Another thing is, if I didn't really like CLW spam on an aesthetic level, why would I bring it up on the forums? As a GM I know my options for house ruling or GM fiat, and as a player I now both that this benefits me and that there are some absurdly strong healing builds available (Dual Life Kitsune Spirit Guide Oracles, Oradins, notably) so I can handle this on my own. As long as we're playing PF1, discussing my aesthetic preferences other than in passing, is kind of useless.
But in PF2 since we're fundamentally changing the system, this stuff matters again.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The resonance complainers haven't even played with the new rules. The developers stated that, resonance wasn't an issue in most of their playtests.
Without knowing the factors, how is that a consideration? For instance, if the 'testing' didn't have any potions or wands or scrolls to use it might not be an issue. Or if their playstyle is to conserve resources. Secondly, if it wasn't an issue, it begs the question if a limit is needed.
As a GM I know my options for house ruling or GM fiat
Here is the thing though... It was neither as the availability of magic item is a suggestion and totally up to the DM. So there is no houseruling needed and if it's DM fiat, it's built in fiat. Any Dm that didn't like it had the tools available to them so it's an issue with them and not the system if they didn't use them.
So my big issue is that we are going from a system in which both playstyles could function without issue to one where one playstyle is pushed out.
As a GM I know my options for house ruling or GM fiatHere is the thing though... It was neither as the availability of magic item is a suggestion and totally up to the DM. So there is no houseruling needed and if it's DM fiat, it's built in fiat. Any Dm that didn't like it had the tools available to them so it's an issue with them and not the system if they didn't use them.
So my big issue is that we are going from a system in which both playstyles could function without issue to one where one playstyle is pushed out.
What I'm rebutting the idea that "a bag full of CLW wands" was not a problem before PF2. It was a problem, but not one worth bringing to the forums because there is very little the forums would have to offer in terms of solutions.
A lot of things were issues in PF1 that were not widely discussed on the forums because nobody needs to be told "well, you can just ban sacred geometry".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a GM I know my options for house ruling or GM fiatHere is the thing though... It was neither as the availability of magic item is a suggestion and totally up to the DM. So there is no houseruling needed and if it's DM fiat, it's built in fiat. Any Dm that didn't like it had the tools available to them so it's an issue with them and not the system if they didn't use them.
So my big issue is that we are going from a system in which both playstyles could function without issue to one where one playstyle is pushed out.
What I'm rebutting the idea that "a bag full of CLW wands" was not a problem before PF2. It was a problem, but not one worth bringing to the forums because there is very little the forums would have to offer in terms of solutions.
A lot of things were issues in PF1 that were not widely discussed on the forums because nobody needs to be told "well, you can just ban sacred geometry".
Sure - you have a great point. I am more interested in the ripple effects - if the only thing I hate about it is CLW wands and potions... I can houserule them easy.
I want to see how it pans out with the rest of the items - having seen the book I'm pretty sure there are some bombshells that will drown out the rest of the forums for the first week (at least just in things I saw that were changed, I'm sure I missed quite a bit too) - I'm very curious if the resonance changes and magic item changes are going to be too much as a whole - because from where I stand house ruling resonance out without altering everything - is going to make the game supremely overpowered (due to the items being built around resonance) and thus this is a 'make or break' it system *as a whole*.
I do agree with you though, if resonance is great outside these items, that's an easy fix.
For years now, with Pathfinder Society games, I have not been buying wands of cure light wounds. Instead what I do is resolutely mark off 750 gold pieces and write "healing 50" on my character sheet. Then, after a fight, I just assume the healer is going to assist me and I tick off the number of charges I need to heal up.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Upon drinking this elixir, you regain 1d6 Hit Points.
Minor Elixir of Life is a spammable consumable, costs 3 gp a pop, costs 0 resonance to use unless your alchemist is using their resonance to make free ones.
I know most of my characters will use these instead of healing potions almost exclusively.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think that the ones in favor of CLW wands spam/against resonance are going to be sourly disappointed when they realize that they are only a vocal minority. And that the majority of pathfinder players will probably not even realize it's gone, or will be mildly ok with it. When someone reads a change that they are neutral on, or even happy about they probably won't post about it. Only when something makes you angry are you sure to post about it. And unfortunately I've seen the same 4 or 5 names complaining about it over this forum.
