If Temporary Hit Points exist, then why not Temporary Damage?

[Arkhios]

I'm not exactly sure where this idea came from, but I came to wonder that if Temporary Hit Points are a thing, why Temporary Damage isn't?

Now, I've discussed this in length with a few friends and we've already decided that the term 'Temporary Damage' doesn't really convey the idea of the concept that well, as all damage you take is temporary. Thus, we came up with a more appropriate name: 'Long-Term Damage'.

The idea is to be the "spiritual" opposite of Temporary Hit Points. Since taking damage reduces your Hit Points by an amount equal to excess points from reducing Temporary Hit Points (if any), Long-Term Damage would do the opposite to regaining hit points.

Whenever you would regain hit points, you first reduce your Long-Term Damage and then regain hit points by an amount equal to excess points from reducing Long-Term Damage (if any).

As with Temporary Hit Points, multiple instances of Long-Term Damage do not stack. Unlike with Temporary Hit Points, however, you can't choose the amount of Long-Term Damage you have at any given time. Only the highest amount of Long-Term Damage remains.

Just like gaining Temporary Hit Points can't wake up an unconscious creature, taking Long-Term Damage can't drop the creature unconscious.

For example, let's say a creature with a maximum of 30 hit points is now at 10 hit points. In addition, the creature also has 15 points of Long-Term Damage. The creature is still conscious and can act normally, but in order to gain more Hit Points, any hit points regained are first subtracted from Long-Term Damage.

Long-Term Damage lasts until removed. During a long rest, you can choose to remove Long-Term Damage by spending any remaining Hit Dice, before you gaining the benefits of a long rest.
Alternatively, when you finish a long rest you may spend hit dice to remove Long-Term Damage, after gaining the benefits of a long rest.

Now, what accumulates to Long-Term Damage is basically up to the DM, but a few examples might include particularly devastating critical hits (like, taking more than a half of your current hit points from a critical damage roll), losing a limb, a virulent poison, debilitating disease, or even a condition of madness. Also, in a world of D&D, a simple cop-out answer could always be "A wizard did it".

What do you think?

Edit: I think I should point it out that I don't think the above mechanic is perfect. Far from it. As has been pointed out, RAW already has mechanics similar if not in effect, at least in sentiment (for example, Max HP reduction).
Still, I think this mechanic has some potential, even though it probably requires a revision.

[HappyDaze]

In 5e, all damage is temporary damage. Just sleep it off.

[Arkhios]

In 5e, all damage is temporary damage. Just sleep it off.

Thank you, captain obvious. It's clear as day you didn't even read the post.

[HappyDaze]

{{scrubbed}}

[Arkhios]

{{scrubbed}}

I mean, of course you are entitled to have your opinion. I'm not trying to dispute that.

But I disagree, simple as that. I wouldn't have shared this idea if I agreed 100% with your opinion.

[Dork_Forge]

So it's like a healing debt you have to pay off? I think it has potential but it sounds more like an undead effect than a thing for damage in general.

[JackPhoenix]

I think it's pointless mechanic that adds nothing but mechanical complexity and slows the game down as the player would have to check if they have "long-term damage" every time they get some healing. It counters pop-up healing shennanigans somewhat, but there are more elegant ways to do that that won't make the player who decided to play a healer feel useless.

For long-term damage effect, there's already max HP reduction. Not the same thing, but the same sentiment.

[Arkhios]

So it's like a healing debt you have to pay off?

Yeah, pretty much.

[Yukito01]

I like the idea, though I worry that it will increase book keeping. Still, it seems like a nice mechanic. I have an enemy planned for an upcoming session that could benefit from long-term damage!

[EggKookoo]

What problem are you trying to solve here that can't be solved other ways? Couldn't the exhaustion rules more or less take the place of this? Or just by switching to Gritty Realism with longer long rests?

What added depth are you purchasing with the added complexity?

[MoiMagnus]

Why not?

From a player side, the enemies don't heal often enough for this mechanics to be worth it. It would be just additional complexity. If you really want a similar effect "no healing allowed until successful save" is probably better, because it doesn't require an additional mechanics.

