Interpreting hitpoints in D&D 5e - literal injury or abstract?

Omega · April 23, 2016, 10:49:01 PM

Heres another two lycanthrop stoppers for you Opaopajr.

Adventurers Guide:

Wizard Bladesinger: Song of Defense at level 10. Spend a spell slot when take damage to reduce the damage by 5x the level of the slot.

Also the Rogue Mastermind: Misdirection at level 13. When an attack is targeted at you while you have cover from someone within 5ft. You can redirect the attack on them as a reaction.

rawma · April 30, 2016, 03:50:32 PM

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;893103Hmm, first gap is 2, then 3, then 4, then 5. I bet this can be made into an formula.

1 -> (2) 3 -> (3) 6 -> (4) 10 -> (5) 15

f(n) = 1/2 * n * (n+1)

n = 1 -> 1/2 * 1 * 2 = 1
n = 2 -> 1/2 * 2 * 3 = 3
n = 3 -> 1/2 * 3 * 4 = 6 etc.

Verifying the formula:
f(n+1) = 1/2 * (n+1) * (n+2)
f(n+1) - f(n) = 1/2 * (n+1) * (n+2) - (1/2 * n * (n+1)) = 1/2 * (n+1) * ((n+2) - n) = 1/2 * (n+1) * 2 = n+1.
(sum of 1 to n+1) minus (sum of 1 to n) should be n+1, since all the other terms cancel.

RPGPundit · May 02, 2016, 12:17:08 AM

Hit points are hit points.

Bren · May 02, 2016, 12:52:29 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit;895344Hit points are hit points.

And in other news. Circles are circles and rectangles are rectangles.

Christopher Brady · May 02, 2016, 01:03:42 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit;895344Hit points are hit points.

And this, Ladies and Gentlemen, is how D&D gets Existential.

jeff37923 · May 02, 2016, 01:38:12 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit;895344Hit points are hit points.

Quote from: Bren;895351And in other news. Circles are circles and rectangles are rectangles.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;895357And this, Ladies and Gentlemen, is how D&D gets Existential.

In 35+ years of gaming, I have yet to see anything new on the subject of hit points. I would love it if the discussion became Existential.

RPGPundit · May 04, 2016, 06:35:15 AM

What I mean is, trying to reason it out other than as the most effective way to deal with injury without hassle is kind of pointless.

Bren · May 04, 2016, 05:48:17 PM

Quote from: RPGPundit;895757What I mean is, trying to reason it out other than as the most effective way to deal with injury without hassle is kind of pointless.

Dude! This is a role playing game forum. Pointless discussion isn't our middle name, it's our frickin' first name.

Omega · May 04, 2016, 07:28:56 PM

So true. So true.

And dont forget interpreting some rule in the most crack-headed ways imaginable. Which is why we get these pointless discussions.

Dumpire · May 09, 2016, 07:16:40 PM

If hit points are only a convenience, do you think gamers would be happy with a different but equally simple abstraction?

For example, what about a system that said: "You have a toughness of 10. If you take 10 or more damage from a hit, you're dead. Otherwise you're fine." Like the D6 games without all the foofaraw. This rule requires less bookkeeping than HP and is arguably more realistic.

Omega · May 09, 2016, 07:26:48 PM

That doesnt sound more realistic. Less bookkeeping is not allways a good thing.

D&D's abstract HP works. The problem crops up when someone wants it to mean only meat. Or it gets applied to situations it should not have been. Like the oft trotted out falling damage even WOTC botched three times now.

AsenRG · May 09, 2016, 07:33:10 PM

Quote from: Dumpire;896943If hit points are only a convenience, do you think gamers would be happy with a different but equally simple abstraction?

For example, what about a system that said: "You have a toughness of 10. If you take 10 or more damage from a hit, you're dead. Otherwise you're fine." Like the D6 games without all the foofaraw. This rule requires less bookkeeping than HP and is arguably more realistic.

That's Savage Worlds, except it's "taking a Wound". Most PCs can take up to 3 wounds before keeling over from the 4th one, most people are out in 1 Wound.

Given how popular Savage Worlds is, I'd say that yes, a lot of gamers are happy with such a system.

Dumpire · May 09, 2016, 08:43:27 PM

Well, that's a little different ... Do you think Savage Worlds would be as popular as it is if players died with the first Wound but suffered wounds only 25% as often?

QuoteThat doesnt sound more realistic. Less bookkeeping is not allways a good thing.

Well, maybe not to an unemployed bookkeeper.

On realism, yeah, the two are hard to compare; they both create paradoxes.

Ravenswing · May 10, 2016, 01:23:44 AM

Quote from: Dumpire;896943For example, what about a system that said: "You have a toughness of 10. If you take 10 or more damage from a hit, you're dead. Otherwise you're fine." Like the D6 games without all the foofaraw. This rule requires less bookkeeping than HP and is arguably more realistic.

Well, "arguably" -- you're arguing it, after all. But genuinely more realistic? Let me get this straight: there are only two states of being, "perfectly fine" and "dead." "Wounded," "impaired," "bruised," those don't exist. What remotely makes that realistic?

As far as bookkeeping goes, someone who can't handle the amount of bookkeeping involved in keeping track of hit points in most systems ought to enlist a friendly 2nd grader to deal with the scary, scary addition and subtraction.

Christopher Brady · May 10, 2016, 01:58:19 AM

I prefer the Mutants and Masterminds Saving Throw mechanic. Realistic? Nope. Does it feel in genre? To me? Yeap.