Refinement help requested - HP house rule

[Mjolnirbear]

I got an idea to add a grittier element to combat and damage.

Goals:
A) add realism. No one walks away from 100-foot falls. A critical means you failed to avoid it and got smashed in the skull with a hammer or literally skewered on a spear.
B) not *necessarily* meant to be deadlier overall; but some things should be deadly.
C) encourage defensive actions and planning. Dodge and cover and sight should matter more viscerally. The current 5e meta is offense is better than defense. If defense made more of a difference fights might last more than 4 rounds or be more interesting and challenging.
D) adds depth to healing. Impalement should take longer to heal than bruising or sprains. Medicine should be more useful.

Rough concept
1) HP, death saves, current rules remain. HP represent blood loss, minor wounds, sprains and aches or weakness, internal bleeding, and the like. Standard attacks do this damage. Healed using current healing and resting rules.

2) Wound Points. Equal to your constitution score. Represents actual damage, a hit that got past your armour or evaded your parry, or damage you just can't mitigate by normal means. Cause by crits, coups de grâce or things like falling.



So where I need help between these possible implementations (each option should be and/or) :

Options: What happens at 0 WP?
a) you die. No saves. That means one bad hit can kill you. Great against monsters, bad for players. Some people might like this so that dodge and parry or defensive options matter--it's really hard to get a crit with disadvantage.
b) you're unconscious. You roll death saves at disadvantage. Medicine and healing kits become much more necessary.
C) ?? No other ideas yet
d) if you don't die, you need at least a week of full rest to heal.

Options: How do I wound you?
a) crits, instead of doubling dice, do their damage as a wound instead of or in addition to hp. It's easy to get to 0 WP that way
b) crits, instead of doubling dice: each die you would roll does one WP of damage. Much harder to get to zero. Relies more on attrition.
c)???
d) falling or defenestration. First 10 feet does not hurt. Each additional 10 feet does 6 WP
e) poison damage applies to WP instead of HP

Options: How do I heal?
A) medicine checks
B) during long rests at, say, 5 points per long rest.
C) over seven days
D) powerful healing like Regeneration or Heal
E) minor heal spells have reduced effect

Other things to consider
1) impact of number of dice; a longsword vs a sneak attack/smite vs cantrip
2) damage reduction and resistances
3) late-game combat could possibly be very swingy... À Lucky smite or sneak attack can take out a dragon; same with monsters taking out players.
4) balance between martial and casters could shift a LOT: casters use few spells that can crit. On the other hand a caster may be inclined to rely on cantrips simply for the crits, making utility spells a better choice than most damage spells.
5) wounding builds: you can now, maybe, build a character for the fast, deadly kill. Hello poison being suddenly more useful. Hello defenestration tactics.
6) HP + WP will change the survivability of characters especially at low levels. Not necessarily bad.

EDIT: Additional Suggestions
Laurefindel: Crits cause a wounded condition. Has the advantage of simplicity, can have bite like exhaustion.
Several: Vitality variant
DBZ/Rumsey: Star Wars vitality/wound system

Can I hear everyone's thoughts?

[HammeredWharf]

Honestly, it sounds terrible to me. Luck-based OHKOs aren't fun. Though I suppose it's a matter of preference. I know a guy who loves things like this: fumble rules, extra randomness everywhere, etc. In our group's case, that lead us to never letting him DM, but maybe your group is full of people like that.

If I designed a system like this I'd base it on a table of limbs and associated conditions, so you could get your arms and legs broken, etc. Just dying randomly doesn't add anything to the game. And yes, technically you can try to avoid it, but sometimes you just can't. In the end, D&D is not designed to be played as XCOM. It's better to play something else if you want a high PC death count.

[Findulidas]

I would say that playing a lethal roguelike just like that doesnt really fit in dnd because you also build lore, background and have an idea of your character which you probably really like. Many people will get upset about thier characters dying. Having a permanent and very lethal system is just not fitting in that situation. Now it leads to more tension and fear, which can be good. As it is in my group though thats already the feeling at some parts. In addition if your character dies at the start of a session the rest might very well be no fun for everyone involved.

