Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Proposed Fix for Whack-a-Mole Healing
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="Saeviomagy" data-source="post: 7078339" data-attributes="member: 5890"><p>I think that heal from 0 doesn't really make much of a difference. The simple fact is that in-combat healing is a poor proposition (ie - it's limited, small, takes up valuable actions, typically can only be done by one or two PCs), and it's very difficult to say that pro-active healing is going to be worthwhile (the foe may hit someone else, they may miss, your ally might take defensive measures), as opposed to doing something with a higher chance of reducing incoming damage while also progressing the combat.</p><p></p><p>I think that changing to heal-from-negatives is not going to change things much: in-combat healing will still be bad, so you will still avoid it until someone is down... only now healing that person might not even get them up, so you'll go for the stabilize option.</p><p></p><p>So you'll change the reasoning behind the problem (ie - people won't deliberately say "it's more effective to heal people for a minimal amount once they go down, so I'll hold of on healing now"), but I think the problem will remain (ie - people won't heal now if they weren't doing it before - there's almost always something better to do).</p><p></p><p>I think your second point is probably a better thing to target: switch up the fast-combat tuning. If foes die in 3 rounds, then spending 1 round healing is a waste of time unless your ally dropped during the first round... in which case you don't have time to pre-emptively heal. If foes take 10 rounds to kill, then it's far more reasonable to spend 2 of those rounds healing to keep allies up.</p><p></p><p>So... smaller foes, more of them, trickled into fights to pace them? But still avoiding the feeling of sloggy combat somehow.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Saeviomagy, post: 7078339, member: 5890"] I think that heal from 0 doesn't really make much of a difference. The simple fact is that in-combat healing is a poor proposition (ie - it's limited, small, takes up valuable actions, typically can only be done by one or two PCs), and it's very difficult to say that pro-active healing is going to be worthwhile (the foe may hit someone else, they may miss, your ally might take defensive measures), as opposed to doing something with a higher chance of reducing incoming damage while also progressing the combat. I think that changing to heal-from-negatives is not going to change things much: in-combat healing will still be bad, so you will still avoid it until someone is down... only now healing that person might not even get them up, so you'll go for the stabilize option. So you'll change the reasoning behind the problem (ie - people won't deliberately say "it's more effective to heal people for a minimal amount once they go down, so I'll hold of on healing now"), but I think the problem will remain (ie - people won't heal now if they weren't doing it before - there's almost always something better to do). I think your second point is probably a better thing to target: switch up the fast-combat tuning. If foes die in 3 rounds, then spending 1 round healing is a waste of time unless your ally dropped during the first round... in which case you don't have time to pre-emptively heal. If foes take 10 rounds to kill, then it's far more reasonable to spend 2 of those rounds healing to keep allies up. So... smaller foes, more of them, trickled into fights to pace them? But still avoiding the feeling of sloggy combat somehow. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Proposed Fix for Whack-a-Mole Healing
Top