Why are Wands of CLW such a problem?


Prerelease Discussion

451 to 500 of 743 << first < prev | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | next > last >>

Ryan Freire wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Ryan Freire wrote:
They're too cheap for the # of charges a wand gets. 750 for a wand vs 2500 for 50 potions of clw. Thats why they're a problem.
You have just pointed out the problem with potions as a whole. Well done.
The reverse actually, wands are too cheap.

Respectfully disagree. Potions of a relevant spell level are hugely destructive to any character's budget.

Perhaps we can meet in the middle and agree that the scroll price would be appropriate for consumables?


Probably be ok. They need to be more for sure.


If a consumable is too expensive that few players would buy it it is too expensive.

In PFS I will see players with a few utility potions brought using prestige points. Many of those same players do not buy those potions in a non-PFS game when they cost gold.

If you increase the price of them you will end up with no-one buying them.

The other problem is price scaling. All consumables need to scale linearly for a linear effect. That is your biggest problem. Change that and you change everything.


The concept of a linear price scaling doesn't pan out with the freaky wealth scaling of PF1 and its precursors.

If you keep that sort of wealth scaling you need similar scaling for the cost of items appropriate for higher level characters.

But we may be able to come up with a better formula than Spell Level times Caster Level times X


Unless you change the scaling non-combat multiple low level effects will always be more cost-efficient than fewer high level effects.

I know I'm re-stating the blindingly obvious, but I'm really not convinced that a mechanic such as resonance to 'encourage' using higher level items is the right answer.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wands of CLW are great at level 1. They easily heal you in 1 or 2 charges, and the 750gp expense was meaningful, such that you basically had to give up buying a +1 weapon or armor.

Wands of CLW are terrible in combat even at level 5 or so. You need to be healing more than that 1d8+1 if you are spending an action to heal, so you really need at least CMW or multiple dice of channeling for in-combat use to justify it in the action economy.

The issue is that the CLW wand is now so cheap for out of combat healing, and done officially, requires a bunch of rolls, taking up table time. Instead, the rule could be that you can "Take 5" for out-of-combat use: assume the d8 rolled a 4, add your +1 for the level, get 5. And it makes the math pretty easy. 2 charges [and 2 rounds spent] for every 10 hp.

Wands of CMW, on the other hand, are just too expensive at 4,500 gp. That kind of money buys both +1 weapon and armor, or a headband/belt.

Healing Skill needs a buff. Remove the number of charges on a Healer's Kit (talk about minutiae in tracking...), encourage Take 10 out-of-combat (assuming the user has a +10), reduce the Treat Deadly Wounds time from 1 hour to something reasonable, and have it heal more hp. You could start with the Combat Healer Squire features for Dress Wounds but increase the time from one full round action to 1 minute, allow it to heal real HP damage (level * 3 of real HP, instead of just d4 + level in temporary HP), allow it to work 2 or 3 times per day per recipient, and allow it to work on all creatures.

"Dress Wounds (Su): At 2nd level, a combat healer squire can hastily dress a deadly wound for her knight, temporary alleviating his suffering. This ability acts in all ways like using the Heal skill to treat deadly wounds, except the combat healer squire only needs to take a fullround action to use this ability. The hit points healed are temporary, and only last 10 minutes, but they are not lost first like temporary hit points. A combat healer squire can only use this ability on her knight, not other creatures. A knight cannot benefit from this ability more than once per day, and cannot be treated for deadly wounds with the Heal skill within 24 hours of being subjected to this ability. This ability replaces divine grace."


Mekkis wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:


What's the defense for CLW wands being well designed then? Why is tracking 50 charges of 1d8+1 good? Does anyone actually enjoy that level of minutia? Especially at higher levels when it could take 10+ rolls to get someone back in fighting shape. Does anyone enjoy rolling and adding up that dice X times in a row while also tracking how many X is? Surely even a very basic step like making the wands heal in flat amounts instead of die rolls would make our lives easier.

I'm sure that one defence is that it is consistent with every other wand. It costs 750 * CL * spell level. It does everything a CL1 Cure Light Wounds does. It has fifty charges. It follows established, in-universe creation rules. It's not some "special cased item" that could instead exist to provide out-of-combat healing.

We can of course make the argument that the math for wands makes some wands more effective than others - but that's the same with scrolls, potions, and staves. Nothing new there. I hope that noone is trying to say that a Wand of Feather Fall or a Wand of Hold Portal should have the same utility as a Wand of Cure Light Wounds.

Captain Morgan wrote:


The arguments people ACTUALLY seem to be having is whether Resonance is a good idea or if this game works better with a consumable HP safety net. But regardless of where you fall on the spectrum for these two questions, the wand itself could surely do with some tweaking.

The argument in this thread is "Why are Wands of CLW a problem". Not "Is Resonance a good idea?"

There are plenty of threads for that.

This thread is a reaction to a developer's claim that Wands of CLW are a problem. We're trying to determine why they would make such a claim, and what the problem is.

See, for me, following the the established rules for item creation/pricing only works as a defense if those rules are themselves well designed. I'm not completely convinced they are. I certainly think they haven't worked out well in the specific case of CLW, but to be fair I guess that could be considered a corner case from a design perspective. The problem being that corner case has become the most commonly purchased wand in the game. If you are gonna make new rules for magic items anyway, I can certainly see why wands would be worth a re-design.

On resonance: there are clearly people who are expressing skepticism in this thread as well, in a variety of ways. I don't know how you can argue they aren't? Maybe you could argue that's an irrelevant tangent? But it seems pretty clearly wrapped up in this conversation because it looks like resonance is the solution devs are applying to the "CLW problem."


