Quote from: StormBringer;630415Pistols at dawn, then?

You put down your sword and I'll put down my rock, then we can kill each other as Gawd intended, sportsmanlike.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;630458You put down your sword and I'll put down my rock, then we can kill each other as Gawd intended, sportsmanlike.

Like civilized people.

Quote from: Opaopajr;629332Heh, this reminds me of RPG.net discussion of people trying to figure out how to have an all Fighter party and healing in 2e.

In 2e natural healing was 1 HP a day if doing non-strenuous activity, like traveling (which by foot is still a brisk walk or moderate riding pace), and getting adequate food and rest. Full bed rest was 3 HP a day, with a CON bonus at the end of a week.

When you look at that core rule and think about it, that is a lot of healing for the first few levels. A bunch of fighters could merrily go about, heal while traveling, return, heal, and rapidly head back out again without healing spells. Fast enough to keep the adventures going, slow enough to make low HP actually a strategic as well as a tactical concern.

It is pretty awesome and overlooked, in my opinion.

Most vaulauble post re: healing in D&D for the last four years on this board. I salute you!

Quote from: Settembrini;630473Most vaulauble post re: healing in D&D for the last four years on this board. I salute you!

Getting level hp per day makes more sense as it reflects damage as a % of the total

Quote from: jibbajibba;630483Getting level hp per day makes more sense as it reflects damage as a % of the total

Thats the one thing about old school healing that never quite felt right.

A 1st level n00b (unless killed outright) could never be more than a couple days of rest from being back at full effectiveness.

A 10th level lord could take weeks of bedrest to fully recover.

I could understand if were based on assumed age, since older folks take longer to heal but there was no direct link between age and level.

I think a floating % of total hp healed per day with the exact amount dependent on CON would be a workable solution. A guy with an 18 CON should recover more quickly than the sickly dude with a 6 CON.

Quote from: StormBringer;630461Like civilized people.

With our bare fists.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;630458You put down your sword and I'll put down my rock, then we can kill each other as Gawd intended, sportsmanlike.

I just watched that night before last.  Still an awesome movie.

Quote from: Sommerjon;630446It seems that there is a number of opinions over there that want different things.
Oh, sorry you must be selectively targeting certain posters with your righteous indignation.

Of course this has nothing to do with the concept of keeping the core book pure of all that power gaming munchkinism.  If those dumb bastards want that bullshit put it into some other book.  Who the fuck do these munchkins think they are?   Do they not realize what D&D is?  Fucking twats.

Holy Shit you are colossally stupid.  I'm sorry.  I don't know how much plainer I could have put it and you still don't get it.

Our side:  Keep the basic game just that: basic and streamlined.  Give everyone else their options in optional rules

Their side: Put everything we like about 4e in the core rules and don't make it optional, fuck everyone else who doesn't like 4e.

Maybe it's me.  Maybe how I explained the difference doesn't make any sense at all.  Everyone else, was I incomprehensible?

Quote from: Sacrosanct;630498Holy Shit you are colossally stupid.  I'm sorry.  I don't know how much plainer I could have put it and you still don't get it.

Our side:  Keep the basic game just that: basic and streamlined.  Give everyone else their options in optional rules

Their side: Put everything we like about 4e in the core rules and don't make it optional, fuck everyone else who doesn't like 4e.

Maybe it's me.  Maybe the how I explained the difference doesn't make any sense at all.  Everyone else, was I incomprehensible?

No. I got what you were talking about and I agree.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;630498Holy Shit you are colossally stupid.  I'm sorry.  I don't know how much plainer I could have put it and you still don't get it.

Our side:  Keep the basic game just that: basic and streamlined.  Give everyone else their options in optional rules

Their side: Put everything we like about 4e in the core rules and don't make it optional, fuck everyone else who doesn't like 4e.

Maybe it's me.  Maybe how I explained the difference doesn't make any sense at all.  Everyone else, was I incomprehensible?

To play Devil's advocate for a moment, after that is what he pays me for.
What if the core basic rule was HD recovery after a battle, after each hours rest and after eating or sleep and the optional rule was to remove that and limit it to level HP per day.

That is exactly the same a simple rule recover your HD hp back after each hour with an option to simulate a given play style. How would folks feel about it?

I say this because its easy to go with a proposed simple solution with options and to deride the ones that want 4e style rules when the core rules mimic ones own favoured play styles.

I would be happy with full on 4e healing surges so long as I have a clear optional rule to remove them. I still get to play a flavour of game of my own choosing I suspect there are people here who would reject it for the same reason that the 4e fans complain because they want their version of the game to be core.

Lets face it HD recovery is a simple rule. Really really simple it might not create a 1e style game but that isn't the point the point is simplicity. Recover Level HP overnight is simple too just creates a different game.

Reread your proposal.  You're suggesting that the basic version have rules that could be removed in a more advanced version?

That....doesn't make a lot of sense.  The way things have been proposed, my ideal version of 5e is probably going to be Basic with a lot from the Standard rules (like backgrounds and specialties).

