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="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 4563066" data-attributes="member: 710">I have done this, too, many years ago, when I hadn't figured out the CLW Wand "trick" yet, or when we didn't have a Cleric. But at some point, we decided that without magical healing, things were to tedious.At what percentage does it become a corner case? How many of the 10 % you experienced for mundane healing was actually seen as "good" for the game and the game would have been missing something without it? How much of these 10 % were actually required by the way the game rules operated, and how many because people were "conservative" with their approach to magical healing (either a DM restricting access to items, or someone playing a Cleric not wanting to cast healing spells, or a variety of other reasons). I didn't say it's automatically indicate of the norm. I post the reasons why I think my experience is more indicative of the norm. (Admittedly, I did so only in one of the latest post. But that didn't invalidate the point I made before, just explains how I came to that conclusion).Yes, indeed, a big flaw in the 3E rules. The designers didn't understand the implications of their magical item and wealth by levels rules, particularly in this case. But the CLW Wands are not the only source of magical healing. Potions might be more expensive, but they work pretty well, too. And I think these designers might worry too much. I can see the point for a wound system like in Shadowrun or a non-ablative hit point model like Warhammer (with criticals dealing nasty to deadly injuries). But ablative hit points like in D&D? But just to be clear on this: I say so because I think trying to use "simulation" to faciliate immersion and then give enough ways to allow people to ignore the consequences of the simulation is borderline self-deception. Maybe it falls in the "pretentious" category on that stupid-retro-pretentious scale."Huhu, we have the most realistic wound system ever! Let's create a few magical spells and items that effectively circumvent that wound system, so people can easily bypass having to go through 4 weeks of bed rest and rolling wound infection rolls after every combat!" Sure, you give people the option to ignore that magical healing, but you also make it difficult for people that like fast healing but don't like reliance on magic.The designers could have easily fooled you. Using the disease track to make recovering healing surges difficult should be very easy, for example. And then just add a 1st level Ritual that allows people to recover all healing surges if cast before an extended rest. I could now go and defend their system against sandboxers that love mundane healing and discover that just one spell can ruin their fun: "Just don't use the ritual, and you'd be fine, just as you didn't use Clerics or Wands of CLW or Potions in some AD&D and D&D 3E campaigns!"That's why I often think of the 4E design as "brutally honest". <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification