|
Hi this skill is one that I petitioned for and to see it added to the pathfinder game excited me to no end. However, after playing in our rise of the runelords campaign with no divine caster (two sorcerors and a monk) our group has come to the conclusion that this skill has no practical application.
First off the skill is only a class skill for classes that will get divine spellcasting and therefor not need it. For all the classes that need the skill it is cross-class. So then take a look at the DC, it is 20 to heal 1hp per HD of the creature being healed. In our campaign the monk had the highest wisdom at 16, meaning that in order to heal 1 hp he needed to roll a 17, if he had put a cross class rank into it he would have needed a 16, since this was the goblin attack on sandpoint he didn't have time to take 20 and taking ten wouldn't have healed him. Also it was impossible for him to add his wisdom bonus to heal checks. After the first combat with goblins he needed healing, well he got his 1 hp and wasn't able to heal anymore during the raid. Without being able to heal, the character wound up dying. We took a look at the math while he made a new character, and we learned that the treat deadly wounds skill is useless because even by the time you can reliably add your wisdom bonus, you are taking a greater amount of damage in a single blow than you are usually healing.
We discussed solutions and came up with the following.
1) increase healing to 1d4 per hit die, this keeps the healing recieved less useful than magical healing while at the same time giving classes that need it a viable healing option
2) drop the 1 per 24 hour limit. Either go with 1 heal per point of con bonus so that healthier characters can get more healing, or better yet have no limit but a rule saying that you can't heal the same injuries twice and that self inflicted or willingly accepted wounds cannot be healed (prevents players or allies from cutting themselves or party members just to heal again)
3) give the fighter, monk, and rogue heal as a class skill. These are classes that make sense to know how to bandage their own wounds (I personally would add bard as well, but my group argued that since they have magical healing they don't think bards would study up on healing naturally)
This is one skill that I am very happy Jason listened to us and tried to give us what we wanted, but as it stands it is not worth adding to the rules since the classes that can get the most out of it would just use thier divine magic, and the classes that need it, aren't getting enough out of it to make it worth the skill ranks. Still I hold out hope and have great faith in The Bull Man and the Paizo team.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
Another use of the skill is to conserve magical healing, and therefore extending the usefulness of the cleric/druid/paladin, etc. If they can use the heal skill to heal hp in addition to their spells, their spells last longer, and they can afford to use more spells for combat and other challenges and fewer spells for healing.
|
|
Another use of the skill is to conserve magical healing, and therefore extending the usefulness of the cleric/druid/paladin, etc. If they can use the heal skill to heal hp in addition to their spells, their spells last longer, and they can afford to use more spells for combat and other challenges and fewer spells for healing.
Except that it doesn't, it only conserves one spell per character, typically speaking its the same characters that need healing over and over (the front liners) and the backliners tend to take less damage so from fight to fight you aren't conserving anymore than one or two spells a day. Not to mention that while I see what your saying, it really wasn't being pushed in order to help heal-bots heal more, the reason people wanted the heal skill to heal is because people don't want to be forced to have a cleric in the party. Right now, all this skill does is say okay, clerics in the party can save one or two spells a day. I don't think that was the intent, and if it was, I beg that the intent be reconsidered.
Especially since even if it gets boosted, it will still be able to do this, but this way it's useful to everyone else as well.
I don't know about you, but I want a party to be able to get the job done even if they don't want to have a divine caster, and right now, you need one or else its up s@#t creek without a paddle.
Just for reference:
When treating deadly wounds, you can restore hit points to a damaged creature. Treating deadly wounds restores 1 hit point per level of the creature. If you exceed the DC by 5 or more, add your Wisdom modifier to this amount (if positive). A creature can only
benefit from treat deadly wounds within 24 hours of being injured and never more than once per day. You must expend five uses from a healer’s kit to perform this task. You take a –2 penalty on your Heal skill check for each use from the healer’s kit that you lack.
We used this for our group when we were shy a cleric, we also used long term care. Neither one is really a replacement for clerical healing, but I think that's ok.
Much like any useful skill in order for the skill to be effective you have to invest in the skill. What you are saying is roughly like saying "Stealth is useless because my fighter in plate mail can't use it". In my group the ranger took healing and also used his half elf skill focus on healing giving him a decent skill bonus. Whether it makes sense for monks and sorcerers to have it is another discussion.
