Glorious Heat + Spark = Unlimited Healing


Rules Questions

201 to 217 of 217 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Dennis Deadsky wrote:

This is a silly discussion. The proposal for unlimited healing is utter cheese. From the above comments, many players seem to feel entitled to unlimited healing between fights. This sense of entitlement is a bad thing that should be painfully squashed by the GM.

You seem to feel there should be an unnecessarily antagonistic relationship between the players and DM. That is a very bad thing.

Players are entitled. Entitled to have fun, playing a game they enjoy. DMs are entitled too, to similar effect. It should be cooperative, even if there is disagreement. Squashing things isn't conductive to the goal.

Tomas Long 175 wrote:
The only ridiculous thing here is that people think a feat that gives a spell's level in hp and +1 to attack (per the new ruling) when a spell with a specific descriptor is cast is worth a feat slot.

It isn't a new ruling. It is a three year old, PFS specific ruling that was not implemented in printed rules when they republished the feat.

I don't anyone from one side is going to be converted to the other side here. In PFS we know the ruling. In other games, we know how the feat reads and that we can run it as written or along the PFS ruling, depending on personal opinion of out of combat healing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dennis Deadsky wrote:

This is a silly discussion. The proposal for unlimited healing is utter cheese. From the above comments, many players seem to feel entitled to unlimited healing between fights. This sense of entitlement is a bad thing that should be painfully squashed by the GM.

Nah, this is DM entitlement if anything given that they are presumably the ones asking for things to be officially changed from the original wording.


Thomas Long 175 wrote:

The only ridiculous thing here is that people think a feat that gives a spell's level in hp and +1 to attack (per the new ruling) when a spell with a specific descriptor is cast is worth a feat slot.

You could literally make this for any spell and I wouldn't consider the new write up of it worth a feat.

Apparently people keep missing the fact that the actual ability as printed in the brand, spanking new Inner Sea Gods book, doesn't say spell level, it says character level. I'll paste in the exact wording of the ability so everyone can see that, for non-PFS play, you are actually healing half the casting character's level in HP.

Inner Sea Gods-italics mine wrote:

Glorious Heat

When you cast divine fire spells, their heat empowers nearby allies.
Prerequisites: Ability to cast divine spells, caster level 5th, worshiper of Sarenrae.
Benefit: Whenever you cast a divine spell with the fire descriptor, choose a single ally within 30 feet that you can see. That ally heals a number of hit points equal to half your level and gains a +1 morale bonus to attack rolls until the end of its next turn.

Cheese or not, outside of PFS (which has changed how the ability works to spell level), this feat, in the hands of a fifth level caster who has the spell Spark prepared, creates the ability to "spam" heal all party damage without wasting any actual resources.

As someone else pointed out, I'd like to know if that was intentional. Especially since two developers comments from three years ago, make it sound very much like they wanted to change it, but were not going to reprint that book, so they didn't. Inner Sea Gods is a new book, just published, and they didn't change it. Which, as I said earlier, gives me pause. Either they allowed it, knowing what benefit it provides to non-PFS players, or they overlooked it entirely and reprinted it with the same mistake.

Shadow Lodge

From what I recall from back then, it was also pointed out that at that point, with the abundance of healing in the game and how little it actually does (10 hp max, but thats at 20th level), its just not as bad as it sounds. Which it really isnt.

So it wouldnt surprize me at all if it was not revised to the PFS way on purpose, honestly. Not saying it wasn't and it may have just slipped through. If so, the real question is so what?


To me the "so what" is that healing is a part of the game that is supposed to cost something: a spell slot, a channel energy use, a wand charge, a potion, the cost of a magic item (or the murderhobo-ing necessary to procure said magic item). I realize a feat is a relative cost, and that divine casters, generally, are feat starved classes, but it doesn't change the fact that once you have this feat, it completely gets rid of "the cost" of healing outside of combat.

I get that whether they left it in on purpose or left it in on accident doesn't make that much of a difference. I guess, for me, it's one of those cases where I'd just like to know, for no other reason than morbid curiosity.


MendedWall12 wrote:
To me the "so what" is that healing is a part of the game that is supposed to cost something: a spell slot, a channel energy use, a wand charge, a potion, the cost of a magic item (or the murderhobo-ing necessary to procure said magic item). I realize a feat is a relative cost, and that divine casters, generally, are feat starved classes, but it doesn't change the fact that once you have this feat, it completely gets rid of "the cost" of healing outside of combat.

Yeah, but the cost of a wand of healsticking is relatively trivial, and its actually an expectation and what people have been doing since 3.0, so its sort of weird to say that people have to spend resources when its trivial to begin with. Other editions of the game did things to remove the healstick nature, but, ymmv.