From a opponent side, look at circumstances that inflict those temporary damages to players.
+ First case: The circumstance does far too many of them, or happens far too often. Just replace this effect by "no healing until long rest" instead of counting. nobody's gonna waste that many healing spells on it. This can even create a situation where a player is de-facto essentially "eliminated" from the group until the next long rest.
+ Second case: The temporary damages are reasonable in amount, but the party is not the kind of party to heal during combat. This mean that those damages have no effect during the fight, and only accelerate exhaustion of resource. Makes a lot of sense if your group is about war of exhaustion and optimizing resources to make it until the end of the day. Otherwise, it's kind of boring. In both situations, you could probably replace it by "you lose one short-rest hit dice" with similar effect.
+ Third case: The temporary damages are reasonable in amount, and the party is the kind to use use heals during combat. Then it's essentially equivalent to raw damages, except that it doesn't kill peoples. Probably a good addition to a housemade monster that might OTK a player on a critical hit: replace the added damages from critical by those temporary damages, so that it cannot eliminate a player on the first turn.

My conclusion: if you're ok with having monsters tailored to the playstyle of your players, that's an interesting idea for monsters against a heal-heavy party. However, most of the time, that looks to me like useless number tracking, so I would not include them in some base rules.

[Arkhios]

What problem are you trying to solve here that can't be solved other ways? Couldn't the exhaustion rules more or less take the place of this? Or just by switching to Gritty Realism with longer long rests?

What added depth are you purchasing with the added complexity?

Essentially the idea was just to answer to a simple question: If Temporary Hit Points exist, why not its opposite as well, and if such a thing existed, what would it look like?

I'm not trying to forcibly introduce a new mechanic into all games that everyone should definitely use, but rather to figure out how to do it elegantly, if someone wanted to. I'm not saying my idea is perfect. It certainly has its flaws, even though I've tried to prune them out. I'm certain I haven't noticed everything.

Personally and entirely honestly, I probably wouldn't try to use this mechanic in every session. Probably not even in every campaign. It's mostly just hypothetical musing.

[EggKookoo]

Essentially the idea was just to answer to a simple question: If Temporary Hit Points exist, why not its opposite as well?

Fair enough and a good question to ask. I suppose the simplest answer is "because there's no call for it."

If you define temp damage in the abstract as "inability to heal" for some period of time, it might be more appropriate to 5e to have a mechanic that prevents healing from any source until the subject succeeds with a Con save, or something along those lines. But to be useful it would have to be short term -- affecting healing magic and so forth -- rather than long-term and affecting hit dice and resting. Why? For reasons MoiMagnus pointed out about effectively disqualifying a PC, and also so you can apply it in a tangible way to NPCs, who typically don't rest or recover HP over time.

Bear in mind the gradual diminishing of HP over a session or crawl, and the consumption of hit dice during that same time, is essentially meant to suggest a wearing down of the PC due to accumulated injury. So there's already a kind of long-term degradation effect going on. PCs lose HP, and it becomes more expensive to restore them.

[Solusek]

A much easier way to think about "temporary damage", would be as a healing absorbtion effect. World of Warcraft makes use of this type of thing regularly. The whole raid gets hit with a debuff that absorbs X amount of healing from each person, and characters can't get actually healed until that is burned through. It works fine in a game where healing damage is a core mechanic that 1/5 of characters dedicate their gameplay entirely to. D&D isn't really that game, though.

[Luccan]

This seems like a complicated way to redo max hit point loss. It's actually a little rougher in the moment, too; rather than limit how much HP they can have, you've limited the effectiveness of certain spells. There's no reviving someone with 15 points of Long-Term Damage with a first or even second level Healing Word. Hit dice are a bit risky at lower levels too.

[Greywander]

I think the main problem with this is that it's functionally identical to normal damage, except that it can't knock you out. You can take as much "temporary" damage as you like, and it won't actually do anything to your character. The only thing it does it eat healing until, as Dork_Forge said, your "heal debt" is paid off.

I guess my problem with it is that this seems like an incredibly niche effect. If you want to stop healing, I feel like an effect like the one on Chill Touch would work better. It's an interesting idea to mirror temporary hit points, but it just doesn't seem that useful.

[Willie the Duck]

I'm not exactly sure where this idea came from, but I came to wonder that if Temporary Hit Points are a thing, why Temporary Damage isn't?

Now, I've discussed this in length with a few friends and we've already decided that the term 'Temporary Damage' doesn't really convey the idea of the concept that well, as all damage you take is temporary. Thus, we came up with a more appropriate name: 'Long-Term Damage'.

The idea is to be the opposite of Temporary Hit Points. Since taking damage reduces your Hit Points by an amount equal to excess points from reducing Temporary Hit Points (if any), Long-Term Damage would do the opposite to regaining hit points.

