I probably won't be switching after all...
Halaster Blackcloak
every thing I say "Yeah, cool!" to, there are three things that I
say "Oh gods no!" to. Or at the very least, the "Oh gods no!" comments
weigh more heavily than the "yeah, cool!" ones.
What seems to be one of the major nails on the coffin is the sheer
amount of invincibility of players. First of all, they start with max
hp. Not a big deal, but it just starts the snowball rolling. Then we
have spells like Mass Heal, where a cleric can heal 2,000 hp of damage
in a single spell. Add to that the death's door rule where each round
the charcter gets a 10% chance to stabilize and even begin healing, and
also the way clerics can swap other spells for healing, and we now have
the equivelant of a bunch of Xmen Wolverine healing factors. The
assault on a dungeon no longer becomes dangerous, it's simply a matter
of attrition. Go in, kill what you can, retreat, heal everyone, go back
in. Never has this tactic been so easy. Hell, now you don't even need
to retreat, just heal on the run, why not? Just takes a short time to
memorize new spells anyway. There's no longer any need to retreat as
charcters can heal as they explore. There's virtually no limit to the #
of healing spells available. I hope the DMG doesn't list healing
potions, because they're an unneeded redundancy.
And this horseshit about characters healing 1hp/day/level?!?! Good
gods, that means a 10th level charcter heals 10 hp per day, 15 if he
has bed rest! In 2E, a character got 21 pts per WEEK with total bed
rest, otherwise just 7 pts per WEEK. These 3E powerhouses (gods) can
get more healing in a day than a 2E character got in a WEEK! That's
before taking into account the overglut of magical healing available.
It seems to me that 3E is obsessed with superpowered characters, with
unkillable PCs who never need fear death. Never have characters had
such potent and plentiful healing potential. In the old days, the
cleric haad a handful of healing spells at best, and if you were lucky,
a few healing potions. You went into a dungeon or on some other type of
adventure, and relied on your wits to keep you alive. The healing was
just there as an emergency measure. You had to be careful, and you knew
there was a limit to the healing ability of the team. Gods forbid there
are two clerics on a team in 3E...you no longer need to worry about
damage, since you never need to go more than a few hours with less than
full HPs.
I truly, honestly fail to see how a DM can challenge a team of 3E
characters without working his ass off just to balance out this single
powergaming aspect. I can't make heads or tails of that damned cleric
spell list, but I take it if I'm reading it right, that a cleric gets
Mass Heal (an 8th level spell) at 15th elevel? Ok, that is a pretty
high level, but by the time the team is around that level, they're
automatically healing 15 hp/day WITHOUT magic. Given that an average
fighter at that level will have about 60 hp, that's a hell of a lot of
automatic healing! And if he gets bed rest, that's 22 hp healing per
day. A cleric at 15th level can also trade in what...25 or so spells
towards healing spells?
No, I think I'm staying in 2E, where the charcters at least have a
CHANCE to die.
--
Halaster Blackcloak
"Undermountain, the Realms' deadliest dungeon? I prefer to call it
home."
"Elminster? Bah! Neophyte!"
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Robin Lim
"Halaster Blackcloak" <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8nispi$6ia$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Well, the more I read into the PHB, the less I feel like switching. For
> every thing I say "Yeah, cool!" to, there are three things that I
> say "Oh gods no!" to. Or at the very least, the "Oh gods no!" comments
> weigh more heavily than the "yeah, cool!" ones.
>
> What seems to be one of the major nails on the coffin is the sheer
> amount of invincibility of players.
*rolls eyes* If you think players are too powerful, then up the level of
opposition. Is it so hard? I mean really now.
> And this horseshit about characters healing 1hp/day/level?!?! Good
> gods, that means a 10th level charcter heals 10 hp per day, 15 if he
> has bed rest! In 2E, a character got 21 pts per WEEK with total bed
> rest, otherwise just 7 pts per WEEK. These 3E powerhouses (gods) can
> get more healing in a day than a 2E character got in a WEEK! That's
> before taking into account the overglut of magical healing available.
Makes sense, since they should be able to heal at the same relative rate.
> It seems to me that 3E is obsessed with superpowered characters, with
> unkillable PCs who never need fear death. Never have characters had
> such potent and plentiful healing potential. In the old days, the
> cleric haad a handful of healing spells at best, and if you were lucky,
> a few healing potions. You went into a dungeon or on some other type of
> adventure, and relied on your wits to keep you alive. The healing was
> just there as an emergency measure. You had to be careful, and you knew
> there was a limit to the healing ability of the team. Gods forbid there
> are two clerics on a team in 3E...you no longer need to worry about
> damage, since you never need to go more than a few hours with less than
> full HPs.
Maybe its because most people who play the game don't like the idea of PCs
running out of the dungeon and spending a few weeks of downtime before going
back into the dungeon? Besides, if you think PCs spend too much time
healing, just throw more monsters at them.
> I truly, honestly fail to see how a DM can challenge a team of 3E
> characters without working his ass off just to balance out this single
> powergaming aspect. I can't make heads or tails of that damned cleric
> spell list, but I take it if I'm reading it right, that a cleric gets
> Mass Heal (an 8th level spell) at 15th elevel? Ok, that is a pretty
> high level, but by the time the team is around that level, they're
> automatically healing 15 hp/day WITHOUT magic. Given that an average
> fighter at that level will have about 60 hp, that's a hell of a lot of
> automatic healing! And if he gets bed rest, that's 22 hp healing per
> day. A cleric at 15th level can also trade in what...25 or so spells
> towards healing spells?
>
> No, I think I'm staying in 2E, where the charcters at least have a
> CHANCE to die.
Check out some CL 15 monsters first.
Rob
Sea Wasp
> And this horseshit about characters healing 1hp/day/level?!?!
One of the wiser changes. The old way, there was absolutely no point
to HAVING natural healing at all. At least, not after first or second.
After that, it took SOOO bloody long to heal from what were, to the
character, proportionately minor wounds, that no one would ever USE
bed rest, and if for some reason they had to, it took a LONG time.
I mean, take your high-level fighter with 80 HP. He takes 10 points.
This is, proportionately, the same amount of injury as he would have
taken if he had 8 HP at first level... but it takes him 10 times as
long to heal. The first level fighter is up and out the door in one
day. It takes the high-level one a week and a half. Now THAT was
horseshit, my friend.
As far as the other healing, what's the problem? The characters don't
become invincible; just able to survive more attacks. If they get
killed in battle, the fact that the cleric COULD have healed them for
200,000,000,000 points of damage is irrelevant; they're dead already.
Battles aren't calmly ordered things like your standard videogame
interface, where you can sit and think about how your healing should
be allocated, and where someone with a potion or spell can decide to
heal Joe Fighter when Joe is across the room a dozen yards away with
several hostile creatures between Joe and the would-be healer. In an
RPG, the characters first have to be able to KNOW that another
character needs healing, AND be able to administer the healing, and
often a battle doesn't afford you that luxury.
What the healing supply DOES do is reduce the number of times that
the characters must simply go backwards and spend a week and a half
hanging around town to heal.
--
Sea Wasp http://www.wizvax.net/seawasp/index.html
/^\
;;; _Morgantown: The Jason Wood Chronicles_, at
http://www.hyperbooks.com/catalog/20040.html
Halaster Blackcloak
"Robin Lim" <ascen...@home.com> wrote:
>*rolls eyes* If you think players are too powerful, then up the level
of opposition. Is it so hard? I mean really now.<
That's my point. I don't WANT to have to up the level of every monster
and villain. I simply don't like the escalation. I mean, at the rate
these new 3E characters can heal, killer dungeons from 1E/2E become
cakewalks.
>Makes sense, since they should be able to heal at the same relative
rate. <
How do you figure that? In 2E, a 10th level character heals 1 hp/day.
In 3E that same character heals 10 hp/day. That's a tenfold increase.
That's what, a 1,000% increase in healing ability? And if you go by
strict bedrest rules, it's 15 hp/day in 3E as opposed to 3hp in 2E,
which is a five-fold increase. Characters at 10th level in 3E can heal
more hp in two days without bedrest than a 2E character can heal in a
week with bedrest! It's insane.
>Maybe its because most people who play the game don't like the idea of
PCs running out of the dungeon and spending a few weeks of downtime
before going back into the dungeon?<
Powergaming. There's no challenge. When a cleric can swap his entire
spell roster for healing, when we have super spells like Mass Heal,
when characters can heal 10-15 hp/day at 10th level naturally, and
let's not even factor in healing potions...well, you now have an orgy
of healing happening, the charcters NEVER need to retreat. I fail to
see the fun in that. I certainly don't want a character like that, much
less have to DM them.
>Check out some CL 15 monsters first.<
Don't need to. The escalation is there regardless. Besides, PCs fight
more NPCs than monsters. Weapons still do basically the same damage as
they used to, only now the characters can heal 5-10 times faster, and
have an almost inexhuastable source of healing with their clerics. If
there's two clerics on the team, you might as well have them fight gods
once they hit 10th level. Also, the mature red dragon in the back of
the PHB does 7 pts LESS damage than his 2E counterpart with his breath
weapon, his claws do a little more, his bite about the same overall. I
don't see this as balancing out, not when PCs heal so powerfully.
The escalationin 3E reminds me of a sily high powered battle we once
had in a silly, overpowered campaign we ran. The PCs were fighting a
similar team of villains, and everyone kept getting healed and wished
back, and the battle went on for hours because it was hurt, heal, hurt,
heal. Not a lot of fun.
I guess if others like 3E, then more power to them, I hope they enjoy
it. I'm not arguing that 3E sucks or that people shouldn't play it,
just that I personally am finding it to be WAY too focused on super-
powered PCs, and hence it isn't something I'm likely going to embrace
after all.
A'koss
news:8nispi$6ia$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> No, I think I'm staying in 2E, where the charcters at least have a
> CHANCE to die.
I'll tell you what, actually *run* a game for a couple of weeks and tell
me if this is still the case. As a playtester I can tell you right now that
characters have no trouble meeting their makers in 3e.
A'koss!
--
The Rings of Concordance
http://members.home.net/infinity/Main_Page.htm
Halaster Blackcloak
sea...@wizvax.net wrote:
>One of the wiser changes. The old way, there was absolutely no point
to HAVING natural healing at all. At least, not after first or second.
After that, it took SOOO bloody long to heal from what were, to the
character, proportionately minor wounds, that no one would ever USE bed
rest, and if for some reason they had to, it took a LONG time<
Well, let me preface this with the note that I'm not arguing just for
the sake of argument, and I do tend to agree with many of your posts
I've sen in the past. BUT...I simply can't agree about the healing
factor. Yes, it took a long time to heal, but it SHOULD. Think about
running a razor along the bottom of your foot. Nothing life threatening
assuming you're in general good health, but how many days, or WEEKS
will it be before you can walk, much less run on it? It won't heal in a
day or two on its own.
>I mean, take your high-level fighter with 80 HP. He takes 10 points.
This is, proportionately, the same amount of injury as he would have
taken if he had 8 HP at first level... but it takes him 10 times as
long to heal. The first level fighter is up and out the door in one
day. It takes the high-level one a week and a half. Now THAT was
horseshit, my friend<
I don't see it that way, really. I mean, take a 2nd level fighter with
10 hp. He takes 5 pts of damage, so he's technically half dead. He can
just heal all that with 2 days of bed rest? It makes no sense. I
understand your proportionate comparison above, but the way I see it, a
10th level character who loses 10 hp has taken more grievous wounds
than a 1st level character taking 1 hp. Because as levels go up, it
assumes a character can take more damage. I'm thinking about the part
in the 2E DMG that explains hp. If an 8pt sword thrust can kill a 1st
level character who has 8hp, that doesn't imply that a 10th level
character with 80 hp can survive 8 of those thrusts. It means he
manages to turn or pivot, making each thrust do a little less deadly
damage. He learns to handle deadly thrusts like that, hence lessening
its fatal effects. But imagine what that means. He's still got multiple
dangerous wounds. He SHOULD take long to heal. Overall, he's taken mroe
damage.
>As far as the other healing, what's the problem? The characters don't
become invincible; just able to survive more attacks. If they get
killed in battle, the fact that the cleric COULD have healed them for
200,000,000,000 points of damage is irrelevant; they're dead already. <
True, but let's take a dungeon setting for example. The characters
don't have to worry about running out of healing spells anymore, they
heal at 10 times the rate they used to, and eventually they get massive
spells like Mass Heal. They no longer need to worry about combat,
because they can afford to get all banged up and then retreat to an
adjacent room, perform all those healing spells, and continue on. On
top of that, it takes less time to memorize spells, less sleep is
needed, etc.
>Battles aren't calmly ordered things like your standard videogame
interface, where you can sit and think about how your healing should be
allocated, and where someone with a potion or spell can decide to heal
Joe Fighter when Joe is across the room a dozen yards away with several
hostile creatures between Joe and the would-be healer.<
Again, true, but typically charcters fight, retreat, heal, and continue
on. The difference now is that when they retreat to heal, they have a
virtually unlimited amount of healing available. Even resting one day
restores as much as magical healing used to, perhaps even more. I cnnot
even imagine how a 3E party could ever manage to stop for a day's rest
and not set out the next day fully healed, no matter HOW badly hurt
they all were the day before. It's like resetting a video game where
you get extra "lives" added to you score.
>In an RPG, the characters first have to be able to KNOW that another
character needs healing, AND be able to administer the healing, and
often a battle doesn't afford you that luxury.<
Again, I agree, but see my previous answer.
>What the healing supply DOES do is reduce the number of times that the
characters must simply go backwards and spend a week and a half hanging
around town to heal<
Well, I hated when that happened as much as the next guy, but sometimes
that's the only logical way it works. Shit happens, you gotta go
recover. You go back, re-plan everything, make sure you're better
prepared the next time. Maybe bring some extra healing potions or
scrolls. But I rarely saw that problem crop up because for the most
part, the players tended to use their wits and not rely on magical
healing to pull them through. Now that isn't much of a condsideration
because of how much healing they can get.
Also, I've seen players abuse things and go off loaded with healing
potions and scrolls, and tons of memorized healing spells, and it gave
them a hell of an edge. Imagine what it would be like now, with more
potent healing spells, the ability to swap other spells for healing,
and a vastly increased rate of natural healing. I just can't see this
as balanced, or even fun.
Halaster Blackcloak
"A'koss" <infi...@home.com> wrote:
>I'll tell you what, actually *run* a game for a couple of weeks and
tell me if this is still the case. As a playtester I can tell you right
now that characters have no trouble meeting their makers in 3e.<
I fail to see how, considering how much more potent healing has gotten,
and how weapons do the same damage. Also, even that dragon in the 3E
PHB was not that tough compared to his 2E counterpart (considering his
damage totals, BW, etc). Are the other monsters toughened up or
something?
I'm just not getting it for some reason, how they can not be
overpowered with the super-abundance of healing available, the sheer
increase in natural healing, etc. If I'm WAY missing something, please
LMK because I haven't closed my mind totally to 3E yet, I'm just having
trouble getting past some things, this healing abundance being one of
them. ;-) I'm asking honestly, because since you've playtested it, I
figure you might be able to explain it to me so I can understand WHY
it's balanced. I'd hate to have to wait till October and spend $40 more
to figure it out! ;-D
Halaster Blackcloak
>I'll tell you what, actually *run* a game for a couple of weeks and
tell me if this is still the case. As a playtester I can tell you right
now that characters have no trouble meeting their makers in 3e.<
Ooops! Left out something I wanted to say in response to this. What
I've seen so far, I think I can "tinker with" enough to like 3E. I
mean, as far as minor complaints like not having the druidic
hierarchy...I can easily add those back in if I want, it wouldn't take
any work at all. I can also take out a spell like Mass Heal *IF* I find
it overpowerful. I don't like the he/she pronouns, or the way they now
say "YOU cast a fireball", "YOU summon an animal", I don't even care
for much of the art, but those are all immaterial to being able to
enjoy the game, it's the mechanics that are important.
That's why this healing thing has gotten me so riled up for lack of a
better word. It just seems so unbalanced to me, so munchkin that it
isn't funny. But if it truly isn't, then sure, I'd like to still be
able to run a 3E campaign. I can always still run a 1E or 2E campaign
regardless. The point is, I have to like 3E and know it works well and
isn't munchkin powered before I go all out and do it.
Anyway, any help with figuring this out would be greatly appreciated.
I'm still hoping 3E turns out to work for me. Justs adds more options
and opportunities for fun. :-)
Dr Nuncheon
Halaster Blackcloak <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>What seems to be one of the major nails on the coffin is the sheer
>hp. Not a big deal, but it just starts the snowball rolling.
Yeah, not having 1 hp Wizards anymore at first level sucks.
>Then we
>have spells like Mass Heal, where a cleric can heal 2,000 hp of damage
>in a single spell.
Technically accurate, but misleading. Heal would heal 2000 hp of damage,
too, if someone had taken that much and survived...
>Add to that the death's door rule where each round
>the charcter gets a 10% chance to stabilize and even begin healing,
Oh, yeah, that's incredibly unbalancing. Read carefully. *90%* of the
time you'll fail that roll and lose another hit point. 60% of the time
you'll eventually stabilize without help if you go to -1. If you go to
-5, you've got a 40% chance. The more wounded you are (surprise) the more
chance you have of kicking the bucket.
>The
>assault on a dungeon
Wow. I thought D&D had generally left that sort of stuff behind.
>no longer becomes dangerous, it's simply a matter
>of attrition. Go in, kill what you can, retreat, heal everyone, go back
>in. Never has this tactic been so easy. Hell, now you don't even need
>to retreat, just heal on the run, why not? Just takes a short time to
>memorize new spells anyway.
8 hours of rest + 1 hour for memorizing for the wizards, and 1 hour 'once
a day' for the clerics. They can't just take that any time they feel like
it, there's a set time for meditation and prayer.
>And this horseshit about characters healing 1hp/day/level?!?! Good
>gods, that means a 10th level charcter heals 10 hp per day, 15 if he
>has bed rest! In 2E, a character got 21 pts per WEEK with total bed
>rest, otherwise just 7 pts per WEEK. These 3E powerhouses (gods) can
>get more healing in a day than a 2E character got in a WEEK!
You're so right. I love playing out 8 weeks of bed rest. I'll just change
that rule right now. (scribble)
So how come a 10th level fighter in 2nd edition who's been beaten within
an inch of his life (to 1 hp) takes so much longer to recover than a 1st
level fighter beaten within an inch of his life? I'd think the more
experienced fighter would be up on his feet faster...
>"Undermountain, the Realms' deadliest dungeon? I prefer to call it
>home."
>"Elminster? Bah! Neophyte!"
