5e highlights reel?

[Koumei]

Browsing the PHB I just found a bit explaining how to describe hitpoint damage (above 50% no visible effect, below 50% cuts and bruises, below 0 actual injury). Personal pet peeve of mine, so this part alone makes up for a lot of bullshit this edition did to piss me off. I don't want to think about how many GMs did "he impales you with his sword, you take 4 points of damage" with a straight face...

So If a snake bites you, it can only deliver its venom if you're below 50% HP? Awesome!

[hamstertamer]

Browsing the PHB I just found a bit explaining how to describe hitpoint damage (above 50% no visible effect, below 50% cuts and bruises, below 0 actual injury). Personal pet peeve of mine, so this part alone makes up for a lot of bullshit this edition did to piss me off. I don't want to think about how many GMs did "he impales you with his sword, you take 4 points of damage" with a straight face...

Wow that's terrible. Another reason to steer clear of this edition.

Since ad&d days I've always unofficially interpret hit point damage as

if damage is 10% max = minor wound
if damage is 20% max = light wound
if damage is 30% max = moderate wound
if damage is 40% max = serious wound
if damage is 50% max = critical wound

those are approximations of course, the purpose is to just describe the effects of a creature or person taking damage.

[nockermensch]

Browsing the PHB I just found a bit explaining how to describe hitpoint damage (above 50% no visible effect, below 50% cuts and bruises, below 0 actual injury). Personal pet peeve of mine, so this part alone makes up for a lot of bullshit this edition did to piss me off. I don't want to think about how many GMs did "he impales you with his sword, you take 4 points of damage" with a straight face...

Wow that's terrible. Another reason to steer clear of this edition.

Since ad&d days I've always unofficially interpret hit point damage as

if damage is 10% max = minor wound
if damage is 20% max = light wound
if damage is 30% max = moderate wound
if damage is 40% max = serious wound
if damage is 50% max = critical wound

those are approximations of course, the purpose is to just describe the effects of a creature or person taking damage.

When I'm DMing I don't like describing losing hit points but your last one as serious wounds. You only get scratches and hero designated should wounds while you have hit points remaining. I know that 4th edition started this bloodied thing but other than changing the battle music for some boss monsters I don't see a good use for it.

Then again, the DM on the 3.5e campaign I'm playing now loves to describe full wounds and impalements during combats, only to have people shrug out of those life-ruining injuries and keep running towards the objective afterwards. But since all his campaigns are to be imagined in anime style and in the Bastard! universe, that at least has internal logic. Sometimes I wish D&D could mature enough to actually discuss matters like campaign style (4color, gritty, comedy, 80's anime) in the DMG.

[infected slut princess]

Then again, the DM on the 3.5e campaign I'm playing now loves to describe full wounds and impalements during combats, only to have people shrug out of those life-ruining injuries and keep running towards the objective afterwards.

This is in fact the only correct way to play D&D. Everything else is unbelievably stupid.

[erik]

Fucking horrible bloodied mechanics. If my screen could transmit smell I would be spraying lysol on this shit.

Did nobody on 5e team ever hear about Wound Thresholds from Earthdawn?

That does a fair sight better job of illustrating wounds from damage instead of caring about % HP.

Pair that up with a condition track for wounds and you're well on your way.

[OgreBattle]

Fucking horrible bloodied mechanics. If my screen could transmit smell I would be spraying lysol on this shit.

Did nobody on 5e team ever hear about Wound Thresholds from Earthdawn?

That does a fair sight better job of illustrating wounds from damage instead of caring about % HP.

Pair that up with a condition track for wounds and you're well on your way.

Could you give me a quick rundown of what those rules are like?

[erik]

If you take a certain amount of damage in a single hit then you take a wound.

In Earthdawn (2nd ed... only book I have) that wound forces a knockdown test and wounds slow down recovery. Not terribly exciting. They have optional rules for a -1 step penalty to about everything for each additional wound after the first.

I'd rather spice things up with a condition track. Say you take 1 wound from a physical weapon and you're bloodied (minor penalty lasts only this battle). Second wound and you're staggered (more significant penalty this battle, ongoing minor penalty until healed). Third wound and you're maimed (ko'd/removed from battle, ongoing major penalty until healed).

You can also be KO'd by just whittling down stamina with damage that does not trigger a wound.

That's what I would do if making a fantasy game.

[hamstertamer]

Then again, the DM on the 3.5e campaign I'm playing now loves to describe full wounds and impalements during combats, only to have people shrug out of those life-ruining injuries and keep running towards the objective afterwards. But since all his campaigns are to be imagined in anime style and in the Bastard! universe, that at least has internal logic.

