[Strain-Injury Variant] A Minor Change to Hit Points


Homebrew and House Rules

351 to 400 of 424 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

Witch's Knight wrote:
...Holding back the last 10-25% after the battle gives it the extra touch of realism that makes it click for me. The more I look at this, the more I want to try it out.

Yay! We caught another one!

Now you've got me thinking about a "Tired" state where you lose 10% HP if you stay conscious for too long. How completely unnecessary. Good going, WK. :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Feel that it is important to point out that taking a few minutes to recover is hardly FREE healing if you are playing a dungeon-crawl. It is a choice: If you stay for a few minutes and rest, you are letting buffs that last X minute(s)/level run their course, and you will not benefit from them in the next encounter. While if you use magic to heal up pronto, you still retain the power of the buffs, and can enter the next encounter more powerful.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I was prompted to come up with a "healing rate" because players were complaining about the verisimilitude of it taking the same amount of time to heal 4 HP of strain as it did 40. (Which might be another way of saying that they wanted to keep some of their minute/duration buffs going into the next encounter).

I did run a series of encounters where the PCs would get 1d3 minutes between waves of enemies. It was kind of fun watching them try to figure out if they should risk rest/refit only giving them a minute worth of HP back or just go ahead and drain some off their magic healing resources.


Very good points about the duration game.

I have a house rule that abstracts time into "scenes", and R&R takes one scene. The reason for that house rule is precisely what Witch's Knight and I were just talking about; the players should be able to "game" time like Kamelguru and Ninja in the Rye suggest, but the duration rules are so precise as to be either arbitrary or annoyingly involved. It's all too easy for the GM to say three minutes when two would have been fine. It inhibits strategic thinking by giving only the GM enough facts to make informed decisions about time. And the paperwork is killer.

I realized that in most of my games, players were estimating the time it took to do a healing wand ritual, and I was being asked to vote up or down on whether x minutes was enough, so that they could keep their buffs. After years of this, I just decided to reduce all durations to that up or down vote. You either get the healing scene or you get pressed into more action.

With abstracted durations, the flow of the game is much the same but without math. The players finish a scene, and if they are strained or hurt enough to be wary about taking on another one, they take a scene to rest. Their buff durations are all tracked in scenes, so they all expire at once, or some might last another scene (none of this 3 minutes, 30 minutes, 8 minutes listing business).

Duration abstraction also helps with other dungeon crawl concerns. It standardizes time spent searching for traps and treasure (more scenes == take 10 or 20), which lets us keep things fast-paced and paranoid at the same time.

The rule can be found here, though it is out of date. I will try to post the current version today.

disclaimer:
Lest anyone accuse me of copying encounter durations from 4e, I've never played it. Just like S-I hit points, I think I was trying to solve the same perceived problem, but in my own way.

--

Beyond that self-promoting tangent, I must say that the balance of rest vs. spell duration (and search time for non-casters) is of great importance. Because I house-rule durations in my own game, I had something of a blind spot for its important to time-scale recovery.

While I personally won't be using a time-scale strain recovery rate (mine will remain "1 scene") I now agree it is important that we agree on a standard rate that GMs could use with the standard system of literal minute-by-minute durations. For this, I must rely on those of you using the S-I Variant with the RAW duration method. How are you managing?


In light of the last post, revisiting NitR's statement:

Ninja in the Rye wrote:

I've experimented with a Stamina healing rate.

I settled on a recovery rate of 10% of your total HP per minute of rest/refit.

So a character with 100 total HP would get back 10 strain per minute of rest/refit regardless of whether they took 80 Strain during the fight or 12. This way a character who barely took any strain damage is fine and ready to go after only a minute of catching his breath, while one who was pushed to the limit needs to rest for close to 10 minutes before they're ready to go again.

I like this, because it's easy math. 85 hp = 8hp/min. 16 hp = 1 hp/min.

And it makes Witch's Knight's "tired" thing easy too. You never get your last tenth back until you sleep. I still won't be using any such rule, but it is starting to seem more usable.

Now, one could extrapolate from that healing rate that you regain 1 hp per 100 total hp? Perhaps by catching your breath as a full-round action? Or catching your breath for one full round if you have < 100 hp. That's more memorable than useful, to be sure.


This would restore the importance of potions and wands somewhat... if your party is running a bunch of 10-minute buffs but only the fighter needs 10 minutes to regain strain, then you might decide to blow the charges.

I just had a zany idea to change the cure spells to restore 10ths of total HP instead of d8s. That's silly.


All this business about how the longer you go on, the harder it is to recover has given me an idea. Instead of putting a discreet and constant amount of time per hp, how about having rests become less effective as the day goes on? That way the characters can easily recover after the first battle, but the more often they rest the less percentage of HP they recover. Maybe the first fight or two they recover completely, but the next few they recover less.


Ragnarok Aeon wrote:
Instead of putting a discreet and constant amount of time per hp, how about having rests become less effective as the day goes on?

That's fairly brilliant. First rest = 100%; second = 90%, etc.


