Alternate Hit Point System

[Lawgiver]

IS it just me or are high level characters too unrealistic. To me combat is deadly -- PERIOD. It makes no sense for a 12th level fighter to have 100 HP. You wide up with a character who can get whacked with a sword like 16 times and still be alive and kicking. ("Tis only a flesh wound!" ;)). To me experience teaches you skills not builds up your tolerance to taking a beating. Yes, it toughens you up, but no it doesn't make you invincible. It shouldn't be normal for a PC to take two fireballs dead in the chest and get up and still be able to fight (at least without serious magical protect).

Do you agree? Do you have any alternate suggestions?

I've never really focused on a solution (since I can't seem to get my PCs to stick with a character past level 7), but I have never liked the D&D HP method.

About the only alternative I can think of off the top of my head is something like:
Fighters +1d4 HP per level
Priests/Thiefs +1d2 per level
Mages +1 per level
Plus any normal Constitution bonuses

It may be harsh, but it makes it more of a challenge. PCs will think twice before charging singlehandedly into a horde of 30 goblins (and emerging victorious... of course).

[dmferry]

Hmm you could use the starwars d20 damage system or alternity damage system. But you should also adjust the monsters.

~dmferry

[Lord Eldred]

As you grow older your body becomes better at absorbing the hits. Cuts from weapons are actually healing faster and better. Another way to look at it is the more experienced you are the better you are at avoiding serious damage. The h.p. system is way to compensate for that ability. Maybe a better way to show that is do what Lawgiver suggests as far as hit points go and the characters armor class improves as they get more experienced. I would also agree with dmferry that you have to adjust monstors as well.

[morgramen]

Instead of increasing the damage a character can swallow as he advances in level, why not come up with some sort of battle skill system?

Your skill with weapons (ala THACO/To Hit) chance improves, your AC (skill at parrying blows) improves - that sort of thing.

This is already part of the 3E system I suppose, but if you were to play with it a bit more, it might be an alternative to 'mega hit points fire ball swallowers then get upers'. (A problem which I totally agree with btw.)

The idea is to make your character harder to hit, not give him more resistance to physical damage, while at the same time improving his chances to get through his rivals defenses.

Just some thoughts - no answers available at this time.
;)

[Lord Eldred]

I really think the way to go is improved AC with slight increase to the ability to take damage.

[blitzmacher]

I took the combat system from runequest and reformed it to work in the DnD setting. It called for dividing the hp by 3 and give each body part the divided number adding 1 point to chest and taking away one in the arms, like this;
9HP = 3hp head 2 hp arms 4 hp chest 3hp abdomen 3hp legs. Now everyone has an AC of 10 - or + regarding to size and allowable dexterity due to armor worn. Armor works as damage reduction reducing the damage done by whatever the AC value of the armor is, chainmail with an AC bonus of 5 will take away 5 points of damage. Each body part when reduced to zero quits working, when reaches -10 it is permanently damaged or a dead character if in head chest or abdomen.
After a succesful hit, you roll a d20 a roll of 1-4 is Rleg, 5-8 Lleg, 9-11 Abs, 12 Chest, 13-15 Rarm, 16-18 Larm, 19-20 Head. Also I took away all strength bonus to hit, combat is by skill, not strength.
This system does take more time to use, and I use the same system for the monsters.

[Mike Cod]

I always liked the system used by Call of Cthulhu and Stormbringer (By Chaosium). A characters hit points is determined by the avg. of his Size and constitution score (usually between 10-18). Armour absorbs a certain amount of damage. all characters have a parrying ability with their weapons. The more you parry the lesser your parry skill becomes (eg. a parry skill of 67% is 67% against the 1st attack, 47% against the 2nd, 27% against the 3rd, 7% against the 4th) As you can see, fighting against 8 goblins can mean death!
Skills improve the more time you use them and your skills, attacks and parrys are used on the die 100%.