Also it leads to HEAVY optimization on the characters part. Everyone will have perception, acrobatics, athletics and be fully defensive in every situation so it also kills part of the personality that characters might have. It likely also leads to full blown paranoia when it comes to traps so everyone will poke the rogue to go in first and the rogue probably will be less inclined to do so.

[Unoriginal]

A) add realism. No one walks away from 100-foot falls.


You know what no one does, too? Shoot fire from their hands, fight dragons with a sword, punch shapeshifters to death or heal wounds by praying elf gods.



A critical means you failed to avoid it and got smashed in the skull with a hammer or literally skewered on a spear.

...You want that each character get a 5% chance of dying each time they are attacked?

[Gray Mage]

First of all, I think the options that makes players unplayable for multiple days is just bad. If one of the players get to that point mid dungeon that means they either fully stop for a long time (so time sensitive plots are undoable) or the rest of the group continues without them and the player does nothing for the rest of the session or sessions.

Secondly, this might actually push the meta game on the opposite direction, making it more rocket tag. Players are often disadvantaged numerically, so instead of playing defensive and allowing for more chances of monsters critting (even at disadvantage the monsters are likely going to get more turns if players are defensive), they might just make it so the monsters don't get to attack at all, focusing on burst/nova damage and BFC.

[Mjolnirbear]

You know what no one does, too? Shoot fire from their hands, fight dragons with a sword, punch shapeshifters to death or heal wounds by praying elf gods.



...You want that each character get a 5% chance of dying each time they are attacked?

Some realism is required of the game. You need to be able to identify and understand what you're doing. DnD is built on the chassis of the realistic. You know when you jump, you'll land; when you run, you're using legs; when you speak, you're breathing.

And no, not 5% chance to die. I want some hits to be significant. Not *necessarily* deadly.

[Mjolnirbear]

First of all, I think the options that makes players unplayable for multiple days is just bad. If one of the players get to that point mid dungeon that means they either fully stop for a long time (so time sensitive plots are undoable) or the rest of the group continues without them and the player does nothing for the rest of the session or sessions.

Secondly, this might actually push the meta game on the opposite direction, making it more rocket tag. Players are often disadvantaged numerically, so instead of playing defensive and allowing for more chances of monsters critting (even at disadvantage the monsters are likely going to get more turns if players are defensive), they might just make it so the monsters don't get to attack at all, focusing on burst/nova damage and BFC.

Hmmm. I could skip the 7 day healing altogether, but I like it as indicating the wound was significant. Maybe an optional 7 day rest is an easy way of 'clearing all WP damage' the way long rests work for HP damage?

For the second point, how would you make, for instance, dodge, more useful and significant?

[Mjolnirbear]

I would say that playing a lethal roguelike just like that doesnt really fit in dnd because you also build lore, background and have an idea of your character which you probably really like. Many people will get upset about thier characters dying. Having a permanent and very lethal system is just not fitting in that situation. Now it leads to more tension and fear, which can be good. As it is in my group though thats already the feeling at some parts. In addition if your character dies at the start of a session the rest might very well be no fun for everyone involved.

Also it leads to HEAVY optimization on the characters part. Everyone will have perception, acrobatics, athletics and be fully defensive in every situation so it also kills part of the personality that characters might have. It likely also leads to full blown paranoia when it comes to traps so everyone will poke the rogue to go in first and the rogue probably will be less inclined to do so.

Not *necessarily* lethal. I was spitballing. I've edited the original post to make that clearer.

And I think the characters are less likely to die at the low level, just by virtue of having more WP than HP (at least to start).

In my games, everyone *does* have perception and either acrobatics/athletics anyways. No one takes medicine, though.

How would you "lead to more tension and fear" without making it outright deadly? My goal is to have some wounds just by nature be dangerous, but not necessarily a one-crit-kill (one of the options is a crit does 1 WP per die rolled).

