Quote from: Sacrosanct;768741However, and this is one thing that is never done in D&D games but would be done in pretty much every single combat where melee would take place, is the rucks would be dropped.  If you wanted to be a realistic DM, you would assign a pretty hefty penalty to fighting while wearing a full ruck.

Yeah, that's one of those things I swear I will emphasis before running every game, and then utterly fail to emphasis while actually running the game...

We did do that in Runequest, but I don't recall anyone ever doing it in D&D.

Quote from: jadrax;768742Yeah, that's one of those things I swear I will emphasis before running every game, and then utterly fail to emphasis while actually running the game...

We enforced it but it was forgotten from time to time. What did get ignored constantly was the weight and general unwieldiness of treasure. We rarely played at levels where teleportation was a thing or had access to multiple bags of holding or similar.

Actually, I did run a WFRP game where for ages they had a hand cart thing that everything got carried on, which caused much fun when it was stolen/got stuck/wouldn't fit down the obvious one-way dungeon...

Quote from: Sacrosanct;76874180 to 100lb ruck sacks were the norm, depending on how long you were planning on being gone.

However, and this is one thing that is never done in D&D games but would be done in pretty much every single combat where melee would take place, is the rucks would be dropped.  If you wanted to be a realistic DM, you would assign a pretty hefty penalty to fighting while wearing a full ruck.

I guess it's one of those things you never really address in the game for the sake of the game, like most bathroom breaks and getting normal illnesses.

Well, if you actually track encumbrance and reduce move for it then it does have an effect.

In GURPS is has a major effect because your move rate affects your reaction time and initiative.

Quote from: cranebump;768683I think when we can't agree that a miss is actually a miss, then we have problems even discussing the issue, because we can't frame it in the same way. DoaM assumes one ALWAYS hits, and sometimes hits harder. There is no "miss." In 13th age, pretty much everything "hits," so they avoid the argument (and make everyone feel good about themselves in the process, evidently).

(you're right about HP's--those discussions just go round and round and round [which is why the system could use a wounds module, IMHO]).

Thats the problem.

If you view HP one way then hits and misses may have to follow through. In fact technically then every "hit" is a miss until the last one that drops you if you follow that angle.

If you view it differently then the rest may follow and you get a potentially radically different idea of what combat is.

As for wounds. Those were added way back in OD&D Blackmoor, and hit locations to back it up. While neet and servicible. It just doesnt fit the totally abstracted D&D system and adds Battletech style bookkeeping and limb loss + bleeding out. If I wanted Rolemaster I'd play that instead. aheh.

Quote from: Omega;768778Thats the problem.

If you view HP one way then hits and misses may have to follow through. In fact technically then every "hit" is a miss until the last one that drops you if you follow that angle.

If you view it differently then the rest may follow and you get a potentially radically different idea of what combat is.

As for wounds. Those were added way back in OD&D Blackmoor, and hit locations to back it up. While neet and servicible. It just doesnt fit the totally abstracted D&D system and adds Battletech style bookkeeping and limb loss + bleeding out. If I wanted Rolemaster I'd play that instead. aheh.

Nooooo!  Not "chartmaster!":-)

I'm using a very simple wounds tracker for an upcoming b/x knockoff (microlite81 system).  PC have body equal to Strength.  You get critter, you take HP damage plus 1 body point. Unhealed BP's give you -1 per. Heal at 1 BP a day.  Spells heal 1 BP per 5 pts on the dice. I coupled this with faster hp recovery 10% of your max/hour.  No death unless BP's per each 0.  Also ported level drain over to BP's, though uncertain how many BP's each level drain attack should be (I figured 1 level=1 BP.

Quote from: jibbajibba;768637Again I am not saying the target moved I am saying can you imagine just missing. It seems like you can't.
I have played around with weapons for years and it is possible to miss a tree stump that isn't moving at all.

You've played around, which does not equate to the level of  training Fighters go through to receive the sort of "proficiency" to not miss a non-moving stump. But sure, we'll say that the 5% of the time he does miss a non-moving stump is akin to rolling a natural 1.    

Quote from: jibbajibba;768637Um ... from my explanation its obvious they develop a larger range of skills that allow them to mitigate damage. And again they don't loose HPs when they take damage, they "spend" HP to avoid taking damage because HPs represent their skill in combat and in not taking damage.

Then how do you explain when someone is poisoned from a hit? You spend HP to not succumb to venom?

Quote from: jibbajibba;768637But you just said that gaining levels must mean they don't gain meat and it must be skill. Hits in D&D don't bleed,  they don't cause discomfort or a drop in ability (except the ability to avoid the next wound) so they can't be cuts can they? Surely its more logical to say the blow was turned from damage into something else by HP.

