D&D 5E Additive versus subtractive modularity

[Psikerlord#]

Wouldn't designing the adventures around the assumption of more healing actually result in the old-school feel when you remove that healing because it would do the following:

1) less healing encourages PC to avoid combat when they can.
2) less healing makes more combat encounters per day more dangerous, which in turn encourages PC to plot strategies to improve their chances of survival and/or victory.

Agree, this might all work out really well. cmon basic pdf and starter set!

 

[Emerikol]

But, that's my point. They ARE offering options. They are offering an option that absolutely, 100% fits with your stated preferences - the ability to treat HP as meat and no martial healing. I would be astonished if the wounds/vitality system didn't work the way i'm predicting. Second wind simply restores vitality. As an added bonus, by varying the percentages, you can easily achieve any level of grit you like. The baseline is that HP=Vitality and thus second wind restores HP. In a wounds/vitality system, you simply split things up by whatever ration you want for the pacing of your game and you're good to go.

How are they not giving you what you are asking for?

I think you are overestimating what they are going to do but of course we can't be 100% sure until the DMG lands. I've said that if I am mistaken or Mike Mearls has been unclear about wotc's intentions then no decision is absolute. I don't feel though based on what I've heard so far that such an option will exist. It either will or it won't. Most of my intentions are based upon it won't. I'll reevaluate if it does of course. If you argue that Mike Mearls is terrible at times at communicating then I can't argue there.

You realize though that I do not want a wounds/vitality system. So if I used such a system, it would be to eliminate vitality I suppose completely. I don't view hit points as entirely meat though so if the wound module starts applying penalties then that is not what I want either. I basically want the pre-4e rules on hit points, emphasis on the rules. We can debate how they were supposed to be interpreted but that is beside the point really.

So do you believe there will be a module for the following....
1. Straight hit points
2. Slow natural recovery anywhere from 1hp/day to level hps/day.
3. No non-magical hit point recovery besides #2

So Second Wind by definition can do nothing. So I just leave it an empty slot. Does that mean the Paladin's lay on hands has to go for balance reasons?

Support would answer those sorts of questions. It would seem to be easier to me to just offer a replacement for second wind than to explain how all the other healing powers get adjusted.

 

[BryonD]

Existing free healing from resting is slower compared to what magical healing can do for you.

If the PCs are under some time constraint, taking anywhere from a day to a week to rest up would simply be a bad idea.

If your talking about Clerics, that's fine but not every group is lucky enough to have people who enjoy playing the Cleric.

The default existing free healing in 5E is 100% with a long rest. So, no, it is not slower.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

The default existing free healing in 5E is 100% with a long rest. So, no, it is not slower.

Is that from the starter set or October playtest? Either way, basic should clear some things up tomorrow. ROLL ON TOMORROW!

 

[Ruin Explorer]

So do you believe there will be a module for the following....
1. Straight hit points
2. Slow natural recovery anywhere from 1hp/day to level hps/day.
3. No non-magical hit point recovery besides #2

So Second Wind by definition can do nothing. So I just leave it an empty slot. Does that mean the Paladin's lay on hands has to go for balance reasons?

Support would answer those sorts of questions. It would seem to be easier to me to just offer a replacement for second wind than to explain how all the other healing powers get adjusted.

I don't think there's any indication that 5E is cleanly distinguishing between "magic" and "not magic" when it comes to abilities. 2E sort of did, but it was always a little vague, which caused some issues with anti-magic zones and the like. 4E makes no formal separation. 3E went into massive detail, categorizing class abilities (and more) as SU, EX or SP, but we're not seeing any sign of similar distinctions in 5E.

So any modules are unlikely to change HP on a "magic/non-magic" basis, I'd suggest, because they would then have to define, retroactively, what was magic and what not (for example, are Monk abilities "magic"? All of them? Some? Which? etc.). They've already stated that they'll have lower HP from resting-type modules, and I believe they also intend HD to be remove-able. Where that leaves SW and similar abilities, I don't know, of course. It really seems like, so far, SW is the only problematic ability (and wasn't problematic until it's most recent iteration!).

