Legends & Lore: This week in D&D (2/18/2013)

Legends & Lore:
This week in D&D
Mike Mearls
2013 02/18



Our goal has been to remove cleric healing as a necessary element of adventuring. Does that approach make sense given our modular design? I'm starting to think that it doesn't. As a default, we can just embrace the cleric's healing with the understanding that most groups have rolled with that in the past without any real issues. The nice thing about that solution is that it keeps things simple, since the Hit Die mechanic becomes an optional rule for groups to use as they see fit.

We can then also offer other options for DMs, either making healing rarer or more plentiful, along with options for lingering wounds, longer or shorter rates of natural healing, and so on. The real issue, based on playtest data, is that there really is no consensus on the perfect set of rules for healing. Going for the simplest route available to use makes the game more accessible while giving DMs the most latitude to make adjustments.

With this sort of thing, we don't assume that the default rule is the "right" or "correct" choice. With the core game, our aim is to err on the side of simplicity and streamlined, easy to learn rules.

In any case, nothing is set in stone.








Talk about this article here.

Wizards, shave and a haircut

Glad to see the sillyness that is Hit Dice healing gone from core. It won't be missed.

Hopefully we can get some proper solutions for normalised/non-magical/self-healing in a dedicated module.
Different characters have different resources. Barbarians have daily rages. Wizards and Clerics have daily spells. The thing is, those resources are specific to those classes, and don't largely affect the group as a whole. The key to making sure that those don't become a problem is giving every class at-will abilities to fall back on so that they're still competent and able to contribute even when their limited resources have run out. They've already done this.

Then, there are resources, like hit points, that everyone has. The difference there is that even though every character has hit points and needs to get them back when they're lost, only certain classes, such as the cleric, are given the ability to replenish them. Wizards are self-sufficient when it comes to their spells. The same goes for barbarians and rages, fighters and surges, etc. They don't depend on someone else to get those back, they just rest, and they can continue to adventure even after those resources have run out. The same is not true of hit points. When those run out, your character is out of play (either dead or unconscious) and you don't get all of your hit points back by resting, they recover very slowly. When a barbarian runs out of rages or a wizard out of spells, the game doesn't come to a screeching halt. When someone's hit points run out, the game does come to a screeching halt. To avoid this, people load up on magical healing.

4e solved these problems by giving everyone self-healing and by having hit points recover completely with rest. The alternative is either forcing someone to play a healer, or stocking up on wands of cure light wounds and healing completely after every battle anyway. I don't know about everyone else, but I'd rather just dispense with the wands and let people heal completely with a long rest. If we really wanted to be realistic about it, people would needs days, even weeks of rest after suffering injuries in battle. Do you really want your game to be THAT realistic? Do you really want to have your character be hospitalized after every battle if no magical healing is available? I don't!
I am fine with nonmagical healing being out of the core and in a module instead, its an option i will use anyway. I believe Overnight Healing should still be there though to let you regain a few HPs.

As for Mike's epic game, you can follow it on his Twitter. Chris Tulach has a few shots too. Awesome set up game look fun! Even without grid...

An overview of the battle. With the necromancer slain, the undead turn against their allies:

Permalien de l'image intégrée

With the recent fighter discussion, and following up with this recent article on healing. It appears they are changing their plans for the basic edition to emulate 1e/2e, and standard to be 3e? And basically 4E is screwed.  They need to come clean if their game design focus has changed, and how they plan to incorporate different versions of D&D. To do that you need to build in concepts from all versions of D&D into the basic edition, core, or whatever else you want to call it.

I still believe they need to make hit dice a cornerstone healing mechanic, even if only clerics, or magic items can heal in the basic edition. This would change the cleric healing spells to restore X amount of hit dice  with their cure line of spells depending on the character. That would build modularity into the system, because any type of healing is based on hit dice, including items like second wind. If they can not implement concepts like the above, then adding modularity is only a name plate to tack on sub-systems ala 3e design. It will not be true modularity built up from beginning. They would also be moving away from the main benefit of 4E design principles.