Really ironic quotes, considering your rant.
J
--
INTERNET SEEMS TO BE FULL OF MILLIONS OF | Jeff Johnston
IDIOTS & LUNATICS ! ! - c2 (ts...@my-deja.com) | jeffj @ io . com
Robin Lim
> In article <458n5.8584$i5.2...@news1.rdc2.on.home.com>,
> "Robin Lim" <ascen...@home.com> wrote:
>
> >*rolls eyes* If you think players are too powerful, then up the level
> of opposition. Is it so hard? I mean really now.<
>
> That's my point. I don't WANT to have to up the level of every monster
> and villain. I simply don't like the escalation. I mean, at the rate
> these new 3E characters can heal, killer dungeons from 1E/2E become
> cakewalks.
I dare you to run Against the Giants and see how long the players live.
Same with Tomb of Horrors. I'll be seeing how Temple of Elemental Evil does
against my players in a sec.
> How do you figure that? In 2E, a 10th level character heals 1 hp/day.
> In 3E that same character heals 10 hp/day. That's a tenfold increase.
> That's what, a 1,000% increase in healing ability? And if you go by
> strict bedrest rules, it's 15 hp/day in 3E as opposed to 3hp in 2E,
> which is a five-fold increase. Characters at 10th level in 3E can heal
> more hp in two days without bedrest than a 2E character can heal in a
> week with bedrest! It's insane.
Your logic is flawed. It works like this:
In 3E, a 1st level rogue with 7 HP will take 7 days to heal from a
near-mortal wound. A 7th level rogue with 35 HP will take about 5 days to
heal from a near-mortal wound. That's what I mean about a similar relative
healing capability. Doesn't make sense that one guy coming back from a
near-mortal wound will take a month, and the other guy will take a week.
> >Maybe its because most people who play the game don't like the idea of
> PCs running out of the dungeon and spending a few weeks of downtime
> before going back into the dungeon?<
>
> Powergaming. There's no challenge. When a cleric can swap his entire
> spell roster for healing, when we have super spells like Mass Heal,
> when characters can heal 10-15 hp/day at 10th level naturally, and
> let's not even factor in healing potions...well, you now have an orgy
> of healing happening, the charcters NEVER need to retreat. I fail to
> see the fun in that. I certainly don't want a character like that, much
> less have to DM them.
Several points.
First of all, chugging potions provokes AoO. It's not a safe thing to do
while a monster is whaleing away on you.
Never need to retreat? I doubt that. People are still going to get
pummelled and take damage. People are still going to go down. Clerics
probably spit out fewer healing spells than they used to, because the wisdom
spell bonuses got reduced. Parties also won't have to take several weeks of
downtime while they heal up.
> Don't need to. The escalation is there regardless. Besides, PCs fight
> more NPCs than monsters. Weapons still do basically the same damage as
> they used to, only now the characters can heal 5-10 times faster, and
> have an almost inexhuastable source of healing with their clerics. If
> there's two clerics on the team, you might as well have them fight gods
> once they hit 10th level. Also, the mature red dragon in the back of
> the PHB does 7 pts LESS damage than his 2E counterpart with his breath
> weapon, his claws do a little more, his bite about the same overall. I
> don't see this as balancing out, not when PCs heal so powerfully.
What, and NPCs can't heal 5-10 times faster than they did under the old
rules?
And considering the new dragon's AC, attack bonus, and everything else, I'm
not worried. But whatever. Some people don't like change. Stick to
whatever works for you. I know that old D&D didn't work for me. At all.
Rob
Dr Nuncheon
Halaster Blackcloak <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>In article <458n5.8584$i5.2...@news1.rdc2.on.home.com>,
> "Robin Lim" <ascen...@home.com> wrote:
>
>rate. <
>
>In 3E that same character heals 10 hp/day. That's a tenfold increase.
*relative rate*, Hal. It takes (roughly) the same time for a 10th level
fighter to heal half his hit points as it does for a first level fighter
to do the same.
>That's what, a 1,000% increase in healing ability? And if you go by
>strict bedrest rules, it's 15 hp/day in 3E as opposed to 3hp in 2E,
>which is a five-fold increase. Characters at 10th level in 3E can heal
>more hp in two days without bedrest than a 2E character can heal in a
>week with bedrest! It's insane.
No, the old way was insane. Thorgrim the 20th level fighter gets thrashed
within an inch of his life and has to spend 3 months recovering, while his
little brother the 1st level fighter is up and perfectly healed in a few
days.
>>Maybe its because most people who play the game don't like the idea of
>PCs running out of the dungeon and spending a few weeks of downtime
>before going back into the dungeon?<
>
>Powergaming. There's no challenge.
Because, y'know, the only way to challenge players is with a fight.
Really. It's not a real D&D game unless you kill 3/4 of the party (or was
that Paranoia? I always mix them up.)
>Also, the mature red dragon in the back of
>the PHB does 7 pts LESS damage than his 2E counterpart with his breath
>weapon, his claws do a little more, his bite about the same overall. I
>don't see this as balancing out, not when PCs heal so powerfully.
Just remember the dragon heals so powerfully too. And he's got way more
hit points than the PCs. He's going to hit more often than he used to
with those huge bonuses to his attacks. He's going to take 10 points less
damage form every hit on him that's not with a magical weapon. He doesn't
have any 3/day limit on his breath weapon.
G. James Wilkinson
<halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>In article <458n5.8584$i5.2...@news1.rdc2.on.home.com>,
> "Robin Lim" <ascen...@home.com> wrote:
>
>>*rolls eyes* If you think players are too powerful, then up the level
>of opposition. Is it so hard? I mean really now.<
>
>That's my point. I don't WANT to have to up the level of every monster
>and villain. I simply don't like the escalation. I mean, at the rate
>these new 3E characters can heal, killer dungeons from 1E/2E become
>cakewalks.
Uhh... I seriously doubt some of the tough modules, such as the Temple
of Elemental Evil, would be a cakewalk for 3rd Edition characters. I
REALLY doubt that, actually.
>
>>Makes sense, since they should be able to heal at the same relative
>rate. <
>
>How do you figure that? In 2E, a 10th level character heals 1 hp/day.
>In 3E that same character heals 10 hp/day. That's a tenfold increase.
>That's what, a 1,000% increase in healing ability? And if you go by
>strict bedrest rules, it's 15 hp/day in 3E as opposed to 3hp in 2E,
>which is a five-fold increase. Characters at 10th level in 3E can heal
>more hp in two days without bedrest than a 2E character can heal in a
>week with bedrest! It's insane.
>
How is this insane? It is in proportion. As a person advances, HPs
go up, and so does the healing rate to represent their ability to
dampen damage through experience. Hit points do NOT equate raw
damage on a point-per-point scale. While five points of damage might
be a life-threatening would for a 1st level Bard with 6 hps, it would
be merely a wound that the 10th level Fighter had used his skills to
dampen to damage done to himself (Hence, 5 damage out of 70 HPs
total.) Why would this relatively small wound (In comparison) take
the same amount of time to heal as the nearly dead Bard? The fighter,
after recieving the same amount of punishement (To scale) as the bard
takes over a MONTH to heal?
Sure, this doesn't make too much sense when it comes to the various
cure spells (Why does a cure light totally heal a near-dead peasant,
while it doesn't do squat for a Fighter with 50 HPs of wounds?) but
this is where the whole HPs issue breaks down a bit, and you need to
ignore it; it's a balance issue for the game (1st, 2nd and 3rd.)
>>Maybe its because most people who play the game don't like the idea of
>PCs running out of the dungeon and spending a few weeks of downtime
>before going back into the dungeon?<
>
>Powergaming. There's no challenge. When a cleric can swap his entire
>spell roster for healing, when we have super spells like Mass Heal,
>when characters can heal 10-15 hp/day at 10th level naturally, and
>let's not even factor in healing potions...well, you now have an orgy
>of healing happening, the charcters NEVER need to retreat. I fail to
>see the fun in that. I certainly don't want a character like that, much
>less have to DM them.
Have you even -played- the game? How can you simply write-off
"There's no challenge to it"?
In pretty much ANY game I've played, Clerics have done pretty much
nothing but heal anyway. This does not change the game very much.
All this does now is encourage Clerics to pray for spells -besides-
healing in the morning, to not feel as much of a combat medic and play
a more active role in the game.
Mass heal is a _very_ high level spell. With higher levels come
better rewards.
>
>>Check out some CL 15 monsters first.<
>
>Don't need to. The escalation is there regardless. Besides, PCs fight
>more NPCs than monsters. Weapons still do basically the same damage as
>they used to, only now the characters can heal 5-10 times faster, and
>have an almost inexhuastable source of healing with their clerics. If
>there's two clerics on the team, you might as well have them fight gods
>once they hit 10th level. Also, the mature red dragon in the back of
Uhh... I think someone's exaggerating just a tad here. Let's not
forget that they have reworked the statistics curve, and higher level
monsters now have a SERIOUS advantage in the areas of strength and
constitution. Add on to the fact that they can be extremely powerful
Fighters/Clerics/whatever themselves, a monster like a mountain giant
will -definitely- give the party enough challenge to make it -seem-
like they're fighting a god.
Oh, wait, strong giants is just power escalation. Duh.
>the PHB does 7 pts LESS damage than his 2E counterpart with his breath
>weapon, his claws do a little more, his bite about the same overall. I
>don't see this as balancing out, not when PCs heal so powerfully.
>
>The escalationin 3E reminds me of a sily high powered battle we once
>had in a silly, overpowered campaign we ran. The PCs were fighting a
>similar team of villains, and everyone kept getting healed and wished
>back, and the battle went on for hours because it was hurt, heal, hurt,
>heal. Not a lot of fun.
The rest of this is antocedal evildence and really has very little
bearing on 3E actually, and sounds more like bitching.
>I guess if others like 3E, then more power to them, I hope they enjoy
>it. I'm not arguing that 3E sucks or that people shouldn't play it,
>just that I personally am finding it to be WAY too focused on super-
>powered PCs, and hence it isn't something I'm likely going to embrace
>after all.
Good for you.
--
James
Halaster Blackcloak
je...@fnord.io.com (Dr Nuncheon) wrote:
>Yeah, not having 1 hp Wizards anymore at first level sucks<
Well, just for the record, I never allowed a character to start without
at least an average # of hp, so wizard always rolled till they hit 2 or
3 hp, fighters until they hit 5, etc. But the whole bit of starting
with max hp for 1st level isn't a problem for me by itself, I was just
saying that that for me was the tip of the iceberg that revealed the
huge problems lurking below.
>Technically accurate, but misleading. Heal would heal 2000 hp of
damage, too, if someone had taken that much and survived,
True, but no character can have 2000 hp. At least not in a sane
game. :-)The thing with mass heal is that once you get it, you no
longer need to memorize ANY other healing spells. You heal the whole
team to full power all at once, with one spell. Slap a few on some
scrolls, and you're set to take on just about anything without fear.
>Oh, yeah, that's incredibly unbalancing. Read carefully. *90%* of
the time you'll fail that roll and lose another hit point. 60% of the
time you'll eventually stabilize without help if you go to -1. If you
go to -5, you've got a 40% chance. The more wounded you are (surprise)
the more chance you have of kicking the bucket<
The death's door tule effectively adds a full 10 hp to a charcter's
life. Adding the stabilizing effect just adds more. To me, it's
overkill.
>Wow. I thought D&D had generally left that sort of stuff behind<
One of the most traditional, classic, popular and fun types of
adventures left behind? I sure hope not!
>8 hours of rest + 1 hour for memorizing for the wizards, and 1
hour 'once a day' for the clerics. They can't just take that any time
they feel like it, there's a set time for meditation and prayer<
I like the idea of clerics having to pray at a specific time, but
still...they've cut HOURS off of memorization/preparation time.
Especially for wizards.
>You're so right. I love playing out 8 weeks of bed rest. I'll just
change that rule right now. (scribble)<
ROTFLMAO!! That was good, I gotta remember that one! The scribble part
was genius! :-D But I never knew anyone who played out 8 weeks of
bedrest (that musta been some battle!). We always jsut posted a
footnote:
"ok, so two weeks have gone by, you've been nursed back to full health,
etc, etc".
>So how come a 10th level fighter in 2nd edition who's been beaten
within an inch of his life (to 1 hp) takes so much longer to recover
than a 1st level fighter beaten within an inch of his life? I'd think
the more experienced fighter would be up on his feet faster..<
Because he's got so much more life to recover? :-) I don't know, not
everything makes total sense. But to me, natural healing is SUPPOSED to
take a long time. People who have heart attacks or gunshot wounds that
take them within an inch of their lives don't get up and walk out in a
few days...they spend weeks in intensive care, total bedrest, before
they can even go home. Granted, lower level characters seem to heal
faster in that system, but chalk it up to youth. Just like boxers
eventually don't recover as well once they get older compared to when
they first started out. That's how I always saw it. If you take lots of
injuries thoughout your life, later on it starts to take you longer to
heal, and you don't heal as well.
>Really ironic quotes, considering your rant.<
But..but..Halaster isn't overpowered in my FR campaign, honestly! He's
just, well...the dark side's way of counterbalancing Elminster! ;-)
--
Halaster Blackcloak
"Undermountain, the Realms' deadliest dungeon? I prefer to call it
home."
"Elminster? Bah! Neophyte!"
carbon...@yahoo.com
Halaster Blackcloak <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
...
> What seems to be one of the major nails on the coffin is the sheer
> amount of invincibility of players. First of all, they start with max
> hp.
They always have in my games.
> Not a big deal, but it just starts the snowball rolling. Then we
> have spells like Mass Heal, where a cleric can heal 2,000 hp of damage
> in a single spell.
None of my players have every made it high enough to cast that
spell, and if they ever do, they'll need it for what I'll throw
at them.
>Add to that the death's door rule
Deaths door isn't new to 3E
>where each round
> the charcter gets a 10% chance to stabilize and even begin healing,
This IS new, but I hardly think it's a problem. In my games the
story is about the continuing adventures of the characters, not
an exercise in how many PCs I can kill. I want them to survive.
> and
> also the way clerics can swap other spells for healing, and we now
have
> the equivelant of a bunch of Xmen Wolverine healing factors.
You're way overstating this. It just means Clerics will be able
to try out all those spells they've never had access to before
because they had to memorize mostly healing spells.
> The
> assault on a dungeon no longer becomes dangerous, it's simply a matter
> of attrition. Go in, kill what you can, retreat, heal everyone, go
back
> in. Never has this tactic been so easy. Hell, now you don't even need
> to retreat, just heal on the run, why not? Just takes a short time to
> memorize new spells anyway. There's no longer any need to retreat as
> charcters can heal as they explore. There's virtually no limit to the
#
> of healing spells available. I hope the DMG doesn't list healing
> potions, because they're an unneeded redundancy.
>
I'n not sure what your games are like, but a good DM challenges the
players, no matter what capabilities they have. If you don't think
you can challenge your players with 3E, don't use it.
> And this horseshit about characters healing 1hp/day/level?!?! Good
> gods, that means a 10th level charcter heals 10 hp per day, 15 if he
> has bed rest! In 2E, a character got 21 pts per WEEK with total bed
> rest, otherwise just 7 pts per WEEK. These 3E powerhouses (gods) can
> get more healing in a day than a 2E character got in a WEEK! That's
> before taking into account the overglut of magical healing available.
>
The 3E goes to great pains to say that x hit points isn't the same
thing to different characters. If a mage manages to heal 25% of
his hit points in a day, why should a fighter not be able to do the
same. After all, HPs aren't supposed to be a direct representation
of the ability to take damage.
> It seems to me that 3E is obsessed with superpowered characters, with
> unkillable PCs who never need fear death. Never have characters had
> such potent and plentiful healing potential. In the old days, the
> cleric haad a handful of healing spells at best, and if you were
lucky,
> a few healing potions. You went into a dungeon or on some other type
of
> adventure, and relied on your wits to keep you alive. The healing was
> just there as an emergency measure. You had to be careful, and you
knew
> there was a limit to the healing ability of the team. Gods forbid
there
> are two clerics on a team in 3E...you no longer need to worry about
> damage, since you never need to go more than a few hours with less
than
> full HPs.
>
Like I said, first of all it's not that much of a power increase.
Lots of the spells have been toned down. Secondly, more powerful
characters means more difficult adventures with more challenging
opponents. Geez, did you see how many hps dragons have now? I
bet the monster manual has lots of unpleasant surprises for your
new powerhouses (not that they are powerhouses).
> I truly, honestly fail to see how a DM can challenge a team of 3E
> characters without working his ass off just to balance out this single
> powergaming aspect. I can't make heads or tails of that damned cleric
> spell list, but I take it if I'm reading it right, that a cleric gets
> Mass Heal (an 8th level spell) at 15th elevel? Ok, that is a pretty
> high level, but by the time the team is around that level, they're
> automatically healing 15 hp/day WITHOUT magic. Given that an average
> fighter at that level will have about 60 hp, that's a hell of a lot of
> automatic healing! And if he gets bed rest, that's 22 hp healing per
> day. A cleric at 15th level can also trade in what...25 or so spells
> towards healing spells?
>
> No, I think I'm staying in 2E, where the charcters at least have a
> CHANCE to die.
>
Sounds like you're trying to convince yourself. Why not try it
and see? Unless you're running a monty haul campaign I don't
think you'll have to worry about mass heal for a while. Besides
if you hate it that badly, just eliminate the spell (The god
won't grant it to you without some special circumstance) or
make it higher level.
USCM_Sulaco
> Well, the more I read into the PHB, the less I feel like switching.
For
> every thing I say "Yeah, cool!" to, there are three things that I
> say "Oh gods no!" to. Or at the very least, the "Oh gods no!" comments
> weigh more heavily than the "yeah, cool!" ones.
>
> What seems to be one of the major nails on the coffin is the sheer
> amount of invincibility of players. First of all, they start with max
> hp. Not a big deal, but it just starts the snowball rolling. Then we
> have spells like Mass Heal, where a cleric can heal 2,000 hp of damage
> in a single spell. Add to that the death's door rule where each round
> the charcter gets a 10% chance to stabilize and even begin healing,
and
> also the way clerics can swap other spells for healing, and we now
have
> the equivelant of a bunch of Xmen Wolverine healing factors. The
> assault on a dungeon no longer becomes dangerous, it's simply a matter
> of attrition. Go in, kill what you can, retreat, heal everyone, go
back
> in. Never has this tactic been so easy.
And this differs from old editions how?
