• 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!

A gamist defense of limited in-combat healing

Raith5

Adventurer
And this is a game. The whole point is to manufacture excitement.

Agree 100%. The strategic capacity to direct in combat healing (and smaller clumps of available hp) adds a time sensitive element to fights. Choices between attack and helping a comrade is at the heart of playing with D&D with my friends! I mean a fight is not fun when the PC's plan goes perfectly, it is fun when somebody goes down or gets bloodied and choice has to be made to abandon the plan and go for the rescue.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Crazy Jerome

First Post
Now it doesn't have to be the above system, but would an encounter-based resource refreshing mechanic like it be interesting to those who like Second Wind and Healing Surges?

Something like it would to be to me, provided the benefits of the system can justify the handling time and bookkeeping. I've been playing around with an analogous idea for a homebrew mechanic (not really the same mechanics at all given the system, but a similar concept). I'm still on the fence on whether the costs are worth it or not.

The closest analog to D&D for my idea would be something like this: Suppose you have a fireball spell that does 5d6. It isn't Vancian D&D in the normal sense, but did take up a "slot" that therefore couldn't be used for fly or lightning bolt or whatever. It's not gone when you use it, but every time you do so, there is a chance you lose a d6 from it. Eventually, probably before you hit 1d6 or 0d6, you want to rest. But it is a more gradual thing.

Find a way to extend that to weapon use, healing, etc., you might have something that makes resting more organic. Of course, there also would need to be a flip side to that, things that got better as they went.
 

ForeverSlayer

Banned
Banned
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this but back in 3rd edition, healing in combat was not as easy as some make it out to be because of the action economy. You only have so many actions that you can take a round and everyone is not going to huddle in a tight group so you can heal them with in reach.
 

Stormonu

Legend
I have nothing against in-combat healing (I actually rather like it), nor do I associate hit points with purely flesh wounds, but like your description plays out, I *HATE* the yo-yo effect that occurred in 4E with characters falling in combat only to bounce up a round later and be back in the fight. It's like the cleric is running around with a pair of shock paddles for each combat.

If a character gets dropped to 0 hp or less, I prefer that the character, through mechanic-based means, is out of the rest of the fight, even if they will survive being revived.

Use those surges before you take a dirt nap, folks.
 
Last edited:

I can see that. But to me, 0 HP is "Rocky hit the mat. Get up Rock! Get up and get back in the fight, you lug!"

Then again, I don't like 0 HP = dying. I prefer 0 HP = unconscious.
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
I can see that. But to me, 0 HP is "Rocky hit the mat. Get up Rock! Get up and get back in the fight, you lug!"

Then again, I don't like 0 HP = dying. I prefer 0 HP = unconscious.
Whether dead or unconscious, Rocky at 0 h.p. ain't gonna get back in the fight just by someone yelling at him.

Limited and risky (and thus, uncommon) in-combat curing is fine. Making it an expected part of every combat is not so good. And it's even worse if the enemies have it too...

Lanefan
 

FireLance

Legend
I think in-combat healing should be an option, but it should be a safety net, to be pulled out during fights against particularly tough opponents (or after the PCs have been particularly unlucky), instead of as an assumed part of a regular fight.

This means that there should be a fairly significant cost to in-combat healing, either in terms of actions (it becomes your significant action for the round), frequency (it is usable only a limited number of times per day), money (for one-shot or charged healing items), etc.

Out of combat healing is a slightly different matter, though - the traditional approach of limited healing even out of combat creates strategic tension (how many hit points will I lose in this fight?) but not tactical tension (will I die during this fight?) until the PCs get low on hit points. The 4e approach is more likely to create tactical tension in a fight, but at the cost of the hit point yo-yo that some some people dislike (get hurt, get healed, repeat).

4e basically does so by limiting the total number of hit points you can bring to bear in any one fight, and then allowing you to replenish that total during a rest. I wonder whether an alternate approach might be able to achieve the same thing while allowing for the gradual hit point loss paradigm as an alternative to the healing paradigm.