The skill is not meant to replace healing magic, instead it's a band aid for when clerical healing is unavailable. Slap a band aid on it and get out of harms way.
I'm not fond of your idea of 1d4/ HD because that definitely starts to get competitive with healing magic.
...the reason people wanted the heal skill to heal is because people don't want to be forced to have a cleric in the party.
...
I want a party to be able to get the job done even if they don't want to have a divine caster...
Without divine magic the strategy is to do some damage to the enemy, retreat, heal up, spend a few days recovering then attack again. You cannot adventure the classic D&D way without some form of magical healing and this skill should not be a replacement for that.
I like the general idea of the Pathfinder RPG heal skill, but I use a slightly more powerful variant:
Heal (Trained only; Wis)
Anyone that takes damage during an encounter can be healed with the heal skill as long as treatment begins within one minute of the encounter’s end. Each PC must choose what to do at the end of the encounter; heal themselves, heal another, or aid another. You heal 1d4 hit points per 5 points of the check’s result up to a maximum of the damage you took during the encounter. You cannot heal any damage taken in a previous encounter. The following also apply:
- Only one check may be made per PC per encounter.
- If you are being healed, you cannot heal another or aid anyone except the person healing you.
- If you heal yourself, you suffer a –2 penalty.
- You gain a +2 circumstance bonus with a healer’s kit; a healer’s kit costs 50 gp and contains 10 uses.
- You cannot take 10 or 20 on this check.
- This action takes 5 minutes to perform.
- If you are interrupted while healing any benefit is lost.
- A natural 20 heals all damage taken in the encounter.
Example: PC #1 has a maximum of 100 hit points. He begins a combat encounter with 80 hit points and takes 10 points of damage during battle. At the end of the encounter PC #2 heals him while PC #1 successfully uses the aid another action to help (including his –2 check penalty for healing himself). Their heal check result is 17, so PC #1 heals 3d4 damage. PC #1 rolls 3d4 and gets 11; however, he can only be healed of 10 points of damage since he only took 10 points of damage during the battle. PC #1 now has 80 hit points. Neither PC #1 nor PC #2 may heal anyone else of any damage from that encounter.
Ideally a party should be able to function without a healer. After all, most fictional adventures notably DON'T feature anyone who can easily heal other people's wounds - or at least make it a highly limited ability. Somehow it takes a lot of tension out of things when a "dagger thrust to the side" goes from potentially life-threatening due to internal damage or due to the healer being exhausted to "it's only eight points, ignore it" or "anybody need a Cure Light?". Negative consequences - wounds or death, being fined or going to jail, or washing out of a tournament - are what makes combat, court trials, or even sports exciting.
That being said, trying to make the game run that way would require some pretty major changes - and would definitely be a back-compatibility issue. Hit points, and at least some healing, are fairly well built in.
Still, a Cleric really shouldn't be any more indispensable than a Monk or Bard - yet a party of four Clerics is generally a lot more successful than a party of four of almost anything else.
If you want a party to be able to get along with a healer, you need to either give healing abilities to everyone or reduce the amount of damage the party takes.
Ideally replacing the cleric with a mage would result in more enemies being destroyed before they can inflict damage, replacing the cleric with a rogue would result in more traps and incidental damage being avoided as well as more enemy spellcasters and support types being taken out by stealth and sneak attacks before they can inflict damage on the party, replacing the cleric with a ranger should allow more monsters to be bypassed or dealt with by "other means" (thus gaining the XP for defeating them without an actual fight) without allowing them to inflict damage on the party, and so on. Unfortunately, this approach usually requires either the cooperation of the game master and a lot more time spent on investigation, stealth, and planning than many groups are comfortable with or giving the other character types some codified special abilities to represent their use of such tactics.
That's probably a good spot for some consideration: there are settings out there that don't include Clerics, or have them be very rare, or mostly have Evil Clerics, or which don't use positive energy, or which don't allow healing magic. There are plenty of games where no one wants to be a Cleric (I've even seen a few cases due to real-world religious issues) - and it would still be nice to be able to sell commercial adventures and material to people playing in those games and settings without demanding that they rewrite the stuff totally before they can use it.
So: What are some options that should be made available so that campaigns without Clerics can use commercial and extrenally-written adventures without major alterations?