<SNIP>
> And this horseshit about characters healing 1hp/day/level?!?! Good
> gods, that means a 10th level charcter heals 10 hp per day, 15 if he
> has bed rest! In 2E, a character got 21 pts per WEEK with total bed
> rest, otherwise just 7 pts per WEEK. These 3E powerhouses (gods) can
> get more healing in a day than a 2E character got in a WEEK! That's
> before taking into account the overglut of magical healing available.
Give me a break! This is one of the most common house-rules and had been
suggested hundreds of times in discussions in this NG as a fix to the
bollox that a 10th level PC takes so much longer to heal than does a 1st
level PC. You just can't please some people.
> It seems to me that 3E is obsessed with superpowered characters, with
> unkillable PCs who never need fear death. Never have characters had
> such potent and plentiful healing potential. In the old days, the
> cleric haad a handful of healing spells at best, and if you were
lucky,
> a few healing potions. You went into a dungeon or on some other type
of
> adventure, and relied on your wits to keep you alive. The healing was
> just there as an emergency measure. You had to be careful, and you
knew
> there was a limit to the healing ability of the team. Gods forbid
there
> are two clerics on a team in 3E...you no longer need to worry about
> damage, since you never need to go more than a few hours with less
than
> full HPs.
But in 3e you *need* the increased power and extra healing. *Everything*
has been scaled up.
> I truly, honestly fail to see how a DM can challenge a team of 3E
> characters without working his ass off just to balance out this single
> powergaming aspect. I can't make heads or tails of that damned cleric
> spell list, but I take it if I'm reading it right, that a cleric gets
> Mass Heal (an 8th level spell) at 15th elevel? Ok, that is a pretty
> high level, but by the time the team is around that level, they're
> automatically healing 15 hp/day WITHOUT magic. Given that an average
> fighter at that level will have about 60 hp, that's a hell of a lot of
> automatic healing! And if he gets bed rest, that's 22 hp healing per
> day. A cleric at 15th level can also trade in what...25 or so spells
> towards healing spells?
Well, you *could* wait to see the DMG and MM before whining about it at
least.
> No, I think I'm staying in 2E, where the charcters at least have a
> CHANCE to die.
Good. More 3e stuff for the rest of us. :)
--
"Superstition is the religion of fools."
Dave's Wyrld http://www.homestead.com/daves_wyrld
My D&D Page http://www.homestead.com/daves_wyrld/adnd.html
carbon...@yahoo.com
unless you're a playtester, you probably haven't even run a
game in 3E yet, so you opinions are at best uninformed. If you
think that new dragon is easy, you haven't read the rules well
yet. Why don't you make up a party of 3Es and try running them
against the dragon and see how you do. They're invincible, right?
It seems to me you're trying to convince yourself that you don't
need to buy 3E because you don't want to spend the money. That's
ok it's your choice. Just don't expect all of us to agree with you.
Sure there are flaws in the new system, there always are. It looks
to me like it's worth trying.
USCM_Sulaco
Halaster Blackcloak <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <458n5.8584$i5.2...@news1.rdc2.on.home.com>,
> "Robin Lim" <ascen...@home.com> wrote:
>
> >*rolls eyes* If you think players are too powerful, then up the
level
> of opposition. Is it so hard? I mean really now.<
>
> That's my point. I don't WANT to have to up the level of every monster
> and villain. I simply don't like the escalation. I mean, at the rate
> these new 3E characters can heal, killer dungeons from 1E/2E become
> cakewalks.
>
> rate. <
>
> How do you figure that? In 2E, a 10th level character heals 1 hp/day.
> In 3E that same character heals 10 hp/day. That's a tenfold increase.
> That's what, a 1,000% increase in healing ability? And if you go by
> strict bedrest rules, it's 15 hp/day in 3E as opposed to 3hp in 2E,
> which is a five-fold increase. Characters at 10th level in 3E can heal
> more hp in two days without bedrest than a 2E character can heal in a
> week with bedrest! It's insane.
The key word was REL-A-TIVE. Since most of your HP are not supposed to
represent actual physical damage, why does it take so much longer fro a
high level PC to heal?
> >Maybe its because most people who play the game don't like the idea
of
> PCs running out of the dungeon and spending a few weeks of downtime
> before going back into the dungeon?<
>
> Powergaming. There's no challenge. When a cleric can swap his entire
> spell roster for healing, when we have super spells like Mass Heal,
> when characters can heal 10-15 hp/day at 10th level naturally, and
> let's not even factor in healing potions...well, you now have an orgy
> of healing happening, the charcters NEVER need to retreat. I fail to
> see the fun in that. I certainly don't want a character like that,
much
> less have to DM them.
Whatever.
> >Check out some CL 15 monsters first.<
>
> Don't need to. The escalation is there regardless. Besides, PCs fight
> more NPCs than monsters.
That is up to the GM.
> Weapons still do basically the same damage as
> they used to, only now the characters can heal 5-10 times faster, and
> have an almost inexhuastable source of healing with their clerics. If
> there's two clerics on the team, you might as well have them fight
gods
> once they hit 10th level. Also, the mature red dragon in the back of
> the PHB does 7 pts LESS damage than his 2E counterpart with his breath
> weapon, his claws do a little more, his bite about the same overall. I
> don't see this as balancing out, not when PCs heal so powerfully.
Then don't play it and shut up about it.
> The escalationin 3E reminds me of a sily high powered battle we once
> had in a silly, overpowered campaign we ran. The PCs were fighting a
> similar team of villains, and everyone kept getting healed and wished
> back, and the battle went on for hours because it was hurt, heal,
hurt,
> heal. Not a lot of fun.
>
> I guess if others like 3E, then more power to them, I hope they enjoy
> it. I'm not arguing that 3E sucks or that people shouldn't play it,
> just that I personally am finding it to be WAY too focused on super-
> powered PCs, and hence it isn't something I'm likely going to embrace
> after all.
>
> --
> Halaster Blackcloak
>
> "Undermountain, the Realms' deadliest dungeon? I prefer to call it
> home."
> "Elminster? Bah! Neophyte!"
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
--
"Superstition is the religion of fools."
Dave's Wyrld http://www.homestead.com/daves_wyrld
My D&D Page http://www.homestead.com/daves_wyrld/adnd.html
USCM_Sulaco
Whatever.
Yes you are. Saying you don't like it or won't play it is one thing,
saying it is "horseshit" and "powergaming" is another. If you don't like
it, fine; but just shut up about it then.
> or that people shouldn't play it,
> just that I personally am finding it to be WAY too focused on super-
> powered PCs, and hence it isn't something I'm likely going to embrace
> after all.
Wow. It is amazing the way you can judge an enitre game based on 1/3 of
the core rules sytem. Very impressive.
Lawrence Mead
> > Well, the more I read into the PHB, the less I feel like switching.
For
> > every thing I say "Yeah, cool!" to, there are three things that I
> > say "Oh gods no!" to. Or at the very least, the "Oh gods no!"
comments
> > weigh more heavily than the "yeah, cool!" ones.
> >
> > What seems to be one of the major nails on the coffin is the sheer
> > amount of invincibility of players.
>
of
> opposition. Is it so hard? I mean really now.
>
Yes, it is. With all the crazy options available, it is timeconsuming
to invent 5th level monk/mage orcs who have a chance of damaging
supercharacters.
> > And this horseshit about characters healing 1hp/day/level?!?! Good
> > gods, that means a 10th level charcter heals 10 hp per day, 15 if he
> > has bed rest! In 2E, a character got 21 pts per WEEK with total bed
> > rest, otherwise just 7 pts per WEEK. These 3E powerhouses (gods) can
> > get more healing in a day than a 2E character got in a WEEK! That's
> > before taking into account the overglut of magical healing
available.
>
> Makes sense, since they should be able to heal at the same relative
rate.
>
> > It seems to me that 3E is obsessed with superpowered characters,
with
> > unkillable PCs who never need fear death. Never have characters had
> > such potent and plentiful healing potential. In the old days, the
> > cleric haad a handful of healing spells at best, and if you were
lucky,
> > a few healing potions. You went into a dungeon or on some other type
of
> > adventure, and relied on your wits to keep you alive. The healing
was
> > just there as an emergency measure. You had to be careful, and you
knew
> > there was a limit to the healing ability of the team. Gods forbid
there
> > are two clerics on a team in 3E...you no longer need to worry about
> > damage, since you never need to go more than a few hours with less
than
> > full HPs.
>
> Maybe its because most people who play the game don't like the idea of
PCs
> running out of the dungeon and spending a few weeks of downtime before
going
> back into the dungeon? Besides, if you think PCs spend too much time
> healing, just throw more monsters at them.
>
It doesn't make more sense to limit healing and/or take time for it
(after all it just means making marks on paper for the DM to note the
passage of time) that to throw purposeless creatures at the PCs en-mass?
> > I truly, honestly fail to see how a DM can challenge a team of 3E
> > characters without working his ass off just to balance out this
single
> > powergaming aspect. I can't make heads or tails of that damned
cleric
> > spell list, but I take it if I'm reading it right, that a cleric
gets
> > Mass Heal (an 8th level spell) at 15th elevel? Ok, that is a pretty
> > high level, but by the time the team is around that level, they're
> > automatically healing 15 hp/day WITHOUT magic. Given that an average
> > fighter at that level will have about 60 hp, that's a hell of a lot
of
> > automatic healing! And if he gets bed rest, that's 22 hp healing per
> > day. A cleric at 15th level can also trade in what...25 or so spells
> > towards healing spells?
> >
> > No, I think I'm staying in 2E, where the charcters at least have a
> > CHANCE to die.
>
> Check out some CL 15 monsters first.
>
I have. A merely mature red dragon with 312 hit points ... C'mon get
real.
dMGorgon
Henry Link
I had many of the concerns that you had when these pieces of
information first became available, many months ago...
1) Proportionate Natural Healing ability
With the new ratio of healing, characters can go continue adventures
further without always needing a cleric in the party. No one in an
average game is "browbeaten" into playing a cleric. Honestly, how many
times on this board have you heard someone complain about getting
"stuck" with playing the cleric? Not everyone views the cleric as
being exciting to play.
Also, hit points are now looked at in a slightly different light. They
truly are more of the ability to turn a killing blow into a glancing
one. An 80 Hit point fighter taking 10 points of damage is just as
beaten up, proportinately, as an 8 HP fighter taking 1 point of
damage. Sure, the spells are called cure ___ wounds, but wounds are
not always sucking chest wounds - anything from major scrapes and cuts
to open bleeding is a wound.
2) "Invincibility" of PCs
Yes, there has been an overall power escalation - one cannot deny
that, compared to 2E. However, Comparing 2E to 3E is like comparing
apples to oranges. They are alike in many key points, but the subtle
changes are system wide. Never before since the Chainmail rules has
the D&D system been internally balanced, yet this system allows
players to play the character they WANT, rather than be restricted by
arbitrary checks and balances. The DM only has to make restrictions
based on the feel of his campaign, not because he is afraid a new
class or "kit" is too unbalanced or broken. Characters are slightly
more surviveable, because face it, no one likes their character to die
off 20 minutes after he has been created. It may happen, but now more
so at high levels than low ones. Playing just a few games of the
unmodified system would tell you this easily.
3) DM's Balancing Encounters
This is actually easier than before. Looking at the survival guide in
the back, you can see the Challenge Rating of each monster. This will
tell you whether this monster is adequate challenge for a group of 4
players of a given level - just match the CR to the party's level, and
add more to taste. An encounter or 3 levels above the party is more
likely to kill them than not. Easier than 2E, if you ask me.
Personally, I am waiting to see how the new XP system works out, since
I have my doubts about it. But, to me this is probably the best
version of D&D I have yet seen.
I would hate to think that you throw it away completely because of a
bad first impression.
Henry Link
"Halaster Blackcloak" <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote in
message news:8nispi$6ia$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> Well, the more I read into the PHB, the less I feel like switching.
<SNIP>
Barry Smith
> I truly, honestly fail to see how a DM can challenge a team of 3E
> characters without working his ass off just to balance out this single
> powergaming aspect. I can't make heads or tails of that damned cleric
> spell list, but I take it if I'm reading it right, that a cleric gets
> Mass Heal (an 8th level spell) at 15th elevel? Ok, that is a pretty
> high level, but by the time the team is around that level, they're
> automatically healing 15 hp/day WITHOUT magic. Given that an average
> fighter at that level will have about 60 hp, that's a hell of a lot of
> automatic healing! And if he gets bed rest, that's 22 hp healing per
> day. A cleric at 15th level can also trade in what...25 or so spells
> towards healing spells?
>
> No, I think I'm staying in 2E, where the charcters at least have a
> CHANCE to die.
I agree with you. The whole 3e game has always given me a feeling that
I'm trying to play a video game or computer game on the tabletop. The
only thing missing is the computer. You know the feeling you get when
you first buy the latest computer game that's been hyped up for months,
if not years? The "I wonder what I can do" feeling? Well, 3e gives me
that feeling, without also giving me the feeling of what I *can't*
do....in other words, I don't sense a restrictiveness or any limitations
to what, who, or how characters are allowed to be played. Anything goes,
and seeing your examples of the healing rates in 3e only solidifies my
feelings on that.
--
Juilliard: The Ultimate Bardic College.
Barry Smith
> Well, let me preface this with the note that I'm not arguing just for
> the sake of argument, and I do tend to agree with many of your posts
> I've sen in the past. BUT...I simply can't agree about the healing
> factor. Yes, it took a long time to heal, but it SHOULD.
Absolutely. People have to remember that any "fair" or balanced system
for natural healing, to where the healing rate is equal across the board
regardless of your level, is going to make higher level characters fly
upwards in healing. The comparison that a 1st level guy who heals his 5
hps damage back in a few hours is the same rate that a high level guy
heals his 5 hps damage back. The fact that a high level character can
heal 34 hps damage in X time has nothing to do with a low level
character's healing rate, because the low level character would be
*dead* if dealt 34 hps damage. That's why 3e's method of healing has
high level characters flying up in the healing rates IMO.
It means he
> manages to turn or pivot, making each thrust do a little less deadly
> damage. He learns to handle deadly thrusts like that, hence lessening
> its fatal effects. But imagine what that means. He's still got multiple
> dangerous wounds. He SHOULD take long to heal. Overall, he's taken mroe
> damage.
Yep. Experience of a character is also a factor in how much damage a
character takes. I think that's why high level characters have so many
hps. By having more hps, a character is more experienced in shrugging of
damage that would normally kill many low level characters in a few
blows. To heal all that damage back as fast as 3e seems to do...
Also, I've seen players abuse things and go off loaded with healing
> potions and scrolls, and tons of memorized healing spells, and it gave
> them a hell of an edge. Imagine what it would be like now, with more
> potent healing spells, the ability to swap other spells for healing,
> and a vastly increased rate of natural healing. I just can't see this
> as balanced, or even fun.
Just like in computer games, characters pile up on the healing as much
as they can, so they know they will get by and survive. I don't see this
as balanced, either.
Halaster Blackcloak
USCM_Sulaco <uscm_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>The key word was REL-A-TIVE. Since most of your HP are not supposed to
represent actual physical damage, why does it take so much longer for a
high level PC to heal?<
Again, I always thought of it as a boxer, who as he gets older and goes
through more and more damaging fights, takes loonger to heal and
doesn't heal as well. It makes sense to me from that viewpoint. Healing
SHOULD take some time. If you have 50 hp and you're 10th level, you
shouldn't be able to be beaten to within an inch of your life (1 hp)
and then have total recovery over the weekend. That borders on
regeneration!
>Then don't play it and shut up about it.<
Look, there's no need to get nasty about this. It's an open forum to
discuss these things, right? I'm just a little freaked over what seems
to me to be a tilt towards powergaming. And I've asked people to
correct me if I'm wrong. I'm still open to playing 3E, although based
on some of what I'm seeing, I'm starting to think I won't. I'm not
saying it sucks or that others shouldn't play it. But this healing
thing seems pretty munchkin to me so far.
--
Halaster Blackcloak
"Undermountain, the Realms' deadliest dungeon? I prefer to call it
home."
"Elminster? Bah! Neophyte!"
G. James Wilkinson
<halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>In article <399D18...@wizvax.net>,
> sea...@wizvax.net wrote:
>
>>One of the wiser changes. The old way, there was absolutely no point
>to HAVING natural healing at all. At least, not after first or second.
>After that, it took SOOO bloody long to heal from what were, to the
>character, proportionately minor wounds, that no one would ever USE bed
>rest, and if for some reason they had to, it took a LONG time<
>
>Well, let me preface this with the note that I'm not arguing just for
>the sake of argument, and I do tend to agree with many of your posts
>I've sen in the past. BUT...I simply can't agree about the healing
>factor. Yes, it took a long time to heal, but it SHOULD. Think about
>running a razor along the bottom of your foot. Nothing life threatening
>assuming you're in general good health, but how many days, or WEEKS
>will it be before you can walk, much less run on it? It won't heal in a
>day or two on its own.
>
<snip>
Alright, it's at this point that I should point something out:
Dungeons & Dragons is a high fantasy game. It is not anchored in
gritty realism. The rules are meant to allow for you to wade through
a group of orcs, shrugging off their weaker blows, etc.
Really, you -should- look into GURPS if this is what you're looking
for. Neither 3rd edition or 2nd edition appears to be what you're
looking for.
--
James
Keith Barber
> Also, the mature red dragon in the back of
>the PHB does 7 pts LESS damage than his 2E counterpart with his breath
>weapon, his claws do a little more, his bite about the same overall. I
>don't see this as balancing out, not when PCs heal so powerfully.
>
you ignore that his INT went up as wll as his spellcasting abilities, use all
of the characteristics of a creature, not just hitpoints, AC and physical
attacks.
Halaster Blackcloak
carbon...@yahoo.com wrote:
>First of all, you're being ridiculously overdramatic,
I wouldn't go THAT far. I think the changes are pretty dramatic,so my
posts have been equally dramatic.
>Secondly,unless you're a playtester, you probably haven't even run a
game in 3E yet, so you opinions are at best uninformed,
Well obviously, that's why I'm hoping the playtesters can reassure me
that it isn't that way and help me make sense of it.
>If you think that new dragon is easy, you haven't read the rules well
yet. Why don't you make up a party of 3Es and try running them
against the dragon and see how you do. They're invincible, right?<
You know, that's an excellent idea, and I should have thought of that.
I forget there's some monsters in the back that I can use to playtest.
Point well taken, I'll do this.
>It seems to me you're trying to convince yourself that you don't need
to buy 3E because you don't want to spend the money<
Honestly, that's not it. I've spent...wow, I don't even want to think
of it...THOUSANDS on 1E and 2E stuff, miniatures, etc. Another $40-60
is a drop in the bucket, I don't mind spending that even if it's just
to find out whether or not I like the system. Would be nice to get a
decent idea one way or the other though, before I spend that next $40
though. ;-) Still, it isn't about the $$$.
