Why are Wands of CLW such a problem?


Prerelease Discussion

601 to 650 of 743 << first < prev | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | next > last >>

Deadmanwalking wrote:


My current game also lacks a Divine caster. The players have two people who can do healing magic, though (a Witch and an Occultist).

This is my current game too, we are doing Hell's Vengeance and we have an Inquisitor and a witch. If we didn't have wands of CLW, we would literally sit around for days waiting on natural healing, or we'd simply refuse to fight something until we were ready. We wouldn't be as cautious if we had a cleric in the party.

We played Reign of Winter with a Druid and a Ranger as the only divine casters, and had the ranger and druid not had those wands, we'd have never survived.

Liberty's Edge

Corrik wrote:
What is clearly a flaw about it? That you don't like it? Because the developers chose to keep the resetting rules from previous editions. They chose to make automatic resetting negative energy devices a thing in their setting.

It's clearly a flaw because it makes the world as presented not make sense. When the rules make the setting fail to function in a coherent manner, that is a failed rule. A mistake.

Corrik wrote:
In real life, you don't need a certain Intelligence score. And IQs are in no way equivalent to how Int scores are presented. You need education and training. Not every doctor, engineer, researcher has a 160+ IQ. In fact, you'd find that the majority of them have average or near average IQs and merely applied themselves and received the necessary training. You have to have a fairly low IQ to not be able to perform a task given enough time and training. Pointing to a group of people who lack training at a task does not provide any evidence that they can't perform a task. Simply that they don't know how, which is where the education comes in. So yeah, pointing at Int scores and then trying to say you can increase your base intelligence in the real world is not an argument that holds weight. Because you can increase your knowledge and training.

This is all basically true. And Pathfinder models this pretty well with skills being able to increase far past where Ability modifier could take them, with things like Skill Focus able to get them pretty high even if the Ability is mediocre at best.

But that actually just goes to prove my point: Being a Wizard doesn't work like that. It is definitionally and wholly restricted by your native Intelligence score. Period.

Corrik wrote:
So I'm going to need another argument for not being able to mass produce Wizards. Because a lot of false assumption and mixed comparisons with the real world is not convincing.

Uh...what false comparison? My whole point was that magic, by the rules, was unlike any skill in the real world in that inherently required a specific degree of native ability to do anything at all with it.

Corrik wrote:
Especially from someone who claims to view the rules as physics.

Actually, I never claimed this. You claimed this about me. I said I preferred when rules in a game like Pathfinder were the physics but that this was not always possible.

Corrik wrote:
Which, yes, do say you can pick your stats and level up by going in to the woods. Because that's the physics of the world remember?

No, they don't. They say the player can pick. There's absolutely nothing saying the character picks in-universe, and indeed rather definitive evidence they do not. People do not decide to be humans or elves in-universe, and they likewise do not decide where their ability scores go.

And the XP rules have actually explicitly been stated to not apply to anyone but PCs. So that doesn't really hold water either.

Corrik wrote:
And the permanent nature of magic items means we don't need a bunch of level 17 wizards. In reality, we only need one to have wanted to do any of this in the last few thousand years.

I actually addressed this bit: Teleport Circles are super easy to destroy compared to how hard they are to create.

Corrik wrote:
Any village with a map typically does. And again, most of them do not list a school. Having one example of a village with a school does little to serve as an example that there is a wide spread education system.

Examples? Please, by all means show a map in a relatively civilized country that lacks a school.

Corrik wrote:
And once more, these are all still off handed examples. The list of things you can do go on and on and on and on. The people with the power to do this exist, and many of them have existed for some time. I mean hell, if Baba Yaga got a bug up her ass she could probably turn the setting in to the Tippyverse on her own. I also have to say,

Baba Yaga probably could, yes. She has no reason to do so and every reason not to, so this is hardly an issue with the universe's verisimilitude that she hasn't. And Baba Yaga is the most powerful thing we've seen stats for in many ways.

Heck, maybe she kills anyone who tries to do this, that'd be pretty in-character for her.

Corrik wrote:
I really don't believe you view the rules as physics as you claim.

Once again, I never claimed this. Stop saying I did.

Liberty's Edge

Alvah wrote:

This is my current game too, we are doing Hell's Vengeance and we have an Inquisitor and a witch. If we didn't have wands of CLW, we would literally sit around for days waiting on natural healing, or we'd simply refuse to fight something until we were ready. We wouldn't be as cautious if we had a cleric in the party.

We played Reign of Winter with a Druid and a Ranger as the only divine casters, and had the ranger and druid not had those wands, we'd have never survived.

Actually, the Witch is sort of an absurdly good healer with Healing Patron, the Vellemancer Archetype (which allows for Contingency on Hexes, basically) and as of 10th level, both the Healing and Major Healing Hexes.

But yeah, removing Wands of CLW from PF1 would have issues. The evidence is that this may be far less true in PF2, so let's see how it works.


Quote:
It's clearly a flaw because it makes the world as presented not make sense. When the rules make the setting fail to function in a coherent manner, that is a failed rule. A mistake.

Well then you have a real problem on your hands, because the rules don't combine together to form a coherent setting at all. Mind pointing to the rules that cover how to breath and poop?

Quote:

This is all basically true. And Pathfinder models this pretty well with skills being able to increase far past where Ability modifier could take them, with things like Skill Focus able to get them pretty high even if the Ability is mediocre at best.

But that actually just goes to prove my point: Being a Wizard doesn't work like that. It is definitionally and wholly restricted by your native Intelligence score. Period.

And thankfully we only need the human stat bonus to get things started. Which the NPCs can choose by focusing on studies instead of physical labor. Gets even better when they fill out their stat array. Which, yes, they can do. Fighters would be just as restricted as Wizards by your logic, as people only have the STR score they are born with. Clearly that is not the case. Unless I'm to be lead to believe that all those NPCs have stat arrays that work for their class is simply a coincidence? Because I don't.

But question for you, if what you say is true, how do you explain Starfinder? That's the Pathfinder setting 4000+ years in to the future. Spell casters are far more common and magic items are mass produced. In fact, essentially every technological item has minor magical components. So if magic items can't be mass produced, how are they doing it?

Quote:
Uh...what false comparison? My whole point was that magic, by the rules, was unlike any skill in the real world in that inherently required a specific degree of native ability to do anything at all with it.

No, magic is a learned skill, which is why it's taught in schools. And stat arrays are representative of people's abilities, can be increased, can be picked, and can be overcome with headbands.

Quote:
Actually, I never claimed this. You claimed this about me. I said I preferred when rules in a game like Pathfinder were the physics but that this was not always possible.

No, you did claim to be in the camp that views the rules as physics. This is a binary stance, the rules either are or are not the physics of the setting.

Quote:
I actually addressed this bit: Teleport Circles are super easy to destroy compared to how hard they are to create.

And I addressed that bit, because that's true of essentially all public transportation. That 10 billion high speed rail doesn't have force fields. Cities are very easy for an 8th level caster to destroy but they keep building those.

Quote:
Examples? Please, by all means show a map in a relatively civilized country that lacks a school.

Off the top of my head Phaendar does not have a school. Could you post evidence of anything approaching a public education system?

Quote:

Baba Yaga probably could, yes. She has no reason to do so and every reason not to, so this is hardly an issue with the universe's verisimilitude that she hasn't. And Baba Yaga is the most powerful thing we've seen stats for in many ways.

Heck, maybe she kills anyone who tries to do this, that'd be pretty in-character for her.

I'm glad you admit all of this is possible then, because it hardly relies on Baba Yaga to do it. Certainly it doesn't rely on mythic rules, but they do trivialize it.

Liberty's Edge

Corrik wrote:
Well then you have a real problem on your hands, because the rules don't combine together to form a coherent setting at all. Mind pointing to the rules that cover how to breath and poop?