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

What I would like to see:

1) A system that has a simple, easy, no tracking out-of-combat healing that is meaningful. This doesn't need to be heal to full, but probably needs to give back somewhere between 25 to 50 percent of a characters HP. (No Resolve Points/Action Point/Healing Surge needed, just happens automatically when you switch from encounter to exploration mode, unless there's extremely extenuating circumstances.

2) An expensive (in time, gp or class ability usages) for topping off above that.

I would not want to use the "short/long" rest distinction for category 1. This healing should be avialable without the party having to debate if they have time for a 10m rest. This is "catching your breath", applying bandages, etc. I could see the baseline free heal as 25% hp with a single successful heal check bumping it to 50% for the party. The fights that barely scratch you, don't matter -- hopefully they've still pulled some resources from the party, but out-of-combat healing is not one that worth tracking at a detailed level every every combat.

The fights that hurt, that you limp out of, those should require some choices. Do you press on when you're in 50-75% of you HP (after the free healing) or do you spend more time and resources. I feel like narratively, those are the times the debate is useful/interesting anyways, so I'm ok introducing that decision point.

Resonance does a good job of balancing the options in section two against each other, assuming there's a reasonable amount of baseline healing for free. The wand of CLW probably stays reasonable on the resonance effieciency usage aspect until level 6-ish, maybe a level earlier for high HP soak tanks.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Reading the recent posts on whether wands are badly designed had me thinking about the math, of course. I might get to that later, but the math is consistent with other Dungeons & Dragons 3rd Edition design. But once I looked at the goals of wand design, I found yet another problem with wands of Cure Light Wounds:


  • Wands of Cure Light Wounds highlight that Pathfinder wands do not work like wands from fiction and folklore. Pathfinder wands have limited charges; folklore wands do not.

TVtropes is good as summarizing folklore, so let's quote it.

TVtropes, Magic Wand page wrote:
The Magic Wand is a unique weapon in that unlike swords, bows or guns, this weapon is generally not for use in physical combat, but is instead a purely magical weapon. In general, a Magic Wand is any device that enhances magic for producing spells, or aid in combat, or—less frequently—enables the use of magic in the first place. Circe used a Magic Wand to convert Odysseus's men to swine, thus making this one Older Than Feudalism.

The reason wands do not provoke, despite being gestured with like a somatic component of a spell, is that wands are acknowledged as a wizard's offensive weapon. They channel the wizard's power for better speed and control, necessary for a civilized attack. Or the wizard waves it like a conductor's baton to direct a continuing spell, as with Merlin washing dishes magically in Disney's The Sword In The Stone.

In some stories, the wand is a focus for the wizard's own power. In other stories, an ordinary person finds a wand and gains magic power from it. A wand has limited charges in none of those stories.

When using most wands in Pathfinder, 50 charges can seem unlimited. A wand wielder can use it every turn during a four-round combat without worry. If the wand were so low on charges that it might run out during a dungeon delve, then the character would bring a spare. The exception is the wand of Cure Light Wounds. Since it is used between encounters, and the PCs bought the cheap low-level version that does little healing per spell, they use up all the charges. That breaks the illusion that the wand is unlimited.

Imagine that wands in the game worked like wands from folklore. I imagine it as:

1) A wand is a thin baton that focuses the casting of spells. A spellcaster gesturing with a wand in one hand can ignore the somatic and material (if cost is 1gp or less) components of a spell she is casting. Casting a spell with a wand does not provoke attacks of opportunity.

2) A spellcaster automatically succeeds at any concentration check for the spell cast with a wand, and a duration of concentration is effortlessly maintained as long as the wand is still in hand. If the wand is used to cast another spell, it no longer maintains concentration for the previous spell.

3) All wands are inscribed with a spell of 4th level or lower. A spellcaster with the wand in hand can make a Use Magic Device check, DC 20, to cast the wand's inscribed spell. If the incribed spell is on the caster's spell list and she can cast spells of that level, then the Use Magic Device check automatically succeeds. A successful inscribed casting requires consuming a prepared spell or spell slot of the appropriate level. The caster level of the inscribed spell is the wielder's caster level for the spell slot consumed. An inscribed cantrip does not consume spells or spell slots. Any character, spellcaster or not, can attempt to use a cantrip wand this way. Metamagic can be applied to an inscribed spell, but it changes the level as usual.

4) A wand's price depends on the level of the spell inscribed on it: 1,000 gp (0th), 2,000 gp (1st), 5,000 gp (2nd), 10,000 gp (3rd), 17,000 gp (4th).

A lot of wizards would buy a 1,000gp cantrip wand of Light to be able to cast without provoking. A wizard in a party without a cleric might buy a 2,000gp wand of Cure Light Wounds in order to convert her 1st-level spells into healing via Use Magic Device. A sorcerer would buy more wands to be able to cast beyond her spells known.


I like that interpretation of wands a lot. :)


dragonhunterq wrote:
Unless you change the scaling non-combat multiple low level effects will always be more cost-efficient than fewer high level effects.

You were in the Economy thread. I am no fan of the economy that forces non-linear scaling of costs.

Quote:
I know I'm re-stating the blindingly obvious, but I'm really not convinced that a mechanic such as resonance to 'encourage' using higher level items is the right answer.

Honestly I get the feeling that the whole wands thing was a one-off comment that's blown up in the community because of the ubiquity of CLW wands for maintaining party health. For battle gear resonance seems like a handy tool for streamlining limited use items vs batteries with their own charge counts.

So long as health is primarily propped up by the Heal Skill with an infrequent gap left behind for magical healing then we'll be just fine.

With the retooling of the skill system it's my sincere hope the Paizo Devs treat Heal right this edition.


kyrt-ryder wrote:

So long as health is primarily propped up by the Heal Skill with an infrequent gap left behind for magical healing then we'll be just fine.

With the retooling of the skill system it's my sincere hope the Paizo Devs treat Heal right this edition.

