Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Crimson Binome" data-source="post: 7329852" data-attributes="member: 6775031">I agree that it's kind of weird for a non-magical character to have a hard limit on ability usage. When you use HP (or hit dice) as an alternative limit, that doesn't make it less weird, because HP is an inherently weird mechanic in this edition. Whether it's more-weird or less-weird is a matter of opinion, but I personally don't see it as a favorable trade-off to ditch the hard-limit abstraction in favor of the HP abstraction.Ignoring the concept of verisimilitude, just in terms of game mechanics, I really don't like this type of rule. Losing HP is a bad thing, to be avoided whenever possible. Hit Points are the only thing stopping you from dying, and I don't want to die. It's a punch in the gut, every time I lose HP, and I can't imagine using an ability fueled by HP unless it was absolutely necessary. (Which, incidentally, is the wrong way for me to look at it; the correct way to look at it is that I should spend HP whenever I expect that using the ability would save me more HP in the long run, as a result of stopping the threat more quickly.) It's hard for me to look at other players, when they lose HP, and I realize that they don't seem to even care. I don't know when that happened, that other people stopped caring about HP, but it's definitely gotten worse in 4E and 5E and this sort of rule would make it even worse.Moreover, in 5E particularly, there's a lot of free healing every day. There's already a problem where PCs can punch way above their level when they only have one or two encounters per day, and letting the fighter turn their excess free healing into more actions would only exacerbate that problem. It would be hard to price things in such a way that ability usage remains reasonable across a variety of circumstances.</blockquote>

Verification