Now to incorporate the die 100% system with birthright............;)

[Lord Shaene]

While the hit point system may seem unrealistic, I would like to point out that this is a fantasy game not a realistic one. the hitpoint systen is in place for a reason i suppose, perhaps its becuase you spend hundreds of hours into developing your character and if you could be killed on the drop of the dime, most people wouldnt want to play any more because the would spend more time rolling up characters then actually roleplaying and besides thats how legends are created

[Lawgiver]

...this is a fantasy game.

What a cop out.

I'll bet $20 bucks your DM lets your PC live past 0 hit points (i.e. -10) even with 100+ max HP, before killing him off. I haven't met a DM yet that honestly kills a PC that has a level greater than 3 without trying in some way to save them. Even with that few DMs prevent resurrection of dead PCs (if they even bother to kill them).

Would you mind relating to me a legend of hero who was hit 16+ times with a sword in a single battle (Hello! My name is Indago Montoya... You killed my father... Prepare to die...) or got hit dead in the chest with a fireball twice and kept walking? Even legends aren't that preposterous.

As fara as spending more time rolling up characters then playing... If PCs used their brains more than their sword they would avoid certain confrontations (which is my point), and the subsequent deaths. Or heres a foreign concept... retreat. Even heros get defeated some times. Unless your a Paladin, there is no need to play Heratio on the bridge. Turn tail and run. A party doesn't need to automatically overcome ever challenge they face.

[morgramen]

"I've been mostly dead all day!!!"


HA! Great flick that one!

[morgramen]

I'll have a peek about for the custom rule engine a friend and I have been working on for the last few years and let you know when I find it Lawmaker.

It basically took the stance that a persons body/vitality doesn't change much over time. THus, PCs created with tend to start at a set amount of HPs, and only receive a few xtra as they advance in level.

The system is actaully very similar to what 3E turned out to be (hence we haven't done much with it since WotC beat us to the punch) assumed that your size determiend how much of a target you were, and thus how easy you were to hit. Your armour made it more difficult to damage you. We also added in wound categories, so that once you were down to 1/2 hps, you started getting penalties.

It worked very nicely.

[Lord Eldred]

Lawgiver, do you always have to make fun of people that have a different viewpoint than you?

Allowing the character to live at -10 doesn't prevent a character from ending up dead if the character only recieves a few extra h.p.'s a level. The character hit by a fireball or a dragons flame will still end up dead.

I still think the improvement should come in armor class. The more levels you have the lesser your AC so that you get hit less often. It would also encourage more role playing if h.p.s didn't go up so high because even though you don't have a great of a chance of getting hit by the dragon you wouldn't want to risk getting hit so you would role play your way out of it!

[Lawgiver]

Orginally posted by Lord Eldred

Lawgiver, do you always have to make fun of people that have a different viewpoint than you?

What have I done to offend you or another? I assure you I meant no insult. These message boards do not convey emotion and tone of voice well. Fogive me for any offense.

[Yak]

IMO the Hit Point system is fine. While the numbers may be big, I don't think they reflect the damage you can take but the potential damage you can take. The acutal damage is one good chop of a blade. The increase in HPs is a reflect of how you can take a blow. The more experienced fighter will know how to deflect a blade or axe just so, where they will get a little damage but not the full force. The Hit Point system was made to relfect this instead of makeing complicated rules and load of extra rolls they just say you increase in hit points. Where monsters depend on their ability to absorb a large amount of damage, PCs depend on their wits. The HP system reflects these wits with the ability to take more damage simply and effectivly without added rolls during combat.

