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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kinak" data-source="post: 6057938" data-attributes="member: 6694112">Actually, I pretty much solely GM these days, but I understand the cut of your jib.We don't really care about healing mechanics. We don't play 4e, but we've used Iron Heroes (using a similar "reserve point" mechanic) which works fine. And 3e works fine.I'd rather have one set of healing rules that the rest of the game can be built assuming. I'd rather have one version of cure light wounds that works the way its intended than one that varies wildly in power between rules options or a bunch of different versions.What you will catch me whining about is designers not having the courage of their convictions. I'd rather there be another game like 4e on the market that does something I don't want, but does it well, than yet another game that thinks it can make everyone happy.WotC's absolutely welcome to enumerate every possible option in the rules. That's not a game I'm interested in, but it's a valid design.But enumerating every option to appeal to players who want it their way or else? That's a game I'd dislike on a visceral level. If the direction of the game is determined by which groups can throw the biggest temper tantrums, nobody wins. And I say that as someone capable of pretty epic tantrums <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />Points for Groucho <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=":)" />Cheers!Kinak</blockquote>

Verification