>That's ok it's your choice. Just don't expect all of us to agree with
you. Sure there are flaws in the new system, there always are. It looks
to me like it's worth trying.<
Right, I don't expect everyone to agree. And I still may end up liking
3E, if I can get it in my head that it does feel balanced. There's lots
of good things I like about it too. I knew from day one that I'd be
doing at least a LITTLE "tweaking", I just want to make sure I don't
need a total overhaul! ;-)
Barry Smith
> So how come a 10th level fighter in 2nd edition who's been beaten within
> an inch of his life (to 1 hp) takes so much longer to recover than a 1st
> level fighter beaten within an inch of his life? I'd think the more
> experienced fighter would be up on his feet faster...
...by gaining a healing rate of 15 hps per hour? That's what you'll have
to do to make up the stagger on the low level character. And if you
choose to make that decision, why doesn't the low level character who's
been beaten within an inch of his life heal at 15 hps per hour, too? The
only way you could kill a low level character under that system is from
massive damage, otherwise, the low level character simply retreats and
heals to full health in one hour...
Clearly, 3e has taken the healing system and dropped the ball by giving
higher level characters a significantly higher healing rate while not
considering what that does across the board IMO.
Halaster Blackcloak
carbon...@yahoo.com wrote:
>This IS new, but I hardly think it's a problem. In my games the
story is about the continuing adventures of the characters, not
an exercise in how many PCs I can kill. I want them to survive<
I guess that in itself isn't such a problem. To me, it's just the
combination of effects, the extra healing spells, more potent healing
spells, swapping for healing, etc.
>You're way overstating this. It just means Clerics will be able
to try out all those spells they've never had access to before
because they had to memorize mostly healing spells<
Hey, if they have Mass Heal, they don't NEED any other healing
spells! ;-)
>I'n not sure what your games are like, but a good DM challenges the
players, no matter what capabilities they have. If you don't think you
can challenge your players with 3E, don't use it.<
True, and yes, I've made challenging games for players even when
they've hit their mid-20th levels and above, and not just by making
incredibly powerful monsters. But I still cringe at the sheer abundance
of healing ability. Unless, as I'm starting to hear this morning, they
actually NEED that much healing. If it balances out, I guess it
wouldn't hurt to try it, since it would be the same as 2E, just using
higher numbers.
>The 3E goes to great pains to say that x hit points isn't the same
thing to different characters. If a mage manages to heal 25% of
his hit points in a day, why should a fighter not be able to do the
same. After all, HPs aren't supposed to be a direct representation of
the ability to take damage.<
I understand that, but again I turn to that boxer analogy and how it's
harder to heal after aging and repeated battles kick in.
>Like I said, first of all it's not that much of a power increase. Lots
of the spells have been toned down. Secondly, more powerful characters
means more difficult adventures with more challenging opponents. Geez,
did you see how many hps dragons have now? I
bet the monster manual has lots of unpleasant surprises for your new
powerhouses (not that they are powerhouses)<
Yeah, it never did quite hit home that a mature adult dragon had 300+
hp. I'm starting to think that either way I'm gonna have to get the DMG
and MM and do some testing before I make my final decision. Still, even
so, I don't see the point of escalation of power if both sides are kept
balanced. Well, we'll see.
--
Halaster Blackcloak
"Undermountain, the Realms' deadliest dungeon? I prefer to call it
home."
"Elminster? Bah! Neophyte!"
Aristotle
>In article <8nj72f$hh4$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
>Halaster Blackcloak <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>>strict bedrest rules, it's 15 hp/day in 3E as opposed to 3hp in 2E,
>>which is a five-fold increase. Characters at 10th level in 3E can heal
>>more hp in two days without bedrest than a 2E character can heal in a
>>week with bedrest! It's insane.
>
>within an inch of his life and has to spend 3 months recovering, while his
>little brother the 1st level fighter is up and perfectly healed in a few
>days.
I agree completely Jeff, and I always thought the healing rate in 1st and 2nd
edition AD&D were horribly broken. We always fudged that because who wants to
spend weeks or months healing up from a dungeon delve. Further, as
you state, it makes no sense that the more powerful your character,
the longer it takes you to regain the same % of your health. Ridiculous!
Also, most of these healing benefits take place AFTER a battle. During a
battle, things are the same. If people try to run over to their cleric to get
healed during battle, they are going to open themselves up to attacks of
opportunity and get slaughtered.
-Aristotle@Threshold
--
VISIT THRESHOLD - Online Roleplaying at its Finest. Player run clans, guilds,
legal system, economy, religions, nobility, and more in a world where roleplay
is required! Roleplay online with thousands of people from all over the world.
http://www.thresholdrpg.com -**- telnet://thresholdrpg.com:23
carbon...@yahoo.com
Halaster Blackcloak <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
...
> True, but no character can have 2000 hp. At least not in a sane
> game. :-)The thing with mass heal is that once you get it, you no
> longer need to memorize ANY other healing spells. You heal the whole
> team to full power all at once, with one spell. Slap a few on some
> scrolls, and you're set to take on just about anything without fear.
>
And what PC has? You using 100th level PCs? No wonder you think
they're invincible.
> The death's door tule effectively adds a full 10 hp to a charcter's
> life. Adding the stabilizing effect just adds more. To me, it's
> overkill.
>
We've been playing this rule for years in 2Ed, so it's definitely
not a new rule. As far as the stabilization goes, the best the
character can hope for if they go to -1 first (not to -5 or -8
etc.) and progress downwards during a battle is a 62% chance
of stabilizing. Even then survival is not assured. It's actually
in the 2E DMG as an optional rule. I suspect this is one optional
rule that got used a LOT.
How much difference does this make anyway? My players bend heaven
and earth to get to someone who's down before they reach -10. I
can't remember anyone being left to bleed to death.
...
> I like the idea of clerics having to pray at a specific time, but
> still...they've cut HOURS off of memorization/preparation time.
> Especially for wizards.
>
I suspect few DMs required their players to prepare for hours
or days at higher levels. This was probably one of the least
followed rules in 2E. This just legitimizes what everyone already
does. Again, no power difference.
...
> Because he's got so much more life to recover? :-) I don't know, not
> everything makes total sense. But to me, natural healing is SUPPOSED
to
> take a long time. ...and you don't heal as well.
>
The rationale in 3E (and 2E by the way) for hit points at higher
levels was that a lot of this damage was not actual physical
damage. So why should non physical damage take as long to recover
as real physical damage. Again, the new rules just make bedrest
an actual option again instead of spending a couple of days with
the clerics casting healing spells like mad, or buying potions
of healing by the ton. Under 2E rules, I can't remember the last
time the characters actually used the bedrest rules to recover
hit points. Even when they do stop and sleep, they don't bother
because 1 or 2 points is in the noise when you have 60hp.
carbon...@yahoo.com
one of it's main simulation goals. Instead it simulates the
high fantasy, epic heroes, fabulous monsters type of play.
If you want realism, try Rolemaster or perhaps GURPS. They will
give you much more of a realistic treatment of wounds and
damage (especially rolemaster). I hate rolemaster. I don't want
to play the realistic fighter who lasts about a round till he's
stunned or dead or incapacitated. I want to play the fighter
who can take a seeming major wound and still rescue the helpless
dragon from the ravening princess. If you want realism, try one
of the other games that specialize in this.
In article <399D36F1...@premier1.net>,
Barry Smith <bsm...@premier1.net> wrote:
...
> I agree with you. The whole 3e game has always given me a feeling that
> I'm trying to play a video game or computer game on the tabletop. The
> only thing missing is the computer. You know the feeling you get when
> you first buy the latest computer game that's been hyped up for
months,
> if not years? The "I wonder what I can do" feeling? Well, 3e gives me
> that feeling, without also giving me the feeling of what I *can't*
> do....in other words, I don't sense a restrictiveness or any
limitations
> to what, who, or how characters are allowed to be played. Anything
goes,
> and seeing your examples of the healing rates in 3e only solidifies my
> feelings on that.
>
> --
> Juilliard: The Ultimate Bardic College.
>
Aristotle
> but the way I see it, a
>10th level character who loses 10 hp has taken more grievous wounds
>than a 1st level character taking 1 hp.
Then clearly you have never understood how the abstraction known as "hit
points" works. As players gain levels, they are able to avoid damage, dodge
blows so they "glance" off, etc. That is why a 10 hit point "slash" does a
higher % of damage to a fighter with 12 hit points than it does to a fighter
with 100 hit points. The 100 hit point fighter is skilled enough to do
something like roll with the strike to lessen the damage.
>Because as levels go up, it assumes a character can take more damage.
No, you are totally wrong. That is not how hit points work. As the rules
state, being a 10th level fighter does not mean you can shrug off a blow that
would fell a rhino. It means you are skilled at avoiding damage in battle and
thus having more hit points reflects this.
>True, but let's take a dungeon setting for example. The characters
>don't have to worry about running out of healing spells anymore, they
>heal at 10 times the rate they used to
So what? How many battles do you know of have a "time out" period where
everyone can do rest up for a day in the middle of the battle?
>and eventually they get massive spells like Mass Heal.
Why are you obsessing over an 8th level spell. 8th level spells SHOULD be
powerful!
>because they can afford to get all banged up and then retreat to an
>adjacent room, perform all those healing spells, and continue on.
You must DM your NPCs as idiots if they do not follow.
>Again, true, but typically charcters fight, retreat, heal, and continue
>on.
And when they retreat, they stay "retreated" until they are fully healed. The
only difference is that now that "pretend" time where the DM says "X days have
passed" is less.
>Also, I've seen players abuse things and go off loaded with healing
>potions and scrolls, and tons of memorized healing spells, and it gave
>them a hell of an edge. Imagine what it would be like now, with more
>potent healing spells, the ability to swap other spells for healing,
>and a vastly increased rate of natural healing. I just can't see this
>as balanced, or even fun.
Yeah, lets imagine. Now if you try to use that stuff in combat you get POUNDED
by a foe using an attack of opportunity. Maybe you just didn't read the whole
book.
Aristotle
>I fail to see how, considering how much more potent healing has gotten,
>and how weapons do the same damage. Also, even that dragon in the 3E
>PHB was not that tough compared to his 2E counterpart (considering his
>damage totals, BW, etc). Are the other monsters toughened up or
>something?
Your two biggest complaints have been increased healing rate per day, and the
8th level spell mass heal.
First off, your daily healing rate has absolutely 0 effect on a battle, and
thus it has no effect on survival. It is not like you are allowed to declare
once per day "I take my daily healing right now, DM!" and thereby heal up in
the middle of battle.
Second, mass heal is an 8th level spell. It makes perfect sence for clerics to
have something like that when they get a spell of that extreme high level.
Please remember that in 2nd edition, clerics didn't even HAVE 8th level
spells.
Halaster Blackcloak
USCM_Sulaco <uscm_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>And this differs from old editions how?<
Well, in 2E I couldn't convert Protection From Evil, Part Water, Light,
Remove Curse, and Wall of Thorns into 4 extra healing spells. That's a
big difference.
>Give me a break! This is one of the most common house-rules and had
been suggested hundreds of times in discussions in this NG as a fix to
the bollox that a 10th level PC takes so much longer to heal than does
a 1st level PC. You just can't please some people<
I honestly never saw that as a problem, neither did any of the players.
It made sense to take a few weeks to heal terrible wounds. Again, a
10th level fighter with 50 hp who's knocked down to 1 hp and is almost
dead can be almost fully recovered over the weekend (counting Friday)
with no special or magical healing. That's pretty spectacular to me, in
fact it's more like magical regeneration than natural healing.
>But in 3e you *need* the increased power and extra healing.
*Everything* has been scaled up<
That's why I'm worried. I don't mind if it still feels balanced, but if
it feels super powerful I won't like it. I mean, at low levels, there's
a certain feel to it compared to higher levels. I don't want it to feel
like the low levels are still powerful, even if it is in balance with
the monsters and such.
>Well, you *could* wait to see the DMG and MM before whining about it
at least,
I didn't think I was "whining" about it, but it does look a lot like
the power levels are way increased. But you're probably right, I'm
starting to think that the only way I'm going to know for sure is after
I pick up the other two core books and give it a workout.
>Good. More 3e stuff for the rest of us. :)<
Does that mean you'd consider selling some of your 2E stuff cheap? ;-)
(Still haven't managed to snag that damned Manual of the Planes!)
--
Halaster Blackcloak
"Undermountain, the Realms' deadliest dungeon? I prefer to call it
home."
"Elminster? Bah! Neophyte!"
Mark Settlage
Manual is released.
Halaster Blackcloak wrote in message <8nispi$6ia$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>Well, the more I read into the PHB, the less I feel like switching. For
>every thing I say "Yeah, cool!" to, there are three things that I
>say "Oh gods no!" to. Or at the very least, the "Oh gods no!" comments
>weigh more heavily than the "yeah, cool!" ones.
>
>What seems to be one of the major nails on the coffin is the sheer
>amount of invincibility of players. First of all, they start with max
>hp. Not a big deal, but it just starts the snowball rolling. Then we
>have spells like Mass Heal, where a cleric can heal 2,000 hp of damage
>in a single spell. Add to that the death's door rule where each round
>the charcter gets a 10% chance to stabilize and even begin healing, and
>also the way clerics can swap other spells for healing, and we now have
>the equivelant of a bunch of Xmen Wolverine healing factors. The
>assault on a dungeon no longer becomes dangerous, it's simply a matter
>of attrition. Go in, kill what you can, retreat, heal everyone, go back
>in. Never has this tactic been so easy. Hell, now you don't even need
>to retreat, just heal on the run, why not? Just takes a short time to
>memorize new spells anyway. There's no longer any need to retreat as
>charcters can heal as they explore. There's virtually no limit to the #
>of healing spells available. I hope the DMG doesn't list healing
>potions, because they're an unneeded redundancy.
>
>And this horseshit about characters healing 1hp/day/level?!?! Good
>gods, that means a 10th level charcter heals 10 hp per day, 15 if he
>has bed rest! In 2E, a character got 21 pts per WEEK with total bed
>rest, otherwise just 7 pts per WEEK. These 3E powerhouses (gods) can
>get more healing in a day than a 2E character got in a WEEK! That's
>before taking into account the overglut of magical healing available.
>
>It seems to me that 3E is obsessed with superpowered characters, with
>unkillable PCs who never need fear death. Never have characters had
>such potent and plentiful healing potential. In the old days, the
>cleric haad a handful of healing spells at best, and if you were lucky,
>a few healing potions. You went into a dungeon or on some other type of
>adventure, and relied on your wits to keep you alive. The healing was
>just there as an emergency measure. You had to be careful, and you knew
>there was a limit to the healing ability of the team. Gods forbid there
>are two clerics on a team in 3E...you no longer need to worry about
>damage, since you never need to go more than a few hours with less than
>full HPs.
>
>I truly, honestly fail to see how a DM can challenge a team of 3E
>characters without working his ass off just to balance out this single
>powergaming aspect. I can't make heads or tails of that damned cleric
>spell list, but I take it if I'm reading it right, that a cleric gets
>Mass Heal (an 8th level spell) at 15th elevel? Ok, that is a pretty
>high level, but by the time the team is around that level, they're
>automatically healing 15 hp/day WITHOUT magic. Given that an average
>fighter at that level will have about 60 hp, that's a hell of a lot of
>automatic healing! And if he gets bed rest, that's 22 hp healing per
>day. A cleric at 15th level can also trade in what...25 or so spells
>towards healing spells?
>
>No, I think I'm staying in 2E, where the charcters at least have a
>CHANCE to die.
>
Halaster Blackcloak
thre...@threshold-rpg.com (Aristotle) wrote:
>First off, your daily healing rate has absolutely 0 effect on a
battle, and thus it has no effect on survival. It is not like you are
allowed to declare once per day "I take my daily healing right now,
DM!" and thereby heal up in the middle of battle.<
Yes, I understand that fully. I've never said anything about healing IN
battle. My whole point is that when the PCs retreat, they can now do
MUCH more healing in a MUCH shorter time, thus making them more
powerful and making it quicker and easier for them to return to combat,
exploring, etc.
Beau Yarbrough
Halaster Blackcloak <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> No, I think I'm staying in 2E, where the charcters at least have a
> CHANCE to die.
Whatever works for you. I don't see a problem challenging characters,
high healing or no. Hell, my 2E PCs NEVER seem to be fully healed, and
I've had to learn to work around hit point oriented adventures. But if
you need to go the other way, there's plenty of ways to threaten
characters that healing doesn't enter into, among them petrification,
poisoning, polymorphing, charming, sleeping, geasing, cursing,
drowning, suffocation, starvation, sleep deprivation (really), the loss
of a sense, crippling, maiming, torturing, insanity, disease and
humiliation.
And, as I'm sure you'll hear countless times, adventures also don't
need to be about life and death. Lots of exciting games can be played
without dice being rolled once.
Halaster Blackcloak
"Henry Link" <hl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
[SNIP]
>Personally, I am waiting to see how the new XP system works out, since
I have my doubts about it. But, to me this is probably the best
version of D&D I have yet seen.
I would hate to think that you throw it away completely because of a
bad first impression<
Henry, thanks for the kind post. Halaster's been losing some hp today
in the melee, so some soothing words were helpful! ;-D
From what I've seen, I'm pretty excited about the xp system. I like
what I'm seeing. Also, that's why I've been posting so many of my
concerns here, because I'd still like to do some 3E gaming if possible,
and I certainly don't want to rule it out over a bad first impression.
So even though a few people have gotten a little upset over my
concerns, at least it's being discussed, which helps a lot because if
*I* have these concerns, I'm sure a lot of other people who are mainly
lurking here have them also. I'm hoping to find out that 3E "feels
right" to me, because I do like some of what I've seen very much
(especially the xp system). Well, here's keeping our fingers crossed!
:-)
--
Halaster Blackcloak
"Undermountain, the Realms' deadliest dungeon? I prefer to call it
home."
"Elminster? Bah! Neophyte!"
Dilandau Albatou
He also ignore the fact that the dragon, wiht a little luck, can use his
breathweapon every second round.
Spellwise, I belive any red dragon with brains would stock up on ice-
spells. So when the PCs attacks with their obligatory Ice Storms etc, the
dragon will just counterspell them
- d -
Any orthographical error above the "d" has
been made with my full knowledge and intent.
Robert Scott Clark
>In article <8njc5s$n66$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> carbon...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>
>>The 3E goes to great pains to say that x hit points isn't the same
>thing to different characters. If a mage manages to heal 25% of
>his hit points in a day, why should a fighter not be able to do the
>same. After all, HPs aren't supposed to be a direct representation of
>the ability to take damage.<
>
>I understand that, but again I turn to that boxer analogy and how it's
>harder to heal after aging and repeated battles kick in.
>
But there was no mention of level here. It's a comparison between the
98 pound bookworm getting his face bashed in and the hulking mass of
muscle getting his face bashed in. And in this game the bookworm gets
better faster.
carbon...@yahoo.com
Halaster Blackcloak <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
...
> Yes, I understand that fully. I've never said anything about healing
IN
> battle. My whole point is that when the PCs retreat, they can now do
> MUCH more healing in a MUCH shorter time, thus making them more
> powerful and making it quicker and easier for them to return to
combat,
> exploring, etc.
>
Thereby eliminating the exciting roleplaying possibilities of
laying around on cots with bandages.
carbon...@yahoo.com
Barry Smith <bsm...@premier1.net> wrote:
...by gaining a healing rate of 15 hps per hour? That's what you'll have
> to do to make up the stagger on the low level character. And if you
> choose to make that decision, why doesn't the low level character
who's...
Huh? Where do you get that. It's 1/level/day, or with complete
rest 1.5/level/day.
Dr Nuncheon
>
>> So how come a 10th level fighter in 2nd edition who's been beaten within
>> an inch of his life (to 1 hp) takes so much longer to recover than a 1st
>> level fighter beaten within an inch of his life? I'd think the more
>> experienced fighter would be up on his feet faster...
>
Now it's per hour? The claims are getting more and more dramatic (and
nonsensical.)
>That's what you'll have
>to do to make up the stagger on the low level character. And if you
>choose to make that decision, why doesn't the low level character who's
>been beaten within an inch of his life heal at 15 hps per hour, too?
He's healing at the same *proportional* rate.
A 1st level fighter who took 9 points of damage might have taken a sword
through the gut.
A 10th level fighter who took 8 points of damage most certainly did *not*
take a sword through the gut. He got a cut on his stomach that *would*
have been a sword throught he gut if his experience and such hadn't let
him avoid most of the blow.
A 20th level fighter who took 8 points of damage is barely scratched.
Why should it take someone who is 'barely scratched' as long to heal as
someone who is 'on death's door'?
> The
>only way you could kill a low level character under that system is from
>massive damage, otherwise, the low level character simply retreats and
>heals to full health in one hour...
Where is this 1 hour BS coming from, anyway? Besides your own
imagination?
J
--
INTERNET SEEMS TO BE FULL OF MILLIONS OF | Jeff Johnston
IDIOTS & LUNATICS ! ! - c2 (ts...@my-deja.com) | jeffj @ io . com
Dilandau Albatou
>The death's door tule effectively adds a full 10 hp to a charcter's
>life. Adding the stabilizing effect just adds more. To me, it's
>overkill.
You died at -10 in 1st Edition too.
Dr Nuncheon
Halaster Blackcloak <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>In article <8njc5s$n66$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> carbon...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>to try out all those spells they've never had access to before
>because they had to memorize mostly healing spells<
>
>Hey, if they have Mass Heal, they don't NEED any other healing
>spells! ;-)
How many 8th-level spells can the cleric cast per day?
Is he going to want to cast 'Mass Heal' to just to cure the fighter of
20hp
damage?
If he waits for it to be 'more worthwhile' he runs the risk of the fighter
taking a killing blow because he went into the next battle without most of
his hit points...
>>The 3E goes to great pains to say that x hit points isn't the same
>thing to different characters. If a mage manages to heal 25% of
>his hit points in a day, why should a fighter not be able to do the
>same. After all, HPs aren't supposed to be a direct representation of
>the ability to take damage.<
>
>I understand that, but again I turn to that boxer analogy and how it's
>harder to heal after aging and repeated battles kick in.
Are they going to heal 1000% slower, though?
(Besides, it *does* take longer for a 20th level fighter to heal from 1 hp
than it does a 1st level fighter. Just not 20 times as long...)
>Still, even
>so, I don't see the point of escalation of power if both sides are kept
>balanced. Well, we'll see.
The greater the range you have, the finer gradiation within the range 1
hit point is. If the bar for "incredibly powerful" is raised, then you
can have a lot finer control over the toughness of monsters in between
'wussy' and 'incredibly powerful'. So that's kind of a good thing IMHO.
carbon...@yahoo.com
> I understand that, but again I turn to that boxer analogy and how it's
> harder to heal after aging and repeated battles kick in.
>
Characters don't age very fast in this game. Typically high level
characters might only be a few years older than they were when
they started out. We're not talking about 70 year olds who's
bones break more easily (actually that might be fun to play),
we're talking someone who's 22 rather than maybe 19 (or in their
late 20's anyway). If anything, they're in BETTER shape then
they ever were (hence their higher hit points).
Halaster Blackcloak
Barry Smith <bsm...@premier1.net> wrote:
>I agree with you. The whole 3e game has always given me a feeling that
I'm trying to play a video game or computer game on the tabletop. The
only thing missing is the computer. You know the feeling you get when
you first buy the latest computer game that's been hyped up for months,
if not years? The "I wonder what I can do" feeling? Well, 3e gives me
that feeling, without also giving me the feeling of what I *can't*
do....in other words, I don't sense a restrictiveness or any
limitations to what, who, or how characters are allowed to be played.
Anything goes, and seeing your examples of the healing rates in 3e only
solidifies my feelings on that. <
You know Barry, you've just hit on something that I really haven't
expressed yet. That's exactly it. While the healing stuff has been my
focus these past few days, it's only part of what's bugging me. I think
the reason I'm having such a hard time adjusting to 3E is that it
doesn't "feel" like D&D to me so far. First there's that irritating
alteration between he, she, and they. Then there's an even more
aggravating and baffling switching between person. For example, it
switches from saying "A high level character can do so and so" to "YOU
can do so and so" and back again sometimes multiple times in a single
paragraph. It's clumsy, there's no question about it. Same for spells.
Rary's Telepathic Bond says "YOU forge a telepathic link", then Raise
Dead says "THE CLERIC restores life", then Read Magic says "YOU can
read magical inscriptions". There's no damn internal consistancy.
Granted, I understand that has nothing to do with how much fun the game
is to play, but it just makes it difficult for me to warm up to it, you
knwo what I mean? It's like the difference between driving down a
smooth paved road as opposed to speeding over a pothole-filled wreck of
a highway.
Then there's the lack of things that IMO gave some sense of fantasy, of
mystery, like the druidic hierarchy that apparently is only popular in
my neck of the woods. ;-) With all that taken out, the characters seem
generic. No Grand Druids, no Grandfather of Assassins, it just seems
kinda colorless.
And there definitely is a sense of "do whatever it is you like, doesn't
matter if it's dumb". To me, and many of the people I've gamed with, a
dwarven barbarian/wizard in plate armor would totally ruin the feel of
the game. IMO, people just seem to have a hard time dealing with
restriction or limitation in our society, no matter how slight that
restriction might be. That's not to say that everyone needs to play
strictly by the book or have no room for change or experimentation. But
some stuff (like a dwarven barbarian/wizard in plate armor)just makes
no sense to me.
I'm all for allowing variation but unless there's SOME type of
restrictions, you kinda get some unpleasant results. It's like
cooking...sure, you can eat any spice on just about any food, but some
spices were just never meant to be used on certain foods, like
horseradish in chocolate cake! ;-)
I guess I'm a simple man with simple tastes. I'm just hoping that i can
still use the mechanics of 3E and achieve the same feel for the fun and
mystery of the game without it feeling like a computer game.
--
Halaster Blackcloak
"Undermountain, the Realms' deadliest dungeon? I prefer to call it
home."
"Elminster? Bah! Neophyte!"
carbon...@yahoo.com
Halaster Blackcloak <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <8njck7$njl$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> USCM_Sulaco <uscm_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> >And this differs from old editions how?<
>
> Well, in 2E I couldn't convert Protection From Evil, Part Water,
Light,
> Remove Curse, and Wall of Thorns into 4 extra healing spells. That's a
> big difference.
That's because they never memorized them in the first place. No,
they were too busy memorizing ONLY the heal spells and being the
party doctor. Doesn't give them any more spells, it just allows
them to have a bit more fun and flexibility.
I mean think about it. You play a cleric. The party depends on
you for healing. You end up memorizing mostly healing spells.
You're a mediocre fighter at best. You're not exactly getting
the charge out of being a major hero. At least now, you're a
better fighter, and you can use a little imagination in spell
selection, knowing that you can convert if the party gets
badly hurt. Maybe, just maybe, you can have a little fun now.
Beau Yarbrough
carbon...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Thereby eliminating the exciting roleplaying possibilities of
> laying around on cots with bandages.
(Tosses out "Dungeon" proposals based on "A Farewell to Arms," "Catch-
22," "M*A*S*H" and "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest," which had just
been in there to lighten things up.)
Dr Nuncheon
Halaster Blackcloak <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>In article <8njd5s$o7h$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> USCM_Sulaco <uscm_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>>The key word was REL-A-TIVE. Since most of your HP are not supposed to
>represent actual physical damage, why does it take so much longer for a
>high level PC to heal?<
>
>Again, I always thought of it as a boxer, who as he gets older and goes
>through more and more damaging fights, takes loonger to heal and
>doesn't heal as well. It makes sense to me from that viewpoint. Healing
>SHOULD take some time. If you have 50 hp and you're 10th level, you
>shouldn't be able to be beaten to within an inch of your life (1 hp)
>and then have total recovery over the weekend. That borders on
>regeneration!
Well, that's the case for all levels. If you wanted more realism, it's
easier to say "heal 1 hp/level/week" or something. That way a 1st level
mage thrashed within an inch of his life doesn't get up after a weekend of
bed rest feeling all better, either. (which he would in any edition of D&D
as it stands).
The 'realism' problem is not with the 'per level' as you imply, it's with
the 'per day'. Try it with 'per week' and see if you like that better?
Beat the snot out of a fighter and it takes a couple of months to
heal...hm, 'per week' might be too much. 'per 3 days' maybe? Adjust to
taste.
The 'per level' bit is great, though. I'd leave that alone.
Andrew Tellez
Halaster Blackcloak wrote:
>
> I don't see it that way, really. I mean, take a 2nd level fighter with
> 10 hp. He takes 5 pts of damage, so he's technically half dead.
No. He's nowhere near dead as long as he has hit points. Winded and
cut up, perhaps. But not near dead.
> just heal all that with 2 days of bed rest? It makes no sense. I
You might be surprised how much can be healed after two days in bed.
> understand your proportionate comparison above, but the way I see it, a
> 10th level character who loses 10 hp has taken more grievous wounds
> than a 1st level character taking 1 hp.
No, they've taken the same amount. The level 1 character has a bad cut,
the level 10 character has a bad cut from an attack that would have been
a fatal kidney-stab, if his combat skills hadn't gotten him out of the
way.
> Because as levels go up, it assumes a character can take more damage.
The system assumes that characters can *mitigate* more damage, not take
more damage.
> manages to turn or pivot, making each thrust do a little less deadly
> damage. He learns to handle deadly thrusts like that, hence lessening
To the point where they are minimal.
> its fatal effects. But imagine what that means. He's still got multiple
> dangerous wounds. He SHOULD take long to heal. Overall, he's taken mroe
> damage.
No he doesn't. No he shouldn't. No he hasn't.
He's taken a number of bad cuts that together, through pain and blood
loss, have caused him to lose conciousness. Just like a first level
character that takes 1 hp at a time loses conciousness from several
cuts, not greivous wounds.
> True, but let's take a dungeon setting for example. The characters
> don't have to worry about running out of healing spells anymore, they
They're still getting hurt, thus they can run out.
> heal at 10 times the rate they used to,
In your dungeon setting, they don't get a day of rest, they get jumped
by orcs from the 'Roid Rage clan.
> and eventually they get massive spells like Mass Heal.
By which time they can also cast spells to create a fully furnished
cottage, a banquet, and many other things.
> because they can afford to get all banged up and then retreat to an
> adjacent room, perform all those healing spells,
And get jumped by Orcs on Speed.
> top of that, it takes less time to memorize spells, less sleep is
> needed, etc.
Which is good, because the Troll Juicers are on their way.
> Again, true, but typically charcters fight, retreat, heal, and continue
> on.
I've not seen this in years. Usually, I see the characters either win
with a staggering amount of overkill, or get completely routed.
> even imagine how a 3E party could ever manage to stop for a day's rest
> and not set out the next day fully healed, no matter HOW badly hurt
> they all were the day before. It's like resetting a video game where
> you get extra "lives" added to you score.
In the stereotypical "balanced party" you can do this in 2E as well.
Halaster Blackcloak
carbon...@yahoo.com wrote:
>If you want realism, try Rolemaster or perhaps GURPS. They will
give you much more of a realistic treatment of wounds and
damage (especially rolemaster). I hate rolemaster. I don't want
to play the realistic fighter who lasts about a round till he's
stunned or dead or incapacitated<
I'm not big on realism either (as my love of 2E druids points out).
Still, taking weeks to recover from near-mortal wounds is much more
realistic to me (and hence more believable) than recovering from the
same wounds over the weekend. My suspension of disbelief gets a little
strained there. ;-)
--
Halaster Blackcloak
"Undermountain, the Realms' deadliest dungeon? I prefer to call it
home."
"Elminster? Bah! Neophyte!"
Dr Nuncheon
Halaster Blackcloak <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>In article <klbn5.2329$9x3....@news-east.usenetserver.com>,
> thre...@threshold-rpg.com (Aristotle) wrote:
>
>>First off, your daily healing rate has absolutely 0 effect on a
>battle, and thus it has no effect on survival. It is not like you are
>allowed to declare once per day "I take my daily healing right now,
>DM!" and thereby heal up in the middle of battle.<
>
>battle. My whole point is that when the PCs retreat, they can now do
>MUCH more healing in a MUCH shorter time, thus making them more
>powerful and making it quicker and easier for them to return to combat,
>exploring, etc.
Er, so what's the difference between this and saying "you rest for 2
weeks"?
Dr Nuncheon
Halaster Blackcloak <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>In article <OZ9n5.260054$t91.2...@news4.giganews.com>,
> je...@fnord.io.com (Dr Nuncheon) wrote:
>
>>Technically accurate, but misleading. Heal would heal 2000 hp of
>damage, too, if someone had taken that much and survived,
>
>True, but no character can have 2000 hp. At least not in a sane
>game. :-)The thing with mass heal is that once you get it, you no
>longer need to memorize ANY other healing spells. You heal the whole
>team to full power all at once, with one spell. Slap a few on some
>scrolls, and you're set to take on just about anything without fear.
This is often called "Use a sledgehammer to swat a fly". First, you're
not going to have many 8th level spells to cast. Second, what if you
cast it to heal Joe Fighter, and in the next battle Jim Mage gets sorely
wounded? You'll need another healing spell.
>>Oh, yeah, that's incredibly unbalancing. Read carefully. *90%* of
>the time you'll fail that roll and lose another hit point. 60% of the
>time you'll eventually stabilize without help if you go to -1. If you
>go to -5, you've got a 40% chance. The more wounded you are (surprise)
>the more chance you have of kicking the bucket<
>
>The death's door tule effectively adds a full 10 hp to a charcter's
>life. Adding the stabilizing effect just adds more. To me, it's
>overkill.
It's not like they're out there still fighting. It's just a way to not
have the "I'm OK" "ack I'm dead" problem with nothing in between. People
are pretty amazing, and they don't usually die instantly from a lot of
stuff - and that's even in the real world, not in a heroic fantasy world.
I like it, but I'm pretty stingy with ressurrections and raising the dead.
>>Wow. I thought D&D had generally left that sort of stuff behind<
>
>One of the most traditional, classic, popular and fun types of
>adventures left behind? I sure hope not!
De gustibus non disputadum, I guess. I'll agree with the first two anyway.
>>8 hours of rest + 1 hour for memorizing for the wizards, and 1
>hour 'once a day' for the clerics. They can't just take that any time
>they feel like it, there's a set time for meditation and prayer<
>
>I like the idea of clerics having to pray at a specific time, but
>still...they've cut HOURS off of memorization/preparation time.
>Especially for wizards.
Makes them more playable, as far as I'm concerned.
>>You're so right. I love playing out 8 weeks of bed rest. I'll just
>change that rule right now. (scribble)<
>
>ROTFLMAO!! That was good, I gotta remember that one! The scribble part
>was genius! :-D But I never knew anyone who played out 8 weeks of
>bedrest (that musta been some battle!). We always jsut posted a
>footnote:
>
>"ok, so two weeks have gone by, you've been nursed back to full health,
>etc, etc".
So if you're not playing it out, why is it so important that it occurred?
>>So how come a 10th level fighter in 2nd edition who's been beaten
>within an inch of his life (to 1 hp) takes so much longer to recover
>than a 1st level fighter beaten within an inch of his life? I'd think
>the more experienced fighter would be up on his feet faster..<
>
>Because he's got so much more life to recover? :-) I don't know, not
>everything makes total sense.
But 3e makes more sense than 1e (or 2e, from what I gather).
>But to me, natural healing is SUPPOSED to
>take a long time. People who have heart attacks or gunshot wounds that
>take them within an inch of their lives don't get up and walk out in a
>few days...they spend weeks in intensive care, total bedrest, before
>they can even go home. Granted, lower level characters seem to heal
>faster in that system, but chalk it up to youth.
I can thrash a 1st level mage within an inch of his life, and he can get
up after a weekend of bedrest? That's some youth!
I suggested in another post moving the healing rates to 'per level per
week' or 'per level per 3 days'. The per level part is good, because it
means that a 2nd level fighter doesn't heal twice as slowly as a 1st level
fighter. That's a little ridiculous, don't you think?
Andrew Tellez
Halaster Blackcloak wrote:
>
> True, but no character can have 2000 hp. At least not in a sane
> game.
I beg to differ. While it's unfeasible for PCs IMC to get 2000 hp, it's
still possible.
> longer need to memorize ANY other healing spells. You heal the whole
> team to full power all at once, with one spell. Slap a few on some
And yon Evil Priest can do so as well.
> The death's door tule effectively adds a full 10 hp to a charcter's
> life. Adding the stabilizing effect just adds more. To me, it's
> overkill.
So have NPCs go to finish off the PCs. I do. If he's down, give him a
stab.
> "ok, so two weeks have gone by, you've been nursed back to full health,
> etc, etc".
My games tend to be time sensitive, both for the adventures and the
campaign as a whole. Thus, reasonable healing rates are important.
> Because he's got so much more life to recover? :-)
Hit points are skill, not life energy. Even under the "hit points as
badness" model, the healing rates are wacky.
> everything makes total sense. But to me, natural healing is SUPPOSED to
> take a long time.