They're not really shrugging those injuries off, your just interpreting it that way. There's been tons of rules for D&D (and other RPGs) for a more detailed injury system. So if you want to use them then go use them. But most people are happy role-playing the damage, so that game doesn't become overly complex.

Sometimes I wish D&D could mature enough to actually discuss matters like campaign style (4color, gritty, comedy, 80's anime) in the DMG.

Don't worry they do. For example on page 8 of the 3rd edition DM guide under 'determining style of play.'

[OgreBattle]

Reading the free PDF download. The most clever idea in D&D5e is using existing characters from Dragonlance, Faerun, and so on to describe archtypes of race and class. I'm surprised this wasn't done in an earlier edition.

[brized]

If you take a certain amount of damage in a single hit then you take a wound.

In Earthdawn (2nd ed... only book I have) that wound forces a knockdown test and wounds slow down recovery. Not terribly exciting. They have optional rules for a -1 step penalty to about everything for each additional wound after the first.

I'd rather spice things up with a condition track...

You can also be KO'd by just whittling down stamina with damage that does not trigger a wound.

That's what I would do if making a fantasy game.

That's great for more closely modeling injuries realistically. Just be aware that that implementation takes up a lot more real estate on character sheets and the players' working memory than simpler/more abstract implementations, so you'll have to cut other systems/mechanics to compensate.

[erik]

I'd probably have DM cards where you can hand someone a card for conditions. Crappy part would be there's 9 condition tracks, so 27 cards (with multiples. But wait!
Don't really need one for the 3rd tier though since you are out of action then. So could have 9 versions of double-sided cards and be solid. NPCs can just be on scrap paper and be fine.

[deaddmwalking]

GM just gave me a yellow card. One more and I'm out of the game!

[Insomniac]

I remember this condition track from SAGA. It can be cool, but people will try to game the system by moving people down the condition track (Feats, equipment, spells, etc) and then beating them up when they can barely fight back. It can induce something called a Death Spiral where people just get a little behind, can't make the comeback, get a little more behind and then they are doomed.

One good thing is if you had poker chips around, you could give people a poker chip to tell you how down the track they were.

White=1
Blue=2
Green=3
Red=4
Black and you are out the fight.

[Koumei]

Since ad&d days I've always unofficially interpret hit point damage as

if damage is 10% max = minor wound
if damage is 20% max = light wound
if damage is 30% max = moderate wound
if damage is 40% max = serious wound
if damage is 50% max = critical wound

I wouldn't use those terms when there are actually spells that can inflict or cure those types of wounds. Unless you want to change Cure to %healing (not actually a bad idea for higher-level characters, crappier deal for healing the general populace) and Inflict to the Demi spells (good for boss fights, lame for 4d12 orcs).

But the general idea of "you're a bit scratched", "it hurts but you can ignore it", "you're bleeding to some extent", "you're bleeding like the Great Muta", "you're a train wreck" seems fine. Using percentages for basic benchmarks of injury description.

[OgreBattle]

All I'm getting from this is "D&D would be a lot better off using that system in SAME where you have 10 hitpoints and roll damage vs soak"

[FatR]

They're not really shrugging those injuries off, your just interpreting it that way. There's been tons of rules for D&D (and other RPGs) for a more detailed injury system.

And nobody cares about them.

Talking specifically about DnD, interpreting hit points as anything but the ability to be hit and not die in a game where wyverns impale you on their poisonous stings and purple worms chew on you if fuckstupid.

The only thing worth discussing is whether your characters can take enough pounding to paste a company of normal men and maybe only have superficial scratches until they run out of HPs, superhero comics-style, or they are depicted taking ridiculous bloody injuries and disregarding them, One Piece-style.

[Jilocasin]

Every single time anyone mentions HP and what it looks like it's impossible for me to not think of this. The new PHB interpretation is pretty damn bad though. Someone please tell me they include those guidelines on HP and have something like death from massive damage.

[fectin]

Oh my god fectin, you can't actually tell what the arguments are. You honestly don't think Frank, DSM, and I have been telling you the same thing. Then again, you also think being paid in pennies isn't inconvenient to the point of losing you money. I'm just impressed with the level of willful ignorance going on here.

Tell you what: you think these are all the same argument? Group and summarize, then I'll respond. Make sure to synthesize Kaelik's and DSM's posts.

[nockermensch]

Every single time anyone mentions HP and what it looks like it's impossible for me to not think of this.

what_you_thought_Exalted_was_about.webm

[...You Lost Me]

[quote="fectin]Tell you what: you think these are all the same argument? Group and summarize, then I'll respond. Make sure to synthesize Kaelik's and DSM's posts.[/quote]

Sorry, fectin, you don't get to weasel your way out of an argument by posting a week later asking someone to do the work for you because you can't read.

