Under the RAW none of the above effects stop bleeding as they aren't spells or a heal check.
I believe you are correct here. Under the RAW, bleed damage can only be stopped through the Heal skill or by spells that heal hit points.
On the other hand, it would also be reasonable for a cleric's channel energy to stop bleed as it is a similar effect as (and in fact directly tied to) healing spells.
The way I have personally run creatures with regeneration/fast healing under the effect of Bleed is that if the regen/fast heal exceeds the amount of bleed then it "heals the wound" and the creature stops bleeding. Do note, however, that the creature still bleeds that round (effectively reducing how much their fast healing applies during that round).
Example: A Quasit (Fast Healing 2) is hit with an ability that causes 1d6 Bleed each round. In the first round, a 4 is rolled, dealing the Quasit four damage, two of which is healed by its fast healing. In the following round, the Quasit continues to bleed (1d6), this time rolling a 2. The Quasit takes the two damage which is immediately healed up by the fast healing.
By the RAW, the Quasit would continue to take 1d6 damage each round (healing 2 back of course) until dead or it manages to find a healing spell or use the Heal skill.
The way I run, however, the Quasit's Fast Healing manages to "close" the wound in the second round because it heals all of the damage done that round from Bleed. This is of course a house rule, one that came about out of necessity when my creatures would continually die fast deaths when the Rogue would Sneak Attack with Bleeding Wound...
No... casting Regen on someone that is bleeding is like almost instantly growing them a new arm where their last one was cut off -- because that's what the spell does. Also remember that Regenerate the spell is magical healing meaning it ends bleed immediately. In fact so does Blessing of the Salamander.
Honestly remember that it's a heal check or magical healing -- supernatural is magical (meaning channel energy). Fast Healing and Regeneration are both extraordinary.
Actually, by the RAW,No... casting Regen on someone that is bleeding is like almost instantly growing them a new arm where their last one was cut off -- because that's what the spell does. Also remember that Regenerate the spell is magical healing meaning it ends bleed immediately. In fact so does Blessing of the Salamander.
Honestly remember that it's a heal check or magical healing -- supernatural is magical (meaning channel energy). Fast Healing and Regeneration are both extraordinary.
through the application of any spell that cures hit point damage (even if the bleed is ability damage)
So, it isn't all magical healing. Granted, I agree that it would make sense for magical/supernatural abilities that heal (such as channel energy) to give the same ability. The spell regenerate does cure hit points so it would in fact remove the bleed condition.
As I said earlier, the ability for fast healing or natural regeneration to stop a bleed is purely a house rule. I just think it makes sense for a creature that naturally heals its own wounds over a matter of seconds or minutes to be able to stop a bleeding wound (to a certain degree).
Honestly remember that it's a heal check or magical healing -- supernatural is magical (meaning channel energy). Fast Healing and Regeneration are both extraordinary.
Interesting note Abraham, I shall reasses my stance on Bleed.
I had feared that the Fast Healing/Regeneration abilities stopped bleeding damage, but this is clearly not the case.
Hmm.
|
Regenerate spell:
RegenerateSchool conjuration (healing); Level cleric 7, druid 9
....
Regenerate also cures 4d8 points of damage + 1 point per caster level (maximum +35), rids the subject of exhaustion and fatigue, and eliminates all nonlethal damage the subject has taken. It has no effect on nonliving creatures (including undead).
So it stop bleeding by RAW.
Fast Healing (Ex) A creature with the fast healing special quality regains hit points at an exceptional rate, usually 1 or more hit points per round, as given in the creature's entry. Except where noted here, fast healing is just like natural healing. Fast healing does not restore hit points lost from starvation, thirst, or suffocation, nor does it allow a creature to regrow lost body parts. Unless otherwise stated, it does not allow lost body parts to be reattached. Fast healing continues to function (even at negative hit points) until a creature dies, at which point the effects of fast healing end immediately.Regeneration (Ex) A creature with this ability is difficult to kill. Creatures with regeneration heal damage at a fixed rate, as with fast healing, but 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).
Strictly by RAW they don't stop the bleeding.
I would make them stop bleeding as J.J. suggested.
|
Personally, I would err in favour of the bleeder in every case.
