Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 7623141" data-attributes="member: 6795602">Whack-A-Mole isn't a guaranteed return in all circumstances either.&nbsp; It's only guaranteed in a few very particular cases.&nbsp; 1)&nbsp; Enemies ignore downed allies and don't hit them with AOE'sAND2)&nbsp; No enemies go after you would heal a downed ally before he gets his turn.&nbsp; If those 2 conditions aren't met then whack-a-mole isn't guaranteed.This also assumes enemies aren't particularly vicious toward downed PC's.&nbsp; If they are then the PC might be dead before you can pop up the whack-a-mole.Sure.&nbsp; But that also applies to the downsides and not just the advantages.&nbsp; Suppose you use a high level heal spell in a scenario where the PC wouldn't have actually been downed if you didn't use it.&nbsp; What's the downside? Likewise, suppose you didn't heal a pc before he dropped to 0.&nbsp; What's the potential downside.&nbsp; It's not just about the potential benefits, it's also about mitigating the potential downsides.My contention is that potential downsides of not healing as I advocate are so bad that long term it's too risky not to heal in such situations.&nbsp; &nbsp;Sure.&nbsp; The worst case scenario if you heal in this situation is that you've used a spell slot and restored hp that your allies don't actually need to win this fight.&nbsp; They still keep those HP's etc.&nbsp; The only real downside is you risk being in a situation later that day where you end up needing that slot and you don't have it.&nbsp; Spending your strongest action this combat as I advocate for would fit perfectly in this scenario.&nbsp; It literally would be you doing everything you can to survive this fight without thought of future combats.I agree.&nbsp; I just think you have to look at pros and cons both when evaluating risk. So for my tactic, which while on average there's often a tiny amount of downside, there are times it has immense upside.&nbsp; Compared to whack-a-mole healing which while it often has a small upside, there are times it has an immense downside.&nbsp; Generally speaking when managing risk for something extremely important you want to minimize extreme downsides even if it costs a little more overall.&nbsp; That's the foundation the insurance industry is built upon.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FrogReaver, post: 7623141, member: 6795602"] Whack-A-Mole isn't a guaranteed return in all circumstances either. It's only guaranteed in a few very particular cases. 1) Enemies ignore downed allies and don't hit them with AOE's AND 2) No enemies go after you would heal a downed ally before he gets his turn. If those 2 conditions aren't met then whack-a-mole isn't guaranteed. This also assumes enemies aren't particularly vicious toward downed PC's. If they are then the PC might be dead before you can pop up the whack-a-mole. Sure. But that also applies to the downsides and not just the advantages. Suppose you use a high level heal spell in a scenario where the PC wouldn't have actually been downed if you didn't use it. What's the downside? Likewise, suppose you didn't heal a pc before he dropped to 0. What's the potential downside. It's not just about the potential benefits, it's also about mitigating the potential downsides. My contention is that potential downsides of not healing as I advocate are so bad that long term it's too risky not to heal in such situations. Sure. The worst case scenario if you heal in this situation is that you've used a spell slot and restored hp that your allies don't actually need to win this fight. They still keep those HP's etc. The only real downside is you risk being in a situation later that day where you end up needing that slot and you don't have it. Spending your strongest action this combat as I advocate for would fit perfectly in this scenario. It literally would be you doing everything you can to survive this fight without thought of future combats. I agree. I just think you have to look at pros and cons both when evaluating risk. So for my tactic, which while on average there's often a tiny amount of downside, there are times it has immense upside. Compared to whack-a-mole healing which while it often has a small upside, there are times it has an immense downside. Generally speaking when managing risk for something extremely important you want to minimize extreme downsides even if it costs a little more overall. That's the foundation the insurance industry is built upon. [/QUOTE]

Verification