Ragnarok Aeon wrote:
Instead of putting a discreet and constant amount of time per hp, how about having rests become less effective as the day goes on?

I think a potential flaw with this system is that if the Cleric takes major strain in the first fight of the day while the Fighter only takes a small amount it creates an imbalance. Is the Fighter going to "save" his first rest/refit on the day for later when he has an actual serious amount of damage?

I don't really have much interest in using such a system, but IMO it should be based on the amount of strain actually taken by the character.


It could be good, but I think it needs to be very simple. Percentages are great as long as you're dealing with common fractions like 1/10 or 1/2 or even 1/4. A diminishing system like 100%-90%-etc is going to necessitate a calculator for many players who will not be able to calculate 40% of 75 hp off the tops of their heads.

Honestly, I don't see the need for this kind of endurance in HP. But if there is a need, we should be able to come up with something easier.

When in doubt, I think it is good to look at how the game actually plays already and work back from there. This kind of rule introduces entirely new concepts into gameplay, and while that's cool, it doesn't meet my personal objectives. I'll still watch a discussion of it with interest, though.


So my Runelords group is restarting with new PCs, and one of them is a Machinesmith... so, suddenly the implications of SI on constructs is relevant.

I can't recall if this has come up before, but because constructs don't "heal" and they get bonus HPs based on size to replicate their inherent durability, should all damage be treated as Injury?


Nephelim wrote:

So my Runelords group is restarting with new PCs, and one of them is a Machinesmith... so, suddenly the implications of SI on constructs is relevant.

I can't recall if this has come up before, but because constructs don't "heal" and they get bonus HPs based on size to replicate their inherent durability, should all damage be treated as Injury?

Nope, they take strain and injury like everything else. Injury just represents "breakage" and strain represents all of the reasons that getting hit with a big axe didn't break them.


Nephelim wrote:

So my Runelords group is restarting with new PCs, and one of them is a Machinesmith... so, suddenly the implications of SI on constructs is relevant.

I can't recall if this has come up before, but because constructs don't "heal" and they get bonus HPs based on size to replicate their inherent durability, should all damage be treated as Injury?

Nope, they take strain and injury like everything else. Injury just represents "breakage" and strain represents all of the reasons that getting hit with a big axe didn't break them.

Since Injury doesn't actually heal without treatment in the variant (at least not without GM intervention), it should work perfectly fine to represent broken parts that need fixing.


Whereas Strain is more like dents and dings caused by the archetypal "glancing blow." On reflection, that makes sense... and construct immunity prevents them from failing saves - and thus taking injury - from poisons and other biological concerns.

I love this variant more and more.


I have enshrined Ninja in the Rye's healing rate in my own house rules (as a guideline to be used alongside my timekeeping houserule).

The rate is 10% of total HP per minute, and 1% of total HP per full round of rest (provided you are not threatened or at risk of damage in any way). This is strain only, of course.

I want to write it into the rule document, but I feel like the whole thing needs an overhaul, so it may be a while before I get to it.

I have changed my stance on eidolons. Eidolons should manage strain and injury damage exactly as other creatures do. Otherwise the summoner will just buy a wand of rejuvenate eidolon and then we're back to the old ways.

If you use the GP damage sub-variant, you should consider giving eidolons a price break, since rejuvenate is more efficient than cure. I am too lazy to calculate the actual number, but it is probably close to 2.5 GP per hp restored (instead of 3).


Okay, here is the text that currently lives in my house rule document. I think it's pretty tight, but you know how it is.

Evil Lincoln's House Rules wrote:

There are two types of damage which both deplete your hit points, but recover at different rates:

Critical hits, failed saves, and the “final blow” which leaves a character at negative hit points deal injury damage. Injuries do not heal without mundane or magical treatment. Damage from “mere hits”, successful saves, or any other source is strain damage. Strain represents energy lost to parrying or dodging, weakening armor, taxed morale, divided attention and dumb luck.

Recovery: You recover hit points lost to strain at a rate of 10% of your total hit points per minute. You must take no actions other than recuperating and tending wounded comrades in order to recover from strain damage. You can not recover while you are in combat, nor while you are still subject to ongoing Strain damage such as severe heat, cold or starvation.

Non-lethal attacks: Non-lethal attacks deal only strain, even on a critical hit, and a non-lethal final blow knocks the target unconscious at zero HP. Damage from non-lethal attacks can combine with damage from lethal attacks; whether the target becomes unconscious or dying is determined by the attack type that dealt the final blow.

Special Attacks: Special attacks such as poison or disease are still transmitted even if the attack deals only strain damage. In this case, the trauma that delivered the effect (e.g. poison) is negligible and will not require treatment (e.g. a pinprick or scratch), but the special effect may require treatment of its own.

GP Damage Option: GMs concerned about free healing should charge 3 GP per hit point of strain damage recovered. (2.5 GP for Eidolons).

It's been a long road working on this rule and nothing significant has changed in a long while. Try putting this in front of someone who has never heard of the variant, especially if they're complaining about 15-minute adventuring days, wands of cure light wounds, or the unrealistic nature of hit points. Please let me know if I can tighten up the language or make it more appealing.


