Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
I don't get the dislike of healing surges
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Gaerek" data-source="post: 5699145" data-attributes="member: 73666"><p>First off, I apologize for taking me so long to reply. It's been busy in Gaerek's world. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> Having said that, I'm enjoying our little conversation. I'm gaining a lot of insight here. I appreciate that.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Please correct me if I have the wrong understanding, but I always took the second part of the sentance, the "...and the ability to turn a serious blow into a less serious one." to fall under the perview of everything I mentioned. It's the idea that, "Man, that was going to be a hard hit, but I got lucky and sidestepped at the right time!" or "Good thing that sword only glanced off my armor, or I'd be in a world of hurt right now!" In essense, it covers the "...physical health, mental health, endurance, vitality, ability to mitigate damage, glancing blows, luck, etc." that I mentioned in my last post. I will agree that 4e went further than 3.x, but 3.x HP's were still very abstract and did not completely mean physical wounds. </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Good point. I didn't think about it like that. I suppose that this is another issue of extremes.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Again, to be clear, I just love playing. I haven't found a system I truly hate. And I certainly don't hate older version of D&D. I tend to DM for the group, so right now, we're more about killing and looting. I have no problem with the other side of the coin, and if my players wanted that, I would adapt the system, or even move over to PF or something else. But for us, right now, 4e is the perfect system, flaws and all.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>I totally understand. Difference of playstyle. Immersion is great, and for your group it's needed. Not so much for my group. And that's perfectly fine for either of us.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>This is very true. But it's a bit more representitive of our playstyle. Just like permanent death in an MMO would kill off pretty much all the fun, excessive "realistic rules" would pretty much kill off the fun of our tabletop game. Again, difference of opinion and playstyle, and I can respect that.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Your DM is going to have a lot of say over what's "needed" in your group. In the "kick in the door" style play that has represented about 75% of the games I've ever played, wand of CLW have pretty much been a staple. We had even nick-named them crack sticks, because of how "addictive" they were.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Sounds like fun, honestly. Just not like the type of game I'm running at the moment. I would enjoy it, my players, not as much.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>I can accept this. It's possible to have it both ways in the same system.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>And here I disagree with you. In my games, the PCs are always a cut above the rest. If my level 1 PC got into a fight with the town butcher (not that it should happen, but hypothetical), there would be no contest. I've always played this way. I want my PCs to feel like they are something special, that they were somehow, someway, set aside. If an average NPC is 4 HD, and is an actual threat to my 1st level PCs, there's a problem. Take your relatively typical 1st level "quest." We need the PCs to rid the town of the kobold threat. If the NPCs are 4HD, they can do it themselves. Why hire these PCs? I could see a town guard, or militia, or soldiers, or whatever being like this, but your average farmer (in my opinion, YMMV) or whatever, should be anywhere near the PC's in skill, health, etc. Like you said, this is all preference, and it's nice to see a different opinion here. It gives me a broader perspective and helps me see outside the box.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Certainly, the world moves along. I don't think I explained it right. Basically, in LotR, every single person in that setting, either directly, or indirectly, was affected by the actions of main characters. If Frodo had decided in Rivendell not to take the ring, Sauron would have ended up with the ring, and the world would be a much different place. If Strider hadn't decided to step up and become Aragorn, King of Gondor, the world would be a much different place. If Legolas and Gimli had decided to let their racial differences be an issue (instead of as a place to respect one another) there's a good chance the fellowship would have failed even sooner, and Strider's group would have been killed in one of their many fights. What I'm trying to say is, I present something the world is attempting to do. What happens to the world, is a direct result of the decisions my players make, either positive, or negative. If there's a problem I present, there's a way for them to deal with it. I know this might not be the best way to do things, it might not be everyone's preference, but it goes along with my feeling that heroes should be heroes. And the PC's are heroes. Not regular joes who carry a sword (or wand, or holy symbol, or whatever) and might get good enough to present a challenge to farmer in a fight in a little bit.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Ok, I can see this. I'm starting an Eberron campaign, and the world is full of faster travel options. But, almost each one presents an opportunity for "Action in the mountain pass!" as you put it. In previous games, I got over this in the Final Fantasy method of travel. You're low level, well, you have to walk everywhere. Oh, you've explored the continent? Well, here's a land vehicle you can use to get around this continent. Oh, action on the next continent! You're going to have to take a boat, but you can't bring your vehicle, you're hoofing it! Oh, you've explored two continents now? Awesome, here's an airship! Now you can fly around the whole world. Oh look, a new island has popped up. You fly there? Well, you're attacked, and now the airship has crashed. You're hoofing it again! Except in my games its more like, by the time they can instant travel in the world, they're planeshopping, so it makes it harder to instant travel. I try to organically prevent fast/instant travel, rather than saying, "Sorry, teleport spell doesn't exist!" That may be what you had in mind, but it didn't look like it.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>Did you read his last L&L article? It's obvious he's getting ideas for 5e now, at least to me. I'm pretty excited to see what comes of this.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>I like the more general skills, but that's preference again, I suppose. This could be another discussion, for another thread, I think. