D&D 5E Assaying rules for 5E E6 (Revised)

[Horwath]

One advantage if you will, with a scheme like this, is how it inverts expectations and pressure to keep going. Normally the casters feel exhausted and in need of rest. But here the -1 penalties affect martial characters much more, since casters seldom actively roll dice (in D&D, the defender needs to save against magic, while the spell is assumed to work automatically).

I would say the rest cadence wasn't hugely impacted. The big win was that nobody ever suggested "let's hold off healing until the character is at zero"

that is why we give -1 to all AC and DCs and speed penalty. That way all aspects of the play are affected more or less the same. Except if you are a designated healer, but with penalty to speed and AC it still affects you.

 

[CapnZapp]

unless you have a party full of healers, Healing does not compete with one Scorching ray, it competes with every other thing that you can throw at the party per round,
there is loads of "auto-attacks", rage, sneak attack bonuses, alchemical items and what not.

Point of buffing the spell is to make it worth the slot it is spent on.
And as most people find healing as boring, it is moved to Bonus action so your Action stays free to do something not boring, and as it is a spell you are still limited to Cantrip only spells as your action. Or to whack someone over the head with a mace.

Healing word is now loved/hated because it heals pitiful amount of damage, but still removed dying condition and those pesky failed death saves in one Bonus action.

In D&D you are just as awesome and effective with 1 HP as 100 HP.

Either a healing spell heals you a significant amount of healing or it can just as well heal a single point.

The advantage of a 7 or 11 point heal over a 2 or 3 point heal are minuscule in practical play.

NB. Hope everybody are aware healing will give twice as much dice in 2024 as in 2014. Saying this so everyone realizes the fight over the value of healing is already over and done with.

 

[CapnZapp]

that is why we give -1 to all AC and DCs and speed penalty. That way all aspects of the play are affected more or less the same. Except if you are a designated healer, but with penalty to speed and AC it still affects you.

My DM simply went with whatever his source used.

Not impacting passive values (i.e. only applying the penalty to d20 rolls) does help avoiding the death spiral phenomenon.

But again, if combat is something to avoid rather than the reward it is in default D&D, you can absolutely experiment with harsher penalties.

 

[Horwath]

In D&D you are just as awesome and effective with 1 HP as 190 HP.

Either a healing spell heals you a significant amount of healing or it can just as well heal a single point.

The advantage of a 7 or 11 point heal over a 2 or 3 point heal are minuscule in practical play.

NB. Hope everybody are aware healing will give twice as much dice in 2924 as in 2014. Saying this so everyone realizes the fight over the value of healing is already over and done with.

that is why healing is increased and must come in pair with penalties of dropping to zero.
and with addition of negative HPs again, there is amount you need to "overheal" in order to get someone back on their feet.


As for negative HPs, maybe Con score or half max HP, whatever is higher.
This gives some more value to Con on low levels where half max HP would be very little(wizard with 12 CON would be very likely to be instakilled with 1 crit). 7 Max HPs, half of that in negative value(3), you are dead after taking 10 damage. That is maybe too low.

 

[Horwath]

My DM simply went with whatever his source used.

Not impacting passive values (i.e. only applying the penalty to d20 rolls) does help avoiding the death spiral phenomenon.

But again, if combat is something to avoid rather than the reward it is in default D&D, you can absolutely experiment with harsher penalties.

yeah, death spiral can be a problem. that is why we add that when you are healed to 50% of max HP or more, those exhaustion levels go away(might try with 75% max HP to make it harsher).

you can also add 1 exhaustion level while you are at 25% max HP or lower. Barbarians in rage are immune to this effect.

 

[CapnZapp]

that is why healing is increased and must come in pair with penalties of dropping to zero.
and with addition of negative HPs again, there is amount you need to "overheal" in order to get someone back on their feet.


As for negative HPs, maybe Con score or half max HP, whatever is higher.
This gives some more value to Con on low levels where half max HP would be very little(wizard with 12 CON would be very likely to be instakilled with 1 crit). 7 Max HPs, half of that in negative value(3), you are dead after taking 10 damage. That is maybe too low.

I used negative HP in one campaign. (Capped to -10 at the bottom)

Ultimately the "gain Exhaustion" rule (together with Exhaustion= -1) is much more elegant, accomplishing the same design goal in a simpler less fiddly better way.

 

[Horwath]

I used negative HP in one campaign. (Capped to -10 at the bottom)

Ultimately the "gain Exhaustion" rule (together with Exhaustion= -1) is much more elegant, accomplishing the same design goal in a simpler less fiddly better way.

negative HPs or death saves can work either, but with mandatory -1 exhaustion.
maybe both negative and death saves.

 

[NotAYakk]

Thanks for the reply! It's funny how Healing Word caused a lot of issues.. I wonder if just removing it, making it Touch range, or grant Temp HP would resolve all the house-rules etc. that have been built up around the bonus action heal yo-yoing.

Healing Word also solves a big problem. Namely, the "heal bot".

Having a way for a character healing to not spend their entire action doing nothing but recover another player's HP makes playing a healing character less toxic.

So long as their non-spell actions are somewhat fun, they can help an ally regain some HP while still moving the fight towards its conclusion (damage, debuffing, whatever else).

Healing Word is used to yo-yo because low amounts of HP are enough to get someone up from being down. If it was an action it would just mean the healer PC gets to do less active stuff.

 

[clearstream]

I used negative HP in one campaign. (Capped to -10 at the bottom)

Ultimately the "gain Exhaustion" rule (together with Exhaustion= -1) is much more elegant, accomplishing the same design goal in a simpler less fiddly better way.

Concur that negative HP is fiddly. I see it as having some reasonable upsides, but I can readily picture it not being a good solve for a lot of tables.

I don't hate "gain Exhaustion"... although I do love "Stunned: X"

 

[clearstream]

Healing Word also solves a big problem. Namely, the "heal bot".

Having a way for a character healing to not spend their entire action doing nothing but recover another player's HP makes playing a healing character less toxic.

So long as their non-spell actions are somewhat fun, they can help an ally regain some HP while still moving the fight towards its conclusion (damage, debuffing, whatever else).

Healing Word is used to yo-yo because low amounts of HP are enough to get someone up from being down. If it was an action it would just mean the healer PC gets to do less active stuff.

Very much agree. The fix for healing word isn't to make healers pay more for the yo-yo. Costs should fall on the side of the character going down.

I mean, balance-wise, range and bonus action is worth far more than 2HP... but that isn't fundamentally the problem. It just casts it in brighter light.