Regeneration and Fast Healing 2 in 1


Homebrew and House Rules


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This has "bothered" me for years, I don't know why I didn't write about this earlier.
We have two subrules for essentially the same thing. The only differences between Regeneration and Fast Healing are that the first can be halted by some attacks and the second can't regrow or reattach body parts.

This could easily be made in a single subrule, under Regeneration.
Just change the format in stat blocks as following:

Regeneration 5/fire/R

What does it mean? It means 5 points of Regeneration per round (if it was per minute, just add "/minute"), stopped by fire, and the R means a type of Regeneration that can regrow or reattach body parts.
Basically, it's an example of normal Regeneration, like that of a Troll.

Want a Fast Healing like that of a Vampire?

Regeneration 5/-

Meaning it's a type of Regeneration that can't be stopped (just as for Damage Reduction, same format and same meaning) and can't regrow or reattach.
As a side note, this brings my mind to wonder what happens if you sever a Vampire's limb, given its gaseous transformation upon physical destruction, but that's another matter.

It also makes for special Regenerations like that of the Tarrasque, which can't be suppressed but at the same time can regrow or reattach:

Regeneration 40/-/R

And of course that would cover other possible special cases, as for a creature whose Regeneration can be suppressed, but can't regrow or reattach.

If we want to go further, we can differentiate regrowth and reattachment with RG and RA respectively.
In the format, a simple R would mean the creature can do both, while only RG or RA would mean it can do only the specified one.
Think for example of Piccolo (from Dragon Ball Z): he can regrow but not reattach; the T-1000 (from Terminator 2), on the other hand, has a finite mass and can reattach lost parts but can't regrow them.

Also, it would be nice to have specific rules for "how much can a creature regrow or reattach", but I won't do that here.
I mean, if I sever a Troll's head, will it die or both parts will still be alive and reform the normal Troll if put together? Or will the head regrow a body and the body a head, thus forming two Trolls? How much do you have to reduce it to poultice to definitively suppress its Regeneration?
There has been much discussion about this, and that's why clear rules would be nice.


Although in the stat portion of the block, I would say that an assimilation is almost moot as neither take up a significantly large size of the defenses part and the rules are rather simple, but for the sake of not having long, wordy additions in the special ability section this would be helpful. GJ


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

The biggest difference between Regeneration and Fast Healing is how they function once the character is below -Con HP.


If it bothers you so much then use the 3.5 version of Regeneration, there's a definite difference there.


Um, there is a big and powerful difference between regeneration and fast healing:

Quote:
they cannot die as long as their regeneration is still functioning (although creatures with regeneration still fall unconscious when their hit points are below 0).


That can be added with zero problems to the workings of R/RG/RA, it's not as if it was a difference that absolutely determines the need for two separate sets of rules.


Regrowth and reattachment really doesn't have much purpose in standard Pathfinder. Unless you are using alternative rules about lasting wounds, you don't get parts cut off.

But the not dying thing is a huge distinction.

Liberty's Edge

Dotting for interest


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Astral Wanderer wrote:
That can be added with zero problems to the workings of R/RG/RA, it's not as if it was a difference that absolutely determines the need for two separate sets of rules.

At that point your creating more complexity than the standard system and aren't adding anything, so what's the point?


To be honest, I find Fast Healing 5 and Regeneration 5 (Fire or Acid) more readable than Regeneration 5/- or Regeneration 5/fire or acid/R

In addition, the fact the regeneration can regrow/reattach is pretty much anecdotal, so there's no real need to indicate that in a statblock.

The important part of the difference between Fast Healing and Regeneration is that Regeneration is basically "can't die unless attacked by X". It's what makes (in part) the Tarrasque so iconic : it literally can't die, because its regeneration can't be cut off.

If you truly want to have only one healing ability, maybe you'll be better off removing the healing part of regeneration, keeping unkillable & regrowth there :

¤ Fast healing : As currently written
¤ Regeneration : The creature cannot die as long as regeneration is active. Regeneration is disabled for one round when the creature is hit by attacks of a specific type. The creature can reattach limbs within 1 hours of severing. Given enough time, the creature can regrow limbs.

That way, a Troll would have Fast Healing 5, Regeneration (fire or acid).


Milo v3 wrote:
Astral Wanderer wrote:
That can be added with zero problems to the workings of R/RG/RA, it's not as if it was a difference that absolutely determines the need for two separate sets of rules.
At that point your creating more complexity than the standard system and aren't adding anything, so what's the point?

What's more complex?

If the Regeneration entry says X, Y happens (and Z, and whatever). If it doesn't, it won't happen.
Basically, you have Fast Healing rules; if you add R, you add Regeneration rules. And in the process, you eliminate a division of what is basically the same set of rules with its improved version, streamline a format, and also save space (for small that it can be) in the book, since you don't have to repeat the same things twice.
All of which is also more user-friendly, especially for who may be new to the game.

Imagining a discussion in reverse, where we have unified rules already and someone asks to make two separate sets (bringing them to what they are in reality now), can you really say anyone could see that as making things less complex?
Then alright, why don't we split up the rules for, say, bull-rushing in two separate sets and call them differently while the basic workings are the same and most of the same words are repeated twice? One set if you want to move with the target, the other if you don't.

Aralicia wrote:
To be honest, I find Fast Healing 5 and Regeneration 5 (Fire or Acid) more readable than Regeneration 5/- or Regeneration 5/fire or acid/R

You can write it however you want, mine was just an explanatory example.

