I think bigdog should just mod his game if its that important to him. Where's that voting option? Seriously...its barely noticeable as it is. Let the devs work on shit that's actually important insteadof you people coming up with some ridiculous "change of the week"
@bigdogchris, I may have failed to communicate. That last question wasn't a point or an argument. It was a request. I'm trying to pick your brain and understand the origin of your opinion.
The writers of the original 2nd edition rules made a regeneration system for high CON and they decided to set the rate at certain values. I'd like to know your opinion, if any, why you think that rate was originally chosen and published.
Do you think that there was a mathematical reason? Style reason? Just numbers out of thin air? Is there a reason why you would choose those values if you were writing the book? Is there any degree of philosophy to it?
Why does the original rule exist at those values?
Not talking about BG or following rules at this point. Just curious what your brain considers to be the primordial intent of setting the regeneration rate as is (in the book).
I know what you were asking but chose not to answer. The question seems a little too positioning.
I'll just say that I agree with the PnP authors more than the original BG developers as I try to side with conservatism when possible. I see 'having less' as more of a challenge than giving players all the power they want. All of these little pieces add up.
The PnP table seems better to me, I doubt that this will be changed (outside of a mod). I think it was most likely intentional, as CamDawg stated many intentional liberties were taken. Due to that and the fact that the players jealously guard their bonuses, this doesn't seem likely to be changed.
As I've said before, I think that the PnP rules are balanced well and play well and that a lot of unnecessary liberties were taken with a great system, but that was Bioware's prerogative I guess. At the end of the day, they made an excellent game.
I'm anxiously awaiting a few mods for BG:EE (PnP restorations are, as always, at the top of my list)
If it was changed to PnP it would only be beneficial for resting, specially when having rings of regen, as of now it's actually slightly beneficial as a mechanic.
I voted in no. I think it makes sense for Bhaalspawn with high constitution to have faster than normal regeneration. I think there are more important things to fix. Also if it is so easy to fix, why not just make a custom mod for the hardcore p&p players?
But perhaps having it as a difficulty setting would work for everyone?
I think it was cleared that this is not a bug. That's it. If you don't like it, just mod it for yourself, simple as it is. Why do you have the urge to make this to be implemented for everyone? That is even for those who disagree with you?
I know what you were asking but chose not to answer. The question seems a little too positioning.
I'll just say that I agree with the PnP authors more than the original BG developers as I try to side with conservatism when possible. I see 'having less' as more of a challenge than giving players all the power they want. All of these little pieces add up.
Sorry about how it sounds. I didn't know another way to put it. I believe this actually tells me everything I was looking for: "I try to side with conservatism when possible." If I'm reading it right, this means that we're arguing toward entirely different ends. Thus, a long in depth philosophical debate from me about original game rule intent wouldn't serve any purpose.
@BigDogChris From time to time I reflect back on previous posts and decide that my spur of the moment asshole inside of me took over and I should have been mature enough to express myself without being aggressive.
It's just that you post ALOT of suggestions on your own threads, or others with your opinion and say things like "Can we get the rules authority here and put it on the dev tracker!" My defensiveness started when a certain cloak was changed to be more annoying than balanced, needing to rest between uses. Since then it seems people have flocked here to try to make the game the exact same as PnP(and I don't agree with all of it) or just flat out change an item or spell because they believe it is overpowered.
I didn't buy this game because it is an exact video game interpretation of the 2nd edition PnP rules. I didn't buy it for challenging combat that needed a treadmill of nerfs and buffs to remain challenging and interesting. I bought it because I loved the game when it came out, and I wanted to relive that same exact excitement I experienced years ago by roleplaying my weak little hero's and watching them grow into gods (in a higher resolution)
Every rule change, item change, and spell change slowly chips away at the game I wanted to play. In short, I feel it would be much more appreciated by the community if you focused your efforts on modding the game for yourself and like minded people, instead of trying to impose your idea of gaming perfection on the general community.