Over on the (extremely lengthy and rather technical) discussions on the “Is Channel Energy Overpowered” thread, someone asked for some quick possibilities as to other ways in which a party could continue functioning in a dangerous environment. Here's a segment from among the possibilities for the "let other classes reduce the damage approach":
"If the problem is "too much damage" - a party-wide problem - address it on a party-wide basis rather than making it vital to have a Cleric. Let the Cleric perform a Healing Burst once or twice a day and have their (separate) uses of “turning” just do damage. Let the Thief have a "Warning Shout" ability once or twice a day that reduces the damage each character in a radius takes from a trap or round of surprise attacks. Let the Wizard have a "Countering Word" which reduces the damage taken from a spell attack - whether individual or area effect - once or twice a day. Let the Fighter "Organize the Line" and reduce the damage taken from a round or two of melee attacks once or twice a day. Let the Sorcerer reduce the damage from breath weapons, natural energies, and environmental damage once or twice a day. For variety, let the barbarian do the "land on the grenade bit" once or twice a day - throwing himself into the path of an area-effect attack and thus reducing the damage everyone else takes. Let the Bard shatter missiles with a few notes every so often, reducing the damage from barrages at the price of reducing the parties ability to fire missiles in those rounds. We can let him do it more often, since this is more specialized than most of the others. The Paladin can get a couple of healing bursts like the Cleric - but - since theirs are a die or so less effective - we could let them redirect an individually-directed enemy attack or spell to themselves once or twice a day. That way they can be fittingly heroic and self-sacrificing (Of course, at L20 they start getting maximum effect, so maybe not). Let Druids reduce the damage from unnatural attacks - from undead, constructs, creatures of the outer planes, and aberrations - once or twice a day. If that turned out to be a bit weak, let them do a little damage to such creatures as well. Let the Ranger - thanks to their ability to scout, warn the party, and keep an approach handy - either negate surprise for those in the area or impose a surprise round on enemies at the beginning of combat once or twice a day. That should help reduce the damage the party takes... As for Monks - Hmm... We could let Monks reduce the effects of Psionic attacks, but many campaigns don’t use them. Letting them heal some damage with non-magical treatments might be interesting, you could let them negate toxins for other people, or - most fittingly for a class which is so rigidly channeled otherwise - we could give them a set of choices. It would be nice to have the antipsionic option for campaigns which use psionics without making the ability useless in other campaigns. Most of those options will need to be immediate actions of course, but that really isn’t much of a problem.
That still leaves the Cleric - and, to a lesser extent, the Paladin - as the supreme font of healing, but allows parties to function almost-equivalently without one and “preserves their precious spells” for their own use. Healing is still more useful than the other forms of damage reduction, since you can use healing regardless of the source of damage, while the other stuff may or may not be usable - but a party can get along without a Cleric if they’re a little more careful. It also adds an interesting option to the fighter, who - at least according to some of the other threads - might be able to use one. It won't eliminate the impact on the game setting, but it does reduce it drastically - and spreads it out over everybody, and having a high-level adventurer-class character around already had quite an impact. (Hm. This one seems like fun actually)."
Those were just quick possibilities thrown out for discussion of course.
So: Why not see how many suggestions we can come up with on how to keep the game functioning more or less normally in the absence of Clerics?
|
Personally, I think the skill is fine (better than fine, actually ...more like "awesome") the way it is.
I think the intention behind "Treat Deadly Wounds" is just that. To stop the bleeding (stabilize the character) and get that to a same place where the body can begin the healing process (Treat Deadly Wounds). From there on out, it's First Aid/Long Term Care.
If you want magical healing, get a spell caster able to do so or buy potions.
Of course, for your game, you have the freedom to change the skill to heal 1d4 a level. But like many above, I think that's a bit much.
But hey, that's just me. Your milage may vary..
|
|
...the reason people wanted the heal skill to heal is because people don't want to be forced to have a cleric in the party.I can't speak for anyone else, but I only want the Heal skill to approximate real-world medicine. And real world medicine is not magic. It shouldn't even come close to duplicating cleric spells.