[Xander]

If the numbers get too big, then introduce a critical hit table like the one in ICE and various other systems. EG: strike cut major artery, limb useless, loses x hp/rd will die in x rds. Just a thought.
;)

[Lord Eldred]

Point well taken Lawgiver. You will have to type in tone of voice and emotion when you REALLY want to make fun of some one until then I will always take you as meaning no offense :)

[Lawgiver]

[scowling at Eldred] Fine! Have it your way you meddling old man! [grumbling to himself]

[pauses, winks at Eldred and flashes half a grin]

[Lord Eldred]

See how much clearer things are when you type some emotion and tones of voice ;) :P

[faehew]

i created a system of increasing ac instead of hp. i had to create new spells,which was a little difficult. you had to increase low spell damage and decrease high spell damage or it becomes unbalancing. also it is difficult to have a character to split in different classes when you change the combat system. for instance a character who goes half in fighter and half in rogue is about half as good at fighting than a full fighter at all levels in dnd. in the ac improvement a character who goes ahlf and half is only slightly worse at low levels and really sucky at high levels. hp allow people to develope in a balanced manner. it also is a lot to do with the psyche of the warrior. self confidance elan ect. it allows people to say hay lets back off and not correlate it to cowardice. it is a good thought but unless you can find a way to balance it its not going to work.

[Lord Eldred]

After reading faehew's comments, I would have to agree with Yak when he says the current system is fine. Everything else suggested seems way too complicated and complicated only serves to slow down game play.

[Lawgiver]

complicated... Which is precisely why I started the thread. I don't have a simply system...;)

[Lord Eldred]

You don't find the original system simple?

[Lawgiver]

I find it simple, but unrealistic. You know me Mr. Fantasy Realism.

[Lord Eldred]

Well Mr. Fantasy Realism, I hate anything that slows down the game play even if it makes things more realistic!

[Lawgiver]

I agree. Which is why I posted the thread. I was looking for a quick and dirty way to solve the dilemna. :P

[Lord Eldred]

Unfortunately the solutions look more dirty than quick

[Chaos Lord Arioch]

Well I'm back and I'm bad ;(
(the commoner formerly known as Mike Cod)
As I posted previously, a system I liked was that of Chaosium Inc. (call of cthulhu and Stormbringer RPG's).
Armour absorbs damage.
plate mail absorbs 1-10+2.
Each character has HP = to the average of their size and constitution (usually between 10 and 12).
A broadsword does 1-8+1!
Combat is scary indeed.
I would love to encorporate that system with birthright.
No one, no matter how experienced or tough-skinned would survive a 100 ft plummet (yes I know there's a 40 or 50 HP limit where you have to save or something but 40 HP is a lot of HP's!!)

[Arch-Sorcerer Gargamel]

Yak is pragmatic man. The current hp system is fine. High-level PCs and high level monsters still have the capability of eliminating each other rather quickly. This just allows PCs to not have to suffer humiliating defeat to the backstab of a kobold. I don't know how many people would play the game if combat took as long as mechwarrior or if their 'heroes' had only a 50% survival chance against twelve pitch-fork wielding (evil, if you wish, Lawgiver) farmers.

Its the age old concept of reality vs. fantasy. Its common for me to hear video game players talk about how half-life is more realistic than quake. I don't care, though, I don't play video games to experience reality, I play to entertain myself with games that are somewhat based in reality, but don't contain many of the drawbacks of reality.

In essence, the point I'm trying to make is that I need to make shorter posts. (Oh yeah, and I like reality in games, just balanced a bit).

[Lawgiver]

Orginally posted by Arch-Sorcerer GargamelI don't know how many people would play the game if combat took as long as mechwarrior or if their 'heroes' had only a 50% survival chance against twelve pitch-fork wielding (evil, if you wish, Lawgiver) farmers.

I agree that long drawn out combat, forgive me Abbess, but --sucks! I was hopeing someone had a descent system or idea that I could implement easily.

Why do the pich-fork weilding farmers have to be evil??? Peasants are humans they get riled up about things and seek to take up "arms" too.

I agreee that its a fanatasy game and that the outlandish should happen at times. I would prefer to make levels and skills reflect the character's ability to avoid or block opponents hits. Even in most fantasy flick most wounds are serious (though highly temporary... two scenes later they rarely hurt anymore...) and many are fatal. Though I'm not suggesting every kobold with a knife kill PCs. I just would like PCs to reflect on the seriousness of comabt and unless the rules promote that a fighter with 70+ HP isn't going to sweat taking on 30 foot soldiers.

