What are the good tactical maxims as to when to cast healing spells / drink healing potions in the middle of combat?
When should your actions be spent healing rather than preventing damage in combat?
I argue that it should be done only when a PC is one attack away from zero hit points. Then, you should use the biggest healing you have to heal as many hit points as you can in one action.
It's kind of intuitive after a handful of combats, knowing how squishy this character is opposed to that one, plus there's the ever present HP total and so forth giving you a mathematical approach to the question.
In general I find that most parties I've DMed forget that they can heal until someone is making death saving throws. Then it's a race to see if they can end combat before healing needs to be given.
Tactically, after the 2nd or 3rd combat round it should be easy enough to average out the damage being dealt and how easy it is to defend against those attacks. Once that is figured out I'd offer that you should pop healing just enough to keep everyone at a mid-range in HP and burst heal/top off, if the fight seems to be protracted.
I argue that it should be done only when a PC is one attack away from zero hit points. Then, you should use the biggest healing you have to heal as many hit points as you can in one action.
Because 5e doesn't track "negative hit points" below 0 HP, Unless your DM has houseruled some sort of exhaustion rule to deal with having slipped into unconsciousness and then been healed back up mid-combat, it is usually best to only heal allies that have already dropped to 0 hit points. Main exceptions are:
you anticipate that they'll be subjected to damage while unconscious before you can heal them, that might cause them to fail multiple death saves;
there's a credible risk of them dropping to 0 with "massive damage" that will kill them outright (pretty unlikely) or being hit by a disintegrate or power word; or
the initiative order is such that you won't be able to wake them back up before their next turn, causing them to waste combat rounds rolling meaningless death saves.
It depends on your DM. Usually DMs don't attack downed players. In that case, it's definitely preferable to bring players up from zero due to the lack of negative hp. However, I think intelligent opponents would be able to recognize when the opponents they drop keep getting back up. Under this circumstance they should change tactics and start auto-critting the downed enemies to prevent the yo-yo effect. If the DM is operating under this paradigm, then that should change your healing tactic from healing at zero to the less "optimal" keeping people above zero (for the lower chance of really dying).
That's why I believe that you should heal when the PC is one successful attack away from zero. With a few notable exceptions, it is pure metagaming for the monster to not take the time to make sure that a PC with zero hit points isn't getting back up. Many creatures will do it because they enjoy disemboweling you. Many creatures will do it because they are smart enough to know that you are one spell from getting back on your feet. Many creatures will do it because it is just part of their nature.
That's why I believe that you should heal when the PC is one successful attack away from zero. With a few notable exceptions, it is pure metagaming for the monster to not take the time to make sure that a PC with zero hit points isn't getting back up. Many creatures will do it because they enjoy disemboweling you. Many creatures will do it because they are smart enough to know that you are one spell from getting back on your feet. Many creatures will do it because it is just part of their nature.
I tend to agree with you about the metagaming. I would like to point out that it's also metagaming for a creature that attacks a downed enemy to stop attacking a downed enemy once they are dead dead. Some exceptions would be extreme mutilation of the corpse or using an action to make a medicine check determine if the enemy is actually dead. Maybe that's too extreme of a position. I'm just trying to point out that enemies generally shouldn't always simply move on after making the exact number of attacks to make a player die.
Personally, the only monsters that I have attack downed players are like Ghouls. In that they might ignore everyone else to start getting a meal.
Unless the monster has MultiAttack, then attacking a down party member is 2 auto fails. That still gives time for the group to heal that party member, unless the PC is next in the initiative order.
I'm pretty sure that a demon is going to know you're dead when you're tangled up in your own intestines and a mercenary is going to know you're dead when your head is rolling across the floor.
I'm pretty sure that a demon is going to know you're dead when your spleen is laying next to your sneakers and a mercenary is going to know you're dead when your head is rolling across the floor.
Needing a medicine check is extreme.
I think those examples fall under mutilation of a corpse. No player character is losing their head when they drop to zero hp. If a body is just laying there bleeding out, how do you determine if it's actually dead?
When was the last time you stabbed a monster after it's fallen? NPCs essentially lay there and auto-fail three death saves without PCs mutilating them (I refuse to accept that the PC/NPC divide actually has physiological differences that give PCs entirely different life/death mechanics, even though it's RAW), so it's not that hard to accept that monsters are likely to extend the same courtesy to PCs.
Personally I heal below half, mitigate above half for best return (though that also depends on maximum hit points). As to potions whenever the best moment allows and it is needed.
That said I'm an old school player/DM so if characters are dropping unconscious it has already gone a bit wrong.
