Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Guest&nbsp; 85555" data-source="post: 5720700">Whether any mechanic is believable enough or not is kind of a subjective call. I am not suggesting you should have the same experience as me with them. Some people found the explanation offered in tge 4e phb totally acceptable, others didn't. And the reasons for those differences have been pretty well argued by both sides in this and other threads on the subject.I said it could be mundane as well but was responding to your suggestion that it could also be due to divine magic (as in the warlord example). My issue is I find both explanations difficult. On the one hand if I heal and there is no cleric around then I am healing myself through magical means of some kind, or I am nearly instantly healing myself through mundane means (adrenaline, etc). I just find it disruptive. You may find it perfectly believable, I don't. Damage in the game has traditionally been both physical and non-physical (though i would argue in practice it has been mostly treated as physical). So there is physical damage in there being cured by a mundane method in the explanation offered. I found 3e natural healing a stretch but acceptable. To me this just takes it a step too far.</blockquote>