D&D 5E Death, dying and class balance

Tony Vargas · Apr 1, 2016

Cap'n Kobold said:
5e healing is a lot less "liquid" than any previous edition other than 4th. Editions 1 through 3.5 relied on healing through magic from specific sources, whereas 5e has a significant amount of healing on a per-character basis from HD. Compare to the editions where rest healing was a few points per day, where healing resources were actually pooled together.

What you're getting at is that there's some dedicating healing resources (HD) in 5e, and some multi-purpose resource (slots) that can be used for healing, or other things. In the classic game, healing came from spells and from found items. In 3e, from spells and from cheap made/bought items. In 4e, almost entirely from Surges, with foundational surge-triggers also dedicated, healing powers could only be 'converted' when re-trained at level-up. When you have a ready resource for dedicated healing, be it HD or WoCLW or Surges or what ever, /and/ you have a multi-purpose resource that can be used for healing or for many other things, the tendency is to avoid using the multi-purpose resource for healing. The more flexible the resource that can be used for healing, the more likely it'll be used for something else. In 3e that contributed to CoDzilla. In 4e, class & encounter balance. In contrast, in the classic game, Healing tended crowd out daily spell loads for casters that had it on their list, making the Cleric the un-popular 'heal bot.'

5e, in keeping with it's goals, take a middle-of-the-road approach. There's dedicated healing, but it's limited in both availability (its the slowest-recharging resource in the game) and quantity (1/3 to 1/5th what it was in 4e, relative to PC hps, though PC have a lot more hps at high level, and a lot less at very low level). There's spell-slot healing, but it's extremely flexible, being chosen round-by-round, and low-overhead (you only need to prep one healing spell to be able to use a slot of any level to heal in an emergency).

Furthermore, in 5e compared to 4th ed (and 3rd ed in some cases), defensive-capable classes are much less "sticky". This leads to damage being spread around the party a lot more, rather than the Defender-type classes being able to focus much of the incoming damage upon themselves.

Depends on the DM and the enemies. If enemies are using basic tactics like focus fire and prioritizing targets, lack of sticky 'defender' mechanics results in damage being concentrated on one high-value target, like a vulnerable-looking caster, first. If enemies are heedless warriors trying to prove themselves against a 'worthy' foe in single combat, or otherwise looking for individual victory, sure, it'll get spread around.

FormerlyHemlock · Apr 1, 2016

Cap'n Kobold said:
I find this a rather false assumption.

5e healing is a lot less "liquid" than any previous edition other than 4th. Editions 1 through 3.5 relied on healing through magic from specific sources, whereas 5e has a significant amount of healing on a per-character basis from HD. Compare to the editions where rest healing was a few points per day, where healing resources were actually pooled together.

An optimized healer in 5E can do healing that utterly dwarfs whatever is available from HD healing. Approx. 2000 HP of healing per long rest is achieveable by level 10. Some counterintuitive multiclassing is required (Sorc 3/Lore Bard 6/Life Cleric 1) but you wind up with a character who is not only a superhealer but surprisingly gishy, a skillmonkey, and excellent party support (Hypnotic Pattern, Bless, Enhance Ability, Faerie Fire, etc.). You can replace the cleric with just such a superhealer and never miss out on anything important.

When I first started playing 5E it looked as though HD healing was going to be fairly unimportant. And in fact, my actual players at the table haven't discovered or used anything even vaguely approaching this theoretical optimum--I think there's been a grant total of about 120 HP worth of magical healing over the last year and a half. The closest my players have come to powergaming was one player running a Necromancer for about four months, and let me tell you, Necromancers can shred enemies like lettuce.

So anyway, healing in 5E can be amazingly liquid if you optimize for it, but in practice it doesn't have to be. If you change the rules to make the game more deadly you might see more healing optimization though.

Cap'n Kobold · Apr 1, 2016

Hemlock said:
An optimized healer in 5E can do healing that utterly dwarfs whatever is available from HD healing. Approx. 2000 HP of healing per long rest is achieveable by level 10. Some counterintuitive multiclassing is required (Sorc 3/Lore Bard 6/Life Cleric 1) but you wind up with a character who is not only a superhealer but surprisingly gishy, a skillmonkey, and excellent party support (Hypnotic Pattern, Bless, Enhance Ability, Faerie Fire, etc.). You can replace the cleric with just such a superhealer and never miss out on anything important.

