What 5e got wrong

[ChrisCarlson]

I'm just as disappointed in Margaret Weis Productions' Marvel Heroic Roleplay System. I was trying to use it to play a Breaking Bad style, gritty melodrama setting. I couldn't believe how poorly it emulated such a story without the need for a great deal of houserules and ignoring large portions of the book. I mean it's not like I need all those superpowers. Not sure what they were thinking when the wrote the game. Shame on them.

 

[OldSkoolRPG]

I'm just as disappointed in Margaret Weis Productions' Marvel Heroic Roleplay System. I was trying to use it to play a Breaking Bad style, gritty melodrama setting. I couldn't believe how poorly it emulated such a story without the need for a great deal of houserules and ignoring large portions of the book. I mean it's not like I need all those superpowers. Not sure what they were thinking when the wrote the game. Shame on them.

Nevermind....didn't read your post thoroughly enough to catch the sarcasm

 

[Wuzzard]

I don't think I could find players for a gritty melodrama setting if I had a rules systems that worked for it.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Just thinking through this thought experiment: the Fighter/Fighter/Rogue/Rogue/Barbarian party with no in-combat healing (though we both agree that healing potions are something a non-magical party might still be comfortable with).

Even so, it's a fair assumption. Items may or may not be available. But, they are most helpful at low level, when feeding a fallen ally one is less of a wasted action (the 4-10 hps aren't trivial), and low level is when in-combat healing is perhaps most critical.

The rest of the party goes nova and ends the combat after 1-2 rounds.

'Goes Nova' isn't very meaningful for this hypothetical party. The Barbarian's probably raging anyway, whether someone else drops or not. The Champion & Battlemaster Action-Surging (if they didn't since the last short rest) is about as nova as it gets. There's a world of difference between that and an AE spell erasing half the enemies you face, for instance.

It takes a downed PC ~6 rounds to be fully dead on average, so there's little chance of permanent death (not impossible, just not "average").

Assuming PC victory (or mutual droppage, with everyone left lying on the field, for that matter).

These ways would affect a party with a cleric in it equally - the cleric is the one made unconscious during that surprise round with fairly optimal tactics.

The party with a Cleric replacing one them, perhaps. A party with caster/non-caster proportions more in keeping with the number of classes (let alone sub-classes), OTOH, will likely have two or more sources of bandaids, as well those and other characters able to 'nova' with AEs or big damage, and/or contribute buffing, de-buffing, battlefield control, lockdown &c.

If you reread my post which you quoted I never said those abilities made those classes Tier 1. I pointed out that they are Tier 1 and have those abilities.

Still not sure I buy it, but not important, atm...

As for "narrative incoherence" I have no idea what you are talking about.

Yeah, not my words, but the idea is clearly that it's BadWrongFun for a non-magical ability to be x/Day. The question was, if that's the case, why is it not a problem in 3.5/PF (Barbarian Rage being both EX and X/day)? I thought maybe it 'flew under the radar' because it was just one power of a Tier 4 class (3.5 Tiers, c2008 - which I foolishly assumed still held in PF).

I was just pointing out that such powers definitely do not fly under the radar in PF.

Which blows my theory.

Just thinking through this thought experiment: the Fighter/Fighter/Rogue/Rogue/Barbarian party with no in-combat healing (though we both agree that healing potions are something a non-magical party might still be comfortable with).

Even so, it's a fair assumption. Items may or may not be available. But, they are most helpful at low level, when feeding a fallen ally one is less of a wasted action (the 4-10 hps aren't trivial), and low level is when in-combat healing is perhaps most critical.

The rest of the party goes nova and ends the combat after 1-2 rounds.

'Goes Nova' isn't very meaningful for this hypothetical party. The Barbarian's probably raging anyway, whether someone else drops or not. The Champion & Battlemaster Action-Surging (if they didn't since the last short rest) is about as nova as it gets. There's a world of difference between that and an AE spell erasing half the enemies you face, for instance.