Then stretch out the base rate. A level one fighter can recover from
being beaten almost to death in 10 days. Now, so can a level 10
fighter. If you want slower healing, it would make more sense to make
the base rate longer, and have both heal in 10 weeks, rather than just
punishing the higher level characters.
> take them within an inch of their lives don't get up and walk out in a
> few days...they spend weeks in intensive care, total bedrest, before
> they can even go home.
And they aren't all high level characters.
> Granted, lower level characters seem to heal faster in that system, but
This is a problem.
> they first started out. That's how I always saw it. If you take lots of
> injuries thoughout your life, later on it starts to take you longer to
> heal, and you don't heal as well.
That's an interesting point. The effects of persistent abuse on
recovery. It isn't fair in all cases, though. I've run characters that
didn't take any damage at all until they hit fourth level. Why would
they heal slower than low level characters?
James Tackett
days of pretend recovery time. So? most situations my players have been in
where they had to spend that much time healing weren't productive roleplay
times since you cant go bar hopping, training with local guilds, having
diner parties etc cause your in bed bandaged up and healing doing pretty
much nothing else... so why should it matter if it takes days instead of
weeks now? The only reasoning that might work is that it allows the
monsters/NPCs less time to call in reinforcements from outlying or remote
regions, hire/enslave more connon fodder etc.
"Halaster Blackcloak" <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8njhas$t7k$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <klbn5.2329$9x3....@news-east.usenetserver.com>,
> thre...@threshold-rpg.com (Aristotle) wrote:
>
> >First off, your daily healing rate has absolutely 0 effect on a
> battle, and thus it has no effect on survival. It is not like you are
> allowed to declare once per day "I take my daily healing right now,
> DM!" and thereby heal up in the middle of battle.<
>
> Yes, I understand that fully. I've never said anything about healing IN
> battle. My whole point is that when the PCs retreat, they can now do
> MUCH more healing in a MUCH shorter time, thus making them more
> powerful and making it quicker and easier for them to return to combat,
> exploring, etc.
>
>
Staffan Johansson
<halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>I truly, honestly fail to see how a DM can challenge a team of 3E
>characters without working his ass off just to balance out this single
>powergaming aspect. I can't make heads or tails of that damned cleric
Five words: Wait For The Monster Manual.
--
Staffan Johansson (bal...@crosswinds.net)
Lizard
wrote:
> It's not a real D&D game unless you kill 3/4 of the party (or was
>that Paranoia? I always mix them up.)
Wasn't there a Paranoia module set in DND Sector? :)
*----------------------------------------------------*
Evolution doesn't take prisoners:Lizard
"I've heard of this thing men call 'empathy', but I've never
once been afflicted with it, thanks the Gods." Bruno The Bandit
http://www.mrlizard.com
Lizard
wrote:
>Well, 3e gives me
>that feeling, without also giving me the feeling of what I *can't*
>do....in other words, I don't sense a restrictiveness or any limitations
>to what, who, or how characters are allowed to be played.
Uhm...that's a FEATURE.
Countless gamers, like me, have avoided D&D for years due to the
inability to play anything more than narrowly-defined collections of
powers, with roleplaying and interesting character concept sacrificed
on the altar of 'game balance' (a false god if ever there was one!).
While D&D 3e still has a lot of 'D&D isms', it's a hell of a lot more
flexible -- and therefore, more FUN -- than the previous editions
were. Fun enough that I'd play it or run it.
Lizard
<halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>The
>assault on a dungeon no longer becomes dangerous, it's simply a matter
>of attrition. Go in, kill what you can, retreat, heal everyone, go back
>in.
Two things:
1)Any GM who lets the players get away with this is a moron. Hell,
even the FIRST EDITION DMG had a section about how monsters will react
to an invasion. Their second trip to the dungeon will be a PC
slaughterama, as the surviving monsters have doubled security, added
traps, maybe called in some powerful mercenaries, etc. Not to mention
*following the PCs home*. Suddenly, that peaceful little village just
outside the Fortress Of Terrible Doom is under assault, as the
surviving orcs or whatever tear the town apart, demanding the
'murderers' be turned over to them for 'orcish justice'. (It involves
pointy bits in places pointy bits do not belong)
2)Since the PCs fled before overcoming the Challenge, they get
***ZERO*** XP for the encounter. That alone is enough to make them
risk death.
3)(OK, three things) Given that monsters can now have classes, levels,
skills, and feats, just like PCs, some increase in power level was
necessary. Just make sure those Kobolds include some second and third
level fighters, or there's aparticularly bright Ogre who can function
as a dualclass barbarian/wizard, and watch the body count rise.
4)(Sigh, 4 things) If you're running D&D, or any tabletop RPG like a
game of Wizardry I, which is what it sounds like, I think you need to
get with the naughts, man.
Lizard
<halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>Well, let me preface this with the note that I'm not arguing just for
>the sake of argument, and I do tend to agree with many of your posts
>I've sen in the past. BUT...I simply can't agree about the healing
>factor. Yes, it took a long time to heal, but it SHOULD. Think about
>running a razor along the bottom of your foot. Nothing life threatening
>assuming you're in general good health, but how many days, or WEEKS
>will it be before you can walk, much less run on it? It won't heal in a
>day or two on its own.
Joe the First level fighter (8 HP) takes seven points from a sword.
This is, what, almost 90% of his hit points? He's healed in a week.
Fred the Tenth level fighter (60 HP) gets a seven point scratch while
clearing out a horde of kobolds. This is barely more than 10% of his
hit points. He's healed in a week, too.
Larry the tenth level fighter (60 HP) barely survives a scrabble with
a troll. He is down to 6 HP. He is healed in 54 days -- nearly two
months. Yet he's take the same RELATIVE damage as Joe -- while Fred
has taken a pittance of the damage Joe has.
You cannot possible tell me this makes sense.
Leif Magnar Kj|nn|y
>
>Thereby eliminating the exciting roleplaying possibilities of
>laying around on cots with bandages.
Hey, that sort of stuff can also be fun. I had a cyberpunk campaign
once that ended with the PCs *and* their NPC opponents from the last
scenario all lying in "critical but stable" condition in the same
hospital ward (they had the same health insurance, see), glaring
at each other across all the tubing and machines that go "bing" and
so forth, racing each other toward becoming healthy enough to get out
of bed and crawl over to pull each others' plugs...
--
Leif Kj{\o}nn{\o}y | "Its habit of getting up late you'll agree
www.pvv.org/~leifmk| That it carries too far, when I say
Math geek and gamer| That it frequently breakfasts at five-o'clock tea,
GURPS, Harn, CORPS | And dines on the following day." (Carroll)
schu...@my-deja.com
The opponents the characters will face are much more formidable also.
And in converting my current campaign, nearly the whole party has a
worse AC than in 2E. They will need the extra HP's.
Can I have your 3E PHB then? Since you don't want it.
Troy
USCM_Sulaco
thre...@threshold-rpg.com (Aristotle) wrote:
> In article <r6an5.260084$t91.2...@news4.giganews.com>,
je...@fnord.io.com (Dr Nuncheon) wrote:
> >In article <8nj72f$hh4$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> >Halaster Blackcloak <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >>That's what, a 1,000% increase in healing ability? And if you go by
> >>strict bedrest rules, it's 15 hp/day in 3E as opposed to 3hp in 2E,
> >>which is a five-fold increase. Characters at 10th level in 3E can
heal
> >>more hp in two days without bedrest than a 2E character can heal in
a
> >>week with bedrest! It's insane.
> >
> >No, the old way was insane. Thorgrim the 20th level fighter gets
thrashed
> >within an inch of his life and has to spend 3 months recovering,
while his
> >little brother the 1st level fighter is up and perfectly healed in a
few
> >days.
>
> I agree completely Jeff, and I always thought the healing rate in 1st
and 2nd
> edition AD&D were horribly broken. We always fudged that because who
wants to
> spend weeks or months healing up from a dungeon delve. Further, as
> you state, it makes no sense that the more powerful your character,
> the longer it takes you to regain the same % of your health.
Ridiculous!
Exactyly. Since the higher HP total of a higher-lever character is meant
to represent the ability of that character to be less affected by a
wound that is major to a lesser character, what sense then does it make
that that no relatively minor would confines the higher-level character
to bed for the same length of time as a lower-level character. How
heroic is that?
"Bah! Tis but a scratch for Pelam the Mighty! A scratch that will
require two weeks of bedrest! Huzzah!"
<SNIPPITY SNIP>
--
"Superstition is the religion of fools."
Dave's Wyrld http://www.homestead.com/daves_wyrld
My D&D Page http://www.homestead.com/daves_wyrld/adnd.html
Dilandau Albatou
>How many 8th-level spells can the cleric cast per day?
>
>Is he going to want to cast 'Mass Heal' to just to cure the fighter of
>20hp damage?
Besides, isn't Mass Heal more of an post-battle spell? The targets must be
withing 30' of eachoter, and that may not allways be possible in a battle.
James Tackett
>
> Because he's got so much more life to recover? :-) I don't know, not
> few days...they spend weeks in intensive care, total bedrest, before
> eventually don't recover as well once they get older compared to when
> they first started out. That's how I always saw it. If you take lots of
> injuries thoughout your life, later on it starts to take you longer to
> heal, and you don't heal as well.
>
> Halaster Blackcloak
>
Well if you think of Hit Points in the following way the concept makes more
sense...
Hit Points represent both Physical Damage and Skill. The amount of physical
damage a PC can take never increases from the time the character is created
(reaches adolescense?), but the skill (for knowing when to twist to make the
sword stroke merely cut the skin rather than slice the muscle) does.
Therefore as Hit Points increase they represent an increase in defensive
combat skill that makes it less and less likely that wounds taken are actual
physical damage to the character. Natural Healing should apply to the
physical side of the equation and restore a proportionate amount of skill in
the same amount of time (since as the muscles and flesh heal they can again
be called upon for that memory of physical motion they are trained to do).
USCM_Sulaco
Halaster Blackcloak <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <8njck7$njl$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> USCM_Sulaco <uscm_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> >And this differs from old editions how?<
>
> Well, in 2E I couldn't convert Protection From Evil, Part Water,
Light,
> Remove Curse, and Wall of Thorns into 4 extra healing spells. That's a
> big difference.
Nicely snipped to avoid pointing out to what I was actually replying.
> >Give me a break! This is one of the most common house-rules and had
> been suggested hundreds of times in discussions in this NG as a fix to
> the bollox that a 10th level PC takes so much longer to heal than does
> a 1st level PC. You just can't please some people<
>
> I honestly never saw that as a problem, neither did any of the
players.
> It made sense to take a few weeks to heal terrible wounds. Again, a
> 10th level fighter with 50 hp who's knocked down to 1 hp and is almost
> dead can be almost fully recovered over the weekend (counting Friday)
> with no special or magical healing. That's pretty spectacular to me,
in
> fact it's more like magical regeneration than natural healing.
The high HP totals of high-level characters is meant to represnt that
these are *not* terrible wounds. A character with 100hp who is knocked
down to 10hp is equally as hurt as a character with 10hp who is knocked
down to 1hp. The hp ratios are relatives, not absolutes. An 8hp wound
delivered to a 100hp fighter is less of a wound than the same injury
dealt to a 10hp fighter. Where the 10hp guy is opened up from top to
tails, the 100hp takes a minor nick and carries on.
> >But in 3e you *need* the increased power and extra healing.
> *Everything* has been scaled up<
>
> That's why I'm worried. I don't mind if it still feels balanced, but
if
> it feels super powerful I won't like it. I mean, at low levels,
there's
> a certain feel to it compared to higher levels. I don't want it to
feel
> like the low levels are still powerful, even if it is in balance with
> the monsters and such.
Why not? D&D is, and always has been, *heroic* fanatsy. If you want
realism and a very low mortality baseline play GURPS. If you want to
wade into an army of orcs cutting a bloody swathe with your longsword
play D&D.
> >Well, you *could* wait to see the DMG and MM before whining about it
> at least,
>
> I didn't think I was "whining" about it, but it does look a lot like
> the power levels are way increased. But you're probably right, I'm
> starting to think that the only way I'm going to know for sure is
after
> I pick up the other two core books and give it a workout.
Perhaps "whining" was a poor choice of words. Sorry. "Complaining" would
have been better.
> >Good. More 3e stuff for the rest of us. :)<
>
> Does that mean you'd consider selling some of your 2E stuff cheap? ;-)
> (Still haven't managed to snag that damned Manual of the Planes!)
Nope. I still have my BD&D and 1e stuff too and I ain't letting go, even
if I never play it. :)
USCM_Sulaco
Halaster Blackcloak <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <8njd5s$o7h$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> USCM_Sulaco <uscm_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> >The key word was REL-A-TIVE. Since most of your HP are not supposed
to
> represent actual physical damage, why does it take so much longer for
a
> high level PC to heal?<
>
> Again, I always thought of it as a boxer, who as he gets older and
goes
> through more and more damaging fights, takes loonger to heal and
> doesn't heal as well. It makes sense to me from that viewpoint.
Healing
> SHOULD take some time. If you have 50 hp and you're 10th level, you
> shouldn't be able to be beaten to within an inch of your life (1 hp)
> and then have total recovery over the weekend. That borders on
> regeneration!
>
>
> Look, there's no need to get nasty about this. It's an open forum to
> discuss these things, right? I'm just a little freaked over what seems
> to me to be a tilt towards powergaming. And I've asked people to
> correct me if I'm wrong. I'm still open to playing 3E, although based
> on some of what I'm seeing, I'm starting to think I won't. I'm not
> saying it sucks or that others shouldn't play it. But this healing
> thing seems pretty munchkin to me so far.
You are right. I guess I am getting a bit testy cos so many people seem
to be so happy picking apart 3e and finding fault and I snapped at you.
Sorry. I will save my insults for when you deserve them. ;)
carbon...@yahoo.com
dilandau-...@another.com (Dilandau Albatou) wrote:
...
> Spellwise, I belive any red dragon with brains would stock up on ice-
> spells. So when the PCs attacks with their obligatory Ice Storms etc,
the
> dragon will just counterspell them
>
The dragon has the same problem any single high level individual
has, that is he has to be doing one something. If he's holding
his action waiting to counter the mage, the fighters are going
to be hacking on him.
Makes more sense to have a couple of hireling evil mages to
do that! "No, you won't have to fight, you just have to
counter the enemy mage's spells."
Chris Pierson
Halaster Blackcloak <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>I guess I'm a simple man with simple tastes. I'm just hoping that i can
>still use the mechanics of 3E and achieve the same feel for the fun and
>mystery of the game without it feeling like a computer game.
If you can't inject fun and mystery into your campaign, that's _your_
shortcoming. Don't want dwarven wizards? Fine -- tell your players they
can't have them. Want a rigid social structure for druids? Knock yourself
out. But hey, those who like dwarven wizards (y'know, like in Norse
mythology), and maybe want a _different_ druidic social structure (like,
oh, one more suitable to the Celts), can do their thing too now.
--
Chris Pierson ** "I write poems like a spider spins webs, and for much the
Author ** same reason: to support my existence."
Game Designer ** -- Gordon Downie
Kayvan Koie
>
> Don't need to. The escalation is there regardless. Besides, PCs fight
> more NPCs than monsters. Weapons still do basically the same damage as
> they used to, only now the characters can heal 5-10 times faster, and
> have an almost inexhuastable source of healing with their clerics. If
> there's two clerics on the team, you might as well have them fight gods
> once they hit 10th level. Also, the mature red dragon in the back of
> the PHB does 7 pts LESS damage than his 2E counterpart with his breath
> weapon, his claws do a little more, his bite about the same overall. I
> don't see this as balancing out, not when PCs heal so powerfully.
>
Crap Hal you are way underestimating the dragon in the back of the PHB!
For one thing, I doubt the dragon will miss much in combat unless the PCs
are a Fantasy Tank. The dragons own AC is damn hard, 32?! that's -12 under
the old system! How can you call that weak? And how can you call the breath
weapon weak? That's still an average of 77 points of damage, with a
required save of 28 (you would need an average of +18 in pluses to get 50%!
And I'm sorry Hal but I don't see a cleric getting his spells off very well
when he has 77 points of fire damage cooking his ass. Even if he makes his
save, thats still an average of 35-40 points of damage he would have to add
to his DC to make his Concentration check to get his spell off. I could go
on but I think you get my point. If this dragon is any indication of a
great wyrm, I don't see PC's killing great wyrms very often.
And as far as the healing bit that you are so blind as to understand, take
this into consideration.
You have two individuals, a 3rd level fighter with 18 hp, and a 10th level
fighter with 75 hp. Both of them get beaten by clubs for 15hp each. In
real world terms, the low level, being a weaker and less experianced in
combat, would take longer to heal. After all, he got beatin within inches
of his life . The 10th level, only got slapped for a fraction of his body.
He would still have aches and bruises, but the major damage would heal
quickly. The notion that it would take him the same amount of time to heal
as the weaker guy, regardless that he's tougher and can take more damage, is
plain silly.
And your bit about it being harder for DMs to challenge PCs is a weak
argument. You give me the character and I can create a serious challenge
for him without consulting any books (except maybe the conversion manual :)
.)
Dr Nuncheon
>expressed yet. That's exactly it. While the healing stuff has been my
>focus these past few days, it's only part of what's bugging me. I think
>the reason I'm having such a hard time adjusting to 3E is that it
>doesn't "feel" like D&D to me so far.
Wow...that's really strange. I thought D&D3 'felt' like D&D without all
the stupid baggage that used to be associated with it. I can still dive
off of a cliff and then pick myself up and wade into battle with an army
of goblins. (and with the Great Cleave feat I'll still be downing them
left and right, too!)
>Then there's the lack of things that IMO gave some sense of fantasy, of
>mystery, like the druidic hierarchy that apparently is only popular in
>my neck of the woods. ;-) With all that taken out, the characters seem
>generic. No Grand Druids, no Grandfather of Assassins, it just seems
>kinda colorless.
Personally, if and when I want that, I can add it in myself. I'd rather
be able to add in a Grand Master Paladin if I wanted to - maybe Paladins
of a war god have to do the 'fight' thing to go up in levels. If I want
the Grand Druid Mortal Kombat I can add that in too.
Or I can divorce that from levels, and say "anyone can be the Grandfather
of Assassins, but he has to kill the previous one." That puts the flavor
int he world, where it belongs.
>And there definitely is a sense of "do whatever it is you like, doesn't
>matter if it's dumb". To me, and many of the people I've gamed with, a
>dwarven barbarian/wizard in plate armor would totally ruin the feel of
>the game.
