Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on March 26, 2022, 12:04:01 PMHan Solo may take out more Stormtroopers then he realistically could, but he will still try to retreat and search for cover immediatly

How many hit points do you think Han Solo lost in that encounter?

Quote from: mightybrain on March 27, 2022, 03:32:27 PMHow many hit points do you think Han Solo lost in that encounter?

Thats pretty much exactly the scene Im talking about. All heroes in fiction have a degree of plot armor, but how that armor works dictates the tone.
In a D&D game with HP, Han Solo would blockade the doorway because they can't hurt him all that much, and would only retreat if his HP was low.

In 'The Return of the Jedi' he takes a defensive position near the shield generator, and is again unrealistically fine, but the 'implication' is that he has to retain that position or die.

The Jedi in the prequels on the other hand stand out right in the open all the time. They only change strategies when confronted with heavy artillery, or are encircled with extremly heavy odds.

Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on March 25, 2022, 05:24:04 PM

Quote from: tenbones on March 25, 2022, 04:39:26 PMPeople look at HP as an absolute value for that PC. ...as those silly memes that have emerged at our tables and from stories (or satirized like Backstabbing with a ballista or whatever) the rules are interpreted typically more literal than intended.

So would you say that the problem is that what was intended as primarily a Gamist element of the rules is now inextricably entwined with an effective widespread perception of it as a Simulationist element?

Well... I don't think those terms "Gamist" and "Simulationist" are helpful due to the charged nature of what they may mean to the people here. But *I* take it to mean (Forge debates aside) - I think the "Gamist" narrative around HP is post-facto as a term. I think HP were *exactly* what people conceived them to be when they were created. They were exactly supposed to represent a broad abstract qualities that Arneson, and Gygax et. al. didn't feel D&D required more elaboration on, and obviously were influenced by their Wargame roots.

What happened *after* that fact, is pretty obvious. Rules skimming and page turning aside - how many times goes Gygax have to be quoted on what he himself has said many times in many places about what HP were meant to represent? The advent of Videogames completely changed the consciousness of people's perceptions. It doesn't matter what people *claim* they're meant to represent, when there are concrete examples of using arbitrary number-piles and direct damage mechanic applications to reduce that number-pile and show characters punching, Hadoukening, Shoryukening set damage values against that pile and people applying that obvious same analog representation to their D&D games?

No amount of "abstracting" or "Gamist" bullshittery is going to make people coming from that background feel good about it. And that notion stands to this day. While I'm old and I'm a first-generation D&D player, my background was never Wargaming, but I was a video-game guy, also from the very beginning. My sensibilities are more kinetic and absolute than abstract.

Call it "simulationist" or whatever (I'm not that - and this is why Forgey categories were never good as anything other than bumperstickers for invested nerds) the brass tacks is you're gonna go with what "feels right" both mechanically and narratively. And those poles can change over time.

HP is simplistic, but in the hands of a very good GM, they work fine. This doesn't mean that players that don't look at them as abstractions feel good when they have the villain with a knife at their throat, and aren't thinking "This guy has 100hp... why is he scared that a 1d4 weapon is at his throat?"

It takes a good GM with trust in his players to flip that mindset. The real question I have is - why not have more discrete mechanics that fulfill all the these needs?

So it's not that HP are dumb - or not. What makes it dumb is when people will insist it's "the only way" or even the "best way". Depends who is using them and the player's buy-in.

Quote from: mightybrain on March 27, 2022, 03:32:27 PM

How many hit points do you think Han Solo lost in that encounter?

Yep, good example.

As an alternative - in the FFG Star Wars game he would have taken no damage, but probably some Strain. And he'd have given a bunch of Strain to the Stormtroopers.

Quote from: tenbones on March 27, 2022, 06:10:20 PM
HP is simplistic, but in the hands of a very good GM, they work fine. This doesn't mean that players that don't look at them as abstractions feel good when they have the villain with a knife at their throat, and aren't thinking "This guy has 100hp... why is he scared that a 1d4 weapon is at his throat?"

I'd say there's two problems with that particular scenario that essentially break the versimultude if you're going with abstract hit points.

