4e Fan Creations and House RulesWorking on variant powers? Statting up a PC race or your version of a monster? Creating or converting an adventure? Put it here!
I can certainly understand the rationale for being hesitant in using second wind during combat. Its roots stem from 3e, where healing during combat was for most part inefficient because it required a standard action, and did nothing to kill your enemy faster (unless the healing was the secondary effect of any attack).
As it is, I suspect that any party's top priority would still be to focus on taking down all the foes ASAP, then heal after the encounter. You have the benefit of milking your surges for all they are worth (using effects such as healing word). The sooner you take down a foe, the less time he has to attack, meaning he deals lesser damage, your PCs take lesser damage as a result, so fewer resources need to be expended to heal the party as a result (in addition to your surges healing more hp).
Think about it. Potions are popular because you can quaff them as a swift action. Dwarves using them are no brainer because it will not interfere with you attacking. So for second winds to remain a competitive option during combat, it has to be comparable to the next best alternative you could be using that standard action for - attacking.
Is the hp you heal, plus the minor boost to defenses, worth the loss of an attack, and the extra damage the monster in question could potentially deal as a result of living that much longer? More often than not, I believe my answer would be no. And in general, more efficient methods exist, such as aforementioned healing word.
I personally feel that as it is, second wind is like the counterspelling option of 3e. It may have its uses, but tends to be overshadowed by the plethora of better options available.
Is the hp you heal, plus the minor boost to defenses, worth the loss of an attack, and the extra damage the monster in question could potentially deal as a result of living that much longer? More often than not, I believe my answer would be no. And in general, more efficient methods exist, such as aforementioned healing word.
I personally feel that as it is, second wind is like the counterspelling option of 3e. It may have its uses, but tends to be overshadowed by the plethora of better options available.
Comments?
Second Wind is a go to the well ability, just like Daily powers are. As such, it should not be all things to all PCs.
It's the refuge of last chance, not the refuge of first choice.
The game is designed to have other resources expended in most circumstances before going to Second Wind. Does that make Second Wind worthless? No. It makes it the last or next to last choice option. Changing it to an earlier choice option is probably something designed to help save on healing potions.
But, I have seen Second Chance used in virtually every single large or powerful encounter in our campaigns and although players might like to see it new and improved, they also use it because it does its job of keeping PCs alive for a bit longer.
__________________ The first sign of a broken rule is when someone suggests that the way to stop it is by readying an action.
What if second wind allowed you to get an instant saving throw in addition to healing? Maybe a save at +2 (or even +5), or all your saves this turn are at +2, or you get an extra save with no bonus against every save-ends effect, or something. Maybe this could be used in place of healing. Maybe this could be used by solos to counteract daze-lock... hmmm...
I can certainly understand the rationale for being hesitant in using second wind during combat. Its roots stem from 3e, where healing during combat was for most part inefficient because it required a standard action, and did nothing to kill your enemy faster (unless the healing was the secondary effect of any attack).
As it is, I suspect that any party's top priority would still be to focus on taking down all the foes ASAP, then heal after the encounter. You have the benefit of milking your surges for all they are worth (using effects such as healing word). The sooner you take down a foe, the less time he has to attack, meaning he deals lesser damage, your PCs take lesser damage as a result, so fewer resources need to be expended to heal the party as a result (in addition to your surges healing more hp).
I sometimes feel healing's loaded the wrong way in 4E.
Wouldn't it have made more sense to make in-combat healing weaker than after-combat healing rather than stronger?
To make the game choices really interesting, the free heals (the minor Word powers) should do the least healing.
The not-so-free healing (i.e. Second Wind) should to average healing.
And the very costly healing (as in "you can't even do it until after the fight") should do the most healing.
This would optimize the cost/benefit decisions.
As it is now, Healing Word is a no-brainer. Okay, so at the very low cost of one minor action, I can do very convenient healing (at a range) that also happens to yield the most hit points.
WTF?
Compare the current rules with the following scenario:
Healing Word (& Co) gives your surge value in HP's regained.
Second Wind adds +1d6 to +6d6 to that value (depending on your level).
Short Rests adds you back to full HP at the cost of only one healing surge.
Now you would have to face really interesting choices, in the healing department.
