|
Post by joatmoniac on Apr 1, 2016 21:53:21 GMT
Did you guys see this article on Angry DM... theangrygm.com/fighting-spirit/It takes a while for him to get to the point, but basically it's an argument of players and monsters being fully functional until they hit zero hp, then they're suddenly down and dying. It doesn't really make sense. I couldn't agree more with both of those sentences, haha. I almost want to have a Not So Angry GM filter where I get the information without all of the other stuff. Which it's fine and works for him, but I could do without, haha. As for the grid disappearing whole sale I think it only works for the right group, but if/once it does it can be a magical thing. I say that knowing that that could NEVER happen with my current table, dun dun duunn. They have played too long with the grid and have minis older than I am, so it would be a long hard sell. Also, I think that using a grid can be helpful for new players and DMs, but not necessary of course. Learning what 30ft movement means compared to others and flanking and soft cover v full cover etc can be helpful to be the catalyst of thinking more openly about circumstances, and asking more questions about their environment. All that to say I think both are great, and that I definitely won't see TotM at my main table for some time.
|
|
|
Post by robosnake on Apr 5, 2016 0:30:43 GMT
Did you guys see this article on Angry DM... theangrygm.com/fighting-spirit/It takes a while for him to get to the point, but basically it's an argument of players and monsters being fully functional until they hit zero hp, then they're suddenly down and dying. It doesn't really make sense. But also it sucks to get worse in combat because of a "death spiral" effect, but that does force parties to sometimes retreat in the face of danger. He comes up with some cool systems, and there are even better alternatives in the comments. I'll definitely be trying some of those, but probably looking for the simplest option. Yes, it's a truly excellent analysis of a systemic problem that has existed in D&D since 1st edition. I plan on implementing/play testing his solution in our upcoming campaign. I definitely agree about the problem, but I'm not sure this is the solution. Have you seen the vitality and wounds system from D20 Star Wars? That was another attempt to address the same problem, as was the "bloodied" condition in 4E in it's own way. I like linking this system to the under-utilized exhaustion system in 5th Ed - not utilized in my games at least. There just aren't that many opportunities to impose it for me. But exhaustion levels are a progressive track, and could function the way health levels function in other games, modeling how injuries are actually, you know, bad. I think a much easier solution would be for each player to figure out that 50% and then 10% of their hit points are, or maybe 50% and 25%. At 50% you get a level of exhaustion and are bloodied. At 25% you get a second level of exhaustion. And then you fall unconscious and make death saves as usual. A system I really like for "hit points", which I've tried to model in some games I've designed, is actually from Middle Earth Online. In MEO, your "hit points" were your morale. You took damage to morale from physical attacks and also from psychological attacks - think a Nazgul's Black Breath for example. When you lost morale, you fled the battle to what would normally be your spawn-point. Then, having recovered your wits, you could run back into the fray. Then there were special attacks and events that dealt wounds, and each wound had a negative effect on you - reducing an ability, slowing your movement, stunning you and making you miss an attack, etc. This sytem also meant that your healers could be anyone who gave you courage or raised your spirits, enabling MMO-style magical healing into Middle-Earth without breaking it. I'd love to see a hack of D&D, especially given how psychic damage is just damage now, that was similar. And now that I've talked about it I'll probably try to think of one.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2016 7:07:23 GMT
100% functional with only 1 HP is generally fine as long as you keep HP an abstraction rather than meat points. That's a discussion unto its own, with some very vocal people on either side of the debate, and additional debate internal to each camp. There's no "right" way to handle it, obviously. We do what works for our groups and GM style.
That said, it is my personal preference to use the abstraction. This is especially important concerning the expenditure of HDs in 5e, which I narrate as a reflection of the PCs sucking it up, bandaging minor wounds, steeling their resolve, and catching their breath... Not regenerating major wounds Wolverine-style. If I were to treat every missing hit point as physical damage, I would need an explanation for the rapid healing, or to negate the rapid healing. Neither is tenable for my setting and style.