However, at this point 5E is not a game I want to play, since it looks like the developers are throwing up their hands in reference to any type of inclusive game design in reference to every versions of D&D. I do not want to wait for an advanced module to introduce concepts from 4E. And the funny thing is, I was willing to give up alot in reference to 4E, but apparently that is not enough.
About healing there are two options:


Videogame:

Hitpoints represent tiredness. Healing is fast. No-magic healing powers (like by warlord) can be accepted. (All daily powers became encounter ones).

 + optional module of "special damage" only can by healed by special ways (for example the vile damage from "Book of evil darkness" only could be healed within an area sanctified by the forces of good - such as within a consecrate or a hallow spell). 

The special damage or long-time penalties (supernatural curses, fatal injuries, sickness, poisons..) should be added like monster templates, with extra XPs reward. 


" Realistic" rpg.

Hitpoints represent the "blood pool" hasn´t ben lost yet. Healing is slower, and most of times only healing is possible for resting

---

 Mass combat: 

Lots of monsters and characters. The stats should be simple and some modules (like localitation of damage) aren´t advisable. 

I suggest the monster squad subtype, like swarn subtype. The squad is a group of soldiers but stats are like only a creature to do a faster game. Sometimes squad is defeated because soldiers are alive but demoralized and they try escape. 

Mass combat could need morality rules, and the monsters the "courage" stat (the AD&D monster morality). I suggest the "courage" like extra score ability, specially for horror campaigns like Ravenloft.  

And we should clarify this: Defeated henchmen for mass combat shouldn´t be dead automatically, only they are K.O. but most of time they could fight again other day. 

We need rules (a module) to change monsters, for example a minion be improved to elite, and to elite to solo, or the opposite way, from solo monster to be only elite, and from elite monster to be only minion. 


Skirmish battle: It is a interesting idea for me, but I would like play band vs band game (dozen characters aprox., like Mordheim by Games Workshop).  It interesent could rpgs sourcebooks and miniatures should be retro-compatibles. 

"Say me what you're showing off for, and I'll say you what you lack!" (Spanish saying)

 

Book 13 Anaclet 23 Confucius said: "The Superior Man is in harmony but does not follow the crowd. The inferior man follows the crowd, but is not in harmony"

 

"In a country well governed, poverty is something to be ashamed of. In a country badly governed, wealth is something to be ashamed of." - Confucius 

With the exception of optional wound rules being added to the game, healing it whatever you want it to be. What is more important is the healing mechanics, because that is brought forward to every aspect of the game. If spells do one type of healing, and potions another, then healing kits add a third, and herbalism a fourth, without any mechanism to tie those all together with a common basis, then all you have is a pile of sub-systems. So 5E, is just 3E, with a lot of fancy terms thrown arouund to appease the player base.
I think D&D should be clear about the proportion of hps representing the non biological resilience of the character, and then decide how each class can manage to recover this part of the HPs without any healer.

Healer should be a facilitator, not a class tax. 

If you think my english is bad, just wait until you see my spanish and my italian. Defiling languages is an art.

so great no healing needed from clerics to adventure why not give every pc regeneration 100/second and get it over with. if you are creating a game called dnd that is susposed to make fans of every editon happy then why remove one of the major components of the game for over 30 years it dosent make historical sense at all. you could do a system where you lose stamina points then get into your hit points and im fine with that but seperate them then and that still wouldnt remove a healer from the picture. ill miss you dnd they are ripping you apart and losing pieces each day
I find it far easier to imagine HP as plot armor than as any sort of meaningful real wounds:

Until you are at or below 0 there are no adverse effects. 

You're not slowed down or less effective in any way. 

You maintain 100% effecacy until you keel over. 

There is seldom any damage due to ongoing blood loss and when it does happen it is an exception with specific rules. 

Swords and axes, arrows and daggers are either instantly lethal or cause a small easily ignored wound.

An experienced warrior can take a beating that would fell an elephant and fight on.

You don't get worse by choosing to exert yourself when injured.

