Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mannahnin" data-source="post: 9099111" data-attributes="member: 7026594">Getting back to the pacing/healing rate question for a minute, though I recognize the discussion has moved on a bit since yesterday.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f606.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":LOL:" title="Laugh    :LOL:"  data-smilie="17"data-shortname=":LOL:" />This mostly reads as personal preference, to me.I do tend to concur that relaxing restrictions and limitations on spellcasters from AD&D to 3E did result in some issues.  AD&D had its own issues, with M-Us tending to suck at low levels (or suck in inverse proportion to DMs' generosity with scrolls and other magic items they could use) and then get pretty absurd at higher levels.  4E took big steps to rein the 3E caster issues in and balance everyone, and then 5E went back more toward the earlier state, as it did in a lot of areas of the rules.Whether the healing rate in any given edition is too slow, just about right, or too fast is really a question of personal preference and what kind of game you want to run/fictional world you want to simulate.  IME AD&D always ran into the issue of people wanting to play scenarios and games full of Heroic Fantasy Action but the system's healing and recovery rates not being designed for that.</blockquote>