why rename HP & Saves?
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="Lacyon" data-source="post: 4200013" data-attributes="member: 63046"><p>Are you talking about spending X development resources making the combat system playable and fun, and Y development resources making it sensible? If so, you are not spending X+Y resources making it fun and are therefore sacrificing some potential for fun in exchange for "sensibility".</p><p></p><p>If you are talking instead about a system where you spent X+Y resources building the system to be fun, and tacked on a "sensible" explanation, you are back to the same "problem" that HP have, which is that the "sensible" explanation doesn't satisfy everyone's definition of sensible.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>These are fundamentally hit points by another name. You may change the recovery mechanics, but those have changed from edition to edition anyway and in 4E everyone recovers their own HP pretty quickly outside a fight anyway. You also need to add in some kind of "toughness" mechanic that represents actual "meat points" (see various Vitality Point systems), or else "get hit by the ogre's club" becomes a non-option (cake or death? I'll have the cake please), making the system overall more complex.</p><p></p><p>Besides simply being more complex to implement than HP, you're still back to square one in most gameplay. Any sufficiently bad <s>hit</s>fate will be avoided by spending your <s>hit</s>fate points. You're making it so that grapples and such can be avoided, too, but any sufficiently dangerous grapple <em>will</em> be avoided, and any attacker controlled by a player who knows the rules then won't bother grappling unless it's going to cause a bigger fate point loss than the attack he makes instead. This means that in practice, among skilled players, nobody ever gets grappled - it's a non-maneuver in actual combat, only usable when you've run an opponent out of fate points and don't want to kill them outright. That's fine for those who <em>want</em> grappling and the like not to happen in most fights, but for those who like the maneuvers aren't going to have too much fun.</p><p></p><p>Then you're adding in the idea that instead of people <em>surviving</em> long falls off cliffs (for example), they just don't fall off in the first place, which is actually something I'll consider in my next game without changing the mechanics at all. I can do this just fine on its own because HPs are abstract.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Nothing you can't already do if you're willing to accept HP as abstract. Ogre minions and level 10 <s>hobbit</s>halfling rogues get along in the same game just fine.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lacyon, post: 4200013, member: 63046"] Are you talking about spending X development resources making the combat system playable and fun, and Y development resources making it sensible? If so, you are not spending X+Y resources making it fun and are therefore sacrificing some potential for fun in exchange for "sensibility". If you are talking instead about a system where you spent X+Y resources building the system to be fun, and tacked on a "sensible" explanation, you are back to the same "problem" that HP have, which is that the "sensible" explanation doesn't satisfy everyone's definition of sensible. These are fundamentally hit points by another name. You may change the recovery mechanics, but those have changed from edition to edition anyway and in 4E everyone recovers their own HP pretty quickly outside a fight anyway. You also need to add in some kind of "toughness" mechanic that represents actual "meat points" (see various Vitality Point systems), or else "get hit by the ogre's club" becomes a non-option (cake or death? I'll have the cake please), making the system overall more complex. Besides simply being more complex to implement than HP, you're still back to square one in most gameplay. Any sufficiently bad [S]hit[/S]fate will be avoided by spending your [S]hit[/S]fate points. You're making it so that grapples and such can be avoided, too, but any sufficiently dangerous grapple [I]will[/I] be avoided, and any attacker controlled by a player who knows the rules then won't bother grappling unless it's going to cause a bigger fate point loss than the attack he makes instead. This means that in practice, among skilled players, nobody ever gets grappled - it's a non-maneuver in actual combat, only usable when you've run an opponent out of fate points and don't want to kill them outright. That's fine for those who [I]want[/I] grappling and the like not to happen in most fights, but for those who like the maneuvers aren't going to have too much fun. Then you're adding in the idea that instead of people [I]surviving[/I] long falls off cliffs (for example), they just don't fall off in the first place, which is actually something I'll consider in my next game without changing the mechanics at all. I can do this just fine on its own because HPs are abstract. Nothing you can't already do if you're willing to accept HP as abstract. Ogre minions and level 10 [S]hobbit[/S]halfling rogues get along in the same game just fine. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Why rename HP & Saves?
Top