When they don't revert the changes and don't put CLW wand spam back in the game don't be angry that they didn't listen to the community. because they absolutely will have.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So my big issue is that we are going from a system in which both playstyles could function without issue to one where one playstyle is pushed out.
Exactly.
This is my big concern.From what we have seen there are several areas of the playtest ruleset which "solve" problems I don't have. And they do this by forcing a solution which is tightly integrated into the mechanics engine.
There are ways to alleviate issues without proactively alienating a chunk of loyal fans.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What I'm rebutting the idea that "a bag full of CLW wands" was not a problem before PF2.
Yep, and I'm pointing out that it can only be an issue if the DM fails to use the tools the game gives them. If your group prefers no CLW spam, the DM can select an availability to match your playstyle. And as a player, if it's bothersome to you, you do not have to buy any and can ask your fellow players not to or just ask the DM to alter the availability.
nobody needs to be told "well, you can just ban sacred geometry"
Well A: people actually complained about sacred geometry and B: there was no need to ban/alter/change anything other than availability which was 100% in the DM's hands.
So it's not really equivalent situations: One is using the rules in place vs altering the rules by creating a house rule.
The search function on this board is also borked. I wouldn't use "I did a search of this board" as proof of anything.Can you offer any other proof? Any other dissenting evidence of the consensus pre-2018?
I think I and many others who have been here for a while (and no, I'm not doing a search of the forum or anything else, this is what we've already seen personally, no search required) have already seen multiple discussions about wands of CLW, both those who hate that people spam them, and those that love spamming them.
There have been multiple discussions in the past, FAR before the announcement of the playtest by those who dislike the entire idea of spamming CLW, and normally they are met by those who absolutely LOVE the idea of wands of CLW.
To say that this was never an issue or never a major topic of discussion prior to 2018 is absolutely un-true. This discussion of wands of CLW goes back YEARS...literally. Claiming that these discussions never took place is disgenious, and I have no idea why someone would even try to claim something like that, unless they are hoping every individual who is able to remember topics prior to 2018 suddenly lost their entire memory of the past few years of discussions on these boards (and elsewhere).
Am I going to present physical evidence of this...no. And anyone who's paid attention to the boards and seen the topics shouldn't need it either...as they already KNOW that these discussions happened multiple times...no search required...just someone who hasn't lost all their memory of various discussions over the past few years.
There have been multiple discussions in the past, FAR before the announcement of the playtest by those who dislike the entire idea of spamming CLW, and normally they are met by those who absolutely LOVE the idea of wands of CLW.
There have been discussions before. There are not many, but most people don't start a new thread just to complain.
An example from November 2017, Is Fast Healing 1 OP on a Ring?, touches many of the topics in this thread, For example, the quote that brought wands into that thread:
Also, what seems sillier: most adventurers packing around a dozen wands of first level spells or letting their rings patch them up if they aren't on a tight schedule?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There have been multiple discussions in the past, FAR before the announcement of the playtest by those who dislike the entire idea of spamming CLW, and normally they are met by those who absolutely LOVE the idea of wands of CLW.
There is another group, a group I'd argue is bigger than the other two combined. That group avoided the issue by not confusing an exploit for the way to create the kind of fun that *they* wanted to have.
But, that said, doesn't your point suggest that this solution will alienate the love group roughly as much as it will please the hate group? When you take two groups who are both (by definition) playing the game and turn them into one group who is happier and another group who is driven away, how does that better the game?
And that assumes that having a solution forced upon the don't care group doesn't alienate some portion of them as well. And that would be a poor assumption.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
There have been multiple discussions in the past, FAR before the announcement of the playtest by those who dislike the entire idea of spamming CLW, and normally they are met by those who absolutely LOVE the idea of wands of CLW.There have been discussions before. There are not many, but most people don't start a new thread just to complain.
An example from November 2017, Is Fast Healing 1 OP on a Ring?, touches many of the topics in this thread, For example, the quote that brought wands into that thread:
Also, what seems sillier: most adventurers packing around a dozen wands of first level spells or letting their rings patch them up if they aren't on a tight schedule?
