Wuzzard
First Post
Just think, a level 1 version could revive someone who's only mostly dead.
Can we get that in pill form?
Just think, a level 1 version could revive someone who's only mostly dead.
Can we get that in pill form?
But beyond low levels, that's a pointless rule. Short of a Palentar critting on your corpse (which it probably wouldn't do anyway) most hits are going to deal somewhere in the range of 20-30 damage. That's, for most people, level 4 and below. Once you're past that benchmark, you're basically one-hit-unkillable, since nothing is going to deal that level of damage to you short of a breath weapon.
If symptoms persist after 4 hours, see a doctor.It is in pill form. However, market-testing found users unwilling to administer it and people needlessly died. It was a rectally administered pill. It's back in R&D for further testing.
It's not just you. Default 5e is very much "easy mode" - full overnight healing and spells like revivify. First thing we did was remove revivify, raise dead, etc from the game (along with leomunds magic hut). Then swap in slow overnight healing for normal overnight healing. Then add lingering injuries (or preferably some variant of it). Remove the -5/+10 mechanic from GWM and SS. At that point things should be significantly more difficult.Hello
So as I'm reading through the forum I saw in passing a comment here and there about this spell. It took a while for me to catch on that this spell was *important* and I looked it up.
Did this spell originate in 5e or does it come from a previous edition?
So from a purely "magic" logical point of view, I have to concede that the spell makes sense. If a level 7 spell can turn back someone to life after years of being dad, and level 5 spell after days, then perhaps a level 3 spell can revive someone just after a few short moments of death. If a level 3 spell can create a fireball, it makes sense that a level 1 spell makes a burning hand. And we also know that well, with modern medicine someone who is dead might be brought back with emergency care if this death occurred but moments ago.
That being said, the *impact* is has on the game is huge. When someone drops to zero it's a big, dramatic moment. The injured PC has to be shielded from vindictive enemies that may perform a coup de grace on him/her, and must be healed/stabilized before death follows. But with this... eh just leave him/her, let's deal with the enemies and we'll revivify him/her right after. The dramatic tension is removed, and the overall risk are also reduced.
Is it just me?
Yes, this is also awful. Healing should be touch only, to at least make positioning slightly important. I also think it should cost a whole action, which can kinda start a death spiral, but hey, that's dangerous battle for ya! Hmmm possibly - bonus action while target above 0 hp, but if target reduced to zero hp, then spell takes longer to work/cast, and requires a normal action. That would at least encourage healing while someone is on their feet, rather than waiting for them to drop, then whack-a-mole heal.As mentioned, Revivify goes back to late 3E / early 3.5, but it's been getting less-and-less restrictive with each passing edition.
The other big game-changer in terms of instant saves is Healing Word, which does go back only to 4E, but can stabilize an ally (and return them to the fight) from across the room as a bonus action.
And long-time players too.I seem to remember at least one of the devs indicating they went with "hard to die" by default, because they thought "easy to die" default might inadvertently scare off/annoy new players.
And long-time players too.
Most of the gamers I've ever had personal experience with, and even most of the gamers I have had online conversations with, tend to take games with "easy to die" default and turn them into "hard to die" (at least by comparison to the default) through house-rules and/or play-style choices - especially if it takes any considerable amount of time to build a character for the system.
Can we get that in pill form?