What difference does it make?

Any gold spent on healing is by design supposed to be given right back to players - cost is a non issue unless it costs too much as a % of player wealth to keep the item in hand, should you move the scale that far then you get back to 'Must have healer' play.

Any skill check or other method of healing between fights = the exact same thing as a cure light wounds wand. Changing the words or action taken makes no difference - if the end result is 'party is healed to full or almost full after every fight' then the system didn't change anything.

That's the point here - if you get rid of wands that's a real change, but if you just replace it with 'more complex system' that does the same thing that's not a better change - it's just the new boss, same as the old boss.


Ckorik wrote:
Any skill check or other method of healing between fights = the exact same thing as a cure light wounds wand. Changing the words or action taken makes no difference - if the end result is 'party is healed to full or almost full after every fight' then the system didn't change anything.

Good

The problem with wands is one of economy [it's a sizable budget that could be spent on more interesting things] and flavor [many on these boards hate the image of the Happy Stick]

Another thing worth noting is the general value of resonance as a tool to replace 'charges' being screwed up when resonance is spent for healing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Captain Morgan wrote:
it looks like resonance is the solution devs are applying to the "CLW problem."

I have no problem with them trying to fix the problem that I'll be honest, am unsure of how wide spread it is.

The problem is this "solves" the problem in a round about way that nerfs CLW wands. Oh and, every Magic based item at the same time, to say nothing about Alchemist and/or classes that get more than Enough Resoance due to class features if they make them like Alchemist.

The solution seems a clunky fix to a problem that remains to be solved.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ckorik wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:

So long as health is primarily propped up by the Heal Skill with an infrequent gap left behind for magical healing then we'll be just fine.

With the retooling of the skill system it's my sincere hope the Paizo Devs treat Heal right this edition.

What difference does it make?

Any gold spent on healing is by design supposed to be given right back to players - cost is a non issue unless it costs too much as a % of player wealth to keep the item in hand, should you move the scale that far then you get back to 'Must have healer' play.

Any skill check or other method of healing between fights = the exact same thing as a cure light wounds wand. Changing the words or action taken makes no difference - if the end result is 'party is healed to full or almost full after every fight' then the system didn't change anything.

That's the point here - if you get rid of wands that's a real change, but if you just replace it with 'more complex system' that does the same thing that's not a better change - it's just the new boss, same as the old boss.

Let's go back to Mekkis' list of problems with wands of Cure Light Wounds. I removed "Allows healing classes to prepare spells for use in-combat," because thorin001 meant that as a benefit of wands not a problem, and added my most recent observation.


  • (1) A claim that it breaks immersion and balance by ensuring characters start every fight at full health.
  • (2) Lack of opportunity cost due to the low cost of the wands; Allegedly breaks Wealth-by-level due to a lack of expenditure on consumables.
  • (3) Breaks the economy of the internal consistency of the universe
  • (4) A 'learning problem' where new players don't know of their existence
  • (5) They make attrition useless (see claim 1)
  • (6) It's a 'mandatory magic item'. 'Mandatory magic items' are bad.
  • (7) They are used up and discarded frequently, breaking the folklore of wands.

An alternative healing method, such as an effective Heal skill combined with a Healer's Kit, still has problems 1 and 5.

If the healing skill requires investment in the skill to use effectively, then it is an opportunity cost and fixes problem 2.

If the Healer's Kits are mundane items sold at a reasonable cost, then they fit in the mundane economy, fixing problem 3.

Heal skill and Healer's Kits have names that automatically direct new players to them as healing methods. They don't have to piece together, "Hey, if we put Cure Light Wounds on a wand and learn Use Magic Device, we can have all the healing we need!" This fixes problem 4.

Wands and potions of Cure Light Wounds will still exist, though nerfed. The additional Healing skill item makes them less mandatory. And they make the Healing skill less mandatory. This fixes problem 6.

Healer's Kits are expected to be used up and discarded. They do not break the folklore of wands. This fixes problem 7.

kyrt-ryder's preferred solution makes no difference only if problems 1 and 5 were the only problems with wands. But this thread found 5 other problems that it fixes. The benefit of this lengthy thread is letting us judge whether any fix to wands of Cure Light Wounds fixes the actual problems.


Ryan Freire wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Ryan Freire wrote:
They're too cheap for the # of charges a wand gets. 750 for a wand vs 2500 for 50 potions of clw. Thats why they're a problem.
You have just pointed out the problem with potions as a whole. Well done.
The reverse actually, wands are too cheap.

Wands are fairly well-balanced against scrolls, with both item types getting used at their respective price points. Scrolls are more cost effective if you need fewer than 30 charges, wands are more cost effective if you need more than 30 charges, and that's actually a pretty good balance point that keeps both item types generally viable.

Potions are the black sheep of the consumable family, being simply too expensive to consider using when compared against the other two item classes. So yes, I do think the potion is the one that's too expensive and the wand and scroll are about right.

As I've already mentioned, I don't much care if the wand get changed. If Potions and Scrolls move into its former niche, that's fine by me. However, they require resonance too so that doesn't really address the concerns.


MerlinCross wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
it looks like resonance is the solution devs are applying to the "CLW problem."

I have no problem with them trying to fix the problem that I'll be honest, am unsure of how wide spread it is.

The problem is this "solves" the problem in a round about way that nerfs CLW wands. Oh and, every Magic based item at the same time, to say nothing about Alchemist and/or classes that get more than Enough Resoance due to class features if they make them like Alchemist.

The solution seems a clunky fix to a problem that remains to be solved.

I agree that resonance may be the the wrong answer, though I'm withholding some judgment until I see it and magic items in action.