The breathing rules exist in the suffocation rules, and no, I don't think rules for pooping are necessary. The game lacking a rule for something hardly means it doesn't happen though. Nor does it need to.

Corrik wrote:
And thankfully we only need the human stat bonus to get things started. Which the NPCs can choose by focusing on studies instead of physical labor. Gets even better when they fill out their stat array. Which, yes, they can do. Fighters would be just as restricted as Wizards by your logic, as people only have the STR score they are born with.

Yep. That's substantially correct. Though not 'born with' precisely, more 'have the potential for'.

Corrik wrote:
Clearly that is not the case. Unless I'm to be lead to believe that all those NPCs have stat arrays that work for their class is simply a coincidence? Because I don't.

People go into professions that their natural abilities incline them to. This is true in the real world, and certainly in the game. It's not that deciding 'I'm gonna be a Fighter!' suddenly gives you high Strength, its that high strength people will often go into a field where that is useful...like fighting.

Corrik wrote:
But question for you, if what you say is true, how do you explain Starfinder? That's the Pathfinder setting 4000+ years in to the future. Spell casters are far more common and magic items are mass produced. In fact, essentially every technological item has minor magical components. So if magic items can't be mass produced, how are they doing it?

Basically? By cheating. Most items are primarily technological, with limited magical components, which makes this much more workable.

Corrik wrote:
No, magic is a learned skill, which is why it's taught in schools.

It is indeed, but unlike other skills, it's one with an obligatory minimum requirement in a way no real world skill has.

Corrik wrote:
And stat arrays are representative of people's abilities, can be increased, can be picked, and can be overcome with headbands.

They can't be meaningfully increased in most circumstances without items. Which are too expensive to be logistically supportable most times.

And no, the people in question do not get to pick their stat array. No rule even implies that as an in-universe thing and several things explicitly contradict it.

Corrik wrote:
No, you did claim to be in the camp that views the rules as physics.

Not precisely. Let's quote that and I'll bold some things for clarity:

Deadmanwalking wrote:
DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:
The rules that govern the game do not have to govern all of the fantasy reality they live in. They are game rules, not physics, whatever is not happening as a tactical challenge at the table, can be handled by GM decision.

Some people prefer this to be the case. Some other people prefer that the rules do more or less accurately reflect the 'laws of physics' of the world, not necessarily with total accuracy but with enough that the implications of them are substantially correct.

I don't see any reason that the people in the latter category (which I admittedly tend towards personally) can't be catered to a little as long as it doesn't interfere with actual game play.

Nowhere in there do I say that I think all rules are invariably the physics of the game in all situations, no exceptions. And yet that's the position you keep ascribing to me. Please stop doing so.

Corrik wrote:
This is a binary stance, the rules either are or are not the physics of the setting.

No, it isn't.

One can easily acknowledge that, for example, the character creation rules (which explicitly do not apply to NPCs, just by the way) are a matter of narrative convenience while thinking that, say, the combat rules are more like the physics of the game world.

That's a possible and reasonable position. And one I hold, for that matter.

Corrik wrote:
And I addressed that bit, because that's true of essentially all public transportation. That 10 billion high speed rail doesn't have force fields. Cities are very easy for an 8th level caster to destroy but they keep building those.

First, how does an 8th level caster destroy a city with 8th level people in it? Please explain.

Second, my point is that yes, infrastructure can be destroyed, but it can be recreated, too. By any architect. Teleport Circle networks created 100 years ago by a guy who's dead now cannot be recreated as easily, which is where your argument involving 'but they've had thousands of years' runs into issues. There would need to be someone around now to maintain the network, or it would've been lost over time.

Corrik wrote:
Off the top of my head Phaendar does not have a school.

I see a whole 4 labeled buildings there out of 40 or so. Where is it specified what the other 30+ are? Also, I'm perfectly willing to believe a 40 building village may be too small for a dedicated school, I'm just saying that's the minority, and they probably send their children to school somewhere (is there a temple? Maybe the children learn stuff there).

Corrik wrote:
Could you post evidence of anything approaching a public education system?

It doesn't need to be public to be widespread.

Corrik wrote:
I'm glad you admit all of this is possible then, because it hardly relies on Baba Yaga to do it. Certainly it doesn't rely on mythic rules, but they do trivialize it.

A 20th level Wizard with no opposition and unlimited resources and unlimited time can do basically anything. Most 20th level Wizards lack all three of those things. Indeed, I'd be inclined to say all of them lack at least one of those, and most lack all three (even Baba Yaga lacks the first, which might well keep her from doing this).


I'm not even going to bother with this discussion anymore, but if you argue humans can choose what stat they have through training, then you also have to answer why all the other races don't have that ability.


Quote:
The breathing rules exist in the suffocation rules, and no, I don't think rules for pooping are necessary. The game lacking a rule for something hardly means it doesn't happen though. Nor does it need to.

No, the rules for what happens when you don't breath are in the suffocation rules. Please point to the rule which describes the breathing mechanism. How often it needs to be done, how it is done, which gases are needed? If you don't think the rules need to cover pooping, then what physics are involved with pooping?

Quote:
Yep. That's substantially correct. Though not 'born with' precisely, more 'have the potential for'.

Then when and how do they get their stats?

Quote:
People go into professions that their natural abilities incline them to. This is true in the real world, and certainly in the game. It's not that deciding 'I'm gonna be a Fighter!' suddenly gives you high Strength, its that high strength people will often go into a field where that is useful...like fighting.

No, people can go in to professions that their natural abilities incline them to. They can also go in to professions that they are not inclined to. But with your system, they can literally only go in to a profession that matches their stat array.

Quote:
Nowhere in there do I say that I think all rules are invariably the physics of the game in all situations, no exceptions. And yet that's the position you keep ascribing to me. Please stop doing so.

You don't say it but that is, in fact, your stance. The rules are or are not the physics. They represent the workings of the world or they are an abstraction for gameplay. There is not distinction between some rules being "real" and others not, no matter how much you want to claim that the rules you like or think make sense are physics and those you don't aren't.

Quote:

No, it isn't.

One can easily acknowledge that, for example, the character creation rules (which explicitly do not apply to NPCs, just by the way) are a matter of narrative convenience while thinking that, say, the combat rules are more like the physics of the game world.

That's a possible and reasonable position. And one I hold, for that matter.

Yes, it is. The rules represent the physics or they do not. Or you can point to me where the game draws a definition between rules for narrative convenience and rules that are physics?

Quote:
Basically? By cheating. Most items are primarily technological, with limited magical components, which makes this much more workable.

Ohhh so if it can be done then it's cheating is it? Because the stance at hand was that it simply wasn't possible to mass produce magic items. Full blown magic items are also mass produced by the way, so that goal post hasn't moved.

Quote:
First, how does an 8th level caster destroy a city with 8th level people in it? Please explain.

Ohh, so now there are multiple casters with 8th level spells are there? How convenient for you. But with your basic shadow or weight apocalypse. Exponential growth for the win.

Quote:

They can't be meaningfully increased in most circumstances without items. Which are too expensive to be logistically supportable most times.

And no, the people in question do not get to pick their stat array. No rule even implies that as an in-universe thing and several things explicitly contradict it.

The fact that most NPCs have stat arrays that match their class is a very strong implication that characters can influence their stats. And a +4 headband is measly 8k to make. A magic crafters guild could easily produce those. Especially if they rent those out to their workers.

Quote:
I see a whole 4 labeled buildings there out of 40 or so. Where is it specified what the other 30+ are? Also, I'm perfectly willing to believe a 40 building village may be too small for a dedicated school, I'm just saying that's the minority, and they probably send their children to school somewhere (is there a temple? Maybe the children learn stuff there).