I'm also considering adding the following, although I don't think it is strictly necessary:

"" wrote:

Injuries heal slowly, and if left untreated may never fully heal. You can recover 10% of your maximum hit points in injury damage per week of full rest. If you seek magical or mundane treatment, and those methods cure at least 25% of the injury damage, the remaining 75% of the damage will heal naturally at the 10% weekly rate.

If you neglect to seek sufficient mundane or magical treatment, then you can only heal 75% of the injury damage. The remaining 25% (or what remains of it after partial treatment) becomes a permanent decrease in your hit points in the form of a scar, limp, or similar infirmity.

This rule is a shameless nod to "reality", which makes for notoriously dreadful game rules. Its only redeeming quality is that it is almost impossible that it would actually come up in the course of normal Pathfinder play. I mean, people would lower themselves to rolling the Heal skill if it ever got that desperate. And who even does that, ever?

EDIT: or... instead of messing about with all those fractions, perhaps the "core" damage of the wound that must be treated is equal to the critical damage multiplier... so for x3 damage you must treat at least 3 hp. Just brainstorming.


I never been warm to the terms "mere hits" and "final blows". I get what they mean, but only because I know of the variant already. "Final blow" is a bit more evocative, but "mere hits" is a weak term IMO.

Also when I read manuals, I prefer to learn about the rule and then, about the exception. I believe it would be best to state that damage cause strain, except on critical / failed save / final bow (rather than the other way around in your excerpt).

I get that in term of design, strain IS the exception and derivation from RaW. But since strain damage is the norm in combat, I'd rather say that "damage causes strain, except in the 25% cases where it causes injuries" than "damage causes injuries, except in the 75% cases when it causes mere strain".

Show is about to start and I need to go, but I'll elaborate / propose alternate descriptions later.


Rather than charging for free healing under this variant, I am considering just doubling the cost of magic items that heal (i.e. wands of CLW). The PCs will not need as much magic healing so it seems like it should be more rare/costly under this variant.


Lincoln, I do not like that permanent damage rule.

I see where you're coming from, but I don't think it has anything to do with the other parts of the rule. Neither relies on the other and they exist for completely different reasons.

I think you also need to rule on how to heal the permanent damage. Even lost limbs and ability drain are heal-able, so this ought to be too. Possibly by the very same spells.


Evil Lincoln wrote:

I'm also considering adding the following, although I don't think it is strictly necessary:

"" wrote:

Injuries heal slowly, and if left untreated may never fully heal. You can recover 10% of your maximum hit points in injury damage per week of full rest. If you seek magical or mundane treatment, and those methods cure at least 25% of the injury damage, the remaining 75% of the damage will heal naturally at the 10% weekly rate.

If you neglect to seek sufficient mundane or magical treatment, then you can only heal 75% of the injury damage. The remaining 25% (or what remains of it after partial treatment) becomes a permanent decrease in your hit points in the form of a scar, limp, or similar infirmity.

This rule is a shameless nod to "reality", which makes for notoriously dreadful game rules. Its only redeeming quality is that it is almost impossible that it would actually come up in the course of normal Pathfinder play. I mean, people would lower themselves to rolling the Heal skill if it ever got that desperate. And who even does that, ever?

EDIT: or... instead of messing about with all those fractions, perhaps the "core" damage of the wound that must be treated is equal to the critical damage multiplier... so for x3 damage you must treat at least 3 hp. Just brainstorming.

You guys are over thinking this. Just make it a quick Fortitude Save when the wound is healing. If it fails it's a scar. Done.


Evil Lincoln wrote:
It's been a long road working on this rule and nothing significant has changed in a long while. Try putting this in front of someone who has never heard of the variant, especially if they're complaining about 15-minute adventuring days, wands of cure light wounds, or the unrealistic nature of hit points. Please let me know if I can tighten up the language or make it more appealing.

As I explained before, "mere hits" is a weak term and should go. Start with the rule, then state the exception. Stress how both type of damage deplete the same pool of hit points.

Allow nonlethal damage to bring a character to dying (and eventually, killed) condition or else players have nothing to fear of cold, starvation or suffocation.

Perhaps include a line about falling damage and other source of "OMG you should so be totally dead!" damage.

I've tinkered with your summary to this result:

Evil Lincoln's House Rules wrote:

There are two types of damage which you can deal and receive. Both deplete the same pool of hit points, but are later recovered at different rates.

As a general rule, attacks and other sources of damage cause strain damage. Strain represents energy lost to parrying or dodging, weakening armor, taxed morale, divided attention and dumb luck. Hit points lost to strain damage recover quickly with magic or simple rest.

Damage resulting from critical hits, failed saves, and final blows (successful hits leaving a character at negative hit points) deal injury damage instead. Unlike strain, injuries do not heal without mundane or magical treatment.

Recovery: You recover hit points lost to strain at a rate of 10% of your total hit points per minute of complete rest. You cannot recover hits points lost to strain damage while you are in combat or any other threatening situations, nor while you are still subject to ongoing strain damage such as severe heat, cold or starvation.

insert recovery rate of hit points lost to injury damage / treatment mechanics here

Cure spells and other forms of magical healing heal injuries first but otherwise replenish your pool of hit points regardless of the type of damage received.

