Does anyone apart from me think, that "unlimited" healing due to feats like lay on hands, eliminate certain problems like hazards or enviromental damage too damn easy? I feel like it's too cheap to be true! Any house rouling to keep that from going nuts? And don't say "Just throw encounters to them!", because that feels too argumentably f@$%ed, like what the hell.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Lay on hands provides unlimited healing to a party that has time.
So does medicine. Parties being able to heal hp damage if they have time is normal, expected, and not a problem.
If a hazard exists on it's own, unconnected from any potential encounter or time pressure, and just deals hp damage, that's not a well used hazard.
If a hazard exists on it's own, unconnected from any potential encounter or time pressure, and just deals hp damage, that's not a well used hazard.
Yep. If a hazard/trap is JUST there to rack up random damage it's pretty much forgettable damage. I certain subsection of gamers like the 'attrition' type of play where the game is a slog through dangers while carefully rationing your healing out always 1 hit away from death... That's not really this game or really PF1 either.
Does anyone apart from me think, that "unlimited" healing due to feats like lay on hands, eliminate certain problems like hazards or enviromental damage too damn easy?
If you feel that way and you're the DM then you just have to control pacing to ALWAYS prevent 10 min rests. This means EVERY adventure is on a running clock with non-stop combat, which to be honest gets old pretty fast but it's really your only option as easy healing is built into the game.
And don't say "Just throw encounters to them!", because that feels too argumentably f~+~ed, like what the hell.
Preventing rest is about it. If that feels "too argumentably f~+~ed", well then don't and let healing work as intended because any 'fix' is going to feel like that as you are subverting the way the game is meant to be played and the players will know it. PF2 isn't a grimdark death march setting/game.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
From the GMG:
PCs have many ways to heal themselves, so
keep in mind that a damaging hazard won’t always have
a huge effect. They tend to work best if their activation
might alert creatures in the area, lock the PCs out of an
area, or cause a similar setback beyond just damage
I would sooner put a debuff on healing, a curse of some sort, than punish 10 minute resting too much because of focus spells that aren't healing.
If you take away the option to transform from your druid player because in the meantime people get healed you might be taking away the fun for a player.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Does anyone apart from me think, that "unlimited" healing due to feats like lay on hands, eliminate certain problems like hazards or enviromental damage too damn easy? I feel like it's too cheap to be true! Any house rouling to keep that from going nuts? And don't say "Just throw encounters to them!", because that feels too argumentably f!!*ed, like what the hell.
Yes but it seems to be a design decision of the game. The PCs are supposed to be healed between combat with only a few conditions having long duration.
It allows them to put encounters into a module without having to worry too much about the previous or next encounter.For me, medical treatment being massively effective in ten minutes, let alone the one action of Battle Medicine, is extreme and fantastical.
If you change it make sure you know what you are doing with encounter design. But yes it may well be an interesting game choice to put in a limit of 1 per hour (or day) per target on each of the healing focus spells and medicine checks, explicitly nerfing these abilities.
Or you could not allow ten minute gaps between combats. But that affects other abilities. I tend to think of that ten minutes as a fairly abstract time period anyway.
This already the case for Treat Wounds.Does anyone apart from me think, that "unlimited" healing due to feats like lay on hands, eliminate certain problems like hazards or enviromental damage too damn easy? I feel like it's too cheap to be true! Any house rouling to keep that from going nuts? And don't say "Just throw encounters to them!", because that feels too argumentably f!!*ed, like what the hell.If you change it make sure you know what you are doing with encounter design. But yes it may well be an interesting game choice to put in a limit of 1 per hour (or day) per target on each of the healing focus spells and medicine checks, explicitly nerfing these abilities.
You are doing it without Continual Recovery? IMHO more important than Battle Medicine.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If players can't heal up fairly easily without time pressure, they're just going to start spending their money on more potions, playing cautiously to an annoying degree, and pushing for 15 minute adventuring days.
No one is having fun with random damaging traps with no follow up. If those do appear in a game, the players punish you by detecting magic every five feet, going home to sleep after stubbing their toe, or leaning in to metagaming to maximize their chances of avoiding those traps. Players don't want to get randomly slapped and be expected to be cool with it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If players can't heal up fairly easily without time pressure, they're just going to start spending their money on more potions, playing cautiously to an annoying degree, and pushing for 15 minute adventuring days.
