Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 6147319" data-attributes="member: 22779">You asked why people don't see fighter capabilities as epic.&nbsp; That's why.&nbsp; It's inconsistent with the other side of the argument.&nbsp; If HP's lost are ALWAYS a physical loss then how do you possibly justify regaining 144 HP in 3 days (any 12th level PC in 3e) without any magic?&nbsp; And, if you can justify it, then what's wrong with 1 day?&nbsp; I'd have a lot more faith in the arguments if they had appeared during 3e.&nbsp; But they didn't.&nbsp; This was barely an issue during 3e, despite 3e having virtually the same HP recovery rules as 4e.&nbsp; And, yes, I do consider 3 days vs 1 day to be virtually the same.&nbsp; I mean, changing 4e's recovery rate to match 3e would be trivial.&nbsp; Instead of full HP/ full rest, you gain 30%.&nbsp; Done.&nbsp; So, if 4e's natural healing rate matched 3e's, would warlords then be acceptable?&nbsp; Why not?&nbsp; After all, now both systems use IDENTICAL HP definitions.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 6147319, member: 22779"] You asked why people don't see fighter capabilities as epic. That's why. It's inconsistent with the other side of the argument. If HP's lost are ALWAYS a physical loss then how do you possibly justify regaining 144 HP in 3 days (any 12th level PC in 3e) without any magic? And, if you can justify it, then what's wrong with 1 day? I'd have a lot more faith in the arguments if they had appeared during 3e. But they didn't. This was barely an issue during 3e, despite 3e having virtually the same HP recovery rules as 4e. And, yes, I do consider 3 days vs 1 day to be virtually the same. I mean, changing 4e's recovery rate to match 3e would be trivial. Instead of full HP/ full rest, you gain 30%. Done. So, if 4e's natural healing rate matched 3e's, would warlords then be acceptable? Why not? After all, now both systems use IDENTICAL HP definitions. [/QUOTE]

Verification