Ring of Cure Light Wounds


Advice

101 to 129 of 129 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

If a ring of infinite cure light wounds was supposed to be in the system then I have a feeling that Paizo would have included.

Let me put it this way: A ring of infinite cure light wounds, even at CL1, is twice as good, on a roll of 1 on the spell's 1d8, than a 90,000 gp ring of regeneration.

This is an absolutely terrible idea. ANYONE who casts spells can decide to be an Samsaran and gain access to all of the important healing spells. If you really don't want to do that then just make it so that anyone who casts spells can expend 2 spells to turn it into a cure spell of that level.

If you don't want to force someone to play a healer--who can still be completely awesome btw--then bring in a cohort, a DM-NPC whose entire job is just to heal and is ignored during combat.

Alternatively there is the reality that if everyone is playing a class that, in some way, has access to healing spells then you don't need a dedicated healer.

This all said, when you look at new magical items you cannot look at them as "roleplaying" items. They are game items. You, as a GM, need to look at the game system and ask, "does this work within the system?" If the answer is no, then don't allow it. Does this new item become the new first optimal strategy for healing instead of having a cleric? If the answer is "yes" then by having it in your game you eliminate the entire reason for classes that can heal.
You are messing with the conventions that the game is built around, there will be 1 guy who can take hits, 1 guy who can heal HP damage, 1 guy who can deal a lot of damage in the right circumstances, and 1 guy who can do special things, thereby eliminating the need for one of those conventions. Worse, instead of that now eliminated convention being in danger during combat--the cleric CAN die, and if he does your party is SCREWED--it is immune to being attacked as it is just an item.

I think this is an absolutely terrible idea--obviously--and that you should not do it--obviously--but this is because of the fact that when I design for this TTRPG I build it like a gaming system. It should be challenging, something should be being tested.

However, arguing with some of you is completely pointless. Go make your bad decisions, and may it bite you in the arse so you don't do it again.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Remy Balster wrote:
Gaberlunzie wrote:
James Risner wrote:
Remy Balster wrote:
A single item out healing 5 level 5 clerics, an item that anyone can use. That is artifact level power.
+1

It outheals 5 level 5 clerics under very specific circumstances.

About the same circumstances that would allow a 1st level witch to outheal 5 5th level clerics.

It is also incorrect. A single 5th level cleric with 14 cha can under optimal circumstances heal 94500 average hit points of damage per day to medium-sized creatures. A ring tops out at 79200 average per day.

Both require quite specific circumstances, but 5 of those clerics blow the item out of the water. Also, 3 1st level clerics are as effective as 1 5th level cleric.

Haha... people are still commenting about the wrong part of that post?

Guys... the point was that by limiting the item to uses per day... you get to effectively replace the healing character, but also prevent any such abusive uses that might potentially crop up. Why leave the door open for abuse, when that door is absolutely useless.

All that you need is an item with the number of uses per day that the GM feels is the correct amount for his game and the pace he wants it to take. Any more than that serves only one function: Abuse.

Nothing good comes from giving a group more healing than they need, and that is only compounded by it being effectively unlimited healing. A ring of cure light wounds x5 per day, or x10 per day, or x20 per day is far better for the game, it is more balanced and just as useful as a ring of infinite cures.

It's like folks don't remember why cure minor wounds didn't make the cut.


blahpers wrote:
Remy Balster wrote:
Gaberlunzie wrote:
James Risner wrote:
Remy Balster wrote:
A single item out healing 5 level 5 clerics, an item that anyone can use. That is artifact level power.
+1

It outheals 5 level 5 clerics under very specific circumstances.

About the same circumstances that would allow a 1st level witch to outheal 5 5th level clerics.
It is also incorrect. A single 5th level cleric with 14 cha can under optimal circumstances heal 94500 average hit points of damage per day to medium-sized creatures. A ring tops out at 79200 average per day.
Both require quite specific circumstances, but 5 of those clerics blow the item out of the water. Also, 3 1st level clerics are as effective as 1 5th level cleric.

Haha... people are still commenting about the wrong part of that post?

Guys... the point was that by limiting the item to uses per day... you get to effectively replace the healing character, but also prevent any such abusive uses that might potentially crop up. Why leave the door open for abuse, when that door is absolutely useless.
All that you need is an item with the number of uses per day that the GM feels is the correct amount for his game and the pace he wants it to take. Any more than that serves only one function: Abuse.
Nothing good comes from giving a group more healing than they need, and that is only compounded by it being effectively unlimited healing. A ring of cure light wounds x5 per day, or x10 per day, or x20 per day is far better for the game, it is more balanced and just as useful as a ring of infinite cures.
It's like folks don't remember why cure minor wounds didn't make the cut.

