D&D 5E (2014) Should 5E have Healing Surges?

[BryonD]

Yeah, I just don't agree that it is a mechanics-first thing. It models the way people 'rally' themselves. Perfectly? Maybe not, but then hit points by themselves don't perfectly represent 'damage' or anything else either. If they did then falling off a cliff would involve something like a % loss of hit points or use some other mechanism.

Falling is a good example of the worst of the worst.
In my games I use a house rule. Falling works exactly as written EXCEPT, all 1s on the d6 are 1 point of CON damage. All 2-6 are HP damage.

PCs do not jump off cliffs in my game.

As to the "perfectly" comment, multiple editions and many other RPGs have consistently demonstrated that HP work more than "adequately". It may not be that everyone everywhere uses them the same. So I won't argue with someone who says they don't. But they can.

Surges, OTOH, used as designed are a pure sacrifice of narrative in deference to gamist concerns. Lack of perfection in A is not a justification for adding the disfunction of B.

 

[harlokin]

Surges, OTOH, used as designed are a pure sacrifice of narrative in deference to gamist concerns. Lack of perfection in A is not a justification for adding the disfunction of B.

IMO what they do is grant the Player some control over the narrative in respects of their character. Nothing bad.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I don't think anybody would, honestly. But from what I've read so far, it doesn't sound like 5E will be anything of the sort. They aren't talking about "fixing 4E," they are talking about "going back to basics." If anything, it sounds like they are bandaging the old BECM rules, not 4E.

I don't think anyone expects the rules to be mechanically exactly like anything that has come before, just generally close and evocative of older editions. I'm not really too wedded to specific mechanics anyway, it is what they accomplish that matters, and some aspects of how they are structured (IE you really need the rules to be reasonably transparent).

I'm just saying there were a lot of things in BECMI and AD&D that were responsible for me saying "meh, yeah, D&D, been there, done with that" and 4e largely dealt with the most critical ones. Certainly enough to make it interesting to run 4e campaigns again, which I had not done in a long time before 2008.

Now, 5e could do that too, but it has to DO that because from MY perspective I don't need to run out and buy a new edition of D&D that has the same shortcomings as the one I mostly stopped running in like 1997 or something. I'm interested in what 5e can bring to the table in terms of IMPROVING what I have in 4e. While I'm happy for other people that they might get the game that they want I'll have no real reason to buy into AD&D redux.

And, yes, it may be more complicated than that because it may regress on some things and still do other things much better, etc. It will not be a single simple choice. I don't really have specific 'deal breakers' either, but if the way damage is handled is old school, that's going to be a REAL hard thing to swallow. Real hard. I'll hope it works out one way or another and I like the game. That will be cool.

 

[BryonD]

No, it doesn't. When you use Second Wind or most healing powers you're removing surges, and if you don't think that's a consequence you haven't played in any game I've run, because you ARE going to need those surges later, and you're going to be sorry you had to use them now. If that isn't a consequence then what is?

When a character in my game is wounded he has consequences of the wound. When he is healed he doesn't have those consequences any longer.
If he was healed because a cleric cast a spell then that spell is gone. The spell being gone is a secondary consequence of the wound. But it is not a true consequence of the wound.
The surge being gone is a secondary consequence of the wound, but it is not a true consequence of the wound.

Same thing either way, only one requires actual healing and one is a fighter thinking his wounds away.

The problem is every 'constraint' you propose is to simply eliminate any of the nice things that surges do model. Your proposal was ridiculously limited and would add nothing to the game that some simple proportional healing rule wouldn't add. Don't toss out some useless crumb and then tell me you're willing to compromise, lol.

From a gamist pov, you are right. I've no interest in that pov.

I'm not offering a crumb and I'm really not willing to compromise on this point.
I respect your desire for a game you like. I respect that WotC should throw me to the curb if they can get more fans without me. I don't remotely claim 5e design should revolve around my preference for my sake. But I do think that if it doesn't take my point of view strongly into account for the MARKET's sake. It will pay the price for it. (I made similar comments four years ago)

I'm going to play the BEST game for me. If they want me to play that game they need to make THAT GAME, not ask me to compromise. And I realize that is a hard standard and I'm FULLY prepared to keep playing PF. I actually EXPECT to keep playing PF.

But I'm going to keep an open mind and also keep making comments relevant to what would bring me over.

Everyone is justified in having their own preferences. Don't mistake my defense of mine as an attack on anyone else's. I'm sure we all feel the same way on that. If we can all get something we're reasonably satisfied with that's fine. Everyone has to be actually willing to compromise some though. Having a "surge that restores some HP at the end of the day" is not compromise IMHO. I'm asking for a bit more than that.

Understood. And if they can blow my expectations away then awesome for them.
It is also possible that they will have another game that fails to capture the marketplace but a select niche loves and you may well be in that niche again.
Or maybe they will do what I want but blow YOUR expectations away so that you love it anyway.
Or maybe you get to take a turn finding a new game.

Time will tell.

 

[BryonD]

IMO what they do is grant the Player some control over the narrative in respects of their character. Nothing bad.

Sounds nice.
The devil is in the details.
There is all kinds of bad in the details here.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

IMO what they do is grant the Player some control over the narrative in respects of their character. Nothing bad.

Exactly. There's no sacrifice that was made with HS, it is just DIFFERENT. That's enough for people to not want to use it, but the idea that 4e's HP system is worse in some fashion narratively than the pre-4e one is just not going to fly.

 

[harlokin]

Sounds nice.
The devil is in the details.
There is all kinds of bad in the details here.

I'm not saying it has to be implemented in the same manner as 4e, I'm just asking for an equivalent that fits within the framework of 5e.

 

[Hassassin]

Again, PCs are not your average guy walking down the street. They're people who are going knowingly into extreme danger, actively defending themselves and expecting to suffer for it.

But actually suffering for only five minutes?

Ok, until the morning, if they're out of surges.

 

[BryonD]

I'm not saying it has to be implemented in the same manner as 4e, I'm just asking for an equivalent that fits within the framework of 5e.

Ok, you get an "equivalent" that also purges the devil from all the details, I'll happily look. That seems a pipe dream for now.

 

[Guest 85555]

Exactly. There's no sacrifice that was made with HS, it is just DIFFERENT. That's enough for people to not want to use it, but the idea that 4e's HP system is worse in some fashion narratively than the pre-4e one is just not going to fly.

This has been covered extensively in other threads and I think it boils down to some people find healing surges disruptive to suspension of disbelief and others don't. I think it is better to assume good faith on both sides. I know for my part, the issue I have with healing surges isn't simply that it is different. That doesn't mean you can't like it, or find it perfectly realistic. I just have trouble with it on those grounds.