Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 5957069" data-attributes="member: 2067">This is totally possible when you look at combats as very quick things. The reason healing is kind of &quot;necessary&quot; in a game is because in a combat-as-sport kind of game, where getting into fights is at least half the fun, it's important to have a back-and-forth tug over a longer period of time. Healing is the way you accomplish that, the way the characters come back from the brink of defeat and outlast their foes. If each combat goes fast, and is OK with one side dominating and quickly ending it, in-combat healing becomes de-emphasized, making it easier to exist without a healbot, as long as you can recover some HP in between encounters (which could also be overnight in a short-rests-as-nightly/long-rests-as-weekly model). I speak from experience as a DM and a player when I say that a party that doesn't have a leader suffers dearly for that fact.But since anecdotal evidence isn't, I can point to 4e's idea that a balanced party is 5 characters, one from each role +1 as bit of non-anecdotal evidence some dedicated healer was an assumed part of the game's design.Making a game where healers are unnecessary means making a game where the Leader role is entirely optional, too. More so than it was in 4e, given its assumption. Since 5e seems to be going in a role-less direction, it's a pretty good indication that they're keeping this in mind.And I think quick combats + short rests = a pretty good solution. A problem does come in getting the &quot;right amount&quot; of healing from a short rest, and making sure the rest takes up the &quot;right amount&quot; of time and effort to accomplish what they mechanically accomplish, but that's not an entirely impossible dial to set. Just gotta make sure to set it by default to somewhere comfortably in the middle.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 5957069, member: 2067"] This is totally possible when you look at combats as very quick things. The reason healing is kind of "necessary" in a game is because in a combat-as-sport kind of game, where getting into fights is at least half the fun, it's important to have a back-and-forth tug over a longer period of time. Healing is the way you accomplish that, the way the characters come back from the brink of defeat and outlast their foes. If each combat goes fast, and is OK with one side dominating and quickly ending it, in-combat healing becomes de-emphasized, making it easier to exist without a healbot, as long as you can recover some HP in between encounters (which could also be overnight in a short-rests-as-nightly/long-rests-as-weekly model). I speak from experience as a DM and a player when I say that a party that doesn't have a leader suffers dearly for that fact. But since anecdotal evidence isn't, I can point to 4e's idea that a balanced party is 5 characters, one from each role +1 as bit of non-anecdotal evidence some dedicated healer was an assumed part of the game's design. Making a game where healers are unnecessary means making a game where the Leader role is entirely optional, too. More so than it was in 4e, given its assumption. Since 5e seems to be going in a role-less direction, it's a pretty good indication that they're keeping this in mind. And I think quick combats + short rests = a pretty good solution. A problem does come in getting the "right amount" of healing from a short rest, and making sure the rest takes up the "right amount" of time and effort to accomplish what they mechanically accomplish, but that's not an entirely impossible dial to set. Just gotta make sure to set it by default to somewhere comfortably in the middle. [/QUOTE]

Verification