Bleed is insanely nasty, and IMO, needs to have its cure conditions extended.
Don't forget, every rule you introduce to the game applies equally to PCs. Some people forget that, when they post that 'awesome ability X should totally pwn every encounter! Why is my GM nerfing me?'. You have to consider, would I be happy for that PC I built up for weeks/months/years to be taken down like a chump by the famed 'ability X'?
For example; housecat scores crit, draw card from Crit Deck: apply bleed 1. Would you be happy for your PC to die from that? In less than a minute? What if there's a cleric standing there, out of spells, but with 6 Channel Energy remaining? Is the best that he can do to prolong the inevitable?
I thought we were supposed to be improving the game by getting away from cookie-cutter parties, always having to have a cleric, always having to be the healbot. By disallowing the use of healing that doesn't specifically come from spells, you just reinforce that old status quo. And once you do bring a cleric, no-one has reason to put ranks in Heal, because 'the cleric's got that covered'. Round and round in a vicious cycle.
Does a creature have to have thumbs, to perform a Heal check?
Does it need a healers kit?
If either of those is true, then forget about running any encounters with animals, or supernatural quadrupeds that don't specifically have spells. One hit is a death sentence, run away, repeat.
Even if there's a herd of a thousand of them, all having the supernatural ability to heal 100 hp/round, they're dead critters walking if the rogue can inflict a single point of bleed. Shoot them all, and they have to stay awake 24/7, spamming their healing till the day they die.
Just curious if there's any rulings on weather or not Regenerate or Fast Heal stop the bleed condition. Also, for that matter does the cleric's Channel energy ability stop bleed? Under the RAW none of the above effects stop bleeding as they aren't spells or a heal check.
Thanks
Bleed (Ex)
A creature with this ability causes wounds that continue to bleed, dealing the listed damage each round at the start of the affected creature’s turn. This bleeding can be stopped by a successful DC 15 Heal skill check or through the application of any magical healing. The amount of damage each round is determined in the creature’s entry.Universal monster rule says any magical healing. Where are you getting the only spell healing?
I guess you could argue that extraordinary abilities that give fast healing and regen don't work by RAW, but supernatural fast healing or regeneration would work. I play it that extraordinary does too. That is a house rule. It makes sense to me.
I disagree about Fast Healing, however. This is an improved rate of healing, but not an actual instantaneous fix. Imagine that someone is taking 2hp/round of bleed damage but only has fast heal 1. Should that automatically stop the bleeding? If someone has taken 4 wounds that are each bleeding 1hp/round should fast heal 1 instantly close them all?I know you can argue that even 1hp of magical healing and/or 0 hp of Heal check can stop it, so perhaps it seems counter-intuitive that 1hp/round of fast heal wouldn't.
The distinction is that the application of curative magic or a Heal check is active and requires a Standard Action to perform. As much as anything, this is the point of Bleed, to force the use of an Action to counteract it.
By comparison, fast healing is passive and automatic. In that sense, it is inherently different from the RAW requirements to cease bleeding and IMHO should not automatically apply.
My ruling would be this: If Fast Healing equals or exceeds the per-round bleed damage then, regardless of any other damage taken that round, the bleeding ceases in the first round in which it is negated (i.e. it does apply against the fast heal, but only for 1 round, which may or may not be the first round of bleeding).
Thus, if you have fast heal 3 and take an injury inflicting you with bleed 1 then in the...
You are right in that it is an improved rate of healing, way above and beyond what the "typical" creature has. Most creatures get their HD in healing every 24 hours. A fast healing creature gets its HD back in healing every set amount of rounds in most instances. Just like Regeneration. The general population of the Core game doesn't have fast healing, they have the typical sit on your butt and rest healing and that is what the rules cater to. Fast healing is healing the "bleeder" every round mechanically. I don't see the problem unless you are trying to factor in "fluff" on what seems more like a mechanical decision. That being stated, with RAW I would side on the "if the ability is EX then it doesn't work" because of the wording (basically requiring magic or the heal check).
Realistically, I'd let both stop bleeding as I believe that is more in line with the implied intent of the abilities.