What I asked is how one narrates gaining HP from leveling up. I honestly don't narrate or question the HP increase because it's purely gamist at it's core (and I'm OK with that) just as I don't delve too deeply into things like how ones loses or replenishes HP from gamist methods (DoaM or Inspiration, non-magical healing). They don't need to make a ton of realistic sense for me to enjoy the game.

When someone gains a level I accept that it's part skill, part meat, part luck, part *plot armor* whatever. Thus when someone is "hit" (ie. the AC was equaled or exceeded by the to-hit roll) then someone takes damage. Explain it however you like, by using HP to deflect the hit or that the sword just cut you and you lost health. I also see why "cuts" must equate to some level of inability to do stuff? Have you ever cut your hand but still had the ability to function with it? Have you ever jarred you knee or toe but was able to walk comfortably in the next 10 minutes?

Quote from: jibbajibba;768637But there is an explicit relationship in D&D in a hit = HP loss. You loose HPs in a variety of explicit ways. You fall = HP loss, you get hit in combat = HP loss, you get caught in a fireball = HP loss. The relationship is explicit and it's -  "whenever the result of an incident would have caused a wound or other damage you loose HPs. If the loss of HPs exceeds your current HP total you are knocked unconscious".

Sure, but people can also Save and lose HP too. The relationship in D&D is a Hit = HP loss (that hasn't changed) but things can be added to that which alter the relationship on specific cases.

Quote from: jibbajibba;768637I have used a similar system for the last 25 years or so because of these sorts of debates but also due to magical healing, trap damage and PCs of more than 4th level being toally unphased hen 2 guards point loaded heavy crossbows at them from 5 feet away.
However, I feel a complete system would include vitality cost for a wider range of actions and attacking in full armour would be one of those things. In each case though when taking an evasive action the PC needs to decide whether to spend vitality. You roll to hit a hit 5 damage. I can choose to take 5 wounds , maybe loosing an arm, or I can spend 5 vitality to turn the wound into a minor cut. If I want to use a power that costs say 6 vitality I might opt to take the 5 wounds and then expend my remaining 6 vitality on the charge to knock you over the cliff or lift the portcullis or whatever.

Vitality =/= Endurance. Having actually fought in plate and mail the weight is considerable (though not as bad as Chainmail) but fighting in it for a couple of hours isn't terribly bad. Further, I feel that such as system would be painstakingly cumbersome to keep track of.

Quote from: jibbajibba;768637So even where I use such a system I never impose a HP loss on a miss. Doing so removes the possibility that you might actually just miss with your attack.

And that's bad why?

Quote from: jibbajibba;768637Hmmmm... I don't think you can equate a reformating of the entire combat/HP/Damage system with the the folical appearance of one of a number of possible PC racial types. I can see that some beleive that Vancian Casting is of a similar level of importance however I would argue that in the grand scheme of things if a wizard can cast 3 spells due to Slots or 3 spells due to Manna points the actual difference to the game is somewhat limited.

What is "D&D" to people is subjective, yes? Such a Wound/Vitality system could be in place but you said "it wouldn't be D&D". I said that it's subjective because if D&D did use such a system, then it would still be D&D because that's what's on the cover of the book. Systems don't always have to resemble previous iterations for it to be considered the same game.

Further, a departure from HP to a Wounds & Vitality system was supported by D&D in Unearthed Arcana (and IMO works far better for a mess like this) so were they to implement that system inplace of HP, I think it would still be D&D.

What are hit points in D&D?
A historical perspective

Chainmail
Man to Man combat was added to handle smaller scale combat like siege assaults. In this system you cross indexed your weapon vs the target's armor. If you rolled the number or higher you killed the target.

In addition Fantasy Combat was added. Heroes and Superheroes were introduced. Heroes took four hits to kill and Superheroes took 8 hits to kill.

Blackmoor & Greyhawk
When Dave Arneson adapted Chainmail for his Blackmoor campaign he quickly found that 1 hit = 1 kill to be too deadly and too boring. So it was changed to 1d6 per hit and 1d6 damage per blow.

Heroes were given 4d6 hit points and Superheroes 8d6 hit points. Additional levels were introduced inbetween.

Gygax took Arneson's notes and wrote it up into the form we now know as D&D.

Greyhawk Supplement
This altered the various d6 + modifier rolls of D&D's Men & Magic to a d8 for fighters, d6 for clerics, and a d4 for Magic Users and Thieves.


These three represented the broad phases of the development of hit points. What are hit points? Hit points represent how hard to kill a individual character or creature. Things that are four times as harder to kill get four times the amount of hit points or eight times.

It all goes back to Chainmail abstraction of handling Heroes and Superheroes in medieval combat. Gygax made them harder to kill by require more hits. That design decision has echoed down throughout the various edition to the present.

