Re: D&D hit points

On Tue, 2 Dec 2003 22:33:42 -0000, "David Meadows"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>"Wayne Shaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Tue, 2 Dec 2003 19:35:37 -0000, "David Meadows"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> >The campaign tone probably affects this, too. In a superheroic game when
>the
>> >players are all happily playing with a "traditional" comic-hero mindset
>> >(i.e. will not kill, and will minimise the chance of an accidental
>death),
>> >that particular trick is going to be very rare. Heck, the system has
>enough
>>
>> I disagree, since it often works preportionately best against those
>> with the best defenses, exactly the folks it most safely can be used
>> on.
>>
>> >other obvious points of game balance abuse that worrying about a minor
>thing
>> >like gambling with stun multipliers seems a bit futile.
>>
>> My observation, shared by many people, is this is _anything_ but a
>> minor problem.  I've probably seen it overbalance more Champions
>> fights over the years than any other property of the system.
>
>My observation is that it's noticeable enough for players to grumble when it
>happens, but not noticeable enough for them to complain about game balance.

No, because it often serves them more than it serves NPCs, as it tends
to favor the uphill attacker.

>They just accept it as a "rule" of the world: guns can be dangerous, even
>when they're not deadly. It gives a low-level super a healthy respect for
>firearms, and I find that fits with the tone of the campaign. I realise that
>not all campaigns are of similar tone and style.

Low powered supers should be afraid of guns for reasons other than the
massive Stun they create.