So then I take it you want to ignore every instance in the real world of people taking inguries who instead of going down to the hospital and resting for three days to recover completely, bandage themselves up and continue to do whatever it is they were doing (heck right now there's that girl they keep showing for the olympic commercials who had a sprained ankle or something and still won the gold medal, ta da treat deadly wounds represented as healing a d4)? Hit points were never meant to represent purely physical damage. And none of the injuries people take in D&D reflect real world scenarios. I don't see rules for shock, or heck even dexterity loss when taking fire damage.
EDIT: also it doesn't duplicate, you can't do a treat deadly wounds check in 6 seconds, nor can you do it in a burst that heals everyone within 30ft. The advantage of clerical magic is that it is instantaneous and without failure. and if you want it to approximate real world healing, why aren't you arguing about dropping the one per day limit. I can just imagine a person going to the hospital with a knife wounds, "Oh I'm sorry sir, there's nothing we can do about that, remember when you came in earlier today to get treated for those burns?"
|
|
I think the intention behind "Treat Deadly Wounds" is just that. To stop the bleeding (stabilize the character) and get that to a same place where the body can begin the healing process (Treat Deadly Wounds). From there on out, it's First Aid/Long Term Care.
Um then what is the DC 15 stabilize wounds heal check for which does exactly what you are talking about?
|
|
Much like any useful skill in order for the skill to be effective you have to invest in the skill. What you are saying is roughly like saying "Stealth is useless because my fighter in plate mail can't use it". In my group the ranger took healing and also used his half elf skill focus on healing giving him a decent skill bonus. Whether it makes sense for monks and sorcerers to have it is another discussion.
Okay I find that a little insulting, but I know you and I know you weren't trying to be so we're cool.
First off, I never argued that every class should be able to get it, I argued that three classes that are combat trained and would be probably have a basic training in first aid techniques should have it. you threw in sorcerer, I never once said sorcerer.
Second, it's not the same, a fighter in armour is someone who couldn't possibly sneak because they are using items that negate the skill. the equivalent would have been me saying treat deadly wounds is useless because my barbarian can't do it with his great axe instead of a healers kit.
and the difference for the character that could have done it even had he invested in it was +1 which wouldn't have changed the outcome in the slightest, the only reason he didn't invest in it was because he didn't know about it till after character creation. and if he lived make it to level 2 he probably would have started investing in it. And it's great to say, well use a different approach to D&D, as long as you are also saying, well never use a published adventure unless you force someone to play something they don't want to.
Now as to the d4 pushing on magical healing, which is an understandable concern, I would say this. instead of looking at # healed look at the time it takes to do it and the usefulness of magic vs. the skill where you aren't wasting resources on healers kits and can do it during combat. when you compare those two things and add the fact that it is still isn't healing as much I don't see healing a d4 as game breakingly powerful.
Star Wars Saga has a decent heal-like skill for this kind of thing. It's a DC 15 to heal your level in HP, and by every point you exceed the DC, heal another HP. So... a level 1 character whose total is 20 heals 6 hp.
|
|
Star Wars Saga has a decent heal-like skill for this kind of thing. It's a DC 15 to heal your level in HP, and by every point you exceed the DC, heal another HP. So... a level 1 character whose total is 20 heals 6 hp.
That's a decent alternative. doable at 1st level and with increasing ranks it would maintain usefulness after combat, I don't know, I'll see if my players will give it a try.
My problem is that with his character dying he decided to just roll up a cleric, and he took the extra turning feat so we are not going to be lacking in healing. and therefor won't be able to playtest heal skill alternatives.
If you want to do the 1d4 thing, but still not compete with real magical healing, here's an idea.
You improve 1d4 points of lethal damage to nonlethal damage. Yes, you'll still get knocked down just as quickly, but you won't necessarily be dead. And if you rest for a few hours, you're good to go.
I'm tempted to do that with alot of the magical healing in my world, but it could get tough...
Okay I find that a little insulting, but I know you and I know you weren't trying to be so we're cool.
Sorry about that, I wasn't trying to be insulting, thanks for being understanding.
First off, I never argued that every class should be able to get it, I argued that three classes that are combat trained and would be probably have a basic training in first aid techniques should have it. you threw in sorcerer, I never once said sorcerer.
I put in sorcerer because you mentioned that in your party composition, not trying to put words in your mouth.