Can anyone come up with any explanation why WotC blew their chances of creating an interesting resource management aspect for this sub-game by designing almost the inverse of what would be needed...?
In conclusion, I don't think SW 'needs' to be used more, I would leave it as it is.
Of course, you reach that conclusion well aware your group doesn't even face the decision most groups face: the competition from Healing Word.
Btw, I have a piece of advice for you and your fellow players; as I'm myself DM'ing a leader-less party. Consider having everyone take the Initiate of the Faith MC feat (or the Warlord or Bard equivalents).
Your should quickly feel your party's power increase thanks to some added healing capacity. These feats are really much more powerful than you'd imagine; not because of the extra healing surges, but because of the extra HS triggers.
The ability to focus your "fire" is as useful in healing as it is in fireballin'.
As it is now, Healing Word is a no-brainer. Okay, so at the very low cost of one minor action, I can do very convenient healing (at a range) that also happens to yield the most hit points.
WTF?
Compare the current rules with the following scenario:
Healing Word (& Co) gives your surge value in HP's regained.
Second Wind adds +1d6 to +6d6 to that value (depending on your level).
Short Rests adds you back to full HP at the cost of only one healing surge.
Now you would have to face really interesting choices, in the healing department.
Can anyone come up with any explanation why WotC blew their chances of creating an interesting resource management aspect for this sub-game by designing almost the inverse of what would be needed...?
Certainly.
Second Wind is a 4E gimme. An ability given to the whiny masses who complained about 3E healing.
Your suggestion here is illogical. The healing Clerical power does the least amount of healing and the self-heal does more. The reason they did not do that is because from an in game perspective, that does not make sense. Healing prayers should heal more than catching your breath.
Additionallly, this rule here would seriously increase the amount of healing in a group (as would your original house rule). Instead of 2 stronger Healing Words and 5 weaker Second Winds, this would change it to 2 weaker Healing Words and 5 stronger Second Winds.
You are viewing Second Wind as just a heal, not as a defensive posture. But it is both.
Compare Second Wind to Total Defense.
Second Wind = Total Defense + a healing surge
They are identical except that Second Wind also gains the hit points. This is a wonderful thing that a PC can do a superior version of Total Defense, but you are viewing it as "not good enough".
Look at the fluff text for Total Defense:
Quote:
Sometimes it’s more important to stay alive than attack your foes
The same applies to Second Wind:
Quote:
you spend a healing surge to regain some of your lost hit points, and you focus on defending yourself.
It's a defensive heal, not a normal heal.
Doubling the amount one could heal as per your original suggestion would increase the versatility of the ability and have people use it more often.
But this would also significantly change the balance of power in the game. In a 5 PC group, that's like adding 3 more healing words worth of healing.
And I know about this due to my action point house rules. At first, the ability to regain an Encounter power applied to all encounter powers, not just class ones. The first thing the Cleric did was to regain Healing Word and use it over and over again.
The same would apply to your two healing surge house rule here. Getting back half hit points with Second Wind would seriously alter the balance of power.
The idea to get people to use Second Wind more often is fine. The implementations you have suggested so far all deal with increasing the amount of healing in the party which is not so fine.
__________________ The first sign of a broken rule is when someone suggests that the way to stop it is by readying an action.
The idea to get people to use Second Wind more often is fine. The implementations you have suggested so far all deal with increasing the amount of healing in the party which is not so fine.
I think the way to make it more viable is to follow the line that a second wind is "catching your breath". It's a fall-back you use when things go bad, so you try to get back into the game by taking a break - it is a mini-rest.
As such, it should work like a rest and give back more than just some hit points.
Make it refresh a single encounter power and it gets much more interesting - it effectively becomes a mini-rest allowing you to take 1-2 another hits and take a second shot with something good. And it helps with at-will slugfests/grinds, as it helps with offensive powers.
It also becomes more distinct from other sorts of healing and makes it tactically interesting - because right now, you only burn your second wind, if you don't have other healing options. This way, second wind offers you another gimme and you may even favour it - you now have the choice: More healing or more support? (and doing both, i.e. second wind followed by something like Healing Word - if you do that too often, you burn through surges fast).
The problem is, however, that the dwarves' minor action-version of second wind becomes waaay too good then.
