Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
I don't get the dislike of healing surges
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5699243" data-attributes="member: 6668292"><p>I feel like I'm learning stuff, and it's a good discussion, so no worries about a late reply <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p> </p><p>Turning a blow into a less serious one implies a certain amount of activity to me, not passive forces like luck or fate (unless you can consciously affect those). However, I see how you can draw that interpretation, even if I wouldn't assume that to be the case. I still don't think that's what it means, but I wouldn't argue against it if you were GMing for me <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> </p><p></p><p></p><p>Extremes can really muck up a conversation based on theoretical musings. I'll try to avoid that!</p><p></p><p></p><p>Yeah, again, makes sense to me. Not sure if there is a perfect system. I created the RPG that my group of six players play once a week (game later today!), and I'm still tweaking rules (mostly expanding to fill rules in cases where GMs would normally have to use fiat, because the system doesn't cover it, like running territories and the like). If I can make my own RPG and not be satisfied, I don't know if there is such as thing as a perfect system for me!</p><p></p><p></p><p>Yep <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></p><p> </p><p></p><p>You know what's funny? Years ago, when I used to play WoW, I used to advocate for a "hardcore" server, where if you died, you had until the mandatory release time to be res'd or that's it, you start over from scratch. I thought it'd be cool. Even in WoW, I wanted permanent death as an option (as in mandatory, but only on one or two servers, which you get to pick). Even in Diablo II (which I didn't play much of), I only ever played on hardcore in the campaign mode. I think I made it through two acts before I got kind of tired of my barbarian and played other games.</p><p></p><p>But, yeah, different play styles. No right or wrong answer to that <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></p><p> </p><p></p><p>And the group I ran never went through dungeons or played modules, so they weren't as necessary (though they'd certainly have been useful at times). I've played through a dungeon-like environment or two, but it was low levels (1-3), so they didn't come up (750 gp is a lot to a first level character... way out of his price range).</p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, the amount of combat is basically set by the players. They've tried to avoid fights where possible. The two fights have been instigated by me, when bandits have attacked the PCs when traveling along the road (traveling by yourself means that a group of 4-6 bandits might like their odds when they have ranged weapons and are on the mountainside, waiting for people to pass by). The players could definitely start more fights than they have (they've almost been in, I don't know, probably six fights so far), but they keep letting the negotiator talk people down (that's their preferred plan, but combat was always, "and in case he fails, we jump him...").</p><p></p><p></p><p>I think so, too. I think they'd have to shift healing surges away from the main healing mechanic (heals don't "activate" healing surges in other PCs anymore, but heal raw damage, even if it's 25% instead of a number). Leaving healing surges as the main mechanic for healing puts arbitrary hard caps on the amount of external healing one could receive in a day, which will still rub people the wrong way.</p><p></p><p>I also might have a fundamental misunderstanding of how healing works in 4e. And if so, ignore this <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></p><p> </p><p></p><p>Well, in my game, when you level up, you don't automatically increase in anything (save free skill points, or a feat or stat hop). And, since it's a point buy system, you can dump all of your points into being an amazing butcher if you want to. You can have a 20th hit die scholar with 3 hit points, or a 5th hit die warrior with 50 hit points. So, I put the baseline at 4th hit die to set a certain level of proficiency within professions, not combat (though soldiers might average 4th or 5th level in combat proficiency).</p><p></p><p>These are also settled adults, which means they aren't new or green. If you pick a fight with them at hit die 1, you will probably lose. As you should, in my mind. If you want to be heroic, start at a higher hit die. I wanted a system that could support a "farmboy to hero" story just as well as a "we're naturally the biggest, baddest guys around with little training" in my game. You can have a grizzled, trained warrior captain with decades of training in tactics and real life wars under his belt, and you can have a farm kid who gets dragged into the adventuring life, and becomes a hero.</p><p></p><p>In my ideal version of D&D, it should support different narrative ranges. I know that starting at 8th hit die means you miss out on a chunk of the game, but it's preferable to me than not being able to play a "zero to hero" type game, even if I wanted to. Give me the option for either, and let the group decide what to play.