As i see it, it is unlikely for an opponent to pause between attacks on a target to "see the result", as they have already chosen their target(s) they will in most circumstances continue with that plan (especially if they aren't to clever), often causing automatic death fails on subsequent hits.
Except that's not how combat works... you resolve each attack before assigning a target for the next attack, unless they happen simultaneously, such as with magic missile.
I was making an extreme argument both for the laughs and for clarity. A head doesn't have to actually be rolling across the floor at zero hit points. A significant part of the throat missing or a hole where the heart used to be or any number of signs of being dead will suffice. We are, after all, genrally talking about someone who died in combat. It isn't like they passes away peacefully in their sleep. Their corpses are going to be mutilated.
Except that's not how combat works... you resolve each attack before assigning a target for the next attack, unless they happen simultaneously, such as with magic missile.
My current PbP DM posts every other day. I'm not going to wait almost a week to see if I kill something. Doesn't really matter if there is only one target, if it goes down, smack it for good measure. Undead are feisty.
If I had three attacks and the target was tough, the fight would be like this:
I attack
wait 2 days - you hit
I attack again
wait 2 days - you hit again
I use bonus action for unarmed strike
wait 2 days - he goes down
I loot the body
wait 2 days
frack that.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
That's why I include monster hit points and AC in my play by post thread. The rules however are not intended for use with play-by-post. They were designed with immediate feedback in mind.
I was making an extreme argument both for the laughs and for clarity. A head doesn't have to actually be rolling across the floor at zero hit points. A significant part of the throat missing or a hole where the heart used to be or any number of signs of being dead will suffice. We are, after all, genrally talking about someone who died in combat. It isn't like they passes away peacefully in their sleep. Their corpses are going to be mutilated.
I acknowledge your hyperbole. Still, a player character with their throat ripped out (but still rolling death saves) is by definition not dead. Therefore you can't use the status of the throat as an indication of death. This is why I argue that PCs shouldn't be described as having extreme wounds (like a hole through the heart or missing part of their throat) when they drop to zero; they could get back up again. In fact, left alone they're ~50% likely to wake up on their own instead of dying.
How is an enemy to know if a player character is dead or not? My answer is either make a medicine check or whack at the body until it shows the kind of damage you describe (mutilation).
The entire concept of "dead" being a clearly defined line is a relatively modern construct anyway. Lots of primitive and medieval societies kept "death vigils" of various lengths, based on the uncertainty of telling for certain whether someone was truly departed until things like rigor mortis or the smell of decay arrived. In the middle of a combat, most creatures should focus on active combatants posing a true threat, and leave "stabbing corpses" (or eating them, etc) until after the action dies down.
What are the good tactical maxims as to when to cast healing spells / drink healing potions in the middle of combat?
When should your actions be spent healing rather than preventing damage in combat?
I argue that it should be done only when a PC is one attack away from zero hit points. Then, you should use the biggest healing you have to heal as many hit points as you can in one action.
It's kind of intuitive after a handful of combats, knowing how squishy this character is opposed to that one, plus there's the ever present HP total and so forth giving you a mathematical approach to the question.
In general I find that most parties I've DMed forget that they can heal until someone is making death saving throws. Then it's a race to see if they can end combat before healing needs to be given.
Tactically, after the 2nd or 3rd combat round it should be easy enough to average out the damage being dealt and how easy it is to defend against those attacks. Once that is figured out I'd offer that you should pop healing just enough to keep everyone at a mid-range in HP and burst heal/top off, if the fight seems to be protracted.
Because 5e doesn't track "negative hit points" below 0 HP, Unless your DM has houseruled some sort of exhaustion rule to deal with having slipped into unconsciousness and then been healed back up mid-combat, it is usually best to only heal allies that have already dropped to 0 hit points. Main exceptions are:
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Meh. I just heal people when they need it, regardless of whether they're one hit away or not. I'd rather not chance anyone failing death saves.
It depends on your DM. Usually DMs don't attack downed players. In that case, it's definitely preferable to bring players up from zero due to the lack of negative hp. However, I think intelligent opponents would be able to recognize when the opponents they drop keep getting back up. Under this circumstance they should change tactics and start auto-critting the downed enemies to prevent the yo-yo effect. If the DM is operating under this paradigm, then that should change your healing tactic from healing at zero to the less "optimal" keeping people above zero (for the lower chance of really dying).