Skimming through that thread the concept of virtually unlimited healing being present is discussed. I didn't notice anyone calling for a "solution", they were simply accepting that the mechanical issue was there and debating the comparison between lots of CLW and perpetual FH1.
Can you point to evidence of dismay and calls to purge the game of the CLW menace?
There have been multiple discussions in the past, FAR before the announcement of the playtest by those who dislike the entire idea of spamming CLW, and normally they are met by those who absolutely LOVE the idea of wands of CLW.There have been discussions before. There are not many, but most people don't start a new thread just to complain.
An example from November 2017, Is Fast Healing 1 OP on a Ring?, touches many of the topics in this thread, For example, the quote that brought wands into that thread:
Also, what seems sillier: most adventurers packing around a dozen wands of first level spells or letting their rings patch them up if they aren't on a tight schedule?Skimming through that thread the concept of virtually unlimited healing being present is discussed. I didn't notice anyone calling for a "solution", they were simply accepting that the mechanical issue was there and debating the comparison between lots of CLW and perpetual FH1.
Can you point to evidence of dismay and calls to purge the game of the CLW menace?
No, the evidence is that people knew that wands of Cure Light Wounds were the cheapest healing solutions for a party lacked a character who could cast healing spells. The Dragonborn3 comment called it "silly" but most merely called it an alternative to a cleric. The wand of CLW was nicknamed "cleric on a stick."
I think that the common perception was that it was inelegant but not game breaking.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There have been multiple discussions in the past, FAR before the announcement of the playtest by those who dislike the entire idea of spamming CLW, and normally they are met by those who absolutely LOVE the idea of wands of CLW.There have been discussions before. There are not many, but most people don't start a new thread just to complain.
An example from November 2017, Is Fast Healing 1 OP on a Ring?, touches many of the topics in this thread, For example, the quote that brought wands into that thread:
Also, what seems sillier: most adventurers packing around a dozen wands of first level spells or letting their rings patch them up if they aren't on a tight schedule?Skimming through that thread the concept of virtually unlimited healing being present is discussed. I didn't notice anyone calling for a "solution", they were simply accepting that the mechanical issue was there and debating the comparison between lots of CLW and perpetual FH1.
Can you point to evidence of dismay and calls to purge the game of the CLW menace?
No, the evidence is that people knew that wands of Cure Light Wounds were the cheapest healing solutions for a party lacked a character who could cast healing spells. The Dragonborn3 comment called it "silly" but most merely called it an alternative to a cleric. The wand of CLW was nicknamed "cleric on a stick."
I think that the common perception was that it was inelegant but not game breaking.
So we don't need a solution?
Why did you pick *that* thread as an example? The claim is that the love/hate debates were well known. Why pick such a poor example?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think that the common perception was that it was inelegant but not game breaking.
Well - resonance may or may not work when it's all said and done - but if the previous issue was 'inelegant' - the solution certainly didn't fix that problem.
This is like trying to fix a clashing outfit by making everyone wear purple polka dot jumpers and clown shoes, so that they all look the same.
This is like trying to fix a clashing outfit by making everyone wear purple polka dot jumpers and clown shoes, so that they all look the same.
Myself, in that analogy, I'd say they fixed the clashing outfit by going naked. Sure it fixed the problem... but in a NOT elegant way.
There have been multiple discussions in the past, FAR before the announcement of the playtest by those who dislike the entire idea of spamming CLW, and normally they are met by those who absolutely LOVE the idea of wands of CLW.There have been discussions before. There are not many, but most people don't start a new thread just to complain.
An example from November 2017, Is Fast Healing 1 OP on a Ring?, touches many of the topics in this thread, For example, the quote that brought wands into that thread:
Also, what seems sillier: most adventurers packing around a dozen wands of first level spells or letting their rings patch them up if they aren't on a tight schedule?Skimming through that thread the concept of virtually unlimited healing being present is discussed. I didn't notice anyone calling for a "solution", they were simply accepting that the mechanical issue was there and debating the comparison between lots of CLW and perpetual FH1.
Can you point to evidence of dismay and calls to purge the game of the CLW menace?