I say this with complete respect for you as a person with no malice whatsoever. I want to play the game I thought was perfect from the beginning. I do not want to play a game created by the community. That is much more suited for modders where the player can pick and choose what mods he/she feels is appropriate.
So why were my posts deleted for agreeing with ThebigChris and an administrator is abusing their power to remove two good posts of mine can someone please come forth and explain why you are removing my posts everytime i come up with something insightful and reasonable? who is this adminstrator abusing his powers for I am about to talk to the site owner and have an administraor rights taken away from whoever is removing posts thanks!
Sounds like you have an issue with me posting my opinions but letting an insulter like thedemoninside get away with what hes posting and refuse to remove his insults when I never insulted anyone at all. Im getting sick and tired of these admins on here who dont seem to be acting like an administer at all and arent adressing situations on both sides of the coin. I suggest a thread to poll how the admins are really doing and if we should be allowing forum posters to be given admin rights at all!
There are no rules for longer posts and if they bother you so much to delete them. you need to be removed from administer position. It is a persons right and no rule states posts to be short and sweet. if you cant take the time to read it all and understand some people can be more insightful than others and stop defending favorites and friends or whatever reason this is about. Then going to the site owner him/herself will have to settle about your abusing the admin rights and rules you have upon yourself!
I was discussing the thread of BigdogChris and was agreeing with him on my first two posts but why the admin had to remove it is what I want to know. I explained in good detail about his point and how the regen works and how the game should follow the P&P rules about it. In no way were they needed to be removed at all. They were not insulting or disruptive nor misleading but somehow sounds fishy for an admin to remove them and someone is abusing their power on here. Thanks for telling me where to look at and who to talk to. I will Adress this with Nathan for sure and figure out what is really going on cause this in my opinion is not very administrative at all. I appreciate the info Shandyr. Thats why I posted about it. I had no intentions to go off topic. I thought it be easier to find the admin responsible for their actions and abuse of power to remove my first two posts.
It wasnt a moderator Shandyr. I said Administrator. Those who are running the site that ARENT team members like LadyRhian (who was just like anyone else a forum poster) and Tanthalas who apparently has personal issues with me for unknown reasons because I was being truthful and defending my points and P&P ruleset follows like any other one on here would till some flamers went out of control and having Tanthalas falsely ban me.
bigdogchris said: I know what you were asking but chose not to answer. The question seems a little too positioning.
I'll just say that I agree with the PnP authors more than the original BG developers as I try to side with conservatism when possible. I see 'having less' as more of a challenge than giving players all the power they want. All of these little pieces add up.
Ill make it discreet enough if that admin reads this post again. Sorry to go off topic. But this is what I was following too all my months of keeping up with the forum since being falsey banned for being just liek bigdogchris stating how I feel this game should be true to its P&P style and how this game isnt related to the books which I own as well. Some people on here cant handle both sides of the coin and why they let an insulter like Thedemoninside keep hsi posts up is what is making me question about the administrators on the site nowdays. Should Tanthalas and LadyRhian for example be removed from their rank and understand administartor powers are NOT to be abused like these power gamers do to the game in general!
Sorry for the off topicness again but this administrator needs to understand what abusing is like as it can reflect to this topic in a way. This regen thing si exactly what this issue is like. Its an abuse of the ruleset and it needs to be fixed as it is very power gaming like.
Seriously i think administrators should just leave peoples posts alone even if off topic as even that is causing conflicts among many who had posts removed even when they stayed on topic. This is starting to sound very fishy now about some Admins and their abusing the power they have. I think this topic should be closed and removed and started over again so people can agree with bigdogchris or agree to those opposing him still following the poll.