Honest critique-to my eyes, this really doesn't look like a symmetrical mirror-image of Temporary Hit Points. Were I to try to approximate such a thing, I think it would look more like the 'stun damage' various previous editions of D&D had (i.e. it's effectively regular damage, but it wears off in hours rather than days, and hitting 0 can knock you out but not kill you).

This, again to me, looks like a nifty little mechanic that would be a perfectly fine addition to the game if I thought that it (in particularly the hit point portion of the game) needed added complexity. Since I don't, I don't recommend adding this to your game, but if that's the kind of thing you want in your game, this is a perfectly reasonable implementation of such added complexity.

[Contrast]

For long-term damage effect, there's already max HP reduction. Not the same thing, but the same sentiment.

This. What you're proposing seems quite similar in intent and mechanically to reducing maximum HP which is an existing mechanic.

Feel free to try it out and let us know how it goes in your games though :smallsmile:

[Spriteless]

When I read the title I thought you were going to argue for a return of subdual damage.

But, just a debt of damage? Alright, I got questions. What does this look like? I mean, losing the first HPs looks like dodging attacks but spending adrenaline, the middle HPs is like getting scraped and bruised as you roll with attacks, and the last HP represents the being too exhausted to dodge the wound that puts you down.

What would the long term damage represent? What would it look like if you take 5 LTD? What does it look like when you take 5 when you already have 10? What if you take 10000 LTD, what does that mean that you're immune to healing but aren't knocked out? Things like bruised kidneys and broken bones are tougher to heal irl, but can knock you out, so they don't fit the bill.

No image is popping into my mind to explain it, but I have practice imagining losing HPs. Rules symmetry doesn't always result in engaging stories, but if you have a story for it, could be fun.

[CorporateSlave]

This seems like a complicated way to redo max hit point loss. It's actually a little rougher in the moment, too; rather than limit how much go they can have, you've limited the effectiveness of certain spells. There's no reviving someone with 15 points of Long-Term Damage with a first or even second level Healing Word. Hit dice are a bit risky at lower levels too.

Although in all fairness, reductions in max HP loss can't be healed by Healing Word either - and if someone is dropped to 0 by such effects, they're generally dead.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't like the proposed concept of Long-Term Damage at all, it seems like a needlessly complex way to add something that the game didn't want or need to begin with. I understand that mechanically one might wonder why no opposite to Temp HP, but is that really the right question? To me, Temp HP are about thematically increasing the heroic potential of a PC who gains them...giving the hero the ability to take one or two more hits and fight on when they ought to have been stopped in their tracks.

There are already plenty of ways to mechanically hobble PC's if you think your players will have fun with such things...such as Max HP reduction, stat drains, curses, even Gritty Realism rules if you want healing to be more difficult, etc. For me, house rules shouldn't take from PC's. RAW offers all the ways a cruel DM could ever want to make their players grit their teeth. If I'm going to house rule, its almost always to give the players a little something to make their PC's more heroic and mighty, not somehow less.

[Arkhios]

Honest critique-to my eyes, this really doesn't look like a symmetrical mirror-image of Temporary Hit Points. Were I to try to approximate such a thing, I think it would look more like the 'stun damage' various previous editions of D&D had (i.e. it's effectively regular damage, but it wears off in hours rather than days, and hitting 0 can knock you out but not kill you).

This, again to me, looks like a nifty little mechanic that would be a perfectly fine addition to the game if I thought that it (in particularly the hit point portion of the game) needed added complexity. Since I don't, I don't recommend adding this to your game, but if that's the kind of thing you want in your game, this is a perfectly reasonable implementation of such added complexity.

(In its current state of design) LTD is so asymmetrical due to what my friend said about the concept as a whole: Damage is more common than Healing, and that alone is enough to justify that LTD should last longer than THP.
But again, I repeat this design is without a doubt flawed; far from perfect.


When I read the title I thought you were going to argue for a return of subdual damage.

But, just a debt of damage? Alright, I got questions. What does this look like? I mean, losing the first HPs looks like dodging attacks but spending adrenaline, the middle HPs is like getting scraped and bruised as you roll with attacks, and the last HP represents the being too exhausted to dodge the wound that puts you down.

What would the long term damage represent? What would it look like if you take 5 LTD? What does it look like when you take 5 when you already have 10? What if you take 10000 LTD, what does that mean that you're immune to healing but aren't knocked out? Things like bruised kidneys and broken bones are tougher to heal irl, but can knock you out, so they don't fit the bill.

