|
1 year ago ::
Feb 01, 2012 - 4:28PM
#1
|
|
|
I really love the mechanic of Healing Surges. But I get that a lot of people don't like them. The thing is, a lot of the arguments against them are more based on the flavour, than the basic mechanic. So here's an idea I was thinking about on how to tweak them: For each 25% of your max HP you lose in any given encounter, you gain a wound. You have a limited number of wounds you can take before you're debilitated (can't be granted HP normally, and can't fight, pretty much crawling/being carried) based on your class and/or constitution. The rate at which wounds recover is an explicitly variable thing. You can have them recover daily, or take weeks to fully heal. Outside of combat you can rest up and restore your HP, but the wounds stay constant. Most healing does nothing to wounds, so a Warlord would restore your HP, your will to fight, but do nothing for your wounds. The major exception is obvious: Cure Light Wounds heals you 25% of your HP, and heals a wound. Cure Moderate Wounds heals 2 wounds, and 50% of HP. Etc. How does this differ from Healing Surges? Primarily in the fact that you take wounds IMMEDIATELY from the damage, rather than using HS to restore yourself after the damage. More importantly, the FEEL of the mechanic is different. By calling them "wounds" you make it obvious that HP are not wounds, per se, and by having them be permanent you show that a warlord isn't HEALING, but rather INSPIRING. EDIT: An important bit of development from later in the thread can be found here, in case you don't want to browse through it all.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 01, 2012 - 4:41PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Aug 17, 2011
|
This is definitely very clever. It makes a lot more sense than healing surges. I always explain them as representing the character's ability to be healed. But really that doesn't make much sense.
I think that wounds need to have some sort of other penalty, other than death, or total disability when you have accumulated all the wounds your class allows. One of the thing that makes HP difficult to understand as a direct representation of your injuries, is that your ability to fight stays the same, at full HP, or with just 1 HP. When HP is more of an abstraction, this does not stretch the imagination too much. But with wounds directly representing how injured you are, they need to affect your ability to fight. Maybe they decrease your maximum HP, or maybe the bonuses on your attack and/or damage rolls. The trouble with this, is that it may become annoying to keep track of.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 01, 2012 - 5:28PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Oct 22, 2007
|
So you want a system that punishes all Leaders that aren't a Cleric for doing their job?
Why? Is it because Clerics are "supposed" to be the only class that can "heal" people? What a crock.
-m4ki; one down, one to go "Retro is not new.
Retro-fit is not new."
--Seeker95,
on why I won't be playing DDN
| DDN Metrics (0-10) | enthusiasm: 1 | confidence in design: -3 | desire to play: 0 | Sticking with 4e?: Yep. | Better Options: IKRPG Mk II |
The Five Things D&D Next Absolutely Must Not Do:
Show
1. Imbalanced gameplay. Any and all characters must be able to contribute equally both in combat and out of combat at all levels of play. If the Fighters are linear and the Wizards quadratic, I walk.
2. Hardcore simulationist approach. D&D is a game about heroic fantasy. I'm weak and useless enough in real life; I play RPGs for a change of pace. If the only reason a rule exists is because "that's how it's supposed to be", I walk. I don't want a game that "simulates" real life, I want a game that simulates heroic fantasy.
3. Worshipping at false idols (AKA Sacred Cows). If the only reason a rule exists is "it's always been that way", I walk. Now to be clear, I have no problem with some things not changing; my issue is with retaining bad idea simply for the sake of nostalgia.
4. DM vs. players. If the game encourages "gotcha!" moments or treats the DM and players as enemies, adversaries, or problems to be overcome, I walk.
5. Rules for the sake of rules. The only thing I want rules for is the things I can't do sitting around a table with my friends. If the rules try to step on my ability to roleplay the character I want to roleplay, I walk. Furthermore, the rules serve to facilitate gameplay, not to simulate the world.
NOTE: Items in red have been violated.
Chris Perkins' DM Survival Tips:
Show
1. When in doubt, wing it.
2. Keep the story moving. Go with the flow.
3. Sometimes things make the best characters.
4. Always give players lots of things to do.
5. Wherever possible, say ‘yes.’
6. Cheating is largely unnecessary.
7. Don't be afraid to give the characters a fun new toy.
8. Don't get in the way of a good players exchange.
9. Avoid talking too much.
10. Save some details for later.
11. Be transparent.
12. Don't show all your cards.
Words to live by.
Quotes From People Smarter Than Me:
Show
"Essentials zigged, when I wanted to continue zagging..." -Foxface on Essentials
"Servicing a diverse fan base with an RPG ruleset - far from being the mandate for 'open design space' and a cavalier attitude towards balance - requires creating a system that /works/, with minimal fuss, for a wide variety of play styles, not just from one group to the next, but at the same table." -Tony_Vargas on design
"Mearls' and Cook's stated intent to produce an edition that fans of all previous editions (and Pathfinder) will like more than their current favourite edition is laudable. But it is also, IMO, completely unrealistic. It's like people who pray for world peace: I might share their overall aims, but I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for them to succeed. When they talk in vague terms about what they'd like to do in this new edition, I mostly find myself thinking 'hey, that sounds cool, assuming they can pull it off', but almost every time they've said something specific about actual mechanics, I've found myself wincing and shaking my head in disbelief and/or disgust, either straight away or after thinking about the obvious implications for half a minute." -Duskweaver on D&D Next
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 01, 2012 - 5:35PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Aug 17, 2011
|
So you want a system that punishes all Leaders that aren't a Cleric for doing their job?
Why? Is it because Clerics are "supposed" to be the only class that can "heal" people? What a crock.