It takes a downed PC ~6 rounds to be fully dead on average, so there's little chance of permanent death (not impossible, just not "average").

Assuming PC victory (or mutual droppage, with everyone left lying on the field, for that matter).

These ways would affect a party with a cleric in it equally - the cleric is the one made unconscious during that surprise round with fairly optimal tactics.

The party with a Cleric replacing one them, perhaps. A party with caster/non-caster proportions more in keeping with the number of classes (let alone sub-classes), OTOH, will likely have two or more sources of bandaids, as well those and other characters able to 'nova' with AEs or big damage, and/or contribute buffing, de-buffing, battlefield control, lockdown &c.

 

[Jester David]

I'm sure I could imagine ways they might, too. But, lack of in-combat healing to stand up a fallen PC, for instance, can turn an ordinary combat into a 'death spiral,' as loss of the PC shifts the numeric advantage to the enemy, leading to another dropped PC, further stacking the odds against them.

I played a combat healer in 5e from levels 1 to 9 built for support and not damage, and more often than not my action could be better spent on an offends spells of enabling the damage of another PC thasn rezzing a fallen PC. Combat healing was often a trap as I could never heal enough to remotely keep up with the damage of foes. It was often a waste of a spell that just prolonged combat.
It was useful only if the downed creature acted after me but before any creature near them, otherwise they character would just take another hit while on the ground. It was very situational.
Often, I would have been better with more damage per round and acting as a back-up healer.

Healer is a valid character build and handy in a large party, but its not universally useful. It's a situational build.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I played a combat healer in 5e from levels 1 to 9 built for support and not damage, and more often than not my action could be better spent on an offends spells of enabling the damage of another PC thasn rezzing a fallen PC.
Combat healing was often a trap as I could never heal enough to remotely keep up with the damage of foes. It was often a waste of a spell that just prolonged combat.

Offense-heavy styles tend to shake out that way, yes, I've seen it plenty of times. Imagine how much more so for a character resorting to healing potions for in-combat healing.

It was useful only if the downed creature acted after me but before any creature near them, otherwise they character would just take another hit while on the ground. It was very situational.

Everything's situational. The less versatility you have, the harder it is to adapt to the situation.

Healer is a valid character build and handy in a large party, but its not universally useful. It's a situational build.

Dedicated healers, like a 'pacifist' cleric can be a bit iffy, but in-combat healing is vital to the combat mini-game of D&D remaining playable. It's the safety valve that lets the PCs come back from a bit of bad luck or tougher than expected fight, and, from the story perspective, to have combat scenes that don't come off as rollovers without risking TPKs.

 

[Yaarel]

I want to see the six abilities become crisper in meaning, more mutually exclusive, and more equal in worth.

In his original post, Einlanzer0 mentions the computer game, Pillars of Eternity. It organizes the abilities (≈ attributes) in an interesting and useful way. Its abilities differ from 4e abilities, but like 4e, all six contribute to three defenses.

Strength (≈ Might): +2 Fortitude
Constitution (≈ Constitution): +2 Fortitude

Dexterity (≈ Dexterity): +2 Reflex
Wisdom (≈ Perception): +2 Reflex

Intelligence (≈ Intellect): +2 Will
Charisma (≈ Resolve): +2 Will


Notice, Intelligence and Charisma together apply to Will for all mental defenses, including against Charm and Illusion. By contrast, Wisdom (≈ Perception) only refers to the physical senses, thus improves alertness to ones surroundings and responsiveness of Reflex. The system is coherent and makes sense. These six abilities become more equal in worth.

 

[Jester David]

Dedicated healers, like a 'pacifist' cleric can be a bit iffy, but in-combat healing is vital to the combat mini-game of D&D remaining playable. It's the safety valve that lets the PCs come back from a bit of bad luck or tougher than expected fight, and, from the story perspective, to have combat scenes that don't come off as rollovers without risking TPKs.