Everything else is a consequence of that.

Quote from: estar;768831When Dave Arneson adapted Chainmail for his Blackmoor campaign he quickly found that 1 hit = 1 kill to be too deadly and too boring. So it was changed to 1d6 per hit and 1d6 damage per blow.

As I understand it, it was originally 'your weapon hits 1d6 times' rather than 'your weapon does 1d6 damage' which is subtly different.

Arguably, if they had stuck to that rational, D&D would make a lot more sense.

- Practically speaking, it's easier to narrate hits as hits, or very-near-misses, when you're running a fight, and the very-near-miss part is annoying enough by itself. When you then have damage-on-a-miss mechanics, your narration can wind up being entirely divorced from the die rolls, which is worse, or you just dispense with the narration altogether, which is a style thing and IMO worse/less engaging

- now, if you have wounds/vitality, and I don't have a ton of experience with those systems, but it strikes me that you can have a lot of things affect vitality, including morale, which would have the salutary effect of making characters want to run away when they're scared

Quote from: Imp;768844- Practically speaking, it's easier to narrate hits as hits, or very-near-misses, when you're running a fight, and the very-near-miss part is annoying enough by itself. When you then have damage-on-a-miss mechanics, your narration can wind up being entirely divorced from the die rolls, which is worse, or you just dispense with the narration altogether, which is a style thing and IMO worse/less engaging

I feel your correct, it does put the person narrating the scene with DoaM into a relative box. You don't want to narrate that the attack completely missed and the damage done be.....well "magical?". Thus I feel most narrations are glancing blows. Of course, you can narrate it as fatigue, that dodging and avoiding the big weapon is taking a visible toll on the target. It mostly comes down to what people like or don't like doing. Personally, I don't have a problem with it but I see that a portion of the fan-base does, hence it's exclusion from the Basic PDF. I'm not sure if it made it into the PHB or not?

Quote from: Imp;768844- now, if you have wounds/vitality, and I don't have a ton of experience with those systems, but it strikes me that you can have a lot of things affect vitality, including morale, which would have the salutary effect of making characters want to run away when they're scared

It's what I'd love to employ when running revised 3rd Edition and hopefully D&D:Next. The V&W system, I feel, also makes Critical hits EXTREMELY scary regardless of level. So fighting goblins at 10th level is sort of "meh" until one Crits on you and your like "OH DAYUM..."

Of course, most "missed" blows being glancing hits/etc. especially makes sense if you consider how much AC is a result of armor.

But, given how contentious it is, and how unimportant it is to the core design, I still think WotC was smart to leave it out.

Quote from: jadrax;768752Actually, I did run a WFRP game where for ages they had a hand cart thing that everything got carried on, which caused much fun when it was stolen/got stuck/wouldn't fit down the obvious one-way dungeon...

If I have the gold or can pool enough. I opt to buy a caravan and horse and make it a mobile base to sortie out from. And assuming it survives a few adventures, work on re-inforcing it. Phantom Steed was great for that as you didnt have to worry about the horse then, which we tended to lose every other adventure or at least have to defend/recover/un-rustle.

Quote from: estar;768831What are hit points in D&D?
A historical perspective

Chainmail
Man to Man combat was added to handle smaller scale combat like siege assaults. In this system you cross indexed your weapon vs the target's armor. If you rolled the number or higher you killed the target.

In addition Fantasy Combat was added. Heroes and Superheroes were introduced. Heroes took four hits to kill and Superheroes took 8 hits to kill.

Blackmoor & Greyhawk
When Dave Arneson adapted Chainmail for his Blackmoor campaign he quickly found that 1 hit = 1 kill to be too deadly and too boring. So it was changed to 1d6 per hit and 1d6 damage per blow.

Heroes were given 4d6 hit points and Superheroes 8d6 hit points. Additional levels were introduced inbetween.

Gygax took Arneson's notes and wrote it up into the form we now know as D&D.

Greyhawk Supplement
This altered the various d6 + modifier rolls of D&D's Men & Magic to a d8 for fighters, d6 for clerics, and a d4 for Magic Users and Thieves.


These three represented the broad phases of the development of hit points. What are hit points? Hit points represent how hard to kill a individual character or creature. Things that are four times as harder to kill get four times the amount of hit points or eight times.

It all goes back to Chainmail abstraction of handling Heroes and Superheroes in medieval combat. Gygax made them harder to kill by require more hits. That design decision has echoed down throughout the various edition to the present.

Everything else is a consequence of that.

A good retrospective.  

Anyways, I prefer the tautological "Hit points are hit points".  Or in other words, I know it when I see it.  And damage on a miss is not "it".