I know, rite? If they wanted this to happen they would have included it.


FuelDrop wrote:

Also remember that cure light wounds can be used to pummel the undead. At low levels unlimited cure light wounds could radically change the dynamic of encounters against undead.

Not really. Sure, fighting skellies it might turn the otherwise useful rogue into something decent, but at 1d8+1 the damage is too small to matter. The exception would be incorporeal undead, against those it'd be a nice trick, but incorporeal undead are such a PITA at low levels I hardly dare use them (a shadow as a hard encounter at level 1 or a wraith at level 3 is a large risk of TPK, especially if the party hasn't prepared for that specific enemy).

Quote:


Hmmm, how much would an item that lets you spend a full round action to heal the wearer 1 hp be worth?

Depends. Slotless, I'd pay perhaps 1000 gp for it, not more. Less if it takes a slot.


blahpers wrote:


It's like folks don't remember why cure minor wounds didn't make the cut.

Because they didn't want "fighters can go on all day" to actually exist and rather reinforce the M/C disp?

Because Paizo, while really really really good at creating stories and adventures and world building, still aren't really the best at balance and on top of that were afraid to change how the game was played from core-only 3.5, since their primary target group was people dissatisfied with 4e changing too much?

I mean, I can understand most arguments for not having unlimited healing, and most are legitimate even if I don't agree with them, but "paizo didn't make it" is a really really bad argument.

Also note that from 11th level there is more or less free healing if you have access to Planar Binding, by binding an Akhana that has at will Cure for 3d8+11 as well as providing free raise dead and restoration.


Taku Ooka Nin wrote:


Let me put it this way: A ring of infinite cure light wounds, even at CL1, is twice as good, on a roll of 1 on the spell's 1d8, than a 90,000 gp ring of regeneration.

1. That's because they nerfed the already bad ring of regeneration into the ground, both by removing the ring's power to revive the dead and by removing (AFAIK) all ways to sever limbs.

2. It's not. At 15th level I'd rather have "heal 1 hp every round" than "spend a standard action to heal 30 hp", let alone 5. Granted, both would be pretty pointless, but I'd still choose the fast healing one.
3. The ring of regeneration also provides immunity to bleed.

Paizo isn't some authority on other people's game. If people asked for this to be published, there might be an argument, but when discussing about their home games, there isn't. Because the same thing could be said for every. single. custom. item.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
eleclipse wrote:

So the party healer died and his next pg won't be a healer.

...
As a side question if someone know some item that i can suggest to the group now that they are without a healer it would be much appreciated.

Thanks in advance for any help

If your home group finds the healing mechanic undesirable, simply change the healing dynamics entirely. Let taking 'downtime' be sufficient to recover their wounds. Hit points are an abstract after all.

No need to create new items at all.

On a side note if you want to stick to existing items/spells...a wand of infernal healing would be 750 gp for 10 hp worth of healing (at 1 hp/round for 10 rounds) per charge. And it is a level 1 spell on the arcane (wizard/witch/magus/summoner) list as well as the divine (cleric) list.

Or previously suggested (and in a game I'm playing) the DM simply leaves a lot of potions on the mobs we fight. You generally don't want to spend your round quaffing (and possibly provoking attacks) a 1d8+1 heal...but after the fight during downtime sure.


Hand flying, invisible Improved Familiar 'ring of cure light wounds - infinite charges'. Order familiar, heal me every round. Thus, no loss of actions and acts like fast healing 5.


Sarrah wrote:
Hand flying, invisible Improved Familiar 'ring of cure light wounds - infinite charges'. Order familiar, heal me every round. Thus, no loss of actions and acts like fast healing 5.

You still lose an action, the familiar's action, which could have been used to, say, use buffing wands on your party, or debuffing wands on the enemy, or throwing tanglefoot bags (those never go out of style), or a myriad of other things.

So you still can't compare them to ring of regeneration because you're using (a lot of!) additional investment to compensate for the flaws in the comparison.

5 hp per round, or 1 hp per round and a familiar? Familiar, every time.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Taku Ooka Nin wrote:
blahpers wrote:
It's like folks don't remember why cure minor wounds didn't make the cut.
I know, rite? If they wanted this to happen they would have included it.