In combat healing was a trap in most editions (save 4e). It was almost always more useful to have a character that did *anything* else. The cleric was more useful out of combat reducing the time needed to rest. But that aspect of the class is less necassary with Hit Dice and full overnight healing. Once characters didn't need to spend a week regaining enough hp to keep playing the dedicated healer was less essential.

You could remove the cure wounds spell or not have a character capable of healing and the game would still chug along nicely.

Heck, I've played more Organised Play than not over 3.5e and PF and dedicated healers were super rarer. The game worked just fine. When there was a cleric out healer they often used their spells for other things. The only dedicated healer was the standard issue CLW wand. And I just finished the Skull & Shackles campaign with no one in the party playing a healer in a lower magic setting where they had fewer CLW wand and it worked just fine.

The need for a combat healer is exaggerated.

 

[Tony Vargas]

In combat healing was a trap in most editions

Heard that many times back in the 3.x era. It can be made true under a sufficiently offense-oriented style, but that style isn't as optimal as it seems in a white room or with a DM who over-rewards/under-challenges it.

In more 'natural' 3e campaigns, with more-varied/less-telegraphed challenges, the DM could keep it from degenerating into rocket tag.

Heck, I've played more Organised Play than not over 3.5e and PF and dedicated healers were super rarer.

Dedicated, sure. For one thing, most class-based healing resources were spells, which are definitely usable for a lot more than healing. Short of a Mini-Handbook 'Healer' class or a pacifist build, it wouldn't even possible to have a mechanically dedicate healer. Besides, tere's plenty of ways to get cheap healing outside of class features, and the lure of CoDzilla makes the dedicated healer a chump, while also making it likely there's some heals and other support resources in the party, even if they rarely get used.

 

[Jester David]

Heard that many times back in the 3.x era. It can be made true under a sufficiently offense-oriented style, but that style isn't as optimal as it seems in a white room or with a DM who over-rewards/under-challenges it.

In more 'natural' 3e campaigns, with more-varied/less-telegraphed challenges, the DM could keep it from degenerating into rocket tag.

If a DM can keep it from being that way then it's hardly a mandatory part of the game.

The math doesn't really encourage combat healing.
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/monsters/monsterCreation.html
Monster damage per round increases by 5 per CR at mid-levels and ramps up to 10 per CR at high level. In contrast, healing increases at 3.25 per level (1 for caster level and a new d8 - or 4.5 - every other level). Healing spells simply do not keep up. It's less and less useful until you get heal. Even mass cure light wounds is only so-so as you're healing everyone for a small amount of damage when an AoE half that spell level would do more.
5e is simmilar with monster damage far out pacing healing, and the amount healed goes up slower. You actually heal less, not adding caster level to the equation.
You just cannot heal more than a monster can damage. In combat healing is not generally worth the cost of the action compared to anything else.
If you can take out the monster before it's turn, you've effectively "proactively healed" all the damage it would have done, which will almost universally be more than you could have actually healed. Offence is the best defence.

It can be strategically useful. But that's more something you can handle with a potion or a wand or a feat than regular spells or other class resources. In the same way it can be strategically useful to spend your action pushing a creature rather than dealing damage.
But I'm not going to suggest "pusher" should be the fifth class role and every party needs a "pusher" to be balanced.

Dedicated, sure. For one thing, most class-based healing resources were spells, which are definitely usable for a lot more than healing. Short of a Mini-Handbook 'Healer' class or a pacifist build, it wouldn't even possible to have a mechanically dedicate healer. Besides, tere's plenty of ways to get cheap healing outside of class features, and the lure of CoDzilla makes the dedicated healer a chump, while also making it likely there's some heals and other support resources in the party, even if they rarely get used.

Right. In 3.x, healing was a trap as there was so much better stuff to do.
In Pathfinder it's a trap as you can't keep up with monster damage and you can use cheap magic instead.
In 5e, it's a trap as spells heal even less than 3.x and you have Hit Dice.

Healers were really important in 1-2, but less due to combat and more due to the slow rate of out of combat healing.