tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2688079707543352822.post3784655284001119819..comments2024-03-22T02:46:36.248-07:00Comments on Playing at the World: Arneson's Hit Points for CharactersJon Petersonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09824427209908111302noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2688079707543352822.post-64453833669762262622022-04-26T20:12:55.420-07:002022-04-26T20:12:55.420-07:00Having run Runequest for many years I have seen th...Having run Runequest for many years I have seen the exact problem mentioned. Having characters always a single unlucky roll away from death does have a negative effect on the game. Because characters always have a chance to die, if at all possible they will avoid fair and open fights. Ambushes and murder became the norm. It became so bad that I abandoned that game and went back to hit points. Hedgehobbithttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17606283586332210195noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2688079707543352822.post-21577422998258233552021-11-16T08:15:19.189-08:002021-11-16T08:15:19.189-08:00Theoretical systems like say Runequest where hit p...Theoretical systems like say Runequest where hit points don't increase without increasing attributes which was a difficult and costly in game meta currency. I wish we had the Arneson "cut" of DnD so we could see what it looked like. With skills and limited HP it already sounds like systems that came out later as a reaction to dissatisfaction with DnDs class and level system.Chris MacDhomnuillhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08029879444259623230noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2688079707543352822.post-45355211690304707272021-10-29T15:33:29.796-07:002021-10-29T15:33:29.796-07:00Actually Arnesons system would not preclude such d...Actually Arnesons system would not preclude such decision making at all. It would amplify it. <br /><br />Every time a character is faced with the decision for combat the intelligent question would need to be asked if the reward outweighs the risk. More importantly will the encounter help or hinder the parties overall goals. These are really better questions than whether your character can statistically survive.<br /><br />Hit point depletion is still a factor, just not one of bean counting. In the original campaigns it's questionable whether they knew their characters hit points anyway.dervhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04830683070817856942noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2688079707543352822.post-89799783017194126162021-10-25T06:56:13.741-07:002021-10-25T06:56:13.741-07:00Exactly, Phil. And furthermore, a pool of hit poi...Exactly, Phil. And furthermore, a pool of hit points allows players to make intelligent decisions about fighting or fleeing as those changes occur during the fight. Once your HP are depleted you know you're in danger of dying soon and should consider retreat. <br /><br />Whereas in a theoretical system where hit points never accumulate but the character gets harder and harder to hit, even the mightiest heroes are a lucky blow away from defeat, and this precludes much of that decisionmaking. <br /><br />HP may be less realistic, but they both simulate the heroic fiction of heroes needing to be worn down before their defenses slip, and provide the gameplay value of giving a changing value based on which you may make different decisions.Shimrodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14950780684532279227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2688079707543352822.post-41116447447600168452021-10-22T05:58:02.136-07:002021-10-22T05:58:02.136-07:00Having fixed hit points - but varying probabilties...Having fixed hit points - but varying probabilties to hit/be hit makes sense from a multi-figure wargaming point of view. In a wargame every player typically has a lot of figures to play with. You don't want to track various hit points for each figure, but want a binary decision for life or death. A few hitpoints is still manageable.<br /><br />However, once you make the jump to having one player = one character, a large number of hit points might be the better choice. Every combat round, you want something to happen. It can't be a binary life/death outcome, you want to track a decreasing number.<br /><br />Nevertheless, 'hit points' was a poor choice of terminology from the beginning, and came with expectations about what that decreasing number actually meant. Cfr. the zillions of discussions and articles devoted to hitpoints, how to improve the system, explaining what 'hit points really are' etc, etc.Phil Dutréhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13607941040736764291noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2688079707543352822.post-83271307415478030802021-10-21T23:39:45.315-07:002021-10-21T23:39:45.315-07:00This is really interesting and quite a shock for m...This is really interesting and quite a shock for me. On the surface, Arneson's approach makes more sense. As you grow in experience you are harder to hit but if you are hit then you are just as vulnerable to damage as anyone else. Eg, being stabbed in the stomach should be just as bad regardless of your experience level.<br /><br />Gygax's approach appears to make less literal sense as what are hit points in real life? However, I don't think it really matters much. The way I've always understood hit points is that they are an abstract representation of your health and include things like experience and ability to dodge blows.<br /><br />So the important question being, which is easier to incorporate into the game and keep track of? Presumably, Gygax thought his system was easier but I do wonder if he actually tested both?<br /><br />In the end, I'm guessing that with enough effort, we could create a 1:1 correspondence between both systems such that the results of all the die rolls in terms of death and relative damage would be the same. The only difference being how easy each system is to use.<br /><br />Off the top of my head, I don't really have a good feel for which one would be easier to deal with or if there would be an appreciable difference.<br /><br />In the end, it's probably not worth the effort to change, but it is something worth thinking about or at least fun to consider.Davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11655670180945488603noreply@blogger.com