No image is popping into my mind to explain it, but I have practice imagining losing HPs. Rules symmetry doesn't always result in engaging stories, but if you have a story for it, could be fun.

Hit Points are not meat. When taking that into consideration, I don't think there's any further reason to try and explain it in an exhaustive way. I think anything that would cause LTD could explain how it occurs in a plethora of different ways.

[KorvinStarmast]

What problem are you trying to solve here that can't be solved other ways? {snip} What added depth are you purchasing with the added complexity?
Yes, this is a good point for the OP: all I see is a book keeping exercise. I also agree with Jack Phoenix.

Long time ago, when we did a lot of stuff that was trying to increase realism and crunch, we had stuff like stun damage (see Willie the Duck's post) and bleeding damage and we even tried the original Blackhawk damage by hit location.

And what was the result? Increase in book keeping, and a slowing down of play.

Also, the DMG *lingering wounds* optional rule seems to me to do most of what you want done with this.


Long-Term Damage would do the opposite to regaining hit points.

Chill touch, cantrip.

On a hit, the target takes 1d8 necrotic damage, and it can’t regain hit points until the start of your next turn. Until then, the hand clings to the target. If you want this effect to last longer, make a higher level spell from the necromancy school of magic.

Last point: your proposed mechanic runs afoul of and harms the use of short rests to heal with Hit Dice expenditures, and the reduced role of cleric 'heal bots' in this edition of the game. Your idea is in conflict with the structure of PC HP recovery during the adventure day idea. (I do not find the 'gritty realism' rules in the DMG to be any more than a band aid and a half a nod to older editions. It's not fully integrated into the mechanics as designed).

As with the exhaustion mechanic, this effect *ought* to be removable by a lesser restoration spell. (But the WoTC team buggered up exhaustion rather badly)

[Willie the Duck]

(In its current state of design) LTD is so asymmetrical due to what my friend said about the concept as a whole: Damage is more common than Healing, and that alone is enough to justify that LTD should last longer than THP.
But again, I repeat this design is without a doubt flawed; far from perfect.


Given that your own stated purpose for all of this is "Essentially the idea was just to answer to a simple question: If Temporary Hit Points exist, why not its opposite as well, and if such a thing existed, what would it look like?," it seems that you should be seeking symmetry regardless of how ridiculous the result. If not, it seems like we'll have trouble helping you perfect this, since exactly what perfection you are looking for isn't clear.

[Dr. Cliché]

Essentially the idea was just to answer to a simple question: If Temporary Hit Points exist, why not its opposite as well, and if such a thing existed, what would it look like?

I have to agree with others that Max HP reductions seem a lot closer to what you're looking for here.




Hit Points are not meat.

This is said a lot and it never makes sense.

Like it or not, meat is precisely what hp represents.

[Arkhios]

Like it or not, meat is precisely what hp represents.

Psychic damage begs to differ.

Seriously though. Hit Points are an abstraction. Thus, a hypothetical Long-Term Damage should also be an abstraction. Sure, hit points can be perceived as having a fillet sliced off of your arm, but that's not all it can be.

[EggKookoo]

Like it or not, meat is precisely what hp represents.

YMMV but that's probably best saved for another thread.

[Keltest]

This is said a lot and it never makes sense.

Like it or not, meat is precisely what hp represents.

HP represent a complex blend of meat, the ability to dodge or otherwise mitigate an attack, and a degree of being able to work around solid hits. A 300 hit point barbarian isn't walking around with 13 swords stuck in their chest whenever they come out of a fight, they just have a lot of capacity to deflect and shrug off blows that a lesser man doesn't. Ultimately, it doesn't hit the "meat" part of the mix until you start losing the ability to act due to the damage (ie single digit hit points)

[stoutstien]

I could see a negative THP effect in a very limited mechanic without causing huge issues.

A NPC from the negative plane or what not that has a negative life aura. Any creature that starts their turn within the field has -X HP until they leave it. It would be brutal on tables who like wack-a-mole healing tactics.
Could make it a smaller amount but it can stack and it falls off one level at a time.

I'm going write this up actually.

[EggKookoo]

Seriously though. Hit Points are an abstraction.

Hit points are an illusion. Temporary hit points doubly so.

[Ravinsild]

It reminds me of like Mortal Strike from WoW from Arms Warriors, where it wounds the target reducing their healing, or necrotric strike from the death knight which creates like a negative shield that needs to be healed up before the actual HP can be healed. Of course it has merit, it's been done in other games. I think it is neat. :)

[JumboWheat01]

Wouldn't Temporary Damage be akin to the old "Non-lethal Damage" that you had in 3.x?