As you level, you eventually become so hardy that you can stand up and dust yourself off after falls of 50 or a hundred or more feet.

All of this non debilatating real damage heals up slowly, depending on your viewpoint it should take from overnight to weeks of bedrest to get over wounds that cause you no inconvience at all.

I like HP as plot armor because it makes sense.  It also leaves space for truely debilitating injury rules at 0 HP or with single blows of damage that exceed a certain threshold.  I can see those types of injuries requiring magical healing or extended rest or both.  But not the bleeding exempt non-debilitating wounds represented by HP.  It just doesn't make sense.
so great no healing needed from clerics to adventure why not give every pc regeneration 100/second and get it over with. if you are creating a game called dnd that is susposed to make fans of every editon happy then why remove one of the major components of the game for over 30 years it dosent make historical sense at all. you could do a system where you lose stamina points then get into your hit points and im fine with that but seperate them then and that still wouldnt remove a healer from the picture. ill miss you dnd they are ripping you apart and losing pieces each day

With hit dice as the basic mechanic for all healing, then you can have the standard feel of D&D by cleric using a healing spell to restore hit dice, to characters may use their hit dice after every short rest. The important part is the healing mechanic supports all styles of play. I am attempting to bring us all together versus stating extreme examples to divide us further apart.
(copiedd from comments)

I am beyond confused by this article. Cleric healing cannot be the other base assumption for healing as there still is resting. So the base game has to include both cleric spells and Resting.


1) Divine magic (core)
2) Resting (core)
3) Herbalism and HD (optional?) 
4) Medicine and Surgery (optional?)
5) Morale and Refocusing (optional?)

There are benefits and flaws to this line of design. The main benefit is it is simpler and easier to plug in the other healing aspects of the game. The main flaw is assumed aspects are heavy on the telling of settings. By once again assuming the clerics and divine characters do the healing, you limit what stories can be told without extreme work or aid and how modules and variants are handled and prioritized in later products.





...
My point is by removing nonmagical healing from the core, you make a core that goes from:

"Most adventurer parties use healing kits, filled with bandages and salves, to heal themselves."

to

"Most adventurer parties contain a cleric, who prepares healing magic, to heal them of injury."


It is very altering to the baseline assumption of the game. True, groups can change the game to match their preference. But more settings jump of the baseline of "A world with bandages and ointments" than a "A world with religious folk who cast divine spells".




At least keep healing kits in core. PLEASE!

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

[Space reserved for a Holy Grail that can coordinate conflictive desires about healing in the game]
I've addressed the issue by making my own "Lingering Wounds" module to handle the blood-and-gore side of combat while leaving the morale side (luck, fatigue, scratches, etc) to traditional cleric spells and warlord inspirations.

Wounds Module [updated for Basic]

Proficiency Module

"I think that we started off with a few assumptions too many in terms of what people want out of the core, treating an element that should be an option—nonmagical healing—as a key part of the game."

If this means that non-magical healing will be an option in D&D Next then I'm very happy.      


They are making it clear that when modern design and common sense come into conflict with tradition, tradition wins.

Excuse me while I go vomit.
...whatever
I, for once, agree with Mearls. Non-magical healing is best used as an Advanced rule (probably a Module). It would be harder to remove non-magical healing with an Advanced rule than to add it. Hopefully, the Module will includes various layers of options for non-magical healing, from HD to Warlord Healing. If that is the case, then I suspect that most groups will include at least some of said Module.

My question for this is how it will work for Organized Play. I think that a large percentage of players would not like to attend a convention game to find out their Warlord is not playable. Given the nature of Organized Play, I suspect that non-magical healing will be used for most events.
We have had a few interesting talks about healing in R&D lately. I'm wondering if we might be thinking too much about healing. Our goal has been to remove cleric healing as a necessary element of adventuring. Does that approach make sense given our modular design?

Yes. Perpetuating the flaws of older editions because it is simple and traditional isn't good.

