Read on Twitter
This is a fantastic thread on HP and how players react to taking damage vs mechanical consequences to taking damage.
It's pretty much where my head is at regarding the two. https://twitter.com/DichotomusPrime/status/1286662348980330496
It's pretty much where my head is at regarding the two. https://twitter.com/DichotomusPrime/status/1286662348980330496
To expand a bit, my thoughts are that if you want to have mechanical consequences for getting hit by an enemy during battle ( sprains, broken bones, losing limbs, shock, etc ): don't mix that with HP, like at all.
Instead build a system where hitting someone with a ranged attack is _hard_, but _deadly_ ( or at least, quickly incapacitates someone ). Same thing for melee, make it a back and forth that ends with one person trying to deal with suddenly have a sword through their middle.
But I think we all understand that spending twenty rounds not hitting your target is absolutely not fun. It's why 5E has bounded accuracy: so that you hit more often and feel more engaged.
But I think this is where it's on the GM of the game to work with the players. Suggest tactics and strategies to the players. "Hey, if you get to higher ground, and take a round to aim you'll get a 30% bonus to that shot"
At the end of the day, GMs are part arbiter of rules, part colour commentary -- we're here to turn those (honestly kind of boring) dice rolls into feats of daring do and nail-biting near misses. So that no matter what system you're using the whole experience is fun and engaging.
