Wand usage, how much is too much?

[ferrinwulf]

Yeah I'm just finding out how lethal they are lol. I do like them though, they offer up some great challenges. Perhaps I need to be a bit careful myself form now on too.

Savage worlds, they just give 3 hero points per session that refresh the next session. It's a small lifeline we added to give the game a more swashbuckling edge. Everybody loves it as it makes the game a little more forgiving and fun.

[Experiment 626]

Adamantine Dragon wrote:

ferrin, was that trap in a module or your own creation?

This thread continues to go down the path that sucking a character's hit points is the only way to give the party something to worry about.

I dunno, but my characters have always found hit points to be the least bothersome resource to manage. Level drain was probably the most feared effect. Disease or anything else that did attribute damage was always more feared than hit point loss.

As a GM I rarely depend on reducing hit points to be the thing that puts limits on the player characters. I view hit points as being like battery charges. You charge between encounters. Wands are just one way of doing it. If I want to put the hurt on the party, I attack their attributes. Taking a few int points away from the wizard REALLY gets their attention I've found.

I was going to type something up to this effect, but now I need only say, "+1".

[wraithstrike]

strayshift wrote:

An example: We have a player whose play style consists of 'run in and hit it with my axe/sword/hammer, etc'

Now the game is a broad church and he is willing to play fighter types all day which others aren't so I'm not judging that. However, a consequence of his play style is he dies about twice as much as anyone else, and often ignores clues/instructions that blatantly guide him to be more cautious.

Should I as a DM give him extra access to resources to negate the consequences of his actions?

The answer ultimately comes down to where you draw the line between 'having fun' and creating a challenge for your players (and I will state that there are other players in our group would not want a game where most of the challenges didn't have consequences or could be solved by just 'rush in and hit it with my axe' tactics).

If by "give" you mean throw in extra items to compensate for their inability to learn then no.

[wraithstrike]

Kimera757 wrote:

I said it before and I'll say it again, that was a bad trap. Even if it's in an official module. (Writing a 1e-style module for a 3e/PF-style game isn't a good idea unless you make rules changes. Up front.)

20d6 damage makes for a CR 10 trap by itself. There was no save, so it's more like a CR 15 trap. What level is this adventure for?

I don't know if you can take 20 when searching for traps, at least not if there's a chance that failing a check could result in you getting squished. Maybe said trap wouldn't have squished the rogue, but the rogue had no way of knowing that at first. (Also, taking up time endlessly searching for traps is a bit like taking up time using up the wand. There may be invisible consequences, such as bad guys taking time to buff or bring in reinforcements. There's a funny D&D comic strip that mentions this online; wish I could remember which specific one so I could post it.)

I could talk about undead draining levels and other such challenges too, but enough for today.

You can take 20. The only time you can't take 20 is when failing the skill check is what leads directly to the bad consequence. It is not the failed perception check that gets you in trouble because you still have to set the trap off, which is only an indirect possibility of not rolling high enough. Disabling however would not allow you to take 20 since failure by a certain amount directly sets the trap off.

If the bad guys know you are coming they are likely going to be buffed before you get to them anyway.

[Evil Lincoln]

Traps are binary if they aren't featured in an ongoing encounter (e.g. combat)

An encounter composed solely of one trap will either kill a character or it won't.

Damage will suck up resources, but unless you're really thinking in terms of GP damage, then it isn't going to have the dramatic effect you're looking for.

It is silly to expect that the players are going to take a 50% HP loss from a trap, then shrug and move on to certain death. Why are GMs expecting this suicidal behavior?

The best place for a trap is as the opener for a boss fight. Bosses should use traps as an ace in the hole.

Or poison. Poison works.

[james maissen]

ferrinwulf wrote:

Last nights situation was this which is where the wand question came up:

Not sure if it has any relevence or not but:

The rouge checked for traps, (I rolled he failed to notice it , rolled a 19 in total to notice it needed dc 25). The trap in question was triggered by the rogue when he stepped on the plate. The the trap was activated when the 2nd person walked over it (the druid). The walls sprang together doing 20d6 damage (no save). I rolled the damage and got 51, the rouge had 46hp (6th level). The Druid was stabilized and then used the wand to heal up.

So here is this insanely deadly trap.. and nothing is using it as a location for an ambush?

Traps should not be wandering monsters, but rather hazardous terrain.

Imagine that a somewhat nasty trap is sprung, the party is slowly going to heal, but now the enemy is alerted to their presence and attacks them (after taking a round or two to buff). The rogue is now at 13hps or so, the druid has the wand of cure light out, and the fight starts. Their back is up against the wall.. (literally) and since the trap resets...

Out of combat healing is not something to balk at as there are plenty of times that it is not helpful. If you let the party always dictate terms of combat, then the game will have problems.. but that isn't the fault of any wands. Don't have the monsters waiting behind the next door for the party to open it. They are not stray pets waiting for people to let them out!

-James

[Lemmy]

Riuken wrote:

Would you rather they sit around a day for the cleric to regain spells to heal, or worse yet, leave the adventure to return home to heal? If the players want their characters to be healed up, they will find a way. Healing wands keep the story moving at a faster pace imo.

Yeah, pretty much this... Wands are useful, they keep the party going and the story progresses... Why make them go back to town all the time?

Those wands won't stop them from being killed. You generally can't take a wand from your pocket and keep casting CLW during combat... Well, you can, but it's probably not going to be a very effective tactic.

[Lumiere Dawnbringer]

i have no problems with 3.5 wands of lesser vigor either. those are literally the best bang for your buck for out of combat healing consumables.

555 HP for 750 gold.

1.4 GP spent her HP recovered (rounded up)

it just takes 1 round per hit point

but in PF we have infernal healing

500 HP for 750 GP

or 1.5 GP per HP spent and usable by more classes

hell

i recommend combining 3.5 with pathfinder because it fixes a lot of pathfinder issues. especially PHB 2 and TOB, which have many powerful martial feats designed to make fighters better at combat.

[Stefan Hill]

wraithstrike wrote:

Stefan I have never played a game where a 2nd group followed the first group hoping they cleared the dungeon out for them. However if group 2 did employ this tactic it would be common thinking that either group 1 cleared the dungeon, in which case they would be jumped in their weakened state.

If group 2 was worried about group 1 being to powerful to jump, even in a weakened state then I doubt they will try to go through a dungeon that sent group 1 packing.

It was the OP not I who suggested this. The only way I would see this happening would be if the first party (a) went back to town and told everyone, (b) another bunch of adventurers were about, and (c) they had some kknowledge of %dungeon-cleared.

So I agree with what you have said.

[Drachasor]

I see no good reason to limit wands artificially.

As for buying wands, if anything that means there's a market for them. A market means more would be made.

If the party wants to spend their gold on healing stuff, let them.

Alternatively, you could turn wands into Eberron Eternal Wands. Those had 3 uses/day but never burnt out.