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
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
PC Roles (New Design and Development Article)
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="Anax" data-source="post: 3744196" data-attributes="member: 19868"><p>I think that it does lessen the intensity of the consequences—but it doesn’t negate them. Think about an ability that allows you to take an extra standard action. If that ability is usable at will, clearly you can do it whenever you want. Which will be all the time. If it’s usable once per encounter, you have to think a little bit about when you want to expend it. If you see a potentially deadly situation, you’re going to use it to help he party recover, and you hope there won’t be another for a while. If it’s usable once per day, it’s really a constrained resource: you can use it to save somebody’s bacon—but if you do, and the next fight is even <em>tougher</em>, you might be hurting.</p><p></p><p>In the case of the example of “I hit the bad guy and heal my friend”, what kinds of things can impact this choice? Well, is this two independent actions (choose one to heal, choose one to attack, do them both)? It doesn’t sound like it. If they’re not independent, then what are the limits? What happens if I attack my enemy and miss? Well, then I probably don’t want to do it if I <em>need</em> that heal. How much does it heal? Well, then I probably don’t want to do it if I need a <em>big</em> heal.</p><p></p><p>I would personally imagine that if you absolutely positively must get a big heal to someone <em>right now</em>, you’re not going to be doing anything else (except maybe moving) in that round.</p><p></p><p>Under that assumption, it’s not so much decreasing the danger as increasing the range of possibilities. Now you can do damage for 1.0, or damage for 0.75 and heal for 0.75, or heal for 1.0 in a single round. If you don’t need healing, you can do straight up damage. If you need a crap-ton of healing, you can do straight healing. If you need a mix of the two, your efficiency actually goes up (you’re able to put out more damage and healing than if you were alternating one round healing and one round attacking), but your overall throughput goes down.</p><p></p><p>And the final thought is: If the party can do more stuff, doesn’t it stand to reason that the enemy will be built to take that into account? If healing can be done more easily on the fly, while combat continues, then the enemy will probably be putting out damage more consistently.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Anax, post: 3744196, member: 19868"] I think that it does lessen the intensity of the consequences—but it doesn’t negate them. Think about an ability that allows you to take an extra standard action. If that ability is usable at will, clearly you can do it whenever you want. Which will be all the time. If it’s usable once per encounter, you have to think a little bit about when you want to expend it. If you see a potentially deadly situation, you’re going to use it to help he party recover, and you hope there won’t be another for a while. If it’s usable once per day, it’s really a constrained resource: you can use it to save somebody’s bacon—but if you do, and the next fight is even [i]tougher[/i], you might be hurting. In the case of the example of “I hit the bad guy and heal my friend”, what kinds of things can impact this choice? Well, is this two independent actions (choose one to heal, choose one to attack, do them both)? It doesn’t sound like it. If they’re not independent, then what are the limits? What happens if I attack my enemy and miss? Well, then I probably don’t want to do it if I [i]need[/i] that heal. How much does it heal? Well, then I probably don’t want to do it if I need a [i]big[/i] heal. I would personally imagine that if you absolutely positively must get a big heal to someone [i]right now[/i], you’re not going to be doing anything else (except maybe moving) in that round. Under that assumption, it’s not so much decreasing the danger as increasing the range of possibilities. Now you can do damage for 1.0, or damage for 0.75 and heal for 0.75, or heal for 1.0 in a single round. If you don’t need healing, you can do straight up damage. If you need a crap-ton of healing, you can do straight healing. If you need a mix of the two, your efficiency actually goes up (you’re able to put out more damage and healing than if you were alternating one round healing and one round attacking), but your overall throughput goes down. And the final thought is: If the party can do more stuff, doesn’t it stand to reason that the enemy will be built to take that into account? If healing can be done more easily on the fly, while combat continues, then the enemy will probably be putting out damage more consistently. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
PC Roles (New Design and Development Article)
Top