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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="buddhafrog" data-source="post: 5510935" data-attributes="member: 86605">It sounds like it does for you.  But really, is it that hard for your brain to piece this together?  We're running different games.  It isn't hard for me to piece together what you're doing.For me, the outcome is the same but with less healing (yes, this means less battles and in the long run less damage).  This is how I prefer it.  With the way I run the game, b/c there is actually less damage total and players are generally closer to their exhausted levels of very few surges, I feel that each potential encounter is more threatening - heck, even each attack that does damage can be more threatening.  This leads to more in- and out-of encounter strategies by my players.  This is simply b/c I've scaled down the healing as well as the encounters.  For all the reasons stated above, but also I've found that this makes it easier for me to get more story plot accomplished while speeding combat a little.  (heck, I often skim the monsters HP but increase their damage output as well for the same reasons).  This is just how I like it.  Believe me it works for me.  Work on wrapping your brain around it.  Most people use the standard encounter model which obviously works for them.  I mentioned these houserules only b/c when I use these rules in addition to the (new for me) Essentials characters, I was able to achieve pretty near what I loved with both Pathfinder and 4e in one single game.  And that made me hyped and eager to run my games again -- Running seven different campaigns each week for a total of 9 or 10 sessions really threatens to tap my energy/creative resources.</blockquote>

Verification