Again, HP as an abstraction has some disadvantages, but it still produces a better narrative for my purposes.
|
|
|
Post by dmsam on Apr 5, 2016 7:33:29 GMT
For simplicity sake, can we just make a dying PC "stunned" rather than "unconscious"? It would make so much more sense in terms of drama and story-telling! You can get your faltering last words in, call for help, etc. Keep the death saving throws, keep everything else the same. After passing or failing the saving throws, the PC either falls unconscious or dead.
"You are incapacitated, can't move, and can speak only falteringly.
Attack rolls against you have advantage.
You automatically fail Strength and Dexterity saving throws."
Am I the only one who thinks this makes sense?
|
|
|
Post by friartook on Apr 5, 2016 14:07:45 GMT
I am not sure The Angry GM's solution is "the solution", but I think he's on to something and on the right track. This is the DMs Block forums, so lets break it down and hash it out! Context: When I read Angry's hack, I am reminded of two systems; Edge of the Empire and Palladium games (Rifts, TMNT, Heroes Unlimited, etc.). In EotE, PCs have Strain and Wounds. Strain is fluid; it can be healed easily in combat and characters can take Strain from a variety of sources ranging from stun weapons to simple mental stress. When your Strain runs out, you are unconscious. Wounds are much harder to heal, requiring at least a full day of rest to heal one Wound; medical attention is needed to heal any more than that. When your Wounds run out, you are "dead". "Dead" is in quotes because EotE allows for a lot of fluidity at death. You aren't really dead, just hurt bad and down and out; you also roll on a critical injury chart with lasting critical injuries that are cumulative and lingering. I like this dual system where certain "hit points" are fluid and constantly changing, but Wounds are a big deal and tough to heal. In the Palladium system there were also two sets of HP; SDC and and your actual HP. SDC=Structural Damage Capacity. All objects had this, and so do people. When an object's SDC runs out, it is destroyed. When a person's SDC runs out, they begin taking HP damage. There was also MDC; Mega Damage Capacity. 1 MDC=100 SDC, but that's getting in to mech combat territory so I'll leave it alone. To me, Angry's Fighting Spirit points read like SDC. The issue: My issue with HP is that it is not quite granular enough. You go from completely capable to down and out with nothing in between. Even if you take @nevvur 's approach (which I think is the intention of the RAW) and say its an amalgam of factors, it still reads funny to me. All those factors run out at once? Always? You give up your will and start bleeding out and succumb to your minor wounds and fall unconscious all at the same time? Another problem is the power creep of leveling up. As the PCs grow in power, they are able to shrug off massive damage with no consequences. Another problem I have is how quickly HP heals in 5e. You sleep for 8 hours and all your wounds are healed? The one thing this system has going for it is simplicity. You only have to track one number. Possible solution: So, if take it as given that there is a problem which need solving with HP (and nobody is obligated to think there is), what does a solution look like? I like how Angry's system increases the total pool of HP but splits it up. Your FSP (Fighting Spirit Points) increase faster than your HP. You begin at level 1 with essentially double HP. As you level, your FSP increase every level, but your HP only increases every 4th level (matching the Ability Score improvement progression). This allows a bit of granularity in there where your will to fight and ability to shrug off attacks increases as you level up, but your actual wound capacity increases more slowly. I like where robosnake 's head is at with the Exhaustion Mechanics in 5e. However, one thing I want to avoid with any system is turning it into a crunchy number tracking game. I don't want to have to think about multiple percentages in combat, and I don't want my players to have to think about it either. However, the Bloodied condition has some merit, and led me to some possible tweaks of Angry's system. Proposed HP hack: This is the HP system I am thinking of implementing with my players. Please feel free to pick it apart, poke holes in it, and/or point out potential issues. FSP and Hp follow the track laid out by Angry; roll for FSP and HP at lvl 1 (I'm thinking I'd allow max HP at lvl 1 but have them roll FSP; Proposed question: Con mod; add it to both, or just one score?) FSP gets rolled every level and HP every 4th level. When a PC reaches 50% of their FSP, they gain one level of Exhaustion. When all FSP are expired, they must make a Con save, on a failed save the player falls unconscious, but need not make death saves. (I use an old school mechanic for things like this; the PCs must roll under their Con score, but we could set a static DC instead; perhaps DC 10 like Death Saves). The PC also takes one Lingering Wound (there's a chart in the DMG, I can't recall the page right now). When all FSP are expended, HP damage sets in. When all HP are expended, PC is down and begins the "bleeding out" process (Death Saves; Question: should the PC take another lingering wound? Or should that be moved to here and left off of FSP?). Hit Dice heal FSP only and may be expended on a short rest (duration increased in my campaign to 8 hours, but that is an optional rule I am adding in to slow the pace of the narrative). A long rest (duration increased in my campaign to 24 hours) heals all FSP and 1 HP (I know that sounds tough, its what I'm going for). Again, let me know what you think. I know it sounds rough, but that's what I'm going for. My players are coming most recently from the EotE system, which has harsh combat mechanics (one hit kills were common).