[Spriteless]

Hit Points are not meat. When taking that into consideration, I don't think there's any further reason to try and explain it in an exhaustive way. I think anything that would cause LTD could explain how it occurs in a plethora of different ways.

You quoted me saying HPs were a mix of physical/adrenaline/mental reserves, with only the last hit being a major wound. I agree that HPs are not meat. But they are a story telling tool. They tell the story of how someone gets worn down by fighting. I use it as a guide to narrate fights in game. What story does LTD facilitate telling? A necromantic curse that sucks up life magic? A particularly vicious poison that disrupts healing? The Wailing Death from Neverwinter Nights?

See, I have to have a story explanation every game mechanic, but with an hour for the idea to gestate and some ideas come through.

I don't think it's the best implementation for that idea, though. I would represent those stories as something else. Get just a few points of something that reduces healing received. Like the old 3.5 Barbarians' DR, except reversed.


If you have 2 points of 'Enduring Damage' than every time you are healed by a magic or spending hit dice, you are healed for 2 less points than the dice say you should be (minimum of 0 healing). Enduring Damage doesn't stack, just keep the highest number. If there are saves involved, keep the highest save DC, and the worst frequency for making saves. Extended Damage might be cured automatically in a long rest, just as THPs expire on one, or might only allow a save in a Long Rest (depending on how harsh the source is.) Likewise Remove Curse might outright cure it, but with harsher forms of Enduring Damage the spell merely allows another save.

[HappyDaze]

Hit points are an illusion. Temporary hit points doubly so.

Can you disbelieve your opponents' hit points?

[LibraryOgre]

AD&D 2e had something similar for unarmed combat... 25% was real, the rest would return with a turn's rest (a turn being 10 minutes). I would also use it for damage from illusions; if you go "burned" by a "fire elemental", you'd lose the damage once you realized you were fighting an illusion. If you reached 0 HP from a combination of real and temporary damage, then you were knocked unconscious, but you're wake up after a turn of rest (i.e. you were knocked out for 10 minutes or so). IIRC, magical healing also got rid of temporary damage, without reducing the amount of healing.... so if I was healed for 5 HP, I would gain 5 HP and lose 5 temporary damage.

If I were to implement it in 5e, I'd make it reset at a short rest, since that mechanic exists. It's a useful mechanic for tracking things that won't actually kill you, but will knock you down if you do too much (like bumps and bruises or unarmed combat)

[EggKookoo]

Can you disbelieve your opponents' hit points?

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/ca/f5/c8/caf5c80b99f791bd842cb78eea56d780.gif

[Arkhios]

You quoted me saying HPs were a mix of physical/adrenaline/mental reserves, with only the last hit being a major wound.

First things first, I didn't quote you by saying that. It was Keltest. I prefer to use only one username (yours truly) though I guess someone else might not want to follow the rules! :smalltongue:


I agree that HPs are not meat. But they are a story telling tool. They tell the story of how someone gets worn down by fighting. I use it as a guide to narrate fights in game. What story does LTD facilitate telling? A necromantic curse that sucks up life magic? A particularly vicious poison that disrupts healing? The Wailing Death from Neverwinter Nights?

See, I have to have a story explanation every game mechanic, but with an hour for the idea to gestate and some ideas come through.

I don't think it's the best implementation for that idea, though. I would represent those stories as something else. Get just a few points of something that reduces healing received. Like the old 3.5 Barbarians' DR, except reversed.

I left the explanation vague intentionally, because the initial idea was just to realize what an opposite for Temporary Hit Points could/should/would look like. Flavor comes second, should I find the final mechanic worthwhile to implement (judging from the response, I'm starting to doubt if I will). That said, your guess is as good as mine. Whatever makes the most sense to you. If it doesn't, there's no obligation to use it.

I get that in its current form LTD is not a symmetrical opposite to Temporary Hit Points, primarily because of its duration (in effect, I still argue it matches the ideal: THP are hit points that are reduced first when taking damage vs. LTD is damage that is reduced first when regaining hit points). I think Mark Hall's suggestion of resetting Temporary Damage on Short Rest is sufficient enough. Basically the function is to just make certain encounters more challenging. Also, while initially I felt Temporary Damage shouldn't follow too closely on the footsteps of non-lethal damage, I'm beginning to lean towards letting Temporary Damage knock you out if certain threshold is met. But I repeat, in case it wasn't clear enough: Just like THP, LTD is not supposed to stack with itself! Thus, taking something like 10.000 LTD is very unlikely, because the damage has to come from one source in the same instance.