The first is mechanical; the ratio of potential damage to hit points is too extreme. If the PC instead had 50 points and the villain's skill with a knife let him do 35 points and 52 on a crit (or a talent to let them do extra damage when their target is disadvantaged in that way) then the threat is much more credible.

Alternately, coup de grace rules existed in D&D for a reason. This is also where poison on the dagger can be useful.

The second problem is in that particular GM's style; specifically putting the PC into a situation where there's a knife at their throat when they have so much plot armor left. If the PC was worn down and off his guard (i.e. down to a handful of hit points) and THEN the villain steps out of the shadows and puts a knife to their throat it's a whole different ballgame.

So too would be the villain and PC grappling (i.e. wearing down each other's hit points) until the PC was down to a few hit points and then the villain gets into a position where he can get the dagger to the PC's throat.

Quote from: Chris24601 on March 27, 2022, 07:48:53 PMThe second problem is in that particular GM's style; specifically putting the PC into a situation where there's a knife at their throat when they have so much plot armor left. If the PC was worn down and off his guard (i.e. down to a handful of hit points) and THEN the villain steps out of the shadows and puts a knife to their throat it's a whole different ballgame.

Again Id argue that fits in more with shonen then western hero tropes. In Return of the Jedi, the Emperor took no damage, and Luke didn't wear him down. But in that climactic moment, if it where D&D, the Emperors lightning would have instantly killed Vader, as he would have been at 0-ish HP because he had lost to Luke. Alternatively, if we are using healing surge logic, Vader and Palpatine would have wrestled there for a minute while Luke watched.

Edit: Just to be clear, in a wound system vader might have insta-gibbed luke with 1 shot, so every system has its flaws.

Quote from: Chris24601 on March 27, 2022, 07:48:53 PMThe second problem is in that particular GM's style; specifically putting the PC into a situation where there's a knife at their throat when they have so much plot armor left. If the PC was worn down and off his guard (i.e. down to a handful of hit points) and THEN the villain steps out of the shadows and puts a knife to their throat it's a whole different ballgame.

So too would be the villain and PC grappling (i.e. wearing down each other's hit points) until the PC was down to a few hit points and then the villain gets into a position where he can get the dagger to the PC's throat.

This is only a problem if you assume that "Plot Armor" HP is some sort of sacred component that you absolutely, positively HAVE to completely wear down before anything bad can happen to PCs. Which isn't even a cinematic convention, if that's what you're going for, but a purely "Gamist" conceit that places game elements above narrative flow of events.

There is also no break in verisimilitude if you go against game elements in favor of what makes narrative sense in the situation. If anything, placing game elements above what makes sense in a given circumstance IS what breaks verisimilitude, because you're going against what simulates reality or creates the "appearance of being true or real" (what verisimilitude actually means) in favor of some game convention that can't be violated at any cost.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on March 27, 2022, 08:02:03 PMEdit: Just to be clear, in a wound system vader might have insta-gibbed luke with 1 shot, so every system has its flaws.

Vader was not trying to kill Luke, so he was rolling at a penalty to hit in order to have the option of limiting damage. Dying in the process of throwing the Emperor in to the pit is a heroic sacrifice get one more attack in before dropping dead ability or rule. It looked protracted, because grappling is a protracted endeavor in any system. More importantly, the Emperor probably had enough HP to survive maximum falling damage.

There is also the issue that movies are meant to be watched and games are meant to be played. In video games, I hate it when the computer takes control of my character to execute some prescripted spectacle kill because I did not do that.  All I got to do was press X to animate kill, and now I have nothing I can while I wait to get control back.

Rules need to bend to the conceit of the fiction or the world need to be build around the game mechanics as its fundamental laws. It is a lot easier to bend the rules than develop a sensible and recognizable world where house cats pose a mortal threat to commoners and adventures can swim in lava for minutes at a time or walk off hitting the ground at terminal velocity.

It may be" Narravist" to have the rules follow the fiction, but the rules only exist to resolve uncertain outcomes. If success or failure is guaranteed, then there is nothing to roll for. You do not roll hacking to use the default credentials of a device anymore than you would roll save vs death after a decapitation.  We can all agree on what happens next, thus there is nothing game mechanic about it.

