Anun's Miffed Ghost's page

It was one of those over dinner kinds of revelations. Since back in the misty days of yore when Gary Gygax or whoever it was said that hit points aren't a measure of physical punishment so much as pluck, resolve, stamina, and morale--I've always hated it, and fought against it tooth and nail. It seemed overly abstract, clunky, hard to narrate, and a drama killer, all just to give PCs a safety net that it'd be more fun to do without. I hated it.

Then some articles came out for 4e, where they were talking about taking the old sad idea and actually flesh it out with some nice mechanics that took it seriously. Now PCs could step back behind the line of defenders, take a round to catch their breath, and get back some hit points. Inspiring leaders could stoke the courage of their fellows, and it would be reflected in hit points regained. There were even fun ideas that maybe divine "healing" was less a matter of mending shattered bones and more about instilling zealous faith to soldier on.

That got me thinking tonight. If that's what hit points are, then why does losing all one's hit points necessarily mean they're dying? I mean what if their resolve just gives out and they're too tired to raise their sword for another attack? What if their morale breaks and they run? What if they just lose all hope? I mean if hit points aren't your meat and bones, then might the loss of them be interpreted more broadly? Certainly it would give a lot more narrative power to the DM, the ability to paint neat scenes where badguys are driven off or surrender rather than always die. Likewise TPK's would have a new possible resolution other than defilement by monsters followed by rolling up new characters.

It got me thinking of all sorts of things. Heavy armor and weapons costing HP to wear or use. Fear effects that drain HP. All sorts of novel takes on the idea.

I dunno. I think I may be warming up to it.

One of the things that has gotten me so excited about the new edition is the idea that we get a brand new Core World to explore. The key problem with the last edition for me was that Greyhawk kind of got lost. It was nominally the core setting so it didn't get the kind of love Faerun or Eberron did, with a dozen books each, because the presumption was that every Core book was supposed to be a Greyhawk book. On the other hand, rather than explore Greyhawk as it is, there was a big pressure to marginalize the things that made it distinctive and turn it into more the "generic vanilla D&D". The Races series of books retooled each race, as if for some new setting, rather than use the original Greyhawk cultural stuff. They spliced in a whole bunch of new gods and wierd origin stories, until it was hard to know where Greyhawk ended and the Pseudo-Greyhawk Core Setting began. It was a mess. Lots of books did this, all of them pushing and pulling at the identity of Greyhawk as a setting and giving me the kind of knife-behind-the-eyeballs headache that only a continuity hound like me can get.

So I was looking through the Worlds & Monsters book and on the whole I was very impressed. A whole fresh world, with historical underpinnings for its races, whole nations and cultures, unfolding histories. They even give some names for this place--Creation (which, okay, was lifted straight outta' Exalted *sigh*) and The Middle Realm (which I really kind of like, halfway between the Elemental Vortex and the Astral Sea, and likewise straddling the Shadowfel on one side and the Feywild on the other).

Great. A new setting at last! Now Greyhawk can be Greyhawk without everyone messing with it. Awesome.

Then I catch the bit about "What the Development Team Means When We Say World"

Uh-oh.

See a world isn't a world in any conventional sense. It's not a plane or a realm or a planet. Nothing like that. It's the D&D game in its essence that makes it different from every other setting out there. It's like a template for a game to make it "feel D&D". It's a brand.

So now I'm right back to not knowing what they're talking about.

So when they describe the history of Io creating the dragons, is that how it works now in EVERY setting? The one country where the Tiefings come from, is that supposed to exist across all settings? In none of them? I don't get it! Are they saying that their ideas of empires falling all the time and the world being stuck in a mapless dark age, is something that applies to every D&D setting out there?

I just don't know.

Here's my take. The Middle Realm IS a world. It's a real physical world. It's made of dirt. It's not a template or a brand name. Those kingdoms and histories and whatnot exist THERE. The modules and whatnot written for 4e exist THERE. It's a big freeform dark age place full of excitement and adventure and I WILL NOT ALLOW it to become some big floaty "not-really-a-world" thing because that will kill me-- and after a whole edition of having to put up with mealymouthed crap I will have my way on this dangit!!

So...yeah okay that's my peace.