Second, it's not the same, a fighter in armour is someone who couldn't possibly sneak because they are using items that negate the skill. the equivalent would have been me saying treat deadly wounds is useless because my barbarian can't do it with his great axe instead of a healers kit.
Clearly I did not make the point I intended. You suggested that the skill was useless but your example use included using a character who was using it cross class, untrained, and without any effort to optimize for that skill. Any skill is nearly worthless under those conditions, I should have said a wizard trying to sneak using the stealth skill which would have been a better counter example. In my group we knew we were going without a healer so we had our ranger take max ranks in it plus skill focus so you can understand we had significantly different experiences with the skill.
And it's great to say, well use a different approach to D&D, as long as you are also saying, well never use a published adventure unless you force someone to play something they don't want to.
That was an observation about the game and adventure design, not an assertion or decision on my part. Maybe I'm wrong but as far as I can tell the system is designed for a party to have a cleric. The only way around that is to not use products (adventures) which are published based on those assumptions.
I'm of mixed feelings over this. It would be great to ditch the cleric reliance (I don't like playing clerics). Is the best way to do this through a skill? I'm not so sure that's the answer.
My big concern is that it's 1d4/HD which can be quite significant at higher levels. Maybe 1d8+1/HD, inline with CLW, a big help at low levels but not so much at higher levels.
|
|
Clearly I did not make the point I intended. You suggested that the skill was useless but your example use included using a character who was using it cross class, untrained, and without any effort to optimize for that skill. Any skill is nearly worthless under those conditions, I should have said a wizard trying to sneak using the stealth skill which would have been a better counter example. In my group we knew we were going without a healer so we had our ranger take max ranks in it plus skill focus so you can understand we had significantly different experiences with the skill.
Well he didn't notice that healing was possible (it's really easy to miss if you aren't looking for it) until I told him after the first combat, like I said, if he had survived he would've max ranked it at level two, and the reason I said it was useless wasn't because of the skill in and of itself but rather that it is given as a class skill to only divine caster classes, even with your optimised ranger, he has a wisdom of what, 16? so with a good roll he heals 4 at first, 5 at second, and 6 at third, the first level isn't so bad, but it quickly falls behind until he starts getting magical healing and will use the skill less and less. Maybe saying useless was a bad choice of words on my part, I should have just said "significantly underpowered". The problem for every other class though is that, without an 18 wisdom or investing in precious feats at the low levels where they are most important, a player won't be able to get their wisdom bonus till level two or three (well not technically true, aid another helps, but aid another was the only reason he got healed in the first place) and even then will need to roll a 18-20 to get it.
That was an observation about the game and adventure design, not an assertion or decision on my part. Maybe I'm wrong but as far as I can tell the system is designed for a party to have a cleric. The only way around that is to not use products (adventures) which are published...
Yeah well I've only got time to run published adventure, I'm a prep heavy DM and I don't have time to do the normal amount of prep that I would to run a homebrewed adventure, which don't get me wrong, I love doing, I just don't have time right now. And I don't like hearing, well you have to use a cleric in this adventure, cause I don't want to force someone into a character they don't want.
I'm of mixed feelings over this. It would be great to ditch the cleric reliance (I don't like playing clerics). Is the best way to do this through a skill? I'm not so sure that's the answer.
Why not, I think a skill is the perfect way personally, especially if it leaves enough to be desired to want to have a divine caster, but just not seriously bone the party for not having one.
My big concern is that it's 1d4/HD which can be quite significant at higher levels.
Really? I mean even a maxed check would only heal 80hp at level 20 +wis bonus which would be +5 or 6 when a character has around 200hp that doesn't seem significant since the divine caster could cast heal and beat it in 6 seconds.
Maybe 1d8+1/HD, inline with CLW, a big help at low levels but not so much at higher levels.
only problem is that you need healing just as much if not more so at higher levels. I mean i'd at least like to see 1d4 playtested a little to see if it really ever becomes game breaking or rediculously overused. If after some people tried it out they said, our cleric would never heal us because he'd just wait till after combat because treat deadly wounds was more than enough, I'd be willing to reconsider. I just hate when people say its too close to magical healing when really it leaves so much to be desired that the argument seems ludicrous
Yeah well I've only got time to run published adventure, I'm a prep heavy DM and I don't have time to do the normal amount of prep that I would to run a homebrewed adventure, which don't get me wrong, I love doing, I just don't have time right now. And I don't like hearing, well you have to use a cleric in this adventure, cause I don't want to force someone into a character they don't want.
