Community

 
Jump Menu:
Post Reply
Page 2 of 2  •  Prev 1 2
Switch to Forum Live View Very confused on Hit Dice...
1 year ago  ::  Jun 01, 2012 - 6:06AM #11
JayM
Date Joined: Aug 31, 2007
Posts: 2,249

Jun 1, 2012 -- 6:01AM, Storyteller-Zero wrote:

I would rather the rules intended for parties to actually finish their quests before heading back to town from level 1 onwards.


The caves are not meant to be a single trip quest site. The party is supposed to make several attacks on the caves in multiple trips over a period of days or weeks.

This is fairly common of the classic big dungeon sprawl adventures. The party is expected to explore a bit, retreat, rest, resupply and go again, having weakened the defenses a bit and learned a bit in the previous attempts. I don't think any of the published 4e adventures are built around this idea, but it was standard in the 1e/2e period and common in the 3e era.

Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Jun 01, 2012 - 6:12AM #12
Storyteller-Zero
Date Joined: Jan 29, 2011
Posts: 186

Jun 1, 2012 -- 6:06AM, JayM wrote:

Jun 1, 2012 -- 6:01AM, Storyteller-Zero wrote:

I would rather the rules intended for parties to actually finish their quests before heading back to town from level 1 onwards.


The caves are not meant to be a single trip quest site. The party is supposed to make several attacks on the caves in multiple trips over a period of days or weeks.

This is fairly common of the classic big dungeon sprawl adventures. The party is expected to explore a bit, retreat, rest, resupply and go again, having weakened the defenses a bit and learned a bit in the previous attempts. I don't think any of the published 4e adventures are built around this idea, but it was standard in the 1e/2e period and common in the 3e era.




You could still have the experience of the classic big dungeon sprawl adventures with more stamina, but you can't have the experience of uninterrupted quests as easily with less stamina.

If they want to appeal to all edition lovers, they're going the wrong direction. It's better to simply increase the danger level of danger sprawls so that you can have your cake and eat it too.

 

Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Jun 01, 2012 - 8:49AM #13
Yuwain
Date Joined: Apr 21, 2011
Posts: 716

Jun 1, 2012 -- 6:12AM, Storyteller-Zero wrote:

Jun 1, 2012 -- 6:06AM, JayM wrote:

Jun 1, 2012 -- 6:01AM, Storyteller-Zero wrote:

I would rather the rules intended for parties to actually finish their quests before heading back to town from level 1 onwards.


The caves are not meant to be a single trip quest site. The party is supposed to make several attacks on the caves in multiple trips over a period of days or weeks.

This is fairly common of the classic big dungeon sprawl adventures. The party is expected to explore a bit, retreat, rest, resupply and go again, having weakened the defenses a bit and learned a bit in the previous attempts. I don't think any of the published 4e adventures are built around this idea, but it was standard in the 1e/2e period and common in the 3e era.




You could still have the experience of the classic big dungeon sprawl adventures with more stamina, but you can't have the experience of uninterrupted quests as easily with less stamina.

If they want to appeal to all edition lovers, they're going the wrong direction. It's better to simply increase the danger level of danger sprawls so that you can have your cake and eat it too.

 


you are missing the point.

the old eddition players LIKE not being able to do one big dungeon crawl at once. they LIKE having to take it in chunks, this instantly pits old vs. new.

but this comprimise isn't something that the new guys should hate, look at herbalism, you can easilly spend a few hours prepping potions so that healing isn't an issue.

think of the edition split like minecraft (yes... i just did that). older players like to play survival, for them the fun is in the preparation, it's in "surviving", while new players are more like creative, it's less about prep and more about doing what they love to do, which is building.

TLDR. get your cleric to whip up a bunch of health pots before you start if you really want to go start to finish withough retrating from the quest hub.

Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Jun 01, 2012 - 12:37PM #14
Storyteller-Zero
Date Joined: Jan 29, 2011
Posts: 186

Jun 1, 2012 -- 8:49AM, Yuwain wrote:

Jun 1, 2012 -- 6:12AM, Storyteller-Zero wrote:

Jun 1, 2012 -- 6:06AM, JayM wrote:

Jun 1, 2012 -- 6:01AM, Storyteller-Zero wrote:

I would rather the rules intended for parties to actually finish their quests before heading back to town from level 1 onwards.


The caves are not meant to be a single trip quest site. The party is supposed to make several attacks on the caves in multiple trips over a period of days or weeks.

This is fairly common of the classic big dungeon sprawl adventures. The party is expected to explore a bit, retreat, rest, resupply and go again, having weakened the defenses a bit and learned a bit in the previous attempts. I don't think any of the published 4e adventures are built around this idea, but it was standard in the 1e/2e period and common in the 3e era.




You could still have the experience of the classic big dungeon sprawl adventures with more stamina, but you can't have the experience of uninterrupted quests as easily with less stamina.

If they want to appeal to all edition lovers, they're going the wrong direction. It's better to simply increase the danger level of danger sprawls so that you can have your cake and eat it too.

 


you are missing the point. the old eddition players LIKE not being able to do one big dungeon crawl at once. they LIKE having to take it in chunks, this instantly pits old vs. new. but this comprimise isn't something that the new guys should hate, look at herbalism, you can easilly spend a few hours prepping potions so that healing isn't an issue. think of the edition split like minecraft (yes... i just did that). older players like to play survival, for them the fun is in the preparation, it's in "surviving", while new players are more like creative, it's less about prep and more about doing what they love to do, which is building. TLDR. get your cleric to whip up a bunch of health pots before you start if you really want to go start to finish withough retrating from the quest hub.




