The problem of low hit points on humans

[Taqwus]

Hullu said:
Any pre-D&D? Herakles and Achilles come to mind. I doubt they're the only ones. Oh you mentioned non-magical/blessed - the Dom3 heroes ARE blessed and/or magical and/or just HEROES.

They're NOT called militia for a reason, or are they?

Herakles was not human -- he was half-man, half-god... and was killed with a bit of poison, not by being repeatedly smashed into the ground. He overpowered his opponents with strength, not his damage-taking ability.

Achilles was killed with a single well-aimed blow -- he had high PROT everywhere else, not unusually high HP. And if you read the classics... well, the Iliad is littered with dead heroes.

[Epaminondas]

Taqwus said:


Herakles was not human -- he was half-man, half-god... and was killed with a bit of poison, not by being repeatedly smashed into the ground. He overpowered his opponents with strength, not his damage-taking ability.

Achilles was killed with a single well-aimed blow -- he had high PROT everywhere else, not unusually high HP. And if you read the classics... well, the Iliad is littered with dead heroes.

You are either factually off or misleading on some of your assertions.

1. While Herakles was indeed killed with poison, it was no ordinary poison but a superabundant dose of poison from a supernatural creature. Even then, he did not die immediately. Compare this to Paris, who died nearly instantly when he was shot with a poison-dipped arrow from Philoctetes--who had been Herakles' companion who had used a much smaller dose of the same poison that killed Herakles.

Further, while I am not sure if Herakles ever took a severe blow from many of his mythical enemies, my assumption is that he must have, given the number of his accounts. In this respect, perhaps it is important to emphasize that the legends usually emphasize Herakles' strength and hardiness, not his agility, in contrast to, say, Achilles, who is usually depicted as swift or fleet-footed.

2. Achilles' near invulnerability came from his mother Thetis dipping most of his body (except the notorious Achilles' "Heel") in the River Styx. One could say that that is an equivalent of his natural armor or "protection" but it could also said to represent his natural hardiness or constitution or--gasp!--HP. To insist on Achilles' near-invulnerability solely as a category of "protection" may be to try to interpret everything according to your convenience.

3. Yes, the "Iliad is littered with dead heroes." But so what? I don't know too many instances where heroes in the Iliad (I can't think of any at the moment) die due to causes other than the might of other heroes or divine interventions. That is, heroes do not die by a lucky stroke from an ill-trained militiaman. And that is the whole point with the dissatisfaction of some who have expressed concern about the human heroes' low HP. We do not mind if a human is killed by a full blow from a Niefel Jarl; but if Pathos--who like Herakles is half-god and half-man--dies by a few militiamen surrounding him getting a lucky thrust, then there is a problem.

[Taqwus]

Epaminondas said:
Further, while I am not sure if Herakles ever took a severe blow from many of his mythical enemies, my assumption is that he must have, given the number of his accounts. In this respect, perhaps it is important to emphasize that the legends usually emphasize Herakles' strength and hardiness, not his agility, in contrast to, say, Achilles, who is usually depicted as swift or fleet-footed.
[/b]

As noted, he was also not human -- he was half-god, and not just any god, but the leader of the pantheon known for direct divine intervention. He's therefore not a great example of what should be achievable by humans.

[/b]
2. Achilles' near invulnerability came from his mother Thetis dipping most of his body (except the notorious Achilles' "Heel") in the River Styx. One could say that that is an equivalent of his natural armor or "protection" but it could also said to represent his natural hardiness or constitution or--gasp!--HP. To insist on Achilles' near-invulnerability solely as a category of "protection" may be to try to interpret everything according to your convenience.
[/b]

That is the textbook definition of protection. He could not be harmed save by a blow to the one vulnerable location. When he was struck there by an enemy who was forewarned, Achilles died. That's protection, not hp -- hp reflect being hurt. He was simply not hurt when hit elsewhere. His ability to not be hurt when hit elsewhere, was completely irrelevant when he was hit in his one vulnerable location. That is not consistent with any explanation that relies on a global stack of hit points, not protection + critical hit.

3. Yes, the "Iliad is littered with dead heroes." But so what? I don't know too many instances where heroes in the Iliad (I can't think of any at the moment) die due to causes other than the might of other heroes or divine interventions. That is, heroes do not die by a lucky stroke from an ill-trained militiaman.

...as if a soldier who killed a hero wouldn't be treated as one in the tales, at least tales written by his own side?

Also, consider this: was Patroclus considered a hero in his own right, until he demonstrated the skill of fighting as Achilles did, to the point that his opponents believed his armor? Or was it his (not special!) damage-taking ability that fooled them?