[Kane0]

Essentially the idea was just to answer to a simple question: If Temporary Hit Points exist, why not its opposite as well, and if such a thing existed, what would it look like?

If asked that question i probably would have replied 'max HP reduction'

[Arkhios]

If asked that question i probably would have replied 'max HP reduction'

While I understand why you would think so, 'max HP reduction' is not symmetrical opposite to 'temporary HP' because 'max HP reduction' can kill you. If that were to be symmetrical, temporary hit points should be able to revive you. But it can't; if you have 0 hit points and are given temporary hit points afterwards, it doesn't cause you become stable - you are still at risk of dying and will have to continue to make death saving throws. Thus, whatever Temporary Damage turns out to be like, it shouldn't be able to kill you. That's the key point why I disagree on this.

[EggKookoo]

Thus, taking something like 10.000 LTD is very unlikely, because the damage has to come from one source in the same instance.

And for the sake of symmetry, I don't think there's anything in the rules that maxes out how many temp HP you can have at any one time. If the DM creates an item that grants 1d20 x 100 temp HP, you could end up with 2,000. While that might be broken, it's not technically against the rules (as opposed to, say, something that brings you to level 21, or gives you negative HP, or anything else that the system is incompatible with).

I'm still not sure I'm into LTD in this way for a number of reasons. Not the least of which is I don't feel as though all elements must maintain symmetry. Where are our negative levels? Or what's the opposite of a saving throw? Why is 20 a crit but a 1 not some kind of anti-crit?

[Arkhios]

And for the sake of symmetry, I don't think there's anything in the rules that maxes out how many temp HP you can have at any one time. If the DM creates an item that grants 1d20 x 100 temp HP, you could end up with 2,000. While that might be broken, it's not technically against the rules (as opposed to, say, something that brings you to level 21, or gives you negative HP, or anything else that the system is incompatible with).

I'm still not sure I'm into LTD in this way for a number of reasons. Not the least of which is I don't feel as though all elements must maintain symmetry. Where are our negative levels? Or what's the opposite of a saving throw? Why is 20 a crit but a 1 not some kind of anti-crit?

True, but that's entirely in the hands of each individual DM's, and neither Temporary Hit Point's or LTD's fault. Mechanically the restriction is same for both, and that's the point.

I agree there doesn't have to be symmetry in everything, but this whole topic is purely hypothetical and sprung from a intentionally simplified question. Ideally, should this end up being implemented, the resulting mechanic is satisfying for everyone.

[JackPhoenix]

While I understand why you would think so, 'max HP reduction' is not symmetrical opposite to 'temporary HP' because 'max HP reduction' can kill you. If that were to be symmetrical, temporary hit points should be able to revive you. But it can't; if you have 0 hit points and are given temporary hit points afterwards, it doesn't cause you become stable - you are still at risk of dying and will have to continue to make death saving throws. Thus, whatever Temporary Damage turns out to be like, it shouldn't be able to kill you. That's the key point why I disagree on this.

But your LTD absolutely can kill you. If you have it, your healer may be prevented from healing you when you drop to 0. And you can't wake from being unconscious on your own, as that happens when you regain 1 hp, either due to natural 20 or waiting while you're stable, but you can't do that if you have LTD. And, inability to be healed when you're close to death can kill you when an enemy gets lucky crit.

[djreynolds]

You have conditions. Perhaps this could be considered temporary damage.

Things like being restrained or grappled or poisoned create a temporary weakness.

The awesome thing of temporary hit points is they last until a rest or 8 hours... no concentration or rage

I'm not sure if temporary hit points make you braver.... But rage certainly does.

It's an interesting thread. If you're poisoned do you avoid combat?

A raging barbarian can be paralyzed? But if she/he had temporary HP it still exists.

[Spriteless]

What do you want from us? When we try to workshop it into something usable, you say "But I wanted symmetry!" When we point out that stun damage used to be a thing, you say "But it's not enough like THP to be the opposite."

I mean, did you want a pat on the back for coming up for something symmetric but not very usable? I only pat people for trying when it's clear they want to give the same reciprocity. Without that symmetry I feel I am being taken advantage of.

But I can brainstorm along your lines if it will help. In what ways is your perfectly symmetrical rule not symmetrical enough? How do you want help?

[djreynolds]

I like the idea... But HP is more than meat. It's confidence and mojo and blood... etc

Just being at half HP makes players play less recklessly.