Actually, you're the one missing the point of my last post.

By having good health as a BASE at level 1, you can more easily cater to BOTH the older and newer edition players.

The older edition guys can get their chunks by exploring dungeons that have been beefed up accordingly.

The same could be said about toning down dungeons for newer edition players but I believe it's more efficient to add to a base than to subtract when it comes to dungeon design.


Quick Reply
Cancel
1 year ago  ::  Jun 04, 2012 - 2:12AM #15
Aehrlon68
Date Joined: May 24, 2012
Posts: 177
OK, kids, fight nice.  Here's my thought on the whole process; Change it to grant a little more and yet not be so powerful at higher levels.... AND incorporate a decreasing ability to gain HP back from short rests.... read on.

With the new higher starting HP, LV1 characters are a little more durable.  That being said the hit die healing is a little too weak at lower levels.  You can very easily roll low and if you have a low CON score, you're hosed.  Otherwise, this mechanic is very much like a healing surge.  In the playtest I ran, Hit Dice worked OK but seemed like not enough.  Here's my idea I had before the playtest was released, posted on EN World back on Feb 8th:
www.enworld.org/forum/d-d-legacy-discuss...

"I would advocate for something I’ll call “After Battle Recovery”, LOL just a working title.

The way it could work, after a combat is over, you can choose to ‘Recover’ 1d12 HP +1 per Character Level (or whatever your Hit Die is; using a Barbarian character as an example). Add a d12 every 4 Character Levels (so 2d12+5 at LV 5, 3d12+9 at LV 9, etc). This die would be based on your Class Hit Dice: d12 for a Barbarian, d10 for a Fighter/Paladin, d8 for Cleric & so on, with each class getting a minimum of 3 'Recoveries'. Sure, this means more 'Recovery' for fightery types but they usually sustain more punishment & being naturally tougher, would be able to shake off such 'battle fatigue' easier. But other classes get Recoveries too, just fewer of them and not for as many HP.  (EDIT: should also include CON bonus to give a few more HP back).

Furthermore, you reduce the type of dice used for each subsequent combat, representing a declining ability to endure battle fatigue, cuts & bruises, general wear and tear of your body. After the next combat your Barbarian only gets d10s… 3rd combat, d8, etc. By the 5th combat, the Barbarian is down to 4-sided dice and not regaining much at all, even at higher levels. a Fighter would get 4 such Recoveries (d10, d8, d6, d4). A Rogue only 3 (d6, d6, d4). Then you would have to camp and rest to reset your “Recovery” cycle (& it would make sense that you get some healing for camping/resting, of course, say 1HP/LV + CON bonus EDIT: And Level; needs to give more in hindsight). This whole idea differs from 4E Healing Surges in a few ways. First of, you get less Recoveries than you would Healing Surges. Also, Healing Surges or for 1/4 of your total HP; my idea is for less and further declines each time until your last Recovery is used. And it's more than likely that my idea for Recoveries while useful, wouldn't get you back up to full HP very often... part of the idea.

Adventuring parties that had a Cleric among them would certainly fare better, be able to get healed DURING a battle (via Spells) and wouldn’t have to camp as often. AND maybe a Cleric could augment your “After Battle Recovery” by adding an extra die to another's Recovery 3 times/day + WIS modifier, representing "Being under the care of a Healer". Just my 2CP. WotC, feel free to use this idea, heheh. I'm planning on using it in future 3.5 and/or Pathfinder games."

I know, it's a little more complicated but if you get +1 to an ability score at LV 4, 8, etc, my idea was to add a more dice to the Recovery.  And no healer's kit was required; as HP are an abstraction I'm not sure why they are required anyway.  In the playtest rules, you have to keep track of how many Hit Dice you're used anyway so either way, you'd be keeping track.  In my proposed system, you would track the number of times used, not the number of Hit Dice used.

So, No, I don't think Healer's Kit should be needed.  You should just get some HP back.  BUT, if you DO have a Healer with Kit and in the spirit of the current Play-test, a Healer should augment HP recovery by giving more in the form of an Advantage on Hit Dice rolls for healing.  I REALLY like that idea; 2 dice, take the better result.  Conversely, if you were at zero HP or lower in a fight, you should be at a Disadvantage when healing up, just for that one Short Rest.  Heheh, yes, I have given this a lot of thought.... we're all geeks, aren't we??  But this last part really does seem in the spirit of the game we've seen so far and would make for better healing under a Cleric (or Druid or Ranger).  The Disadvantage seems in-line with a return to a "grittier" kind of game.

Why am I adding so much about this?  I think that the current rules for healing are too stingy at low levels but will get very powerful at higher levels.  As flatter math/progressions seem to be the trend, maybe Healing needs to be this way as well.  AND I really do think I'm onto something with a decling ability to heal... the current system "sort-of" has that; when you use up your Hit Dice, you're out.  I guess I prefer it to be more gradual... at the time I made the original post, I was assuming a more retro-ish D&D game where there were no "healing surges" so it's naturally stingy as the assumption can be that NO non-clerical healing would be available without potions & the like.  Healing Potions also need a boost IMHO.  All this is just my 2CP; take it with a grain of salt.  I just love this game and I'm optimistic moving forward.  I like a lot of what I've seen so far...
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 2 of 2  •  Prev 1 2
Jump Menu:
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing