Vaalingrade
Legend
Keep up. Mecheon also doesn't agree with your assessment.Keep up.
Keep up. Mecheon also doesn't agree with your assessment.Keep up.
Fun story. If you look at heals the same way you do dpr then you’ll find that using your highest level of spell for cure wounds does provide enough hpr to offset the dpr of a single level appropriate foe. On first glance that seems solid. I don’t think we want heals invalidating all of team monsters damage when all of them are attacking 1 PC.Enough to make the loss of a round of attacks be worthwhile, so probably at least the full amount of damage you could expect to get in at least a single round, if only a single round and a half as a bare minimum. As for resource cost? Basically the same as what it is at present
There are "virtual" negative hit points in 5e, from a certain point of view. Let me expand @Nightfly's example in more detail.There is no -20 hp in 5E.
failed death saves carrying over until your next rest would certainly give an incentive to not go down in the first place, short rests removing one failed save, long rests removing all of themYo-yo healing is ridiculous in-and-of itself. It's also the optimal strategy, which is why it's so common to see. The PC suffers no drawbacks until they hit zero HP, so it's simply more efficient to not bother healing until the PC is dropped to zero. Death saves are cleared and the revived PC operates at full combat capability regardless of their recent near-death experience, so the healer is being more efficient by simply waiting. None of the "solutions" you provide are more efficient for the gamers, which is why gamers reject them.
Except I'm full certain the same people who would do this are on the 'only two short rests a day' train. So Five Minute Work Day it is.failed death saves carrying over until your next rest would certainly give an incentive to not go down in the first place, short rests removing one failed save, long rests removing all of them
true perhaps, but that's an entirely separate issue to yoyo healing to be solved in it's own ways.Except I'm full certain the same people who would do this are on the 'only two short rests a day' train. So Five Minute Work Day it is.
I mean it helps, making it relatively more optimal to heal characters while they're up. And sure, it also makes the game harder and more deadly, and if that's not what one wants then it is bad solution. However, given that a lot of people feel that the game is too easy, to them this might be basically solving two problems at once.If you need to punish dropping to 0 in a way that doesn't help anything and only makes the play experience worse, why not simply kick the player under the table?
This ignores the cost in action economy of the character that goes down, not to mention the possibility of that character getting outright killed in the intervening round.There are "virtual" negative hit points in 5e, from a certain point of view. Let me expand @Nightfly's example in more detail.
A PC starts a round at max, 28 HP. They are hit for 24 points of damage, dropping to 4 HP. Consider two options:
1) The party's healer moves to the wounded PC and upcasts cure wounds to heal the PC back to 28 HP. The PC is then hit for another 24 points, and is back to 4 HP.
2) The party's healer makes an attack on their turn instead of healing the injured PC. The PC is hit for another 24 points of damage, and drops to 0 HP. The next round the party healer casts healing word using a 1st-level slot and heals the PC to 4 HP.
So in option 2, the PC ends up at the same place with less resource expenditure. Twenty points of the monster's attack was negated by hitting the 0 HP "wall."
Personally, I think it is a very "gamey" approach and discourage it, but it is a more optimal strategy.
This ignores the cost in action economy of the character that goes down, not to mention the possibility of that character getting outright killed in the intervening round.