  GURPS would have simulated that light saber duel down and the moments after in return of the Jedi.  The only part that is maybe going to stretch the rules is decided what Vader's dying action was, in this case it would seem to be to see his son with his own eyes before he dies, we could also infer taking that helmet off killed vader, who was already in bad shape, and only passing his HT checks due to his armor.  In any event, the whole thing, from parries, to acrobatics, to Luke using a series of Beats and all out attacks to break Vader's defenses to get him to miss a parry and taking his hand off, and then the Emperor getting grappled and tossed to his death...hitting Vader with just enough juice as he goes over to essentially kill vader....to Vader declaring his dying action to be to address his son.

Quote from: Wisithir on March 27, 2022, 09:35:24 PMIt looked protracted.

It really didn't. Vader grabbed, moved, and threw the emperor. In systems focused on HP, that stuff is near impossible.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on March 27, 2022, 10:03:14 PM

Quote from: Wisithir on March 27, 2022, 09:35:24 PMIt looked protracted.

It really didn't. Vader grabbed, moved, and threw the emperor. In systems focused on HP, that stuff is near impossible.

Granted GURPS uses HP, but is more of a "wound" system due to how far under 0 you are in relation to death, but GURPS could do it no problem.  Though as you said earlier, the issue with a simulationist system, is with high tech weapons or powerful foes, you can simulate getting your shit pushed past your teeth pretty easily with one crit.

Quote from: oggsmash on March 27, 2022, 10:10:04 PMGranted GURPS uses HP, but is more of a "wound" system due to how far under 0 you are in relation to death, but GURPS could do it no problem.  Though as you said earlier, the issue with a simulationist system, is with high tech weapons or powerful foes, you can simulate getting your shit pushed past your teeth pretty easily with one crit.

Oh I know gurps. Only system I know to use multipliers for locational based damage.

Any 'Grit' based system risks the chance of uncerimonous death. Any 'Heroic' based system risks chance of protracted disconnected HP slogs. Any 'Narrativist' based system risks the chance of loosing all tension and just stopping being a game.

There is always a chance for bad.

Quote from: Shrieking Banshee on March 27, 2022, 05:38:18 PM

Quote from: mightybrain on March 27, 2022, 03:32:27 PMHow many hit points do you think Han Solo lost in that encounter?

Thats pretty much exactly the scene Im talking about. All heroes in fiction have a degree of plot armor, but how that armor works dictates the tone.
In a D&D game with HP, Han Solo would blockade the doorway because they can't hurt him all that much, and would only retreat if his HP was low.

Do you ever actually play D&D, with other people?  Because I can tell you, based on actual events in play where PC's burst in a door and find a horde of monsters, no one has ever said, "Hey, I can hold them here for a couple of rounds an lose half my hit points... no big deal."  First, just looking at a large number of enemies does not give you information on whether or not any particular one is a mook or a high-level champion.  Likewise, with limited resting and healing, every loss of hp is something to be avoided.  So your scenario sounds like what someone wouldimagine a situation to play out like, and not anything that has ever happened at a table.  Well, that or you have some really crappy players...

Quote from: Eirikrautha on March 28, 2022, 12:20:13 AMDo you ever actually play D&D, with other people?

You got me. It must just be that I have never played D&D. You have proven to be omniscient as ever. If you personally have not experienced, it must not exist. And if it does it exist it, must be because the players suck. Not just me as a GM, but my players must suck.

I will admit to not randomly re-statting mooks into Balors to spite my players for making estimates based off of previous information. I guess I must be doing it wrong.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on March 28, 2022, 12:20:13 AM
Do you ever actually play D&D, with other people?  Because I can tell you, based on actual events in play where PC's burst in a door and find a horde of monsters, no one has ever said, "Hey, I can hold them here for a couple of rounds an lose half my hit points... no big deal."

Isn't that what "tanks" are for? I thought that's why we have the word "tanks" in RPGs. I guess I must have been hallucinating those times the toughest melee fighters in the group blocked a doorway or passage to bottleneck groups of enemies trying to get through while casters and ranged characters sniped them from behind.