One thing I have thought about done is making multiple opponents more deadly. One man can't defend 6 very easily... I use a version of he combined action from Star Wars. +1 to-Hit for each additional opponent. (i.e. if three people concentrate on a single oppenent then they receive a +2 to hit; 5 receive +4). perhaps li,iting the bonus to targets within 3 size catagories.

[Chaos Lord Arioch]

I agree that a player who developes a character over a long period would not like their character slain.
A player who has a 12-20 HP character would then run his character smarter!
No more charging into a hoard of 20 goblins and attacking a dragon is no longer just a treasure hunt. It's something to be avoided!
Of course using the Stormbringer rules does change everything, no levels and experience points but it has other benefits.

[Arlen Blaede]

I have to concur with a previous posting. The most realistic combat system I've seen for fantasy fighting has been put together by the people who made Runequest. You know, the same people who actually like to put on real armor and beat each other silly with real weapons (SCA for all those who didn't know).

[Perhelion]

I'll belatedly pop into the argument just to say that I think that though the DnD system isn't perfect, it allows quick play and heroic feats... After all, if Mr. Muscle can overcome an army all by himself, then its because he's a legend... and will attract some tougher opposition soon. After all we couldn't use the high-HD monsters if the heroes faced too many problems with the easy ones! Besides even a great warrior might have problems if the monsters became a bit intelligent (i.e. use a net, stay on the o0ther side of the river with poisonned arrows etc...)

[Chaos Lord Arioch]

Heroic feats eh. what level would you say Bilbo BAGGINS was when he faced the dragon? He survived the encounter through intelligence and cunning not because he could withstand the effects of a dragon's breath.
A hero should be given the HP of a 100 commoners because he's a hero? A 1st level sorcerer can cause major problems for a 10th level fighter (Most evident in Birthright). It all depends on how intelligent the character is played that makes him a hero.
Think of Braveheart. Wallace was legendary, does that mean he was 7 feet tall and could shoot fireballs out of his arse?
(I'm not sure how you spell that one- arse?)
No, he was just intelligent (of course I'm only refering to the movie to make a point).
And finally when he was disembowelled, was he hacked at over and over to bring his HP down before he died?
It should be the skills and talents of the character that increases not his HP.
One arrow killed Achilles (at least I think it was an arrow) so one arrow should kill a 25th level fighter. It I was that 25th level fighter I would hope that I had excellent armour and magic to protect me and my ankle;)
All challenges can be overcome. Not through brute force but through intelligence and strategy.

[Lawgiver]

Hail the wisdom of the great Chaos Lord Arioch!!! At last another man of great reason!

By the way I'd give Bilbo a level 3 in the Hobbit, maybe up to 6 when he meets Frodo at Rivendale in LOTR.

I'd make William Wallace about a level 10 or 11 fighter (at least the level 9 to get the followers by the 2e rules... though the level 9 requirement is easily debatable). And I beleive its fireballs from his eyes and bolts of lightening from his arse...but I could be wrong (its happened at least 1 or 2 times before ;))

[Chaos Lord Arioch]

drat, I messed up the quote.
I knew he had something coming from his arse. I wonder if there is a blood ability like that?

Kidding, of course!

[Mark_Aurel]

Have you looked at the original justification for hit points? 1e DMG, by Gary Gygax, page 82:

"It is quite unreasonable to assume that as a character gains levels of ability in his or her class that a corresponding gain in actual ability to withstand physical damage takes place. It is preposterous to state such an assumption, for if we are to assume that a man is killed by a sword thrust that does 4 hit points of damage, we must similarly assume that a hero could, on average, withstand five such thrusts before being slain! Why then the increase in hit points? Because these reflect both the actual physical ability of the character to withstand damage - as indicated by constitution bonuses - and a commensurate increase in such areas as skill in combat and similar life-or-death situations, the "sixth sense" which warns the individual of some otherwise unforeseen events, sheer luck, and the fantastic provisions of magical protections and/or divine protection. Therefore, constitution affects both actual ability to withstand physical punishment hit points, and the immeasurable areas which involve the sixth sense and luck (fitness).

