D&D General 4e Healing was the best D&D healing

[Micah Sweet]

I’ll never understand this particular snapping of reality suspenders. (love that phrase)

Why should the stats of the NPC remain the same? Why do the stats of the NPC matter? They’re mechanics to represent what the NPC can do when interacting with the PCs.

I just...it doesn’t grok.

To me, it makes it feel less like a character and more like a bundle of numbers that change to suit your needs. Breaks immersion for to have the rules constantly in my grill like that. My issue, but that's how I feel.

 

[Neonchameleon]

The bad faith of your strawman argument is transparent in your claim that "a solid hit by a veteran with a deadly weapon" is mechanically reflected in "1 damage from a successful attack."

No believable person would die instantly and irrevocably to the weakest conceivable hit from a toddler-sized humanoid with a stick (who was nevertheless intent on inflicting serious injury), which is an accurate description of what "1 damage from a successful attack" actually means. Nevermind the fact that most minions are canonically supposed to be armored soldiers that are tougher than regular humans.

First, please don't conflate a toddler with a toddler sized humanoid. A toddler is undergrown, and has an AD&D strength score in the 4-5 range - which means that they have a damage penalty. That just meant that the "weakest conceivable hit from a toddler-sized humanoid with a stick" just became 0 damage; I think only the D&D 3.X line turned housecats into blenders by giving them a claw/claw/bite attack routine and a minimum of 1 damage per attack.

Second we are talking about a toddler sized humanoid that is as strong as an adult human if this isn't something ridiculously far outside the design assumptions of D&D.

Third, what do you mean by "stick"? If it's something as solid as a quarterstaff then it could kill on an actually solid hit.

Fourth you were talking earlier about how an orc with an axe against a first level fighter was outside the design assumptions of AD&D. As was any PC being caught out of their armour. In 4e NPC on NPC combat is outside the design assumptions, and there are explicit rules for companion characters

Fifth, an actual toddler will not have stats in 4e. They are irrelevant in combat. I'm fairly sure they don't have stats in any other edition.

I'd ask you to stop misrepresenting the rules but:

And since you are apparently incapable of taking this topic seriously, I would thank you to not address me further, or it will be reported as harassment.

The ignore function is right there if you need it. However as you are now issuing threats (however trivial they might be) to try to prevent your posts from being replied to I think this is the time where I use the ignore function for its intended purpose. Goodbye.

 

[Fanaelialae]

If it takes them five hits to beat an adult human into unconsciousness, then that outcome is significantly less ridiculous than allowing them to instantly kill an armored soldier in one hit.

If you want to argue that toddler-sized humanoids with sticks are outside the purview of the game rules, or that they couldn't reasonably kill an adult human regardless, then the setting details disagree with you. Kobolds and goblins exist in most published settings, and are considered to be a notable (potentially lethal) threat to non-adventuring NPCs.

Chimpanzees are significantly smaller than adult humans, yet they are mind-blowingly stronger than a human. Just because something is small doesn't mean it can't be strong. If it has the capacity to effectively use deadly weapons (which act as a force multiplier) then it is even more dangerous. A goblin or kobold does not necessarily have the same muscle strength as a human relative to their size.

However, I was clearly talking about a toddler with a stick. You could substitute any other creature that couldn't reasonably kill an adult human under normal circumstances even if it tried (a mouse for example). Suggesting that it only takes 4-5 hits from such a creature to kill the average human adult is clearly an unreasonable (silly/absurd) outcome. Allowing such a creature to deal even 1 damage is arguably not very realistic. At a minimum, they shouldn't be able to take someone to 0 HP.

Whereas someone with a lethal weapon can most certainly kill an armored soldier with a single attack. That's happened countless times throughout history. It's not an unreasonable outcome at all.

If the soldier had 8 HP instead of 1, and the PC fighting him had an 8 damage minimum (roll of 1 + 5 attribute mod + 2 sneak attack dice) then there's no discernable difference between whether he's a minion or just a low HP creature. He dies from one hit either way. You're suggesting that it's somehow problematic if he was a minion in this hypothetical, despite the outcomes being identical?

I mean, sure, if you let the PCs raise an army of toddlers with sticks and run around whacking soldiers for lots of combined damage, you might have a problem. I would, however, disagree that the problem there is with the minion rules.

I'm not trying to convince anyone that they should use minions if they make the game less fun for them. Obviously, if they aren't fun for you, don't use them.