But I thank you for proving my point that lots of us are actually talking about resonance. :)


Captain Morgan wrote:
MerlinCross wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
it looks like resonance is the solution devs are applying to the "CLW problem."

I have no problem with them trying to fix the problem that I'll be honest, am unsure of how wide spread it is.

The problem is this "solves" the problem in a round about way that nerfs CLW wands. Oh and, every Magic based item at the same time, to say nothing about Alchemist and/or classes that get more than Enough Resoance due to class features if they make them like Alchemist.

The solution seems a clunky fix to a problem that remains to be solved.

I agree that resonance may be the the wrong answer, though I'm withholding some judgment until I see it and magic items in action.

But I thank you for proving my point that lots of us are actually talking about resonance. :)

Given its the solution to CLW as people seem to claim a few times in this thread, myself included, I don't see a reason not to bring it up if only to talk about how wands will be moving forward.

As for CLW wand abuse, I really can't comment on it more. I can suggest solutions or changes but those either "don't work", "cheat the players" or "not my job to fix Paizos problem".

And I'd be repeating myself if I explained my own experience with the subject matter. It's different for me and my groups.

People want a change to stop CLW wand spam, fine fine, go for it. But unless you mess with the healing itself, any change is going to hit Wands as a whole. And I like my Barbed Chains Wand and Mending Wand.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I see resonance as a solution to many problems, rather than just the CLW problem. It opens up a lot of design space by unifying a lot of disparate magic item elements, as well as reducing book keeping to a single stat.

Also, I see this as potentially changing the meta of passive versus use items. A wizard might want more useable items and the fighter might want more passive.

While CLW itself might be pretty minor, I don't see resonance as just a bandaid for that. It is try to fix and improve several elements, as well unifying several systems.

I would agree that resonance is bad if it we're just do deal with cure wand spam, but I don't think it is. We just don't have the full scope of what this does.


Albatoonoe wrote:

I see resonance as a solution to many problems, rather than just the CLW problem. It opens up a lot of design space by unifying a lot of disparate magic item elements, as well as reducing book keeping to a single stat.

Also, I see this as potentially changing the meta of passive versus use items. A wizard might want more useable items and the fighter might want more passive.

While CLW itself might be pretty minor, I don't see resonance as just a bandaid for that. It is try to fix and improve several elements, as well unifying several systems.

I would agree that resonance is bad if it we're just do deal with cure wand spam, but I don't think it is. We just don't have the full scope of what this does.

Personally I view it as a square block into a circle hole. But that's for another topic.

As for an actual different solution, I have no idea. The spam seems to be so bloody ingrained that any change is going to be met with disdain from some group. I can suggest ideas but it's not my job to fix the game it seems.


MerlinCross wrote:
Albatoonoe wrote:

I see resonance as a solution to many problems, rather than just the CLW problem. It opens up a lot of design space by unifying a lot of disparate magic item elements, as well as reducing book keeping to a single stat.

Also, I see this as potentially changing the meta of passive versus use items. A wizard might want more useable items and the fighter might want more passive.

While CLW itself might be pretty minor, I don't see resonance as just a bandaid for that. It is try to fix and improve several elements, as well unifying several systems.

I would agree that resonance is bad if it we're just do deal with cure wand spam, but I don't think it is. We just don't have the full scope of what this does.

Personally I view it as a square block into a circle hole. But that's for another topic.

As for an actual different solution, I have no idea. The spam seems to be so bloody ingrained that any change is going to be met with disdain from some group. I can suggest ideas but it's not my job to fix the game it seems.

There have lots of good ideas floated in the most recent page of this thread alone. Make the heal skill relevant. Make your "HP batteries" deal out flat increments rather than roll for it. Tweak high level consumable costs. Resonance is just one of these options, and it has been implied that Paizo may be pursuing more than one of these.


Captain Morgan wrote:
MerlinCross wrote:
Albatoonoe wrote:

I see resonance as a solution to many problems, rather than just the CLW problem. It opens up a lot of design space by unifying a lot of disparate magic item elements, as well as reducing book keeping to a single stat.

Also, I see this as potentially changing the meta of passive versus use items. A wizard might want more useable items and the fighter might want more passive.

While CLW itself might be pretty minor, I don't see resonance as just a bandaid for that. It is try to fix and improve several elements, as well unifying several systems.

I would agree that resonance is bad if it we're just do deal with cure wand spam, but I don't think it is. We just don't have the full scope of what this does.

Personally I view it as a square block into a circle hole. But that's for another topic.

As for an actual different solution, I have no idea. The spam seems to be so bloody ingrained that any change is going to be met with disdain from some group. I can suggest ideas but it's not my job to fix the game it seems.

There have lots of good ideas floated in the most recent page of this thread alone. Make the heal skill relevant. Make your "HP batteries" deal out flat increments rather than roll for it. Tweak high level consumable costs. Resonance is just one of these options, and it has been implied that Paizo may be pursuing more than one of these.

I prefer the heal skill being made more relevant as an option personally. I'm pretty eager to play a chirurgeon alchemist with the skill unlock for heal TBQH.


Captain Morgan wrote:
MerlinCross wrote:
Albatoonoe wrote:

I see resonance as a solution to many problems, rather than just the CLW problem. It opens up a lot of design space by unifying a lot of disparate magic item elements, as well as reducing book keeping to a single stat.

Also, I see this as potentially changing the meta of passive versus use items. A wizard might want more useable items and the fighter might want more passive.

While CLW itself might be pretty minor, I don't see resonance as just a bandaid for that. It is try to fix and improve several elements, as well unifying several systems.

I would agree that resonance is bad if it we're just do deal with cure wand spam, but I don't think it is. We just don't have the full scope of what this does.

Personally I view it as a square block into a circle hole. But that's for another topic.

