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
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!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Second Wind: Yes or No?
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="Balesir" data-source="post: 6092921" data-attributes="member: 27160"><p>From a purely mathematical point of view, certainly, but this (a) ignores the dramatic value of a heroic recovery and (b) assumes that the recovery requires no (limited) resources to enact.</p><p></p><p>It is only "just more hit points" if it requires no limited resources to use. This is wrong on at least one count, ideally (from my point of view) from two.</p><p></p><p>The first count is that the recovery requires an action in the action economy. Given that you are in a conflict in which both sides act, that makes "actions" a precious resource; second wind takes an action, ergo it is not "just the same as more hit points".</p><p></p><p>The second count is that, if you have "hit dice" or "healing surges" or whatever nomenclature passes muster under the collective sense of aesthetics, then it costs these "long term hit points" to use second wind, making it extremely unlike "extra hit points" indeed.</p><p></p><p>As [MENTION=17106]Ahnehnois[/MENTION] has pointed out in his post that I replied to above, if all you are concerned about is number of hit points then starting hps and second wind recovery are indistinguishable. This means that, for long combats, the sum of hit points available is all that matters, so you could simply reduce both initial and recovered hit points until you get to the shortness of combat and degree of randomness you prefer. In other words, if the in-combat healing is part of the design, it is irrelevant to the combat duration, which simply relies on the total number of hit points available. Personally, I prefer more rather than less, up to a certain point, but if you want wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am fights then just halving all hit points (including healing results) should work a treat.</p><p></p><p>I'd say have the lower numbers as "core" or "basic" or whatever, and I'll just double them as a "module", but that would reduce the granularity available.</p><p></p><p>What on earth is "reality bending" about taking a breather and gaining extended endurance in a fight? Only if hit points are "meat" does that make sense - and hit points as "meat" don't make sense to begin with...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Balesir, post: 6092921, member: 27160"] From a purely mathematical point of view, certainly, but this (a) ignores the dramatic value of a heroic recovery and (b) assumes that the recovery requires no (limited) resources to enact. It is only "just more hit points" if it requires no limited resources to use. This is wrong on at least one count, ideally (from my point of view) from two. The first count is that the recovery requires an action in the action economy. Given that you are in a conflict in which both sides act, that makes "actions" a precious resource; second wind takes an action, ergo it is not "just the same as more hit points". The second count is that, if you have "hit dice" or "healing surges" or whatever nomenclature passes muster under the collective sense of aesthetics, then it costs these "long term hit points" to use second wind, making it extremely unlike "extra hit points" indeed. As [MENTION=17106]Ahnehnois[/MENTION] has pointed out in his post that I replied to above, if all you are concerned about is number of hit points then starting hps and second wind recovery are indistinguishable. This means that, for long combats, the sum of hit points available is all that matters, so you could simply reduce both initial and recovered hit points until you get to the shortness of combat and degree of randomness you prefer. In other words, if the in-combat healing is part of the design, it is irrelevant to the combat duration, which simply relies on the total number of hit points available. Personally, I prefer more rather than less, up to a certain point, but if you want wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am fights then just halving all hit points (including healing results) should work a treat. I'd say have the lower numbers as "core" or "basic" or whatever, and I'll just double them as a "module", but that would reduce the granularity available. What on earth is "reality bending" about taking a breather and gaining extended endurance in a fight? Only if hit points are "meat" does that make sense - and hit points as "meat" don't make sense to begin with... [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Second Wind: Yes or No?
Top