Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 6319821" data-attributes="member: 2067">Sure, but what level does the Starter Set begin at? What level are we introducing new folks to D&D at? "It's only kind of a problem for your first real exposure to the game" kind of makes it a bigger problem to me! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />As always: you could say the same thing about FATAL. It works, it's probably what most DMs will do, but it's a legit flub.With this mechanic, they're also better at healing their own wounds than other classes are. That's the unintended effect that has some unfortunate ramifications. I mean, it's inevitable that 5e will have SOMETHING like this. And if it's a big enough deal, they'll errata it later. And it's probably not a game-breaker or anything. So I don't want to blow it out of proportion -- much like the "bag of rats," it's an abstract tactic that a lot of folks might not do regularly enough for it to be a severe issue. It's just interesting to see where the first cracks appear in the new system. This is a crack. It seems to crack along lines of "encounter-by-encounter play" (ie, it's not something you notice if you just go encounter to encounter), and along lines of "low level testing" (it's not something you notice at higher levels) and along lines of "no devs go" (it's not something newbies would notice, and it's not something that "good play" would notice, and they don't playtest with "exploit all the rules!" in mind, I imagine). Which gives me a bit of a place to look for other cracks -- low level healing effects or effects that can be spammed outside of encounters (cantrips might be a good candidate to look at....). It indicates where there might be some systematic weaknesses. Some things DMs with cheesy friends might want to look out for. It's also interesting to see the reaction. Some unnecessary hostility to those who play against their intent (Overall message: "If you WANT to play in a way that SUCKS, I GUESS you can!"), a few different optional patches for the issue ("Oh, there's a wandering monsters option and a future option to change healing and..."). Which makes some sense if they were feeling defensive and caught off-guard. It's not the most cogent or fair analysis of what's going on there, but it's a fair recommendation for a fix. Again, I don't want to give the impression that this RUINS THE GAME or anything. I'm just pointing out that it's clearly a bit of a mistake. Perhaps an acceptable one, definitely not one that's going to break the game, but a mistake nonetheless. That makes it interesting to look at, to me. Examining how mistakes were made helps us learn our blind spots and our biases.</blockquote>

Verification