Enhanced Resistive Formula: Absurdly OP?

[eamon]

FWIW, I agree with keterys and have already houseruled my game so that temp HPs, like every other effect, only last 5 minutes.

That's certainly sounds reasonable to me. There's quite a few temp.hp sources that this affects, and most of em seem more reasonable for the change. FWIW, my earlier combat about the balance of Resistive formula assumed usage during combat.

I think it's lame to "force" short rests, and there's something wrong with mechanics that encourage DM to do so. I mean, a short rest is supposed to be a good thing... right?

 

[keterys]

There is one magic item, mountain armor, which you'd want to either address or allow as its own special exception (which has some complexity)

 

[Blackbrrd]

That's certainly sounds reasonable to me. There's quite a few temp.hp sources that this affects, and most of em seem more reasonable for the change. FWIW, my earlier combat about the balance of Resistive formula assumed usage during combat.

I think it's lame to "force" short rests, and there's something wrong with mechanics that encourage DM to do so. I mean, a short rest is supposed to be a good thing... right?

Just say that the temp hp goes away after 5 minutes or after a short rest. That way you aren't forcing anybody to take a short rest.

 

[Turtlejay]

We had this short rest thing going on in the last campaign I was in. Our DM had infected us all with a disease, and every time you took a rest, you had to make your endurance check to progress on the disease track. The Avenger in the party didn't take a rest all day. While we rested, he searched bodies, rooms, whatever, and the DM let it slide. Those of us with a less. . .metagamey outlook, took our rests as usual. My Illusionist died of a disease during a short rest.

I guess I think it is kind of cheesy metagaming madness that would posess you to *not* take a rest when everyone else is. Doing jumping jacks while everyone else is winding down from the battle? Really? As such, I think this feat is just right, use it when you think it will be useful and you can get your investment's worth. I certainly don't feel it is OP.

Jay

 

[keterys]

Your disease experience reminds me of the movie Crank.

Clearly, someone should have explained to him that all the crazy stuff he was doing instead of resting was cheesy or cheating

 

[Flipguarder]

If you read it a VERY narrow and specific way and ignore basically every single implication in the text, then what the feat actually does is takes the temp hp from one person and grant them to another. This puts it much more in line with many other feats as in "crappy"

 

[Turtlejay]

Wow, not only do I think that is the wrong interpretation because its *wrong*, but I think that since the default power already does that, the feat can't work that way.

The feat says you can grant an equal number of temp HP to another ally, not half, or a portion, but an equal number. Meaning that you use the power as is, and another nearby ally gets an equal number of temp HP.

Second, since the Artificers gets these powers by having surges donated to him, he is already swapping temp HP's around. If you decided that this power worked by moving temp HP between players, then the feat does absolutely nothing. Not crappy, useless.

Jay

 

[keterys]

Well, no, by his interpretation you could give significant boosts in temp hp to low hp characters.

Like a wizard getting 38 temp instead of 27 temp, cause you bounced it off his friend the warden.

But, agreed, I don't think the feat does that at all

 

[eamon]

Your disease experience reminds me of the movie Crank.

Clearly, someone should have explained to him that all the crazy stuff he was doing instead of resting was cheesy or cheating

Or, the DM should have taken the hint and fixed the mechanic, if that wasn't what he wanted. Which wouldn't have been that hard.

Just say that the temp hp goes away after 5 minutes or after a short rest. That way you aren't forcing anybody to take a short rest.

Yeah, that's a good idea. +added to my shortlist of houserules to consider ;-).


<rant directed at various misguided game effect designers, not you guys>The whole game is set up to encourage players to think tactically within the framework of the effects that are ongoing and available. If you don't want player choice to impact an effect... well... *drumroll* don't make the effect dependent on player choice. It disrupts the game!</rant>

 

[keterys]

Or, the DM should have taken the hint and fixed the mechanic, if that wasn't what he wanted. Which wouldn't have been that hard.

Oh, agreed. My sarcasm was perhaps not clear enough Having a disease, especially one that can outright kill you, potentially better or worsen every time you take a short rest is ludicrous.

I could totally see a curse or effect that would steal your encounter powers triggering on short rests, but that's within the bounds of the short rest framework.