D&D 5E 2/18/13 L&L column

[D'karr]

B: I don't quite comprehend the link you're making between "Clerical healing must be necessary, but you can also play just fine without one," because if clerical healing is necessary, than you can't really play just fine without one, and if you can play just fine without one, then it is not necessary.

BINGO - Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding. Now tell us what KM gets, Johnny! A round trip ticket and all expenses paid trip to Makesenseville!!!!

The arguments I've seen seem to be pulling in both directions with no sense in between. If something is necessary, then not having it is going to have an impact. If something is NOT necessary, then not having it should have little to no impact.

 

[Bedrockgames]

A: I don't think a well-rounded party can be safely assumed in "basic" gameplay. If the basic-level is targeted at newbies, rounding out a party isn't going to be in their minds (that's at least a Standard-level tactic)

it is very easy to incude mention in the rules about party composition and what this means for the level of challenge. For instance explaining that a party without a cleric will ave to rest more, while a party without a thief will be more vulnerable to traps. For me, this is about making character choice meaningful. People can still play without a cleric, it just has an impact on how they approach the adventure.

B: I don't quite comprehend the link you're making between "Clerical healing must be necessary, but you can also play just fine without one," because if clerical healing is necessary, than you can't really play just fine without one, and if you can play just fine without one, then it is not necessary.

because you can play without one, it just means you have to rest more and be careful around undead. For me a big part of the game is figuring out how to work around the absence of oe of the key classes when that member is absent or goes down. It gives texture to the exoerience of play.

 

[Bedrockgames]

The arguments I've seen seem to be pulling in both directions with no sense in between. If something is necessary, then not having it is going to have an impact. If something is NOT necessary, then not having it should have little to no impact.

I am not saying it wont have an impact. It will and that is the point. Not having a cleric ought to have an impact on how the game plays. But you cam play without one. It isnt necessary to have one, just more challenging because you have to rest more and you are at a disadvantage against undead.

 

[Garthanos]

B: I don't quite comprehend the link you're making between "Clerical healing must be necessary, but you can also play just fine without one," because if clerical healing is necessary, than you can't really play just fine without one, and if you can play just fine without one, then it is not necessary.

Fundamentally discordant.. I dont think acting like cowards ELSE dying easily spending huge amounts of time in convalescence or money on tackily prevalent healing potions/wands is just "fine".

The only fiction featuring serial protagonists is basically slasher flicks like nightmare on elm street - what I consider an actually well done example, because having the audience connection to the story which you have built an expectation on die quick is undermining emotionally in a way appropriate to the target genre, ie horror.

 

[steeldragons]

Think? so the HD mechanic made it look like it was damn hard to do anything reasonable at all.

NMever saw the HD mechanic. So dunno what it looked like. But if was bad, who said you have to use it?

I hate the non-porportionate healing...

I'm not sure what this means, but if you hate it...don't use it.

care to write the nasty house rule it will take to give it back and find the dozens of locations that make other assumptions and over rule them individually in appropriate ways? I really dont expect anything pretty.

Again, I don't get what this is really meant to be saying. If you hate it, why would you want 'to give it back'? What 'dozens of locations'?

See my original post in this thread about dropping in a healer's/first aid kit on the equipment list.

Or throw in a "second wind returns half lost hit points, while in or out of combat, once per day" or something like that.

I simply don't see the big deal or the reason for all of the hackles getting up and disagreement in this thread.

 

[Sage Genesis]

That's great. That's totally valid. Then you know your character will get wounded and, when they are wounded "enough/too much", they might die.

Simple.

Translation: the game should passive-aggressively punish TwoSix for his preferred playstyle by taking away his character.


There are some games where careful, tactical play is required in order to survive combats. There are also games where you're expected to go in, guns (or spells) blazing, throwing caution to the wind. And of course many shades of gray in between, as well as other options. None of these styles is better than the others, just different preferences.

The issue we have is which one D&D is going for. With all their dials and options they claim to be able to support multiple styles, but I doubt it. A fairly average 1st level Wizard in Next can straight up die from an orc who rolls a natural 20, regardless of whether or not you choose to implement hit dice as a healing mechanic. Not some odd corner case exception, it's actually fairly likely. This firmly pushes Next towards the "cautious" end of the spectrum, at least at low levels. Contrast this with 4e, where a fairly average 1st level Wizard has 20 hp and cannot possibly die in a single hit from any other 1st level creature. This pushed 4e more into the "guns blazing" end of the spectrum.

Judging from these discussions, the fanbase is rather divided on the issue.

 

[Garthanos]

NMever saw the HD mechanic. So dunno what it looked like. But if was bad, who said you have to use it?

So you havent been reading the play test material? that makes discussion harder. It was an attempt to mollify fans of 4e removing healing surges and using a poor replacement named after earlier editions hit dice but keeping next to none of healing surges benefits.

I'm not sure what this means, but if you hate it...don't use it.

Yeh I hate disproportionate healing, its written in to the rules everywhere healing occurs every spell item or ability that heals.

Disporportionate healing is where a cure light wounds heals my character from unconcious to full health when I am low level but somehow at high levels barely causes a blip. Its where might mildly injured fighter takes more healing like many many potions or spells and my wizard takes next to none... Its where it takes more resources to heal the most healthy.

A pure proportionate healing system would be where health was primarily recovered as a percentage.

 

[Garthanos]

Translation: the game should passive-aggressively punish TwoSix for his preferred playstyle by taking away his character.


There are some games where careful, tactical play is required in order to survive combats. There are also games where you're expected to go in, guns (or spells) blazing, throwing caution to the wind.

Yup

and actually

Tactics requires there be significant choices other than "Runaway" or "Fight" which are really strategic choices in some ways, excessively quick craps game like fighting undermines any sort of use of maneuvers. Even though the MDD mechanic has interesting possiblities they are undermined.

And that is what I worry about there huge interactions between various mechanics... they have implications modules modules modules modules not as easy as people pretend.

 

[Garthanos]

In WoW you have to in effect have high level food, high level magic and high level potions to practically heal high level characters... its pretty ridiculous. In other words bleh... I dont want my D&D going back to that.

 

[TwoSix]

That's great. That's totally valid. Then you know your character will get wounded and, when they are wounded "enough/too much", they might die.

Simple.

That's fair. Hopefully the Standard/Advanced options will include sliders so that "enough/too much" can be set.