 

[Neonchameleon]

However, I was clearly talking about a toddler with a stick. You could substitute any other creature that couldn't reasonably kill an adult human under normal circumstances even if it tried (a mouse for example). Suggesting that it only takes 4-5 hits from such a creature to kill the average human adult is clearly an unreasonable (silly/absurd) outcome. Allowing such a creature to deal even 1 damage is arguably not very realistic. At a minimum, they shouldn't be able to take someone to 0 HP.

Why not go with something that's actually in the Monstrous Manual - the domestic cat. 1/2 hit dice, THAC0 20, AC 6, two attacks (claws and bite), one for 1-2 damage and one for 1 damage.

I think this sort of nonsense is where the idea of a toddler with a stick doing real damage comes from (and housecats being able to beat up average adult humans continued into 3.0 and 3.5; there was a minimum 1 damage rule there despite the cat's claws doing 1d2-4 damage)

 

[doctorbadwolf]

To me, it makes it feel less like a character and more like a bundle of numbers that change to suit your needs. Breaks immersion for to have the rules constantly in my grill like that. My issue, but that's how I feel.

Huh. I felt that the mechanics were less in my face in 4e, at least in terms of NPC design and usage. Guess it’s just a personal perception thing.

I wouldn’t say it’s your issue as if there is something wrong with having a particular experience of the game, though. It’s just your experience.

Some people can’t make themselves view hit dice as part of their characters health, because they grew up viewing HP exclusively as the model of health. Other people grok intuitively without any explanation that Hit Dice, and in 4e Healing Surges, are an extension of HP, and so an attack’s damage carries over to HD when you use them to heal HP, to represent that you are able to keep going but you aren’t at 100%, and there is only so much of that you can take.

Games are weird. Perception is weird.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Huh. I felt that the mechanics were less in my face in 4e, at least in terms of NPC design and usage. Guess it’s just a personal perception thing.

I wouldn’t say it’s your issue as if there is something wrong with having a particular experience of the game, though. It’s just your experience.

This. I find that in 4e I start with my NPC then use the 4e mechanics as a markup language to write down what I envision them doing. In 3.X I'm supposed to start with the mechanics and their levels in their classes or their racial dice. In 5e I've got a feedback loop if I'm to tie things to the CR system.

I do think that there is a difference between "Game rules as physics engine" and "Game rules as user interface" as approaches. I'm firmly on the UI side.

 

[Undrave]

I do think that there is a difference between "Game rules as physics engine" and "Game rules as user interface" as approaches. I'm firmly on the UI side.

Same here!

 

[doctorbadwolf]

This. I find that in 4e I start with my NPC then use the 4e mechanics as a markup language to write down what I envision them doing. In 3.X I'm supposed to start with the mechanics and their levels in their classes or their racial dice. In 5e I've got a feedback loop if I'm to tie things to the CR system.

I do think that there is a difference between "Game rules as physics engine" and "Game rules as user interface" as approaches. I'm firmly on the UI side.

Agreed.

IME, it isn’t that 4e “requires” 4 stat blocks for the same critter, it’s that 4e has NPC crafting mechanics such that you can craft a unique stat block for that creature for every fight. That’s a good thing.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Huh. I felt that the mechanics were less in my face in 4e, at least in terms of NPC design and usage. Guess it’s just a personal perception thing.

I wouldn’t say it’s your issue as if there is something wrong with having a particular experience of the game, though. It’s just your experience.

Some people can’t make themselves view hit dice as part of their characters health, because they grew up viewing HP exclusively as the model of health. Other people grok intuitively without any explanation that Hit Dice, and in 4e Healing Surges, are an extension of HP, and so an attack’s damage carries over to HD when you use them to heal HP, to represent that you are able to keep going but you aren’t at 100%, and there is only so much of that you can take.

Games are weird. Perception is weird.

Yeah, I'm one of those people. HD don't bother me a ton, I just see them as another source of healing, rather than as part of the character's overall health. Characters in 5e can heal themselves to a limited degree. They have to be conscious and out of combat to use HD, so I never saw it as a problem. Like you said, perception is weird.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

IME, it isn’t that 4e “requires” 4 stat blocks for the same critter, it’s that 4e has NPC crafting mechanics such that you can craft a unique stat block for that creature for every fight. That’s a good thing.

But then it is blatantly clear that those mechanics do not represent anything 'real'. Whether this bothers you or not is a matter of personal taste, but it definitely massively bugs some people. This fundamental difference in how the purpose of the game mechanics is understood was basically in the core of 97.5% of 4e flame wars. People never agreed about it then and they won't now.