But it's why I like exhaustion and conditions as they fill this niche of temporary damage.

I do think 5E should've given out something negative for being less than half HP.

A wizard say with 3 hp remaining from their 7 point max should be frightened of dying.

Because in game the players themselves play differently when they have lost half HP or more. They're scared of dying

[EggKookoo]

A wizard say with 3 hp remaining from their 7 point max should be frightened of dying.

Because in game the players themselves play differently when they have lost half HP or more. They're scared of dying

Doesn't that solve that problem, though? If the player is concerned with their PC dying at less than half HP, wouldn't that cause the PC to act similarly?

A lot of "mechanical" things can be solved just by proper roleplaying.

[ciopo]

actual "temporary" damage that mirrors temporary HP would be effect worded such as "you take X damage, Y rounds/minutes/hours later, you are healed for X-Z , where Z is the amoutn of X damage you have already otherwise healed in some other way"

I don't really see what added scope this would bring to the game tho

[prabe]

Although in all fairness, reductions in max HP loss can't be healed by Healing Word either - and if someone is dropped to 0 by such effects, they're generally dead.

Generally, someone reduced to 0 by effects that reduce HP maximum isn't merely dead. Barring some sort of intervention, they're almost certainly coming back, and they're going to be hungry.

[Man_Over_Game]

The idea is to be the "spiritual" opposite of Temporary Hit Points. Since taking damage reduces your Hit Points by an amount equal to excess points from reducing Temporary Hit Points (if any), Long-Term Damage would do the opposite to regaining hit points.

I think something like this is supposed to be shown with Hit Dice, although its implementation is pretty weak.

One thing I've started doing is having players roll HD to recover HP at the end of a Long Rest, regaining half their HD (as normal), and then spending those as needed as well, until they have filled their HP or they ran out of HD.

This generates a similar scenario to yours, where the more stress someone takes now, the less they can take later. Someone who delves into dungeons 2 days in a row might not wake up with full HP on the third day, and have no more HD to fuel fights without additional rest.

Coincidentally, this encourages more healing before resting (that is, closing wounds while they're early), which becomes a buff to the unused Medicine and Cure Wounds options, as well as rewarding any feature that improves Hit Dice (like some feats).

[djreynolds]

Doesn't that solve that problem, though? If the player is concerned with their PC dying at less than half HP, wouldn't that cause the PC to act similarly?

A lot of "mechanical" things can be solved just by proper roleplaying.

I believe you have answered the riddle.

That's the probably the quote of the year so far.

[Sigreid]

I dont know if anyone has mentioned it but there are a very few monsters that can temporarily lower your max hp.

[CorporateSlave]

Reading through all of this, I've kind of come up with another reason I don't like the idea of "Temporary Damage," which has to do with what HP essentially are (from a mechanical standpoint), which is to say just one of the resources a player has attached to their PC, just like Long Rest/Short Rest reset class abilities, Spell Slots, etc.

Resources in general don't need any drain or blockage beyond simply using them, and needing to restore them via whatever mechanism the RAW has provided for such. I don't feel like we need a new way to prevent reacquisition of HP any more than we need a way to prevent restoration of Spell Slots or Superiority Dice upon rest. While concussion house rules could accomplish that same thing, and in a fairly "realistic" fashion, I have grown to appreciate 5e's relatively simple mechanics, even if some are better implemented than others.

I know the OP didn't just want a "all damage is temporary" argument, but when you think about it, the inverse is also potentially true...all HP are temporary. Temporary HP are just an element of the HP resource that allows a PC to get beyond their level maximum of the HP resource for a short duration. The ability of Temporary HP to do this has been factored in to game balance. Temporary Damage would probably require significant rebalancing of the rules or else risk distorting the strength of various spells and class abilities in unintended ways.

[EggKookoo]

While concussion house rules could accomplish that same thing, and in a fairly "realistic" fashion, I have grown to appreciate 5e's relatively simple mechanics, even if some are better implemented than others.

I've found that 5e makes so much more sense the more you divorce the mechanics from the "reality" of the fiction. Hit points simply don't exist. They're a tool to make the game work as a game at the table. There's really nothing corresponding to them from the perspective of the characters themselves. When a feature provides, say, temp HP, it's not like the character actually gets something.* It just means for whatever reason that character has a better chance of surviving the next few successful attacks. Maybe that chance was already pretty high and the temp HP don't produce any noticeable benefit in the moment. Maybe the character was worn out and beat up, and the temp HP manifests as a second wind or solidifying of resolve. What it manifests as doesn't matter mechanically -- that's up to us to imagine.