[Mjolnirbear]

Honestly, it sounds terrible to me. Luck-based OHKOs aren't fun. Though I suppose it's a matter of preference. I know a guy who loves things like this: fumble rules, extra randomness everywhere, etc. In our group's case, that lead us to never letting him DM, but maybe your group is full of people like that.

If I designed a system like this I'd base it on a table of limbs and associated conditions, so you could get your arms and legs broken, etc. Just dying randomly doesn't add anything to the game. And yes, technically you can try to avoid it, but sometimes you just can't. In the end, D&D is not designed to be played as XCOM. It's better to play something else if you want a high PC death count.

I actually agree, which is why I wanted help. Fumble rules drive me nuts, but it's at least partly because if you drop your weapon while being a trained fighter, it's because someone made you do it or you did it on purpose, not because you suddenly became clumsy. I want a system where some hits are significant, not necessarily one where one hit kills.

I do like the associated conditions. I was thinking of having WP damage result in scars, and possibly going to 0 WP have something like that.

[DivisibleByZero]

Just use Vitality Points and Would Points (originally from Star Wars d20, but included in 3.5 within Unearthed Arcana.... maybe.... somewhere).
Anyway, your HP aren't HP. They're vitality points. They don't represent meat. They represent vitality/energy. When you get "hit" with a sword, if you have VP remaining, you parry it, or turn it into a glancing blow, or dodge it, or whatever. You lose VP instead of HP.
When you run out of VP, you then have wound points equivalent to your Con score.
Once you take damage to those, you just actually got hit, and you suffer adverse effects depending on how many you've lost.
Once those WP are gone, you're dead.
Crits don't do extra damage. Crits bypass VP and instead immediately damage WP.

Basically, the VP/WP system takes the abstract nature of HP, and makes it formulaic. Mind you, this is basically just what HP represent in the first place, but this design gets the point across for those that still think of HP as *meat*

[Laurefindel]

You know what no one does, too? Shoot fire from their hands, fight dragons with a sword, punch shapeshifters to death or heal wounds by praying elf gods.

Dragons, elves and magic relate to the fantasy genre. Surviving a 100-foot fall or withstanding the punch of a 20-foot giant relates to the super-hero genre. You can have fantasy without super-heroes, and super-heroes without fantasy, even if D&D does a bit of both. As a matter of fact, fantasy literature often does without the super-hero element. Granted, there's a lot of fantasy in American superhero comics, but there are many story arcs that do without space-elves and earth-wizards and that are perfectly viable.

D&D is flexible enough to downplay one or the other element, and house rules can help with that.

[mrumsey]

I actually agree, which is why I wanted help. Fumble rules drive me nuts, but it's at least partly because if you drop your weapon while being a trained fighter, it's because someone made you do it or you did it on purpose, not because you suddenly became clumsy. I want a system where some hits are significant, not necessarily one where one hit kills.

I do like the associated conditions. I was thinking of having WP damage result in scars, and possibly going to 0 WP have something like that.

Have you thought of 0 WP removing a point of constitution permanently? It isn't lethal, but makes all future battles potentially more lethal, as a 'soft death' permanently affects one of the most important stats in the game. If you LOVE record-keeping, you could even remove one CON at 0 and an additional one every time the damage overflows their WP entirely (i.e. Con 10, WP 1, 10 damage = -1 Con, 11 damage = -2 Con).

I think this might be a good compromise. It is gritty and dangerous without OHKO potential. Also, with alternative healing rules for WP and 'soft deaths' reducing Con, you may see some 'interesting' feat selections or stat prioritization after a couple of deaths.

[Gray Mage]

Have you thought of 0 WP removing a point of constitution permanently? It isn't lethal, but makes all future battles potentially more lethal, as a 'soft death' permanently affects one of the most important stats in the game. If you LOVE record-keeping, you could even remove one CON at 0 and an additional one every time the damage overflows their WP entirely (i.e. Con 10, WP 1, 10 damage = -1 Con, 11 damage = -2 Con).

I think this might be a good compromise. It is gritty and dangerous without OHKO potential. Also, with alternative healing rules for WP and 'soft deaths' reducing Con, you may see some 'interesting' feat selections or stat prioritization after a couple of deaths.

Removing it permanently is just bad, especially for frontline fighters. At the very least make it recoverable with Lesser Restoration or something.

Anyway, offense is always going to be better than defense in the global sense, as dead enemies can't kill you (undead excluded of course). If you want Dodge to be usefull I suggest either make it so it's not stopping them from dealing damage (either it takes one attack from the attack action or the player deals half damage that turn) or make some obvious situations where it can be usefull for a specific round (have some enemies have a charged up attack that they can pick clues and use dodge to avoid it), but it'll still probably be something that won't be used frequently.

[mrumsey]

Removing it permanently is just bad, especially for frontline fighters. At the very least make it recoverable with Lesser Restoration or something.

Anyway, offense is always going to be better than defense in the global sense, as dead enemies can't kill you (undead excluded of course). If you want Dodge to be usefull I suggest either make it so it's not stopping them from dealing damage (either it takes one attack from the attack action or the player deals half damage that turn) or make some obvious situations where it can be usefull for a specific round (have some enemies have a charged up attack that they can pick clues and use dodge to avoid it), but it'll still probably be something that won't be used frequently.

I think the point is to have something that is bad, but not end-of-the-world bad. It is still loads better than OHKO at 0 WP.

Also, I agree that it isn't something I personally would find attractive in play, but I'm just trying to be helpful. I played the Star Wars RPG with Vitality/Wound and it was pretty lethal. It was also cheesable with high crit / high strength jedi builds. I played it, but didn't love it. Some of my friends did love it, though. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

[Laurefindel]

I got an idea to add a grittier element to combat and damage. (snip) Can I hear everyone's thoughts?

I encouraged you to refine your definition of "realism", if only for yourself. You won't be able achieve a realistic simulation without a major overhaul of the system. It looks like you want to address specific situations that bust your suspension of disbelieve, which is good, but you might get burned by attempting to turn D&D into a realistic game.

A few notes/thoughts:

A system like yours or like vitality/wound system can involve quick one-shot deaths or, at the other end of the spectrum, becomes a burden without "fun" benefits for the game. The sweet spot in-between is hard to adjust and changes with character levels.

Some attacks involve lots of dice but deal relatively low damage. Some attacks have high damage but only involve one or two dice.

Looks like spells with attack rolls can wound, but not AoE spells (like fireball). This can be a "feature-no-bug" thing depending on your interpretation, but it should be addressed at the very least.

A different avenue would be to create a "wounded" condition. Get a crit or go do 0hp (you could add roll a 1 on a save) and you gain the wounded condition. Feel free to define it as you wish and determine the means to get rid of it.

[DivisibleByZero]

I think the point is to have something that is bad, but not end-of-the-world bad. It is still loads better than OHKO at 0 WP.

Also, I agree that it isn't something I personally would find attractive in play, but I'm just trying to be helpful. I played the Star Wars RPG with Vitality/Wound and it was pretty lethal. It was also cheesable with high crit / high strength jedi builds. I played it, but didn't love it. Some of my friends did love it, though. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

VP/WP is less deadly than standard 3.5 unless you have a ridiculous crit build because WP were higher than the ten HP you got to put you at -10 and die.
And even then, all you have to do is tweak the WP#, make it so that extra damage (sneak attack, smite, etc) were VP only unless VP were gone and only the weapon's damage was applied directly to WP, and you're good to go.

Or, you know, just use HP with this idea of vitality and losing HP actually means turning a glancing blow, etc, in mind.... like HP's abstract nature is really supposed to be. Personally, in our games, we do it this way.
A "hit" is a dosge/parry/glancing blow. When you get to half-HP (bloodied) you took a small wound. When you reach 0HP, you took a sword to the gut (or whatever).

You don't really need to change anything but your mindset and your descriptions.
Instead of: "You took a sword to the gut and lose 8HP"
it would be: You narrowly sidestep as the sword was about to impale you. It gashed your arm a little. You lose 8HP."

