Search results

Fair enough. And I'll agree that I don't particually like that all damaged is healed fully with a single nights rest (unless magically aided). However, I also do not like every "hit" being considered as physical damage. It's imaginitively restrictive and mechanically restrictive.

To me a "hit" just represents a successful attack. I've even gone so far as to change the wording when I DM. No longer do I describe a good combat roll as a "hit", instead it is now a "successful attack". It is amazing that simple wording from back when the game was in its infancy now turns into...

My thoughts exactely.

If hit points are a mashup of actual physical damage, fatigue, luck, skill etc why can't some of those hit points come back at the end of a short rest. No need for surges. Each character automatically regains a portion (say 1/2 of the damage taken from the pervious encounter), but only a portion...

Or 1d6 per level plus constitution bonus of character being healed?

Yes. If they go back to something resembling 3rd edition or earlier then a cure wounds spell should heal 1/4 of the hit points of the character being healed rather than 1d8 plus level of the cleric. Maybe it won't follow that specific formula but it I think it should be based off the character...

This is what I would like to see kept: Healing based on the character being healed not on the character doing the healing. Never felt right that 1st level cleric could heal the common man from 1hp to full health with a cure light wounds but the 5th level fighter only got a scratch healed...

I've liked feats but I will agree that since their implementation they do have a tendancy to get a little out of control. As far as organizing them I feel like they could be set up as a way to structure the base classes out to "sub-classes". If the base classes are Cleric, Fighter, Rogue...

For all of those not liking the AEDU aspect of 4e, are we forgetting that 2e and 3e had a trimmed down version of this with their "you can use this ability 1/day per level" and "you gain a bonus feat or special ability at this level". Of course 4e expanded this but by only one additional type...

I slightly confused here since the definition of round seems to be shifting. The way I see it is: A round is a unit of measure in which all participants have an opportunity to act. I think in D&D that even though there is a little nod to the fact that everyone is sort of acting at the same...

Yeah, but if you are restoring a resouce that prevents you from getting wounded then it is important. But the point is to have less of it.

According to KD it is historically typical that characters lose half their hit points every encounter. :) I think you are not looking closely at this enough. This is an attempt to keep adventurers going without having to rely so much on clerical healing. Though it still can be important to have...

Historically for you? Does a 1st level group have golf bags full of Cure Wounds Wands? Or does the 1st level group have one encounter, loses half their hps and then calls it a day? Clearly we play the game differently.

I wouldn't really consider this pro one group and anti another. It sounds like a particularly deadly game if every encounter melee characters are losing more than half their hit points.

I like this a lot. I thought about this a little after reading it in the other thread. As far a magical healing goes I think it would make sense if a clerical cure wounds spell would read something like "you cure one quarter of targets wounds with this spell". This way you avoid the weird "cure...

I agree with this. Though, if there is some sort of "minion" in DDN, then I think a nat 20 should allow for some other options. (It sucks to have wasted a nat 20 on a minion). For example the other option could allow a melee attacker who rolled a nat 20 to make an immediate attack an adjacent...

I loved those chose your own adventure books!!!!

The cover art on Dragon Magazine was at times just awesome. Some of my favorites:

Why is this true? "4e changed that, and ended up with pretty speeches closing sucking chest wounds." If hit points are considered abstract in 4e as they have been considered abstract in all editions then why all this flailing about pretty speeches closing sucking chest wounds? 4e at times has...

And if everyone sees that the fighter just lost 50% of his hit points in a single hit of physical damage from the maw of a dragon he ... what ... I'm trying to figure out a way to describe this ... he was bitten badly but not badly enough that it broke any bones? He was just bitten by a dragon...