Nonlethal attacks: Nonlethal attacks deal only strain, even on a critical hit, failed save or final blow. While a character still becomes dying when brought to -1 HP or less by nonlethal damage, its condition is automatically stable and does not worsen in subsequent rounds. A character can still die of nonlethal damage if its HP are brought to a negative amount equal to its Constitution score.

Attacks with no Attack Roll or Save: Some source of damage (notably falling or immersion in lava etc) have no attack rolls to provide a critical hit and allow no saving throws to fail. Such attacks only deal injury damage on a final blow. After all, such circumstances are usually fatal unless equipment, luck or "something" saves the character!

Special Attacks: Special attacks such as poison or disease are still transmitted even if the attack deals only strain damage. In this case, the trauma that delivered the effect (e.g. poison) is negligible and will not require treatment (e.g. a pinprick or scratch), but the special effect may require treatment of its own.

GP Damage Option: GMs concerned about free healing should charge 3 GP per hit point of strain damage recovered (or 2.5 GP per hit point in case of Eidolons). These expenses can take the form of food, drinks, maintenance kits etc.


Actually Findel, when you first posted your comments I went and make the following changes to my house rule doc. I just never posted back here. :/

Tyrant d20 Variant Rules wrote:

There are two types of damage which both deplete your hit points, but recover at different rates:

Injury damage is caused by critical hits, failed saves, and any attack which leaves a creature at negative hit points. Injuries do not heal without mundane or magical treatment.

Strain damage is caused by damage from non-critical hits, successful saves, or any other source that does not cause injury. Strain represents energy lost to parrying or dodging, weakening armor, taxed morale, divided attention and dumb luck; all consequences of damage that don’t require treatment.

Recovery: You recover hit points lost to strain at a rate of 10% of your total hit points per minute. You must take no actions other than recuperating and tending wounded comrades in order to recover from strain. You can not recover while you are in combat, nor while you are still subject to ongoing strain damage such as severe heat, cold or starvation.

Non-lethal attacks: Non-lethal attacks deal only strain, even on a critical hit, and a non-lethal final blow knocks the target unconscious at zero HP. Damage from non-lethal attacks can combine with damage from lethal attacks; whether the target becomes unconscious or dying is determined by the attacker who deals the final blow.

Special Attacks: Special attacks such as poison or disease are still transmitted even if the attack deals only strain damage. In this case, the contact that delivered the effect (e.g. poison) is negligible and will not require treatment (e.g. a pinprick or scratch), but the special effect may require treatment of its own.

GP Damage Option: GMs concerned about free healing should charge 3 GP per hit point of strain damage recovered. (2.5 GP for Eidolons).

I will be adding the missing clauses that you caught.

As for the permanent damage thing, I was never really serious about that.

I really do think the healing rate for untreated injuries should be never. Untreated means nobody could be bothered to even throw the Heal skill at it. If it's any kind of injury and not strain, just trying to sleep it off should do pretty much nothing — even if it heals partially it will continue to be a nuisance and a defensive handicap.

Others may disagree. I commend Ragnarok's suggestion of a Fort Save for the healing of untreated wounds... but it shouldn't be generous.


Here's the lovechild of Findel's version and my own:

Rule wrote:

There are two types of damage which both deplete your hit points, but recover at different rates:

Strain damage is caused by damage from non-critical hits, successful saves, or any other source that does not cause injury damage (see below). Strain represents energy lost to parrying or dodging, weakening armor, taxed morale, divided attention and dumb luck; all consequences of successful attacks that don’t require treatment.

Injury damage is caused by critical hits, failed saves, and any attack which leaves a creature at negative hit points. Injuries do not heal without mundane or magical treatment.

Recovering from Strain: You recover hit points lost to strain at a rate of 10% of your total hit points per minute. You must take no actions other than recuperating and tending wounded comrades in order to recover from strain. You cannot recover while you are in combat, nor while you are still subject to ongoing strain damage such as severe heat, cold or starvation.
Recovering from Injury: Untreated injuries do not heal effectively unless the victim succeeds at a Fortitude save equal to 10 + the total injury damage. Success allows the wound to heal at the normal rate (1hp/level/day, or more with long-term care). Injuries treated with the Treat Deadly Wounds application of the heal skill also require a Fortitude save for any remaining damage to heal correctly, but may use the Heal check in place of the Fortitude save if it is a higher result.
Cure spells and other forms of magical healing heal injuries first but otherwise replenish your pool of hit points regardless of the type of damage.

Non-lethal attacks: Non-lethal attacks deal only strain, even on a critical hit or a failed save. While a character still becomes dying when brought to -1 HP or less by nonlethal damage, its condition is automatically stable and does not worsen in subsequent rounds. A character can still die of nonlethal damage if its HP are brought to a negative amount equal to its Constitution score.