[Findulidas]

In my games, everyone *does* have perception and either acrobatics/athletics anyways. No one takes medicine, though.

How would you "lead to more tension and fear" without making it outright deadly? My goal is to have some wounds just by nature be dangerous, but not necessarily a one-crit-kill (one of the options is a crit does 1 WP per die rolled).

In my games they dont optimize the characters that heavily, well most people usually pick them but not always. Ive actually taken medicine myself two times, once as a life cleric. It just made sense I suppose.

You dont need more fear for battles or death at my table either. Last session we spent 15 minutes arguing about going into a room that for all intents and purposes was completely safe. Just because we knew mages probably had something they wanted to protect down there, which meant it was probably trapped and we had no idea to tell. Turns out later it was a completely safe room though.

[mrumsey]

VP/WP is less deadly than standard 3.5 unless you have a ridiculous crit build because WP were higher than the ten HP you got to put you at -10 and die.
And even then, all you have to do is tweak the WP#, make it so that extra damage (sneak attack, smite, etc) were VP only unless VP were gone and only the weapon's damage was applied directly to WP, and you're good to go.

Or, you know, just use HP with this idea of vitality and losing HP actually means turning a glancing blow, etc, in mind.... like HP's abstract nature is really supposed to be. Personally, in our games, we do it this way.
A "hit" is a dosge/parry/glancing blow. When you get to half-HP (bloodied) you took a small wound. When you reach 0HP, you took a sword to the gut (or whatever).

You don't really need to change anything but your mindset and your descriptions.
Instead of: "You took a sword to the gut and lose 8HP"
it would be: You narrowly sidestep as the sword was about to impale you. It gashed your arm a little. You lose 8HP."

My friends loved jedi/sith games and some races combined to have silly crit builds. I lost the taste of Jedi (and the system to some degree) after that.

I didn't find most of 3.5 to be super lethal after a the early levels (5-6ish), but my DMs were generous with allowing custom magic items and a little under-informed as to the strength of saves.

I too use the near miss terminology in my games (when possible). Healing makes 100% more sense and end of day recovery is understandable. Some people, however, love the idea of getting bashed by an ogre and magically making their brain-damage going away.

[Mjolnirbear]

With feedback being strongly on the insta-kill is bad side, I'm thinking something along the lines of this:

HP are officially defined as near-misses, minor cuts and bruises or sprains, blood loss, or exhaustion.
WP are officially defined as meat. You got bashed in the head, or the sword found a weakness in your armor, or the dagger found a kidney.

Crits: instead of double damage dice rolled, a crit does one damage per die.
Example: A paladin crits. He decides to smite. Normally he does 1d8 (longsword) +2d8 (smite). Instead of 6d8 for a crit, the target takes 3 WP. Assuming a con of 10, that's just under 1/3.

Healing Magic: Only very strong magic, such as Heal or Regeneration, can heal WP.

Rest Healing: You heal one WP per day. Someone who tends you during a long rest can double this healing with a successful Medicine check DC 15.

WP at 0: same as HP at 0, but you make death saves at disadvantage. Stablizing is *critical*

Temp HP: do not affect WP.

Alternate Forms: WP do not change with your form. If you are struck with a critical hit or a fall in an alternate form, it damages your WP in your normal form.





After this quick write up, it feels like it has very little bite, unless I include poison and falling as WP damage. It would take several crits to put someone at risk. The healing feels slow enough. I wonder... maybe it would be more effective to have a 'massive damage variant'. If a critical does more damage than your constitution score, roll a con save or fall unconscious. If you fall unconscious due to a crit, you roll death saves at disadvantage. Stabilizing is still critical. Easier to track, easier to enact, easier to understand; but healing is still too easy in my opinion.

[Mjolnirbear]

Sorry I missed the comment about the wounded condition. That would also simplify things. It would become something with bite like exhaustion. I'll have to think more on that, it's a great suggestion, thank you.

[Lombra]

I believe that there's a Vitality rule in the DMG, it may be what you are looking for.