Healing can't just be a simple option, it effects too much of the game. If you change the healing system/rate for the party then the party's power level has been massively changed unless HP is adjusted to match. Changing HP effects all kinds of things across the game. Spells that have HP targets become more or less effective, flat healing becomes more or less valuable and so on. It will change which feats are even available. A feat that grants an extra HD per day makes no sense if you don't have HP, a feat that lets you heal more for a nights rest doesn't work without lingering wounds. HP simply effects too much of the game to be an easily swappable module.

Right now the balance is off, at higher levels characters get so much healing through HD that clerics are secondary and that is a problem for somebody who wants to make a medic character. However, going back to the design that every party had to have a healer just to function is simply bad game design.

so great no healing needed from clerics to adventure why not give every pc regeneration 100/second and get it over with. if you are creating a game called dnd that is susposed to make fans of every editon happy then why remove one of the major components of the game for over 30 years it dosent make historical sense at all. you could do a system where you lose stamina points then get into your hit points and im fine with that but seperate them then and that still wouldnt remove a healer from the picture. ill miss you dnd they are ripping you apart and losing pieces each day

There's a middle ground.

Any class can justify ways to prevent damage during combat, and recover from fatigue or renew determination outside combat.
And support class can be better at it, do it for the others, or improving the other's abilities.

If you think my english is bad, just wait until you see my spanish and my italian. Defiling languages is an art.

One thing to do to remove pressure on the Cleric is to ensure more classes have healing capabilities early on through magic; ex . the Druid, Ranger, Bard, Paladin etc...

And more off-class healing capabilities like the Herbalism, Healing Initiate and Magic Rejuvenation Feats that give easier access to Potion of Healing and Cure Wounds spells.
IMO, the BEST rules for core would be to drop HP and damage to very low values, representing the number of "hits" you take before you are done. Pretty similar to the board games, although I'd start everyone with a little bit more. Keeping the numbers ridiculously small allows for a much better modular design by allowing HP/damage/healing to be correlated together. They all have to be part of the same module, or the system will fail.

Magic Dual Color Test
I am White/Green
I am White/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I am both orderly and instinctive. I value community and group identity, defining myself by the social group I am a part of. At best, I'm selfless and strong-willed; at worst, I'm unoriginal and sheepish.

Healing can't just be a simple option, it effects too much of the game. If you change the healing system/rate for the party then the party's power level has been massively changed unless HP is adjusted to match. Changing HP effects all kinds of things across the game. Spells that have HP targets become more or less effective, flat healing becomes more or less valuable and so on. It will change which feats are even available. A feat that grants an extra HD per day makes no sense if you don't have HP, a feat that lets you heal more for a nights rest doesn't work without lingering wounds. HP simply effects too much of the game to be an easily swappable module.



That's actually the concern. What is critical to have built in the design a basic scalable health unit. 4E had it as 'Surge', but there are other ways: for instant SW Saga uses the Fortitutde value for a similar end. Upon that the whole healing system can be built and driven. 
Now, it is still ok to 'hide' this in the Basic game, for the sake of simplicity. But the system needs to be there underneath. Otherwise it won't work just as a patch slapped on afterwards.
Hopefully that's been taken in account, but so far we've seen no evidence.
 
Problem is: static healing in a system with scaling hp will inevitably fall short.        
Mathematical modeling is a useful starting point, but I've found that sitting down and playing is the best way to get a good handle on the correct assumptions, details we've overlooked, and the actual flow of events in the game.



Um yeah, I'd put more stock into this if they showed even the tiniest inkling of how the math behind the game worked. As it is you can play test like this to see if something feels right or fun, but you need to have all of the play testers do this or you may end up making a game that is fun for you, but not fun for the customers. You should use the math modeling to weed out ideas that won't work mathematically, then after that has been done you simulate the math to see if there are any unwanted trends (like huge DPR increases from an extra attack), then hand it to your 80 thousand testers to see if its fun. The math modeling rules things out before wasting hours of time testing to see if its fun.