I'm so glad they thought of everything the game would ever need, and anyone would ever find useful. Time to tell everybody to turn off the lights and go home.

I don't think cure minor wounds was a big deal either, and I allowed unlimited use of 0 levels by the end of 3.5.

It might be surprising to learn, but not everybody plays the same way. Not everybody plays the way it's "intended". Yet somehow they manage to have fun.


eleclipse wrote:

As a side question if someone know some item that i can suggest to the group now that they are without a healer it would be much appreciated.

Thanks in advance for any help

In the earlier parts of Rise of the Runelords, I allowed the PC's to borrow a divine wand from Father Zantus as a thanks for service to the town - it basically worked something like a Witch's Hex in that it cast Cure Light, Moderate, Serious or Critical Wounds based on the level of the recipient and it would only do so once per day per person. Once a month it could be used to cast Breath of Life.

It was the ideal divine item for a town priest, but of limited use to an adventuring party. Nonetheless, they lacked a dedicated healer and it made the difference at those low levels.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scythia wrote:
Taku Ooka Nin wrote:
blahpers wrote:
It's like folks don't remember why cure minor wounds didn't make the cut.
I know, rite? If they wanted this to happen they would have included it.
I'm so glad they thought of everything the game would ever need, and anyone would ever find useful. Time to tell everybody to turn off the lights and go home.

Oh, well then. Lets go. *grabs coat and hat, walks out front door*

Hey, want to get a drink? I know this great place downtown called Blaphers. An awakened pig is the bartender.

Grand Lodge

@OP: As said above, just point the players to a Wand of Infernal Healing. 500 HP on a stick, for only 750 gp. That accomplishes their goal of healing up between fights. Get two.


550 hp actually. Though its an evil action to use (however minor evil, some chars might take issue with it)

Sczarni

As a gm, I would allow the creation of such an item but treat it like a rod/staff with X amount of charges of clw. Once the charges are used, you would have to visit a cleric to add more charges.

Liberty's Edge

Many people have posted calculations, however, quite few have followed the magic item crafting rules and advices Paizo have written: http://paizo.com/prd/magicItems/magicItemCreation.html

The questions to me seems to be;
1. What he cost would be correct for an item involving an unlimited "cure light wounds" - item
2. If that item would be allowed - which rules affect it?
3. How gamebreaking it is?
4. Resolve!

1.
First off - It's impossible to build an item such as "Ring of regeneration" of "Cure Light Wounds", simply because its effect isn't measured in rounds and thereby can't be continous. ("Ring of regeneration" is based on the spell "regeneration".)

2.
Don't be afraid, we can still build something similar;
Instead of having this item auto heal us, we'll need to activate it with a free action each round - because it's "Use Activated".
The cost of this item as unlimited with the "use activated" trigger mechanic would cost;
CL=Caster Level, SL = Spell Level, UA = Use Activated
CL1 x SL1 x 2000 = 2000gp

Bonus rule: You can touch up to six allies with a full-round-action. *correct me if I'm wrong! (touch attack, like lay on hands and all other touch attacks effecting allies)

3.
For 2000 gp, you can now heal on average 5,5 Hp with each use of this item.
If you spend a full-round-action healing, you can heal allies up to 33 Hp each round!
It's better than a 1-level cleric, AND it's not limited in uses/day!
If this item would be allowed, you could replace your 20 level cleric for the cost of 2000gp and healing will take 6 times longer than "Cleric's channeling". Up to 36 times, if not using the bonus rule - full-round touching.
(Channeling: 10x1d6=35 /Allie, Cure item: 5,5/Allie. 35/5,5 = 6,2)

4.
The Resolve:
Not only is it cheap as hell! The game would change;
Channeling will only be taken for time saving reasons.
Resources (as others have spoken of) will be severely saved.
Encounters versus easy foes will serve no purpose except drain casters' spells and drain time.

For all the reasons above - Unlimited use of healing at a static cost - destroys the balance.

There is also another reason...
The rules explicitly states that unlimited use of magic lead to balance issues - especially healing in unlimited supply!
This rule is most likely there for above reasons.

This should conclude why unlimited healing isn't an option.

Typing on my IPhone...
To be continued...

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
TorresGlitch wrote:
Bonus rule: You can touch up to six allies with a full-round-action. *correct me if I'm wrong! (touch attack, like lay on hands and all other touch attacks effecting allies)

The spell must allow multiple targets to use that option, as I understand it. Cure Light is single target.

Liberty's Edge

... Continues!