[Gray Mage]

Your new crit system is a big nerf for PCs. If I understood it correctly it only deals WP and monsters are more likely to die via HP than with WP, since there won't be many crits in an encounter and monsters are unlikely to appear in multiple encounters. At low levels the PCs won't be able to heal WP in an effective manner so it could accumulate for them. So PCs are much more likely to die due to WP and they lose the crit damage, so now a critical is just like a miss. Champion would be nerfed hard.

[Laurefindel]

Sorry I missed the comment about the wounded condition. That would also simplify things. It would become something with bite like exhaustion. I'll have to think more on that, it's a great suggestion, thank you.

My houserule is similar to that, derived from a 3.5 houserule developed by some Evil Lincoln chap over at the Paizo boards 5-6 years ago.

Damage received in combat causes the character to accumulate strain (they lose hp, but no real injuries). When a character receives a critical hit, fail a save by rolling a 1 or go down to 0hp, they get a wound. Each wound imposes 1 exhaustion level.

A character is healed of all wounds when it goes back to 100% hp. Sometimes a short rest is enough, sometimes lots of magical healing is needed, or they have to wait for a long rest. When wounds gets healed, associated exhaustion level(s) go away automatically. So a long rest cures all wounds and associated exhaustion levels, plus one exhaustion level because that's what a long rest does. We play with the gritty realism variant, so long rests are a bit further apart. Even then, a wound rarely last more than 2 weeks (1 adventuring week and 1 week of long rest), which is unrealistically fast, but it doesn't cripple gameplay too much.

If you don't play with gritty realism variant, I suggest you heal wounds differently, perhaps just with time and higher level spells. Then again perhaps you don't. It's up to your interpretation of "realism"

[MrStabby]

I do sympathise with the OP, although disagree on response.

For me I wan't a cost to combat for my players. Murder-hobo is the first response, wade into any combat that the players think they can win safe in the knowledge that that which does not kill them grants them XP. I would like a more strategic game - players can fight any fight but they have to wonder if it is worth the cost.

I don't have a complete answer yet but I am keen to try some changes. Firstly is exhaustion being a mechanic that sees a bit more play. It is a lasting effect and taking a short rest to recover HP won't fix it - I am thinking exhaustion for any fight longer than 5 rounds (exact parameters to be determined). Enemy reserves might not kill you but they might leave you vulnerable and being harried by enemy skirmishers will take its toll on the party. Exhaustion itself may need a few changes to keep balance between the classes.

Secondly is ability score drain representing serious injury - thinking from critical hits, going to 0HP. A crit is always a risk in any fight so you have to be sure it is worth it. Restoration and regeneration to fix - temples common enough to stop it being an issue but can be expensive and delay the party getting fixed.

Thirdly is treating some damage as max HP drain. After a long rest HP are recovered then HP maximum reverts to normal to ensure some damage "caries over" between days. Picking a fight knowing that nothing is a threat for 12 hours is fine, but with this you need a longer security horizon.

This is still in need of a lot of refinement and some serious balance consideration. It is also for a slightly different purpose to the OP so shouldn't be considered the same. For example I have no problem with characters using their high HP to jump off a cliff and survive (or more of a cliff than a less sturdy character). HP as high as a level 10 barbarian is pretty supernatural to me and should let them do supernatural things. A high con score should let characters be that bit safer from physical damage. This is just my personal preference for fun over realism though.

[Unoriginal]

Dragons, elves and magic relate to the fantasy genre. Surviving a 100-foot fall or withstanding the punch of a 20-foot giant relates to the super-hero genre.

Ah, yes, I forgot the classic super-hero comic book "the Lord of the Rings".

Snark aside, I don't see why you make this distinction. Superhuman characters aren't a "super-hero genre" thing.

[Mjolnirbear]

Okay I'm leaning more and more towards adding a wounded condition. It's true that a WP system has a balance issue; strong enough to hurt monsters, and it's too strong for outnumbered players. Weak enough not to be unduly deadly to characters is too weak for monsters. The wounded idea seems to strike a good chord and seems like a very elegant balance without unduly complicating the game. It also has an equivalent effect on Monsters and on Characters; at least for big bosses such as dragons, where such things would matter.

