D&D 5E Second Wind: Yes or No?

[Rhenny]

I really don't like 2nd wind in combat (expecially as an encounter resource). It forces the DM to make every combat exceptionally difficult so that players use their 2nd wind. If a DM designs an encounter that does not push PCs to use their 2nd wind, the encounter becomes superfluous and unnecesary because at no point during the combat do the players feel as if they are in danger, and chances are they will never use healing spells or other stronger magics because they don't fear failure.

 

[D'karr]

I really don't like 2nd wind in combat (expecially as an encounter resource). It forces the DM to make every combat exceptionally difficult so that players use their 2nd wind. If a DM designs an encounter that does not push PCs to use their 2nd wind, the encounter becomes superfluous and unnecesary because at no point during the combat do the players feel as if they are in danger, and chances are they will never use healing spells or other stronger magics because they don't fear failure.

That has not been my experience at all. Not all combats are supposed to be exceptionally difficult. A variation is supposed to be the norm, not the exception. That escalating mentality is one of the main reasons some complain about grind. If variability was the norm, then combats that are supposed to be setpiece would be exciting, and not grindy. Combats that are easy, remain easy. In setpiece combats the healing is going to be necessary, in the others, not so much. This allows the "healers" to do other things besides being a healbot.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

I'm torn. I like the cinematic aspects, but I'm not so sure that Second Wind is the best way to get it. Also, I think the modular knobs needed to make it more flexible across a wider range of styles are lacking.

Ideally, I'd like to see Second Wind tied to a resource, but on a sliding scale where you can make it matter more or less. Making it an Encounter ability may work out roughly equal, but it doesn't have nearly so much room to tweak.

For example, let's say that SW is tied to the Hit Die mechanic. Well, right there if you aren't using the Hit Die, you probably aren't using and don't want SW. So that's good. Furthermore, if SW gets hit points back based on the Hit Die, it scales by character, but isn't nearly so powerful by default. That gives it room to go up. Then we might, by default, say that HD and SW give equal, but that SW is limited to 1/Encounter. OK, now it's still better than waiting until after combat, but it cuts into your daily resource. You can't do it indefinitely (a nicely appropriate simulation nod).

From there, however, we can adjust with modules. For example, the "tactical" module gives a bonus when Hit Die are used with a healing kit (perhaps requiring one charge per die to compensate). You get to roll an extra die when you use a kit, but you have to declare when you roll. When you use SW, it requires no charge, but you only get to roll one die. That means that burning all that adrenaline in a hurry has strategic cost.

Or using a healing kit out of combat makes HD permanent healing, but using HD in combat with SW makes them temp hit points (nod to Jester) that only lasts until the end of the encounter and cannot exceed your normal total. Use as many as you want, one die per action. That's a slightly different tactical and strategic calculation: if you are about to get heavily pounded and have a breather, temp hit points are as good as any others. If the monsters miss, you just wasted a critical resource.

Combine that with my suggestion in another topic to only grant HD every odd level. That's some real limits on what you can heal, but still very helpful.

All of that has obvious and easy ways to scale to make it more or less cinematic, more or less simulation, more or less gritty, more or less epic. As with all knobs, the key is to make the default useful but somewhat restrained, to give room to turn it up or down.

 

[Leatherhead]

Yes, but it won't, because it doesn't want to offend all the people who despise healing surges.

You don't neeed surges to have second wind.

 

[pemerton]

It gives them that sense only if they don't realize the mathematical reality (i.e. that this healing is basically just more hit points). For a new player, maybe it has that effect, but it doesn't hold up to any real scrutiny.

As [MENTION=27160]Balesir[/MENTION] mentioned, this completely disregards that action economy dimension, which at least in 4e is extremely significant.

Action points, however, are not a daily or encounter or per-time resource (at least not in any of the implementations I've seen).

Action points are a quasi-encounter resource in 4e.

I really don't like 2nd wind in combat (expecially as an encounter resource). It forces the DM to make every combat exceptionally difficult so that players use their 2nd wind. If a DM designs an encounter that does not push PCs to use their 2nd wind, the encounter becomes superfluous and unnecesary because at no point during the combat do the players feel as if they are in danger

I have two responses to this.

First, I've run a lot of 4e combat and second wind usage is highly variable. Even when a PC is low on hit points, the player might decide to use the standard action to attack rather than heal, hoping to take out the enemy or to receive minor action healing from another pC.

Second, if you're running combats that don't generate enough pressure to make players consider using their incombat healing resources (whatever those might be), those combats aren't going to become more exciting just by taking away those incombat healing resources. A combat where the stakes are 20 hp out of 100 is a combat where the stakes are 20 hp out of 100, whether or not I have the capability to regain some hit points if I feel I'm getting a bit low on them!

