NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Willie the Duck" data-source="post: 9710106" data-attributes="member: 6799660">Hmm. I don't feel like they bring back the feel of early editions (so much as we can generalize about them) so much as just plain tamps down on the so much discussed 'low risk mode' quality of 5e. The two are not the same. In particular, any time you raise a safety measure but then raise the offense to counteract, you have to understand the downstream consequences and incentivization structures it creates. A good example might be 3e increasing both hp and damage making save-or-die/suck spells so powerful, or AC raising alongside to-hit and then touch attacks dominating, or eventually ability damage (dragons falling to shivering touch).For 5e, one thing I have noticed about tamping down on/negating the usefulness of pop-up healing is that the consequences fall disproportionately on the party frontliners (and especially those that mitigate attacks via lots of soak instead of an AC of 23 or the like). Those are the ones who already are agreeing to get in harms way so the casters and archers and flee-away rogues/monks can set up their devastating offenses. That's a choice, and one one should recognize when thinking about adding effects like this (or altered rest frequency, consequences to pop-up healing, etc.). Anyways, my overall opinion is that it is fine. Death is relatively easy to recover from (much like early D&D) -- except when it isn't -- so even this isn't the last word.</blockquote>

Verification