What we've learned:
Unlimited + fix cost = bad

So how to fix this?
Let us find the counterpart of unlimited...
The counterpart is: Charges!
Options:
1. Potions
2. Wands / staves
3. Charges
4. Charges/day (not very recommendable, cause of reasons mentioned in earlier post, such as; fixed cost, resources and game effect)

These options grant the same effect, but with different quantities and are diverse in User-Friendliness. As such, their cost for 1 use differs!
___________________________

Costs:
1. Potions: 50gp (1charge)
Cost/use=50gp
Craft yourself: 25gp
Action: move action (yourself)
Pour potion in friends mouth: Full-round-action.
With feat: "Swift Drinker" - Swift action to drink your own potion.
___________________________

2. Wands: 750gp (50charges)
Cost/use=15gp
Craft yourself: 375gp
Action: Standard Action (heal anyone within melee touch range)

Staves: worse in all ways compared to wands
___________________________

3. Charges: ?
Cost/use=?
Craft yourself: ?/2
Action: Standard Action / Free Action

*("This option isn't supported by Pathfinder society's House Rules, as free crafting options never will be regarded the same by 2 GMs.")

Ex. A: Trigger: Command Word (1800gp)
CL = Caster Level, SL = Spell Level, CW = Command Word, UA = Use Activated
Ch = Charges (halve the cost, "1/2")
CL1 x SL1 x CW1800 x Ch1/2 = 900 !!!

Ex. B: Trigger: Use Activated (2000gp)
CL1 x SL1 x UA2000 x Ch1/2 = 1000 !!!
___________________________

A! - Cost: 900gp
Charges: 50
Cost/use=18gp
Craft yourself: 450gp
Action: Standard Action
___________________________

B! - Cost: 1000gp
Charges: 50
Cost/use=20gp
Craft yourself: 500gp
Action: Free action (as part of a specific action)

Bonus rule: You may touch up to 6 willing allies as a full-round-action! *correct me if I'm wrong.
___________________________

4. Cost: ?
Charges: UNLIMITED!
Cost/use=NONE!
Craft yourself: ?/2
Action: Standard/Free Action

The 1 thing that prevents this item from being gamebreaking is that it has daily charges, directly limiting any risk of abuse.

CD = Charges/Day
The Charges/Day may be set to 1-10.
As charges limits the power of the item, it's cost is devided by 5.
Ex. Lets set the daily charges to 10...

C!
CL1 x SL1 x CW1800 x CD10/5 = 3600 gp

D!
CL1 x SL1 x UA2000 x CD10/5 = 4000 gp
___________________________

C! - Cost: 3600gp
Charges: UNLIMITED
Charges/Day: 10
Cost/use=None
Craft yourself: 1800gp
Action: Standard
Effect: Heals 1d8+1=5,5/charge = 55hp/day
___________________________

D! - Cost: 4000gp
Charges: UNLIMITED
Charges/Day: 10
Cost/use=None
Craft yourself: 2000gp
Action: Free Action (as part of some action)
Effect: Heals 1d8+1=5,5/charge = 55hp/day

Bonus: Can heal up to 6 willing allies as a full-round-action.
___________________________
___________________________

These 4 items, A, B, C and D are fairly limited, and harder to abuse. A and C are a bit cheaper than B and D, but in return B and D makes healing go quicker (full-round-action).

C and D (unlimited) could be reduced to fewer charges/day than 10 if you consider 55 Hp as healing to be too much.

Story wise, you could make C or D relics and give the team opportunities, as they advance and level, to seek up special craft masters who will add "charges/day" to this item, making it progress along with the heroes. - This will keep the team confident enough to risk taking some damage but also vary enough of just how much damage they can take without completely depleting the day's healing rations.

Hope this narrows down your search
GL & HF :)

- "There is no such thing as too much Magic! But excess Magic should be beyond the reach of mare mortals!"

Liberty's Edge

3rd post on Magical Healing item:

3 final things...
First. - All of the items calculated in the second post are calculated as if they take up a slot on the person carrying it. If the magic item isn't carried on the person (doesn't take up a slot on chest, finger, head or similar), then multiply the cost of the item by 2! (The potions, wands, etc from post 1, are unaffected by this 3rd post).

Secondly. - The item based on these calculations could be any type of item, with any shape and such. Could be a belt, headband, ring or if you don't want it to take a slot, make a ball which can be squeezed - call it a healing ball. (but remember, if you make it a ball, that doesn't take a slot on your person, then it costs twice as much.