Hearkening back to the example of Rasputin..."

The point of this entire discussion is to point out that hit points isn't actually all toughness - it is composed of many things. Basically, when a character takes damage, you might say that his "luck" got reduced rather than saying he took a stab in the thigh, as an example. Hit points is a simplification to make things go faster overall - as the text hints, you can actually interpret damage in more ways than just being hacked at.

[Rcook12a]

Lawgiver, Hit Points are part of D&D if you don't like them play a different game like RuneQuest as someone suggested.
I agree that they are bit rediculous at high levels but there are many other game systems that are very good that use different systems, Shadowrun and L5R come to mind. Just convert those systems to the Birthright world and post your conversion here for all to see.
Regards

[Lord Eldred]

Orginally posted by Mark_Aurel

Have you looked at the original justification for hit points? 1e DMG, by Gary Gygax, page 82:

"It is quite unreasonable to assume that as a character gains levels of ability in his or her class that a corresponding gain in actual ability to withstand physical damage takes place. It is preposterous to state such an assumption, for if we are to assume that a man is killed by a sword thrust that does 4 hit points of damage, we must similarly assume that a hero could, on average, withstand five such thrusts before being slain! Why then the increase in hit points? Because these reflect both the actual physical ability of the character to withstand damage - as indicated by constitution bonuses - and a commensurate increase in such areas as skill in combat and similar life-or-death situations, the "sixth sense" which warns the individual of some otherwise unforeseen events, sheer luck, and the fantastic provisions of magical protections and/or divine protection. Therefore, constitution affects both actual ability to withstand physical punishment hit points, and the immeasurable areas which involve the sixth sense and luck (fitness).

Hearkening back to the example of Rasputin..."

The point of this entire discussion is to point out that hit points isn't actually all toughness - it is composed of many things. Basically, when a character takes damage, you might say that his "luck" got reduced rather than saying he took a stab in the thigh, as an example. Hit points is a simplification to make things go faster overall - as the text hints, you can actually interpret damage in more ways than just being hacked at.

Finally someone who knows what they are talking about!

[blitzmacher]

On the first page of this thread I posted the system my group uses for melee. What I didn't put with it was the fact that when you go up in level you still go up in hit points like normal, you just have to divide them up again. This system really works well for called shots. After all, it took david only one well placed shot to take out goliath, not a full blown slug fest.

[Lord Eldred]

The question remains does it slow down the game?

[Chaos Lord Arioch]

You're going to have a hard time convincing me that Rasputin os a 20th level priest. lol.
In my mind it was luck and not his hit points that saved his life. People who didn't know how to kill tried to kill him! lol.
I prefer the Chaosium hit point system as I mentioned before. A characters hit points are determined and remain constant unless they increase their constitution or size characteristic. Armour absorbs damage, wpn and non-wpn skills use the 100% system and increase the more you use your skill. There is also a characteristic known as "luck" which would help explain that Rasputin thing.
Rasputin............. lol, he cracks me up:)

[Lawgiver]

Orginally posted by Rcook12a
Lawgiver, Hit Points are part of D&D if you don't like them play a different game like RuneQuest as someone suggested.

...well that certainly sounds a bit rude.

[Lawgiver]

Orginally posted by Mark_Aurel
Have you looked at the original justification for hit points? 1e DMG, by Gary Gygax, page 82:


No it seems I'm only about an 11th level Rules Lawyer who hasn't memorized every publication back to the dark ages of 1e... :P By the way why then hasn't this mystical explaination (that makes a bit more sense) been carriesd over. Seems to me that according to the lovely 3e PHB Glossary, HP is defined as:
A measure of character health or object integrity. Damage decreases current hit points, and lost hit points return with healing or natural recovery. A character's hit point total increases permenantly with additional experience and/or permenant increases in Constitution, or temporarily through the use of various special abilities, spells, magic items, or magical effects (see temporary hit points and effective hit point increase).