No one is having fun with random damaging traps with no follow up. If those do appear in a game, the players punish you by detecting magic every five feet, going home to sleep after stubbing their toe, or leaning in to metagaming to maximize their chances of avoiding those traps. Players don't want to get randomly slapped and be expected to be cool with it.
While I agree with the thrust of your argument--that randomly damaging players and restricting their in-dungeon healing options most likely deteriorates into undesirable behaviour, I also want to point out that technically one of those typically annoying behaviours has since been codified into a standard exploration tactic. A party being paranoid of traps, magical or otherwise, can simply declare that they are taking the Search tactic so that they get free secret rolls to check for hazards, and likewise with the continual detect magic spam being explicitly valid as a choice.
Nevertheless, going home every time they randomly stumble into damage they can't heal readily but also have no time constraint to push forward is 100% plausible reaction for characters who want to live, especially as they learn not to trust the homebrew mechanics seemingly only designed to cost them time or hit points without doing anything for the actual tension
|
The out-of-combat healing mechanics allows for interesting encounter design that can focus on the story.
Limited Time
With this design a GM can lower the difficulties of consecutive (or semi-consecutive) combats. Lowering the difficulty accounts for their ability to rest in general. This also has the effect of 10 minute buff being very relevant.
All the time in the world
This design allows for more long term exploration with each combat being high difficulty. With plenty of time in between combats, a dangerous location story can be told.
Those are the two ends of the spectrum. Traps can fit anywhere in there.
side note: Traps can also just help add to the setting. Just because the characters can heal from the trap doesn't mean that it serves no purpose. You can use traps to help tell the story.
Maybe it is a shift in mindset, but I try to use the game mechanics as tools or a filter to tell the story. (i.e. 'if this is true then what would this look like?')
2nd side note: Sometimes it is okay for things to be easy for the players. As added amusement, it might make them paranoid.
side note: Traps can also just help add to the setting. Just because the characters can heal from the trap doesn't mean that it serves no purpose. You can use traps to help tell the story.
If it's JUST for story, there is no need to play it out: you can fill in the ambiance with 'you find some traps' or 'you trip some traps and have to heal up' and just move things along. If it's JUST for story and you have to roll and take damage, I'd count that as serving no purpose.
side note: Traps can also just help add to the setting. Just because the characters can heal from the trap doesn't mean that it serves no purpose. You can use traps to help tell the story.If it's JUST for story, there is no need to play it out: you can fill in the ambiance with 'you find some traps' or 'you trip some traps and have to heal up' and just move things along. If it's JUST for story and you have to roll and take damage, I'd count that as serving no purpose.
You find some traps and some creatures and then you kill the BBEG and you are victorious.
Story is also told by rolling dice, otherwise we would never roll any.A trap in the face serves the story. Either by increasing the feeling of danger or by giving the trapfinder/disarmer a moment to shine. Or whatever you want, actually.
side note: Traps can also just help add to the setting. Just because the characters can heal from the trap doesn't mean that it serves no purpose. You can use traps to help tell the story.If it's JUST for story, there is no need to play it out: you can fill in the ambiance with 'you find some traps' or 'you trip some traps and have to heal up' and just move things along. If it's JUST for story and you have to roll and take damage, I'd count that as serving no purpose.You find some traps and some creatures and then you kill the BBEG and you are victorious.
Story is also told by rolling dice, otherwise we would never roll any.A trap in the face serves the story. Either by increasing the feeling of danger or by giving the trapfinder/disarmer a moment to shine. Or whatever you want, actually.
That's kind of like saying you have to roll some dice for a roleplaying section to make the Face feel good. You can "increasing the feeling of danger or by giving the trapfinder/disarmer a moment to shine" without rolling for inconsequential traps. For instance, Search for a trap is a secret roll anyway, so just skipping the roll and saying Bon the eagle eyed points out a few traps does what you suggest just fine AND move things along without the extra time/work.
|
|
side note: Traps can also just help add to the setting. Just because the characters can heal from the trap doesn't mean that it serves no purpose. You can use traps to help tell the story.If it's JUST for story, there is no need to play it out: you can fill in the ambiance with 'you find some traps' or 'you trip some traps and have to heal up' and just move things along. If it's JUST for story and you have to roll and take damage, I'd count that as serving no purpose.