</p><p></p><p>But, like you said, it's preference. I see the real downsides to doing it my way (you lose out on the early hit die, thus you might have a shorter long term game). But the upsides more than make up for it to me. But, it's just preference in what we want in a system. If I had to hazard a guess, I'd guess that you'd rather have a specialized game this resonates with most of your wants, then a general game that adapts to different styles. Many people prefer the "I'd rather all games be specialized, so I can pick a game that is tailored to my wants, and that specializes in the things I desire, rather than doing it halfheartedly." I understand that mindset, but since D&D has such a broad base, I'd rather have it appeal to as many different styles as possible (which is a goal that might, ironically, lose it some gamers).</p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm okay with this style of play. I don't want it to be the base of all of my games. I want more options. Sometimes, the PCs are the heroes that help defeat the demonic forces from invading the Mortal Realm (happened in my game), while other times they're the evil warlords expanding out (happening later today). Other times, they're orphans raised in service to the crown, and they follow orders (happened in my game), and other times they're outcasts on a human continent looking for a way to survive (happened in my game).</p><p></p><p>I want a lot of possible narratives in my game, and I don't want all of them to be life-changing, world-altering narratives. Sometimes it's nice to see if the warlords rise to power, or fall trying. Sometimes it's nice to see if the nobles can help a nation build a new frontier town. It really depends on what our group feels like, and I don't want the system to shackle me.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Nope, not what I had in mind at all. In my game, it's basically all mundane travel unless you have a powerful magician (Passage specialist... basically teleportation magic), and even then, it costs him permanent resources (consumes a bit if his soul, by permanently reducing his Charisma, which you need an 18 or higher to cast spells at all). This makes it very, very rare. I'm not proposing this for D&D, since it's way too radical. I was just stating my preference of overland or boat travel most of the time, since it lets the world evolve. At high levels, with teleportation magic common, it's hard to have an army even begin to form without high level PCs (or even NPCs!) show up and nip it in the bud early. And that kills narratives, in my mind. Making teleportation rare but possible leaves narratives open, so it's my preference.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Yep. I really liked his take on magic items (it's basically what I did for my RPG). I hope he keeps up quality thoughts on the articles. And, just like Mr. Mearls said, "this is something Monte showed me that I liked," I hope we see Mr. Cook say, "this is something I was talking to Mike about. What do you guys think?"</p><p></p><p></p><p>Yep <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> </p><p> </p><p></p><p>Yeah. It's nice to be able to converse and say, "play style difference, but that's cool" and not have the conversation dry up right away. I do find it interesting and informative. I hope others caught in our conversation do as well! As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JamesonCourage, post: 5699243, member: 6668292"] I feel like I'm learning stuff, and it's a good discussion, so no worries about a late reply :) Turning a blow into a less serious one implies a certain amount of activity to me, not passive forces like luck or fate (unless you can consciously affect those). However, I see how you can draw that interpretation, even if I wouldn't assume that to be the case. I still don't think that's what it means, but I wouldn't argue against it if you were GMing for me :) Extremes can really muck up a conversation based on theoretical musings. I'll try to avoid that! Yeah, again, makes sense to me. Not sure if there is a perfect system. I created the RPG that my group of six players play once a week (game later today!), and I'm still tweaking rules (mostly expanding to fill rules in cases where GMs would normally have to use fiat, because the system doesn't cover it, like running territories and the like). If I can make my own RPG and not be satisfied, I don't know if there is such as thing as a perfect system for me! Yep :) You know what's funny? Years ago, when I used to play WoW, I used to advocate for a "hardcore" server, where if you died, you had until the mandatory release time to be res'd or that's it, you start over from scratch. I thought it'd be cool. Even in WoW, I wanted permanent death as an option (as in mandatory, but only on one or two servers, which you get to pick). Even in Diablo II (which I didn't play much of), I only ever played on hardcore in the campaign mode. I think I made it through two acts before I got kind of tired of my barbarian and played other games. But, yeah, different play styles. No right or wrong answer to that :) And the group I ran never went through dungeons or played modules, so they weren't as necessary (though they'd certainly have been useful at times). I've played through a dungeon-like environment or two, but it was low levels (1-3), so they didn't come up (750 gp is a lot to a first level character... way out of his price range). Well, the amount of combat is basically set by the players. They've tried to avoid fights where possible. The two fights have been instigated by me, when bandits have attacked the PCs when traveling along the road (traveling by yourself means that a group of 4-6 bandits might like their odds when they