Death and Dying 4e Style [Archive] - Wizards Community

Death and Dying 4e Style [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
MarkusTay63
02-23-08, 12:05 PM A few people were having a good discussion about the new rules (which can be read about in This Article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drdd/20080201a)) over in the "ask the Designer's thread". Unfortunely, that was an inappropriate place for it, and since I wanted to respond, I thought we could continue it here.

My Thoughts -
Basically, they seem to be over-complicating things a bit. All the are doing is increases HP by ½, and then you 'pass out' when you get to 1/3 HP.

Couldn't they simply have increased HP, and you neeed to start making saving throws when your PC was down to 1/3 HP to see if he remains conscious?

In the RW, people have been know to fight until death (and even beyond), so to say everyone automatically has this 'unconscious' level is just plain stupid, IMHO.

That means for a monster to score an 'actual kill', it would have to overcome your 'negative HP number' in a single blow. That should be possible, but it seems with the new rules, that will only occur at very low levels.

And why do monsters die at 0 HP? What if you want to knowck them uncoscious? Why is there a double standard, now? Sure, PCs are far more important then a single-encounter beastie, but where is the sense of accomplishment when the deck is stacked in the PCs favor?

I like the idea of wounded characaters, and 'bleeding out', but it should really apply to everyone, not just PCs. Also, negative HP is clumsy, and I would rather just hand-out more regular HP, and have two or three percentage thresholds when PCs must roll to remain conscious.

That could even be done with the newer cookie-cutter monsters - suppose an Orc has 20 HP - at 10 HP he would need to make a fortitude SR, and at 5HP (and each increment thereafter) he would have to make one at -5. If he misses, he falls to the ground unconscious. If he reached exactly 0, he stays alive 1d6 turns before 'bleeding out' (notice, we need not keep track of silly NHP that way). Why are monsters both 'tougher', and 'wimpier' at the same time? They can die instantly, yet they can fight right up until their last breath (unlike the PCs).

It just seems very strange, to me, to have two different systems in place, and yet they are claiming things will be simpler.

Simple = the same rules for everyone.

Just my :twocents:
Lord Karsus
02-23-08, 12:49 PM -This is what I like, and it originates from a video game I like (Saga Frontier). Asides for hit points, everyone has 'Life Points'. Once you are knocked unconscious, Hit Points are not part of the equation anymore. Life Points are now. You have anywhere between 4-9 Life Points. Every blow you take while unconscious takes away 1 Life Point. Get down to 0, and that's it, you die. Anything else, though, you're hanging on.
MarkusTay63
02-23-08, 02:15 PM I've tried seperating them before, into 'Fatigue Points' and 'Life Points', but I've found over the long run that keeping one number for everything is easier.

Thats why I give more HP - I also require much more from it. For instance, fighting, Magic use, and even running all require you to burn HP (which I see as Fatigue). You also can get it back faster as well. What they means is that I've always had it where Wizards could use more then the normal allotment of spells per day, by burning off extra HP, so I guess thats why I'm more willing to except the new magic system then others.

I suppose I have something similar to what you describe, though. A person's true 'Body Damage' value = their Constitution, and Criticals come off of that (with all appropriate changes made due to lower Con). Once you're unconscious, everything comes off of that.

I'll look at the 4e system, and then figure out what changes need to be made (if any), to keep things 'real'. ;)
Lord Karsus
02-23-08, 04:41 PM I've tried seperating them before, into 'Fatigue Points' and 'Life Points', but I've found over the long run that keeping one number for everything is easier.

-Yeah, I guess.

Thats why I give more HP - I always require much more from it.

-I noticed in the new Rogue article that, on top of doing that 1/3 HP past 0 thing, they are also giving the classes more HP to begin with. Rogues, for example, get 12 HP + CON each level now.
Alediran
02-27-08, 05:17 PM In Star Wars SAGA the characters recieved 3 maximized dies of Hitpoints, those who had d10 for HP started with 30 + CON
Lord Karsus
02-27-08, 05:35 PM In Star Wars SAGA the characters recieved 3 maximized dies of Hitpoints, those who had d10 for HP started with 30 + CON

-Wow. Too much.
MarkusTay63
02-28-08, 01:37 AM Not really, as long as the baddies get the same.

Combat lasts a little longer, but it all balances out.
Zanan
02-28-08, 04:23 AM -Wow. Too much.