Additionally, if HP represents something like "the immeasurable areas which involve the sixth sense and luck (fitness) why then would they need to be healed magically. You would almost have potions of self-esteem, ESP, and luck that mimic potions of healing... ;)

[Mark_Aurel]

Who says that healing spells and potions don't have a placebo type effect to them? You could interpret healing spells as blessings from on high that protect the chosen of the gods.

The Glossary in the PHB denotes function only, and is not an extensive discussion of the nature of hit points.

2e contained rules, and more rules, but neglected to actually discuss the reasoning behind those rules. The 1e books contained a lot of "behind the curtain" type discussions of why the game was such and such - the 1e DMG is commonly recognized as far superior to the 2e DMG, and the 3e DMG is actually more similar to the 1e than 2e version.

I simply offered up the discussion from the 1e DMG to illustrate that hit points doesn't necessarily represent "health" as in "the healthier you are, the more stabs you can withstand." The further discussion of Rasputin in the 1e DMG was used as an example to illustrate how some humans can actually withstand amazing amounts of damage; the 2e books also contained such examples, to justify their capping off falling damage at 20d6.

I could easily argue from a point of "don't mess with the rules unnecessarily" - if you change the hit point rules around somewhat, things will become unhinged in other parts - the CR system will become unusable, higher-level wizards will become far more powerful than they are, the mortality ratio of PCs will increase dramatically, etc. Hit points are so essential to D&D that the effort/reward ratio of altering it any much is ridiculous - you might as well switch systems then. I don't think that's a rude thing to say - the hit point system is central to D&D.

3e does offer some ways of making hit points more "realistic" within the scope of the system as is, however - DMG page 64-67 contains many different subsystems that can be used to set up a more lethal game. The notion of critical hits and the coup de grace mechanic does a lot to make players be more careful, even around "insignifcant" opponents. If you used the rules for Instant Kill, players would almost certainly be careful about taking on hordes of low-level creatures - about one in 8000 hits would be instantly lethal, regardless of hit points.

Personally, I prefer the system as it is. If you want to modify it for your home campaign uses, I'd suggest you study the options they propose first - they make sense, without altering the game too much. They may give you the "feel" you want without too much work.

I prefer to interpret only critical hits as "real injuries" - other blows hurt, but they aren't life-threatening by themselves. Chalk it down to luck. ;)

[doom]

Everyone has their own solution to this "problem" - probably the BEST solution is just to leave well enough alone. The D&D HP system, as written, works fine and is fun to play.

That being said... I don't follow my own advise. ;) I play a fairly 'gritty' campaign where a serious wround can lay a warrior up for a week or two... and I LIKE it that way. I use HP to represent ONLY the "training/luck/magical defense/will of the gods" sort of HP defense. Until my characters HP actually go to 0, they haven't received much more than bruises and scratches. BUT I let my characters continue fighting after 0 hp. Negative hp damage reduces all of their physical stats by a like amount. A character at -5 hp recieves -5 to Str, Dex, and Con (with all appropriate effects, include loss of feats, mobility, or, at 0 con, being dead as a door nail). I have some extra nonsense that I throw in there regarding healing time for these serious wounds and the like, but that is the basic mechanic. It works for me. Might not work for anyone other group anywhere, but that why they call '
em house rules. ;)

- Doom

[Green Knight]

The DnD system isn't the most realistic one available. While a RPG system can never become truly realistic, some are a lot more true to real life than others. Sadly, the more realistic, the more complex a system usually gets.

