It's amazing how admitting that you have nothing to say let's you think of things unsaid. Perverse that.
I have been reviewing the rules of Under the Dying Sun as I may get a real live group to play soonish. And I came across this: "Hit Points are an abstract measure of vitality, ability to withstand pain, defensive skill, and luck." Nothing new or earth-shaking there, but that's actually kind of the point. Hit Points have always been abstract, but that is one of the most overlooked parts of Ye Auld Game's system. I mean, they are called hit point, for Gary's sake; obviously they represent how many hits you can take! Right? And that's why we have the crazy stuff about high-level guys shrugging off arrows, becoming immune to a knife in the throat, and easily surviving falls from high place. Ah, the arguments in Dragon magazine back in the day; how I miss ye.
As I mull this over in my head, I think that the name may be a large part of the problem. So what if you called them something else? What if you called them, for example, "Fortune" or "Luck Points"?
You get this:
Luck Points are an abstract measure of vitality, ability to withstand pain, defensive skill, and good old-fashioned luck. At the conclusion of combat, all characters who still have at least 1 Luck Point regain half of those lost in the bout (rounding down). Thus if a character takes a total of 5 points of damage, even if from different opponents, he regains 2 points once the fight ends and he can catch his breath.
Characters fall unconscious when they drop to 0 Luck Points or less and suffer from a Wound.
That's from the section on Injury & Death with the appropriate substitutions. And I rather like it. Instead of saying, "You are all out of hit points; you're dead", you could now say, with some brutal understatement, "Your luck has run out; you're dead."
On the other hand, that terminological shift might be a bit too much for some players. Hit Points are a fairly intrinsic piece of the game's history. God knows how much the shift to ascending Armour Class bothers some people. Hmn, something to think about.
I've been thinking the same thing for a while. Some of the terms aren't the best (see also 'armor class', 'to hit roll', 'damage' etc)
ReplyDeleteI was leaning towards 'Stamina' with Luck being for something else.
Maybe it's because I grew up watching movies like "Die Hard" or anything with Arnie in it, where the hero gets the living crap beat out of them, shot in non-vital locations, stabbed, blown up, yet keeps on fighting...but I've never had the problem with hit points equaling how many wounds you can physically take.
ReplyDeleteIf you've got 30 hit points, you DON'T take a knife to the throat. You take it in the shoulder and keep on fighting. It's only the poor schlubs with 4 or less hit points that might take it in the neck.
But that's just me.
If I were to pick up a game that changed the name to Luck Points, or Stamina, or Combat Capacity Points, or anything else, it wouldn't bother me.
You could also do something like "You're luck has run out, the next successful attack against you will kill you."
ReplyDeleteI like the general gist of this, though I'm unsure what's the best implementation.
ReplyDeleteI made the same suggestion, specifically in relation to Western games, where the source fiction seems to assume that one bullet kills you.
ReplyDeleteHowever saving throws are also traditionally explained as largely representing luck, so maybe your Hit Points should also be your saving throw?
PS That would require that saving throws were 'roll under or equal' rather than 'roll equal or higher'.
ReplyDeletePPS Another consequence would be that clerics' 'healing' wouldn't involve anything obviously supernatural happening in the world of the game. A character nearly gets killed by an arrow (ie they lost HP), and so they feel the gods have sent them a warning (ie their HP are low). So they get the priest to petition the gods to be merciful to them (ie increase their HP).
ReplyDeleteThe effect would be helped if players didn't know their own HP.
Which also raises the question "can the players spend these luck points on other things"? Need to find an implausible item to escape a deadly situation? That'll cost you 2 luck points. But now you've pushed your luck, & your next fight might be your last.
ReplyDeleteIt provides some narrative cover for surviving unlikely events. Fall out of a tower? It'll cost you 6 luck points to punch through a series of awnings & land on a pyramid of fresh bread.
Also, it occurs to me the players might get to haggle for luck costs too. Fall out of the same tower but don't have 6 luck points, or don't want to lose that many? Offer to lose 4 but suffer a broken leg (DEX & movement penalty) or a savage blow to the head (penalty to all psychic abilities or INT checks).
ReplyDelete@Lord Gwydion - I should clarify: I get that now. But I did not get that as a younger gamer and it's pretty clear to me that many people still don't when they speak about D&D's "unrealsitic" combat. So I'm thinking that maybe a name change woudl make it clearer.
ReplyDelete@anarchist - damn but that's a good point. In fact, I have wrestled over and over about distinguishing Hit Points from Saving Throws. I blogged some about that when working on the Survivor class
@Mark - I already implemented a version of that with Desperate Effort, which let's players blow HP's to modify certain rolls. But I'm leery of taking it too far (with "too far" being utterly undefined right now).
Generally, I've tested the spending of HP's to modify things in Derelict Delvers, and found players are unwilling to spend those points. They'd rather survive than do something cool.
ReplyDeleteI'd suggest letting them be luck, but making sure the next hit may kill them. Perhaps once luck has run out they must make a Con check versus a flat number--if they fail they die.
I've thought of another permutation: if you say they are Luck, you could be justified in saying that Thieves get more than Fighters. And, off the top of my head, I think that could be fine. Fighters get better armour and better chances to hit to counter-balanced it.
ReplyDeleteHmn.
Generally, I've tested the spending of HP's to modify things in Derelict Delvers, and found players are unwilling to spend those points. They'd rather survive than do something cool.
ReplyDeleteI see that. My much more limited idea is that you could spend HP's in desperate straights if you think it's worth the gamble. So, is it worth losing some HP to make sure you hit this time or do more damage? It becomes a strategic choice. I'm not much interested in adding "stunting" to D&D.
I'd suggest letting them be luck, but making sure the next hit may kill them. Perhaps once luck has run out they must make a Con check versus a flat number--if they fail they die.
When they run out of HP, they fall unconscious and roll on the Wound Table. I think having characters crippled and maimed is more interesting than killing them. :)
I use luck points rather than hit points and it does clear up a lot of issues. It also breaks a few of the (in my case irritating) D&D cliches (squires and henchmen being of no use, impossible escort missions).
ReplyDeleteLater I branched it out so that the pool of luck points could be used for other types of damage (stealth becomes a lot more interesting if being spotted costs X much luck, allowing even the warrior to participate in stealth, just about as wealth as a rogue in combat).
http://zzarchov.blogspot.com/2010/05/on-elegance-of-luck-points-versus-hit.html