Different people are different it seems. Some people play the game to help create a story, others to roll dice.
That's kind of like saying you have to roll some dice for a roleplaying section to make the Face feel good. You can "increasing the feeling of danger or by giving the trapfinder/disarmer a moment to shine" without rolling for inconsequential traps. For instance, Search for a trap is a secret roll anyway, so just skipping the roll and saying Bon the eagle eyed points out a few traps does what you suggest just fine AND move things along without the extra time/work.
If the face has heavily invested in Diplomacy, Deception and Intimidation but you never make them roll because "that would be inconsequencial" the face may feel really bad about it's investment. And also everyone will start taking the face's place because it doesn't seem to be important to have high charisma in your campaign.
Inconsequential doesn't mean useless. As most of what we play is inconsequential (ultimately, we win and the BBEG dies, I have seen very few variations of this scenario). But playing your character and rolling the checks you have invested in is pleasant.
And the trap may be part of a trope, like the very last chest being trapped because it's logical (but useless).
You can also have an interesting inconsequential trap, with a nice mechanism or whatever.
And you can have a trap that's part of the story. Like the type of trap gives you information about who you're after or what you can expect in the next room.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the face has heavily invested in Diplomacy, Deception and Intimidation but you never make them roll because "that would be inconsequencial" the face may feel really bad about it's investment. And also everyone will start taking the face's place because it doesn't seem to be important to have high charisma in your campaign.
I don't think you got my point: I NEVER said that there shouldn't be rolls since there should be rolls for situations where it matters. What I'm saying is if, for instance, you're going to give information anyway to the group, making them roll until they get it is just useless rolling much like isolated traps that are just speedbumps really don't need rolls. Remember, we're talking about things that "just help add to the setting", not important rolls. The Face character feels good when they bluff the guard captain or intimate the sub-boss: they don't feel good when commoner #64 tells them it rained yesterday even if that required a roll.
Inconsequential doesn't mean useless.
It LITERALLY means "not important or significant, of little or no importance;, insignificant, trivia, inconsequent, irrelevant.". If it is useful, it's not Inconsequential.
And you can have a trap that's part of the story. Like the type of trap gives you information about who you're after or what you can expect in the next room.
You sure can... What part of that requires a roll? If there is no meaningful threat, it's busy work.
Inconsequential doesn't mean useless.It LITERALLY means "not important or significant, of little or no importance;, insignificant, trivia, inconsequent, irrelevant.". If it is useful, it's not Inconsequential.
We are moving from the original discussion. We were speaking of a trap that was just dealing hp damage that can be healed after that without consequence. And inconsequential means that it doesn't have a consequence. But I never meant that the trap was just a speed bump. There can be consequences in the ambiance, on the information it gives. The fact that part of an encounter is irrelevant doesn't mean the encounter must be simplified. Roleplaying the discussion with the guard captain is inconsequential as only the check matters, so you snip it? Fighting the Low difficulty encounter is inconsequential so you snip it? As is the Recall Knowledge check to understand who you're dealing with, so you snip the backstory?
A big part of the game is inconsequential. I'll even go further away: The inconsequential parts of the game are what makes it a pen and paper roleplaying game. Otherwise, just play a video game, there's nothing inconsequential in video games, but there's also way less freedom.
A big part of the game is inconsequential. I'll even go further away: The inconsequential parts of the game are what makes it a pen and paper roleplaying game. Otherwise, just play a video game, there's nothing inconsequential in video games, but there's also way less freedom.
