Quote from: RandallS;631819Unfortunately, that only works if you rest after everything. My groups generally do not. Say they are traveling through dangerous wilderness. That's two random encounter checks, one in the morning, one in the afternoon. With per day healing, I don't need any more time info that this.

With per hour healing, if there are two encounters that day, I have to know exactly what time in the morning and in the afternoon the encounters take place and each character has to take up play time figuring how much they have healed since the morning encounter. I have to do this for any NPCs traveling with the group at the same time I should be setting up the "monsters" from this random encounter. Oh and all the hirelings need to have their HP recalculated too.  No thanks. Far too much bookwork for too little gain, especially given my sandbox/random encounters style of play.

No if they don't rest they don't heal. Done.

Quote from: jibbajibba;631820No if they don't rest they don't heal. Done.

What's resting? If they are riding on horseback or in a wagon, is it rest? Do they have to be asleep? Even if it requires sleep, all you will have happen with many players is a 1 encounter "day" followed by rest until everyone is back at full HP. No interested in this either nor am I interested in constantly coming up with reasons the party can't rest until healed every time they get injured.

Quote from: RandallS;631821What's resting? If they are riding on horseback or in a wagon, is it rest? Do they have to be asleep? Even if it requires sleep, all you will have happen with many players is a 1 encounter "day" followed by rest until everyone is back at full HP. No interested in this either nor am I interested in constantly coming up with reasons the party can't rest until healed every time they get injured.

Okay obviously a major issue for you so fair enough.

Luckliy the rules let you change it to once a day so no biggie.

Quote from: RandallS;631819Unfortunately, that only works if you rest after everything. My groups generally do not. Say they are traveling through dangerous wilderness. That's two random encounter checks, one in the morning, one in the afternoon. With per day healing, I don't need any more time info that this.

With per hour healing, if there are two encounters that day, I have to know exactly what time in the morning and in the afternoon the encounters take place and each character has to take up play time figuring how much they have healed since the morning encounter. I have to do this for any NPCs traveling with the group at the same time I should be setting up the "monsters" from this random encounter. Oh and all the hirelings need to have their HP recalculated too.  No thanks. Far too much bookwork for too little gain, especially given my sandbox/random encounters style of play.

I knew I was not the only one who has tried universal continuous regeneration as a D&D houserule. It sounded like a good idea when I joined the table, but boy was that an experience of "beware of what you wish for, you might just get it." To hear experience from the GM side of the screen is enlightening, but cements my view.

The sad thing is I think the "X per day, Y per full rest day" chassis is remarkably simple and adaptable for strategic HP management, while also leaving HP poolsize as tactical HP management. I hated HP structure when I was younger, but it took time to appreciate what it was attempting. If people want to adapt HP to a new playstyle it is remarkably transparent on where to fix things for what you want.

If you want to change tactical flexibility, look at changing HP poolsize. To let tables engage more encounters per day, increase the HP per level roll, either by larger HD or breaking HD into smaller dice. e.g. Change a Wizard from d4 to either d6 or 2d2. If you want more strategic flexibility, look at changing HP per day/full rest day. To cover farther travel distances, increase HP per day while traveling; to cover dungeon delving, increase base camp full day rest.

Creating a new paradigm feels unnecessary when all they have to do is explain why the original paradigm was there in the first place. Once you lay that bare, and how to adjust it to accomodate your table, you keep the D&Disms while also supporting customization. Fighting the paradigm with glommed on patches reads like they do not know what the original design was attempting in the first place.

:rolleyes: in regard to the regeneration, of course.
Other than that in this article, I liked Mearls' explanation of what he was aiming at with the big monsters vs. lots of little guys, although so far to me looks like although the limited scaling in attack and AC and stuff sound like it'll support that, there may be too many dice going everywhere from Advantage or weapon powers or whatever for me to want to do mass combat in it.
Didn't like the thing about Roles, either (classes with any healing having 'sufficient' healing). Too much like 4E where all 'Leader' classes come with standardized, re-fluffed abilities that particularly suit the class (artificers blowing magic powder at people).

Quote from: Opaopajr;631843Fighting the paradigm with glommed on patches reads like they do not know what the original design was attempting in the first place.