This is a fair point. I would suggest giving various class access to powers that eliminate wounds. Warlords could do first aid, artificers could use magical salves, and divine and arcane classes, could have a similar sort of spell. It doesn't have to be the "Cure Light Wounds" spell.
I think the goal is to eliminate the confusing nature of healing surges, and to emphasize the abstract nature of HP. Of course this also means that you may have to adjust the "dying" mechanic. if HP can be easily restored, then losing all your HP without any wounds, shouldn't kill you. maybe losing all your HP, causes you to fall unconscious, and lose a wound. And then failing death saving throws create additional wounds. So your ability to be killed in battle would be affected by how wounded you were going into it.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 01, 2012 - 5:38PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
So you want a system that punishes all Leaders that aren't a Cleric for doing their job?
Why? Is it because Clerics are "supposed" to be the only class that can "heal" people? What a crock.
Compromise Healing Wound is a 5 to 10 round ritual (The scars are on the inside) and Medical Practices are a non-magical analog (availability is subject to game world plus might take a little longer although maybe cheaper).
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 01, 2012 - 5:43PM
#6
|
|
|
So you want a system that punishes all Leaders that aren't a Cleric for doing their job?
Why? Is it because Clerics are "supposed" to be the only class that can "heal" people? What a crock.
No, I want a system very much like 4e.
Remember, wounds function as a limit on healing, just like surges do in 4e. They are, in fact, the same thing in almost every way. Just flavoured slightly differently. (Rather than using up "healing surges" which some people consider gamist, you gain "wounds")
In 4e, Clerics have surgeless healing, ie. Cure Light Wounds, Cure Moderate Wounds, etc.
What's the equivalent of surgeless healing in the "wound-based" system? It's being able to heal wounds.
The ability to heal wounds should be precisely as limited as access to surgeless healing is in 4e.
I think the goal is to eliminate the confusing nature of healing surges, and to emphasize the abstract nature of HP. Of course this also means that you may have to adjust the "dying" mechanic. if HP can be easily restored, then losing all your HP without any wounds, shouldn't kill you. maybe losing all your HP, causes you to fall unconscious, and lose a wound. And then failing death saving throws create additional wounds. So your ability to be killed in battle would be affected by how wounded you were going into it.
I do like this idea. Personally, I'd have it be that you only end up dead if you fail another death save once you're already out of wounds.
Edit: I think M4kitsu's reaction serves to demonstrate just how effective refluffing can be at changing people's opinions. M4kitsu is a staunch defender of 4e, but the moment I refluff healing surges into wounds, all of a sudden the 4e mechanic (where very few classes get surgeless healing, and clerics are the best at it) is terrible.
Now I just need to get it to work in the other direction :p
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 01, 2012 - 8:32PM
#7
|
|
|
1 change to healing surges- "Healing surges return at a rate of one per day."
Ritual (heal) Bed Rest- The target of this ritual gains an aditional number of healing surges per day deturmined by a Heal check. The effect ends when the target of the ritual engaves in anything more strenuous than walking to the chamber pot.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 01, 2012 - 9:30PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Jan 15, 2009
|
What's the equivalent of surgeless healing in the "wound-based" system? It's being able to heal wounds.
The ability to heal wounds should be precisely as limited as access to surgeless healing is in 4e.
That right there is quite clever...
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 01, 2012 - 10:47PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Jun 28, 2003
|
Wow +1 to OP. I love 4e. I love all Editions. I'm a PC in 1E/2E and a DM for 4E, where I use 2E Crit Charts, 1E Hirelings, and 3E Slashing/Percing/Blugeoning (you've prolly heard this before  ). That being said, even though I love 4E, it doesnt mean I dont see the Op's point. If I'm not reading it wrong, its so simple its elegant! Just Check off healing Surges as wounds! Change the fluff, change the verisimilatude (sp?)! Brilliant! HP represent turning that near lethal blow into a graze, tiring out etc. Healing Surges/Wounds represent actually getting hurt. I mean, hey, they already do this with skill challenges. i remember the 1st 4E preview adventure had a skill challenge when people were trying to escape the guards and escape the city (Sembia I think, Chris Tulach the awesome author), where someone fell over the wall (failed athletics check/roll) twisted an ankle or something, and lost a healing surge, I.E. got wounded. 4E has a lot of great ideas, its just that bad things happening (murder suicide with head of DDI), hasbro rushing it out the door, and bad marketing hurt it; among other things not to do with mechanics/fluff, which are awesome. Think about it, if they were treated as wounds from the get go, would so many detractors say that it didnt have the 'feel of D&D'? I always liked the non-rolled HP for 4E idea. That way, no more Wiz with 8 Con having more HP then the dwarf Barbarian with a 20 Con just due to poor rolls. My only problem was and is that 4, 5, 6 per level left the Wiz and Ftr only 2 hp apart. Looking at it from a HP and Surges = Wounds perspective, it makes me feel that the original 4E designers figured it out, but due to many outside factors through no fault of their own, rushed the idea before it was fully playtested/implemented. Now looking at it from a new perspective (think i actually posted something similar to the OP before, defending 4E healing Surges) the wiz and ftr being only 2 hp = turning lethality into graze doesnt bother me so much. Why? Because that Fighter still has alot more Healing Surges=Wound Points then the Wizard! Now, only if DDI will let us modify our character sheets in the online builder 
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 01, 2012 - 11:09PM
#10
|
|
|
A very nice system, indeed. One that I use myself (with minor variations). The only thing I would change (to keep a bit more compatability with 4E) is that the "wounds" don't start until "Bloodied" (50% of full hp). Voila!
-DS
|
|
|
