Flat Healing Without Using a Surge--Infinite Daily HP?

[silentounce]

Oberoni.

I didn't say this, "There is no inconsistency/loophole/mechanics issue with Rule X, because you can always Rule 0 the inconsistency/loophole/mechanics issue."

He asked if there was anything preventing something, and I answered that the DM was. Obviously, there is some kind of issue, IF the DM is a pushover. I mean, really, that's such an easy fix. If your players start doing some crap like that, stop them. Rule 0 is a fix, sometimes it's the best one.

 

[Sylrae]

I think the reason posts like this exist is because people are annoyed that the rules need a DM who can say "that rule is stupid, we're not using it." or "that's because the writers at wizards wrote the power badly. I'm not letting it work that way."

If it's stupid it shouldn't be in the book.

If I have to make houserules to avoid exploits, the game designers did a sub-par job in that area.

There were definitely issues like this in 3e/3.5, but there didnt seem to be nearly as many. (at least in the core 3 books)

Off Topic, I think the expression Sub Par doesn't make much sense. Sub Par would be a good thing, cause in golf you want to get low scores, and Par is good, but lower is better. I dunnoes. O.O

 

[silentounce]

I think the reason posts like this exist is because people are annoyed that the rules need a DM who can say "that rule is stupid, we're not using it." or "that's because the writers at wizards wrote the power badly. I'm not letting it work that way."

If it's stupid it shouldn't be in the book.

If I have to make houserules to avoid exploits, the game designers did a sub-par job in that area.

There were definitely issues like this in 3e/3.5, but there didnt seem to be nearly as many. (at least in the core 3 books)

Off Topic, I think the expression Sub Par doesn't make much sense. Sub Par would be a good thing, cause in golf you want to get low scores, and Par is good, but lower is better. I dunnoes. O.O

It's simple, subpar means "below standard". In golf, scoring below the standard is a good thing. In almost everything else, such a state is bad. It makes perfect sense. It's interesting though, that the term "subpar golfer" can actually mean two different things that are, in fact, opposites. I wonder if there's a term for such a situation and if there are other examples.

 

[Sylrae]

i thought the term came FROM golf, which is why I thought it was funny that subpar is not a good thing.

 

[Particle_Man]

To Serve Man

(For you Twilight Zone and/or Simpsons fans)

 

[Particle_Man]

It's simple, subpar means "below standard". In golf, scoring below the standard is a good thing. In almost everything else, such a state is bad. It makes perfect sense. It's interesting though, that the term "subpar golfer" can actually mean two different things that are, in fact, opposites. I wonder if there's a term for such a situation and if there are other examples.

There was a SNL skit trading off of the ambiguity in sentences like "You can never get a nuclear power plant too hot" and "You can never stare too long at a nuclear explosion."

Fat chance and slim chance mean the same thing, though you would think they would be opposites.

Flammable and Inflammable meant he same thing, though you would think they would be opposites (in fact, the word flammable was invented because some people thought inflammable meant "cannot be set on fire so safe to have around open fires" which led to...problems in real life).

Oh, and from an Archie movie, based on the comic: "I saw a sign that said "Fine for Parking"...so I parked there." Yes it was Moose.

 

[Makaze]

If it's stupid it shouldn't be in the book.

But it's not a stupid power. It just has the potential to be applied abusively by highly abusive and meta players. Taken with the intent of the credible threat rule it's neither an oversight nor a sub-par power.

Now could a lot of the power descriptions use better wording and formatting? Absolutely. Indentations and the various actions in blocks are very inconsistent.

The credible threat rule could also use quite a bit more, well everything. But I still maintain that asking he DM to use their judgement to draw the line of credible threat is not Rule 0. It's no different than the hundreds of other judgement calls the DM is asked to make like encounter composition, treasure, or NPC actions.

 

[silentounce]

i thought the term came FROM golf, which is why I thought it was funny that subpar is not a good thing.

Naw, "par" goes all the way back to Latin where it literally meant "equal."

To Serve Man

(For you Twilight Zone and/or Simpsons fans)

My 7th grade (I think) homeroom teacher read that short story to us, it's not very long, but it's very good. I can't remember if that was before or after I saw the TZ episode. If you plan on trying to find it (not you sylrae, you obviously are familiar) be very wary of spoilers. Either way, it's freakin' awesome!

 

[Victim]

Sunburst recharges in 5 minutes and heals 10+CHA+WIS - so less than 30 HP a pop. If we have a cleric with 22 CHA, she's healing ~25. It's going to take around 7 shots, or 35 minutes to fully heal characters of that level. Add 5 minutes to that time, since Sunburst was probably used inside the encounter too. If we assume that the group will use Healing words to boost healing surges spent resting, they're probably resting/looting for 10 - 15 minutes between encounters. Relying on Sunburst is roughly tripling their resting time per fight. So it won't take too many Sunburst rests before the characters have spent time equivalent to an extended rest.

Moreover, characters are still probably spending healing surges in combat to recover HP quickly. Sunburst might be covering one hit per character at high levels inside a fight; you'll probably take more than that. So they're going to be running out of juice anyway.

So I'm not seeing a major problem here. If a high epic party has lots of time to rest and doesn't need serious in combat healing, they can keep going almost indefinitely. But if our high epic party has lots of time to rest, they probably don't need to keep going almost indefinitely. And if they are taking enough damage to require additional combat healing besides 1 Sunburst, then the party is running out of resources.

 

[Sylrae]

But it's not a stupid power. It just has the potential to be applied abusively by highly abusive and meta players. Taken with the intent of the credible threat rule it's neither an oversight nor a sub-par power.

I'm not really saying the idea for the power is stupid, just how it's implemented. the credible threat rule is part of that I am saying is stupid however. It's too vague, and frankly, I dont think attacks should depend on whether or not something is threatening. It kindof defeats the purpose of non-good PCs. (which I usually have more than half the players either neutral or evil.) I (and many PCs, would consider every idiot who pulls a knife on you, or takes a swing at you in a bar, is a threat.) would that work with these sorts of mechanics, it would be abusive.

Now could a lot of the power descriptions use better wording and formatting? Absolutely. Indentations and the various actions in blocks are very inconsistent.

The credible threat rule could also use quite a bit more, well everything. But I still maintain that asking he DM to use their judgement to draw the line of credible threat is not Rule 0. It's no different than the hundreds of other judgement calls the DM is asked to make like encounter composition, treasure, or NPC actions.

This is what I was saying is stupid. they whould be designing the powers to try not to have them be exploitable, and the credible threat rule whould just be dropped. seriously.

Not everyone plays good PCs, hence the release of "The Book of Vile Darkness". and each player's opinion (or ability to understand/play) different alignments differs. In one game the players (all of good and neutral alignment but one, and 6 players total) decided poisoning the whole town's water supply was an acceptable way to kill the evil wizard lording over the town, because they decided that the lives saved by dropping the wizard would be larger than those lost by killing the town with poison. The only time players made paladins was when they wanted to convert their abilities over to blackguard, so they would start good, and then have turning blackguard planned from the beginning of the game.