MrSin wrote:
... the cost of a wand of healsticking is relatively trivial ...

That depends on the magic level of the campaign, the generosity of the GM, and the level of the characters. In a lot of the campaigns I've been part of, "trivial" does not describe the cost of healing wands.


MendedWall12 wrote:
MrSin wrote:
... the cost of a wand of healsticking is relatively trivial ...
That depends on the magic level of the campaign, the generosity of the GM, and the level of the characters. In a lot of the campaigns I've been part of, "trivial" does not describe the cost of healing wands.

Which means your not playing in normal expectations. As far as WBL is concerned, a healstick quickly becomes almost nothing. In PFS you'll probably buy one after your first adventure with PP.

I suppose if you ditch those things then it becomes invaluable to find another means of healing, but if your using houserules like that you may as well just ditch the feat imo.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
MrSin wrote:
MendedWall12 wrote:
MrSin wrote:
... the cost of a wand of healsticking is relatively trivial ...
That depends on the magic level of the campaign, the generosity of the GM, and the level of the characters. In a lot of the campaigns I've been part of, "trivial" does not describe the cost of healing wands.

Which means your not playing in normal expectations. As far as WBL is concerned, a healstick quickly becomes almost nothing. In PFS you'll probably buy one after your first adventure with PP.

I suppose if you ditch those things then it becomes invaluable to find another means of healing, but if your using houserules like that you may as well just ditch the feat imo.

Spoiler:
Reign of winter

That is an AP, so far we have reached level 4 and we hadn't any chance to by a CLW wand.

I think that several other AP present the same situation, and not only during the initial levels.

In [spoiler]Carrion Crown

we used all the charge of the wand we had during the first half of the 3rd module and were unable to buy another until we started the 5th module as it wasn't available where we where or int he village we visited and we hadn't the time to spare for a trip to a city were we could buy another.

It think that playing an AP is playing by normal expectations.


I think cheap healing is still very different from free healing as it essentially eliminates HP as a resource. But there are arguments that it's more fun for non-casters to have infinite hp between encounters so this is my plan:

In Golarion games I'll allow it. In homebrew settings I won't (I generally don't use campaign setting books for homebrew settings). If I notice any difference in the experiences I'll either allow it in my homebrews or ban it from my Golarion games.


Dennis Deadsky wrote:

This is a silly discussion. The proposal for unlimited healing is utter cheese. From the above comments, many players seem to feel entitled to unlimited healing between fights. This sense of entitlement is a bad thing that should be painfully squashed by the GM.

No it is because the designers knew that there was a problem with this ability years ago and said that they would fix it when they reprinted it. And then didn't fix it. The debate on this was well settled until this reprinting.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I guess I'm just sick of watching them neuter feats from something thats worth a feat slot but not op (a feat for something that gives out of combat utility, but will never be very useful in combat, seriously max healing from this is less than a level 1 fighter power attacking in damage) to something that will never be useful every again.

I'm gonna spend all my 9th level spells because I want you to have 27 hp!

Edit: and if you're going to say the amount of gold this gives is OP, well, never have a crafter in any of your games ever.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, with Boots of the Earth now coming out in ISG, I wonder if anyone has changed their mind about the balance of this feat?

(or the cost of an unlimited CLW wand)


Samasboy1 wrote:

Well, with Boots of the Earth now coming out in ISG, I wonder if anyone has changed their mind about the balance of this feat?

(or the cost of an unlimited CLW wand)

Wow, that's like the best of both worlds. Before the argument was "cost of wands of CLW vs. having the extra feat not spent on Glorious Heat to save money w/ an item creation feat." Now, you can take the best item creation feat in the game and right from level 3 make these boots for only 2500 gp, and then go on to make all sorts of other stuff at half cost.


Well that's flavor for ya.

"Everyone, lets just stand in place for half an hour. We all good now? K lets go."


Thomas Long 175 wrote:

Well that's flavor for ya.

"Everyone, lets just stand in place for half an hour. We all good now? K lets go."

Mmmm... Photosynthesis. All part of sleep and spell prep you know. At least your not poking eachother with sticks or laying hands on eachother, that's just gross and unsanitary.


MrSin wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:

Well that's flavor for ya.

"Everyone, lets just stand in place for half an hour. We all good now? K lets go."

Mmmm... Photosynthesis. All part of sleep and spell prep you know. At least your not poking eachother with sticks or laying hands on eachother, that's just gross and unsanitary.

Excuse me. Methink's you're not doing photosynthesis right

201 to 217 of 217 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Glorious Heat + Spark = Unlimited Healing All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.