|
|
|
Post by robosnake on Apr 5, 2016 15:00:09 GMT
I was thinking about a simpler hack to represent stages of degeneration between fully functional and dying. I like the simplicity of incorporating exhaustion levels (seriously, how many people see more than one or maybe two levels in their games? Like, ever?)
When you take a critical hit, take a level of exhaustion. When you are bloodied (fewer than 1/2 hit points left), take a level of exhaustion. When you roll a 1 on a save against a damaging effect, take a level of exhaustion. That's pretty much it.
Built into the exhaustion level system are the progressive levels of loss of functionality we're looking for. And if the same system is applied to foes, I think it balances out easily. Instead of a race to zero in every single encounter, you can depict the foes staggering around, missing with their attacks because of cumulative damage and blood-loss, etc.
What do you guys think?
|
|
|
Post by swordnut on Apr 5, 2016 15:03:35 GMT
I was thinking about a simpler hack to represent stages of degeneration between fully functional and dying. I like the simplicity of incorporating exhaustion levels (seriously, how many people see more than one or maybe two levels in their games? Like, ever?) When you take a critical hit, take a level of exhaustion. When you are bloodied (fewer than 1/2 hit points left), take a level of exhaustion. When you roll a 1 on a save against a damaging effect, take a level of exhaustion. That's pretty much it. Built into the exhaustion level system are the progressive levels of loss of functionality we're looking for. And if the same system is applied to foes, I think it balances out easily. Instead of a race to zero in every single encounter, you can depict the foes staggering around, missing with their attacks because of cumulative damage and blood-loss, etc. What do you guys think? That is a stunningly good idea. definitely for a grittier game though. Would you apply it to monsters as well?
|
|
|
Post by friartook on Apr 5, 2016 15:05:34 GMT
I was thinking about a simpler hack to represent stages of degeneration between fully functional and dying. I like the simplicity of incorporating exhaustion levels (seriously, how many people see more than one or maybe two levels in their games? Like, ever?) When you take a critical hit, take a level of exhaustion. When you are bloodied (fewer than 1/2 hit points left), take a level of exhaustion. When you roll a 1 on a save against a damaging effect, take a level of exhaustion. That's pretty much it. Built into the exhaustion level system are the progressive levels of loss of functionality we're looking for. And if the same system is applied to foes, I think it balances out easily. Instead of a race to zero in every single encounter, you can depict the foes staggering around, missing with their attacks because of cumulative damage and blood-loss, etc. What do you guys think? Two questions: 1. Is this adding too much to track on the DM's part? Imagine a group of 10 Orcs fighting the PCs, and having to track not only their HP and position, but also their exhaustion levels. Remember that some of us missed the 4e era of effect counters on minis, and still do things in TotM. 2. What would the recovery mechanic be for Exhaustion levels? One level per short rest and a long rest gets you back to normal?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2016 19:33:17 GMT
It's a good system Friartook. I know because I briefly instated something extremely similar when 5e first came out, well before Angry wrote that post. Then I turned into an anti-house rule nazi for awhile, then I finally found a happy medium, but that's another story. Anyway, since you put time and thought into the problem of HP, I challenge you to tackle another issue that arises whether they're an abstraction, meat points, or your hybrid: unnatural healing
Here's the problem in an example. You've got two warriors of approximately equal mass and temperament. They survive a battle, and each quaffs an identical healing potion that restores exactly 10 HP. One of the warriors is level 10 and has 10/100 hit points remaining. The other is level 1 and has 1/11 HP. Why does this potion leave the more experienced warrior still depleted, while restoring the less experienced warrior to full?