Damage with no Attack Roll or Save: Some sources of damage (e.g. falling, immersion in lava, etc.) have no attack rolls to provide a critical hit and allow no saving throws to fail. Such attacks only deal injury damage only if they bring the target below zero hit points.

Special Attacks: Special attacks such as poison or disease are still transmitted even if the attack deals only strain damage. In this case, the contact that delivered the effect (e.g. poison) is negligible and will not require treatment (e.g. a pinprick or scratch), but the special effect may require treatment of its own.

GP Damage Option: GMs concerned about free healing should charge 3 GP per hit point of strain damage recovered. (2.5 GP for Eidolons). These expenses can take the form of food, drinks, maintenance kits, etc.

There's a lot of new stuff I just threw in there. It's not necessarily good. FORUMS GO.


Evil Lincoln wrote:


I really do think the healing rate for untreated injuries should be never.

I can get behind that.

I like the "10% strain/minute and no healing of injuries until treated" best, but the "full rejuvenation of strain with rest and injuries heal at normal rate of 1hp/level/day" is more directly portable into RaW.


I feel like the latter is caving on my principles a bit.

I included it because I didn't want to have to throw out the long-term treatment parts of the heal skill.

The trouble is, healing 10-20 points of injury a night is silly. Heck, healing speed based on level is kind of silly too. I would feel better if it was weeks instead of days.

This will almost never come up, unless you're playing a no-magic setting.

Strain is what you heal without treatment. Injuries require treatment. I don't think untreated injuries should heal at all. If anything, they should get worse, but that's a whole new can of worms, isn't it?

Maybe an untreated injury gets worse by 1 hp per day or something simple like that. A fort save stops the deterioration.

In any case, it's all tangential to the real meat of the rule. The basics of strain and injury haven't changed in ... a year and a half?! They're not going anywhere.

GMs, how would you handle Injury healing rate, based on untreated, full treatment, and partial treatment?


Here's how I think I would do it in my game:

Quote:

Quick rest (10 minutes-ish) heals all hp lost to strain damage. Area must be quiet enough for adventurers not to feel threatened / constantly be on high alert. If rest is interrupted, they only restore half. I don't foresee stressing the difference between 7 or 9 minutes in my games.

Injuries don't heal until treated with magic (even a stabilize spell would do) or Heal skill (first aid or treat deadly wounds). Untreated wounds put character at risk of disease after 24 hours (probably filth fever), but no worsening of hp or condition.

Treated wounds heal at rate of 1 hp per level per 8 hours of rest (3 hp for full day). Long-term care doubles that (and perhaps tripples with extra expenditure of healing kit, or successful Survival check made to find curative herbs).

It still means that high-level but low-hp character heal faster proportionally, but that's close enough for me.

So yes; that's a lot of injury damage that heals "naturally", but nothing says that all of this treatment and healing is all that "natural". There may be a lot of alchemical stuff in that heal kit, and the ranger may know a few plants with quasi-magical curative properties.

That's assuming that I play in a high fantasy world and in where injuries remain abstract, like Pathfinder RPG (even if played in a low-ish magic campaign). If injuries where more precise (broken arm, bleeding gash) or had lasting consequences (character lost an eye, is permanently lame) I may reconsider the healing time to more "realistic" standards.

If injuries are that long and tedious to heal, then adventurers will carry bagful of cure-wands and we're back to square 1 (well, let's say 1.5)


I like that, especially the filth fever application.

My players still carry a wand of cure light wounds to deal with injury damage. It's still foolish not to. The only thing Strain-Injury has changed is that it's only ONE wand of CLW now.

That's good enough for me... more in line with the original intention of the rules, I think.

I like that healing rate too, but it has the standard problem: the tougher you are (more HP) the slower you are to heal to full. We've already got a % in the variant for healing strain. Why not go all the way? 5% of your total HP recovered per day for a treated wound.

A mortal wound, comprising almost 100% of your HP, will therefore require 20 days (or a week of full bed rest) to recover from (without magic). Far from realistic, but about right for high-adventure scenarios like PF usually entails.


Evil Lincoln wrote:
I like that healing rate too, but it has the standard problem: the tougher you are (more HP) the slower you are to heal to full. We've already got a % in the variant for healing strain. Why not go all the way? 5% of your total HP recovered per day for a treated wound.

I do suggest you go all the way in %, and would suggest 10% for both strain and injuries for KISS.

Only in my games, I think I would keep it as I wrote above because:

1) The way I run my games, I don't see the necessity of having variable amount of strain healing for a matter of minutes. Either they'll have the time to rest, or they wont. All I need is a clause where the group had some rest but got interrupted, but I don't need the granularity of a scale of 1 to 10.

2) For me, the fact that creatures with lots of hp and few levels heal proportionally slower does not bother me that much. I can even rationalize it by saying that the 10-hp injury the fighter took is the same 10-hp injury that the wizard received. So I don't mind so much that both will recuperate from the same injury in the same amount of time. This means that the fighter can potentially stay on the hospital bed longer, but only because the wizard would have been in the morgue around the corner had he/she received the same injury...

In other words, its a matter of perceived issue. I think your solution is perfect for the perceived issue, but I just don't see the original concern as such of an issue myself.