You sure made such a storm thedemoninside. You shouldnt have insulted me as it resulted your posts being removed and if you never had struck like this, my two posts would still be up and none of this insulting from you wouldve made such a big commotion. I hope you are happy with what you caused. Because what you did was very disrespectful and rude. If this is bothering you too much Shandyr. I am with you. This topic has gone too far and im not impressed I spent all that time discussing in detail why this rule should be allowed in the game if it follows the ruleset exactly as the developers marketed the game as they said it will be 2nd edition P&P AD7d rules. So something tells me no disrespect to you. It seems you even arent follwing guidelines anymore and are just deleting things for even thedemoninside had a post i agree was posted to bigdogchris and even shouldnt be removed and yet im defending him too for that yet he insulted me. I was right. Admninistrators that were former forum posters should be disbanded from their ranks and no longer hand out these admin rights to people who dont own the site and cant even uphold their own guidelines. If you cant expalin why the posts were removed for following on topic including thedemoninside who even said his deleted was to bigdogchris. You dont seem to be a good administrator and you arent admin type at all from how your proflie looks. Sorry to say.
Xezmeraude2, you were told to remain on topic. I've deleted your most recent posts in this thread. If you wish to discuss the matter, please do so by sending me a message.
Further derailing of this thread will be treated as trolling. ~Aosaw
Yeah, I've noticed that as well. Rather then nerfing the classes that are already ridiculously broken compared to what their actual stats and bonuses should be (using PnP 2nd Ed as a baseline), they keep suggesting buffing the classes that are already correct in the first place but seem ridiculously underpowered by comparison.
I'm with the camp that bringing everything as close to PnP as possible, as a base-line for the game is the best of course of action. If you want the stupidly OP crap that's currently in here, mod it back in.
And especially, stuff like the con regen is a barely touched piece of the game in the long run. Outside of Dwarves, Half-orcs, Warrior-types, or part clerics buff with high lvl DUHM, other classes never really spend enough points in con to ever see it. That said, I'd still prefer it have the correct bonus, since it's primary use is healing during rest or transition. Unless you have a truly massive amount of CON, you'd never actually see benefit except in the longest of battles anyway
Also...a round in 2nd edition is 1 minute, a turn is 10 minutes. In BG a round is 6 seconds, and a turn is 1 minute. So even if it's corrected use turns as in PnP, it'll still be 10x faster then it would under their default round/turn settings.
It's worth bearing in mind that the standard ring of regeneration in P&P is actually 1 hp/turn. Whereas in BG it's 1hp/round. So if you want to be consistent then when changing constitution regen, you should nerf the ring of regeneration too.
Now the ring of gaxx and axe of the unyielding (+3/+5) obviously arent listed in standard P&P, but those should probably be nerfed to be consistent as well.
Personally I'd say leave it as it is. Especially when you consider that the ring of regeneration in P&P can bring a player back from the dead - perhaps that feature should be implemented as well...
In many of the mods produced for the Baldur's Gate series, particularly spell and summoning related, much effort was put forth to modify the game mechanics to more closely adhere to P&P.
I haven't seen any that addressed the issue of constitution regen. I am not sure about this one.
I have no overwhelming opinion on this. I like it as it is but wouldn't mind tooo much if it was changed to more closely match PnP.
However before this is even looked at I would want to see high Wisdom benefits to saves (and spell immunities) to be revisited and those bonuses added to the game - as per PnP. This is my mind is a more glaring issue than the different regen speeds.
I do agree it's a small issue, vs a lot of other missing stuff, especially from intelligence (enforced max castable spell level, immunity to all illusion spells up to a certain level), dex (+saves vs certain spells, dex adjustment reducing dual-wield penalties as proper) and wisdom (+saves vs certain spells, immunities to certain spells as it increases).
This seems like a perfect example of pointless rules lawyering.
In BG1, there's a grand total of 2 ways you can get CON regeneration: pick up Kagain, or play a Dwarven/Half-orc protagonist. If you push Kagain to the limit with the CON tome and Buckley's Buckler, he'll wind up with 22 CON, which unless I am mistaken results in him regenerating 1 HP every 40 seconds. Think about it. 40 seconds. For a level 1 Kagain to regenerate completely if he's brought down to 1 HP, you have to stand around and let him do nothing for 9 1/2 minutes. 9 1/2 minutes! Who in their right mind would do this rather than just have him chug a potion or cast a CLW. And that's at level 1... later on, using it as a healing agent becomes a moot point. Using regeneration on the protagonist is even less useful, since you can only start at 19 CON.