 

[billd91]

Second wind is cinematic, it reduces the need for healers or clerics to be only healers, and makes hp a bit more strategic. So yes! I am fine with it being an encounter ability.

It's really only cinematic if it's used sparingly - so I favor the once/day model (although SWSE did allow it up to 3 times a day with the appropriate investment in feats and talents). If it's used in virtually every combat, it's not really very cinematic - except for very repetitive and predictable cinema that typically (and rightfully) gets panned by the critics.

I don't mind a 5 minute recovery period after a fight to regain hit points, but I would peg that as a proportion of new damage sustained rather than 1/4 hit points or anything like that. That way it is always wearing the PCs down, bit by bit. I really wouldn't characterize that as a true second wind in the cinematic, SWSE sense.

 

[DEFCON 1]

It's really only cinematic if it's used sparingly - so I favor the once/day model (although SWSE did allow it up to 3 times a day with the appropriate investment in feats and talents).

If there was a second wind type of feature... I'd personally rather see it tied not to 'every encounter' or 'once a day' (two arbitrary designations that have nothing to do with the individual involved)... but I'd rather it be CON modifier times per day.

This way, those who have higher CONs (and thus more likely to have "better health" in-game and higher HP totals as their out-of-game mechanic) can take those breathers more often. It would also inspire players to think harder about distributing their ability scores more often.

Do PCs with only a 11 or less in CON not get a second wind? Yup. But that's their problem for not being healthier, and let's face it... those characters will more often be the ones who fight at range anyway and thus are less often getting attacked and hurt.

I think the game would be better served if more features got tied to ability score modifiers for the number of times you could use them, rather than just arbitrary "X per day".

 

[billd91]

If there was a second wind type of feature... I'd personally rather see it tied not to 'every encounter' or 'once a day' (two arbitrary designations that have nothing to do with the individual involved)... but I'd rather it be CON modifier times per day.
<snip>

I think the game would be better served if more features got tied to ability score modifiers for the number of times you could use them, rather than just arbitrary "X per day".

I would be reluctant to tie it to a stat. Like the Action points in 3.5, there are some resources that should be equally available to all PCs. Plus, it contributes to Con being even more valuable.

 

[Balesir]

It's really only cinematic if it's used sparingly - so I favor the once/day model (although SWSE did allow it up to 3 times a day with the appropriate investment in feats and talents). If it's used in virtually every combat, it's not really very cinematic - except for very repetitive and predictable cinema that typically (and rightfully) gets panned by the critics.

Second wind definitely should be a fairly occasional thing - and my experience of 4E is that, as presented there, it is. But I would not really want to see it as a "daily" ability; quite apart from verisimilitude issues, it would then itself become a resource, the use of which would push towards taking a long rest. I don't think it would work well like that.

I would much rather see it (a) given a real cost in the moment - the use of an action fits well, here, and is certainly effective in 4e - and (b) achieving something that could be achieved for the same or lower cost during a short rest. Which brings me to:

I don't mind a 5 minute recovery period after a fight to regain hit points, but I would peg that as a proportion of new damage sustained rather than 1/4 hit points or anything like that. That way it is always wearing the PCs down, bit by bit. I really wouldn't characterize that as a true second wind in the cinematic, SWSE sense.

I quite like this as an alternative to healing surges/hit dice. It manages to keep a real cost to getting damaged (the remaining proportion of hit points that are "unhealable" by the short rest), similar to losing surges or dice, and could also make magical healing during short rests useful even if quite restricted in terms of number of hit points healed (because it could heal the points of damage left over after the recovery afforded by the short rest has happened).

I'd need to think through the ramifications a bit more, but I think there might be the germ of a nice system, there.

 

[billd91]

I quite like this as an alternative to healing surges/hit dice. It manages to keep a real cost to getting damaged (the remaining proportion of hit points that are "unhealable" by the short rest), similar to losing surges or dice, and could also make magical healing during short rests useful even if quite restricted in terms of number of hit points healed (because it could heal the points of damage left over after the recovery afforded by the short rest has happened).

I'd need to think through the ramifications a bit more, but I think there might be the germ of a nice system, there.

We used it in a PF campaign through 13th-14th level (Council of Thieves, FYI) and it seemed to work pretty well. We had to figure out what to do with magical healing that happened in combat or within that 5 minute rest period. And our solution was to always apply it to new damage first and then any amount over that was applied to previous damage. For the duration of a fight, until that 5 minute rest and refit was over, players did have to keep track of 2 hit point pools (or at least 2 hit point loss pools). But that ended up being pretty easy.

We noticed that any healing resources the PCs had went quite a bit farther (obviously) so they went out to buy wands of cure light wounds a lot less often. Potions ended up being a bit better than usual because they tended to heal a larger proportion of remaining injuries after that 5 minute rest, same with low level healing spells. But high level healing spells were still useful in fights whenever PCs got into injury trouble or KOed.