As for an actual different solution, I have no idea. The spam seems to be so bloody ingrained that any change is going to be met with disdain from some group. I can suggest ideas but it's not my job to fix the game it seems.

There have lots of good ideas floated in the most recent page of this thread alone. Make the heal skill relevant. Make your "HP batteries" deal out flat increments rather than roll for it. Tweak high level consumable costs. Resonance is just one of these options, and it has been implied that Paizo may be pursuing more than one of these.

Tweak the number of charges, give reducing heals on the same target(1d8 - 1d6 - 1d4 - nope), reduce the cost of potions especially healing ones, flat full removal of CLW as a wand option and focus on making a spell list that can be wands(with a little [Wand] tag next to them in the book?), buff ways of healing besides wands...,

or you know, stop expecting full HP all the time. Designer, DM and players.


Yeah, whether the game works better when people can trivially heal between combats is kind of it's own question. Talking about CLW wands really only skirts around it because there are plenty of ways you could get health back to full while yanking wands out of the game entirely.


Captain Morgan wrote:
Yeah, whether the game works better when people can trivially heal between combats is kind of it's own question. Talking about CLW wands really only skirts around it because there are plenty of ways you could get health back to full while yanking wands out of the game entirely.

Making wands arcane only and excising infernal healing from the game works too.


Ryan Freire wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
Yeah, whether the game works better when people can trivially heal between combats is kind of it's own question. Talking about CLW wands really only skirts around it because there are plenty of ways you could get health back to full while yanking wands out of the game entirely.
Making wands arcane only and excising infernal healing from the game works too.

Indeed it does. Lots of better options than CLW wands as they exist right now, really.

And resonance might wind up being fine too.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Albatoonoe wrote:

I see resonance as a solution to many problems, rather than just the CLW problem. It opens up a lot of design space by unifying a lot of disparate magic item elements, as well as reducing book keeping to a single stat.

Also, I see this as potentially changing the meta of passive versus use items. A wizard might want more useable items and the fighter might want more passive.

While CLW itself might be pretty minor, I don't see resonance as just a bandaid for that. It is try to fix and improve several elements, as well unifying several systems.

I would agree that resonance is bad if it we're just do deal with cure wand spam, but I don't think it is. We just don't have the full scope of what this does.

Resonance seems to open up or cause as many problems as it ‘solves’. Really, it seems like it’s going to be somewhat clunky feeling as a mechanic.


Mathmuse wrote:


Let's go back to Mekkis' list of problems with wands of Cure Light Wounds. I removed "Allows healing classes to prepare spells for use in-combat," because thorin001 meant that

Already responded to that - so not going to rehash that - if you want to go backwards you can respond to my previous response and I'll be happy to get into that conversation.


kyrt-ryder wrote:
Ckorik wrote:
Any skill check or other method of healing between fights = the exact same thing as a cure light wounds wand. Changing the words or action taken makes no difference - if the end result is 'party is healed to full or almost full after every fight' then the system didn't change anything.

Good

The problem with wands is one of economy [it's a sizable budget that could be spent on more interesting things] and flavor [many on these boards hate the image of the Happy Stick]

Another thing worth noting is the general value of resonance as a tool to replace 'charges' being screwed up when resonance is spent for healing.

No the budget doesn't matter - because you aren't supposed to reduce the players budget based on wands - you are supposed to compensate them. At the end of the day they should be around wealth by level. If you play the AP's - they already work that way and factor the wands into the equation. If you don't then it's your job to factor it in - but changing the cost of the wands doesn't change that at the end of the day - the cost of healing is meant to be a non-factor.

This means that cost is a non-issue with the current wands. Using it as a basis to change the game is a non-starter, because the game doesn't use it as a basis now.

The other things you argue can be dealt with, without using resonance - which makes the rest of the game over complex for no reason if you take cure light wounds wands out of the consideration.

Finally - what you are arguing is moot. I can spend just a hair more at mid-high levels, and bring hirelings along that only spam cure light wounds wands, and thus don't eat my resonance. We are back to square one.


If it is assumed the happy stick is the problem, there are two ways to fix it:

1) Make it so you can't spam the happy stick
2) Make it so it doesn't help to spam the happy stick

Solving 2 is even better than solving 1.

As to 1, Resonance works pretty well as long as you don't do the hireling with a happy stick trick.

As to 2, making CW spells cap at a % of target max hp solves the problem. You don't keep casting CLW if it only brings your pal up to 20% of max hp. If it is 20% target max hp per level, your happy stick will probably be a 5th Level Wand of Heal, which brings the target up to max hp, so you would never spam it.


Ckorik wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Ckorik wrote:
Any skill check or other method of healing between fights = the exact same thing as a cure light wounds wand. Changing the words or action taken makes no difference - if the end result is 'party is healed to full or almost full after every fight' then the system didn't change anything.

Good

The problem with wands is one of economy [it's a sizable budget that could be spent on more interesting things] and flavor [many on these boards hate the image of the Happy Stick]

Another thing worth noting is the general value of resonance as a tool to replace 'charges' being screwed up when resonance is spent for healing.

No the budget doesn't matter - because you aren't supposed to reduce the players budget based on wands - you are supposed to compensate them. At the end of the day they should be around wealth by level. If you play the AP's - they already work that way and factor the wands into the equation. If you don't then it's your job to factor it in - but changing the cost of the wands doesn't change that at the end of the day - the cost of healing is meant to be a non-factor.

Wrong.

The cost of consumables does come back to you, but it is a chunk of your current wealth by level. Have one Level 1 wand? Your WBL at that moment is 750 gold lower for other purposes. Have 4 of them? Your WBL at that moment is 3000 gold lower for other purposes.

It's huge at low levels and doesn't become trivial until double digits in my experience.

Quote:
This means that cost is a non-issue with the current wands. Using it as a basis to change the game is a non-starter, because the game doesn't use it as a basis now.