Not a school, or it would have been labeled as such. But there is your map, no school, as asked for.

Quote:
It doesn't need to be public to be widespread.

It does to be widespread to the levels I'm talking about, and you claimed the Inner Sea already had. So please, move the goal post back to where it was and provide evidence of something approaching a public education system.

Quote:
A 20th level Wizard with no opposition and unlimited resources and unlimited time can do basically anything. Most 20th level Wizards lack all three of those things. Indeed, I'd be inclined to say all of them lack at least one of those, and most lack all three (even Baba Yaga lacks the first, which might well keep her from doing this).

A 20th Wizard might have no opposition, but they can easily effectively get unlimited resources and time for things. They can certainly lay the foundation for things to build up.

Liberty's Edge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Okay, I'm done. I've got stuff to do today, we're not going to agree, and I'm not interested in continuing a discussion with someone who continues to misrepresent my position or tells me they know what that position is better than I do.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

So yeah.

I think the CLW wand distorts the game and I'm looking forward to seeing more and varied healing options with tighter limits.


Corrik wrote:

The rules represent the physics or they do not. Or you can point to me where the game draws a definition between rules for narrative convenience and rules that are physics?

Lets start with the 6-second round vs falling damage. In the time it takes one person to fall 500 ft, 100 people can pass a rock around a circle.

Corrik wrote:

The fact that most NPCs have stat arrays that match their class is a very strong implication that characters can influence their stats.

There is literally a NPC in Hell's Rebels that wanted to be a cleric, but he didn't have enough Wis for it (10) so he became a fighter instead. And this was after a Wis boost, if you check his stats.

Corrik wrote:

Ohh, so now there are multiple casters with 8th level spells are there? How convenient for you. But with your basic shadow or weight apocalypse. Exponential growth for the win.

Please get rid of the term "spell levels" in 2E, thanks.

Corrik wrote:
Not a school, or it would have been labeled as such. But there is your map, no school, as asked for.

By that logic, Korvosa doesn't have half the temples that it's explicitly noted as having.


Quote:

Okay, I'm done. I've got stuff to do today, we're not going to agree, and I'm not interested in continuing a discussion with someone who continues to misrepresent my position or tells me they know what that position is better than I do.

We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.

Bye Felicia.

Quote:
Lets start with the 6-second round vs falling damage. In the time it takes one person to fall 500 ft, 100 people can pass a rock around a circle.

Are you implying that the Peasant Railgun isn't accurate to the presented physics of the setting?

Quote:
There is literally a NPC in Hell's Rebels that wanted to be a cleric, but he didn't have enough Wis for it (10) so he became a fighter instead. And this was after a Wis boost, if you check his stats.

Okay, that's one. Luckily I stated most and not all huh? Now if the majority of the NPCs were similarly presented, that would certainly have implications for stat arrays. Or if we saw more NPCs that had terrible stats for their class.

Divine stuff should follow similar concepts because people learn to become more devout and powerful clerics at temples. However, since that is the realms of the gods it is difficult to theory craft that. It should be noted that in Starfinder, magic which would be considered Divine has been detached from the gods. While they still grant magic, Mystics can get their power from the empty void of space and numerous other connections.

Quote:
Please get rid of the term "spell levels" in 2E, thanks.

I'd be cool with that, it can certainly get confusing. Especially for new players.

Quote:
By that logic, Korvosa doesn't have half the temples that it's explicitly noted as having.

Fair point, the map doesn't list a school and neither does any of the text blocks for the town.


Corrik wrote:


Quote:
Lets start with the 6-second round vs falling damage. In the time it takes one person to fall 500 ft, 100 people can pass a rock around a circle.
Are you implying that the Peasant Railgun isn't accurate to the presented physics of the setting?

I'm pretty sure that's an obvious rule that's narrative convenience, even without including the railgun..

Quote:


Quote:
There is literally a NPC in Hell's Rebels that wanted to be a cleric, but he didn't have enough Wis for it (10) so he became a fighter instead. And this was after a Wis boost, if you check his stats.

Okay, that's one. Luckily I stated most and not all huh? Now if the majority of the NPCs were similarly presented, that would certainly have implications for stat arrays. Or if we saw more NPCs that had terrible stats for their class.

Divine stuff should follow similar concepts because people learn to become more devout and powerful clerics at temples. However, since that is the realms of the gods it is difficult to theory craft that. It should be noted that in Starfinder, magic which would be considered Divine has been detached from the gods. While they still grant magic, Mystics can get their power from the empty void of space and numerous other connections.

Well, let's see what I can find glancing through Hell's Rebels.

The level 17 witch only has 20 Int with a +2 headband. Breaking down her stats...I get 10/12/14/16/10/14. With stats like that, it's guaranteed she put two of her level up points into Str/Wis, one into Int, and one into Con/Cha. That's really a weird setup for someone who should be very heavily into Int by class.
There's the halfling brawler/rogue who probably wasn't planning brawler, given that 13 Int.
Then there's the human polearm fighter who put her +2 in that 8 Dex or Int, while also having 13 Cha.
The half-elf gunslinger with 14 Con and Cha, meaning the +2 was in there.
The set of rangers with Wis 10.
There's actually quite a few more examples, but they're less questionable than the ones I listed.

Interesting note that I found as I'm going through: Cheliax has no need of a communication system. Their message system is to send a devil to greater teleport in and hand off the message before returning. Alternately, they send a messenger with boots of teleportation.

Quote:
Quote:
Please get rid of the term "spell levels" in 2E, thanks.
I'd be cool with that, it can certainly get confusing. Especially for new players.

Well, the main reason I was bringing it up was because you two were getting confused between casters with 8th-level spells and people of level 8 - often in the same sentence. And I'm pretty sure neither of you can be considered a 'new player'.

Quote:
Quote:
By that logic, Korvosa doesn't have half the temples that it's explicitly noted as having.
Fair point, the map doesn't list a school and neither does any of the text blocks for the town.

Taking a closer look at Phaendar specifically, my personal bet would be that it doesn't have a school. Lore of -2 and impoverished suggests its unlikely, while insular also suggests that any schooling there is probably done informally by members of the community.

Liberty's Edge

Cyouni wrote:
Well, the main reason I was bringing it up was because you two were getting confused between casters with 8th-level spells and people of level 8 - often in the same sentence. And I'm pretty sure neither of you can be considered a 'new player'.

For clarity, I started references to 8th level with the minimum level to destroy a Teleport Circle with Dispel Magic (which it is, they need to roll a 20, but it's doable with an 8th level Sorcerers and a bit of luck, or a couple of 8th level Sorcerers and their luck not being terrible). I meant an 8th level character. All my references were to that and I was never confused regarding what I meant, nor did Corrik ever say anything about spell levels (he said '8th level caster', which sure sounds like a description of their level to me rather than what spells they can manage), though looking back that does seem to be what he meant.

Just to be clear on what I meant there.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm going to be super-weird and make the argument that healing up fully after a fight is a good thing.

Pathfinder is a game of resource utilization. Fully healing up after an encounter removes the resource utilization aspect of HP. However, in my experience, I've found that "low HP totals without any ability to recover them" are more likely to cause adventurer workdays than running low on rest-based abilities, because most people consider "being low on rest-based abilities" less of a risk of character death (which can mean character loss, or at least the loss of X loot, where X is the cost of your favorite death recovery spell).

And more to the point, allowing the players to fully heal after a fight (by using resources to do so) lowers the risk of unintentional party wipe and puts less stress on the GM to fully monitor player hp totals to avoid unintentional death/permadeath.

I know 2E is transitioning towards a more "death-safe" system, similar to 5e, and I'm guessing that's a big part of why "HP as a resource" is suddenly super important again. I'm betting the idea is that risk-averse players who are more likely to call for a long/daily/whatever rest period when low on hp will be less likely to if the risk of permanent death (or at least death recovery prices) is generally lower. But I don't think that's going to be the end result.