You are expected to House Rule more in 5E, note, this has been clearly stated. So what I'd be unsurprised to see would be a "Ultra-gritty" module where HD were gone and where you only healed 10% HP per night of safe bed-rest (say - 10% is nice and easy for most people to calculate in their heads), minimum 1hp, and where they expected the DM to do the rest and House Rule appropriately for his campaign.

Presumably with the Living Rules, they will then survey us all a year after release (or six months or whatever) and find out what we did, and if tons of people changed Second Wind, maybe the DMG2 or Dragon will contain suggestions on what to do with it, optional rules or whatever.

Personally I think it's fair to say that, if they gave you rules to slow natural HP regen that solved the issue for all classes but Fighter, your playstyle would be supported. I'm pretty sure all of us are going to have to House Rule some stuff (obviously in an ideal world, they'll also advise on SW - "Just make it THP" is a very simple fix with limited balance implications).

 

[BryonD]

Is that from the starter set or October playtest? Either way, basic should clear some things up tomorrow. ROLL ON TOMORROW!

Playtest.

We can certainly hope.

 

[Emerikol]

Personally I think it's fair to say that, if they gave you rules to slow natural HP regen that solved the issue for all classes but Fighter, your playstyle would be supported. I'm pretty sure all of us are going to have to House Rule some stuff (obviously in an ideal world, they'll also advise on SW - "Just make it THP" is a very simple fix with limited balance implications).

It's funny but while I would view a THP option as them trying to address my needs, I'd have to houserule it anyway.

You seem optimistic and maybe I'm too pessimistic. I'll definitely read the DMG when it comes out. I will do it in the store though and then I'll decide if I want to play the game or not.

We are all speculating. I'm giving Mike Mearls more credit than I should perhaps in being able to state clearly what he intends.

I hate the lack of clarity. Maybe I'll ask him at Gen Con.



Things I'm already having to houserule
1. Defy Death
2. Survivor
3. Evasion. (Time machine mechanic. I'll have to require the rogue to announce his evasion before the attack roll.)
4. Ace in the Hole (I've never had a 20th level PC so this might be academic)

It's sad that so much of this work is on the classes I can't ban which are the fighter and rogue. I didn't bother looking at the Barbarian or Monk as I don't have those classes ever get played anyway. Though I do consider the Monk's ki as a form of supernatural ability.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

It's funny but while I would view a THP option as them trying to address my needs, I'd have to houserule it anyway.

You seem optimistic and maybe I'm too pessimistic. I'll definitely read the DMG when it comes out. I will do it in the store though and then I'll decide if I want to play the game or not.

I dunno. I'm pretty sure I'm being realistic. They've talked about modules for removing HD and "grittier" healing. So it's not optimistic to believe they will be there, it's a reasonable belief. If I was saying they'll fix your problem, I'd be being optimistic! Rather I think they will support your playstyle, just not as far as perhaps you would like. I think almost everyone but some (hopefully large) sweet-spot audience will be in that position.

We are all speculating. I'm giving Mike Mearls more credit than I should perhaps in being able to state clearly what he intends.

I hate the lack of clarity. Maybe I'll ask him at Gen Con.

I like Mike Mearls, but "clearly stating what he intends" has not, historically, been his strong suite.

 

[Hussar]

/snip I basically want the pre-4e rules on hit points, emphasis on the rules. We can debate how they were supposed to be interpreted but that is beside the point really.

So do you believe there will be a module for the following....
1. Straight hit points
2. Slow natural recovery anywhere from 1hp/day to level hps/day.
3. No non-magical hit point recovery besides #2

So Second Wind by definition can do nothing. So I just leave it an empty slot. Does that mean the Paladin's lay on hands has to go for balance reasons?

Support would answer those sorts of questions. It would seem to be easier to me to just offer a replacement for second wind than to explain how all the other healing powers get adjusted.

