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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 3785003" data-attributes="member: 18280">(1)  Again, it doesn't matter which round you use your abilities in; merely that you either use them or do not.  Either an opponent is one who damages you enough where using "second wind" becomes prudent, or he is not.  If he is, the fight passes the mechanical threshold of significance.  If he is not, players will soon realize that these fights are mechanically meaningless.  Unless the average DM uses a theshold of significance other then the mechanical, this means that in the average game these fights are meaningless.(2)  I will readily agree that any per-day ability that has no relevance to 90% of the game need not be considered.  For example, a "pick your nose" per-day ability has no bearing on how resources are used.(3)  Before I begin answering a case-by-case "What if X?", "What if Y?" I would prefer if, having read what is already written about the topic, you can demonstrate that there is any point to answering them.For someone who is well versed in logic and philosophy, you seem at a loss when confronted by an IF/THEN statement.   <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> My claim is not that there is no consequence to using per-day resources, my claim in that there must be one for prudence to not use per-day resources in any mechanically significant encounter.....or, for that matter, in most encounters where winning is significant due to other thresholds of significance.Again, IF there is no risk/reward consideration involved THEN it is always prudent to use your best resources in any given encounter.I appreciate your attempts to do so, but I think that, based upon your responses, you fail to grasp what I am saying.  This may well be my fault.  Perhaps I am not being clear enough.  Way back upthread I tried to start a Q&A method of explaining what I was saying, bringing it into the simplest possible terms I could think of.Again, it doesn't matter whether or not one leads the encounter with one's per-day resources (as I have said or tried to say multiple times in multiple posts), only that an encounter is or is not challenging enough to make a party use their per-day resources, and that there is or is not a cost/risk associated with doing so.BTW, I have said, repeatedly, that ensuring that tehre is a cost/risk associated with doing so is one obvious method of dealing with the 9-9:15 adventuring day problem.  In 1e, there were the following obvious costs/risks associated with using resources:(1)  Some resources were intrinsically hazardous to use.  This includes spells that age you, System Shock, and the way potions mixed if you attempted to use two at once.(2)  Wandering monsters were intended to create a time constraint.  If you sat around camping, or spent too much time searching an area, you ran a risk of encountering something else that might sap (or overwhelm!) your resources.(3)  Limitations to what one can do within a round.  You can attack or cast a healing spell, for example.Well, we know that 3.X gutted (1) from the game, with very few exceptions.  Those sort of cost/risk assessments were apparently "unfun".  We know that the WotC site has run an adventure design article, widely discussed on this forum at one time, about cutting (2) from games because, again, they are "unfun".  We also know that 4e is designed to ensure that you can attack while, say, healing your companions because the types of decisions required by (3) are "unfun".I realize that I am somehow not being clear enough, and that what seems blatantly obvious to me will still seem hazy and unclear.  I apologize in advance.  I am doing my best.My reply should read "Go back and read what I've already written on this".Or it should read "Based on what I've written, the answer should be obvious."Instead it will say:  "No.  You can have any number of encounters in any system that may be significant using non-mechanical thresholds of significance, because you need not take the mechanics into account.  Thus per-day resources don't give rise to this problem, nor do per-encounter abilities cause this problem, nor does any mechanical system."RC</blockquote>

Verification