In my opinion, the end result of this shift will not be that players are forced to enter more encounters while low on hp (i.e. have to manage HP as an in-encounter resource). Instead, post-encounter healing will be just as requisite as ever, but more expensive in terms of money and resources (especially since, with a death-safe system, players are encouraged to save healing spells until someone has actively dropped and needs to be picked back up, so single-use and charged healing systems will probably see heavy usage). And because these are now dependent on a daily resource that offensive and defensive abilities are also dependent on, players will be encouraged to Adventurer Workday after a tough encounter just to manage the resources they lost recovering hp from that encounter.

I realize my results may not match the results of others, but if the problem stems from risk-averse play, this does not appear to be a solution.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

As a risk-adverse player I totally agree.

The only thing reducing the availability of healing does for me, is encourage the 15 minute adventuring day.

Now after a tough fight, I will be more likely to retreat and heal up and come back the next day.

At which point the GM can institute counters of adding more enemies (back up) or stronger enemies, both of which result in the same thing happening again. Or the plot moves forward without the heroes saving the day. Which would often result of the end of the campaign by way of the MacGuffin staying in the hands of Lord Evil who summoned the world ending Deus Ex Machina.

None of these is a satisfying conclusion.

You could make the argument that eventually a risk-adverse player will learn to go along with it anyways, or be drug along by the rest of the party, which might be true. But at least for myself, I will hate it the whole way.

I've hated it enough in other games that I just outright quit after I couldn't stand it anymore.

I don't mind having to manage my offensive resources to be able to contribute effectively all day. I don't like having to manage my defensive resources to keep my character alive.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

As a GM it's pretty easy to not let your players just go to sleep every 15 minutes. Either give them deadlines on what's going on. (most adventures have this anyways). Or stop having static monsters that sit around in their room waiting to be defeated.

It's really easy, and most adventure paths give you plenty of wiggle room here. I really wonder what GMs you guys are playing with that let you just sleep off every encounter.

Dark Archive

Yeaaaaah, I've never seen players stick retreating JUST because of lacking resources because usually it wouldn't really make sense. Like, if they leave right before final boss of the dungeon, that just gives final boss chance to escape(and sleeping in dungeon is usually always bad idea)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dire Ursus wrote:

As a GM it's pretty easy to not let your players just go to sleep every 15 minutes. Either give them deadlines on what's going on. (most adventures have this anyways). Or stop having static monsters that sit around in their room waiting to be defeated.

It's really easy, and most adventure paths give you plenty of wiggle room here. I really wonder what GMs you guys are playing with that let you just sleep off every encounter.

That's always the stock solution -- and comes with its own problems. Deadline-heavy story arcs prevent sidequests, any downtime activities that take more than a few minutes, and any story events that rely on long timescales. I make plenty of use of them, but I wouldn't want to be forced into giving every quest a deadline.

"Within dungeon" deadlines such as monsters refilling or bosses escaping are the same -- with the exception that, since bosses tend to be tough encounters, deadlines encourage players to "boss rush" and ignore the trivial side encounters so that they can focus their resources on the boss, before returning to the rest of the dungeon afterward (and possibly after resting). Sure, this in theory could limit their total XP and GP gained from the whole dungeon, but _dying_ limits that even more, and there are always more encounters.

But if that *is* an easy solution, then what is preventing "CLW spam" actually helping? If its "the players aren't having their HP sufficiently ground down before the boss fight", then this isn't solving the issue. They either start the fight with lower HP or lower offensive resources (i.e. spells and resonance, which are both), which is the more risky option, or they try to maximize success by avoiding as many encounters as possible before they hit the boss. And their reward for following option one is more character deaths, more turns spent lying on the ground, and more work for the DM.


wizzardman wrote:
Dire Ursus wrote:

As a GM it's pretty easy to not let your players just go to sleep every 15 minutes. Either give them deadlines on what's going on. (most adventures have this anyways). Or stop having static monsters that sit around in their room waiting to be defeated.

It's really easy, and most adventure paths give you plenty of wiggle room here. I really wonder what GMs you guys are playing with that let you just sleep off every encounter.

That's always the stock solution -- and comes with its own problems. Deadline-heavy story arcs prevent sidequests, any downtime activities that take more than a few minutes, and any story events that rely on long timescales. I make plenty of use of them, but I wouldn't want to be forced into giving every quest a deadline.

"Within dungeon" deadlines such as monsters refilling or bosses escaping are the same -- with the exception that, since bosses tend to be tough encounters, deadlines encourage players to "boss rush" and ignore the trivial side encounters so that they can focus their resources on the boss, before returning to the rest of the dungeon afterward (and possibly after resting). Sure, this in theory could limit their total XP and GP gained from the whole dungeon, but _dying_ limits that even more, and there are always more encounters.

But if that *is* an easy solution, then what is preventing "CLW spam" actually helping? If its "the players aren't having their HP sufficiently ground down before the boss fight", then this isn't solving the issue. They either start the fight with lower HP or lower offensive resources (i.e. spells and resonance, which are both), which is the more risky option, or they try to maximize success by avoiding as many encounters as possible before they hit the boss. And their reward for following option one is more character deaths, more turns spent lying on the ground, and more work for the DM.

Why are you running off to do side quest things in a dungeon, is the question?

The big problem with healing to full without any real cost is that any encounter that doesn't kill at least one character or cause more permanent damage becomes irrelevant, resource-wise. Thus, in order to pose any challenge, every encounter has to be capable of that. It's literally gotten to the point where players at my table refuse to use higher level spells because the encounter isn't going to affect resources in any way.


Cyouni wrote:
wizzardman wrote:
Dire Ursus wrote:

As a GM it's pretty easy to not let your players just go to sleep every 15 minutes. Either give them deadlines on what's going on. (most adventures have this anyways). Or stop having static monsters that sit around in their room waiting to be defeated.

It's really easy, and most adventure paths give you plenty of wiggle room here. I really wonder what GMs you guys are playing with that let you just sleep off every encounter.

That's always the stock solution -- and comes with its own problems. Deadline-heavy story arcs prevent sidequests, any downtime activities that take more than a few minutes, and any story events that rely on long timescales. I make plenty of use of them, but I wouldn't want to be forced into giving every quest a deadline.

"Within dungeon" deadlines such as monsters refilling or bosses escaping are the same -- with the exception that, since bosses tend to be tough encounters, deadlines encourage players to "boss rush" and ignore the trivial side encounters so that they can focus their resources on the boss, before returning to the rest of the dungeon afterward (and possibly after resting). Sure, this in theory could limit their total XP and GP gained from the whole dungeon, but _dying_ limits that even more, and there are always more encounters.

But if that *is* an easy solution, then what is preventing "CLW spam" actually helping? If its "the players aren't having their HP sufficiently ground down before the boss fight", then this isn't solving the issue. They either start the fight with lower HP or lower offensive resources (i.e. spells and resonance, which are both), which is the more risky option, or they try to maximize success by avoiding as many encounters as possible before they hit the boss. And their reward for following option one is more character deaths, more turns spent lying on the ground, and more work for the DM.

Why are you running off to do side quest things in a dungeon, is the question?

The big problem with healing to full without any real cost is that any encounter that doesn't kill at least one character or cause more permanent damage becomes irrelevant, resource-wise. Thus, in order to pose any challenge, every encounter has to be capable of that. It's literally gotten to the point where players at my table refuse to use higher level spells because the encounter isn't going to affect resources in any way.

As an example, though I can't speak for wizzardman.