I can sympathize with you. Again, it's not my idea of an idea situation. I also don't have the time/ patience to build a full home-brew campaign.
Why not, I think a skill is the perfect way personally, especially if it leaves enough to be desired to want to have a divine caster, but just not seriously bone the party for not having one.
Well mainly I am cautious because it changes some of the basic assumptions of the game. What happens if you have this plus a cleric?
Really? I mean even a maxed check would only heal 80hp at level 20 +wis bonus which would be +5 or 6 when a character has around 200hp that doesn't seem significant since the divine caster could cast heal and beat it in 6 seconds.
Heal is what level spell? For 1d4 you get an average of 2.5HP/ level, at 10th level that's 25HP or the equivalent of cure critical wounds (10+3.5*4). What other skill gives you access to the equivalent of a 4th level spell for a DC 20 skill check?
For my group what I do is increase the amount of healing magic I've introduced into the game. Sure it is arbitrary but it doesn't change to core system and if a cleric joins the group I just shift over to other items.
|
|
Why not, I think a skill is the perfect way personally, especially if it leaves enough to be desired to want to have a divine caster, but just not seriously bone the party for not having one.Well mainly I am cautious because it changes some of the basic assumptions of the game. What happens if you have this plus a cleric?
I can't imagine this throwing off the balance of the game too much, mainly because a clerics best role as healbot is during combat, treat deadly wounds can't be used during combat. also you can only use it once per day right now or if you change it the way I suggested once per injury, that means that after combat the cleric gets to use one less spell per character to heal up outside of combat. This helps extend the life of a party and helps to continue to negate the 5 minute work day.
Really? I mean even a maxed check would only heal 80hp at level 20 +wis bonus which would be +5 or 6 when a character has around 200hp that doesn't seem significant since the divine caster could cast heal and beat it in 6 seconds.Heal is what level spell? For 1d4 you get an average of 2.5HP/ level, at 10th level that's 25HP or the equivalent of cure critical wounds (10+3.5*4). What other skill gives you access to the equivalent of a 4th level spell for a DC 20 skill check?
hm, I see your point, maybe an increasing DC for every d4 added so instead of DC20 to heal d4 per level DC 20 to heal d4+wis and then for every 5 by which you beat the dc you add a d4, that would scale with level and prevent a DC 20 check from healing a cure critical, but right now a character would get a whoping 14 hp at level 10, so healing maybe 1/2 of one hit from a CR appropriate monster, not really going to help much.
For my group what I do is increase the amount of healing magic I've introduced into the game. Sure it is arbitrary but it doesn't change to core system and if a cleric joins the group I just shift over to other items.
I can't bring myself to add more healing magic, I use NPC classes for all NPCs only the bad guys in a module and the very important and well known NPCs get class levels, and even then I'm stingy on magic NPC classes (although I did create a wizard version of the adept so that I didn't have to give arcane casting NPCs class levels), Course I'm stingy on magic too, I don't allow buying of magic items. Maybe it's my love of low magic that makes me want a skill to heal with to make low magic more viable.
|
|
I mean right now the people of sandpoint are all a buzz about the new cleric (players new character) whos sermons can heal people. They have seen clerics (adepts, but the people think they are clerics) cast heal spells before, but they've only heard in tales about clerics who's faith is so strong that just hearing them speak cures what ails you (channel positive energy)
Heal is what level spell? For 1d4 you get an average of 2.5HP/ level, at 10th level that's 25HP or the equivalent of cure critical wounds (10+3.5*4). What other skill gives you access to the equivalent of a 4th level spell for a DC 20 skill check?hm, I see your point, maybe an increasing DC for every d4 added so instead of DC20 to heal d4 per level DC 20 to heal d4+wis and then for every 5 by which you beat the dc you add a d4, that would scale with level and prevent a DC 20 check from healing a cure critical, but right now a character would get a whoping 14 hp at level 10, so healing maybe 1/2 of one hit from a CR appropriate monster, not really going to help much.