Nay, it is "Welcome WoW and Final Fantasy!".

I can't see a point in this new threshold thing, as you once more give an advantage to the "HP monsters", who not only have more HP than the average mage, bard, or rogue, but now also more time to get their help. As if the monsters will select the "HP monsters" first and leave the weaker folk standing a little longer. Give them all the -10 HP rule and then keep them alive for a number of rounds according to their HD. Equal chances for anyone, not just fighters and barbarians.
GreenKnight
02-28-08, 04:28 AM Rogues, for example, get 12 HP + CON each level now.

Incorrect. That's what they get at 1st level. Every following level they get 5 Hit Points.

Hit Points at 1st Level: 12 + Constitution score
Hit Points per Level Gained: 5
MarkusTay63
03-01-08, 02:35 AM Wow... thats really static. I like to mix luck with static for HP, not go all one way or the other. It seems like D&D has done a complete about-face.
GreenKnight
03-01-08, 06:37 AM A system which I like is one used for Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay. Basically, it's just like Hit Points. Except once you're knocked down to 0, you're not KO'ed. Nor are there negatives. Simply put, every hit that would reduce you below 0 inflicts a critical hit on you. We're not talking double-damage deals or anything like that. In WFRP, critical hits roll on a table to determine what they do. They're made worse depending on how far below 0 an attack would've reduced you (So if the critical would've reduced you to -3, it's not as bad as one that would've reduced you to -8). You then roll on a table to see what the effect is. The effects ranging anywhere from getting dazed, having a limb chopped off, or being outright killed (skull crushed, decapitated, heart cut out, etc).

Oh, and the most powerful characters have, at most, about 20 Wounds (Hit Point equivalents). So some random schmoe with a greatsword can still potentially one-shot your character, no matter how tough he is. Or your character could potentially end up a paraplegic (The critical hit tables account for whether your hand is cut off at the wrist or the elbow. It matters, because in the former case, at least you can still use a shield with that arm).
GreenKnight
03-01-08, 06:44 AM Double post.
MarkusTay63
03-01-08, 12:05 PM Thats one system I haven't checked out - It sounds cool; I'll have to look into it,