Another round:

rule wrote:

Recovering from Injury: Untreated injuries do not heal on their own. For each day a wound is left untreated, the injured creature must make a Fortitude save or contract filth fever.

The Treat Deadly Wounds application of the heal skill removes a small amount of injury damage, but also starts the process of natural healing. After treatment, injury damage is recovered at a rate of 10% of the injured creatures total hit points per day of light activity. Multipliers for full bed rest and long-term care apply.

Cure spells and other forms of magical healing heal injuries first but otherwise replenish your pool of hit points regardless of the type of damage. Any amount of injury damage recovered from cure spells is enough to start the process of natural healing.


Evil Lincoln wrote:

Another round:

rule wrote:


The Treat Deadly Wounds application of the heal skill removes a small amount of injury damage, but also starts the process of natural healing. After treatment, injury damage is recovered at a rate of 10% of the injured creatures total hit points per day of light activity. Multipliers for full bed rest and long-term care apply.

Does this mean that even the most injured character (after receiving treat deadly wounds), without magical healing, would only need to rest 10 days at the most to recover all of his lost health? If so, that seems a bit fast to me. And with bed rest and long-term care, that recovery time would be reduced even further? It seems like this would make it impossible to receive injuries that cause anyone to convalesce longer than a week (if they are getting treatment). Bob the soldier nearly bled out on the battlefield but, don't worry, he'll be back in full fighting form in less than a week with no magical aid.

I realize that most PCs will just use magical healing but this rule might come into play for NPCs, monsters, etc. with no access to healing magic. In some of those cases, it seems like it may result in an overly quick recovery which trivializes getting gravely injured. It is not difficult to change the percentage of recovery per day for my own version of this rule. I understand that 10% is easy to work with from a math perspective. Thanks for considering my feedback. This house rule is brilliant!


Technotrooper wrote:
Evil Lincoln wrote:

Another round:

rule wrote:


The Treat Deadly Wounds application of the heal skill removes a small amount of injury damage, but also starts the process of natural healing. After treatment, injury damage is recovered at a rate of 10% of the injured creatures total hit points per day of light activity. Multipliers for full bed rest and long-term care apply.

Does this mean that even the most injured character (after receiving treat deadly wounds), without magical healing, would only need to rest 10 days at the most to recover all of his lost health? If so, that seems a bit fast to me. And with bed rest and long-term care, that recovery time would be reduced even further? It seems like this would make it impossible to receive injuries that cause anyone to convalesce longer than a week (if they are getting treatment). Bob the soldier nearly bled out on the battlefield but, don't worry, he'll be back in full fighting form in less than a week with no magical aid.

I realize that most PCs will just use magical healing but this rule might come into play for NPCs, monsters, etc. with no access to healing magic. In some of those cases, it seems like it may result in an overly quick recovery which trivializes getting gravely injured. It is not difficult to change the percentage of recovery per day for my own version of this rule. I understand that 10% is easy to work with from a math perspective. Thanks for considering my feedback. This house rule is brilliant!

Thanks Techno.

We're feeling it out. As you can see, my first rate was half as fast (5%) and I thought even that was a little quick.

I'd be fine with 1%, as it is an easy number to calculate. That would be a "realistic" rate, I suppose.

We're really putting a lot of thought into something that will only rarely crop up, and if it crops up a lot I would expect the GM to have a house rule to get it /just right/.


Evil Lincoln wrote:
We're really putting a lot of thought into something that will only rarely crop up, and if it crops up a lot I would expect the GM to have a house rule to get it /just right/.

Agreed. For me, it is always nice when a rule works for both PCs and NPCs (even those without magical healing) consistently. Thanks again for your efforts on this.


It's worth noting how "unrealistic" the RAW healing rate is, too. If a 2nd level commoner has 5 hp, and he is thrashed into unconsciousness, he'll be perfectly fine in three days.

We all know that the game doesn't need to meet these standards of "realism", but it's fun to think about sometimes. Keeps the rule you're working on in perspective. You don't want it to be a huge improvement in realism and a huge setback for playability.

So we work backwards? How long should it take to recover completely from a really nasty injury? A quick google search says 6-8 weeks for a broken leg. If we say a broken leg is equivalent to half your HP in injury (not uncommon due to the crit element of the rule) then characters would "realistically" heal half their HP in 6-8 weeks, or 100% in 12-16 weeks. That's (very roughly) 1% per day.

So that's the ballpark "realistic" number I just pulled out of my ***. Whether that's "playable" is another matter entirely.


I like the 1% number. Of course, this is easy for a DM to change. As you have mentioned, we aren't really talking about something that will affect PCs very often--so I don't believe much "playability" is on the line here. In practical terms, this house rule definitely results in PCs (overall) recovering hit points much more quickly and with fewer resources than RAW. I appreciate the nod to realism/verisimilitude that true bodily injuries are going to take awhile to heal on their own without magical aid--even if this rarely affects PCs.