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p> </p><p> </p><p></p><p> </p><p>I like everything. I think the best term for my games is cinematic. That's just because it fits my group. People want gritty? I can do gritty. But I give my players what they want. Since I've been playing with the same players since 4e came out (prior to 4e, I didn't play at all since about 2003, due to my group moving away), it works well. I'm enjoying the conversation as well. Thanks for it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Gaerek, post: 5699145, member: 73666"] First off, I apologize for taking me so long to reply. It's been busy in Gaerek's world. :) Having said that, I'm enjoying our little conversation. I'm gaining a lot of insight here. I appreciate that. Please correct me if I have the wrong understanding, but I always took the second part of the sentance, the "...and the ability to turn a serious blow into a less serious one." to fall under the perview of everything I mentioned. It's the idea that, "Man, that was going to be a hard hit, but I got lucky and sidestepped at the right time!" or "Good thing that sword only glanced off my armor, or I'd be in a world of hurt right now!" In essense, it covers the "...physical health, mental health, endurance, vitality, ability to mitigate damage, glancing blows, luck, etc." that I mentioned in my last post. I will agree that 4e went further than 3.x, but 3.x HP's were still very abstract and did not completely mean physical wounds. Good point. I didn't think about it like that. I suppose that this is another issue of extremes. Again, to be clear, I just love playing. I haven't found a system I truly hate. And I certainly don't hate older version of D&D. I tend to DM for the group, so right now, we're more about killing and looting. I have no problem with the other side of the coin, and if my players wanted that, I would adapt the system, or even move over to PF or something else. But for us, right now, 4e is the perfect system, flaws and all. I totally understand. Difference of playstyle. Immersion is great, and for your group it's needed. Not so much for my group. And that's perfectly fine for either of us. This is very true. But it's a bit more representitive of our playstyle. Just like permanent death in an MMO would kill off pretty much all the fun, excessive "realistic rules" would pretty much kill off the fun of our tabletop game. Again, difference of opinion and playstyle, and I can respect that. Your DM is going to have a lot of say over what's "needed" in your group. In the "kick in the door" style play that has represented about 75% of the games I've ever played, wand of CLW have pretty much been a staple. We had even nick-named them crack sticks, because of how "addictive" they were. Sounds like fun, honestly. Just not like the type of game I'm running at the moment. I would enjoy it, my players, not as much. I can accept this. It's possible to have it both ways in the same system. And here I disagree with you. In my games, the PCs are always a cut above the rest. If my level 1 PC got into a fight with the town butcher (not that it should happen, but hypothetical), there would be no contest. I've always played this way. I want my PCs to feel like they are something special, that they were somehow, someway, set aside. If an average NPC is 4 HD, and is an actual threat to my 1st level PCs, there's a problem. Take your relatively typical 1st level "quest." We need the PCs to rid the town of the kobold threat. If the NPCs are 4HD, they can do it themselves. Why hire these PCs? I could see a town guard, or militia, or soldiers, or whatever being like this, but your average farmer (in my opinion, YMMV) or whatever, should be anywhere near the PC's in skill, health, etc. Like you said, this is all preference, and it's nice to see a different opinion here. It gives me a broader perspective and helps me see outside the box. Certainly, the world moves along. I don't think I explained it right. Basically, in LotR, every single person in that setting, either directly, or indirectly, was affected by the actions of main characters. If Frodo had decided in Rivendell not to take the ring, Sauron would have ended up with the ring, and the world would be a much different place. If Strider hadn't decided to step up and become Aragorn, King of Gondor, the world would be a much different place. If Legolas and Gimli had decided to let their racial differences be an issue (instead of as a place to respect one another) there's a good chance the fellowship would have failed even sooner, and Strider's group would have been killed in one of their many fights. What I'm trying to say is, I present something the world is attempting to do. What happens to the world, is a direct result of the decisions my players make, either positive, or negative. If there's a problem I present, there's a way for them to deal with it. I know this might not be the best way to do things, it might not be everyone's preference, but it goes along with my feeling that heroes should be heroes. And the PC's are heroes. Not regular joes who carry a sword (or wand, or holy symbol, or whatever) and might get good enough to present a challenge to farmer in a fight in a little bit. Ok, I can see this. I'm starting an Eberron campaign, and the world is full of faster travel options. But, almost each one presents an opportunity for "Action in the mountain pass!" as you put it. In previous games, I got over this in the Final Fantasy method of travel. You're low level, well, you have to walk everywhere. Oh, you've explored the continent? Well, here's a land vehicle you can use to get around this continent. Oh, action on the next continent! You're going to have to take a boat, but you can't bring your vehicle, you're hoofing it! Oh, you've explored two continents now? Awesome, here's an airship! Now you can fly around the whole world. Oh look, a new island has popped up. You fly there? Well, you're attacked, and now the airship has crashed. You're hoofing it again! Except in my games its more like, by the time they can instant travel in the world, they're planeshopping, so it makes it harder to instant travel. I try to organically prevent fast/instant travel, rather than saying, "Sorry, teleport spell doesn't exist!" That may be what you had in mind, but it didn't look like it. Did you read his last L&L article? It's obvious he's getting ideas for 5e now, at least to me. I'm pretty excited to see what comes of this. I like the more general skills, but that's preference again, I suppose. This could be another discussion, for another thread, I think. :) I like everything. I think the best term for my games is cinematic. That's just because it fits my group. People want gritty? I can do gritty. But I give my players what they want. Since I've been playing with the same players since 4e came out (prior to 4e, I didn't play at all since about 2003, due to my group moving away), it works well. I'm enjoying the conversation as well. Thanks for it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
I don't get the dislike of healing surges
Top