Make it refresh a single encounter power and it gets much more interesting - it effectively becomes a mini-rest allowing you to take 1-2 another hits and take a second shot with something good. And it helps with at-will slugfests/grinds, as it helps with offensive powers.
Yes, this is a preferable alternative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Tirian
The problem is, however, that the dwarves' minor action-version of second wind becomes waaay too good then.
Not really. The Dwarf is still expending a healing surge resource for some healing and an encounter power, just like other PCs. We are using house rules where players can get back an Encounter power (or even Daily power if they want to expend the resources) and it doesn't really make or break the game.
Sure, those powers are stronger than At Will powers. But they are not so devastatingly more powerful that they unbalance anything. One can still miss with an Encounter power and even if it hits, it tends to be an additional die of damage (an additional two dice of damage for a Daily).
+3 more points of damage (on average) and a possible condition for your suggestion versus an extra 20+ hit points of healing (or more at higher levels) for the increased healing suggestions.
Your suggestion is a lot more balanced and I suspect one that many players would seriously enjoy.
__________________ The first sign of a broken rule is when someone suggests that the way to stop it is by readying an action.
I'm currently in a campaign with 3 PCs, a wand wizard, great weapon fighter and me, a TWF ranger. Second wind is obviously our only option for healing in any given fight with the exception of a few fighter powers (unstoppable temp hp I think).
In any given encounter, my ranger and the wizard have a lot of ways to avoid incoming damage through our various utilities (and the wizard always makes it very clear that he always has invisibility up his sleeve so that he can run away and leave us in the lurch if things go wrong), most of the time, the fighter is the only PC who would need to use his SW.
My point is I suppose, that as a party, we aren't accustomed to receiving healing, and as such, if we are in a position where we need it to survive, then its appropriate 'punishment' to lose our standard action, as we would only ever use it when we don't have a choice, ie we don't think we are going to kill them before they kill us.
In our group, making it anything other than a standard action would make it a no-brainer in every encounter for sure, as soon as you lose more HP than your surge value, use SW, there's no reason not to, and that takes away the tactical element for me (which I like).
In conclusion, I don't think SW 'needs' to be used more, I would leave it as it is.
Sigma brings up a very good point here. I don't think second wind was meant to be used in combat often, I think it is meant as a failsafe for parties without healers. It is also an option in a round where you can't attack for whatever reason. You might find that second wind isn't getting used, but this isn't a problem if the party is still getting healed. If they need healing badly, but won't use second wind because it loses them a turn, yeah, you could add an extra incentive. The move action could be useful to some classes. You could let the paladin or fighter mark someone, the rogue or ranger shift, or the warlock or wizard move. Something that helps them play their role while they heal.
How about, when a player Second Winds, they may choose to spend an additional healing surge (for a total of 2) to regain an encounter power?
Since, IMO, Second Wind for HP and an Encounter power means that Second Wind becomes a no-brainer the vast majority of the time. WotC said that many players would gladly sacrifice a standard action to regain their preferred encounter power. The fact it's per encounter puts a stop to that, but I'd prefer there to be more of a trade-off, even if most of the time, players still end up blowing a surge for the power.
So when you Second Wind, you have an option to channel your Second Effort. Personally, I'd say Dwarves aren't allowed to Second Effort if they use their Dwarven Resilience, but as you will.
I really like the idea of allowing players to translate unused healing surges into damage.
How about, when a player Second Winds, they may choose to spend an additional healing surge (for a total of 2) to regain an encounter power?
I would rarely trade a healing surge for an encounter power.
Even at first level, that's 6 points of healing (13+ points if the healing surge is used with a power like Healing Word) vs. an extra 2 to 4 average points of damage (over an At Will power because the Encounter power will not always hit).
At level 30, that's 40+ points of healing (70+ with healing word) vs. an extra 4 to 8 average points of damage.
Sure, there are potential other benefits for the encounter power, but they typically aren't that impressive that it's worth a healing surge. YMMV.
The only time I would do this is if I was running a PC that almost always had several healing surges remaining at the end of the combat day, or if I had an area effect Encounter power that would target 3 or more foes in a given situation. But if a PC runs out of healing surges in an encounter, was the extra 5 points of damage earlier on worth it?