I never claimed that was a huge issue.

Frankly even the happy stick was never my real issue, mine is the lack of the Heal Skill being the badass vehicle of restoration and rejuvenation that it deserves to be.

The other things you argue can be dealt with, without using resonance - which makes the rest of the game over complex for no reason if you take cure light wounds wands out of the consideration.

Quote:
Finally - what you are arguing is moot. I can spend just a hair more at mid-high levels, and bring hirelings along that only spam cure light wounds wands, and thus don't eat my resonance. We are back to square one.

Why would you when the party can just bring one person who trained the Heal Skill [ideally to the highest proficiency rank available at that level, but one lower (Trained until 7, Expert until 15 and Master from 15 onward) should be more than good enough] and not have all the dead weight?


totoro wrote:

2) Make it so it doesn't help to spam the happy stick

As to 2, making CW spells cap at a % of target max hp solves the problem. You don't keep casting CLW if it only brings your pal up to 20% of max hp. If it is 20% target max hp per level, your happy stick will probably be a 5th Level Wand of Heal, which brings the target up to max hp, so you would never spam it.

I had an idea along these lines upthread.

My proposition was 'Cure Wounds' restores 50% of the recipient's maximum hit points, but only has its full effect on targets whose level is no more than double the spell level [so Cure Wounds cast from a 2nd level slot won't provide 50% healing on a 5th level character/character with 5 hit dice.]

Perhaps 25% recovery at one spell level too low would be worth including.


kyrt-ryder wrote:
totoro wrote:

2) Make it so it doesn't help to spam the happy stick

As to 2, making CW spells cap at a % of target max hp solves the problem. You don't keep casting CLW if it only brings your pal up to 20% of max hp. If it is 20% target max hp per level, your happy stick will probably be a 5th Level Wand of Heal, which brings the target up to max hp, so you would never spam it.

I had an idea along these lines upthread.

My proposition was 'Cure Wounds' restores 50% of the recipient's maximum hit points, but only has its full effect on targets whose level is no more than double the spell level [so Cure Wounds cast from a 2nd level slot won't provide 50% healing on a 5th level character/character with 5 hit dice.]

Perhaps 25% recovery at one spell level too low would be worth including.

I think that might be worth the complexity. Otherwise you get the 1st Level Cleric hireling trick. The question is whether it would be worthwhile to lug around a bunch of squishy low-level hirelings to get to a % of max hp in the first place, or to use a low level wand for similar effect. At 9th Level, it would be pretty tempting to just get the heal, as opposed to getting bumped up to 20% of your max hp (or whatever value is deemed appropriate for the calculation).


I wasn't suggesting a 1st level spell be capable of healing a 9 hit die target at all. Said Target's realm has surpassed that spell just like how a target's realm can surpass a spell like Sleep or Color Spray.


kyrt-ryder wrote:
I wasn't suggesting a 1st level spell be capable of healing a 9 hit die target at all. Said Target's realm has surpassed that spell just like how a target's realm can surpass a spell like Sleep or Color Spray.

Right on. I guess that's not bad. To my taste, maybe something more like:

Cantrip heals a target up to Ancestry (racial) hp.

Cure Wounds heals a target to Ancestry hp and hp for a first level(Class hp + CON mod). Preparing in a higher slot heals the target up to an additional level (Class hp + CON mod) for each higher level slot + 1d8 + WIS mod. (Multi-class target can choose the best classes first.)

So a heal spell in a 9th Level spell slot would heal Ancestry hp + 9 Class Levels + 9x CON mod (of target) + 9d8 + 9x WIS mod (of caster).

Maybe a little too clunky, but along those lines.


Arssanguinus wrote:
Albatoonoe wrote:

I see resonance as a solution to many problems, rather than just the CLW problem. It opens up a lot of design space by unifying a lot of disparate magic item elements, as well as reducing book keeping to a single stat.

Also, I see this as potentially changing the meta of passive versus use items. A wizard might want more useable items and the fighter might want more passive.

While CLW itself might be pretty minor, I don't see resonance as just a bandaid for that. It is try to fix and improve several elements, as well unifying several systems.

I would agree that resonance is bad if it we're just do deal with cure wand spam, but I don't think it is. We just don't have the full scope of what this does.

Resonance seems to open up or cause as many problems as it ‘solves’. Really, it seems like it’s going to be somewhat clunky feeling as a mechanic.

I feel like we don't have enough information to fully judge that. We seriously can't tell if it will cause problems until we see the whole picture.


Albatoonoe wrote:
Arssanguinus wrote:
Albatoonoe wrote:

I see resonance as a solution to many problems, rather than just the CLW problem. It opens up a lot of design space by unifying a lot of disparate magic item elements, as well as reducing book keeping to a single stat.

Also, I see this as potentially changing the meta of passive versus use items. A wizard might want more useable items and the fighter might want more passive.

While CLW itself might be pretty minor, I don't see resonance as just a bandaid for that. It is try to fix and improve several elements, as well unifying several systems.

I would agree that resonance is bad if it we're just do deal with cure wand spam, but I don't think it is. We just don't have the full scope of what this does.

Resonance seems to open up or cause as many problems as it ‘solves’. Really, it seems like it’s going to be somewhat clunky feeling as a mechanic.
I feel like we don't have enough information to fully judge that. We seriously can't tell if it will cause problems until we see the whole picture.

I'm not sure what you mean by "fully judge," but I think we have enough information to start forming an opinion. I rather like what I am seeing so far, but I had a much different mechanic that was accomplishing a similar function in my house rules, so I am predisposed to like it. I am hopeful it will have similar impact with less book-keeping than my solution.