I am perfectly OK with the basic version not having all the options I want because it's a basic version.

We've come to a point where people have such a need to whine and cry and lambast 4e that they are actively ignoring what the WoTC team is actually saying.  Go look at that LL article from 2/18 on TBP.

What Mearls said was that the basic version will be the most streamlined, clerics doing the bulk of healing did OK, , nothing is written in stone, and there will be options for non magical healing perhaps in the more advanced versions

The part in green?  That's what so many people are ignoring.  Folks have got their panties all in a wad because Next is refusing to have any sort of mundane healing, and it's just another way to say screw you to 4e fans.  It doesn't matter how many times you can point out, "No, there will be mundane healing options, didn't you read the rest of the sentence?"  Folks there ignore it AGAIN and keep repeating how Next won't put in mundane healing.

It's nuts man.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;630508I am perfectly OK with the basic version not having all the options I want because it's a basic version.

Why is this so hard to understand?

Quote from: Sacrosanct;630508Reread your proposal.  You're suggesting that the basic version have rules that could be removed in a more advanced version?

That....doesn't make a lot of sense.  The way things have been proposed, my ideal version of 5e is probably going to be Basic with a lot from the Standard rules (like backgrounds and specialties).

I am perfectly OK with the basic version not having all the options I want because it's a basic version.

We've come to a point where people have such a need to whine and cry and lambast 4e that they are actively ignoring what the WoTC team is actually saying.  Go look at that LL article from 2/18 on TBP.

What Mearls said was that the basic version will be the most streamlined, clerics doing the bulk of healing did OK, , nothing is written in stone, and there will be options for non magical healing perhaps in the more advanced versions

The part in green?  That's what so many people are ignoring.  Folks have got their panties all in a wad because Next is refusing to have any sort of mundane healing, and it's just another way to say screw you to 4e fans.  It doesn't matter how many times you can point out, "No, there will be mundane healing options, didn't you read the rest of the sentence?"  Folks there ignore it AGAIN and keep repeating how Next won't put in mundane healing.

It's nuts man.

First off I am not upset in any way.
Also I am not suggesting there is a healing mechanic you can remove I am suggesting 2 different healing mechanics

i) You recover 1HD after each encounter and 1 HD per hour.
ii) you recover Level HP per days rest.

they are both siimple and they do not overlap.
they provide entirely different gaming expereinces.

Now I am postulating this position simply because the argument here is 'the 4e fans are acting like dicks because their version of what they think is D&D healing should be will only be an option in the standard rule book". this is an easy position to take if your version of the healing rules is the one in the core book.

What Mearls said is irrelevant to my question. I was merely asking how people here would feel if the HD mechanic was core and the Level HP per day (or 1HP per day + con bonus or whatever) was the optional rule.

It seems from your post they would get quite upset and claim that any such idea was nuts studid, I didn't read the text I don;t understand the rules etc etc
And you are one of the more reasonable proponents of the go back to TSR healing suggestion.

Quote from: jibbajibba;630512they are both siimple and they do not overlap.
they provide entirely different gaming expereinces.

And that's actually a problem, because after you can't design modules for everyone who plays basic, or at least not in a way that builds meaningfully on the healing rates assumptions of the game, because you have these two completely different healing mechanics which then have a domino effect on how adventurers rest, when, whether they leave the area they are exploring regularly or not, etc etc. So you are either designing for one group of basic players, or the other, for no apparent reason, whereas there are the players of standard and advanced in which one these two subgroups could have been folded in the first place.

It'd be dumb to do that. Seriously.

Then we are back to what is the simplest expression of the game, and the fact that it is WAY easier to ADD options to a simple framework with the other advanced rules than to take them away. Which means you better start with Clerics healing normally, and then add options for "mundane healing" and whatnot, rather than include those from the get go to then provide 'options' to take them off the game.

It's basic logic man. Common sense.

Quote from: Benoist;630514And that's actually a problem, because after when you can't design modules for everyone who plays basic, or at least not in a way that builds meaningfully on the healing rates assumptions of the game, because you have these two completely different healing mechanics which then have a domino effect on how adventurer rest, when, whether they leave the area they are exploring regularly or not, etc etc.

It'd be dumb to do that. Seriously.

Then we are back to what is the simplest expression of the game, and the fact that it is WAY easier to ADD options to a simple framework with the other advanced rules than to take them away. Which means you better start with Clerics healing normally, and then add options for "mundane healing" and whatnot, rather than include those from the get go to then provide options to take them off the game.

It's basic logic man. Common sense.

No Ben its not logic.
The reason you prefer the cleric healing option is that is your prefered game style.
Both approaches affect how the game runs hugely but both are valid and logical approaches.
I agree that the two mechanics have a large influence on the game and the way modules are written and you can therefore see why 4e fans who loved 4e as much as you loved 1e might fight for their version of the game to be the basic core one that the modules are written for.
That is logic.