There's really no benefit to be had from it in combat. Yes, if you're fighting for a very long time, Kagain or your PC might end up regenerating 2-3 HP. That's nothing. That's one third of a healing potion. No enemy that you have to fight for several minutes is going to be so weak an extra 2-3 HP is going to slow him down.
Since you seem intent on allowing regeneration while resting (where the ability is already useful), I don't see the point of this, except if you have some kind of weird fixation with always implementing things according to the P&P book, come hell or high water. Honestly, this is such a non-existent issue that I am surprised anyone brought it up... the devs have about 500 things that are far more important to deal with, and assuming even one of them reads this, you just sucked away valuable development time.. eugh.
As for the suggestions to nerf the Ring of Regeneration and Ring of Gaxx, whatever for? Ring of Regeneration is already a fairly weak choice, what with the abundance of healing potions and spells (really, you want to sit around for several minutes while it, ever so very very slowly, heals your tank up? Or swap it around on your back-rowers to save a few cure spells?). Ring of Gaxx is supposed to be powerful, it's one of the hardest fights in SoA, at least for the people that haven't played through the game several dozen times and knows it inside and out.
The only argument I can see here is "It doesn't adhere to P&P! Burn it!". From my point of view, gameplay trumps rules lawyering. Especially when the gameplay really isn't much affected by this, it's just a nice little perk that picking up Kagain can save you a few healing potions early on.
Actually you CAN get very high con with potions or DUHM.
DUHM lasts 1 turn. As I recall, with 25 CON you regenerate 1 HP every 10 seconds. So you'll regenerate 6 HP. Again, once you're past the absolute earliest levels, this simply won't matter, you can just chug a potion of extra healing and get 4x the effect.
I'd also say it's beside the point, as you only get a maximum of 2 DUHM as Bhaalspawn powers. Otherwise you have to spend spell slots on them, and the whole debate (as far as I can make out) concerns having the regeneration as a passive benefit, not something that you actively have to spend potions/spells on to activate.
One thing I could agree on fixing is casting DUHM, resting immediately, and thus regenerate fully since you had a regeneration CON when you started resting. This could potentially be fixed, but it's such a minor exploit I don't consider it worth the time.
That having been said, I do support Romulan's point about event-occurence over a period of time as supporting the current regen rates. In PNP you can "Play bones for 10 minutes" and fast-forward past the lengthy process of constitution-granted regeneration. If the regen rates were properly distributed in the game, you'd have to actually let the game run for 10 minutes while you do other things. I don't now about you, but I never leave my game unpaused. Usually because there's some beneficial spell running, but there's also a somewhat elemental fear that I'll come back to the game and be dead.
I think the ideal answer would be to add a way to speed up the passage of time. A "Wait" feature that lets you skip a number of turns.
!!What if it were a "Meal" feature? You break bread with your party members. Skip 10 turns. High chance of triggering banter. Maybe reduces fatigue. That might be kind of cool. And it would allow you to incorporate proper Constitution regeneration rates, while still giving you a way to collapse time and treat the computer game like a computer game while roleplaying at the same time.
I don't see how this really matters or really effects game play.
It is still so slow that sitting around and waiting for HP to regen is ridiculous. And if you make it as low as it should be you are still going to get HP back when traveling for 20 hours to different areas etc...
So I guess my question is how would changing this actually effect game play? Because unless people are currently sitting around and using it in real time to gain HP back to a large degree ( I don't believe they are ) or slowing it down would make it so traveling or resting still wasn't enough to gain your HP back this is just rules for the sake of rules
Plus, I've never known a DM that stuck 100% to the rules, they always had house rules for minor rules here and there. So I think of these things as house rules.