Pathos gets godly protection, just like Achilles. In fact... unless it's been reduced, he's BETTER protected than the average mage who just cast Invulnerability, if memory serves. Like Achilles, if he takes a well-aimed critical hit, he can die. If he gets tired and his skills effectively degrade, he can easily die -- just as, say, Zhang Fei died to two lowly, common soldiers.

[Epaminondas]

Taqwus,

I am glad we are having an intelligent debate rather than shouting matches. This is what I expected from this forum, as opposed to a Blizzard forum.

Now let me respond to all three of your points:

1. I am not completely sure Herakles is so exceptional as heroes go. Yes, he is probably the greatest hero in the Greek mythos, but the trait you single out for his exceptional character--his half-divine birth--is not so exceptional in Greek myth or other prominent myths. That is, many of the great heroes of various sagas claim to have half-divine births. In Greek myth alone, many--if not the majority--of the greatest heroes do have such pedigrees. For instance, Achilles himself is born of an immortal mother, Thetis (though she was indeed not Zeus or even Hera or Athena but a nymph).

More germane, Pathos does have the same half-divine lineage, and he is nowhere as overpowering as a Herakles or an Achilles. Achilles, it should be pointed out, was not simply another Joe with high "protection." He battled a damn river god in the Iliad!

2. I concede wholeheartedly that Achilles' near-invulnerability is best defined as "Protection" not HP in the context of Dom III. Nonetheless, it is not "Protection" in the sense of armor you "wear" but what is called "Natural" armor or protection. My point is that it is not so easy to separate natural armor or toughness and high constitution or high HPs. But I suppose this has to do with my own conceptual biases.

3. Most of the Iliad's near-superhuman or frankly superhuman heroes were considered as such prior to the Trojan War. Achilles was long considered the best warrior in the world, and that is why the Greeks fetched Odysseus, the most clever among them, to get him to participate in the war. Ajax or Aias was already considered the next greatest warrior. Hector, likewise, was considered the greatest Trojan Warrior. Diomedes' and other heroes' heroic pedigrees were also well-established.

I do agree that the case of Patroclus is an exception, but exceptions do not make an argument--or at least an argument of a general nature.

Finally, regarding Zhang Fei--he died in old age and rather drunk. Since you appear to be familiar with Luo Guanzhong's tale, you know what kind of rear-end kicker he was when in prime and sober!

[Epaminondas]

By the way, I am surprised at the number of replies and interest this thread has generated.

If anything, that shows that a lot of people do agree with me in feeling that there is a problem with the base human commander or hero HPs.

[PvK]

Epaminondas said:
...
If anything, that shows that a lot of people do agree with me in feeling that there is a problem with the base human commander or hero HPs.

Actually, my posts are all about trying to point out that the low hit points on humans is not a problem, and that even if it seems that humans have a survival problem, the HP themselves are not the problem. At most, the damage amounts may be a problem, but the HP ratings are in line.

[Epaminondas]

PvK said:

Actually, my posts are all about trying to point out that the low hit points on humans is not a problem, and that even if it seems that humans have a survival problem, the HP themselves are not the problem. At most, the damage amounts may be a problem, but the HP ratings are in line.

I wasn't referring to you: It's not all about you, even though I often think that way myself!

[Taqwus]

Heroic Luck wouldn't necessarily make a hero unkillable. After all, there's no reason why it'd have to increase linearly and unbounded, rather than asymptotically approaching some sub-100% upper bound. And even if it did reach 100%... that's nothing that Umor can't handle. (and one might consider perhaps cons6 or cons8 items to weaken luck).

On a related note, it strikes me that it would be useful if a modder could give constraints or hints as to what HoF ability would be given to a specific hero. In fact, for a veteran hero (say, an already legendary one) -- it would make sense to assign both XP and a specific HoF ability (but one which wouldn't increase further unless he remained within the HoF).

For 'neophytes with potential' heroes, constraining HoF ability choice would lower the risk of getting something wildly athematic. For instance, it would be galling for Heroic Stupidity to land on your average heroic sorceror-type, and Unequaled Obesity might not make sense against a backstory describing feats of long-distance running, et al. A great paladin champion and enemy of the undead shouldn't suddenly get Undead General. For a healer-type to get Legendary Cruelty would be rather bizarre, unless she's got a rather odd personality or doubles as an inquisitor... I don't know if the game would ever be perverse enough to assign such, but the ability to give hints to the engine would help.