Though I really can't see how you could find it harder. The entries for attacks and many special attacks are like 300 times less readable, and they're perfectly readable. Except for who is new to the game, but who's new won't find "5 (fire)" less obscure and confusing than "5/fire/R". Or than "CMD 25" or "RD 10/cold iron and good", for that matter.

Aralicia wrote:
In addition, the fact the regeneration can regrow/reattach is pretty much anecdotal, so there's no real need to indicate that in a statblock.

Maybe you never used it. I did. Beside that, as said above, that would include the "undying" rule and allow easy room for Regeneration that can't be suppressed or, if missing, Fast Healing that can be.


Astral Wanderer wrote:
Then alright, why don't we split up the rules for, say, bull-rushing in two separate sets and call them differently while the basic workings are the same and most of the same words are repeated twice? One set if you want to move with the target, the other if you don't.

You mean like Bull Rush, Overrun, Reposition and Drag ?

Astral Wanderer wrote:
Imagining a discussion in reverse, where we have unified rules already and someone asks to make two separate sets (bringing them to what they are in reality now), can you really say anyone could see that as making things less complex?

Well, let's talk about Mutant&Mastermind, then. This system use unified rules for power creation... and these rules are so complex that I have to rewrite each power so that the players can understand how they works. In effect, I recreated multiple sets from the original superset simply to be able to use the game. In fact, even the designers did so in the core book. (still, it's a good game)

If a mechanic contains many variables, it increase its complexity and becomes harder to use. In such case, having multiple smaller mechanics makes each of them simpler, and more accessible.

In the case of your proposition, you give a mechanic with 4 different variables (intensity, weaknesses, Regrow/Reattach, undying). That not negligible.

Originally Fast Healing and Regeneration had respectively 1 and 2 variables, far easier to manage.


Astral Wanderer wrote:

What's more complex?

If the Regeneration entry says X, Y happens (and Z, and whatever). If it doesn't, it won't happen.
Basically, you have Fast Healing rules; if you add R, you add Regeneration rules. And in the process, you eliminate a division of what is basically the same set of rules with its improved version, streamline a format, and also save space (for small that it can be) in the book, since you don't have to repeat the same things twice.
All of which is also more user-friendly, especially for who may be new to the game.

It's adding additional quantifiers to a single thing, which is generally harder for individuals to recall instantaneously, rather than separate concepts that having separate names can have.

Also, I do want to say your suggestion is... aesthetically unpleasant, at least to me. Having multiple slashes doesn't look great, especially in the middle of a giant text dump that is creature stats.


Aralicia wrote:


Well, let's talk about Mutant&Mastermind, then. This system use unified rules for power creation... and these rules are so complex that I have to rewrite each power so that the players can understand how they works. In effect, I recreated multiple sets from the original superset simply to be able to use the game. In fact, even the designers did so in the core book. (still, it's a good game)

If a mechanic contains many variables, it increase its complexity and becomes harder to use. In such case, having multiple smaller mechanics makes each of them simpler, and more accessible.

In the case of your proposition, you give a mechanic with 4 different variables (intensity, weaknesses, Regrow/Reattach, undying). That not negligible.

Originally Fast Healing and Regeneration had respectively 1 and 2 variables, far easier to manage.

M&M Ultimate Power did a great job to improve the Power system. It's the "M&M 2.5" to be honest, because the impact that the Powers have in the system. The 3rd edition take a step further and now is way more easy, elegant and quick to make and understand power structures.


Metal Sonic wrote:
M&M Ultimate Power did a great job to improve the Power system. It's the "M&M 2.5" to be honest, because the impact that the Powers have in the system. The 3rd edition take a step further and now is way more easy, elegant and quick to make and understand power structures.

Agreed. Ultimate Power is my go to when I'm using M&M (not tried the 3rd yet). Still, I continue to write a detailed power description for my player (after applying modifiers, extra & other structures).

It allows us to play without worrying about all the inner working of powers. For example, for a character with a teleport Power : Rather than having "Teleport 5 (Accurate, Portal, Limited[Shadows], Short-Range;Increased Size 2)", I have the player write "Shadow Portal", and add a description with all the effects and variables already computed.

But, M&M is still a good example that unifying abilities by adding lot of knots and variable is a very good way to make the abilities and the statblocks completely confusing.


Aralicia wrote:
But, M&M is still a good example that unifying abilities by adding lot of knots and variable is a very good way to make the abilities and the statblocks completely confusing.

I care to disagree. Because all the rules for the power are there, you don't need to look in another chapter about how a Teleport work. The variables are way less and more reelevant that the ones the spells have.

How this:

Fireball Power wrote:


Fireball(Damage 6, DC 21)
Descriptors: Magic, Evocation, Fire
Extra: Area (30 ft. Burst).
Extra: Range (Short, 60 ft.)
Flaw: Action (Full Round)

Is more confusing then that?

Fireball Spell wrote:


School evocation [fire]; Level bloodrager 3, magus 3, sorcerer/wizard 3; Domain fire 3; Elemental School fire 3

CASTING
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M (a ball of bat guano and sulfur)

EFFECT
Range long (400 ft. + 40 ft./level)
Area 20-ft.-radius spread
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw Reflex half; Spell Resistance yes

In M&M you don't need to now the details about what Evocation is: Is a Descriptor. You don't need to keep recalculating the range of power if you gain experience if you don't expend points on it. You don't need to know what happens if you are grappled or mute. You don't need to know how Spell Resistance works.

It goes right into the point of the power: Hit everyone on the area of 30 ft. into a 60ft. with a Magic Fire damage with a 21 DC. It's not that hard, it's just of experience with the game.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Homebrew and House Rules / Regeneration and Fast Healing 2 in 1 All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Homebrew and House Rules