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="Sword of Spirit" data-source="post: 6317980" data-attributes="member: 6677017">Since you specifically mentioned me, I'll take the opportunity to address your assumptions.First, I don't want natural healing to be 1 hp per day. Far from it. I'm okay with characters healing from zero to full in about 4 or 5 days. I think there are a lot of people that are okay with healing to full in something around a week or two. I'd even venture a guess that that includes the majority of those who dislike inspirational healing. What we dislike is healing zero to full overnight, or within a couple of hours.Second, I'm not concerned about the mechanical balance of Second Wind, except as it relates to optional modules that might slow healing. If they don't address this specific class feature, then slowing healing creates a very weird lopsidedness, since it won't affect fighters the same way as it will affect other classes. I'm sure the designers will do their best on the healing modules, but I'm not sure they will take into account specific class features like this. Hence my concern.I actually like Action Surge. I don't feel that it is overpowered. I also like the combat maneuvers of the Battlemaster fighter. It might run contrary to your assumptions, but I like fighters to have "cool things" as the phrase goes.As far as spellcasters and campaign management to prevent 5 MWD issues I can understand if your preference is not for my style, but it works quite well for my group in creating a setting that feels right to us. Giving classes like fighter Action Surge and other powerful resources they won't have to ration or plan ahead for based on short rests makes them powerhouses with constant effectiveness. I have no problem with that whatsoever.Have you familiarized yourself with game style theories, such as the distinctions between narrativism and simulationism?My preferences for D&D are primarily simulationist. This is actually contrary to a lot of my other role-playing, where I tend to prefer a more simulationist/narrativist hybrid.I don't want to pre-judge your frame of reference, but it sounds as if you are coming from a perspective that fails to recognize the validity of various playstyles, and most importantly the reason for those playstyles. I'm not sure why you feel that simulationism is rooted in some sort of nerd wish-fulfillment, given that many of the people (including myself) to whom you would attribute that mindframe also enjoy playing martial characters with interesting special abilities.Yes, this is the issue. If a module can take care of it, that's fine. I'm just concerned that, as a core fighter class option, it will be more or less immune to a simple healing module that doesn't do brain surgery on classes on an individual basis.Yes.I believe it's been addressed by others, but that isn't necessarily the case. 3e explicitly made that assumption, and I believe it is one of the best things that ever happened to D&D, just like others believe the overt difference in 4e is one of the best things ever to happen to it. I'm not really sure what is being argued about here. The record is pretty clear. It's just a matter of preference, which seems rather a wasted argument.I'd be fine with a number of ways of handling the issue. The simplest for me would be a rule limiting characters to benefiting from a set number of short rests in a day. Such a rule would allow for a more uniform treatment of short rest based abilities across the classes, and would work well with modules that simply changed or removed that limit, and/or changed the length of time needed for a short rest. Second Wind would still be a bit over the top for me, but I wouldn't have a serious problem with it.The problem with this is it destroys our verisimilitude for those who  share my desire not to distinguish combat time from non-combat time (a very narrativist concept).</blockquote>

Verification