You can apply this basic problem to other HP systems, including FSPs. Why the healing potion restores only a fraction of one warriors fighting spirit but fully restores the other is still a valid question, given that some sort of physical process is occurring on two people of similar biology. There's only one viable solution I can think of, and that's to make all healing a proportion of max HP rather than a static amount. That is, maybe a healing potion restores 10% of your HPs. Maybe cure wounds restores 10% per spell level used to cast it. If you want to keep it random, you can convert the dice into percents, e.g. a 5e healing potion cures (2d4+2)%
But then you run into the problem of low level heals being almost worthless in the overall maths inherent with the resource management game. You could raise the percentages, but then they become too effective at higher levels. And in either case, you're probably going to pull out a calculator to figure out how many HPs/FSPs you restore, and that's a deal breaker for many GMs.
It's a difficult problem, and one that I'm content to hand wave for the sake of simplicity.
|
|
|
Post by friartook on Apr 5, 2016 19:50:10 GMT
Hmm, I don't find that I really have an issue with that one @nevvur .
When I think of this, I think of how much more damage a level 10 warrior is able to soak up. They just fought off 6 Orcs on their own, took multiple cuts and bruises, shrugged off a scalp wound, and generally toughed it out all around. They drink a healing potion which heals 10 HP; which equals the scalp wound. He still has all those other wounds he sustained, and needs more potions.
His squire, on the other hand, is a level 1 fighter. He had a pretty rough go of it with just one Orc. He managed to get away with just one or two nasty cuts, and killed the brute with a lucky swing. He drinks the same healing potion and it is enough to heal both cuts in his arm, and soothes the pain in his bruises. He is now much better, and able to help tend his master's wounds so he may heal faster and be ready to face the next big challenge.
Another reason I don't have an issue with this: I tend to make healing potions a rare thing. I don't like my players relying on such things, nor do I like how the huge amounts of gold your average PC gets can be transformed into heals when such potions are readily available. In my current setting, there are no healing potions; no magic potions of any kind. Though PCs like clerics and rangers can use the Medicine skill to heal wounds more quickly (but NOT in the heat of combat).
Edit: I guess this comes down to how potions work as well. Do they heal a guaranteed percentage of your wounds? Or just a set amount of wounds? How much healing power is in there? This is magic after all. We get to (at least partially) make up how it behaves.
|
|
|
Post by catcharlie on Apr 5, 2016 21:23:52 GMT
Here's the problem in an example. You've got two warriors of approximately equal mass and temperament. They survive a battle, and each quaffs an identical healing potion that restores exactly 10 HP. One of the warriors is level 10 and has 10/100 hit points remaining. The other is level 1 and has 1/11 HP. Why does this potion leave the more experienced warrior still depleted, while restoring the less experienced warrior to full? The way that I see it is to a weak little level 1 character each and every hit point is such a large deal because they are not used to the wounds, a couple of cuts across the back of a Lvl 1 PC is probably enough to down them, and a potion will sort those cuts right out. However a Level 10 PC who gets those same cuts has experienced that pain before, and probably worse, it's become nothing to them but that same potion will still only fix those couple of cuts out.