I don't people not wanting this change is about people not wanting to give up something they have. Most characters aren't going to have 20 con, and as I've pointed out this perk really only comes into play when traveling or making resting faster. I think maybe they want fixes that would actually impact the game other than being a check mark next to one more house rule fixed.
I mean this game is a hybrid of 2nd and 3rd edition, which is already house rules to begin with. So if we are going to stick hardcore to every single rule with no house rules allowed. You either have to be ok with removing every single 2nd edition element and replacing it with a 3rd edition counterpoint or vice versa.
Sorry if I misunderstood the math and the regen rate is somehow game breaking, but I've never noticed that.
TL;DR
Would this actually have an impact in game balance? Or is this just a rule for the sake of matching a table in the player handbook? If it is the second one then you must also agree to remove every 2nd edition element or every 3rd edition element as mixing the editions is already house rules which aren't ok because we have to match a table in a book.
Comments
The writers of the original 2nd edition rules made a regeneration system for high CON and they decided to set the rate at certain values. I'd like to know your opinion, if any, why you think that rate was originally chosen and published.
Do you think that there was a mathematical reason? Style reason? Just numbers out of thin air? Is there a reason why you would choose those values if you were writing the book? Is there any degree of philosophy to it?
Why does the original rule exist at those values?
Not talking about BG or following rules at this point. Just curious what your brain considers to be the primordial intent of setting the regeneration rate as is (in the book).
I'll just say that I agree with the PnP authors more than the original BG developers as I try to side with conservatism when possible. I see 'having less' as more of a challenge than giving players all the power they want. All of these little pieces add up.
As I've said before, I think that the PnP rules are balanced well and play well and that a lot of unnecessary liberties were taken with a great system, but that was Bioware's prerogative I guess. At the end of the day, they made an excellent game.
I'm anxiously awaiting a few mods for BG:EE (PnP restorations are, as always, at the top of my list)
But perhaps having it as a difficulty setting would work for everyone?
So, I'll save my words.
It's just that you post ALOT of suggestions on your own threads, or others with your opinion and say things like "Can we get the rules authority here and put it on the dev tracker!" My defensiveness started when a certain cloak was changed to be more annoying than balanced, needing to rest between uses. Since then it seems people have flocked here to try to make the game the exact same as PnP(and I don't agree with all of it) or just flat out change an item or spell because they believe it is overpowered.
I didn't buy this game because it is an exact video game interpretation of the 2nd edition PnP rules. I didn't buy it for challenging combat that needed a treadmill of nerfs and buffs to remain challenging and interesting. I bought it because I loved the game when it came out, and I wanted to relive that same exact excitement I experienced years ago by roleplaying my weak little hero's and watching them grow into gods (in a higher resolution)
Every rule change, item change, and spell change slowly chips away at the game I wanted to play. In short, I feel it would be much more appreciated by the community if you focused your efforts on modding the game for yourself and like minded people, instead of trying to impose your idea of gaming perfection on the general community.
I say this with complete respect for you as a person with no malice whatsoever. I want to play the game I thought was perfect from the beginning. I do not want to play a game created by the community. That is much more suited for modders where the player can pick and choose what mods he/she feels is appropriate.
Edit: Thanks for undeleting it
It wasnt a moderator Shandyr. I said Administrator. Those who are running the site that ARENT team members like LadyRhian (who was just like anyone else a forum poster) and Tanthalas who apparently has personal issues with me for unknown reasons because I was being truthful and defending my points and P&P ruleset follows like any other one on here would till some flamers went out of control and having Tanthalas falsely ban me.
I know what you were asking but chose not to answer. The question seems a little too positioning.
I'll just say that I agree with the PnP authors more than the original BG developers as I try to side with conservatism when possible. I see 'having less' as more of a challenge than giving players all the power they want. All of these little pieces add up.
Ill make it discreet enough if that admin reads this post again. Sorry to go off topic. But this is what I was following too all my months of keeping up with the forum since being falsey banned for being just liek bigdogchris stating how I feel this game should be true to its P&P style and how this game isnt related to the books which I own as well. Some people on here cant handle both sides of the coin and why they let an insulter like Thedemoninside keep hsi posts up is what is making me question about the administrators on the site nowdays. Should Tanthalas and LadyRhian for example be removed from their rank and understand administartor powers are NOT to be abused like these power gamers do to the game in general!