When I first started playing 5E it looked as though HD healing was going to be fairly unimportant. And in fact, my actual players at the table haven't discovered or used anything even vaguely approaching this theoretical optimum--I think there's been a grant total of about 120 HP worth of magical healing over the last year and a half. The closest my players have come to powergaming was one player running a Necromancer for about four months, and let me tell you, Necromancers can shred enemies like lettuce.

So anyway, healing in 5E can be amazingly liquid if you optimize for it, but in practice it doesn't have to be. If you change the rules to make the game more deadly you might see more healing optimization though.

Would you say that such mechanical gymnastics are typical of the healing in most 5e D&D groups?

Cap'n Kobold · Apr 1, 2016

Tony Vargas said:
Depends on the DM and the enemies. If enemies are using basic tactics like focus fire and prioritizing targets, lack of sticky 'defender' mechanics results in damage being concentrated on one high-value target, like a vulnerable-looking caster, first. If enemies are heedless warriors trying to prove themselves against a 'worthy' foe in single combat, or otherwise looking for individual victory, sure, it'll get spread around.

If the enemies always tend to focus on the same type of target when they are using tactics, that allows other members to take actions that will spread the damage around, such as the tougher members interposing themselves between the enemies and the target that they are predicting the enemies will focus on.

As far as I can tell, although you went into a lot more analysis, you're agreeing with me in your first paragraph?

Tony Vargas · Apr 1, 2016

Cap'n Kobold said:
If the enemies always tend to focus on the same type of target when they are using tactics, that allows other members to take actions that will spread the damage around, such as the tougher members interposing themselves between the enemies and the target that they are predicting the enemies will focus on.

And those actions are more effective if at least one of the other members undertaking them have some defender-style mechanics to help them do it successfully.

As far as I can tell, although you went into a lot more analysis, you're agreeing with me in your first paragraph?

I had hoped that's what I was doing. I wasn't sure if that was what you meant by 'liquid.' It seems we're more or less on the same page, there. Restoring hps has been a critical function in every edition, but the way healing resources have been handled has varied, with differing effects on balance and play. It's an interesting topic I've given a lot of thought over the years, but I hadn't thought of from quite that angle, before.

Cap'n Kobold said:
Would you say that such mechanical gymnastics are typical of the healing in most 5e D&D groups?

I suspect they're not necessary. And also kinda moot. When the party most needs copious healing is when they're most likely to get dropped out of the blue, and that's at very low level, long before such a build would mature.

FormerlyHemlock · Apr 2, 2016

Cap'n Kobold said:
Would you say that such mechanical gymnastics are typical of the healing in most 5e D&D groups?

I'm a bit confused why you're asking this question. I just finished telling you that my own players don't do this and don't need to do this. The OP asked for feedback on his house rules, though, and one possible outcome of changing the rules for death saves/etc. is "players need to/begin investing more energy in healing optimization." I.e. the behavior of my current players right now in vanilla is not necessarily a good guide to the behavior of OP's players after OP implements his planned house rule. Change the incentives and you may change the behavior.

FormerlyHemlock · Apr 2, 2016

Cap'n Kobold said:
If the enemies always tend to focus on the same type of target when they are using tactics, that allows other members to take actions that will spread the damage around, such as the tougher members interposing themselves between the enemies and the target that they are predicting the enemies will focus on.

As far as I can tell, although you went into a lot more analysis, you're agreeing with me in your first paragraph?

One such potentially-excellent action is to leverage illusions such as Disguise Self and Seeming. Especially if you throw Malleable Illusion into the mix so that the illusionist can shuffle everybody's appearances at will.

Naturally this only works if you're able to interrupt the enemy's line of sight. E.g. it doesn't work on featureless flat plains but it could work in a forest.

pemerton · Apr 2, 2016

jgsugden said:
you will always have an undue influence in the outcome of a game when you are the DM. You make the rules, stack the deck, deal the cards and tell the players when they can play their cards.

Not all influence is undue.

Also, in your card-playing metaphor, it's not true at all tables that the GM deals the cards, nor that the GM tells the players when they may play their cards.

Just to focus on the first of those two things: I believe that [MENTION=6688858]Libramarian[/MENTION] prepares to run a sandbox-y sort of game. In that sort of game it is generally the players, not the GM, who choose what it is that their PCs encounter (within the confines of a list drawn up by the GM, but the list is expected to include some reasonable variety).