Ryan Freire wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
Yeah, whether the game works better when people can trivially heal between combats is kind of it's own question. Talking about CLW wands really only skirts around it because there are plenty of ways you could get health back to full while yanking wands out of the game entirely.
Making wands arcane only and excising infernal healing from the game works too.

Only if they also take cure spells away from Bards (and eventually witches, should they show up).

_
glass.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well the heal skill will have expert, master and legendary levels (if that's the right names), so a lot may change depending on what they do. Pushing somebody to invest in the heal skill has a lot less impact than pushing them to be a healer cleric. And several classes are likely to have several skills they can invest in, so one being heal isn't asking so much.
I don't suppose it'll offer much in-combat healing, but stabilising, and immediately after combat should be good. If anyone can create magic items, they might be able to make potions of healing, or minor restoration too.


Albatoonoe wrote:
Arssanguinus wrote:
Albatoonoe wrote:

I see resonance as a solution to many problems, rather than just the CLW problem. It opens up a lot of design space by unifying a lot of disparate magic item elements, as well as reducing book keeping to a single stat.

Also, I see this as potentially changing the meta of passive versus use items. A wizard might want more useable items and the fighter might want more passive.

While CLW itself might be pretty minor, I don't see resonance as just a bandaid for that. It is try to fix and improve several elements, as well unifying several systems.

I would agree that resonance is bad if it we're just do deal with cure wand spam, but I don't think it is. We just don't have the full scope of what this does.

Resonance seems to open up or cause as many problems as it ‘solves’. Really, it seems like it’s going to be somewhat clunky feeling as a mechanic.
I feel like we don't have enough information to fully judge that. We seriously can't tell if it will cause problems until we see the whole picture.

We can tell though that it is 'answering' problems that just don't exist for many of us. That is potentially a problem.

Resonance powering too many disparate elements such that you can't reliably use magic items/use class abilities/heal after a fight is potentially a problem. If it's not a problem, do you really need resonance.

And surely making every character rely on a single stat has to be as bad as that stat being mechanically weak that unless you need it it gets dumped. Potentially a problem.

Sure, until we get to see the big picture we don't know if they are actually problems, but we have more than enough information to be concerned that they are potentially problems.

I have enough information to know that some implementations at least do feel clunky to me (YMMV). But that goes back to my first point - my clunky is someone else's 'so natural why didn't they do this from the start'. PF2 has a lot of disparate player desires to balance.


Well D&D and other games in its lineage have that resource management aspect. Its kind of the balancing crux that it falls on. The fact that you can ignore half of that balancing system by throwing a relatively low amount of cash at it seems like an obvious problem. Hp is suppose to be a resource that you manage just like everything else. It also encourages defense when previously most builds ignored defense to a point for all offense, but when you can heal up after every combat with a 1st level wand you could afford to do that. Its a different design then PF1 but it is more in line with original designs for earlier editions of DnD. when everyone runs out of resonance it might be time to rest for the day.

This also has the added effect of keeping magic items powers reasonably in check. Which granted is not always necessary but it Does curb some abuses like wands and scrolls. Not to mention it might encourage casters to vary tactics a bit as well.

As far as relying on a single stat I think its good to make very stat at least some what important and people have been pushing for charisma to have more mechanical uses for quite a while.

It gives you a choice. Hmm well do I want to up my reflex and ac or do I want to be able to use my ring one more time per day or do I need some more hp?


Albatoonoe wrote:
Arssanguinus wrote:
Albatoonoe wrote:

I see resonance as a solution to many problems, rather than just the CLW problem. It opens up a lot of design space by unifying a lot of disparate magic item elements, as well as reducing book keeping to a single stat.

Also, I see this as potentially changing the meta of passive versus use items. A wizard might want more useable items and the fighter might want more passive.

While CLW itself might be pretty minor, I don't see resonance as just a bandaid for that. It is try to fix and improve several elements, as well unifying several systems.

I would agree that resonance is bad if it we're just do deal with cure wand spam, but I don't think it is. We just don't have the full scope of what this does.

Resonance seems to open up or cause as many problems as it ‘solves’. Really, it seems like it’s going to be somewhat clunky feeling as a mechanic.
I feel like we don't have enough information to fully judge that. We seriously can't tell if it will cause problems until we see the whole picture.

If the basic concept inherently holds the problems? I have trouble seeing how the problems can be overcome without either providing so many points to make the concept pointless or exempting large swathes of items from spending it. If it had been limited to two things; preventing wand spam and replacing magic item slots, sure. But it’s trying to do so much more than those to things and that’s where the problems come.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber
Arssanguinus wrote:
Albatoonoe wrote:
I feel like we don't have enough information to fully judge that. We seriously can't tell if it will cause problems until we see the whole picture.
If the basic concept inherently holds the problems? I have trouble seeing how the problems can be overcome without either providing so many points to make the concept pointless or exempting large swathes of items from spending it. If it had been limited to two things; preventing wand spam and replacing magic item slots, sure. But it’s trying to do so much more than those to things and that’s where the problems come.

If ... that's the crux, isn't it? I'm pretty use you haven't seen the whole system yet and so can't know if it's going to cause the problems you're worrying about.

I think it sounds like an interesting solution to multiple issues. But I haven't seen the whole system and don't know either, we'll see how it plays in August.


kyrt-ryder wrote:
Why would you when the party can just bring one person who trained the Heal Skill [ideally to the highest proficiency rank available at that level, but one lower (Trained until 7, Expert until 15 and Master from 15 onward) should be more than good enough] and not have all the dead weight?

And this only seems to solve the problem of "Immersion" and the paycheck. Your group still then sits down and bandages up after every fight so any fight besides a boss is going to just be laughed at as the team rolls heal check on every person possibly 3 times after each fight. And there's no limit to the check.