My group was going through a desert estate when they found a big snake. But it was just chilling in the shade, so they left some food out and went elsewhere. Later on, they see the snake again but it seems to want them to follow it now. This leads to a small mini side quest inside the main quest that helped to show them how evil a certain monster in the area was(And from a DM side, lead them to a weapon that would get around it's DR).

Another time they spent trying to figure out how a corpse had died in the tomb they were in, as it was Recent and no one else was supposed to be here. They gathered up some evidence before heading to the main quest of clearing the tomb but will have some advantages later when asking around.

The side quest doesn't need to be a big thing but if they aren't in a hurry, you can always find a spot for them. Especially if you need to suddenly come up with something on the fly.


Sure, but players are going to be able to take time for small things line those anyways. Those really take only a little more time than a battle, followed by searching the room afterwards.

I generally meant longer things that would become impossible with a implicit deadline, like doing 2 fights and then running away to rest.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cyouni wrote:

Sure, but players are going to be able to take time for small things line those anyways. Those really take only a little more time than a battle, followed by searching the room afterwards.

I generally meant longer things that would become impossible with a implicit deadline, like doing 2 fights and then running away to rest.

True, they didn't have a deadline over their heads, though they kinda do. It's not a "Save the world one" but more a "Hey there's a good time to make money coming up, maybe have all your tomb sites cleared in a week".

I do believe there's a time for laid back exploration and a time for "We need to go stop this NOW".

It's a balancing act between the two. Someone brought it up but as an example, there's several spots in Wrath of the Righteous where falling back is going to result in bad things happening. As a DM you should stress this to the team but at the same time, also keep in mind a general idea of the team's resources. If they are at a spot where they could retreat and the world doesn't end, let them. Shuffle the guards/monsters around, pull up some new ones(I suggest maybe weaker just to make some chaff), and have spell casters ready some buffs/debuffs for the next day. That or have some faceless allies die off to distract the enemy each day only to warn that "Hey this NPC you have made friends with is distracting the enemy for you and seems to be wounded worse and worse each day, maybe hurry up".

But something you have to gauge from each table though, so returning to CLW wands; system spanning fixes might work for some tables but to others or at least for me, it feels like I'm getting penalized for something that never happened in the games I played.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Dire Ursus wrote:

As a GM it's pretty easy to not let your players just go to sleep every 15 minutes. Either give them deadlines on what's going on. (most adventures have this anyways). Or stop having static monsters that sit around in their room waiting to be defeated.

It's really easy, and most adventure paths give you plenty of wiggle room here. I really wonder what GMs you guys are playing with that let you just sleep off every encounter.

As I said, the living dungeon is a semi-reasonable solution but could just results in a repetitive situation.

Player: "That fight was hard, so we leave and rest and come back"
GM : "Tomorrow you find even more enemies, with stronger enemies apparent than appeared before."
Player - after the first tough fight of the new day: "Guess we'll retreat again, we can't take another fight like that."

Eventually the GM either kills the party, or the plot moves along without them resulting in the loss of the campaign.

This is extremely unsatisfying as a player, and I assume also for the GM, unless the GM is a killer GM who likes to win (GMs should have the goal of providing a challenging situation where the players still win).

It's a very hard thing to balance.

Personally, I think it's better for the game to just assume the players will start each fight at full health and plan on HP effectively just being a per fight resource. You can still have fights be plenty challenging even if they aren't obviously risking death going into the fight.

Dark Archive

I think arguing about hypothetical situations is always rather unsatisfying. I mean, unless someone has had situation like that, is there really anyway to prove that could or couldn't happen?

Like, its same thing why I don't really take account the possibility of 15 minute adventuring days when running games, why I should take account something that I've never seen anyone actually do? It's like taking account chance of party just killing every npc when they have never initiated combat on their own <_<


Claxon wrote:
Dire Ursus wrote:

As a GM it's pretty easy to not let your players just go to sleep every 15 minutes. Either give them deadlines on what's going on. (most adventures have this anyways). Or stop having static monsters that sit around in their room waiting to be defeated.

It's really easy, and most adventure paths give you plenty of wiggle room here. I really wonder what GMs you guys are playing with that let you just sleep off every encounter.

As I said, the living dungeon is a semi-reasonable solution but usually just results in a repetitive situation.

Player: "That fight was hard, so we leave and rest and come back"
GM : "Tomorrow you find even more enemies, with stronger enemies apparent than appeared before."
Player - after the first tough fight of the new day: "Guess we'll retreat again, we can't take another fight like that."

Eventually the GM either kills the party, or the plot moves along without them resulting in the loss of the campaign.

This is extremely unsatisfying as a player, and I assume also for the GM, unless the GM is a killer GM who likes to win (GMs should have the goal of providing a challenging situation where the players still win).

I mean you can do living dungeon but I think it takes balancing.

Returning to my earlier example, the team left the estate after killing basically everything in it. The next day they DIDN'T come back to find it refilled with everything they had killed.

No they just found a few more skeletons the big bad evil had lured onto the grounds, 1 looter who they befriended, and were warned about a Fire Elemental(Small) that the boss had also lured in. Big bad had also positioned itself in the small underground tomb where the remaining enemies were(The team had skipped that and cleared the main building).

In total, they went from having to kill about 11 enemies on their first trip, of varying types and CR; to well about 10 enemies but 5 of them were skeletons, the small elemental ran off after a Command spell of some kind was used on it, and 4 of them were already listed to fight anyway in the book.

My players seemed to like this and were convinced the big bad was some kind of Necromancer due to getting new skeletons(It was a nice reveal when the looter explained the BBEG just baited new skeletons into the estate).

This worked for me but the whole 'refill the encounter table' really depends on; where you are, what you're doing, and what's happening.


CorvusMask wrote:

I think arguing about hypothetical situations is always rather unsatisfying. I mean, unless someone has had situation like that, is there really anyway to prove that could or couldn't happen?

Like, its same thing why I don't really take account the possibility of 15 minute adventuring days when running games, why I should take account something that I've never seen anyone actually do? It's like taking account chance of party just killing every npc when they have never initiated combat on their own <_<

To be fair, I was in a Strange Aeons game. We retreated after a bad run in with three Ghouls. Got patched up as best we could, diseases removed as we could and readied ourselves for the next day.

First fight, three more ghouls and two of us just got new instances of the disease we just bloody cured.

That was..., well we as players grumbled about it and had to suck it up and keep going. But it was very unsatisfying to us. Or at least felt bloody cheap. We couldn't double back and rest from this fight because each day we seemed to get sicker and weaker so we had to clear the problem out as fast as we could. But it felt blahg, for lack of a better word.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cyouni wrote:


Why are you running off to do side quest things in a dungeon, is the question?

Dungeons can be big places, with more than one plot to solve. And I included "obvious side rooms" in that.

The snake example MerlinCross provided is pretty relevant for this, actually. What if the snake led the PCs to a series of combat encounters? The players are effectively being encouraged to *avoid* those in order to make sure they can efficiently beat the boss (or prevent their escape).

The problem is present outside of dungeons as well. Take for example WotR.

With as few spoilers as possible, a book of WotR relies heavily on an enforced "time limit" where the players are given X number of days to complete a thing or bad stuff happens. Because that X includes travel time, it pretty much set a limit on what the PCs actually had time to do before completing X -- they didn't have time to finish the crafting they were working on, they couldn't go back and handle other situations (because they wouldn't have time to travel back and forth, etc), and RP moments pretty much closed off because they were too busy moving to chat with NPCs.

While that works great for some areas, my players were actually pretty annoyed by the whole thing; the deadline enforced by the story was set up to prevent them from repeatedly recovering resources, but because they didn't *need* to recover resources, all it did was make it difficult for them to complete the other activities they wanted to do. If they'd had to expend extra resources on healing, and thus had to rest more often, that *could* have upped the tension... but wouldn't have changed the fact that the deadline already prevented them from doing what they wanted, and in fact would have encouraged them to skip the "less necessary but still plot relevant" aspects of that mission and head directly to the top.