Ancalagon · Apr 2, 2016

Hemlock, your post intrigues and confuses me

Hemlock said:
An optimized healer in 5E can do healing that utterly dwarfs whatever is available from HD healing. Approx. 2000 HP of healing per long rest is achieveable by level 10. Some counterintuitive multiclassing is required (Sorc 3/Lore Bard 6/Life Cleric 1) but you wind up with a character who is not only a superhealer but surprisingly gishy, a skillmonkey, and excellent party support (Hypnotic Pattern, Bless, Enhance Ability, Faerie Fire, etc.). You can replace the cleric with just such a superhealer and never miss out on anything important.

I can certainly see how such a character could be a great support character, but I clearly don't have your level of system mastery. So:

1: to be gish-y, wouldn't you need to be a *valor* bard?

2: Sorcerer: are you twining your healing spells to double healing? Do you actually have enough sorcery points?

3: Bard: Why 6 levels of lore bard? Wouldn't more life cleric levels be better for healing?

When I first started playing 5E it looked as though HD healing was going to be fairly unimportant. And in fact, my actual players at the table haven't discovered or used anything even vaguely approaching this theoretical optimum--I think there's been a grant total of about 120 HP worth of magical healing over the last year and a half.

Ok I'm a bit confused by this part - I *think* I know what you mean but I want to confirm. You expected HD healing to be unimportant, but in fact very little magical healing is going on... so am I right to conclude that in fact, HD healing is actually very important in your game? That or your player's PCs aren't getting hurt...

FormerlyHemlock · Apr 2, 2016

Ancalagon said:
Hemlock, your post intrigues and confuses me

I can certainly see how such a character could be a great support character, but I clearly don't have your level of system mastery. So:

1: to be gish-y, wouldn't you need to be a *valor* bard?

2: Sorcerer: are you twining your healing spells to double healing? Do you actually have enough sorcery points?

3: Bard: Why 6 levels of lore bard? Wouldn't more life cleric levels be better for healing?

Ok I'm a bit confused by this part - I *think* I know what you mean but I want to confirm. You expected HD healing to be unimportant, but in fact very little magical healing is going on... so am I right to conclude that in fact, HD healing is actually very important in your game? That or your player's PCs aren't getting hurt...

First off, RE: the part in bold, it looks like I typo'ed. When I first started playing, I expected HD healing to be sufficient and magical healing to be unimportant, because of how weak clerical healing is. What I didn't realize is that clerical healing is not even close to a ceiling on effectiveness.

As for the gishy superhealer, have a look at my post here as MaxWilson for details: (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?471899-Ridiculously-good-healer-(just-for-fun)). The gist of it is stacking Aura of Vitality (70 HP healing) with Extended Spell metamagic for one sorcery point (140 HP of healing), and also with Disciple of Life (240 HP of healing).

Even if you roll poorly on stats and can't afford a Str over 10, by level 10, you'll wind up with a plate armor-wearing, Con save-proficient superhealer with good melee and range capabilities. Mobile cancels out the movement speed penalty from plate armor (Longstrider would too of course, but I like not having to spend the spell slot, and having Longstrider in reserve) and also enables Booming Blade tricks. With only Str 10 her to-hit isn't anything fantastic, so she's not as good as a real gish, but still not bad. That's half of what I meant by "surprisingly gishy", and the other half is the way she can cast Blur and Shield to tank if she wants to, or just drop a Careful Web on the party (to which PCs will be immune because careful) which makes it basically infeasible for melee enemies to engage you while you're standing within it. By level 12 she can be a warlock 2 with Agonizing Repelling Blast, which makes her even better at range and at support tasks such as blasting enemies off cliffs and into walls of fire. Access to Bless is just gravy, and having four or five uses per short rest of Cutting Words is a lot like a Shield spell that can go to anyone in the party--or you can save it for skill checks and saving throws of course.

Does that answer your questions about "why not life cleric"? Bards are already better healers than life clerics thanks to Aura of Vitality, even before you consider Extended Spell shenanigans. Also I hate playing clerics, which is probably the single biggest reason why this build has remained theorycraft for me and not something I've actually played. (Well, that and the reason that I mostly DM.) But because I'm a powergamer at heart, my RP objections to clerics are warring with my powergamer instincts, looking for a compromise that can satisfy both...

Final comment: a superhealer will have Stealth and Perception expertise and is not unlikely to have a Stealth skill of +10 or better relatively soon, but unlike a Rogue she doesn't have Cunning Action to exploit it during combat. Don't let that stop you though. Sometimes, Hiding with your regular action is a perfectly good choice especially if it lets you e.g. stay safe/untargetable within darkness while healing someone every round with your bonus action (Aura of Vitality for 2d6+5 thanks to Disciple of Life, for twenty rounds in a row thanks to Extended Spell). Don't feel like you absolutely have to do damage every round.