-- thanks.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
MarkusTay63 02-23-08, 12:05 PM	A few people were having a good discussion about the new rules (which can be read about in This Article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/drdd/20080201a)) over in the "ask the Designer's thread". Unfortunely, that was an inappropriate place for it, and since I wanted to respond, I thought we could continue it here. My Thoughts - Basically, they seem to be over-complicating things a bit. All the are doing is increases HP by ½, and then you 'pass out' when you get to 1/3 HP. Couldn't they simply have increased HP, and you neeed to start making saving throws when your PC was down to 1/3 HP to see if he remains conscious? In the RW, people have been know to fight until death (and even beyond), so to say everyone automatically has this 'unconscious' level is just plain stupid, IMHO. That means for a monster to score an 'actual kill', it would have to overcome your 'negative HP number' in a single blow. That should be possible, but it seems with the new rules, that will only occur at very low levels. And why do monsters die at 0 HP? What if you want to knowck them uncoscious? Why is there a double standard, now? Sure, PCs are far more important then a single-encounter beastie, but where is the sense of accomplishment when the deck is stacked in the PCs favor? I like the idea of wounded characaters, and 'bleeding out', but it should really apply to everyone, not just PCs. Also, negative HP is clumsy, and I would rather just hand-out more regular HP, and have two or three percentage thresholds when PCs must roll to remain conscious. That could even be done with the newer cookie-cutter monsters - suppose an Orc has 20 HP - at 10 HP he would need to make a fortitude SR, and at 5HP (and each increment thereafter) he would have to make one at -5. If he misses, he falls to the ground unconscious. If he reached exactly 0, he stays alive 1d6 turns before 'bleeding out' (notice, we need not keep track of silly NHP that way). Why are monsters both 'tougher', and 'wimpier' at the same time? They can die instantly, yet they can fight right up until their last breath (unlike the PCs). It just seems very strange, to me, to have two different systems in place, and yet they are claiming things will be simpler. Simple = the same rules for everyone. Just my :twocents:
Lord Karsus 02-23-08, 12:49 PM	-This is what I like, and it originates from a video game I like (Saga Frontier). Asides for hit points, everyone has 'Life Points'. Once you are knocked unconscious, Hit Points are not part of the equation anymore. Life Points are now. You have anywhere between 4-9 Life Points. Every blow you take while unconscious takes away 1 Life Point. Get down to 0, and that's it, you die. Anything else, though, you're hanging on.
MarkusTay63 02-23-08, 02:15 PM	I've tried seperating them before, into 'Fatigue Points' and 'Life Points', but I've found over the long run that keeping one number for everything is easier. Thats why I give more HP - I also require much more from it. For instance, fighting, Magic use, and even running all require you to burn HP (which I see as Fatigue). You also can get it back faster as well. What they means is that I've always had it where Wizards could use more then the normal allotment of spells per day, by burning off extra HP, so I guess thats why I'm more willing to except the new magic system then others. I suppose I have something similar to what you describe, though. A person's true 'Body Damage' value = their Constitution, and Criticals come off of that (with all appropriate changes made due to lower Con). Once you're unconscious, everything comes off of that. I'll look at the 4e system, and then figure out what changes need to be made (if any), to keep things 'real'. ;)
Lord Karsus 02-23-08, 04:41 PM	I've tried seperating them before, into 'Fatigue Points' and 'Life Points', but I've found over the long run that keeping one number for everything is easier. -Yeah, I guess. Thats why I give more HP - I always require much more from it. -I noticed in the new Rogue article that, on top of doing that 1/3 HP past 0 thing, they are also giving the classes more HP to begin with. Rogues, for example, get 12 HP + CON each level now.
Alediran 02-27-08, 05:17 PM	In Star Wars SAGA the characters recieved 3 maximized dies of Hitpoints, those who had d10 for HP started with 30 + CON
Lord Karsus 02-27-08, 05:35 PM	In Star Wars SAGA the characters recieved 3 maximized dies of Hitpoints, those who had d10 for HP started with 30 + CON -Wow. Too much.
MarkusTay63 02-28-08, 01:37 AM	Not really, as long as the baddies get the same. Combat lasts a little longer, but it all balances out.
Zanan 02-28-08, 04:23 AM	-Wow. Too much. Nay, it is "Welcome WoW and Final Fantasy!". I can't see a point in this new threshold thing, as you once more give an advantage to the "HP monsters", who not only have more HP than the average mage, bard, or rogue, but now also more time to get their help. As if the monsters will select the "HP monsters" first and leave the weaker folk standing a little longer. Give them all the -10 HP rule and then keep them alive for a number of rounds according to their HD. Equal chances for anyone, not just fighters and barbarians.
GreenKnight 02-28-08, 04:28 AM	Rogues, for example, get 12 HP + CON each level now. Incorrect. That's what they get at 1st level. Every following level they get 5 Hit Points. Hit Points at 1st Level: 12 + Constitution score Hit Points per Level Gained: 5
MarkusTay63 03-01-08, 02:35 AM	Wow... thats really static. I like to mix luck with static for HP, not go all one way or the other. It seems like D&D has done a complete about-face.
GreenKnight 03-01-08, 06:37 AM	A system which I like is one used for Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay. Basically, it's just like Hit Points. Except once you're knocked down to 0, you're not KO'ed. Nor are there negatives. Simply put, every hit that would reduce you below 0 inflicts a critical hit on you. We're not talking double-damage deals or anything like that. In WFRP, critical hits roll on a table to determine what they do. They're made worse depending on how far below 0 an attack would've reduced you (So if the critical would've reduced you to -3, it's not as bad as one that would've reduced you to -8). You then roll on a table to see what the effect is. The effects ranging anywhere from getting dazed, having a limb chopped off, or being outright killed (skull crushed, decapitated, heart cut out, etc). Oh, and the most powerful characters have, at most, about 20 Wounds (Hit Point equivalents). So some random schmoe with a greatsword can still potentially one-shot your character, no matter how tough he is. Or your character could potentially end up a paraplegic (The critical hit tables account for whether your hand is cut off at the wrist or the elbow. It matters, because in the former case, at least you can still use a shield with that arm).
GreenKnight 03-01-08, 06:44 AM	Double post.
MarkusTay63 03-01-08, 12:05 PM	Thats one system I haven't checked out - It sounds cool; I'll have to look into it, -- thanks.