My version won't be quite the same: I don't use gritty rest, because waiting a week to get my spells back would be just not fun.

So:

New Condition: Wounded
Hit Points aren't meat points; they represent blood loss, minor wounds, exhaustion, sprains, and the ebbing of adrenaline. The hit that downs you because you are so tired you miss your parry is one that does real damage. Other types of damage, such as critical hits or falling, also do real damage. Going to 0 HP, being hit with a crit, or falling more than 10 feet imposes the Wounded condition. The DM may decide another source of damage, such as being crushed by a falling stalactite or a particularly virulent poison, can also impose the Wounded condition. In addition, being Wounded causes a lovely (or horrifying) scar, which has a purely cosmetic impact and can be later removed if the character wishes.

The Wounded condition stacks. Each level of Wounded acts like the same level of Exhausted. They are separate conditions, so they do not stack with each other; your character suffers the effects of the conditions with the most levels. Effects that cure Exhausted does not cure Wounded, or vice versa.

Example: Thrak the Paladin falls 20 feet. He suffers the Wounded condition, level 1: Disadvantage on Ability Checks. However, he's also been starving without rations in the desert for some time; he's currently under the effects of a level 3 Exhaustion: he has disadvantage on attacks, saves, and ability checks, and his speed is halved. Being wounded does not make his Exhaustion worse

Weak magic is not sufficient to remove the Wounded condition. Edit: Any spell of 5th level or higher that heals hit points gains the following line: Removes one level of Wounded. Regeneration and Power Word: Heal also gain this line:

Example the 2nd: Thrak managed a full night of rest, and casts Lesser Restoration on himself the next morning. He loses a level of Exhaustion for the rest, and another level for the Lesser Restoration. His Wounded condition has no change. A wandering tribe finds him later that day and a powerful shaman casts Heal. It removes his Wounded condition but any remaining Exhaustion (he's still starving) is unaffected.

A character under the care of someone with the Medicine skill can remove a level of Wounded after a night's rest, provided the caretaker succeeds at a DC 15 Medicine check. A healing kit provides advantage on this check. Without this care, a full week's bed rest is required to heal a level of Wounded.

(in addition, in my houserule document I'd add the following)

Note: Exhaustion can be deadly, and Wounded even more so. You can avoid being wounded by taking fewer risks; talking someone into surrendering, circling the orc camp instead of running in, using defensive options such as Dodge, Parry, Heavy Obscurity and Cover.

(I also have an Inspiration rule: you get Inspiration when you do something you know is a bad idea but your character would do anyways: using your action to take a drink if you're alcoholic; spitting in the face of the elf offering you a quest if you hate elves; and if I enact this rule, acting recklessly by charging into combat without a thought. :) )

[Mellack]

Getting hit by crits is an expected part of doing an adventure. It is not that unlikely for one or two to happen every encounter. I think that the wounds (WP) given would force your players to retreat in adventures much too early. Even the first level of wounds basically ruins stealth or grappling builds. This because of something that will happen on 5% of every attack. Imagine the terror of facing several kobolds with pack tactics? They would destroy whole parties.

[Gray Mage]

Maybe make it so there's either a constituition save to avoid it (DC 5 per die doubled on the crit, so stuff like sneak attack would be harder to avoid) and/or making it be a short rest instead of a long one to heal with a medicine check.

[Malifice]

If you really want to make long falls scary, then make all damage dice explode.

[Mjolnirbear]

Getting hit by crits is an expected part of doing an adventure. It is not that unlikely for one or two to happen every encounter. I think that the wounds (WP) given would force your players to retreat in adventures much too early. Even the first level of wounds basically ruins stealth or grappling builds. This because of something that will happen on 5% of every attack. Imagine the terror of facing several kobolds with pack tactics? They would destroy whole parties.

I think I'm abandoning WP in favour of a Wounded condition; but retreat *should* be an option. And I'm strongly in favour of Tucker's Kobold's.