have ranged weapons and are on the mountainside, waiting for people to pass by). The players could definitely start more fights than they have (they've almost been in, I don't know, probably six fights so far), but they keep letting the negotiator talk people down (that's their preferred plan, but combat was always, "and in case he fails, we jump him..."). I think so, too. I think they'd have to shift healing surges away from the main healing mechanic (heals don't "activate" healing surges in other PCs anymore, but heal raw damage, even if it's 25% instead of a number). Leaving healing surges as the main mechanic for healing puts arbitrary hard caps on the amount of external healing one could receive in a day, which will still rub people the wrong way. I also might have a fundamental misunderstanding of how healing works in 4e. And if so, ignore this :) Well, in my game, when you level up, you don't automatically increase in anything (save free skill points, or a feat or stat hop). And, since it's a point buy system, you can dump all of your points into being an amazing butcher if you want to. You can have a 20th hit die scholar with 3 hit points, or a 5th hit die warrior with 50 hit points. So, I put the baseline at 4th hit die to set a certain level of proficiency within professions, not combat (though soldiers might average 4th or 5th level in combat proficiency). These are also settled adults, which means they aren't new or green. If you pick a fight with them at hit die 1, you will probably lose. As you should, in my mind. If you want to be heroic, start at a higher hit die. I wanted a system that could support a "farmboy to hero" story just as well as a "we're naturally the biggest, baddest guys around with little training" in my game. You can have a grizzled, trained warrior captain with decades of training in tactics and real life wars under his belt, and you can have a farm kid who gets dragged into the adventuring life, and becomes a hero. In my ideal version of D&D, it should support different narrative ranges. I know that starting at 8th hit die means you miss out on a chunk of the game, but it's preferable to me than not being able to play a "zero to hero" type game, even if I wanted to. Give me the option for either, and let the group decide what to play. But, like you said, it's preference. I see the real downsides to doing it my way (you lose out on the early hit die, thus you might have a shorter long term game). But the upsides more than make up for it to me. But, it's just preference in what we want in a system. If I had to hazard a guess, I'd guess that you'd rather have a specialized game this resonates with most of your wants, then a general game that adapts to different styles. Many people prefer the "I'd rather all games be specialized, so I can pick a game that is tailored to my wants, and that specializes in the things I desire, rather than doing it halfheartedly." I understand that mindset, but since D&D has such a broad base, I'd rather have it appeal to as many different styles as possible (which is a goal that might, ironically, lose it some gamers). I'm okay with this style of play. I don't want it to be the base of all of my games. I want more options. Sometimes, the PCs are the heroes that help defeat the demonic forces from invading the Mortal Realm (happened in my game), while other times they're the evil warlords expanding out (happening later today). Other times, they're orphans raised in service to the crown, and they follow orders (happened in my game), and other times they're outcasts on a human continent looking for a way to survive (happened in my game). I want a lot of possible narratives in my game, and I don't want all of them to be life-changing, world-altering narratives. Sometimes it's nice to see if the warlords rise to power, or fall trying. Sometimes it's nice to see if the nobles can help a nation build a new frontier town. It really depends on what our group feels like, and I don't want the system to shackle me. Nope, not what I had in mind at all. In my game, it's basically all mundane travel unless you have a powerful magician (Passage specialist... basically teleportation magic), and even then, it costs him permanent resources (consumes a bit if his soul, by permanently reducing his Charisma, which you need an 18 or higher to cast spells at all). This makes it very, very rare. I'm not proposing this for D&D, since it's way too radical. I was just stating my preference of overland or boat travel most of the time, since it lets the world evolve. At high levels, with teleportation magic common, it's hard to have an army even begin to form without high level PCs (or even NPCs!) show up and nip it in the bud early. And that kills narratives, in my mind. Making teleportation rare but possible leaves narratives open, so it's my preference. Yep. I really liked his take on magic items (it's basically what I did for my RPG). I hope he keeps up quality thoughts on the articles. And, just like Mr. Mearls said, "this is something Monte showed me that I liked," I hope we see Mr. Cook say, "this is something I was talking to Mike about. What do you guys think?" Yep :) Yeah. It's nice to be able to converse and say, "play style difference, but that's cool" and not have the conversation dry up right away. I do find it interesting and informative. I hope others caught in our conversation do as well! As always, play what you like :) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
I don't get the dislike of healing surges
Top