The original design was Arneson swiping some rules from a battleship game on his shelf to stop his players continually bitching about the fact that they died.

Not to comment either way on the matter, but I find it fascinating that we have had a non stop shitstorm over hit points and healing since the first article on it over a week ago on various forums.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;632048Not to comment either way on the matter, but I find it fascinating that we have had a non stop shitstorm over hit points and healing since the first article on it over a week ago on various forums.

Of course you'd find it "fascinating", you're on forums FOR the storm, dude.

Quote from: thecasualoblivion;632048Not to comment either way on the matter, but I find it fascinating that we have had a non stop shitstorm over hit points and healing since the first article on it over a week ago on various forums.

Heh, in my games you max out at 10 or 12 HP, usually less, and it can take months to recover naturally. If you go into negative hit points it's disabilities time.

Yes, if you get shot with an assault rifle you may die quickly or spend a long time healing, what makes anyone think getting a belt from a five foot length of razor sharp metal is any different.

Why is this even a debate?

Quote from: The Traveller;632056Heh, in my games you max out at 10 or 12 HP, usually less, and it can take months to recover naturally. If you go into negative hit points it's disabilities time.

Yes, if you get shot with an assault rifle you may die quickly or spend a long time healing, what makes anyone think getting a belt from a five foot length of razor sharp metal is any different.

Why is this even a debate?

Because apparently large numbers of people disagree with your sentiment.

Quote from: The Traveller;632056Heh, in my games you max out at 10 or 12 HP, usually less, and it can take months to recover naturally. If you go into negative hit points it's disabilities time.

Yes, if you get shot with an assault rifle you may die quickly or spend a long time healing, what makes anyone think getting a belt from a five foot length of razor sharp metal is any different.

Why is this even a debate?

Some people want to simulate modern action movies, and treat injuries as something heroes can shrug off until the climax (Commando, Die Hard, Rambo and so forth).

Quote from: Votan;632066Some people want to simulate modern action movies, and treat injuries as something heroes can shrug off until the climax (Commando, Die Hard, Rambo and so forth).

Thats fine and dandy. Find a game that is designed to simulate such things and have at it.

Why does every story/action movie wanker feel the need to co-opt D&D and then whine like bitch when it proves unsuitable for the desired game instead of selecting one of the many games out there that handle cinematics much better.

Let D&D BE D&D for fucks sake.

Quote from: Votan;632066Some people want to simulate modern action movies, and treat injuries as something heroes can shrug off until the climax (Commando, Die Hard, Rambo and so forth).

Oh you can sort of do that too, but you need to be really skilled and it only works against certain forms of attack. A broadsword does 4 damage, but if you roll high over your opponent you can get that to 5, 6, 8, 10, or whatever.

So if you're really good at dodging or really good with deflecting, you can evade most damage. That doesn't mean a knife can't end you though, or you can't be hit with a molotov cocktail or a dead drop trap, this concept of having 65 HP and a sword doing 1d6 damage is a safety blanket, virtual immunity to most injuries.

I get the simulation argument, it's just not how I choose to game really. Tactically this means you are going to think and plan fights carefully, no charging into hordes of enemies, the peasant mob with pitchforks are actually dangerous. In my opinion it makes for a much more affecting experience, it's alive.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;632073Thats fine and dandy. Find a game that is designed to simulate such things and have at it.

Why does every story/action movie wanker feel the need to co-opt D&D and then whine like bitch when it proves unsuitable for the desired game instead of selecting one of the many games out there that handle cinematics much better.

Let D&D BE D&D for fucks sake.

See, I would argue that Gygax got there first with Hit Points simulating action and adventure movies. It is the people who make Hit Points = real damage who are not letting D&D be D&D.

Would it not be easier (and to keep everyone happy) to divide Hit Points into Hit Points and Wounds as core.

HP being metaphysical, wounds being 'real' - when they've gone you are dead, when HP run out you are into your Wounds. For those that want more realism ditch HP or reduce them. Anyone could recover HP; in an instant if you like because they aren't real! HP are also there to separate the PCs, NPCs and unique monsters and creatures against everyone else. Wounds on the other hand can only be magically healed (by a Cleric) or regained after a significant amount of time, most folk only have Wounds - they don't have HP. Is that too simple?