Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jester David" data-source="post: 6292631" data-attributes="member: 37579">The limits of healing per encounter are solely limited by the number of powers/consumables available. It’s not a hard limit. It exists, but often the action economy and range is more of a factor.The second, attrition of healing surges, only exists with finite healing surges. It’s a cyclical argument: healing surges allow attrition because you can run out of surges. This ignores slower health attrition where the actual hitpoints a character has slowly decreases over successive fights.Or the reduction of healing resources as people run out of spells. While the number of healing surges you can use in a given encounter are finite, the majority of the time, this number is constant and resets at the start of the encounter. 4e PCs very seldom have access to less healing because of a hard fight. Hrm… that’s actually a really good point. Kudos. I am likely a little indoctrinated to the existing gamist logic so it’s more ignorable. Still, it doesn’t change the fact drawing attention to it with new mechanics is awkward and problematic. And while the other edition may have X amount of gamist logic (that I am accustomed to), 4e still has X+1, increasing the total proportion of gamist logic. And many of the changes it made were for gamist reasons, reducing the total amount of simulation. True, but your response ignores my point that healing surges are only the loosest reflection of health. You don’t die any less quickly at full surges, you don’t stabilize any faster, or healing a greater amount. HP is the reflection of health.While at 0hp you cannot take advantage of any healing, if at full hp you don’t need to. The results of entering a combat with 10 surges or 1 surge is the same, especially if you don’t spend a surge. As I’ve said before, I had to change the stories I told to accommodate 4e. I didn’t have to between 2e and 3e, between 3e and PF, and won’t between PF and D&D5. In fact, D&D5 makes it easier to tell the stories I want.Which is the big difference. Had I more interest I might have mangled 4e into something more appealing, but my player’s reliance on the character builder made that impossible. The whole “that wasn’t my experience” argument always seems a little… off to me. What’s the point? Are you suggesting you’re a better DM than me? That I’m playing wrong? That the problem  does not exist because you haven’t experienced it?I’ve never experienced racism. Or sexism. Or poverty. But I’m not going to suggest those problems don’t exist due to a lack of personal experience. Experiences will always vary, and if one segment of the player base regularly experiences problems with play, then that problem exists and needs to be acknowledged. It sounds like 4e really works for you. So much so that you’re heavily defending it in a thread dedicated to healing in D&D5. Cool. Glad you have a game with no problems that impact your play. So keep playing it.I tend to run sessions as self-contained stories that tie into a larger story. Extended rests at the end of each session. Except if I want a “two-part” session, which I avoid unless I know I can schedule another game quickly enough to avoid details being forgotten. So, yes, part of my problem is that I’m playing the game “wrong” by not tracking resources between sessions and not having more than 1-3 combats per session. But, if I cannot play D&D how I want, I will (and did) find games that do work for me.Still... even in the games I played rather than ran, the story dictated when we rested much more often than healing surges.</blockquote>

Verification