Quote from: tenbones on August 17, 2023, 10:28:48 AM
I can't believe you guys are re-litigating the HP debate. It's fucking DUMB.

This is TheRPGSite. We have to re-litigate something.

Quote from: tenbones on August 17, 2023, 10:28:48 AM
I can't believe you guys are re-litigating the HP debate. It's fucking DUMB.

HP is clearly an abstraction of skill in avoiding meaningful damage (which itself is odd since there is no loss of effectiveness. You're either at 100% or you're out cold). It's a weird bifurcation of the AC system which abstracts this bizarre idea armor makes you harder to hit. When in reality it absorbs damage. They acknowledge this partially in Unearthed Arcana when they made Full Plate and Field Plate absorb damage on each hit.

This doesn't address the HP issue of course.

This is why having HP/Vitality split is a better abstraction for D20 systems.

I find that a lot of the AC issue is solved if you just explain it as "how difficult you are to wound", rather than "how difficult you are to hit". It's not perfect, but neither is giving armor a flat damage soak value. Just to give one example: Take being wacked in the chest with a mace, versus being stabbed in the chest with a dagger. To a plate-armored man, the the mace is probably the deadlier blow, whereas to an unarmored man, the dagger is. To come close to "realism", you almost have to give every weapon a different rating versus each type of armor, which is just impracticable. Personally my favorite compromise for armor is probably using armor saves or the dragon warriors system where each weapon has an armor piercing die separate from it's damage value.

I do like a split between health and something like "stamina" or "vitality" for D20 systems. It kind of formalizes a lot of people's head-canon about how HP works, and also you can use stamina as a spendable resource which opens up some interesting options. But as health systems go, I think I still prefer a toughness+wounds system like you get in something like WFRP or Savage Worlds. At least it works for more "heroic" tones where it's fine for heroes to take a hit and shrug it off, and it's easier to track wound penalties if there's only two or three wound levels.

Quote from: tenbones on August 17, 2023, 10:24:25 AM

Quote from: Ghostmaker on August 17, 2023, 08:05:06 AM
But the old ones are the best!

Banded mail.

haha!

Leather armor was never real. - Leather was too expensive to mass produce as armor.

"You can't shoot a fireball spell into a dark room." - Requires line of sight.

I've always understood "banded armor" to refer to something like the Roman Lorica Segmentata, so that's definitely real.

Leather at least makes some sense as armor, even if it's not historical, and I believe there is at least some evidence for boiled leather (including that it's a possible origin for the term "cuirass").

"Studded Leather" is where the goof patrol rides in.

Quote from: tenbones on August 17, 2023, 10:28:48 AM
I can't believe you guys are re-litigating the HP debate. It's fucking DUMB.

HP is clearly an abstraction of skill in avoiding meaningful damage (which itself is odd since there is no loss of effectiveness. You're either at 100% or you're out cold). It's a weird bifurcation of the AC system which abstracts this bizarre idea armor makes you harder to hit. When in reality it absorbs damage. They acknowledge this partially in Unearthed Arcana when they made Full Plate and Field Plate absorb damage on each hit.

This doesn't address the HP issue of course.

This is why having HP/Vitality split is a better abstraction for D20 systems.

>Can't believe we reignited the age old HP debate
>Proceeds to pile onto it

Perhaps you can now understand why we just can't let this one go. D&D HP are just too DUMB to ignore.

This discussion has clearly branched into my specialty of pedantic metamechanical philosophy.

The problem with HP is not that it's hybrid between applying your character's skill and experience and your character's raw stamina and "meat points," but it took all the bad attributes of both. Like a stamina system, it has a ton of bookkeeping minutia, and like a skill system, it's abstract and hard to explain. In fact, it's even harder to explain than a pure system would be because players so strongly gravitate to understanding HP as meat points. It isn't quite "the worst of both worlds" but it certainly isn't as streamlined as a unified system should be and it definitely isn't as intuitive as an isolated system would be.

It's very meh, and the fewer games which use it, the better.

Quote from: VisionStorm on August 17, 2023, 10:24:17 PM

Quote from: tenbones on August 17, 2023, 10:28:48 AM
I can't believe you guys are re-litigating the HP debate. It's fucking DUMB.

HP is clearly an abstraction of skill in avoiding meaningful damage (which itself is odd since there is no loss of effectiveness. You're either at 100% or you're out cold). It's a weird bifurcation of the AC system which abstracts this bizarre idea armor makes you harder to hit. When in reality it absorbs damage. They acknowledge this partially in Unearthed Arcana when they made Full Plate and Field Plate absorb damage on each hit.