__________________ The first sign of a broken rule is when someone suggests that the way to stop it is by readying an action.
Your suggestion is a lot more balanced and I suspect one that many players would seriously enjoy.
The more I think about it, the more I think you're right - a good benchmark is probably WotC's "Sacrifice to Caiphon" feat from the Star Warlock article - that feat pegs regaining a totally missing encounter power at 1 hp/power level. Even if we say double that for a power that actually hit (which may not be always the case), it is in the range of healing that the various healing boosters (i.e. Healing Word et al.) provide in terms of extra healing.
The only time I would do this is if I was running a PC that almost always had several healing surges remaining at the end of the combat day, or if I had an area effect Encounter power that would target 3 or more foes in a given situation. But if a PC runs out of healing surges in an encounter, was the extra 5 points of damage earlier on worth it?
Powers that stun (or daze, etc.), or heal your allies who DO need the healing (whether it costs a surge or not), may also be worth translating your surges into encounter powers. Maybe you're right, but I'd prefer to default towards "not used enough" than "used too often." I also really like the idea of translating surges (or maybe just HP) into damage, so that the PC who does have a lot surges remaining can make use of them, since that's kind of my intent: that excess surges can be channeled. I also don't want it to be a no-brainer, though maybe I'm leaning too far in the other direction, since I tend to run two fight days currently, but perhaps that's a reward for not taking damage in the previous fight.
Your suggestion here is illogical. The healing Clerical power does the least amount of healing and the self-heal does more. The reason they did not do that is because from an in game perspective, that does not make sense. Healing prayers should heal more than catching your breath.
Hang on here a minute - aren't you a believer of 4E's newfound philosophy promoting the game before the history?
I would have thought we could agree clinging to sacred cows of editions past and notions of "realism" would be the "illogical" thing here...
I would say you haven't really responded to my suggestion. All you have done is dismissing it on grounds that I feel isn't what a 4E designer would use.
Let me ask you the question this way: okay, so 4E might not be ready to ditch the notion clerical healing should do the most healing; but do you see any inherent gameplay reasons to keep to this scheme, or can you see my change in a 5E down the line?
That is, I would like to know if there are any hidden mechanism or balance issues that make what on the surface seems like a strange and illogical idea (the current healing system) necessary? Are there any hidden pitfalls with my reshuffle of the power of these Powers?
Fluff issues should really not come into play. Neither here nor anywhere. Right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by KarinsDad
The implementations you have suggested so far all deal with increasing the amount of healing in the party which is not so fine.
Well, I do confess I like the idea, as it helps keep the brick wall that is "running out of surges" at a distance.
Obviously, I need to dismantle the brick wall to solve that particular problem.
However, when it comes to moving the bonus healing (the extra d6's) from Healing Word to Second Wind, you could equally easily say the current system is borked.
All it takes is having a second Leader, or people taking MC feats.
As I see it, in a party where you don't have any Leader at all, boosting Second Wind might not be necessary (simply because the boost is intended to help it in the competition with Healing Word, a competition that doesn't exist in these parties) it is certainly not broken (after all, these parties are the most healing-starved there are, so it's not exactly like we're seeing "too much" healing here).
All I see is that you're taking a fairly small step towards encouraging Leader-less parties. However, if the presence or absence of a Leader in your party depends on something as little as some bonus healing then I really think the problem lies with such a weak and useless class. (And for the record: I don't see Leaders as weak and useless, I am confident in their ability to be appreciated even with this shift in healing power balance).
Let's look at the bigger picture here: D&D is supposed to be a game where you always need to compromise; to get this, you can't have that.
Why should healing be an exception?
Especially as the solution seems so simple? Again, I am not telling you all I have found some Holy Grail here. I'm asking: what am I missing?
If the only reason 4E healing's balanced the way it is is this thing about "but second wind can't be powerful - that's unrealistic" then I will feel a bit sad. Thinking about all the sacred cows they slaughtered and still they forgot about this one...
Hang on here a minute - aren't you a believer of 4E's newfound philosophy promoting the game before the history?
If you really want to go down this path, I'll discuss it.
I think 4E screwed up a lot of things because they put simpler game mechanics before game flavor and fun. The most obvious of these is that spells do not have significant durations. They totally dropped the concept of protection spells. They totally dropped the concept of summoning. They totally dropped the concept of autonomous allies like henchmen and animal companions.