But if there is a limit, well I can see players making some heal priority of what to use first.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ampersandrew wrote:
Arssanguinus wrote:
Albatoonoe wrote:
I feel like we don't have enough information to fully judge that. We seriously can't tell if it will cause problems until we see the whole picture.
If the basic concept inherently holds the problems? I have trouble seeing how the problems can be overcome without either providing so many points to make the concept pointless or exempting large swathes of items from spending it. If it had been limited to two things; preventing wand spam and replacing magic item slots, sure. But it’s trying to do so much more than those to things and that’s where the problems come.

If ... that's the crux, isn't it? I'm pretty use you haven't seen the whole system yet and so can't know if it's going to cause the problems you're worrying about.

I think it sounds like an interesting solution to multiple issues. But I haven't seen the whole system and don't know either, we'll see how it plays in August.

If the points they have mentioned so far are true it seems those problems will be very hard to avoid.


MerlinCross wrote:


as the team rolls heal check on every person possibly 3 times after each fight. And there's no limit to the check.

Allowing multiple Heals per battle is illogical and not something I do.

In my own games at this time, the Heal Skill heals approximately 1/2 the patient's maximum hit points and can only be used once for any relevant event [if a party is ambushed before completing the Healing (1 minute per patient, 2 minutes for self treatment) that new encounter is still considered part of the same event for any party members who haven't been completely treated.]

Quote:
But if there is a limit, well I can see players making some heal priority of what to use first.

The only limits I use are once per patient per event and one minute delay for the treatment of each patient.

Quote:
Your group still then sits down and bandages up after every fight so any fight besides a boss is going to just be laughed at

This must be a gaming style disconnect. I LIKE my party to casually enjoy casual encounters without constant stress over every single hit point.

I enjoy a mix of casual encounters and fierce encounters and hate the concept of a 'boss fight.' As a GM I'm not building to some climactic encounter at the end of some dungeon, I'm just roleplaying a dangerous world the PCs live in.

Personally I use a mix of something like 10-20% non-encounters the party can have their way with, 60-80% casual encounters that burn up a few spells but seldom drop anyone lower than a medic can restore, and 10-20% nailbiters that have a decent chance [maybe in the vicinity of 10-20%] of killing a party member.

EDIT: and no those nailbiters are not [usually] some big buildup boss at the end of a bunch of other encounters. They appear wherever they appear by virtue of the story progression and the turning of the world. They might take advantage of a weak moment where the party should be getting worn down and tired, but they're just as likely to be their own thing.


kyrt-ryder wrote:
MerlinCross wrote:
as the team rolls heal check on every person possibly 3 times after each fight. And there's no limit to the check.

Allowing multiple Heals per battle is illogical and not something I do.

In my own games at this time, the Heal Skill heals approximately 1/2 the patient's maximum hit points and can only be used once for any relevant event [if a party is ambushed before completing the Healing (1 minute per patient, 2 minutes for self treatment) that new encounter is still considered part of the same event for any party members who haven't been completely treated.]

House rule, you are apparently doing it wrong. You aren't supposed to fix the game, Paizo is.[sarcasm]

While interesting, I have no actual rules for PE2 Heal check. If it's spammable, it's going to get spammed. That's how the game works according to the forum.

kyrt-ryder wrote:
MerlinCross wrote:
But if there is a limit, well I can see players making some heal priority of what to use first.
The only limits I use are once per patient per event and one minute delay for the treatment of each patient.

That is your limit, not Paizos. The limit the forum cares about is what Paizo will do, not what I or you do.

But what I mean by that is there's going to be a prority of "Do we use Potion, Spell, Heal check, or Wand first, second, third, or fourth?" If your Heal check can get a person up to half their HP, I can see that as being either Last to be used or just before cracking open the spells.

kyrt-ryder wrote:
MerlinCross wrote:
Your group still then sits down and bandages up after every fight so any fight besides a boss is going to just be laughed at

This must be a gaming style disconnect. I LIKE my party to casually enjoy casual encounters without constant stress over every single hit point.

I enjoy a mix of casual encounters and fierce encounters and hate the concept of a 'boss fight.' As a GM I'm not building to some climactic encounter at the end of some dungeon, I'm just roleplaying a dangerous world the PCs live in.

Personally I use a mix of something like 10-20% non-encounters the party can have their way with, 60-80% casual encounters that burn up a few spells but seldom drop anyone lower than a medic can restore, and 10-20% nailbiters that have a decent chance [maybe in the vicinity of 10-20%] of killing a party member.

This IS a gaming style disconnect. I very much low ball my fights between a combo of poor rolls, not wanting to massively kill, and some bad rules reading(Holy zen this creature was supposed to be Large? Oops). So the CLW spam has not actually been a problem.

But the complaint of "It trivalizes all Non boss fights" is something that keeps coming up about CLW wands.


What if all damage healed back after a short rest, unless it was the result of a critical success / failure?

Two damage tracks: Hit Points, and Wounds.

The Heal Skill and Curative Magic operate on a per-Wound basis.

Meaning barring a skilled healer or powerful magic, some wounds take time to heal (while others don't).


MerlinCross wrote:
But the complaint of "It trivalizes all Non boss fights" is something that keeps coming up about CLW wands.

People also complain repeatedly about the existence of classes, the penalties to iterative attacks, wealth by level and vancian magic.


dragonhunterq wrote:
MerlinCross wrote:
But the complaint of "It trivalizes all Non boss fights" is something that keeps coming up about CLW wands.
People also complain repeatedly about the existence of classes

Really?

I see/do a fair share of complaint about the restrictive way classes are created and even more restrictive way some people interpret them and want Paizo to create them, but I don't see a lot of complaint about the existence of classes...

451 to 500 of 743 << first < prev | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Why are Wands of CLW such a problem? All Messageboards