Again, not disagreeing with ANY of that: JUST disagreeing what ANY of that requires a die roll. In fact, I'd say it'd seem MORE like a video game if you needed a roll for them. You can roleplay the background or the Low difficulty encounter or anything else and skip the rolls. I mean you can make everyone roll until their characters get over a 3' wall with a DC 5 but knowing that failing has no downside, why not just say everyone clambered over the wall and continue? Why not reserve such rolls for when they are chasing someone and it matters if they can quickly make it over the wall because there is a consequence in failing. :P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Otherwise, just play a video game, there's nothing inconsequential in video games
Gonna have to completely disagree there. I'd even say this is backwards.
rarely do i think that trap damage is purposeless.
even in the scenario that the party can indeed just stop and heal it, walking through a place with traps and basically spending 10minutes after each one of those to heal up can easily make a 10minute distance take 2h+
that kind of time stretching usually does have consequences, at least in my experience.
now, if you just put 1 random trap "just because" then yeah, it makes little difference, but it's hardly the case on a trapped area to only have 1 trap.
My point has hasn't been that the scenario is purposeless but that rolling for the whole thing would. For instance, in that scenario you put forth above, the Dm can just ask the party if they plan to heal up if they are hit with a trap and then just describe the 2+ hours and note that whatever timetable you have for the game moved up by the time it took.
Now if the party is in a hurry and on a timer, then those rolls start to matter. I find that such timers are a rarity and often added times have no direct impact on the game. YMMV of course depending on specific DM and adventures.
but rolling does matter.
I don't agree that is HAS to. Searching is a secret roll, so NO rolling isn't required: you can just mark off time and continue based off party tactics.
because in that scenario it's 10minutes for each failed check, not for each trap.
Not sure that matters. It might but it might not and overall doesn't have to be figured out individually: A quick 'it'll take you an extra 30 min if you heal up after making your way through the traps' works fine unless that 10 mins actually DOES matter, just like you said "making an 1h walk to 1h 10mins, that's indeed hardly relevant". If making every roll and just guesstimating a time is realistically that kind of difference, it's just kind of rolling to roll.
but in "general" if there are traps, you roll, even if it's just to know how long the players want to delay their advance.
I agree in general but here we're talking about traps added JUST for the story. I'm specifically talking about those "story" traps.
side note: Traps can also just help add to the setting. Just because the characters can heal from the trap doesn't mean that it serves no purpose. You can use traps to help tell the story.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Traps for trap's sake are just as interesting as combats for combat's sake. Yeah, you can do that but it is hardly good storytelling.
Traps that you can heal from can serve a story purpose if the people at the table wish them to. However, if such things are viewed as inconsequential, I'd agree, don't bother.
PF2 makes it completely up to the players and GM what they want to focus on. It is not a universal truth that traps need to be rolled for, nor that they shouldn't be. It should be each table that decides for themselves.
A big part of the game is inconsequential. I'll even go further away: The inconsequential parts of the game are what makes it a pen and paper roleplaying game. Otherwise, just play a video game, there's nothing inconsequential in video games, but there's also way less freedom.Again, not disagreeing with ANY of that: JUST disagreeing what ANY of that requires a die roll. In fact, I'd say it'd seem MORE like a video game if you needed a roll for them. You can roleplay the background or the Low difficulty encounter or anything else and skip the rolls. I mean you can make everyone roll until their characters get over a 3' wall with a DC 5 but knowing that failing has no downside, why not just say everyone clambered over the wall and continue? Why not reserve such rolls for when they are chasing someone and it matters if they can quickly make it over the wall because there is a consequence in failing. :P
I was obviously speaking of a level-appropriate trap, not a DC 5 one. And yes, if my players are facing a level-appropriate wall I ask them for an Athletics check even if the only risk is hp loss.
I think your reasoning doesn't hold water. Most encounters only deal hp damage and if you're not in a hurry it doesn't mean you should handwave half of the dungeon.
I was obviously speaking of a level-appropriate trap, not a DC 5 one. And yes, if my players are facing a level-appropriate wall I ask them for an Athletics check even if the only risk is hp loss.
IMO, it matters not if it was level-appropriate or not in the context of it being inconsequential.
I think your reasoning doesn't hold water. Most encounters only deal hp damage and if you're not in a hurry it doesn't mean you should handwave half of the dungeon.
If all it's doing is dealing random damage that you can then sit around and heal later without consequence, then why not skip it? I mean you can but what was gained? If, on the other hand an encounter takes daily resources like spells it matters. Or if you're on a clock or you don't have time to sit around. Or your fight or missed trap attracted another encounter. or...
