NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5704090" data-attributes="member: 6668292">Well, I think you're really on the fringe of things, if that's your opinion. If the only way to die (via save or die while in the negatives) is by going into shock over fairly minor wounds in your game, I'd say you're detached from most groups. This is just a gut assessment, obviously, but it's nothing I've ever heard anyone else put forward before this moment.Now, it's fine to be in a corner case scenario. I mean, it doesn't solve the problems of people who want to participate in standard fantasy genre narratives, but you didn't set out to solve that, either.The healing surge rules (including full recovery on an extended rest) make it much harder to mechanically support getting terrible wounds in combat. If you take a terrible wound in 3.X and are naturally heal, it'll take a few days (to a couple of weeks) while your wounds heal. This isn't the case in 4e. To this end, 3.X certainly doesn't shut off the narrative the way 4e does. Within this context, 3.X certainly has more mechanical support for getting terrible wounds in combat (it allows the simulation of slower healing over time) while 4e has a mechanic that actively denies this narrative, by your own admission (people can only "bleed out" over shock on minor wounds).I think the issue is whether or not a particular type of narrative is available in the game. The question, "why don't you like healing surges?" was answered with, "because they close off this type of narrative to my group." Going into your opinion on the value of the mechanics isn't germane to this discussion. For example, I didn't keep the healing mechanics in my SRD-based RPG as they were written. However, the issue here is whether or not a narrative is available, not whether or not it's a good "simulation of bad wounds." The fact that bad wounds cannot be simulated well in your mind in 4e is problematic when the complaint is over narrative possibilities.Are their rules for it in the game?Same for my group. Not once did a player ever use a healing wand. Wands were used literally twice in the 7 or so years we played 3.X (including my long-running campaign with over 2,000 hours put into it).In 3.5, you need at least 901 people per town to buy that wand. On top of that, you'll need to run across a town that has it "in stock" as Danny indicated; this meshes well with the DMG's advice on a "living, breathing world" (page 131) and exceptions to towns and prices ("while exceptions are certainly possible (a boomtown near a newly discovered mine, a farming community impoverished after a prolonged drought)", page 137). If the area of the world is affected by the setting in ways outside of what is assumed in the DMG (frontier settlements, low magic setting, wartime ("during wartime, authorities may restrict or even confiscate materials and supplies", page 133), etc.), it is encouraged that the towns differ from how they are presented in the DMG.I think it's reasonable to say, "circumstances permitting" without taking it to the extreme of, "but now you're playing DA's Personal D&D, and not the shared actual game." Plenty of people play in or have played in low magic games, with the setting adjusted accordingly. The guidelines in the 3.5 DMG support changing the rules to reflect this. It's not controversial, and it's not playing a different game.Which ours weren't. So, yes, it's assuming that.</blockquote>

Verification