...The guy who was crafting all those magic items is still a little pissed about that, because the time limit also kind of invalidated all the work with the Downtime Rules he'd been doing.

Cyouni wrote:


The big problem with healing to full without any real cost is that any encounter that doesn't kill at least one character or cause more permanent damage becomes irrelevant, resource-wise. Thus, in order to pose any challenge, every encounter has to be capable of that. It's literally gotten to the point where players at my table refuse to use higher level spells because the encounter isn't going to affect resources in any way.

Unless your players are *also* running into the adventurer workday (the "1-2 encounters per day then rest" variant) then you're neglecting to account for resource utilization aside from HP.

My argument is mostly that HP is a poor resource to focus the resource management aspect of the game on because it is the resource players are inclined to be most risk-averse towards. Pathfinder has plenty of room for other forms of resource management, and in fact already makes use of them, ranging from magic items and abilities that rely on a limited operation time [like Rage], to spells and spell slots, to... well, the new Resonance mechanic is honestly a good example. Forcing the players towards limited healing capacity, with health being the one resource most likely to result in overall losses, is not conducive to solving the problem.

Then again, it sounds like we're arguing from different situations. I haven't had an issues with players not using upper-tier resources in a long time; leaving aside my expectations of my players teamwork and character building skills, my group in general (regardless of who is DMing) tends to run either several moderate to hard encounters per in-game day (sometimes ten or more, depending on level and buffing strat), or a small number of moderate encounters in a situation where the players do not have time to buff or prep. As a result, I view healing between encounters as an asset, as it encourages players to keep going as long as they generally have combat resources available. Basing after-combat healing on a less-renewable resource like resonance will only discourage that.

It sounds like the issue you're running into is that your players view any scenario where they aren't risking death *as* trivial, and aren't using enough of their lower-tier resources to be forced to use higher-tier ones. And as such, I can see where you're coming from. However, I think the general idea in 2E has already been to increase resource consumption; as such, I think you're already going to see more of your players using their high level spells on "trivial" encounters, regardless of whether or not they're spamming CLW.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

One of the things a designer needs to look at in game design, is if a certain element that should be an option, becomes something that isn't really an option anymore. So if something becomes so ubiquitous that it effects how game design, adventure design, and encounter design happens, then that ubiquitous thing needs rethinking on how it interacts with the game rules.

In this case, a wand of cure light wounds has become that ubiquitous item. If in any particular adventure (AP, Module, PFS scenario, or GM homemade crafted), accommodations need to be made for the fact that every character will become fully healed between encounters simply because of the existence of one item, then something needs to happen.

1) Remove the item from the game: This feels punitive. Without creating something to fill that design space, just taking an item away because its too ubiquitous feels wrong.

2A) Redesign that design space so that it works fundamentally different. Make it so that the way the healing system works or the way the magic items work, work differently in that there isn't the option anymore for the item to become that ubiquitous that it changes the very nature that encounters are designed to stand up to the fact that characters will always be fully healed up before each encounter by using essentially an unlimited resource for insignificant cost.

2B) Change the healing system so that everyone just automatically heals up between encounters. This would be the easiest way to do so to maintain what is essentially happening right now anyways. But for me, and I'm sure some others, it would break verisimilitude and immersion to just say, "Yeah, you walked into another room, so you are just fully healed now."

Another thing to consider, is if healing is going to happen automatically, for all intents and purposes, between every encounter, then stop spending actual time at the table resolving that. In this case, I think the resonance system stops wasting time rolling multiple d8's, finding more wands of cure light wounds to purchase, and generally using up time that could be used further exploring the world, meeting NPCs, and collecting interesting loot.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I like how some GMs feel like they can press players to do anything - you push too hard and you don't have a game at all.

I'm hurt, I'm retreating. Some of the suggested 'solutions' just mean I retreat quicker or more regularly.

I have played too many games where players have pushed on injured (or even forgotten to heal) and it leads to a spiral of death. It is not fun.


Honestly, Tallow, I'm not as certain that "item that allows players to heal to full between encounters in exchange for a regular monetary cost" becoming ubiquitous is that bad.

Nor do I necessarily agree that healing between encounters changes the nature of how the game is designed -- when was the last time "current player status" affected the CR or XP systems in any way more than a fiat modification provided by the DM?

But if you want to simplify healing out of combat so it doesn't take up time, why not skip resonance entirely and add a spell or magic item that provides fast healing 1 for 10 minutes? Maybe priced at a point where PCs are unlikely to purchase it before level 5.

Sure, everyone is going to take it, and that's probably a little boring (unless you provide some interesting variants or side abilities), but we're never going to see a system where there isn't a 'Most Optimal' option somewhere, and at least this way the players sing fewer campfire songs.

Hell, I'd just say "fine, I'll do that for my games", but I'd like to still be able to go to Pathfinder Society games with my group. And I can only eat so many smores in one sitting.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
dragonhunterq wrote:

I like how some GMs feel like they can press players to do anything - you push too hard and you don't have a game at all.

I'm hurt, I'm retreating. Some of the suggested 'solutions' just mean I retreat quicker or more regularly.

I have played too many games where players have pushed on injured (or even forgotten to heal) and it leads to a spiral of death. It is not fun.

Seriously. If I am made to constantly feel like I'm playing an adventure that's too high level for my character, I'm not going to feel guilty about roleplaying it out.

"We're nearly dead, but the clock is ticking and we have no means to heal. Guess the king should have hired someone better. Who wants to come with me to kill rats in the tavern's basement?"

"I've been stabbed in the stomach twice and I'm all out of healing. Dollars to doughnuts there's another dude in the next room dreaming about stabbing a guy in the stomach. You know what? I gave it a shot, I'm becoming a teacher."


Meanwhile, in Carrion Crown my party of kineticist, bard, daring champion cavalier, and spiritualist cleared through Renchurch only resting once. We were somewhere around 30-40k XP above level 14 before we rested, and had been level 13 that whole time.

Turns out when you don't care about HP damage, you can go for a very long time.


Cyouni wrote:

Meanwhile, in Carrion Crown my party of kineticist, bard, daring champion cavalier, and spiritualist cleared through Renchurch only resting once. We were somewhere around 30-40k XP above level 14 before we rested, and had been level 13 that whole time.

Turns out when you don't care about HP damage, you can go for a very long time.

I mean, yeah, but your party was going to clear through Renchurch anyway, right? Why does it matter whether you clear Renchurch in one continuous sitting or six? Why should health be the limiter that sends the group back to the camp, rather than all of their other resources as a whole?


Because the other resources were unnecessary to consume. What are they going to do, save us HP? Nothing expendable (except one bardic performance round extended with Lingering Performance) was actually used in the vast majority of the fights.

Using the other resources would only make us rest a lot sooner, so why should we use them when they provide us with limited value? Every action use has to be weighed against the wand, and is generally found wanting. There's no point in using a high-level spell, a challenge, or some burn to disable enemies when the only downside to not doing so is that someone takes some more damage. That way, we save resources for fights that actually are going to have a relevant downside.


But you're going to run into the exact same issue *with* the resonance cost on healing. You're not expending anything to complete the combat, so all you're doing is moving the "combat ability" cost onto after-combat healing. And all that's going to do is force you to rest before the final encounter (at best).

It sounds less like after-combat healing is making the game too easy, and more like the encounters you're running into are a waste of your time.


Cyouni wrote:

Because the other resources were unnecessary to consume. What are they going to do, save us HP? Nothing expendable (except one bardic performance round extended with Lingering Performance) was actually used in the vast majority of the fights.