So DC 30 heals 3d4+Wis? I like the variable and scaling nature of it. What about leaving the base at 1HP/ level + WIS and adding 1d4/ 5 points you exceed the DC 20. So at 5th level you could heal 5+WIS + 1d4 with a 25, or 5+WIS + 2d4 with a 30. I think I could deal with that.
|
|
Heal is what level spell? For 1d4 you get an average of 2.5HP/ level, at 10th level that's 25HP or the equivalent of cure critical wounds (10+3.5*4). What other skill gives you access to the equivalent of a 4th level spell for a DC 20 skill check?hm, I see your point, maybe an increasing DC for every d4 added so instead of DC20 to heal d4 per level DC 20 to heal d4+wis and then for every 5 by which you beat the dc you add a d4, that would scale with level and prevent a DC 20 check from healing a cure critical, but right now a character would get a whoping 14 hp at level 10, so healing maybe 1/2 of one hit from a CR appropriate monster, not really going to help much.
So DC 30 heals 3d4+Wis? I like the variable and scaling nature of it. What about leaving the base at 1HP/ level + WIS and adding 1d4/ 5 points you exceed the DC 20. So at 5th level you could heal 5+WIS + 1d4 with a 25, or 5+WIS + 2d4 with a 30. I think I could deal with that.
That would work, the problem i have with it is that the low levels where you need more than 1 or 2 hp still hurt. But in the name of comprimise I would accept this, at least it leaves the potential to be a useful tool.
Damn thing ate my post. Summary:
DC 20 Heal check which takes 5 minutes heals 1d6.
For every 3 points by which you exceed the DC, heal an additional 1d6. This cannot heal more dice than the target has HD.
If the process is interrupted for any reason, the attempt fails automatically.
This can only be attempted once per person per encounter.
Heal is a class skill for any and every class that can reasonably be considered self sufficient. That's most of them.
Example in use: A level 1 Fighter gets smacked for 3 damage. He tries to Heal, but only gets an 18 so the attempt fails. Unless someone else succeeds at the Heal check, or he gets magical healing he will have to enter the next fight at less than full. In the next fight he doesn't take any damage because it was over on round 1. This time the heal attempt succeeds on a 20 and he regains 1d6 HP. He rolls a 4, and is back in top shape. Next fight he gets smacked hard for 8 damage. This time the heal check result is 25, but he only has 1 HD so he still gets 1d6. If he were level 2, he would get the full 2d6.
Overall this is a half decent method of out of combat healing, which at least provides different flavor text to the old passing the CLW wand around approach. It is blatantly inferior to magical healing, which aside from Heal is rather meh anyways. It's essentially impossible to break it, because by the time you can reliably hit DC 38 for 7d6 average 24.5, 24.5 is practically meaningless to you. The CCW sited as an example is 4d8+7, average 25. Hint: You're higher than level 7 when you can reliably hit that DC. To match a minimum CL Heal, you need level 32 and the ability to hit a DC 113(!) skill check. You're clearly better off UMDing a Staff of Heal since the Cleric was doing what you do 21 levels ago, and he gets status effects to boot.
I used a variation of the heal skill presented in this post. Some basic rules assumptions go along with how I treat the skill.
1. Characters do not roll each level for HP. They just recieve the maximum, or a set percentages of full HP each level + modifiers.
2. Heals spells recieve the maximum effect, i.e. no dice rolling.
3. The opposite of heal spells that cause damage roll dice for damage as normal.
Based on the above I require the heal skill to use bandages or an equivalent mechanism. When applying the heal skill, a successful DC check of 15 allows you to use cloth bandages, DC 20 silk, DC 25 dragon weave, etc.
When you apply a heal check it lasts as long as you are resting and are not physically active, in combat or applying a skill check. Every 10 minutes you heal your level or HD plus the modifier for the type of bandage (cloth 1, silk 2, dragon weave 3, etc.) Therefore for a 5 level character with cloth, you recieve 6 hp every 10 minutes. As soon as you stop resting the effect stops and the bandage is lost (no longer useful).
For combat situations, or during skill checks, or physical activiy only heal spells work.
The rules allows healers to conserve their spell slots for combat when a heal is critical to success of a fight, but incorporates healing during downtime, to allow more encounters per day.
This appears to be a good balance for campaigns (fantasy versus realism) and to avoid extended down times. But this also places a limit on healing skill based on available bandages and the DM has a method to limit its use (based on availability or cost).