10% of recovery rate for injuries is unrealistically fast (never-mind 20%!), but for a player's whose character is stuck without magical care, it can be quite long. 5-10 days is also about the time it would take for a character to recover from its wounds without magic by RaW.

In a game where most things are calculated in increments of 6 seconds, 5 to 10 days can be incredibly long. I know I feel that way when I order a pdf via internet (almost instantaneous) and then have to wait a week for the physical book to arrive by mail.

So my point is; even if this healing rate is stupendously fast, it may be slow enough to serve the purpose and drive the point that without magic, healing is not an instantaneous process. A few days is enough for the villain to get away or to otherwise screw up the PC's plans. It's probably enough for the magic user to craft a magic item, but not three. A few days is a nice downtime that doesn't stretch into a full season.

10% also has the advantage of being an easy number to calculate and in line with the 10% strain recovery rate.

So even if this brings Bob-the-generic-fighter on its feet unrealistically fast, I think that as a baseline, it's enough of a nuisance for the PCs (around whom the game revolves) to serve its purpose without disgusting the players. As a houserule, it would be easy enough to modify that rate to one that suits the needs of a particular group better, and perhaps a line could suggest as such in your final document EL?


Laurefindel wrote:
As a houserule, it would be easy enough to modify that rate to one that suits the needs of a particular group better, and perhaps a line could suggest as such in your final document EL?

This approach makes sense to me.


It's worth noting that only very rarely will a large fraction of hit points be injury. Most of the time, it will be less than half the total hp, and if it's more than that it means that a save vs. death from massive damage was triggered. Such wounds should take a long time to heal.

In most cases, a hard-hit PC will have mostly strain and a big chunk of injury. So that 5-to-10 days (at 10%) Findel's talking about is really revered for spectacular injuries. Of course, this is variable considering level, and attack type.


Sorry, nothing to add. Just dotting for future perusal. Please excuse.


I just want to add, I happen to agree with Witch's Knight assessment of recovering all your energy after a prolonged fight. I participate in historical fencing (SCA), and frankly, if we're doing a fair bit of fighting (beyond jockeying for position and sizing each other up, etc), after a few minutes I become noticeably winded. Breathing is labored, parries are slower - all indicative of "strain" as given in the system (I may not have taken a good blow yet, but it's now more likely to happen).

If I sit in and rest for 5 or 10 minutes after 15 minutes or so of combat, I can get up and be relatively good to go - but I certainly won't be as fresh as I was before I fought earlier today.

One thing one might consider is that after so many fights (thinking 3 or 4, based on level - maybe 1/3 of level), your max HP goes down until you rest proper. Alternatively, one can give the fatigued condition (requiring an hour of rest). If you do that, casters should also be impaired (they aren't by RAW) and you should incur meaningful penalties on them as well.

In my own experience (which is only sport experience), your system does a solid job of simulating combat well. Even after a minute or two of intense fighting in fencing, I may not have taken any good blows yet, but my fatigue (strain) has certainly caused to me to lose later on in that fight.

One Time...:
I remember I was tired and knew it. Attacks were slow, parries were slow, my strength was sapped. My opponent lunged at me, right in the middle of my torso. I felt a thunk right around my abdomen. I parried like I always do - get a cross-section, check. My strong on his weak, check. Turn my hand properly, check. Push his tip off-line so it misses me, ...Oh. My body just didn't push it out enough for it to miss me. And fatigue was the cause of it. I took a bunch of strain (from effort, dodges, and parries) and it tired me until the injury hit (a rapier in my chest).


I think we covered that under the "tired" state mentioned at the top of the thread. If you want to model fresh-off-a-night's-sleep-ness vs. just-took-5-ness, don't allow characters to regain their last 10% of hp lost to strain unless they rest.

As much as I like the "realism" this imparts, it just ain't practical at the table. If people want to test it and post back, that's cool, I'll list it alongside the other subvariants like GP damage. But it is moving in a direction that I think will lead to unrealistic expectations of realism (see what I did there?) when it interacts with the rest of Pathfinder. :)


Evil Lincoln wrote:

I think we covered that under the "tired" state mentioned at the top of the thread. If you want to model fresh-off-a-night's-sleep-ness vs. just-took-5-ness, don't allow characters to regain their last 10% of hp lost to strain unless they rest.

As much as I like the "realism" this imparts, it just ain't practical at the table. If people want to test it and post back, that's cool, I'll list it alongside the other subvariants like GP damage. But it is moving in a direction that I think will lead to unrealistic expectations of realism (see what I did there?) when it interacts with the rest of Pathfinder. :)

No, I agree, actually. We're not currently using S-I, but if I did I doubt I would use a rule like that. I just wanted to reinforce his point more than anything.

The rest of PF is a mess, I agree. If they could find easy solutions like yours and somehow get the rest of the system to work that efficiently, I would have no qualms with the game.


TheRedArmy wrote:
The rest of PF is a mess, I agree. If they could find easy solutions like yours and somehow get the rest of the system to work that efficiently, I would have no qualms with the game.

Well, it's a mess as far as realism is concerned. It's pretty fun though, or I wouldn't be posting here!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just want to pitch in a little here.