This doesn't address the HP issue of course.

This is why having HP/Vitality split is a better abstraction for D20 systems.

>Can't believe we reignited the age old HP debate
>Proceeds to pile onto it

Perhaps you can now understand why we just can't let this one go. D&D HP are just too DUMB to ignore.

Touche!

Quote from: tenbones on August 18, 2023, 09:56:22 AM

Quote from: VisionStorm on August 17, 2023, 10:24:17 PM

Quote from: tenbones on August 17, 2023, 10:28:48 AM
I can't believe you guys are re-litigating the HP debate. It's fucking DUMB.

HP is clearly an abstraction of skill in avoiding meaningful damage (which itself is odd since there is no loss of effectiveness. You're either at 100% or you're out cold). It's a weird bifurcation of the AC system which abstracts this bizarre idea armor makes you harder to hit. When in reality it absorbs damage. They acknowledge this partially in Unearthed Arcana when they made Full Plate and Field Plate absorb damage on each hit.

This doesn't address the HP issue of course.

This is why having HP/Vitality split is a better abstraction for D20 systems.

>Can't believe we reignited the age old HP debate
>Proceeds to pile onto it

Perhaps you can now understand why we just can't let this one go. D&D HP are just too DUMB to ignore.

Touche!

Quote from: Eric Diaz on August 16, 2023, 01:39:27 PM
Okay, I realize we can discuss this point forever and not reach an agreement.

Well, yeah, because you're completely wrong, and I'm never going to agree to something wrong just for the fuzzy warm vibes. Just because wrong people speak up doesn't mean a fact is in debate.

I only replied here because some dude arrogantly posted a statement that is definitely false acting like there does not even exist a valid counterargument, and when push came to shove he didn't even have a single valid argument for his position.

QuoteJust a couple of things:

"I don't think there is a whole lot of correlation between potential deadliness of an injury and recovery time from an injury.".

I think there is a correlation and this is why we disagree here.

Yeah, but that would be an inaccurate framing of what's going on. It's not like you have yer opinion and I have muh opinion and they just clash. You have your opinion and there are at least half a dozen other opinions out there for this narrow slice of a rule, and the big tent position is going to be the one that takes them all into consideration. In my estimate, that's what the rules are doing. And as far as I know, you haven't even claimed you're trying to do that.

QuoteWell, of course; I don't think you're being reasonable either. Or neutral (you are obviously a bigger fan of AD&D than me, while I prefer simpler systems). Faithful to the rules I WILL concede that you are, I'd even say you "fetishize" RAW if we are playing this game. But I think it is mostly a matter of taste (you're an "AD&D RAW" guy, I'm more a "B/X with house-rules" guy).

Yeah, but you're just being childish. I called you out for fetishizing something that you actually are fetishizing and don't deny it. You need to make up facts just to be able to use the word right back because I don't fetishize RAW. I advise DMs all the time to go with their gut. I just believe in being honest. When people are pointing out flaws that are actually a manifestation of their own erroneous assumptions, I don't that should go unchallenged.

Quote
Why? What is the purpose of this rule, and why would it be a problem to make a simpler "one fourth per week if you have more than 30 HP"?

I literally stated it in the post you're replying to and provided a specific example. You managed to snip around it. You want to have an opinion, then have an opinion, and I can respect that. But if this is what you have to do to justify your opinion, you don't get to come back and act like we're just having a difference of opinion here.

My options are stone cold facts based on the most accurate interpretation of the rules, while your opinions are purposefully dishonest distortions of objective reality based on feels and fuzzies. But it is YOU who fetishizes the rules. I'm just setting people straight on their arrogantly posted statements about the rules that I don't fetishize. And your continued attempts to respectfully bow out of this endless argument I won't let go of are just childish attempts to hide how objectively wrong you are about this topic. And present an inaccurate framing of what's actually going on. When I'm right, you're wrong, but you're pretending that we're just having a difference of opinion. 

If I didn't know any better, I'd say someone just dredged up an old rec.games.frp thread and posted it here...

Quote from: Lunamancer on August 18, 2023, 05:56:57 PM

Quote from: Eric Diaz on August 16, 2023, 01:39:27 PM
Just a couple of things:

"I don't think there is a whole lot of correlation between potential deadliness of an injury and recovery time from an injury.".

I think there is a correlation and this is why we disagree here.