Sorry for the off topicness again but this administrator needs to understand what abusing is like as it can reflect to this topic in a way. This regen thing si exactly what this issue is like. Its an abuse of the ruleset and it needs to be fixed as it is very power gaming like.
You sure made such a storm thedemoninside. You shouldnt have insulted me as it resulted your posts being removed and if you never had struck like this, my two posts would still be up and none of this insulting from you wouldve made such a big commotion. I hope you are happy with what you caused. Because what you did was very disrespectful and rude. If this is bothering you too much Shandyr. I am with you. This topic has gone too far and im not impressed I spent all that time discussing in detail why this rule should be allowed in the game if it follows the ruleset exactly as the developers marketed the game as they said it will be 2nd edition P&P AD7d rules. So something tells me no disrespect to you. It seems you even arent follwing guidelines anymore and are just deleting things for even thedemoninside had a post i agree was posted to bigdogchris and even shouldnt be removed and yet im defending him too for that yet he insulted me. I was right. Admninistrators that were former forum posters should be disbanded from their ranks and no longer hand out these admin rights to people who dont own the site and cant even uphold their own guidelines. If you cant expalin why the posts were removed for following on topic including thedemoninside who even said his deleted was to bigdogchris. You dont seem to be a good administrator and you arent admin type at all from how your proflie looks. Sorry to say.
Further derailing of this thread will be treated as trolling.
~Aosaw
I'm with the camp that bringing everything as close to PnP as possible, as a base-line for the game is the best of course of action. If you want the stupidly OP crap that's currently in here, mod it back in.
And especially, stuff like the con regen is a barely touched piece of the game in the long run. Outside of Dwarves, Half-orcs, Warrior-types, or part clerics buff with high lvl DUHM, other classes never really spend enough points in con to ever see it. That said, I'd still prefer it have the correct bonus, since it's primary use is healing during rest or transition. Unless you have a truly massive amount of CON, you'd never actually see benefit except in the longest of battles anyway
Also...a round in 2nd edition is 1 minute, a turn is 10 minutes. In BG a round is 6 seconds, and a turn is 1 minute. So even if it's corrected use turns as in PnP, it'll still be 10x faster then it would under their default round/turn settings.
Now the ring of gaxx and axe of the unyielding (+3/+5) obviously arent listed in standard P&P, but those should probably be nerfed to be consistent as well.
Personally I'd say leave it as it is. Especially when you consider that the ring of regeneration in P&P can bring a player back from the dead - perhaps that feature should be implemented as well...
I haven't seen any that addressed the issue of constitution regen. I am not sure about this one.
However before this is even looked at I would want to see high Wisdom benefits to saves (and spell immunities) to be revisited and those bonuses added to the game - as per PnP. This is my mind is a more glaring issue than the different regen speeds.
In BG1, there's a grand total of 2 ways you can get CON regeneration: pick up Kagain, or play a Dwarven/Half-orc protagonist. If you push Kagain to the limit with the CON tome and Buckley's Buckler, he'll wind up with 22 CON, which unless I am mistaken results in him regenerating 1 HP every 40 seconds.
Think about it. 40 seconds. For a level 1 Kagain to regenerate completely if he's brought down to 1 HP, you have to stand around and let him do nothing for 9 1/2 minutes. 9 1/2 minutes! Who in their right mind would do this rather than just have him chug a potion or cast a CLW. And that's at level 1... later on, using it as a healing agent becomes a moot point.
Using regeneration on the protagonist is even less useful, since you can only start at 19 CON.
There's really no benefit to be had from it in combat. Yes, if you're fighting for a very long time, Kagain or your PC might end up regenerating 2-3 HP. That's nothing. That's one third of a healing potion. No enemy that you have to fight for several minutes is going to be so weak an extra 2-3 HP is going to slow him down.