And to the wall, it's not even a hp loss on failure [you need MORE than a 5' fall], so the example is a pure time sink/speed bump: it's 100% unadulterated rolling for rolling sake unless there are other circumstances to it.
If your entire game is isolated encounter that don't take any daily resources and can be dealt with be healing over a 10 min break, it sounds like a freeform game you don't need to pull the dice out for.
If all it's doing is dealing random damage that you can then sit around and heal later without consequence, then why not skip it? I mean you can but what was gained?
Player spotlight and return of investment comes to mind. If I were the party's "tinkerer" Rogue having picked up every locksmith and trapfinding feat there is and also maximized thievery I would be really annoyed getting hand-waved on every locked door or non-ressource-intensive trap. Sometimes its all about wether to cut the red or blue cable even if the bomb is a dud.
"So you are telling me that I picked up all this stuff only for one roll and only when time is counted in 6 second intervals?"
Also you often do not know how players will react unless given a choice. For example and using the above mentioned wall last time when it came to a relatively easy climbing exercise our Gnome Wizard indeed chose to expend ressources casting Levitate instead of getting helped or pulled up by his friends.
I was obviously speaking of a level-appropriate trap, not a DC 5 one. And yes, if my players are facing a level-appropriate wall I ask them for an Athletics check even if the only risk is hp loss.IMO, it matters not if it was level-appropriate or not in the context of it being inconsequential.
I think your reasoning doesn't hold water. Most encounters only deal hp damage and if you're not in a hurry it doesn't mean you should handwave half of the dungeon.If all it's doing is dealing random damage that you can then sit around and heal later without consequence, then why not skip it? I mean you can but what was gained? If, on the other hand an encounter takes daily resources like spells it matters. Or if you're on a clock or you don't have time to sit around. Or your fight or missed trap attracted another encounter. or...
And to the wall, it's not even a hp loss on failure [you need MORE than a 5' fall], so the example is a pure time sink/speed bump: it's 100% unadulterated rolling for rolling sake unless there are other circumstances to it.
If your entire game is isolated encounter that don't take any daily resources and can be dealt with be healing over a 10 min break, it sounds like a freeform game you don't need to pull the dice out for.
Yes, I ask for a check to climb a 30ft wall, to kill a mook and to disable a trap. For me, it's playing the game.
Now, maybe you only like to roll a check if it separates life from death, but I think it shouldn't happen very often.
Player spotlight and return of investment comes to mind. If I were the party's "tinkerer" Rogue having picked up every locksmith and trapfinding feat there is and also maximized thievery I would be really annoyed getting hand-waved on every locked door or non-ressource-intensive trap.
But no one here is talking about every trap or lock.
"So you are telling me that I picked up all this stuff only for one roll and only when time is counted in 6 second intervals?"
For example, if your chances are good enough that you can't get a crit fail without a 1 roll, why not just tell the trap guy he's so awesome it's bypassed without a roll? It's the same reason you had take 20 on rolls in PF1: if you have the time and enough rolls you know you'll get through so why make the character roll. ALL I'm saying is if you're into 'take 20' territory, why not speed things along.
Also you often do not know how players will react unless given a choice. For example and using the above mentioned wall last time when it came to a relatively easy climbing exercise our Gnome Wizard indeed chose to expend ressources casting Levitate instead of getting helped or pulled up by his friends.
Sure, but again you don't have to force a roll. You can ask how they are going to get over it and if they say 'climb over it', you can skip the roll. I'm not advocating taking anything out of the characters hands other than needless rolling. For the traps, I mentioned that if the players were planning to go through them and heal after what to do then: I wasn't saying anything to bypass their picking whatever options they wanted in dealing with things.
Yes, I ask for a check to climb a 30ft wall, to kill a mook and to disable a trap. For me, it's playing the game.
Now, maybe you only like to roll a check if it separates life from death, but I think it shouldn't happen very often.
Sigh... ALL I've been saying is that not everything requires a roll and that some that have an obvious outcome don't need one unless such a roll somehow advances the story. I'll be honest, I had NO idea this was such a controversial and seeming heretical idea.