Our goal has been to remove cleric healing as a necessary element of adventuring. Does that approach make sense given our modular design? I'm starting to think that it doesn't. As a default, we can just embrace the cleric's healing with the understanding that most groups have rolled with that in the past without any real issues.



Wait what? They 'rolled with it' because there was nothing else available. There was always groaning around the table when it came to deciding who would be the heal bot. No one wanted to play the cleric...Smile

"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
They are making it clear that when modern design and common sense come into conflict with tradition, tradition wins. Excuse me while I go vomit.



You'll still have your option to use "modern" healing techniques, so get over it.  It isn't as if the game has actually lost anything.
I am fine with nonmagical healing being out of the core and in a module instead, its an option i will use anyway. I believe Overnight Healing should still be there though to let you regain a few HPs.

As for Mike's epic game, you can follow it on his Twitter. Chris Tulach has a few shots too. Awesome set up game look fun! Even without grid...

An overview of the battle. With the necromancer slain, the undead turn against their allies:






See this kind of thing indicates to me that they are playing an entirely different game than the play testers...Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
He does not have the option to use modern healing mechanics if they are not incorporated in the game. But accepting your premise, if it was included you could easily ignore it.
One thing to do to remove pressure on the Cleric is to ensure more classes have healing capabilities early on through magic; ex . the Druid, Ranger, Bard, Paladin etc...

And more off-class healing capabilities like the Herbalism and Healing Initiate Feat that give easier access to Potion of Healing and Cure Minor Wounds.




Good ideas. I hope these are implemented. Those four will need early healing magic.
- - -


The issue I think many are having is what kind of healing, besides resting, will be in the "How To Play" section of the next playtest?
Sounds like none. At least none not in a grey box.

Orzel, Halfelven son of Zel, Mystic Ranger, Bane to Dragons, Death to Undeath, Killer of Abyssals, King of the Wilds. Constitution Based Class for Next!

He does not have the option to use modern healing mechanics if they are not incorporated in the game.



Um, it's an optional module, so he has the OPTION to use it.  Knowing the definition of "optional" might help you in these discussions.

But accepting your premise, if it was included you could easily ignore it.



As has been pointed out, it's harder to remove something via option than it is to add it.   
Legends & Lore:
This week in D&D
Mike Mearls
2013 02/18



Our goal has been to remove cleric healing as a necessary element of adventuring. Does that approach make sense given our modular design? I'm starting to think that it doesn't. As a default, we can just embrace the cleric's healing with the understanding that most groups have rolled with that in the past without any real issues. The nice thing about that solution is that it keeps things simple, since the Hit Die mechanic becomes an optional rule for groups to use as they see fit.

We can then also offer other options for DMs, either making healing rarer or more plentiful, along with options for lingering wounds, longer or shorter rates of natural healing, and so on. The real issue, based on playtest data, is that there really is no consensus on the perfect set of rules for healing. Going for the simplest route available to use makes the game more accessible while giving DMs the most latitude to make adjustments.

With this sort of thing, we don't assume that the default rule is the "right" or "correct" choice. With the core game, our aim is to err on the side of simplicity and streamlined, easy to learn rules.

In any case, nothing is set in stone.








Talk about this article here.

Hit dice may have been a bad idea, but healing surges weren't.  Funny, if they want the "simplest" rules to be core, then core should be "everyone autoheals to full out of danger".  Now I don't think that's a good criteria for handling core healing.
so great no healing needed from clerics to adventure why not give every pc regeneration 100/second and get it over with. if you are creating a game called dnd that is susposed to make fans of every editon happy then why remove one of the major components of the game for over 30 years it dosent make historical sense at all. you could do a system where you lose stamina points then get into your hit points and im fine with that but seperate them then and that still wouldnt remove a healer from the picture. ill miss you dnd they are ripping you apart and losing pieces each day



Wow, edition war much?

What they have done is allow the Cleric to heal and do something else like cast a spell or make an attack in the same round. That's literally all they've done. Your over the top, phrased to get an emotional response, inflammatory comment is neither accurate nor helpful...Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
They are making it clear that when modern design and common sense come into conflict with tradition, tradition wins. Excuse me while I go vomit.