* Yes, certain features may package the temp HP as a protective field or something, but not all do.

[Nagog]

Are you thinking of permenant HP reduction, like some powerful Undead (like Vampires) are capable of? Because otherwise it seems far too complicated to keep track of multiple health values. Temp HP is easy and doesn't stack, so at most you have a two digit number to keep track of, meanwhile you don't have to keep track of your health. This sounds like suddenly you'd have to keep track of regular health damage and temp damage and possibly temp hp and everything else on your character sheet, and figure out how everything interacts all over again. (AoA? Arcane Ward? Resistances? HAM?)

[stoutstien]

Hmm. Just realized there is no instances of anti THP effects. Like a spell/ablity that solely targets them.

[Man_Over_Game]

Hmm. Just realized there is no instances of anti THP effects. Like a spell/ablity that solely targets them.

Life drain effects technically do. RAW, they both steal from your HP and still deal it's damage to your THP.

[Keltest]

Hmm. Just realized there is no instances of anti THP effects. Like a spell/ablity that solely targets them.

Not sure why there would need to be. Regular damage usually gets rid of them just fine. Any ability that dealt, I don't know, 100 points of damage to only temporary HP would be incredibly niche.

[stoutstien]

Not sure why there would need to be. Regular damage usually gets rid of them just fine. Any ability that dealt, I don't know, 100 points of damage to only temporary HP would be incredibly niche.

It was just an observation that temporary hit points aren't treated as different from normal HP as far as how they are represented mechanically so negative THP are only separated for the non stacking rule and not bringing someone up from being unconscious rather as being a specific type of HP.

[Keltest]

It was just an observation that temporary hit points aren't treated as different from normal HP as far as how they are represented mechanically so negative THP are only separated for the non stacking rule and not bringing someone up from being unconscious rather as being a specific type of HP.

I assume that's why they call them temporary hit points, as opposed to shield points or barrier points or something else.

[Arkhios]

Are you thinking of permenant HP reduction, like some powerful Undead (like Vampires) are capable of? Because otherwise it seems far too complicated to keep track of multiple health values. Temp HP is easy and doesn't stack, so at most you have a two digit number to keep track of, meanwhile you don't have to keep track of your health. This sounds like suddenly you'd have to keep track of regular health damage and temp damage and possibly temp hp and everything else on your character sheet, and figure out how everything interacts all over again. (AoA? Arcane Ward? Resistances? HAM?)

If I was thinking of Permanent anything, I wouldn't have called it Temporary :smallamused:

The following is not directed at you, but instead in general:
I'm aware this would add more complexity. But if I were to add a houserule such as this, there's no reason that I'd have to use it non-stop. If anything, I would probably make it an encounter hazard that might only occur if the circumstances are right.
And yes, most likely related to the presence of undeath.

Being the "equal" opposite of THP doesn't have to mean it's a thing players could use at their whim on a regular basis. The only thing I find necessary, even hypothetically speaking, to be by any means "equal" is the core mechanic that I have explained time and time again, but everyone simply seem to ignore it, and instead cry about the added complexity.

Multiclassing and Feats are optional rules and both add complexity to the game, for crying out loud. Why temporary damage should be treated any differently than any other optional rule?

[Sindal]

I'd say its probably because it doesnt add much beyond busywork and an extra layer of death to worry about.

There are a very long list of ways to cripple players. I wager its enough. These usually take thr form of an injury in other games, which seldom target your hp and just make it harder to fight instead.

Thinking about it, temporary damage would make the most sense to be counteracted by temporary hp. But they dont work together that way. Or atleast I imagine it wouldn't

Oh to your last general point:
Feats and mutliclasses dont try to kill you. They make 'your character' more complex .what has been suggested so far is just a healing penalty by the sound of things.

It can be complex. Perhaps it's even a good idea. The jury is out on whether the major of people who play 5e want it.

If my dm told me hes introducing temporary damage that needs to be healed away all I would ask is "Why?"

[Mordaedil]

I don't think the idea is all that bad, but it's not really congruent with the design philosophy behind 5e, it almost belongs more in an older edition of D&D, like 2nd or 3rd.

Most things in 5e are made to be transient, hence there's fewer instant kill spells and no level drain. Reducing maximum hit points is the worst effect they have and it's pretty much a slap on the wrist with a cleric nearby.