EDIT: Removed unnecessary snark. All remaining snark is necessary.

[hamstertamer]

They're not really shrugging those injuries off, your just interpreting it that way. There's been tons of rules for D&D (and other RPGs) for a more detailed injury system.

And nobody cares about them.

Talking specifically about DnD, interpreting hit points as anything but the ability to be hit and not die in a game where wyverns impale you on their poisonous stings and purple worms chew on you if fuckstupid.

The only thing worth discussing is whether your characters can take enough pounding to paste a company of normal men and maybe only have superficial scratches until they run out of HPs, superhero comics-style, or they are depicted taking ridiculous bloody injuries and disregarding them, One Piece-style.

If that's only thing worth discussing, then I'm not sure what the discussion is about.

I believe that your hung up on the interpretation of the damage. The hp damage is different for each creature receiving the damage even if the number of damage is the same. 8 points of damage to 1st level elven wizard is a devastating wound but 8 points to 10th level barbarian is just a scratch. The type of wound you describe (if you choose to describe and I'm not saying it's requirement) is based on the damage's numerical amount comparable to the creature's total hp. This is how I've seen it work in every real world D&D game since Ad&d in the 1980s.

There are of course a peculiar click of people that reside, from what I see, only on the internet that have decided to interpret hp damage differently. For them, they see hp as fear points or something like that. The goblin that "hit" you with a sword didn't actually literally hit you and cause a wound, the hp damage is just your fear of the being hit. And pointing out that poison needs a hit to work on someone, they say it's the fear of poison that is working or something like. Weird, but who cares right?

The problem is when this weird interpretation begins to seep into D&D's game design. This where you get damage on a miss mechanics. Plus an increase to dissociated mechanics and other stuff like healing up fully after each battle (you know like in a video game).

[spongeknight]

The hp damage is different for each creature receiving the damage even if the number of damage is the same. 8 points of damage to 1st level elven wizard is a devastating wound but 8 points to 10th level barbarian is just a scratch. The type of wound you describe (if you choose to describe and I'm not saying it's requirement) is based on the damage's numerical amount comparable to the creature's total hp. This is how I've seen it work in every real world D&D game since Ad&d in the 1980s.

That is just completely wrong. There are roughly a thousand examples that show that hit points are literally the ability to suffer massive damage to your body and not care about it. Let's go over a few examples:

Death From Massive Damage: This rule posits that any creature, ranging from a lowly goblin under a delay death to the greatest dragon in existence has to make a save versus death when hit for 50 damage or more on a single attack. Not quite a scratch to high level characters when it has a chance to kill them instantly, hmm?

Coup de Grace: Anyone who has their throat cut when they're asleep or paralyzed or whatever has to save versus the damage or die. There is no "different wounds for different characters," you are straight-up getting your throat sliced by someone when you can't resist. The only difference is that some people are magically able to survive that due to having supernatural toughness (buttloads of hp and fort saves) while others don't. Same wound, different results.

Swimming in acid: You take 20d6 points of acid damage a round when swimming in a pool of acid. There is no mitigating damage from this- you are swimming in a god damn pool of acid. So why does a high level fighter swim through the acid just fine while a low level fighter gets disintegrated? Because hit points are magical and keep you from death when you should be dead. That is literally the only correct interpretation.

There are so many other examples that I've forgotten most of them- sneak attack, critical hits, ability damage, magic missile, falling damage, the wounding special property, injury poison, ect ect.

Stop being wrong, you have no excuse.

[Dean]

5E's action economy is the most fucked of any edition ever written. 5E's action rules are as follows.

Action: One per turn, allows you to take a move before or after it
Bonus Action: One per turn
Reaction: One per turn
Swift Action: One per turn, allows you to take another action as a bonus action this turn but you can't cast a spell unless it's a cantrip.

Every class gains 2 or 3 bonus actions a turn that they cannot use by high level. Every class gets 2 or 3 reactions they cannot use by high level. This is the kludgiest most amateur method to balance 4E reaction overload problems imaginable. Every single build is a cornucopia of mutually exclusive bonus action "abilities" that add nothing to a character.

[Rawbeard]

Bonus actions are swift and you get only one of those, period. Are you still scouring the alpha draft? I think I need to toss you a link...

[Username17]

The big ones are extra actions. Because those are, as far as I can tell, uncapped. A Bonus Action or a Reaction is limited to one per round, but if you get an extra attack, you just win.

-Username17