|
|
|
Post by robosnake on Apr 5, 2016 22:16:35 GMT
I was thinking about a simpler hack to represent stages of degeneration between fully functional and dying. I like the simplicity of incorporating exhaustion levels (seriously, how many people see more than one or maybe two levels in their games? Like, ever?) When you take a critical hit, take a level of exhaustion. When you are bloodied (fewer than 1/2 hit points left), take a level of exhaustion. When you roll a 1 on a save against a damaging effect, take a level of exhaustion. That's pretty much it. Built into the exhaustion level system are the progressive levels of loss of functionality we're looking for. And if the same system is applied to foes, I think it balances out easily. Instead of a race to zero in every single encounter, you can depict the foes staggering around, missing with their attacks because of cumulative damage and blood-loss, etc. What do you guys think? Two questions: 1. Is this adding too much to track on the DM's part? Imagine a group of 10 Orcs fighting the PCs, and having to track not only their HP and position, but also their exhaustion levels. Remember that some of us missed the 4e era of effect counters on minis, and still do things in TotM. 2. What would the recovery mechanic be for Exhaustion levels? One level per short rest and a long rest gets you back to normal? 1. Possibly It is also something that could be ignored if it isn't interesting in a given situation (for example, with characters who have low hp totals at low levels, meaning the distance from functional to dying isn't that far to start with). Actually, it's easier in theater of the mind - it's nothing more than a little mark next to the NPC or monster in your notes. I probably won't introduce it into my game, since characters are already 7th level and a change in mid-stream might not be welcome, but I'd like to try it. It's no more difficult than in many other games that have parsed out hit points some other way. 2. Yeah, that would work for me. Also a casting of something like lesser restoration, I believe, gets rid of exhaustion completely (don't have my PHB handy). I'd also be fine if every use of magical healing removed one wound - in this case, one level of exhaustion imposed by a wound. Any hack that adds complexity to the hit point system will be something extra to track, though. That's the strength of the hit point system - it's a minimal thing to track.
|
|
|
Post by friartook on Apr 5, 2016 22:24:06 GMT
Any hack that adds complexity to the hit point system will be something extra to track, though. That's the strength of the hit point system - it's a minimal thing to track. True! The reason I'm ok with the dual point system and the lingering wounds is that we are coming from EotE, which already has a variant of that system. So it will feel familiar to everyone and not extra burdensome. To be 100% honest: I'm looking forward to getting back to 5e D&D for its simplicity. Everything is so clear cut! EotE is a very complex system, with deep narrative mechanics and many complex crunchy cross-referenced rules and terribly laid out stat blocks for baddies. Not to say we didn't enjoy our time in the Outer Rim, we did and we will be returning! As a GM though, I'm looking forward to the simplicity of 5e D&D (he said, as he added homebrew house rules that will inevitable make the elegant simplicity of 5e into a many headed hydra of house rules).
|
|
|
Post by robosnake on Apr 6, 2016 2:54:48 GMT
Any hack that adds complexity to the hit point system will be something extra to track, though. That's the strength of the hit point system - it's a minimal thing to track. True! The reason I'm ok with the dual point system and the lingering wounds is that we are coming from EotE, which already has a variant of that system. So it will feel familiar to everyone and not extra burdensome. To be 100% honest: I'm looking forward to getting back to 5e D&D for its simplicity. Everything is so clear cut! EotE is a very complex system, with deep narrative mechanics and many complex crunchy cross-referenced rules and terribly laid out stat blocks for baddies. Not to say we didn't enjoy our time in the Outer Rim, we did and we will be returning! As a GM though, I'm looking forward to the simplicity of 5e D&D (he said, as he added homebrew house rules that will inevitable make the elegant simplicity of 5e into a many headed hydra of house rules). I try to house rule things so that they are simpler, or at least more streamlined...most of the time. But I do like systems that model injuries as wearing a character down. It leads to moments like Captain America saying 'I could do this all day', either in the first Cap movie or in trailers for Civil War - you're bloodied and beaten but not down yet. Systems that model injury also encourage players to fear taking damage, and chances the game a bit, from "Is it time to race to see who drops to 0 hit points first?" to "Is what's at stake worth risking life and limb?" But ditto on 5th Ed's comparable simplicity - especially compared to the last two editions. For true simplicity, Fate all the way (Re: Edge of the Empire, I felt like it was a cool, elegant system, and then they felt the need to justify a bullet-stopping core rulebook and so just boated it beyond reason. That's one game I would hack and house rule, mostly hacking bits off of it, if I ran it long term)
|
|