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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jackelope King" data-source="post: 3825450" data-attributes="member: 31454">My appologies for missing this earlier post, RC.Since I've actually been a player (in addition to GM) with my D&D group, I have a fair knowledge of the process they go through to decide how to expend resources (and I'll try to stay to the terminology you've used with resources).1. Understand that ideally, a player wants to utilize the minimum amount of resources to reduce an opponent to a helpless (usually -1 HP) condition in the minimum amount of time possible. If it would always result in this outcome, player would be happiest if they could just use a single magic missile on each enemy they fought to minimize resource expenditure.2. The reason player want to minimize their resource expenditure is because they percieve that they may be at greater risk at a later time without the less plentiful ("more expensive") resource. To them, it's silly to "waste" the extra damage from a greater resource if a lesser resource would've gotten the same job done. To use an example which has been tossed around, if faced with a single standard kobold, a 20th level wizard isn't going to break out Gate or Meteor Swarm, especially not when a Magic Missile will do the same job at the same speed.3. However, players also don't want to waste a turn. They usually get disappointed when they try something and nothing beneficial happens. This is why there is usually a minimum theshold of effectiveness for resources, and why you'll often see players using mid-level spells (for example) instead of being extremely conservative and just using very low-level spells. Mid-level spells strike an acceptable balance for most players between cost (in that they are fairly plentiful) and effectiveness (in that they will have an acceptable level of effect on most enemies).4. As I learned from my players speculating on their actions for a round by asking, "What's everyone's HP at?", players factor another resource into this calculation: hit points. Ideally, players want to minimize damage to themselves to avoid vulnerability.5. Remember that hit point damage is a sort of "reactive resource" in that it can be negated by healing magic. Different types of healing have different costs.6. In a round-about way, players tend to measure the cost to their group to spend a resource in the hopes of ending a fight more quickly versus the resource cost the group with accrue latter in the cost of healing magic restoring them of the damage that the characters will take on a subsequent round. Many times, I'll hear players rationalize saving a charge on their wand of fireball when someone points out that, "This guy is only doing like 8 damage, and we've got a wand of cure light wounds anyway.[/i]" The cost of using sufficient healing magic is below the cost of using the most effective means of destroying an enemy, so the party will err on the side of using a less-costly resource.Now would I expect my players to be able to vocalize this logic? Probably not. But I've seen it enough, and the differences in their perceptions/actions based on whether or not they have access to magical healing to know that they tend to assign value to resources mentally in such a way.I think that the "lead with your best resource" mentality comes about if the value of offensive resources (such as your most-damaging spell) comes to be seen as lower than healing magic, which could be explained by noting that "my level-9 spell will just come back after we rest anyway". If it can be regained quickly, in such a way to minimize the possibility that a player will be left without that resource in a later encounter, then the value of resources might indeed be lowered.It's all a matter of minimizing the cost in resources-per-encounter. Sometimes it's more acceptable to allow an enemy to injure you for three rounds rather than end the fight in one simply because the means to recover from those injuries is less costly than the means to end the fight in one round.</blockquote>

Verification