Let's say that every character has a "pain threshold" which is equal to his Constitution score or one-quarter his full normal hit points, whichever is higher. In any fight, once the character has taken damage greater than or equal to his pain threshold, he is unconscious and unable to participate further in the fight (the Constitution score minimum is there to prevent low-level characters from going unconscious after a single hit). Characters recover from unconsciousness after a short rest.

So, instead of tactical tension from the chance of death, we have tactical tension from the chance of going unconscious. Not as intense, perhaps, but better (in terms of creating tactical tension) than the traditional approach in which a character remains conscious until he loses his last hit point. To add to the tension, we can also rule that unconscious characters are subject to coup de grace attacks which can cause death regardless of how many hit points he has remaining.

This approach does create a small amount of additional bookkeeping. However, in most cases, it is enough to note either the character's current hit points or pain threshold, whichever is higher, on a separate piece of scrap paper, and record all hit point damage taken over the course of the fight there. Adjustments to the character's actual hit points can be done after the fight.
 

Balesir

Adventurer
I was thinking... Fatigue used to be in the game. 3 attacks, 5 full moves, or 4 of any mix (edit: this includes move & attack) - all in a row - means every round thereafter a -1 fatigue penalty is incurred. This penalty affects all rolls, including damage. Performing more rigorous action, like that listed above, increases the penalty by 1 for every round. This increases until it's a -20, the full die basically, and resting is unavoidable.

A round spent resting, which means lowering one's guard, so a -4 AC penalty, removes any fatigue and cumulative action effects.

Now it doesn't have to be the above system, but would an encounter-based resource refreshing mechanic like it be interesting to those who like Second Wind and Healing Surges?
I don't like it, I'm afraid, because:

- it's a "death spiral" effect; the more you lose, the more you are going to lose.

- it depowers solo opponents considerably; if a party of adventurers can spell out to rest while keeping the dragon fighting, they can simply tire it to death...

- how would it apply to constructs, undead and such? It strikes me that these could become either "SoD breaking" or overpowered.

Sorry to be negative, but I see problems with this that just don't exist with recovery of hit points (which, to be honest, I envision as partly/largely fatigue/fear/adrenaline anyway).

I have nothing against in-combat healing (I actually rather like it), nor do I associate hit points with purely flesh wounds, but like your description plays out, I *HATE* the yo-yo effect that occurred in 4E with characters falling in combat only to bounce up a round later and be back in the fight. It's like the cleric is running around with a pair of shock paddles for each combat.
Yeah, I understand this objection; we actually seldom see characters down, it's more often a "oooh, I'm in trouble" sound...

One rule I wouldn't mind seeing (and have considered as a houserule for my next campaign) is "you can't spend a healing surge if you are unconscious". This limits healing from unconscious to "surgeless healing", which is considerably less common than the "spend a healing surge" effects.
 

Raith5

Adventurer
I have nothing against in-combat healing (I actually rather like it), nor do I associate hit points with purely flesh wounds, but like your description plays out, I *HATE* the yo-yo effect that occurred in 4E with characters falling in combat only to bounce up a round later and be back in the fight. It's like the cleric is running around with a pair of shock paddles for each combat.

If a character gets dropped to 0 hp or less, I prefer that the character, through mechanic-based means, is out of the rest of the fight, even if they will survive being revived.

Use those surges before you take a dirt nap, folks.


I see your point, but my gamist instincts reckon it is more fun to revive a comrade and have them launch back into the fray rather than have them rest in a pool of their blood for the whole fight (and more fun for the player). It just doesnt feel heroic to me.

But I will say that the range of healing word in 4th is pretty silly (especially at higher levels). The 4th ed cleric doesnt even have to run! This removes a lot of the possible heroism (and strategy) of going and rescuing comrades.
 


Remove ads

Top