Sure, they put a tiny bit of lip service on these, but some of the new mechanics are pretty bad.
In fact, we just added a house rule to our game for the Ranger's animal companion because it felt like a moveable terrain feature in the game instead of a creature. It was totally boring and felt more like an appendage of the PC instead of a friend and ally of the PC. I suspect that Familiars will feel the same, but we do not have them yet.
So yes, they killed some sacred cows and ended up screwing some things up in the process. There were some really good reasons that some of the early game mechanics were the way they were and WotC basically ignored that in the name of simplicity. Sometimes, it worked well in 4E. Other times, it did not.
You and I often disagree on things like house rules, but it's not that I think you do not see elements of the game system that are problematic. You do. You are really good at that. I just find your solutions to be "too grandiose". You tend to kill the fly with a sledgehammer. Once you have a design idea, you tend to not see the flaws in it, just the good in it.
Like some of the WotC ideas in 4E, I don't think your design ideas are well thought out. You see the big picture, but tend to not see the small important details. Just like many of the features in 4E. IMO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CapnZapp
I would say you haven't really responded to my suggestion. All you have done is dismissing it on grounds that I feel isn't what a 4E designer would use.
I cannot help it if you ignore what I write. I said that the idea to make the useage of Second Wind more desirable by players was fine, your implementations were not. I am not dismissing your ideas out of hand, I just find the implementations too powerful.
I did not find Lord Tirian's suggestion too powerful, but instead useful for your originally stated goal. His solution adds a game element that is both not powerful and something that players would really enjoy. Yours is too powerful and not very exciting or original. Boost healing. Ok. Ho hum.
Your implementations result in significantly increased healing capability. The game system is non-challenging enough without significantly boosting party healing. IMO. You are free to disagree and play whatever house rules in your game you like.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CapnZapp
Let's look at the bigger picture here: D&D is supposed to be a game where you always need to compromise; to get this, you can't have that.
Why should healing be an exception?
Especially as the solution seems so simple? Again, I am not telling you all I have found some Holy Grail here. I'm asking: what am I missing?
If the only reason 4E healing's balanced the way it is is this thing about "but second wind can't be powerful - that's unrealistic" then I will feel a bit sad. Thinking about all the sacred cows they slaughtered and still they forgot about this one...
Second Wind should not even be in the game system in the first place. It's not a plausible flavor element, it's totally a game mechanic wrapped in an artificial flavor element. It's a nonsensical "go to the well" ability. "Oh look, I can heal myself". Yeah, I've heard all of the lame justifications of how it makes sense from a "pick yourself up" POV. I'm not impressed with those rationales.
In our game, it really is a "pick yourself up" ability because we have wound points which do not heal up when the player wants them to. But in the core rules, the PC is not really hurt until he is dead because there are so many ways to instantly heal up even without magic, especially out of combat.
So yeah, it's not a sacred cow that magical healing should be greater than second wind BS healing, it's that it outright makes more logical sense that magic works better. If the designers would have made it the opposite way around, I think there would have been a small uproar over it.
Just because you can think of an idea does not make it a good idea, no matter how excited you get over it. This seems to be something you appear to have in common with WotC, especially in their splat books.
__________________ The first sign of a broken rule is when someone suggests that the way to stop it is by readying an action.
The game system is non-challenging enough without significantly boosting party healing.
Don't forget that you, as the DM, can control what challenges you throw at the players. If you think the game is not challenging enough, you can always use higher level monsters.
Don't forget that you, as the DM, can control what challenges you throw at the players. If you think the game is not challenging enough, you can always use higher level monsters.
Or rather, what works well in this situation is more monsters. Either added to the encounter, or as a separate encounter afterwards.
Unfortunately upping the level of the monsters brings its own set of pitfalls. In other words; the grind.
But now we're way off topic - see Stalkers excellent guide on how to avoid grind for more on that (ultrashort version: "avoid high level monsters"). Here I just need to say that by the very design of 4E, few high-level monsters does not work nearly so well as in previous editions.
The problem then is that your options to challenge the party are reduced. It's still possible to do so, it's just that you have few by-the-book options if you don't have more monsters in mind.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