No, the evidence is that people knew that wands of Cure Light Wounds were the cheapest healing solutions for a party lacked a character who could cast healing spells. The Dragonborn3 comment called it "silly" but most merely called it an alternative to a cleric. The wand of CLW was nicknamed "cleric on a stick."
I think that the common perception was that it was inelegant but not game breaking.
So we don't need a solution?
Why did you pick *that* thread as an example? The claim is that the love/hate debates were well known. Why pick such a poor example?
Most of the threads I found in my search (Google search "wands of cure light wounds site:www.paizo.com" and a few similar phrases) asked about the rules for creating wands. Ignoring playtest discussions, fewer than 6 discussions mentioned a dislike of the wands of cure light wounds. The example I chose had a discussion that mentioned several points brought up in this thread, possibly because it was relatively recent.
The Paizo forum regulars are a polite group of people. Other websites might express harsher opinions. I chose a Paizo forum example because I am familiar with the Paizo forums.
I think that the common perception was that it was inelegant but not game breaking.
Well - resonance may or may not work when it's all said and done - but if the previous issue was 'inelegant' - the solution certainly didn't fix that problem.
This is like trying to fix a clashing outfit by making everyone wear purple polka dot jumpers and clown shoes, so that they all look the same.
I have been worried about the inelegance of resonance. That is one reason that I created the Interpreting Resonance thread.
Wands that cost one resonance per activation, with no other daily limits or charges, would be more elegant than a 50-charge wand. Resonance has the potential to be elegant. Such a wand might be too efficient, however.
Another elegant wand design would be a wand that could be invested once a day and could be used 3 times between investments. It has the disadvantage of needing to count daily uses, but a fresh count every morning is easier than accounting for 50 charges.
This is like trying to fix a clashing outfit by making everyone wear purple polka dot jumpers and clown shoes, so that they all look the same.Myself, in that analogy, I'd say they fixed the clashing outfit by going naked. Sure it fixed the problem... but in a NOT elegant way.
I'm a little sad you didn't continue our little conversation we were having back on page one (last post being at bottom of page) :(
I thought we were getting somewhere.
This is like trying to fix a clashing outfit by making everyone wear purple polka dot jumpers and clown shoes, so that they all look the same.Myself, in that analogy, I'd say they fixed the clashing outfit by going naked. Sure it fixed the problem... but in a NOT elegant way.I'm a little sad you didn't continue our little conversation we were having back on page one (last post being at bottom of page) :(
I thought we were getting somewhere.
You mean about group tactics impacting resource use? Yeah, that is definitely a factor to be sure. Another is if you do not have a healer that has spells they can't convert to healing: they have to guess/estimate how much healing they need and if they miscalculate, you can run out of hp before other resources. Or there are always non-encounter damage like a run of traps, damaging environments or things not easily one shotted like swarms, incorporeal undead, ect. Or you have spells set for an encounter you know is going to happen but the 'easy' intervening encounters deal you several crits that inflated the damage.
Really there is lots of reasons you can run out of healing first. It can be as easy as a string of lucky 20's from the DM.
This is like trying to fix a clashing outfit by making everyone wear purple polka dot jumpers and clown shoes, so that they all look the same.Myself, in that analogy, I'd say they fixed the clashing outfit by going naked. Sure it fixed the problem... but in a NOT elegant way.I'm a little sad you didn't continue our little conversation we were having back on page one (last post being at bottom of page) :(
I thought we were getting somewhere.
You mean about group tactics impacting resource use? Yeah, that is definitely a factor to be sure. Another is if you do not have a healer that has spells they can't convert to healing: they have to guess/estimate how much healing they need and if they miscalculate, you can run out of hp before other resources. Or there are always non-encounter damage like a run of traps, damaging environments or things not easily one shotted like swarms, incorporeal undead, ect. Or you have spells set for an encounter you know is going to happen but the 'easy' intervening encounters deal you several crits that inflated the damage.
Really there is lots of reasons you can run out of healing first. It can be as easy as a string of lucky 20's from the DM.
Hey a string of 20's from the DM is always a bad thing for the players. Its part of the threat and dangers of the game. Its part of the fun yo!
