Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Herremann the Wise" data-source="post: 5710684" data-attributes="member: 11300">Several examples the first two being the most interesting but also most atypical:- Primary one is my Kingmaker campaign where there is no PC cleric, with the only source of healing a Druid that will not choose all healing spells (and usually chooses none by playing his character in a "particular" way - that annoys one my players to no end because they think this character should be playing the healer when such a thing is just NOT what this PC does). There have been various situations where the primary fighter in the group went into the negatives or close to it without immediate magical healing available. Due to the expansive non-rushed nature of this sandbox campaign (and the fact that no one is that great at healing), the group has on several occasions chosen to "spend a week or so recuperating" before heading back out to the frontier. At low levels, those DC 15 heal checks are not that easy. Funnily enough, the narrative in this campaign has a real "wild west" feel to it with the lack of magical healing combined with low level really adding something special.- I remember in a previous 3e campaign where the cleric died leaving a big gaping healing hole in an adventure where the group had to stop a very nasty ritual within a day. With several characters seriously injured, the rather significant decision to not continue and effectively "fail" was a crucial narrative tipping point and decision. While it made stopping the "bad guys" and their plans much more difficult, I think that particular one was actually really rewarding because of the struggle to eventually gain victory after a significant defeat. Certainly a case of a victory earned rather than a victory given.- There is then of course the large number of times when a PC goes into the negatives and a very serious wound is described (that is usually quickly dealt with via magical healing). Despite the fact that magic is typically used and thus the "effect" of a serious wound is not felt; the description of a serious wound is still given (and would have been felt if no magical healing was available).In practice though, I get your point that having a group stay on hold due to injury is far less likely than due to researching something or crafting MIs or general downtime. The fact that in 4e you can't go to that "serious wound" description however is significant (at least for some groups).Back in the day playing AD&D when I was a teenager at school, I think it fair to say that we too only used an "approximation" of the rules as written; and that our descriptions of such things were usually bizarre, impossible, psychotic or a mix of all three.Playing 3e/Pathfinder, our group regularly describes serious wounding whenever a PC goes into the negatives. Going into the negatives equates to the "serious wound situation". I also think this is true for a lot of groups based on various posts on these boards over the years. Even if such narratives are quickly undone by magical healing, the descriptive "threat factor" is still there where as when playing 4e, we are generally more cautious just sticking to the numbers and the excitement they can generate (rolling that healing save on 2 strikes is always thrilling). Going into the negatives in 4e is not the cue required. Going into the negatives with "save strikes" and no surges left is. As you say though, in 4e this situation rarely occurs (mainly because it is usually easy to not get yourself into a low surge/low hp situation). Where as in 3.x/Pathfinder, going into the negatives (and thus describing a serious wound) is much more common.Because I don't think people care that much (except for imbeciles like me who have an axe to grind regarding damage and healing in D&D and who really want to see it fixed in 5e <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=";)" />). In addition, I would say for those that agree with my view, I have provided an un-countered specific example and an un-countered general situation explaining why the difference occurs (and perhaps because I play 3e/Pathfinder/4e and find fault with all of them in regards to damage and healing as well as mentioning incredibly easy fixes for it, my analysis is viewed as fair). As such, it is kind of like premise disproved, case closed, let's move on. Specific examples while interesting are never going to match the debating power of analysing the general situation and why the specifics occur rather than examination of just a handful of particulars.Obviously no snark taken.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />As I have shown, for groups with a similar style to mine, 4e forces you to pull back/change how we do things in terms of damage description producing a slightly unpalatable overall narrative lacking in a certain verisimilitude.Best RegardsHerremann the Wise</blockquote>

Verification