Since you seem intent on allowing regeneration while resting (where the ability is already useful), I don't see the point of this, except if you have some kind of weird fixation with always implementing things according to the P&P book, come hell or high water. Honestly, this is such a non-existent issue that I am surprised anyone brought it up... the devs have about 500 things that are far more important to deal with, and assuming even one of them reads this, you just sucked away valuable development time.. eugh.
As for the suggestions to nerf the Ring of Regeneration and Ring of Gaxx, whatever for? Ring of Regeneration is already a fairly weak choice, what with the abundance of healing potions and spells (really, you want to sit around for several minutes while it, ever so very very slowly, heals your tank up? Or swap it around on your back-rowers to save a few cure spells?). Ring of Gaxx is supposed to be powerful, it's one of the hardest fights in SoA, at least for the people that haven't played through the game several dozen times and knows it inside and out.
The only argument I can see here is "It doesn't adhere to P&P! Burn it!". From my point of view, gameplay trumps rules lawyering. Especially when the gameplay really isn't much affected by this, it's just a nice little perk that picking up Kagain can save you a few healing potions early on.
I'd also say it's beside the point, as you only get a maximum of 2 DUHM as Bhaalspawn powers. Otherwise you have to spend spell slots on them, and the whole debate (as far as I can make out) concerns having the regeneration as a passive benefit, not something that you actively have to spend potions/spells on to activate.
One thing I could agree on fixing is casting DUHM, resting immediately, and thus regenerate fully since you had a regeneration CON when you started resting. This could potentially be fixed, but it's such a minor exploit I don't consider it worth the time.
That having been said, I do support Romulan's point about event-occurence over a period of time as supporting the current regen rates. In PNP you can "Play bones for 10 minutes" and fast-forward past the lengthy process of constitution-granted regeneration. If the regen rates were properly distributed in the game, you'd have to actually let the game run for 10 minutes while you do other things. I don't now about you, but I never leave my game unpaused. Usually because there's some beneficial spell running, but there's also a somewhat elemental fear that I'll come back to the game and be dead.
I think the ideal answer would be to add a way to speed up the passage of time. A "Wait" feature that lets you skip a number of turns.
!!What if it were a "Meal" feature? You break bread with your party members. Skip 10 turns. High chance of triggering banter. Maybe reduces fatigue. That might be kind of cool. And it would allow you to incorporate proper Constitution regeneration rates, while still giving you a way to collapse time and treat the computer game like a computer game while roleplaying at the same time.
It is still so slow that sitting around and waiting for HP to regen is ridiculous. And if you make it as low as it should be you are still going to get HP back when traveling for 20 hours to different areas etc...
So I guess my question is how would changing this actually effect game play? Because unless people are currently sitting around and using it in real time to gain HP back to a large degree ( I don't believe they are ) or slowing it down would make it so traveling or resting still wasn't enough to gain your HP back this is just rules for the sake of rules
Plus, I've never known a DM that stuck 100% to the rules, they always had house rules for minor rules here and there. So I think of these things as house rules.
I don't people not wanting this change is about people not wanting to give up something they have. Most characters aren't going to have 20 con, and as I've pointed out this perk really only comes into play when traveling or making resting faster. I think maybe they want fixes that would actually impact the game other than being a check mark next to one more house rule fixed.
I mean this game is a hybrid of 2nd and 3rd edition, which is already house rules to begin with. So if we are going to stick hardcore to every single rule with no house rules allowed. You either have to be ok with removing every single 2nd edition element and replacing it with a 3rd edition counterpoint or vice versa.
Sorry if I misunderstood the math and the regen rate is somehow game breaking, but I've never noticed that.
TL;DR
Would this actually have an impact in game balance? Or is this just a rule for the sake of matching a table in the player handbook? If it is the second one then you must also agree to remove every 2nd edition element or every 3rd edition element as mixing the editions is already house rules which aren't ok because we have to match a table in a book.