My thing is the amount of healing your using is going to be in direct relation to the tactics you use. Alpha strike for example as long as it is successful may free up some healing options while attrition is going to run you out. If your running out of healing and still doing excellent tactics then sure it probably needs to be tweeked (hence play test). For your not liking managing healing OOC even removing that will affect IC healing as well. and in combat tactics. Your tactics are going to vary greatly if you know for a fact your going to be healed up after combat or if you know thaty if you rely on that to much you won't have any healing left. That in turn will affect spells prepared (not just healing but combat spells buff spells and defensive spells) I think a group having to change their tactics depedning on the classes their playing is one of the interesting thing about the game. Changing dynamics by changing classes is a fun part of the game. If every party played the same whats the point of having different classes and options at all?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My thing is the amount of healing your using is going to be in direct relation to the tactics you use. Alpha strike for example as long as it is successful may free up some healing options while attrition is going to run you out. If your running out of healing and still doing excellent tactics then sure it probably needs to be tweeked (hence play test). For your not liking managing healing OOC even removing that will affect IC healing as well. and in combat tactics. Your tactics are going to vary greatly if you know for a fact your going to be healed up after combat or if you know thaty if you rely on that to much you won't have any healing left. That in turn will affect spells prepared (not just healing but combat spells buff spells and defensive spells) I think a group having to change their tactics depedning on the classes their playing is one of the interesting thing about the game. Changing dynamics by changing classes is a fun part of the game. If every party played the same whats the point of having different classes and options at all?
For me, it's the opposite. Having a limited pool of healing limits what everyone else takes. The healer HAS to take all healing. The other HAVE to alpha strike. When you remove the healing after combat issue, people can actually take abilities/spells that aren't the 100% best abilities. You can take a fun utility spell. You can take a feat just for the heck of it: not so when hp's are always looming over you.
So I agree it changes tactics, but not in, IMO, a good way.
My thing is the amount of healing your using is going to be in direct relation to the tactics you use. Alpha strike for example as long as it is successful may free up some healing options while attrition is going to run you out. If your running out of healing and still doing excellent tactics then sure it probably needs to be tweeked (hence play test). For your not liking managing healing OOC even removing that will affect IC healing as well. and in combat tactics. Your tactics are going to vary greatly if you know for a fact your going to be healed up after combat or if you know thaty if you rely on that to much you won't have any healing left. That in turn will affect spells prepared (not just healing but combat spells buff spells and defensive spells) I think a group having to change their tactics depedning on the classes their playing is one of the interesting thing about the game. Changing dynamics by changing classes is a fun part of the game. If every party played the same whats the point of having different classes and options at all?For me, it's the opposite. Having a limited pool of healing limits what everyone else takes. The healer HAS to take all healing. The other HAVE to alpha strike. When you remove the healing after combat issue, people can actually take abilities/spells that aren't the 100% best abilities. You can take a fun utility spell. You can take a feat just for the heck of it: not so when hp's are always looming over you.
So I agree it changes tactics, but not in, IMO, a good way.
Realistically the line lies somewhere in the middle. Because I disagree with your assertion that they have to do anything.
Also I always felt anything utility shouldn't be a memorized spell. except for spells that do both IC and OOC stuff like teleport. I really like the idea of a lot of utility spells becoming rituals. (and it may not even of gone far enough into that for my preference but I will find out in about 8 hours.)
Feat just for the heck of it. That doesn't have anything to do with healing (well ok slightly) it has to do with the difficulty of the campaign. If you are playing a campaign where the first combat burns through all your healing then the difficulty could just be set a bit high although its probably multi-factorial. Their is going to be a lot of different factors really from party composition, DM expereince, player experience, optimization level etc.
I think what it comes down to is you do not enjoy healing at all in fact I think an HP system doesn't even fit your ideal. I think M&M damage save system might actually be closer to what you want but you tell me? I think the very nature of hp isn't made for how you want it and the starfinder stamina might be a bit closer? (resolve then fully healed after each combat)
I will say some people like to heal and play healing classes. I mean even in other games people do play some healing classes in WOW exclusively.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is like trying to fix a clashing outfit by making everyone wear purple polka dot jumpers and clown shoes, so that they all look the same.Myself, in that analogy, I'd say they fixed the clashing outfit by going naked. Sure it fixed the problem... but in a NOT elegant way.I'm a little sad you didn't continue our little conversation we were having back on page one (last post being at bottom of page) :(
I thought we were getting somewhere.
