April 3rd, Rule of 3

[Crazy Jerome]

Whatever else are their virtues and flaws, the 4E healing surge and 4E healing surge value are effectively two separate mechanics that work in tandem in 4E. There is no inherent reason, however, that you couldn't use either one independently. In particular, the surge value is merely a relatively clean mechanic for handling proportional healing.

 

[dkyle]

Because "2 hp" already has an established meaning in my mind, and I don't see any virtue in changing it for this purpose. I can easily play a game that works very well in which "2 hp" means what I think it means. There's no need to change that interpretation, and no benefit to me for doing so.

Well, I can't argue over it working for you, but I still don't see how "2 hp" could logically mean, in any edition of DnD, what it means to you. Given how HP works, interpreting any value other than zero as "mortally wounded" seems strange to me.

It also strikes me as strange to ascribe a certain meaning to a number, and then seek out games that justify that meaning. Does this mean you wouldn't want to play a game where having starting 2 HP is possible?

I'm unclear as to why, for you. What gameplay elements do you want to preserve?

If it's the "unlockable" nature of surges, doesn't limited healing serve the same purpose? "Okay, I have X hp, but my party has a total of 4 healing powers that each heal me for (X * .25) HP, so some of my HP are functionally in other folks' healing powers."

Healing surges are a limitation of the target, not the healer. It's a way for the Defender to have gobs of HP (over the course of the day), but still have "oh no" moments throughout. Meanwhile the Strikers and Controllers can afford a few "oh no"s, but if the party is lax in their tactics throughout the day, they're liable to run out prematurely.

In the particular example you gave that I initially responded to (just giving those surges worth of healing as a bunch more HP instead), you lose the need for healers to enable surge use, and the tactical decisions they produce in combat. You also lose the "is it worth spending a surge to top off" strategic decisions after combat.

I understand that you don't like those elements, for you own reasons, but I like those sorts of tactical and strategic decisions.

 

[BryonD]

IMO there's no D&D edition that could earn "The Best", including Pathfinder. That's why I'm going to try DDN.

There are two different reasonable interpretations of "the best".
I think the most fitting one for this conversation is "attracts the largest number of fans willing spend money."


But "best *for me as an individual*" is also ok. But in that case I didn't say I won't "try" DDN. But if it doesn't turn out to be better in the end, I'll play what is. I suspect you and I may be together on that, even if what we choose as best for us is not the same game.

 

[BryonD]

I disagree with you on your first point. I believe it does stand up to inspection, even though such a thing didn't exist in 1e - but we can disagree and that's cool.

It is certainly cool if we disagree. But you just AGREED. "such a thing didn't exist in 1E".

My point in referencing HPs in 1e is that many people seem suspicious of the concept of HP in 4e when it has always been representative of more than damage. ....

This has been covered more than enough times in the past.
Not only is the point that HP represent more than physical damage accepted, it is greatly embraced by throngs of people who still loathe surges.

Go find a surge thread if you want to see that conversation.

 

[BryonD]

It said enough to make me happy, and that's something.

I suspect what you inferred did more to make you happy than anything they clearly stated. Maybe I'm wrong.....

 

[pauljathome]

IMO there's no D&D edition that could earn "The Best", including Pathfinder. That's why I'm going to try DDN.

I think that you're in a very small minority with that opinion.

Almost all D&D players that I know of have a strong preference for one particular system. Ie, they have a system that is the "best" by a substantial margin.

They all disagree about WHICH system is the best, of course .

But that is fundamentally the big challenge for 5thEd. It has to be the best for most D&D players. Most pathfinder players have to prefer it, most 4th edition players have to prefer it, most newcomers have to prefer it, etc.

I have no intention of compromising. If DndNext isn't better than Pathfinder in MY opinion then I won't switch so long as I have a choice.

 

[Estlor]

Going back a couple pages for a moment:

Surges help insure success and survival in cases where players do not wish to burden themselves with the albatross of thought.

I read this as Healing Surge = Way to keep people who don't want to think about tactics alive. I disagree.

Healing Surges are a resource just like anything else in the game (powers in 4e, spells in earlier editions, potions, scrolls, etc). They are a measure of your durability, yes, but if the player of the "Big Dumb Fighter" stands there and tries to soak all the attacks by themselves, the party will very quickly have to look for a safe place to camp or retreat back to town because one PC has run out of surges while the other 4 are still at full.

Healing surges, when properly managed by a complimentary party, are a method of extending the adventuring day. Plus it shifts the limits of the party healer's ability to keep everyone upright away from how many spells they want to devote to Cure [Insert Severity Here] Wounds to the individual begging for the healing.

It may not be the best answer, but it's an attempt to shift healing out of the hands of the Cleric (or the Bard with a backpack full of wands) and into the hands of many other classes. Speaking in 4e terms, I've long been in favor of decoupling Utility powers from class so if the party fighter wants to pick up a few healing abilities currently relegated to the warlord, they can do it and play at the healer to a varying degree of success.

If Bob the Warpriest can off-tank, why shouldn't Sir Pointyend the Knight be able to off-heal?

It'll be interesting to see where DDN ends up, knowing it at least started from a "rest budget" to determine what kind of non-Clerical healing was available to a party.

 

[BryonD]

I read this as Healing Surge = Way to keep people who don't want to think about tactics alive. I disagree.

Healing Surges are a resource just like anything else in the game (powers in 4e, spells in earlier editions, potions, scrolls, etc).

I agree with this.
Surges are actually pretty cool for a pure tactics game.

 

[drothgery]

In 3e, anyone able to use a wand of cure light wound was a capable substitute healer. Even a rogue with a high charisma and a good Use Magic device would do in a pinch!

80% of healing occured between encounter anyway and nothing was more cost efficient than the wand of CLW.

Wands of CLW were useless for conditions and ability damage (and non-clerics had very limited access to condition removal spells).

 

[ExploderWizard]

Going back a couple pages for a moment:



I read this as Healing Surge = Way to keep people who don't want to think about tactics alive. I disagree.

You read wrong. Healing surges are very tactics oriented.

Healing surges are a way for people who don't want to think about strategy alive, as in operational parameters. Its not so much, 'how do we fight this encounter?' as ' do we fight this encounter?'