How do you explain overnight Healing in your game?

[Garthanos]

That is awesome. So if the PCs spent, say, 12 hours in a village in which four men were mauled by a bear, three children fell down a well, two guardsmen were ambushed by goblins, and a partridge tumbled out of a pear tree, all those injured folks will be fully healed, come the morrow. Definitely awesome.

Reductio ad absurdum.. or some other latin words... based on the limited evidence of this thread I think you like logical fallacies.

 

[IanB]

Reductio ad absurdum.. or some other latin words... based on the limited evidence of this thread I think you like logical fallacies.

Um, reductio ad absurdum isn't a logical fallacy. You can use it improperly to create logical fallacies, I suppose (particularly straw men), but it is absolutely a legitimate form of argument.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

based on the limited evidence of this thread I think you like logical fallacies.

Based on the limited evidence of this thread, I think you should probably review a basic text on construction of formal and informal logical arguments. Reductio ad absurdum isn't even a formal fallacy. (EDIT: And I see that was already covered. My bad.)

 

[Garthanos]

Um, reductio ad absurdum isn't a logical fallacy. You can use it improperly to create logical fallacies, I suppose (particularly straw men), but it is absolutely a legitimate form of argument.

A straw man... yup like knowingly using an interpreted application of heroic targeted rules for heros healing who have known exceptional resources on npc villagers who by implication do not... hmm intentional omission of implied context limits when using your RAA, seems like a straw man is that technically true.

Terminology aside. I think he is fond of Logical Fallacy to the point people should beware being convinced by the darkside in his presence. It just "informal" logic move along.

 

[Garthanos]

. Reductio ad absurdum isn't even a formal fallacy. (EDIT: And I see that was already covered. My bad.)

Might not be but using that tool is very much the basis of creating the straw man you were making... now feel free to argue it isnt a straw man.

I do agree for your first LF the context was reasonable (because examining the intent of designers how they choose to apply the rules is a reasonable piece of evidence )... the fact that this diverges greatly from RAW and other comments made by designers, really means as others noted there is a lot of wiggle room.

I dont think you have established by hauling out a banner "informal" "informal" that you are doing anything positive. Also lets fan the fires of prejudices ... your picture looks too devilish to me <sinicker />

 

[Cadfan]

Editted because I was in error.

 

[IanB]

that you are doing anything positive. Also lets fan the fires of prejudices ... your picture looks too devilish to me <sinicker />

You should see him in person.

In any case Jeff makes a legitimate point that the healing rules, if applied to NPCs, can create an absurd situation. The right response isn't to start throwing around accusations about logical fallacies and this and that, in my opinion, the right response is to say that the 4e healing rules don't care about that absurdity, because they're designed primarily to adjudicate things that happen to player characters. If an NPC needs a broken leg or to lie wounded for weeks, then that's what he does. PCs and NPCs explicitly have their mechanics differentiated in 4th edition, which is one of the biggest changes from 3rd. I like the change personally but it is a very non-simulationist sort of thing, and if you're used to approaching the game from that perspective it is going to be very jarring.

 

[Flipguarder]

The same way you explain, bullrushing tarrasques, destroying 3 foot masonry walls and pretty much a billion other things in this game:

PCs are superheroes.

/endthread

 

[Jeff Wilder]

In any case Jeff makes a legitimate point that the healing rules, if applied to NPCs, can create an absurd situation.

As always, ian, I appreciate your reasoned responses, but do note that in this case I wasn't actually commenting on the healing rules themselves. At least not directly.

I was actually commenting on someone's suggestion that one can explain the extended-rest healing rules by saying the PCs have eternal wands of healing, or unlimited healing powers, or whatever.

And I was pointing out that "I have an eternal wand of healing" -- and similar examples -- doesn't hold up when you have NPCs who need healing. Why doesn't the wand of healing work on NPCs? Why doesn't the cleric's unlimited out-of-combat healing work on NPCs? Are the NPCs just so "un-special" that the wand stops working? That the PC's god turns up his nose?

 

[Garthanos]

You should see him in person.

hehe...I might be a match (I should get up my pic) my goatee is thick and my hair suitably long and I was married by a Wiccan priestess ;-). I am not afraid of any devilishly sneaky Jeffs.