View Single Post
Old 03-11-2021, 02:52 AM   #132
Opellulo
 
Opellulo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Rome, Italy
Default Re: Hit Points...to be, or not to be?

Weird how a thread on system abstractions in games has devolved on a morbid discussion of human tissues like it's some kind of CSI CGI fetish montage fest.

Trying to steer again the topic I'll repeat my point: Hit Points are just a resource for drama, a way to value the willingness of taking risks and, on a lesser extent, a measure of Power Dynamics (IIRC the maximum achievable HP for a PC in AD&D was 199 which was a nice touch). They mean nothing per sé and in fact, many systems have totally discarded them in favor of other systems like statuses: "wounded", "stunned", "desperate", "shocked" etc.

Now, if a scenario includes unavoidable deaths, how "realistic" or "necessary" this is, it's not a matter of HP (and game mechanics to subtract those) but of Game Mastering. I remember playing with less experienced Masters that chose to include NPC that were supposed to die no matter what... Even if PCs got access to restore or resurrection spells. Or some dead-ends in Pathfinder where some classes got access to powers so weird (that for example require no gesture or activation words) that make their PC basically unrestrainable, so the only option possible to overcome them was beating them dead.

Those are clearly extremes, but IMHO "standard" Gurps (no supers or other shenanigans) lands in a sweet spot where "Character Physical Health" is managed in a way that offers you (both as a player or as a Master) various option and choices on how you want to face challenges and this is no easy feat.
__________________
“A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?”
Opellulo is offline   Reply With Quote