Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Blue" data-source="post: 7235601" data-attributes="member: 20564">Say one character, the tank, has two mortal wounds and three levels of exhaustion.&nbsp; No one else has Mortal Wounds because the tank was doing their job well.&nbsp; The healer was doing a decent job as well but hey, crits happen and sometimes you'll drop.&nbsp; The party as a whole wants to push on, the tank does not.&nbsp; Would you support as the most enjoyable the party splitting and the player of the tank sitting out, or if the tank ends up dying soon after and the player is annoyed because he wasn't allowed to split off and rest?&nbsp; Which brings more fun to the table?If you really want the party to rest on a 7 day cycle, there are DMG variant to change short rests to overnight and long rest to 7 days.&nbsp; This way the whole party has the same cycle.&nbsp; We should not expect all roles of characters to get hit to zero and start picking up Mortal Wounds at the same frequency, so this inherently sets some characters of different cycles than others.This seems like you are making a rule that requires a healer, you are willing to adjust the narrative to insert an extra person in the adventuring party so there will be a healer ... and the rule has very little impact if there is a healer.It sounds like a rule made to be intentionally worked around so it will have no real mechanical effect, but will have a narrative effect of requiring a PC or NPC healer in every party.&nbsp; Wouldn't it just be more direct to make a house rule requiring a healer instead?&nbsp; If that sounds a little odd, consider that's what you just said the main result of the reduced HD recovery rule will be.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Blue, post: 7235601, member: 20564"] Say one character, the tank, has two mortal wounds and three levels of exhaustion. No one else has Mortal Wounds because the tank was doing their job well. The healer was doing a decent job as well but hey, crits happen and sometimes you'll drop. The party as a whole wants to push on, the tank does not. Would you support as the most enjoyable the party splitting and the player of the tank sitting out, or if the tank ends up dying soon after and the player is annoyed because he wasn't allowed to split off and rest? Which brings more fun to the table? If you really want the party to rest on a 7 day cycle, there are DMG variant to change short rests to overnight and long rest to 7 days. This way the whole party has the same cycle. We should not expect all roles of characters to get hit to zero and start picking up Mortal Wounds at the same frequency, so this inherently sets some characters of different cycles than others. This seems like you are making a rule that requires a healer, you are willing to adjust the narrative to insert an extra person in the adventuring party so there will be a healer ... and the rule has very little impact if there is a healer. It sounds like a rule made to be intentionally worked around so it will have no real mechanical effect, but will have a narrative effect of requiring a PC or NPC healer in every party. Wouldn't it just be more direct to make a house rule requiring a healer instead? If that sounds a little odd, consider that's what you just said the main result of the reduced HD recovery rule will be. [/QUOTE]

Verification