That's why I believe that you should heal when the PC is one successful attack away from zero. With a few notable exceptions, it is pure metagaming for the monster to not take the time to make sure that a PC with zero hit points isn't getting back up. Many creatures will do it because they enjoy disemboweling you. Many creatures will do it because they are smart enough to know that you are one spell from getting back on your feet. Many creatures will do it because it is just part of their nature.
I tend to agree with you about the metagaming. I would like to point out that it's also metagaming for a creature that attacks a downed enemy to stop attacking a downed enemy once they are dead dead. Some exceptions would be extreme mutilation of the corpse or using an action to make a medicine check determine if the enemy is actually dead. Maybe that's too extreme of a position. I'm just trying to point out that enemies generally shouldn't always simply move on after making the exact number of attacks to make a player die.
Personally, the only monsters that I have attack downed players are like Ghouls. In that they might ignore everyone else to start getting a meal.
Unless the monster has MultiAttack, then attacking a down party member is 2 auto fails. That still gives time for the group to heal that party member, unless the PC is next in the initiative order.
I'm pretty sure that a demon is going to know you're dead when you're tangled up in your own intestines and a mercenary is going to know you're dead when your head is rolling across the floor.
Needing a medicine check is extreme.
I think those examples fall under mutilation of a corpse. No player character is losing their head when they drop to zero hp. If a body is just laying there bleeding out, how do you determine if it's actually dead?
When was the last time you stabbed a monster after it's fallen? NPCs essentially lay there and auto-fail three death saves without PCs mutilating them (I refuse to accept that the PC/NPC divide actually has physiological differences that give PCs entirely different life/death mechanics, even though it's RAW), so it's not that hard to accept that monsters are likely to extend the same courtesy to PCs.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Personally I heal below half, mitigate above half for best return (though that also depends on maximum hit points). As to potions whenever the best moment allows and it is needed.
That said I'm an old school player/DM so if characters are dropping unconscious it has already gone a bit wrong.
As i see it, it is unlikely for an opponent to pause between attacks on a target to "see the result", as they have already chosen their target(s) they will in most circumstances continue with that plan (especially if they aren't to clever), often causing automatic death fails on subsequent hits.
- Loswaith
Kind of all the time.
I swing at the bad guy with my Weapon of Genericness and follow up with a kick to his head!
Attack 1 15
Damage 8
Attack 2 11
Damage 13
Roundhouse Kick 18
Damage 7
"He only had 10 hp left..."
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
Well, that was some shit rolls but you know what I mean.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
Except that's not how combat works... you resolve each attack before assigning a target for the next attack, unless they happen simultaneously, such as with magic missile.
I was making an extreme argument both for the laughs and for clarity. A head doesn't have to actually be rolling across the floor at zero hit points. A significant part of the throat missing or a hole where the heart used to be or any number of signs of being dead will suffice. We are, after all, genrally talking about someone who died in combat. It isn't like they passes away peacefully in their sleep. Their corpses are going to be mutilated.
My current PbP DM posts every other day. I'm not going to wait almost a week to see if I kill something. Doesn't really matter if there is only one target, if it goes down, smack it for good measure. Undead are feisty.
If I had three attacks and the target was tough, the fight would be like this:
I attack
wait 2 days - you hit
I attack again
wait 2 days - you hit again
I use bonus action for unarmed strike
wait 2 days - he goes down
I loot the body
wait 2 days
frack that.
"Sooner or later, your Players are going to smash your railroad into a sandbox."
-Vedexent
"real life is a super high CR."
-OboeLauren
"............anybody got any potatoes? We could drop a potato in each hole an' see which ones get viciously mauled by horrible monsters?"
-Ilyara Thundertale
That's why I include monster hit points and AC in my play by post thread. The rules however are not intended for use with play-by-post. They were designed with immediate feedback in mind.
I acknowledge your hyperbole. Still, a player character with their throat ripped out (but still rolling death saves) is by definition not dead. Therefore you can't use the status of the throat as an indication of death. This is why I argue that PCs shouldn't be described as having extreme wounds (like a hole through the heart or missing part of their throat) when they drop to zero; they could get back up again. In fact, left alone they're ~50% likely to wake up on their own instead of dying.
How is an enemy to know if a player character is dead or not? My answer is either make a medicine check or whack at the body until it shows the kind of damage you describe (mutilation).
The entire concept of "dead" being a clearly defined line is a relatively modern construct anyway. Lots of primitive and medieval societies kept "death vigils" of various lengths, based on the uncertainty of telling for certain whether someone was truly departed until things like rigor mortis or the smell of decay arrived. In the middle of a combat, most creatures should focus on active combatants posing a true threat, and leave "stabbing corpses" (or eating them, etc) until after the action dies down.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.