Using the other resources would only make us rest a lot sooner, so why should we use them when they provide us with limited value? Every action use has to be weighed against the wand, and is generally found wanting. There's no point in using a high-level spell, a challenge, or some burn to disable enemies when the only downside to not doing so is that someone takes some more damage. That way, we save resources for fights that actually are going to have a relevant downside.

Yeah see it's thought process like this that lead to the community worshipping the CLW Wand in the first place.

Wizard use your Grease to trip up the enemies!
Wizard: Why? You'll just take 2 more swings of damage if I don't. Meh, worry not, we have 300 castings of CLW anyway.

What still floors me is the people that will insist on rolling all their uses individually so they don't "Overheal" or something.

I'm sorry I'm not trying to say badwrongfun, but how other people play, with bloody spreadsheets instead of character sheets?

Scarab Sages

wizzardman wrote:

Honestly, Tallow, I'm not as certain that "item that allows players to heal to full between encounters in exchange for a regular monetary cost" becoming ubiquitous is that bad.

Nor do I necessarily agree that healing between encounters changes the nature of how the game is designed -- when was the last time "current player status" affected the CR or XP systems in any way more than a fiat modification provided by the DM?

But if you want to simplify healing out of combat so it doesn't take up time, why not skip resonance entirely and add a spell or magic item that provides fast healing 1 for 10 minutes? Maybe priced at a point where PCs are unlikely to purchase it before level 5.

Sure, everyone is going to take it, and that's probably a little boring (unless you provide some interesting variants or side abilities), but we're never going to see a system where there isn't a 'Most Optimal' option somewhere, and at least this way the players sing fewer campfire songs.

Hell, I'd just say "fine, I'll do that for my games", but I'd like to still be able to go to Pathfinder Society games with my group. And I can only eat so many smores in one sitting.

To your first point. I'm not sure that being ubiquitous is bad either. But it is ubiquitous, and the designers have determined they don't like it. Else it wouldn't have been one of the primary reasons they alluded to in coming up with the resonance system.

And they currently are doing game design around that ubiquitous concept. And why APs and Modules aren't really designed around that concept (heck, despite majority of GMs using a 20 point buy and having more than 4 players, they still design these adventures around 15-point buy and 4 players), but PFS scenarios--at least based on my prodigious experience running 350 sessions from Season 0 through Season 8--are becoming more consistently difficult across all encounters and thus the idea that daily resources and healing really don't expire, ever, during a PFS scenario, create more difficult encounters and thus scenarios. So there is an aspect of game design (encounter and adventure design in this case) that are done around this fact. And Home GMs who tailor their own adventures (or modify APs & modules) to the groups they run, most likely, even without knowing it, are accounting for the fact that every encounter will include a fully healed group.

As an anecdote, I am currently playing through Skulls and Shackles. And there are some plunder mechanics where you can sell plunder in cities for gold. Where plunder is the generic term for "valuable stuff you stole from other ships or ruins during your pirating career". The DC goes up for every extra amount you want to make. And if you fail, you basically get nothing and don't sell the plunder. But there is no downside to failing. And unless we are made aware of some time constraint, we are going to just sit in port until all the plunder is sold at the level we want to sell it at. But our GM makes us roll it all out. So we spend a couple hours during plunder selling time, selling plunder until we've sold as much as we want, at the break point we want. I'd rather we just figure out the odds and come up with a fair number of random days it could take, and roll a d6 or d8 and say, "it takes you x number of days and you sell your plunder."

The point being, if you are going to just heal between every encounter, why does it have to be by such a time sink method?

And I think the new resonance system will account for the time sink situation as well as the ubiquity of the item itself. And Mark keeps alluding to the fact that there are many, many different ways that there should be plenty of healing available to ensure full healing between encounters. Its just not with the wand apparently.


Tallow wrote:
And I think the new resonance system will account for the time sink situation as well as the ubiquity of the item itself. And Mark keeps alluding to the fact that there are many, many different ways that there should be plenty of healing available to ensure full healing between encounters. Its just not with the wand apparently.

For the most part, I agree -- I wouldn't mind replacing the wand with something that's less of a time sink. My problem is more than anything with the Resonance cost to healing, because it requires an expenditure of a resource used by combat abilities (one that's more limited than spells at anything beyond low levels, as far as we've seen) between combats in order to prevent a high-penalty event (death) while simultaneously making that high-penalty event more likely (death because you ran out of combat juice and couldn't kill the enemy). A resource that can be instantly restored by taking the next 8 hours off. Its effectively an anti-stamina mechanic.

Between camping and the wand, I'd rather have the wand.

If PF2 delivers on Resonance-free healing, we're still good... but then why bother with Resonance-using healing anyway?


I feel like the problem with the CLW wand is ultimately not about how "having full HP before every fight" creates balance problems but more about how this shifts the resource which is undergoing attrition to "money" and this is perhaps the least interesting resource for our ostensible heroes to focus on.

A lot of the changes I like in PF2 are about shifting the limiting reagent from "gold pieces to some other resource. Like the whole items have levels thing is a better way to gate things than trying to set prices so high people can't craft things too early.

Micromanaging party wealth is tedious and unfun.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
wizzardman wrote:

But you're going to run into the exact same issue *with* the resonance cost on healing. You're not expending anything to complete the combat, so all you're doing is moving the "combat ability" cost onto after-combat healing. And all that's going to do is force you to rest before the final encounter (at best).

It sounds less like after-combat healing is making the game too easy, and more like the encounters you're running into are a waste of your time.

It's a waste of time...only compared to a 750 gp wand. The whole problem's that HP damage is not ever relevant when it's applied to PCs unless it kills them, because that's constantly healed before the next fight with 0 effort. When you can casually go down to 20% HP constantly in fights and not care because it's all going to be easily patched up before the next one, that's a problem.

The fact that absolutely 0 resources are expended because we can safely go down to low HP amounts and not care (admittedly, we're decent at covering each other's backs in any case that happens). The whole thing's that moving the goalposts so that HP damage is actually relevant, and return it to a point where resources are being used, even if that's Battle Medic healing the same amount outside combat. The main difference here is that Battle Medic is (presumably) not infinite.

MerlinCross wrote:

Yeah see it's thought process like this that lead to the community worshipping the CLW Wand in the first place.

Wizard use your Grease to trip up the enemies!
Wizard: Why? You'll just take 2 more swings of damage if I don't. Meh, worry not, we have 300 castings of CLW anyway.

What still floors me is the people that will insist on rolling all their uses individually so they don't "Overheal" or something.

I'm sorry I'm not trying to say badwrongfun, but how other people play, with bloody spreadsheets instead of character sheets?

The problem's that it's really easy to see that the wand of cure light is significantly stronger than any alternatives, and thus everyone uses it. When it gets to a point where it's effectively constant free healing outside of combat, the group realizes that even if no one's said it, and thus tactics automatically change to accommodate that.

The group's never actually said anything about any of this, it's just their tactics automatically changed thanks to infinite out-of-combat healing.


PossibleCabbage wrote:

I feel like the problem with the CLW wand is ultimately not about how "having full HP before every fight" creates balance problems but more about how this shifts the resource which is undergoing attrition to "money" and this is perhaps the least interesting resource for our ostensible heroes to focus on.

A lot of the changes I like in PF2 are about shifting the limiting reagent from "gold pieces to some other resource. Like the whole items have levels thing is a better way to gate things than trying to set prices so high people can't craft things too early.

Micromanaging party wealth is tedious and unfun.

I don't see how the changes make it any less tedious and unfun. Actually maybe more as you have the step of having to convert your silver into gold for buying/crafting stuff now.


MerlinCross wrote:
I don't see how the changes make it any less tedious and unfun. Actually maybe more as you have the step of having to convert your silver into gold for buying/crafting stuff now.