I have 2 possible solutions:
1) Stick with the DnD HP system. Some tweaks:
a) If it isn't deadly enough, increase the threath range of all weapons and spells. Example: Longsword 1d8/18-20 x3. Longbow 1d8/19-20 x4 Greataxe 1d12 19-20 x4 Fireball 10d6/19-20 x3
B) Give fixed HPs
With the limited amount of magic available in BR, AC is low and healing magic is scarce. These tweaks hurt a lot.
Example: Ftr 12, Dex, 12, Con 18 (hp 108), AC 22 (full plate n'stuff). Facing 5 orogs w/greataxe (Str 16). 1 crit = 40 hp damage. With average luck, he'll be dead before the orogs are :)
The system is still not very realistic, but even high-level ftrs will die a lot.

2) Throw out the whole DnD system and go for something else entirely. I'd suggest the sweedish RPG "Eon". It's about as realistic as a Fantasy RPG is going to get. I'm not sure if there is an english version though; could be a problem if not ;)

[Lord Shaene]

Well after reading all the posts again, I have to agree the hit point system is unrealistic and should be abolished or changed to assimilate real life! So while that is being done lets eliminate dragons, the Gorgon, Orcs , hill giants, goblins, elfs, orogs, halfings, kobolds, shadow world, beholders, titans,ghasts, vampires, lycanthropes,lizardmen, ogres etc. etc. etc. Oh C'mon the hit point system is fine, it has been for over twenty years or we wouldnt be here still playin this game. :) we play a fantasy game not a fantasy game thats supposed to be realistic

[Chioran]

Is everyone sitting down?

Good.

I agree with Shaene on this one. It works fine.

[Lord Shaene]

<stunned> well i knew it would happen one day but never expected it to happen so soon.

(shakes Chioron's hand) shall we go have an ale?

[Chaos Lord Arioch]

I think some people are missing the whole point of this discussion of the hit point system.
Does the present HP system work? Yes it does, I believe we all agreed on that. Can it be better? Absolutely. Can we discuss what we think would improve the system? I hope so and I am doing so now.
This discussion is a vicious circle. Some argue the system should be changed. Some say it works the way it is. Arguements are made for and against, suggestions are made as to how it can be improved (or in some instances how a DM modified his own campaign), then the arguement to do away with everything fantastic if we want realism.
Can you honestly tell me you never had a realism arguement in your campaign? Anything from the amount of alcohol your warrior can consume without getting drunk to how quickly a fire spreads on a ship!
So on the basis of your arguement Lord Shaene, if you introduce any level of realism to your campaign you should do away with anything fantastic?

But I guess we should not get to excited on the topic. Give WOC four years and they'll change the rules again. And all us faithful will go out and buy their "New" rules.

[Lord Shaene]

I suppose you could always make something better, which is why they are on the 3rd edition of dungeon and dragons. and even our campaign makes some slight modifications to some of the rules. but many things being discussed are major changes which changes the whole complexity of the game. if you change the way hit points are done on humans, wont you in effect have to change the hit points on say a wolf or elephant or ogre or dragon because they no longer will be proportional to each other. for that matter why does a dwarf fighter or human fighter or gnome fighter or halfling fighter get the same die to roll for hit points. one could argue a dwarf should get a larger die to roll than an elf. or a human more than an halfling. the hit point system has proven to work so why change it on the basis its not realistic?

[Chioran]

I hope they don't wait 4 years to update again. I can't wait that long to buy more stuff!!!

[blitzmacher]

To answer lord eldred, no it doesn't slow the game down, assuming that you already keep track of hit points. Besides its kind of cool to be able to see the that the damage of your Great sword crushed your opponents leg and is now forced to fight you from a prone position. But this also works both ways.

[Lord Eldred]

Now that is a concept, don't keep track of hit points at all. Hmmm, I can see it now. "Players your characters are dead when I say they are dead. If you don't like it, leave!"

[Chioran]

Orginally posted by Lord Eldred

Now that is a concept, don't keep track of hit points at all. Hmmm, I can see it now. "Players your characters are dead when I say they are dead. If you don't like it, leave!"

Bye!

[blitzmacher]

Well I guess some people just don't like that rule.:P

[Lawgiver]

[The various party members glance at each other in confusion] At last the cleric, voices the question they have all been pondering, ''What is a-- HIT POINT? And why would we want to track them?''