You mean about group tactics impacting resource use? Yeah, that is definitely a factor to be sure. Another is if you do not have a healer that has spells they can't convert to healing: they have to guess/estimate how much healing they need and if they miscalculate, you can run out of hp before other resources. Or there are always non-encounter damage like a run of traps, damaging environments or things not easily one shotted like swarms, incorporeal undead, ect. Or you have spells set for an encounter you know is going to happen but the 'easy' intervening encounters deal you several crits that inflated the damage.
Really there is lots of reasons you can run out of healing first. It can be as easy as a string of lucky 20's from the DM.
Hey a string of 20's from the DM is always a bad thing for the players. Its part of the threat and dangers of the game. Its part of the fun yo!
My thing is the amount of healing your using is going to be in direct relation to the tactics you use. Alpha strike for example as long as it is successful may free up some healing options while attrition is going to run you out. If your running out of healing and still doing excellent tactics then sure it probably needs to be tweeked (hence play test). For your not liking managing healing OOC even removing that will affect IC healing as well. and in combat tactics. Your tactics are going to vary greatly if you know for a fact your going to be healed up after combat or if you...
.
Resonance doesn't just affect OOC healing, it affects the amount of ALL your consumables AND the amount of magic items you can use. It limits your potential to respond to different situations in a tactical way. We are left hoping that feats and class abilities will be versatile enough to adapt to niche/exotic threats and challenges that just don't come up that often but when they do can be crippling - (and without feeling like those options are wasted if they never come up). if you don't have an appropriate response. Carrying a few clutch potions and scrolls gave you the ability to plan for those uhm...idiosyncratic challenges that GMs just love to throw at you without having to worry about using up a significant personal resource such as feats, or a spell slot, that you never need.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sounds good to me. Better then the party always having the obvious answer on them every time. sometimes Limitations breed inspiration.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to point out that not every group packs every useful potion or scroll available, or enough to solve every instance of a problem throughout a run. I feel deeply sorry for any GM that has to deal with players rolling up and saying "I buy every potion and scroll available. Also, make sure to boost my WBL to keep me up with everyone else later."
I like preparation. Watching the players plan out what to bring on a trip brings me joy. They might grab a wagon, load it with rope, chains, shovels, and food and then start planning on what they might need magically like cures for disease and poison, some emergency healing tools like a wand, and a handful of utility options. These things cost gold, which can make the difference between buying a nice new sword or carrying a pile of gold waiting for the upgrade. They don't buy a laundry list of items, even if the vendors had everything they wanted for sale.
Resonance makes it so that if they prepared, that preparation may just go to waste. That type of thing is *hugely*, *massively* unsatisfying to me.
More potential consumable examples:
1. Party knows they're going into a den of ghasts, so they pack a potion of cure disease each, and plan on the back line keeping theirs as a reserve. Oh, turns out the front line uses theirs, runs out of Resonance, and the back line's potions are useless or have a 50% chance of being money down the drain.
2. Party wants to explore the rumored flooded caves. They all pack a couple water breathing potions. Turns out, they get a bit too hurt and have to use Resonance on healing and have to turn back for the day or risk going underwater with only 1 potion's worth of breathing. The extra potions sitting useless.
3. The rogue puts on his Gloves of Knocking, which lets him cast knock on a door to unlock it instantly at the cost of Resonance, so he can quickly bypass patrols. He also carries a scroll of dispel magic, to get by the final treasure defenses. Turns out, he has to use his gloves once more than he thought, so he's got a 50% chance of his expensive scroll working.
4. Pack a healing kit with emergency potions of cure disease and poison. Get afflicted with both. Can only use one potion. Die while the other sits in your hand uselessly.
If these are personally super fun for you, I can only say we'll never agree on some pretty basic things.
Sounds good to me. Better then the party always having the obvious answer on them every time. sometimes Limitations breed inspiration.
sometimes, maybe. Mostly though it leads to TPKs or fleeing until the following day to re-equip anyway. Neither are particularly satisfying to me.