+1

At this point I'm only participating in the vein hope that on April 1st they will declare all packets up to now have been a horrible joke...Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.

If for exemple we have;

Basic D&D: Core Starter Set 
Standard D&D: Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master Guide & Monster Manual
Advanced D&D: Modules and Supplements. 

It is really bad if Hit Dice and other nonmagical healing mechanic are not in Basic D&D, but in Standard D&D and Advanced D&D instead ? 

People that play a basic form of D&D usually dont use nonmagical healing and people that play a more advanced version of D&D usually use nonmagical healing anyway...

Personally, my favorite set of rules for healing is a combination of hit dice and no automatic hit point healing when you rest. I REALLY like the hit dice rules. I like allowing players to regain hit dice when they take a long rest. I like players being forced to use those hit dice to heal themselves after that long rest (thus reducing how many hit points they have for the rest of the day). I like magical healing being the buffer that makes that process less taxing. But, while I REALLY like the hit dice rules (as they are now, and with the optional hit dice rules they have given us so far), and I will be REALLY upset if they are removed completely, so long as they retain a presence as a set of optional rules I will be happy. I would rather they stay part of the standard game; but then, part of the rules I need to make the game run exactly how I want are already optional. Meanwhile, so long as I have the options I need to build the game I want to run, this is not a deal breaker for me. 

See this kind of thing indicates to me that they are playing an entirely different game than the play testers...

Not really, since the Playtest has no guidelines on how to use maps and minis. You can use maps with grids, hexes or no markings and you won't do it wrong...

Who knows may be they were playtesting the measuring tape module... Tongue Out

If for exemple we have;

Basic D&D: Core Starter Set 
Standard D&D: Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master Guide & Monster Manual
Advanced D&D: Modules and Supplements. 

It is really bad if Hit Dice and other nonmagical healing mechanic are not in Basic D&D, but in Standard D&D and Advanced D&D instead ? 

People that play a basic form of D&D usually dont use nonmagical healing and people that play a more advanced version of D&D usually use nonmagical healing anyway...


Bad? Yes.

I play a Basic style for theater of the mind.

If the Basic Cleric class rapes players forcing them to appear to worship gods. Or else die because of lack healing.

Well, yes. There is a problem.

Not to mention, healbot.
The thing is, we dont play Basic D&D with the playtest material we have. We rather play with packets containing all kinds of stuff...

Its filled with classes and rules that will probably don't make it into Basic D&D.

They are making it clear that when modern design and common sense come into conflict with tradition, tradition wins. Excuse me while I go vomit.



You'll still have your option to use "modern" healing techniques, so get over it.  It isn't as if the game has actually lost anything.



That isn't good enough. Optional rules work for making a good game better. They don't fix a game that gets things wrong, not compared to playing another game that gets it right. 
...whatever
They are making it clear that when modern design and common sense come into conflict with tradition, tradition wins. Excuse me while I go vomit.



It really is puzzling to say the least. .
See this kind of thing indicates to me that they are playing an entirely different game than the play testers...

Not really, since the Playtest has no guidelines on how to use maps and minis. You can use maps with grids, hexes or no markings and you won't do it wrong...

Who knows may be they were playtesting the measuring tape module... 



I've played a few of those games, they take even longer to play than 4E because you have to measure and then argue whether the measurement was right or not. I think it was Necromunda...Smile
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
On the topic of where Mearls said that historically players were satisfied with magical healing only:

They were "satisfied" not by any virtue of the system, but for a lack of alternatives. These days, you can play Pathfinder, 4E, or 13th age instead. 5E needs to deal with that, instead of pretending the issue doesn't exist.
...whatever
On the topic of where Mearls said that historically players were satisfied with magical healing only: They were "satisfied" not by any virtue of the system, but for a lack of alternatives. These days, you can play Pathfinder, 4E, or 13th age instead. 5E needs to deal with that, instead of pretending the issue doesn't exist.



+1
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
Sign In to post comments