I found this thread about a year ago when I started playing Pathfinder, and my group has been using S-I since day 1. It's worked out great for us, especially as we tend towards low-magic party compositions. As a GM, I really like how it resolves the strangeness of two-fellows-bashing-on-each-other-for-a-full-minute that the standard rules gives you. For full disclosure, I also want to note that we use a 15-minute period for R and R, rather than the original 5 (which I see has changed to 10 now).

On the note of long-term healing of injuries, which has come up in a game involving my squishy lvl 1 wizard who tends to get 1-shotted down to negatives, we found (accidentally, due to bad memories) that using the standard rules for recovering HP works just fine for injury damage. (The 10% rule would probably work just as well, as it is pretty close in most cases.)
Laurefindel's point here:

Laurefindel wrote:
So my point is; even if this healing rate is stupendously fast, it may be slow enough to serve the purpose and drive the point that without magic, healing is not an instantaneous process. A few days is enough for the villain to get away or to otherwise screw up the PC's plans. It's probably enough for the magic user to craft a magic item, but not three. A few days is a nice downtime that doesn't stretch into a full season.

is pretty much exactly what I found: it was a long enough period of time to be meaningful in the game, but not to the point that it hurt playability. Even with a couple days of assisted total bed rest, it took a good chunk of time to recover, which cost us time we needed to extend our lead on our pursuers.

Thanks for all your work on this, EL and everyone else involved. You've put together a really slick, easy-to-use ruleset that makes a lot of sense.


Alrighty then: 1% for gritty realism, 10% for playability. (My original suggestion of 5% seems pretty good actually).

And if there are any more lurkers like Braingamer reading this, please post feedback! I don't want to die with S-I being my only great achievement, but if I do, I want to know people were actually using it! :)


I haven't tested S-I in play, but I'm adapting it into my house rules for my next game and ran into one descriptive issue. How do you narratively justify taking a lot of strain and then being dropped by a small amount of injury, vs. accumulating almost all your hp in injuries, when rules-wise you're in equal danger of death the second you drop below 0 hp? I realize it may be more of an issue with the rules for dying, and therefore be outside of the scope of S-I, but I am curious if anyone else has run into this?


Vil-hatarn wrote:
I haven't tested S-I in play, but I'm adapting it into my house rules for my next game and ran into one descriptive issue. How do you narratively justify taking a lot of strain and then being dropped by a small amount of injury, vs. accumulating almost all your hp in injuries, when rules-wise you're in equal danger of death the second you drop below 0 hp? I realize it may be more of an issue with the rules for dying, and therefore be outside of the scope of S-I, but I am curious if anyone else has run into this?

So you think people should die faster from more injury damage? I suppose that makes sense, but it doesn't add much to the gameplay.

We all have this tendency to inject "realism" into rules before really considering whether it makes the game more fun.

The dying rules are pretty strange as written, but I think they're outside the scope of Strain-Injury, the goal of which is really just to make healing rates reflect an abstract interpretation of HP.

The Alexandrian blog has an interesting discussion of alternate death rules. I don't use them myself, but I found it an interesting read.


Evil Lincoln wrote:

So you think people should die faster from more injury damage? I suppose that makes sense, but it doesn't add much to the gameplay.

We all have this tendency to inject "realism" into rules before really considering whether it makes the game more fun.

The dying rules are pretty strange as written, but I think they're outside the scope of Strain-Injury, the goal of which is really just to make healing rates reflect an abstract interpretation of HP.

The Alexandrian blog has an interesting discussion of alternate death rules. I don't use them myself, but I found it an interesting read.

That's not quite what I was going for. More that it feels odd that you can have a character dying with 10 points of injury (minimum 1 to drop them plus bleeding out, assuming CON 10), while another is still fighting having sustained dozens of points of injuries. So what I'm really wondering is how you describe that lethal one point of damage that kills the first character so that it makes sense.

I've seen the Alexandrian rules, definitely some interesting ideas but I'm not thrilled by some of the implementation.


Vil-hatarn wrote:
That's not quite what I was going for. More that it feels odd that you can have a character dying with 10 points of injury (minimum 1 to drop them plus bleeding out, assuming CON 10), while another is still fighting having sustained dozens of points of injuries. So what I'm really wondering is how you describe that lethal one point of damage that kills the first character so that it makes sense.

Oh okay, I see.

"Real Life" injuries are really inconsistent along these lines. Some people die from losing a limb, and some people don't. Some people pass out from breaking an arm, and others don't.

Lost strain basically represents whatever energy/determination you had to stay in the action when you took a serious injury.

Basically, if you get stabbed in the throat but you're otherwise at full strength (a crit), you might fight on. If you get stabbed in the throat as the final stroke of a battle which exchange blows and bites and grapples for a minute or more, you're more likely to pass from consciousness.

It's all very abstract, but that's what S-I is meant to support. We are once again operating in a world where a knife to the throat can kill even an experienced fighter. Good luck portraying that by RAW hp.

351 to 400 of 424 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Homebrew and House Rules / [Strain-Injury Variant] A Minor Change to Hit Points All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.