You don't have to allow them...but now the people for whom it *wouldn't*
ruin the feel can do it and be happy. All you have to do is, when you're
setting down the ground rules for a campaign, say:
"These races are allowed to be these classes. They can be these other
classes but it's rare, talk to me about it first. Don't even ask about
these class/race combinations."
No worries.
>I guess I'm a simple man with simple tastes. I'm just hoping that i can
>still use the mechanics of 3E and achieve the same feel for the fun and
>mystery of the game without it feeling like a computer game.
I think you can, you just need to adjust your thinking a little bit.
3e can recreate the feel of 1e or 2e, but it can do a lot more besides.
Staffan Johansson
<halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>How do you figure that? In 2E, a 10th level character heals 1 hp/day.
>In 3E that same character heals 10 hp/day. That's a tenfold increase.
In 3e, a 1st level character heals 1 hp per day. For an average first
level fighter (let's ignore the max-hp rule), it takes 5-6 days to
heal fully from being on the verge of death (0 hp).
On the other hand, a 10th level character heals 10 hp per day. For an
average 10th level fighter (again, ignoring the max-hp rule), it takes
5-6 days to heal fully from being on the verge of death - the same as
for a 1st level character.
This is because hit points represent lots of other things beside raw
toughness. Healing *should* be relative to character level, because
each hp translates to much less "real" damage for a high-level
character.
Now, I can see the argument "But why does it only take 2-3 days for
the wizard to be fully healed while it takes 5-6 days for the
fighter?". This is a valid argument, since the rationale for the
fighter to have more hp than the wizard is that his skill allows him
to reduce damage more than the wizard does. One suggestion I've seen
here back when the healing rates were first revealed a few months back
(heck, it's possible that I was the one who thought the suggestion up
- I can't remember) is that you heal your basic attack bonus per day
instead of your level. That would mean that a 10th level wizard with a
bonus of +5 and 25 hp would take 5 days to heal fully, and the 10th
level fighter with a bonus of +10 and 55 hp would take 5-6 days. The
+7/45 cleric would take 6-7 days, and the +7/35 rogue would take 5
days. This is a rule that I'm considering using IMC, but I'll run the
game "as is" for a while first.
>once they hit 10th level. Also, the mature red dragon in the back of
>the PHB does 7 pts LESS damage than his 2E counterpart with his breath
>weapon, his claws do a little more, his bite about the same overall. I
>don't see this as balancing out, not when PCs heal so powerfully.
Consider that the dragon in question is considered to be an adequate
threat to a 4-person 13th level party - one that will cause them to
expend about 1/4 of their resources, but not inflict any casualties.
Also note some things you might have missed about the dragon. Sure,
the breath weapon damage is 7 less than in 2e, but look at that save
DC - 28! In 2e, a 13th level priest or wizard has a BW save of 11
(50%), a rogue has 13 (40%) and a warrior has a ridiculously low 5
(80%). In 3e, a 13th level cleric, fighter or wizard has a +4 Reflex
save, and the Rogue has +8.
Since I haven't found anything about a 20 being an automatic success
for a save (I did find it about attack rolls), that means that no-one
but a rogue (or monk or bard) will be able to save against the dragon
without a substantial bonus (at least +4) from stats, spells or items,
and even the rogue is hard-pressed (5%). Of course, the Rogue is a
little better off because he has Evasion and maybe Improved Evasion.
In the first case, he's either totally fried or left unharmed, and in
the second he's either seriously hurt (14d10/2 vs. 13d6) or unharmed.
Still, one character with a reasonable chance of evading the brunt of
the dragon's breath in 3e versus four in 2e, one of whom were almost
certain to avoid it, translates to a significant powerup IMO.
Also note that the Mature Red dragon can cast up to 5th level arcane
and cleric spells, which certainly could help it heal itself a little
if the fight is going badly - fly away, cast a few Cure Critical
wounds, and return. A Cone of Cold would help against parties who have
loaded up on fire-protecting magic, some protection from a Fire Shield
would help against the obnoxious fighter who tries to chop the dragon
to bits, and an Unholy Blight would also help. Darkness is also nice,
especially since the dragon doesn't need to rely on sight within 210'.
>
>The escalationin 3E reminds me of a sily high powered battle we once
>had in a silly, overpowered campaign we ran. The PCs were fighting a
>similar team of villains, and everyone kept getting healed and wished
>back, and the battle went on for hours because it was hurt, heal, hurt,
>heal. Not a lot of fun.
>
>I guess if others like 3E, then more power to them, I hope they enjoy
>it. I'm not arguing that 3E sucks or that people shouldn't play it,
>just that I personally am finding it to be WAY too focused on super-
>powered PCs, and hence it isn't something I'm likely going to embrace
>after all.
>
>--
>Halaster Blackcloak
>
>"Undermountain, the Realms' deadliest dungeon? I prefer to call it
>home."
>"Elminster? Bah! Neophyte!"
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
--
Staffan Johansson (bal...@crosswinds.net)
Staffan Johansson
<halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>game. :-)The thing with mass heal is that once you get it, you no
>longer need to memorize ANY other healing spells. You heal the whole
>team to full power all at once, with one spell. Slap a few on some
>scrolls, and you're set to take on just about anything without fear.
But you either fill a slot with it instead of, say, Summon Monster
VII, Firestorm or Holy Aura, or risk that your friends get killed
before you have time to rest and rememorize.
And each Mass Heal you place on a scroll costs you 120 XP and 1500 gp,
as well as 3 days downtime. That's admittedly not much compared to how
much it takes to go up a level, but it adds up.
>Because he's got so much more life to recover? :-) I don't know, not
Read the decription of what hitpoints represent on page 128.
--
Staffan Johansson (bal...@crosswinds.net)
C. Eric Nastav
James Tackett <tsnf...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:spqljir...@corp.supernews.com...
>
> Well if you think of Hit Points in the following way the concept makes
more
> sense...
>
> Hit Points represent both Physical Damage and Skill. The amount of
physical
> damage a PC can take never increases from the time the character is
created
> (reaches adolescense?), but the skill (for knowing when to twist to make
the
> sword stroke merely cut the skin rather than slice the muscle) does.
Umm...no. There is no skill at last minutes twists to minimize damage.
No offense, but that's completely ridiculous.
Nice attempt at rationalizing. when it comes down to it there should be
no or little increase in hit points with each level gain if you want to be
realistic about it. The old gamma world system actually had a good hit
point formula. You roll one six sider for each point of Con. Then I think
you gain 1d6 per level.
Eric N.
Halaster Blackcloak
USCM_Sulaco <uscm_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>You are right. I guess I am getting a bit testy cos so many people
seem to be so happy picking apart 3e and finding fault and I snapped at
you. Sorry. I will save my insults for when you deserve them. ;)<
Thanks! :-D Seriously, it's no problem at all. I just hated to think
this would get into a flame war or something because people just got
into some heated debate over my he/she post, and I'd hate to get a rep
as a troll! ;-)
But I think the reason we're all so emotionally forceful over it is
that this IS the new D&D, so there's a lot riding on it. Will it go
over well and be successful? Will it flop, leaving us with a bankrupt
company and no future D&D related gaming material? There's a lot riding
on it. WoTC is really resurrecting a game that had gotten the life
sucked out of it by TSR in the end.
I hope I haven't been coming across as picking it apart. Yes, we're
going to have people who hate even the idea of 3E because 2E is the be-
all, end-all of D&D gaming, just as we have 1E people who hold the same
thing true. I'm personally resistant to change. I like things the way
they are, and it takes a lot to motivate me to switch over. Hell, if I
had my way, Marvel comics would STILL be in the Bronze Age (70's)! :-)
I guess I'm hoping the game mechanics are going to be able to work for
me and provide me with a system that I can make "feel" like D&D. The
feel of a campaign is mostly up to the DM, but the system has to play a
part in it too. The balancing act for me is going to be whether or not
it's going to take too much for me to "convert" everything from 3E into
the kind of game I like and the players like.
But I have to admit, a lot of good has been coming out of all this,
IMO. For example, I forgot who gave me the idea of using the dragon
listed in the back of the PHB and running some combat to test the
characters. Also, Robin Lim gave me the idea about the druidic
hierarchy using Wilderness Lore and other skills as a test for druids
to go up a level, and that opened a floodgate of ideas for me.
So I guess I'll keep my fingers crossed, and we'll see how it turns out.
azothath
Halaster Blackcloak <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
<snip>
whatever the comments about the overall game quality, it's premature
until around November/December. The three main books will be out then
and some play will have commenced.
Personally, I think you'll see AD&D2 go on for several years without
support from WotC. D&D3E is the new line, and they'll go forward with
that doing conversions and new development.
--
/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/*/
can it be? Azot...@hotmale.com.invalid
Halaster Blackcloak
"Kayvan Koie" <kk...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>For one thing, I doubt the dragon will miss much in combat unless the
PCs are a Fantasy Tank. The dragons own AC is damn hard, 32?! that's -
12 under the old system! How can you call that weak? And how can you
call the breath weapon weak? That's still an average of 77 points of
damage, with a required save of 28 (you would need an average of +18 in
pluses to get 50%! And I'm sorry Hal but I don't see a cleric getting
his spells off very well when he has 77 points of fire damage cooking
his ass. Even if he makes his save, thats still an average of 35-40
points of damage he would have to add to his DC to make his
Concentration check to get his spell off. I could go on but I think
you get my point. If this dragon is any indication of a great wyrm, I
don't see PC's killing great wyrms very often<
You know, when you put it THAT way...;-D
Yep, I think I'm going to get the rules all down a little better, then
run that combat like someone suggested, using the dragon in back, and
see how it feels. Thinking of it that way, I'm STILL going to have to
get the MM, if only to see how tough those great wyrms are!
>And as far as the healing bit that you are so blind as to understand,
take this into consideration.
You have two individuals, a 3rd level fighter with 18 hp, and a 10th
level fighter with 75 hp. Both of them get beaten by clubs for 15hp
each. In real world terms, the low level, being a weaker and less
experianced in combat, would take longer to heal. After all, he got
beatin within inches of his life . The 10th level, only got slapped
for a fraction of his body. He would still have aches and bruises, but
the major damage would heal quickly. The notion that it would take him
the same amount of time to heal as the weaker guy, regardless that he's
tougher and can take more damage, is plain silly<
I still feel comfortable with my old boxer analogy, where it gets
harder to heal as you get both older and more beat up.
>And your bit about it being harder for DMs to challenge PCs is a weak
argument. You give me the character and I can create a serious
challenge for him without consulting any books (except maybe the
conversion manual :)<
True, I keep underestimating myself and I should know better. I know
how to challenge PCs, even powerful ones. That healing stuff though, it
just threw me for a loop. I still haven't figured out how that isn't
going to give the PCs a really huge step towards making it a lot more
work to challenge them.
--
Halaster Blackcloak
"Undermountain, the Realms' deadliest dungeon? I prefer to call it
home."
"Elminster? Bah! Neophyte!"
Anivair
>Add to that the death's door rule where each round
>the charcter gets a 10% chance to stabilize and even begin healing,
Which is better than the 2ed rule where you never got a chance to stabalize and
likely dies immediately? I mean, i'm sure that 10% really throws believability
to the wind . . .
>And this horseshit about characters healing 1hp/day/level?!?!
It's not horseshit, it has to do with the fact that a 10th level fighter who
gets injured shouldn't need to spend half a year healing while a first level
mage with one hit point who comes even closer to death is at full HP the next
morning (or sometimes that night). in 2ed, a fighter with over 100 hit points
who had been taken all the way down would need to travel for almost half a year
to heal. That's stupid, esspecially considering that fighters nearly die for a
living. They do it for kicks.
>I truly, honestly fail to see how a DM can challenge a team of 3E
>characters without working his ass off
umm. . . I do, but that's not the point. Why should a DM be afraid to work his
ass off to make his game interesting and memorable?
>I can't make heads or tails of that damned cleric
>spell list, but I take it if I'm reading it right, that a cleric gets
>Mass Heal (an 8th level spell) at 15th elevel? Ok, that is a pretty
>high level, but by the time the team is around that level, they're
>automatically healing 15 hp/day WITHOUT magic.
Right. Assuming they have time to rest. If a cleric needs powerful healing
magic, then odds are you're not in bed. And HP's have always been a measure of
more than toughnes. If we're to believe that HP's going up measures your
getting better in combat and better at rolling with blows, then you SHOULD heal
at roughly the same rate all thet ime. it's realism. I know that I heal a
broken arm about as fast as anyone. If some guy healed a broken arm in two
days, i'd be freaked, but I'd also be freaked if it took him two years.
--
later,
~Anivair
Ani...@aol.com
soup cleric
(snip rant about healing being overpowered)
I have several comments related to healing power and character death.
Healing is more powerful in 3e:
1. All Cure spells do Xd8+Y points of healing where X is the spell
level and Y = Min(caster level, 5X). This makes this sort of healing a
more gradually-increasing type of power. It is true that this results
in more healing power per spell.
2. Healing spells are now more-evenly distributed thru the lower spell
levels; there is no longer a gap at 2nd level.
3. The healing domain is nice for a cleric who wants to put even more
focus on healing
4. Cure Minor Wounds is a great way to stabilize a character that has
negative hit points.
5. Bards may now choose healing spells. It appears that they're no
longer "Jacks of all trades except healing".
Limits on healing in the 3e rules:
1. Many deities do not have the healing domain, so if a player wants to
play a cleric of that deity and have the healing domain granted powers
and domain spells, he's out of luck.
2. 3e clerics who change as many spells as possible to healing will
still tend to have fewer healing spells than their 2e counterparts
because they get fewer bonus spells.
3. Only good and some neutral clerics can change their spells into
healing spells.
4. Domain spells cannot be changed to healing.
5. Clerics cannot pray for spells more than once per day.
Other comments
1. A low-level party with one cleric (and no other characters with
healing spells) is still pretty much out of luck in terms of healing up
in emergency situations if the cleric goes unconscious, dies or is
kidnaped.
2. The option to limit a cleric's spell choices (or take all of his
spells away) if he acts contrary to his alignment or religious doctrine
is presumably still there. This could be of great use in limiting
healing spells if a cleric starts acting up. Or you could just be very
conscious of alignment (for good characters) and religious
3. The weapons do not all have the same stats as in 2e. The power of
bows seems to have been increased. Many weapons have increased critical
ranges, and the piercing weapons do times-3 crit. A character could now
take 30 points of damage from a single non-magical arrow. An increase
in healing power may be necessary in order to offset the increases in
damage from these sources.
4. One way to handle the perceived healing problem is to make clerics
the primary targets of monsters who know a bit about religion. It might
be enough to give monsters who have previous experience with clerics a
Knowledge skill check (with a DC of, say, 10) a chance to conclude that
someone wearing a holy symbol is likely to have healing spells and is
thus more of a longterm threat than he appears.
5. You could have an evil spellcaster research a spell that reduces the
effectiveness of healing spells (and/or natural healing) in a particular
area. That would be cool & unexpected. J
6. The more characters per cleric (in a party), the thinner the healing
spells will be spread. If the characters are being healed too quickly,
you could add more non-cleric NPCs that have one or more of the
following characteristics: very curious, low AC, slow, very courageous.
The PCs will most likely welcome such characters into the party;
they'll then have to slow down so everyone is healed after each combat
or watch some characters die (and the party reputation go down the
toilet).
Playtest comments
I have been involved in a playtest since June.
Averaging a 6-hour session every other week, we have had four character
(3 PC and one party NPC) deaths. Early on, a 1st-level character died
when he tried to run past an ankheg (LSS, the GM had placed it in the
party's path in an attempt to get the party to turn back). Shortly
thereafter, the GM upped the PC levels to 3rd (when WOTC finally sent
the module [designed for characters to start at 3rd level and finish at
around 5th] we were to playtest). Since then, we have seen three more
characters die (at level 3) during encounters with monsters in the
module. Our GM is trying to run the module as-written, with neither
undue mercy nor cruelty, to see whether it was well-designed.
I play the party's cleric, and in the face of so much death, he has
begun to warn PCs about joining this party, as he feels that his god may
be judging him by killing his associates. Like in 2e, it is difficult
to know whether to run, use combat-related spells to prevent injuries,
or engage in combat, hoping to survive and be able to cast healing
spells.
One character has been hit hard two or three times by criticals that
have nearly killed him.
--
Help end hunger with a single click:
visit www.thehungersite.com
Anivair
>these new 3E characters can heal, killer dungeons from 1E/2E become
>cakewalks.
That's the point. it's a new edition. of course the 1ed and 2ed stuff is
going to be sasier. that's why there need to be 3E dungeons. compared to first
edition, second edition charachter can cake walk through their stuff. I know.
I've run most of it.
--
later,
~Anivair
Ani...@aol.com
Anivair
>near-mortal wound. A 7th level rogue with 35 HP will take about 5 days to
>heal from a near-mortal wound. That's what I mean about a similar relative
>healing capability. Doesn't make sense that one guy coming back from a
>near-mortal wound will take a month, and the other guy will take a week.
Esspecially if the guy taking a month is supposed to be tougher and more
experienced.
--
later,
~Anivair
Ani...@aol.com
Henry Link
"Leif Magnar Kj|nn|y" <lei...@pvv.ntnu.no> wrote in message
news:8njki9$9an$1...@kopp.stud.ntnu.no...
> Hey, that sort of stuff can also be fun. I had a cyberpunk campaign
> once that ended with the PCs *and* their NPC opponents from the last
> scenario all lying in "critical but stable" condition in the same
> hospital ward (they had the same health insurance, see), glaring
> at each other across all the tubing and machines that go "bing" and
> so forth, racing each other toward becoming healthy enough to get
out
> of bed and crawl over to pull each others' plugs...
Oh, my God! *LOL* you've just made my day. This is getting circulated
to my Gaming group.
-Henry
carbon...@yahoo.com
Halaster Blackcloak <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> I still feel comfortable with my old boxer analogy, where it gets
> harder to heal as you get both older and more beat up.
>
...
Ok, think of it this way. You have a fighter (I'm not going to
tell you the level, he's just a fighter). He goes into a dungeon
and almost dies (comes within a hair of meeting his maker). He's
carried out of the dungeon by his mates. They drag him home
and put him to bed. How long before he's ready to adventure?
Remember, you don't know his level. Pretend there ARE no
hitpoints. How long?
Ok, have a number? Ok fine. Now should greater experience
result in a longer amount of time?