No, it is certainly not besides the point. What you are asking for has never really existed in D&D. In fact, it runs specifically counter to the express interpretations of HP in at least AD&D. Every edition has had monks, which grant non-magical healing as an ability. So, right off the bat, you're into an interpretation that has never actually been supported in any way, shape or form in any version of D&D. In 2ed, if you had the Heal NWP, you could grant 1d4+1 HP to anyone if applied shortly after a fight ended. So, for at least since 2e, you could regain HP through non-magical means simply through a proficiency.

I'd be shocked if there wasn't something similar buried in the 3e rules. Even the complete rest rules allowed for 2hp/level/day without a check, 4 with. Which meant that wizards always heal in 1 day of rest with help. Realistically, all but the highest of HP characters would also heal in 1 day or maybe 2.

So, again, why would they have the specific module you are asking for when it has never, ever appeared in any edition of D&D?

You claim to want the following:

1. HP as partially meat - HP/WP does this, check.
2. No non-magical healing - HP/WP does this, check.
3. Slow natural recovery of meat - HP/WP does this check.

This module does every single thing, covers every single thing that you claim you want. It may do it in a fashion that isn't 100% like you did it in your game, but, that's a bit unreasonable to expect. So, again, what more do you want? You have repeatedly claimed that the Dev's are not providing options for your play style. This is 100% false. We KNOW they have a WP/VP in the DMG. They've specifically called it out.

So, one last time, what more support do you want?

 

[Emerikol]

No, it is certainly not besides the point. What you are asking for has never really existed in D&D. In fact, it runs specifically counter to the express interpretations of HP in at least AD&D. Every edition has had monks, which grant non-magical healing as an ability. So, right off the bat, you're into an interpretation that has never actually been supported in any way, shape or form in any version of D&D. In 2ed, if you had the Heal NWP, you could grant 1d4+1 HP to anyone if applied shortly after a fight ended. So, for at least since 2e, you could regain HP through non-magical means simply through a proficiency.

I'd be shocked if there wasn't something similar buried in the 3e rules. Even the complete rest rules allowed for 2hp/level/day without a check, 4 with. Which meant that wizards always heal in 1 day of rest with help. Realistically, all but the highest of HP characters would also heal in 1 day or maybe 2.

So, again, why would they have the specific module you are asking for when it has never, ever appeared in any edition of D&D?

You claim to want the following:

1. HP as partially meat - HP/WP does this, check.
2. No non-magical healing - HP/WP does this, check.
3. Slow natural recovery of meat - HP/WP does this check.

This module does every single thing, covers every single thing that you claim you want. It may do it in a fashion that isn't 100% like you did it in your game, but, that's a bit unreasonable to expect. So, again, what more do you want? You have repeatedly claimed that the Dev's are not providing options for your play style. This is 100% false. We KNOW they have a WP/VP in the DMG. They've specifically called it out.

So, one last time, what more support do you want?

Maybe you are an inside playtester. Realize that I am not. Why do you believe that the HP/WP modules will support what you say it supports? What reason do you have to think that? I've yet to see one of those optional modules ever support what you say it's going to support.

I considered the monk's recovery to be supernatural. I consider both the monk and barbarian to be "magical" classes. I didn't have a barbarian though ever get played in 30+ years so I could really care less about that class. I considered the super high con score resulting in regeneration to be supernatural too. I considered it wounds closing not stamina coming back faster. I don't have tons of barbarians and monks running around through my world though. Fighters are pretty common though so if I say they are magical the entire tenor of my world is changed.

I admit I'm far more focused on the core 4 and specifically the fighter and rogue than most people. Maybe that is my old school bent or just my general dislike of zillions of classes.

So I do disagree with you that 1 through 3 was not supported prior to 4e. Tons of people played exactly that way. I'd say the 1d4+1 healing is likely small enough to be acceptable as it does imply bandages and so forth. It's still a very small amount of healing and it fits the narrative of my hit points. Sorry I missed every tiny detail.