As for your perceived requirement, I can only say you seem to be making up things about passive and active. The actions that it require happen to be things that normally require action, but that isn't stated in the rules. Given your requirement a contingeny with a healing spell wouldn't work because of it not being "active" healing, it is automatic when the contigency is met. Though by the rules it would work as it is a spell restoring hit point damage. Obviously house rule as you want, but realize this is the rules forum and we should try to keep on topic (AKA RAW) and hash out that. Once we know how it "should" work as written, everyone of us is capable of deciding how to actually run it in our home games.
|
|
During the Beta test, during the endless 'Casters should always trump non-casters' debates, didn't James confirm that there was no automatic heirarchy of Spells>Spell-like>Supernatural>Exceptional>Mundane, and there never had been, through all of D&D3E?
Given that, I'm inclined to allow Fast Healing to cure bleed; if it walks like a duck, and acts like a duck, maybe it's a duck.
And if an ability heals at x14,400 the norm, then maybe it should heal bleeding wounds?
During the Beta test, during the endless 'Casters should always trump non-casters' debates, didn't James confirm that there was no automatic heirarchy of Spells>Spell-like>Supernatural>Exceptional>Mundane, and there never had been, through all of D&D3E?
Given that, I'm inclined to allow Fast Healing to cure bleed; if it walks like a duck, and acts like a duck, maybe it's a duck.
And if an ability heals at x14,400 the norm, then maybe it should heal bleeding wounds?
Regardless of whether there is a heirarchy or not, bleed has two specific ways to end the condition, magical healing and a heal check. By written rule "non magical" healing doesn't end a bleed. SP and SU abilities ared defined as magical and as such they qualify for ending a bleed effect. An EX ability is typically not a magical effect (with a few called out exceptions) and so healing via an EX ability (that doesn't say it is magical) doesn't qualify for stopping a condition that requires "magical healing."
It isn't that there is a heirarchy, it is that the condition has wording that disallows certain effects from ending it.
I tend to think the spirit of the rules, which beats raw every single time, implies very little difference in the way that fast healing and magical healing heals. I would have a hard time explaining why the troll is unable to close his bleeding wounds with 5 hp per round healing while a single point of magical healing can.
I thought you could only suffer one bleeding wound at a time right ? One or two posts above made me doubt that is actually true or not..
I tend to think the spirit of the rules, which beats raw every single time, implies very little difference in the way that fast healing and magical healing heals. I would have a hard time explaining why the troll is unable to close his bleeding wounds with 5 hp per round healing while a single point of magical healing can.
I thought you could only suffer one bleeding wound at a time right ? One or two posts above made me doubt that is actually true or not..
While you would think that, it isn't necessarily true. Intent cannot be known as the vast majority of posters aren't weren't involved with the creation of the rules and when there is an issue with wording of the rules it is very open to interpretation, and people have very differing views on things... So while one person can say it is one way, another can say it is different and because of wording, who is right?
When it comes to discussing the rules, with people who have widely differing opinions on what the game should be, we are left with RAW. In any type of open play, where any of those opinions can be brought up (for example PFS), RAW in fact trumps spirit as it is usually less open to interpretation and will be less of an issue. Most of the problematic rules are usually disallowed or have a ruling dictated in the document for the society.
That being said, when in the rules forum I try to stay with a strict RAW ruling as that is what is in the book. If it is seemingly against the "spirit" I'll put something like I did in one of my previous posts, but still will focus on what is in the book and then people can choose to change what the RAW says for their games. I don't view the Rules forum as someplace to argue about how you want to run your games, do that in Advice or Suggestions, let's figure out what the RAW says here. Make your own decision after that has been revealed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) Does Fast Healing stop bleed damage? By a strict reading of the rules, it's not a magical HP cure (its EX) and it's not a heal check...but it makes no sense for it NOT to stop it.Yes. Fast healing stops bleed damage (provided it's hit point bleed, and not ability score bleed).
Anything that heals hit point damage stops bleed damage.
Not only does that match the rules as intended, it's simple to remember. And there's NO GOOD REASON why cure light wounds should be able to stop bleed damage when a potion of cure light wounds (also not a spell) won't do the same thing. Or fast healing or channel energy or anything else.
If it heals hp damage, it stops all bleed effects.