Anivair
>SHOULD take some time. If you have 50 hp and you're 10th level, you
>shouldn't be able to be beaten to within an inch of your life (1 hp)
>and then have total recovery over the weekend. That borders on
>regeneration!
nobody should be bale to heal being beaten to within an inch of their life over
the weekend. But all first level mages have done it since the beginning of
time. In all honesty, always hated healing in 2ed. As for 3E, i think there is
probably too much healing assecc. One thing I'm going to do it stop everyone
from being able to trade in other spells for healing spells so often. I'll
allow it if it makes sence for your god, but there's no reason why I, as a god,
would let someone trade in a perfectly good spell for a healing spell if I'm
not into healing. That's like saying, Ill take these spells and think ahead
like a good little cleric, but if I get screwed, i fully expect you to bail me
out. So far, i'm running short on other options for trade ins (because I like
the idea of trading in) but I'm working it out.
--
later,
~Anivair
Ani...@aol.com
Dr Nuncheon
C. Eric Nastav <cna...@iupui.edu> wrote:
>
>James Tackett <tsnf...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:spqljir...@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>> Well if you think of Hit Points in the following way the concept makes
>more
>> sense...
>>
>> Hit Points represent both Physical Damage and Skill. The amount of
>physical
>> damage a PC can take never increases from the time the character is
>created
>> (reaches adolescense?), but the skill (for knowing when to twist to make
>the
>> sword stroke merely cut the skin rather than slice the muscle) does.
>
> Umm...no. There is no skill at last minutes twists to minimize damage.
>No offense, but that's completely ridiculous.
Just out of curiosity, how much combat experience do you have?
His explanation may have been poorly worded, but it's not "completely
ridiculous" in the real world, and it's certainly not "completely
ridiculous" in a heroic fantasy like D&D.
Because of the way D&D combat works, defensive skill is partially wrapped
into hit points. A spear strike comes in, and a skilled warrior is more
likely to be able to get out of the way of the blow, so that it does no
damage or so that the damage is minimized.
It's not 'speed' or dexterity, either - it's all about timing.
James Tackett
>First there's that irritating
> alteration between he, she, and they. Then there's an even more
> aggravating and baffling switching between person. For example, it
> switches from saying "A high level character can do so and so" to "YOU
> can do so and so" and back again sometimes multiple times in a single
> paragraph. It's clumsy, there's no question about it. Same for spells.
> Rary's Telepathic Bond says "YOU forge a telepathic link", then Raise
> Dead says "THE CLERIC restores life", then Read Magic says "YOU can
> read magical inscriptions". There's no damn internal consistancy.
> Granted, I understand that has nothing to do with how much fun the game
> is to play, but it just makes it difficult for me to warm up to it, you
> knwo what I mean? It's like the difference between driving down a
> smooth paved road as opposed to speeding over a pothole-filled wreck of
> a highway.
>
Hmmm true plus the occasional slip into she/her even when talking about a
male character <grin> But it is kinda cute in the same way that Gygaxian
prose was in 1st edition <evil grin> (No offense to the master meant)
> And there definitely is a sense of "do whatever it is you like, doesn't
> matter if it's dumb". To me, and many of the people I've gamed with, a
> dwarven barbarian/wizard in plate armor would totally ruin the feel of
> the game. IMO, people just seem to have a hard time dealing with
> restriction or limitation in our society, no matter how slight that
> restriction might be. That's not to say that everyone needs to play
> strictly by the book or have no room for change or experimentation. But
> some stuff (like a dwarven barbarian/wizard in plate armor)just makes
> no sense to me.
>
hmm wizards in plate armor? sounds like a k00l d00d from UO <heheheh> or a
dwarven one? wow! a real munchkin!!!! yes i agree restrictions should be in
place, though i feel they should be the realm of the campaign world not the
core game mechanics. The campaign setting is where you refine and define the
rules so that they make sense in relation to the history and flavor of the
world. Now that might also include minor alterations such as making healing
be per week instead of per day, or limit the number of spells a cleric can
swap out for healing beyond what the core rules allow. That is your choice,
but i have always found it helpful to define my campaign house rules for the
players so they know ahead of time what is possible and impossible in the
world the characters live in.
Anivair
>> 10 hp. He takes 5 pts of damage, so he's technically half dead.
>
>No. He's nowhere near dead as long as he has hit points
Mathematically, he's 25% dead, since he has untill -10 HP. Also, i've always
been wierded out by the fact that you can wade through orks untill you have 1
HP and feel fine, but as soon as you take that one pinprick 1 HP, you fall
down. very silly, but there's no good rule of thumb for altering it.
--
later,
~Anivair
Ani...@aol.com
Halaster Blackcloak
je...@fnord.io.com (Dr Nuncheon) wrote:
>Er, so what's the difference between this and saying "you rest for 2
weeks"?<
Well, in game time it does make a difference. While in real time both
actions take place in minutes or even seconds, in GAME time, the
villains had much more time to regroup, set new traps, get
reinforcements, etc when the PCs had to retreat for a few days or a few
weeks even. Now it's a matter of hours, if not minutes, in game time.
While the villains can also heal at the same rate, they still get the
disadvantage of not having time to "prepare the dungeon" for the next
assault, so to speak.
--
Halaster Blackcloak
"Undermountain, the Realms' deadliest dungeon? I prefer to call it
home."
"Elminster? Bah! Neophyte!"
Anivair
>and how weapons do the same damage. Also, even that dragon in the 3E
>PHB was not that tough compared to his 2E counterpart (considering his
>damage totals, BW, etc).
Weapons do the same damage. fine. of course, you ow get greater bonuses for
lower levels of strength, so most everyone is doing more damage on average. And
that'd before feats which increase damage even firther. And before the plethora
of extra attacks that old school charachters never got.
And as for dragons, how can you say taht the breath weapon is les dangerous?
Because it does a few points less of damage per use? What is that compared to
the fact taht you can use is every two or three rounds now? That's like saying
that it's not worth trading a couple of points off your fireball for the
ability to cast it every round for the rest of your natural life. Of course it
is. And their physical damage is MORE (esspecially with strength bonuses) and
they get more attacks and more spells and maneuvers and feats and hit points.
Overall, i'd say that if my campaigns are switching, then i never killed a
single dragon that I thought I killed.
--
later,
~Anivair
Ani...@aol.com
Anivair
>mean, as far as minor complaints like not having the druidic
>hierarchy...I can easily add those back in if I want, it wouldn't take
>any work at all.
Actually, i'm really excited about being able to come up with a new hierarchy.
i was totally inspired by the bit about some druids not living through the
tests. I can just see the PC's going to camp in the woods for a week while one
of their number takes his initiation. maybe they all watch him fight a bear
bare handed. Man, that's graet stuff.
--
later,
~Anivair
Ani...@aol.com
carbon...@yahoo.com
effect from allowing clerics to trade their spells for healing
spells?
Trading not allowed:
Clerics take most of their spells as healing spells just in
case the party needs them. They rarely get the chance to
take many of the others. Their role, though greatly needed,
is not exactly the starring role in the drama.
Trading allowed:
Clerics analyze the adventure and take the spells they think
will be most useful. They get the chance to be the center of
attention more as some of their spells come in useful. When
the party really gets slammed, they can trade in their spells
to help them.
See, in 2E, clerics were kind of like an player played NPCs
with a rack full of healing potions. In fact we often do have
an NPC playing the cleric because no-one else wants
to. In 2E they're mediocre fighters and all their spells
have to be geared toward keeping the party fit. In 3E at last
you can use a little imagination in picking your spells, and
clerics are also a little better in the fighting department
too.
And if you take this power away from clerics, shouldn't you
take away the perks that all the other classes have? Mages
memorizing lower level spells in higher level slots. Mages
leaving empty slots for 15 minutes of later prep on the fly?
Metamagic? And what about sorcerers -- limited spells, but
the ability to cast them often on the fly! Now is this
clerical ability that unreasonable?
In article <20000818123305...@ng-fe1.aol.com>,
ani...@aol.com (Anivair) wrote:
... One thing I'm going to do it stop everyone
> from being able to trade in other spells for healing spells so often.
I'll
> allow it if it makes sence for your god, but there's no reason why I,
as a god,
> would let someone trade in a perfectly good spell for a healing spell
if I'm
> not into healing. That's like saying, Ill take these spells and think
ahead
> like a good little cleric, but if I get screwed, i fully expect you to
bail me
> out. So far, i'm running short on other options for trade ins
(because I like
> the idea of trading in) but I'm working it out.
>
> --
> later,
> ~Anivair
> Ani...@aol.com
>
Halaster Blackcloak
"James Tackett" <tsnf...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>And this is a problem how? Instead of weeks of pretend recovery time
its now days of pretend recovery time. So? most situations my players
have been in where they had to spend that much time healing weren't
productive roleplay times since you cant go bar hopping, training with
local guilds, having diner parties etc cause your in bed bandaged up
and healing doing pretty much nothing else... so why should it matter
if it takes days instead of weeks now? The only reasoning that might
work is that it allows the monsters/NPCs less time to call in
reinforcements from outlying or remote regions, hire/enslave more
connon fodder etc<
Well, I see it like this. It's a matter of attrition rate. Here's an
example. A party sets out to explore a lost tomb protected by some type
of monster, say a lich. The lich has various traps set, undead
guardians and sevrants, etc. The PCs (using 2E rules) go in, and defeat
certain traps, guardians, etc. At some point they take a lot of damage
so they have to retreat and regroup. Perhaps they realize they need to
bring mroe light spells or whatever. So they leave the tomb, spend a
week or so healing, and go back. Or they at least have to spend a good
number of days while the cleric goes around casting healing spells on
everyone and then sleepign and re-acquiring them. So now the lich has
plenty of time to set new traps, get new guardians set up, new wards,
etc.
In 3E (as it looks to me so far), the PCs would only need to retreat to
the next room, cast all those swapped healing spells, and just keep on
chuggin'! Or at worst, retreat for a single day, get those 10-15 hp
natural healing to supplement all those magical healing spells, and go
right back in at full power. The lich barely has time to assess
damages, much less fix traps, create nbew guardians, etc.
That's how I see it anyway. We'll have to take a closer look at it and
see if this holds true.
--
Halaster Blackcloak
"Undermountain, the Realms' deadliest dungeon? I prefer to call it
home."
"Elminster? Bah! Neophyte!"
Henry Link
> True, but no character can have 2000 hp. At least not in a sane
> game. :-)The thing with mass heal is that once you get it, you no
> longer need to memorize ANY other healing spells. You heal the whole
> team to full power all at once, with one spell. Slap a few on some
> scrolls, and you're set to take on just about anything without fear.
...which costs the PC who does this approximately 128 XP and 3200 gold
pieces.
not that cheap, all things considered.
> I like the idea of clerics having to pray at a specific time, but
> still...they've cut HOURS off of memorization/preparation time.
> Especially for wizards.
Hours? Try DAYS. It took a high - level wizard somewhere between one
and two DAYS worth of time to re-memorize all his spells.
> Because he's got so much more life to recover? :-) I don't know, not
> everything makes total sense. But to me, natural healing is SUPPOSED
to
> take a long time. People who have heart attacks or gunshot wounds
that
> take them within an inch of their lives don't get up and walk out in
a
> few days...they spend weeks in intensive care, total bedrest, before
> they can even go home.
Haven't had that happen lately, have you? I once was acquainted with
someone a few years ago that was sent home to recuperate a WEEK after
brain surgery. And it wasn't some sucky HMO, either! it was full
medical insurance!
Plus, a gunshot wound can be treated and sent home in a few days time.
I have seen this with my own two eyes. They aren't ready for track and
field the next week, but then, they aren't heroes,either.
> Granted, lower level characters seem to heal
> faster in that system, but chalk it up to youth. Just like boxers
> eventually don't recover as well once they get older compared to
when
> they first started out. That's how I always saw it. If you take lots
of
> injuries thoughout your life, later on it starts to take you longer
to
> heal, and you don't heal as well.
You love that boxer analogy, don't you? ;-)
Consider the analogy I used in my previous post. HP are not a way of
looking at GRIEVOUS OR MORTAL WOUNDS, they are a way of looking at the
windedness and the minor wounds you get before you GET to the mortal
wounds.
This is how HP have been portrayed since 1st edition.
The cure spells just restore your energy, close those cuts, and give
you your second wind. Honestly, why would high-level PCs bother with
cure light wounds after they are level 10 or so anyway? :-) The system
WORKS - trust about 1000 playtesters and a host of people on these
boards.
Honestly, Hal, I think you should re-read the PH cover-to-cover, and
take the advice they give young drivers at the DMV: Clear your mind,
unlearn any "bad" habits, and do it by the book. Playtest about 3 or 4
games by the book. At worst, you've tested a new system, you've spent
a couple of evenings with the players enjoying themselves, and you've
picked up a few new ideas for your 2E game. At best, you will see the
beauty of this system, and keep playing it.
I don't see the problem.
-Henry
James Tackett
PHB for the description of Hit Points.
to quote:
"Hit points mean two things in the game world: the ability to take physical
punishment and keep going, and the ability to turn a serious blow into a
less serious one."
I think they said pretty much the same thing i did, although they do later
say that the ability to withstand physical damage also increases, and
perhaps it should somewhat, but i do not think that it is even close to a
50/50 split between the two aspects of Hit Points.
I agree that its rather silly in ways to expect someone to know how to twist
and bend to avoid taking damage from a blow that would knock a novice into
the wall. There is no way any comparison between a 10th level fighter who
can roll with a sword strike and end up with a small bleeding slice on his
stomach or arm where the 1st level would be out of action and say a real
world martial art discipline where the black belt can take a blow that
connects yet seems to deal less damage to him (cause of blocking/ducking
techinques he learned perhaps?) than it would to the white belt student.
Hit points have never been and never will be a feature of the game that
everyone will be content with. Either there are too many HP, they aren't
realistic enough in dealing with fatigue/scars/severing/crippling, or one of
a dozen or more complaints about them. But we aren't stuck with the rules if
they don't fit your concept for your campaign world.
"C. Eric Nastav" <cna...@iupui.edu> wrote in message
news:8njmuv$13b$1...@hercules.iupui.edu...
>
> Umm...no. There is no skill at last minutes twists to minimize damage.
> No offense, but that's completely ridiculous.
Halaster Blackcloak
dilandau-...@another.com (Dilandau Albatou) wrote:
>Besides, isn't Mass Heal more of an post-battle spell? The targets
must be withing 30' of eachoter, and that may not allways be possible
in a battle<
I think I missed a post somewhere, because I don't recall anyone ever
talking about healing while IN combat, yet it keeps getting referred
to. I know *my* arguments have always talked about the amount of
healing going on in between combats, not during. But the amount of
sheer increase in healing is still there.
carbon...@yahoo.com
Halaster Blackcloak <halaster_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
...
> In 3E (as it looks to me so far), the PCs would only need to retreat
to
> the next room, cast all those swapped healing spells, and just keep on
> chuggin'! Or at worst, retreat for a single day, get those 10-15 hp
> natural healing to supplement all those magical healing spells, and go
> right back in at full power. The lich barely has time to assess
> damages, much less fix traps, create nbew guardians, etc.
>
level. Clerics in 2E because they can't swap spells, just
memorize pretty much all healing spells. That means that they
have just as many spells as they would have when they swapped.
The only difference is the 2E cleric is so boring, such a
"servant" of the party's needs that he's just as likely to be
an NPC (because noone wants to play him). Healing happens just
as fast. And if the party is beaten up, it means that they
will be spending lots of those days healing up. Think they
can do that in the middle of a dangerous dungeon run by a lich?
James Tackett
>
> I still feel comfortable with my old boxer analogy, where it gets
> harder to heal as you get both older and more beat up.
> Halaster Blackcloak
>
yes your analogy is a good one and that is why the aging effects are built
into the system. as you age your str and con go down thereby decreasing
your to-hit, damage, fortitude save, and hit point bonuses for those stats.
if you want to add a bit more realism you could consider having
chronological and physiological age stats using something like the time
units from living greyhawk (52 time units per "year" or game time) mark off
the time actual time units that the adventure (including the time required
to heal) but each time a character is dropped to below 0 hitpoints add one
time unit to the physiological age over and above the actual time spent in
the adventure. This would represent the strain on the body's healing and
immune systems from coming so close to death and having to heal back. This
causes the reckless characters (if they survive that long) to enter the next
age catagory and suffer the penalties sooner than thier more cautious
friends. I think this would allow you to keep the more rapid healing intact
yet still have the feel of your boxer analogy.
Halaster Blackcloak
Lizard <liz...@mrlizard.com> wrote:
>1)Any GM who lets the players get away with this is a moron. Hell,
even the FIRST EDITION DMG had a section about how monsters will react
to an invasion. Their second trip to the dungeon will be a PC
slaughterama, as the surviving monsters have doubled security, added
traps, maybe called in some powerful mercenaries, etc. Not to mention
*following the PCs home*. Suddenly, that peaceful little village just
outside the Fortress Of Terrible Doom is under assault, as the
surviving orcs or whatever tear the town apart, demanding the
'murderers' be turned over to them for 'orcish justice'. (It involves
pointy bits in places pointy bits do not belong)<
I agree totally, and that does sound good, but it just might not be
possible if the PCs can slip away for a few hours or a single day and
come back fully healed. For every day that a 10th level charcter gets
natural healing in 3E, that's better than a typical cure serious wounds
spell being cast on him by a cleric, only no spells need to be cast.
This is true for EACH charcter, so that means there's much less need
for healing magic to get the PCs back on their feet in record time. The
bad guys won't have TIME to set up a slaughterama, since the PCs will
be juggernauts.
>2)Since the PCs fled before overcoming the Challenge, they get
***ZERO*** XP for the encounter. That alone is enough to make them risk
death<
I wouldn't penalize them for a strategic retreat, and how is the
attrition tactic not a valid way to handle a problem?
>3)(OK, three things) Given that monsters can now have classes, levels,
skills, and feats, just like PCs, some increase in power level was
necessary. Just make sure those Kobolds include some second and third
level fighters, or there's aparticularly bright Ogre who can function
as a dualclass barbarian/wizard, and watch the body count rise.<
Ogre wizard/barbarian...no...no...no...[voice trails off] ;-)
>4)(Sigh, 4 things) If you're running D&D, or any tabletop RPG like a
game of Wizardry I, which is what it sounds like, I think you need to
get with the naughts, man<
You lost me there. Is Wizard I a video game? I have zero experience
with that stuff, so label me clueless. :-)
--
Halaster Blackcloak
"Undermountain, the Realms' deadliest dungeon? I prefer to call it
home."
"Elminster? Bah! Neophyte!"
Halaster Blackcloak
schu...@my-deja.com wrote:
>The opponents the characters will face are much more formidable also.
And in converting my current campaign, nearly the whole party has a
worse AC than in 2E. They will need the extra HP's.
Can I have your 3E PHB then? Since you don't want it.<
Wait, let's not jump the gun! I still might be keeping it you know! :-D