I don't do the six-encounter workday; short rests classes can simply refresh their abilities if they're not in combat and eat some rations (max 2x per day). At the end of the day, their Wounded level should not be too significant and it should be able to be mostly taken care of that night; however, it encourages tactics and discourages tactics. In my mind, your points are not detractions.

[Mjolnirbear]

If you really want to make long falls scary, then make all damage dice explode.

Er, what? No idea if this is sarcasm or ... or what, really. :)

[Unoriginal]

I don't do the six-encounter workday

Might be why you consider the RAW not dangerous enough, no?

[Gray Mage]

Er, what? No idea if this is sarcasm or ... or what, really. :)

Exploding die is a term for when, if a certain result is rolled (usually the max result possible) on a die, then that die is rolled again and the second result is added (the rerolled die may or may not explode again). For example, if 3d6 is rolled and the result is 2, 6, 3, the second die is rolled again, obtaining, say, a 5. The total damage would be 2+6+3+5 =16.


Might be why you consider the RAW not dangerous enough, no?

Yeah, agreed. Being able to refresh short rest abilities between every encounter is a massive sustain and power boost. If you were to enforce short rest rules your players wouldn't be able to use as many resourses and the fights would be harder.

[Mjolnirbear]

Maybe make it so there's either a constituition save to avoid it (DC 5 per die doubled on the crit, so stuff like sneak attack would be harder to avoid) and/or making it be a short rest instead of a long one to heal with a medicine check.

The consequence of that would be that spellcasters and rogues would crit 'better' than ordinary fighters.

And that it would have less bite than exhaustion. Easier to get rid of than a missed night's sleep? Easier to save against? The point is to make players think to avoid it or use better tactics. If they let it happen it *should* be hard to fix. And to fix it, they only need a rest and a medicine check.

[Mjolnirbear]

Exploding die is a term for when, if a certain result is rolled (usually the max result possible) on a die, then that die is rolled again and the second result is added (the rerolled die may or may not explode again). For example, if 3d6 is rolled and the result is 2, 6, 3, the second die is rolled again, obtaining, say, a 5. The total damage would be 2+6+3+5 =16.



Yeah, agreed. Being able to refresh short rest abilities between every encounter is a massive sustain and power boost. If you were to enforce short rest rules your players wouldn't be able to use as many resources and the fights would be harder.

The 6-encounter work day is artificial, costs more work than it's worth, and there are no benefits to spreading the combat out. Combat would be the only thing we have time to do, and the story would progress monumentally slowly. Eliminating it means that it is more organic and takes less work. Making short rests easy means short-rest classes are not gimped; at the end of the day, all classes end up using all the correct amount of resources.

To be clear, the reason for this thread is not because my players are strong or the fights are easy. The reason is because I want certain wounds to matter and I want players to be encouraged to think outside of combat. Auto-combat, in my view, is boring and pointless.

[DivisibleByZero]

The 6-encounter work day is artificial, costs more work than it's worth, and there are no benefits to spreading the combat out. Combat would be the only thing we have time to do, and the story would progress monumentally slowly. Eliminating it means that it is more organic and takes less work. Making short rests easy means short-rest classes are not gimped; at the end of the day, all classes end up using all the correct amount of resources.

To be clear, the reason for this thread is not because my players are strong or the fights are easy. The reason is because I want certain wounds to matter and I want players to be encouraged to think outside of combat. Auto-combat, in my view, is boring and pointless.

Sounds to me like the gritty variant would be more appropriate for your game, even if you're opposed to it in theory.
The resting mechanic(s) are based around the daily encounter "quota" that has been set. If you delve into combat more slowly, then the resting rules should accommodate in order to find balance.

[Unoriginal]

The 6-encounter work day is artificial, costs more work than it's worth, and there are no benefits to spreading the combat out.

It's not more artificial than anything else in the game. The powers of the classes are more or less balanced to handle around 6 encounters per "adventure day".

You could solve the situation by making the "adventure day" last longer.