Well, things like item level and resonance involving much smaller numbers which are applicable to many fewer things than "your wallet" is a positive change from where I sit.

Like if I want more or less wand spam, it's easier to adjust resonance than money.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
MerlinCross wrote:
I don't see how the changes make it any less tedious and unfun. Actually maybe more as you have the step of having to convert your silver into gold for buying/crafting stuff now.

Well, things like item level and resonance involving much smaller numbers which are applicable to many fewer things than "your wallet" is a positive change from where I sit.

Like if I want more or less wand spam, it's easier to adjust resonance than money.

It was more about managing money as a whole but;

I dislike the idea of item level. Being fully locked out of even TRYING to make something feels wrong. Could it break the balance? Maybe. But if I pool money from the team and get some help from other crafters to make some magic item that will help the team as a whole, to be flat out denied from even rolling because "Your level isn't high enough" feels cheap.

It's also just easier to remove CLW wands. Doing so doesn't mess with the ENTIRE magic item system. But that's crazy talk.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Been gone for a few months, but I see that forums are as caustic as ever.

I personally dislike CLW wands for the following personal reasons. Your campaigns may vary.
1) It trivializes damage. The party tank nearly gets beaten to death, literally 36 seconds later and he's full power again and ready for another boss battle. In areas of APs, like the first books in Skull & Shackles and Strange Aeons there are no stores, so my players had to be cautious and not burn resources carelessly. Having a keg of extra HP just ruins any tension.
2) On the same line, I also award levels when the AP says so, so the players feel no needs to kill everything they see. With limited healing and no need for endless blood-lust, they tend to talk their way out of some fights or avoid pointless encounters. Once they get a CLW wand and like 50 cure potions, they tend to get stupid way more often.
3) I've always hated in PF how the players can just go down to the corner magic shop and pick up a CLW wand, pearls of power, and scrolls, like it's just pizza and nachos. If they want to invest in Craft Wand, that's fine, it feels like a part of their character that they have spend precious resources on, but I don't like magic items by the bucket full feel in PF.
4) I don't think its intended for game balance.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
MerlinCross wrote:

What still floors me is the people that will insist on rolling all their uses individually so they don't "Overheal" or something.

I'm sorry I'm not trying to say badwrongfun, but how other people play, with bloody spreadsheets instead of character sheets?

You don't use a spreadsheet for making your characters? Spreadsheets are good. They automatically calculate your CMB, CMD, etc. Saves a lot of tedious book-keeping.

To me, it sounds like you're engaged in an optimization puzzle just as tedious as the "How can we spend the fewest resources?" puzzle the game is built around:

"It would be slightly quicker if we got a Wand of Cure Moderate Wounds instead of two Wands of Cure Light Wounds, and would only cost an extra 3000gp!"
"But if we had two people using wands, we could heal two people at once!"
"No, the important thing is how many dice we roll at once. See, if we roll them one at a time, that's slow..."
"But if we roll too many, adding up all those numbers might be even slower..."
Who cares if it takes a few seconds longer or shorter for someone to do it the way they like doing it? If they think, "Is it worth a 15gp charge if I'm only 2HP from maximum?" is an interesting decision, let them have their fun.

Not that I've done it with dice for a long time. I just said, "Out of combat, wands of CLW heal 6 points per charge. Work out how many you need and cross them off."

And I tended to make sure they always had enough wands, because otherwise they might need to stop and rest in the middle of an adventure, and that really kills the pacing.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Most things already have been said here.

But I really am wondering what game the opponents of using CLW wands to heal themselves to full HP are playing? Certainly not the game as clearly intended by the designers themselves, if we go by, um, all published Pathfinder 1E adventure paths, ever. You never know when a trio of Seugathi or some bruiser with a scythe will be in the next room and the latter will crit you for eighty hit points. The AP obituary threads are full of those kinds of situations. I recommend you read some of those (also because a lot of the entries are gutbustingly funny) if you are disbeliving of my claims.

The game as intended by the designers is clearly not a game where you pull yourself by skin of your teeth through a dungeon and everybody is on their last legs throughout half of it. CLW wands are a tool to make sure your guys survive to fight the end boss of the module you are in. Are they the most elegant tool? Certainly not, but they work. Hit points should not, IMO, be what stops an adventuring party for the day as the first or even second reason.

I'm not saying that you are wanting badwrongfun for wanting a more grittier game, but don't kid yourselves that the system as it currently stands is designed for that in mind. The proof is in the pudding by just looking at what Paizo's writers have been producing for the last ten years.

I'm personally much more worried about effect resonance will have on the new metagame, of which the disuse of CLW wands at higher levels will be one consequence. But that's neither here nor there for this thread and will be its own megathread once the playtest document releases, I'm sure.

Liberty's Edge

magnuskn wrote:

Most things already have been said here.

But I really am wondering what game the opponents of using CLW wands to heal themselves to full HP are playing?

To reiterate and clarify, my objection is not to healing up completely between fights. I think that's expected. It's just also expected to actually cost some amount of meaningful resources (Channel Energy, spell slots, meaningful amounts of money, something) which Wands of CLW do not after the first few levels. For 'being low on healing' to be something that might cause you to stop for a day, the same way being low on spell slots often does now, which it basically never does at the moment.

The objection is not to healing up between fights, or even to doing so every fight, it's to being able to do so at no meaningful cost and thus for far more fights than you'll ever have in any individual day. For HP to be the very last thing you ever worry about running out of, in terms of resources. That seems seriously wrong.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Deadmanwalking wrote:
magnuskn wrote:

Most things already have been said here.

But I really am wondering what game the opponents of using CLW wands to heal themselves to full HP are playing?

To reiterate and clarify, my objection is not to healing up completely between fights. I think that's expected. It's just also expected to actually cost some amount of meaningful resources (Channel Energy, spell slots, meaningful amounts of money, something) which Wands of CLW do not after the first few levels. For 'being low on healing' to be something that might cause you to stop for a day, the same way being low on spell slots often does now, which it basically never does at the moment.

The objection is not to healing up between fights, or even to doing so every fight, it's to being able to do so at no meaningful cost and thus for far more fights than you'll ever have in any individual day. For HP to be the very last thing you ever worry about running out of, in terms of resources. That seems seriously wrong.

But it is not. HP are a resource which can run out very suddenly just by what awaits you in the next room or cave. As multiple people have already pointed out in this thread, Pathfinder is a game where your heroes don't have plot armor but actually get hurt. As I said, look at the obituary threads to get some excellent examples of how fast that can happen. Hit points should absolutely be the last thing which runs out and is then the sign that it is time to retire for the day.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
magnuskn wrote:

Most things already have been said here.

But I really am wondering what game the opponents of using CLW wands to heal themselves to full HP are playing?

To reiterate and clarify, my objection is not to healing up completely between fights. I think that's expected. It's just also expected to actually cost some amount of meaningful resources (Channel Energy, spell slots, meaningful amounts of money, something) which Wands of CLW do not after the first few levels. For 'being low on healing' to be something that might cause you to stop for a day, the same way being low on spell slots often does now, which it basically never does at the moment.

The objection is not to healing up between fights, or even to doing so every fight, it's to being able to do so at no meaningful cost and thus for far more fights than you'll ever have in any individual day. For HP to be the very last thing you ever worry about running out of, in terms of resources. That seems seriously wrong.

Yes, the wanding for a minute after every fight can be a seriously lame aspect of 3rd Ed/PF1, though of course as a DM you can control access. While the magic-mart/Xmas-tree magic items deal is oft-lamented, it really does not have to be a problem.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

My suggestion would be if you want characters full healed after every combat just say that they are. There is not really much of a difference. except one way you have to keep track of charges for no real reason.

601 to 650 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