Yeah, but that would be an inaccurate framing of what's going on. It's not like you have yer opinion and I have muh opinion and they just clash. You have your opinion and there are at least half a dozen other opinions out there for this narrow slice of a rule, and the big tent position is going to be the one that takes them all into consideration. In my estimate, that's what the rules are doing. And as far as I know, you haven't even claimed you're trying to do that.

You said this sentence. I disagreed. I think there is a correlation, you think there is not. I think this should be the end of it, at least of this one single point, but apparently it is not.

I don't know what the rest of your paragraph is going on about; apparently I'd need to discuss half a dozen opinions before I disagree with a single sentence, et cetera ad nauseam.

If we cannot even agree on wether we disagree (!) about a simple yes/no point ("I don't think there is a whole lot of correlation between potential deadliness of an injury and recovery time from an injury.") we are not getting anywhere.

Thanks for giving it a try anyway (at least I hope you did).

Quote from: VisionStorm on August 18, 2023, 07:01:23 PM
My options are stone cold facts based on the most accurate interpretation of the rules, while your opinions are purposefully dishonest distortions of objective reality based on feels and fuzzies. But it is YOU who fetishizes the rules. I'm just setting people straight on their arrogantly posted statements about the rules that I don't fetishize. And your continued attempts to respectfully bow out of this endless argument I won't let go of are just childish attempts to hide how objectively wrong you are about this topic. And present an inaccurate framing of what's actually going on. When I'm right, you're wrong, but you're pretending that we're just having a difference of opinion. 

Hahaha thanks for putting the argument so plainly and directly so I can understand!

The stupideststupidstupidity that happens at least once every other session:

GM: Player 1 make a perception check ...
Player 1: *rolls* Nailed it!
GM: okay you see blahblahblah over yonder ...
Player 2: wh ... my character can't see it? *rolls*
GM: Oops you fail
Player 2: That's besides the point! I'm standing right next to his character ... why wouldn't I see-
GM: Because you said you were looting the body! How could you see?
Player 2: But I'm right there! I'd notice Player 1's guy saw something! *proceeds to perform a RL reenactment of his PC being able to notice due to proximity and peripheral vision*
Rest of the table: Well if that's the case, we all could've seen it *everyone starts rolling*
GM:

Quote from: Theory of Games on August 20, 2023, 04:28:46 PM
The stupideststupidstupidity that happens at least once every other session:

GM: Player 1 make a perception check ...
Player 1: *rolls* Nailed it!
GM: okay you see blahblahblah over yonder ...
Player 2: wh ... my character can't see it? *rolls*
GM: Oops you fail
Player 2: That's besides the point! I'm standing right next to his character ... why wouldn't I see-
GM: Because you said you were looting the body! How could you see?
Player 2: But I'm right there! I'd notice Player 1's guy saw something! *proceeds to perform a RL reenactment of his PC being able to notice due to proximity and peripheral vision*
Rest of the table: Well if that's the case, we all could've seen it *everyone starts rolling*

Rookie mistake.  Telling and letting the player make a check for something they don't know about.  I print off about 200 random D20 rolls and feed them through a sleeve with a cut out window.  As I use them I cross it out.  So I will only say something if a PC notices the lurking Orc 1/4 mile away.  No one ask about their PC because I will tell them if they see it or what ever.

Quote from: Scooter on August 20, 2023, 04:37:25 PM

Quote from: Theory of Games on August 20, 2023, 04:28:46 PM
The stupideststupidstupidity that happens at least once every other session:

GM: Player 1 make a perception check ...
Player 1: *rolls* Nailed it!
GM: okay you see blahblahblah over yonder ...
Player 2: wh ... my character can't see it? *rolls*
GM: Oops you fail
Player 2: That's besides the point! I'm standing right next to his character ... why wouldn't I see-
GM: Because you said you were looting the body! How could you see?
Player 2: But I'm right there! I'd notice Player 1's guy saw something! *proceeds to perform a RL reenactment of his PC being able to notice due to proximity and peripheral vision*
Rest of the table: Well if that's the case, we all could've seen it *everyone starts rolling*

Rookie mistake.  Telling and letting the player make a check for something they don't know about.  I print off about 200 random D20 rolls and feed them through a sleeve with a cut out window.  As I use them I cross it out.  So I will only say something if a PC notices the lurking Orc 1/4 mile away.  No one ask about their PC because I will tell them if they see it or what ever.

WTFLOL@printing.off.2HUNDRED.rolls