Thrird. - And about the Bonus trick of the "Free action healing magic items";
The bonus trick doesn't work, because the spell doesn't last any specific amount of time, it's instantaneous.
So the bonus use of the free action, as i mentioned in the posts above, cannot be used to heal 6 friendlies with a full-round action. But if the action which triggers this "use activated item" is triggered, then the heal will also trigger. (so you can still possibly heal more than once (if creative)) - but doubtfully.

True, thx TriOmegaZero, found the rule here as well:

Touch: You must touch a creature or object to affect it. A touch spell that deals damage can score a critical hit just as a weapon can. A touch spell threatens a critical hit on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a successful critical hit. Some touch spells allow you to touch multiple targets. You can touch up to 6 willing targets as part of the casting, but all targets of the spell must be touched in the same round that you finish casting the spell. If the spell allows you to touch targets over multiple rounds, touching 6 creatures is a full-round action.
http://paizo.com/prd/magic.html

The End


im running a carrion crown campaign and finished the first book yesterday so the players went shopping. one of the players asked for a ring that could do something along the lines of what the OP asked.

we usually have 4 to 6 players and i do not do the 4 encounters a day scenario. usually if the party is going into a dungeon, they are finishing that dungeon in a single ingame day or 3 depending on if they leave to rest up and etc, which usually means more encounters because the areas they clear get filled back up depending on how long they are away and how far they go.

anyways sorry bout that, i came up with a cure light wounds ring (1d8+5) for 3k. 1 time a day outside of combat which can use the touch up to 6 party members to heal in a single cast or a single target inside of combat.

big enough price for very helpful at lower levels but would pay itself off (compared to wands/potions) before wanting to switch it out for better rings.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

At-will healing has a lot of big consequences for reasons relevant to game design. Overall, it takes away your options and tools as a GM to create tension and interesting adventures.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Redneckdevil wrote:
would pay itself off (compared to wands/potions) before wanting to switch it out for better rings.

Nice necro but this comes up every 2 weeks almost.

The game is designed such that if this thought goes through your mind, it's probably incorrectly priced. It should cost more because wands should be the least expensive route.


If you are the GM, and your intent is to trivialize out of combat healing, just give the party an artifact that does it. Not everyone is interested in the resource management aspects of the game. You are the GM, you do not have to worry about costs and WBL unless you want to. If you are a player trying to convince your GM, the 100k estimate isn't bad. It is essentially Fast Healing for as many people who need it, not being limited like the ring of regen to damage taken while the ring being worn. If you are trying to get it into PFS play...
...well, good luck with that.


Usually wands are cheaper anyways, and will be orders of magnitude cheaper if you go James route. For example, for 3k, you can buy 4 wands, 50 charges each, for 200 charges worth of 1d8+1 healing, or 1100hp worth of healing. And no limit on usage per day, unlike the ring.

That should last you for several levels, and by that time, the next 750gp wand will be pocket change.

Frankly, 1/day healing item can easily be priced using the standard formula without unbalancing the game. That ring is slightly worse than a 3d6 channel from a cleric, once per day. It's unlimited healing that breaks the game.

Though it seems like the above 3 posters missed the 1/day limit on the ring since they seem to be talking about at-will unlimited healing.


Ozy,
Unlimited healing only breaks the Wargame, and kicks the balance of power towards the Martial side of things. These things are not game breaking to several playstyles. They do seriously change what is important, and totally change how things would be optimized, and the value of optimization.

If it suits the way the table plays, it is right for them. I take you at your word that it isn't right for your table, especially if you follow the spirit of PFS play.


Daw wrote:

Ozy,

Unlimited healing only breaks the Wargame, and kicks the balance of power towards the Martial side of things. These things are not game breaking to several playstyles. They do seriously change what is important, and totally change how things would be optimized, and the value of optimization.

If it suits the way the table plays, it is right for them. I take you at your word that it isn't right for your table, especially if you follow the spirit of PFS play.

Eh, I don't have a strong opinion about it either way. It obviously breaks the game for GMs who want depleted hp and similar resources to add challenge to their campaign encounters, it is no issue for GMs who don't mind or prefer players to have full resources for each encounter.

But it seems that most of the respondents were treating the ring as if it were an unlimited healing item, which it most certainly is not. In fact, I think it's far inferior to the same gold spent on wands of CLW.


Don't have much to add but a reply in general to the "wand of cure light wounds accomplishes the same thing" line of thought.

Sort of, the wands are not a permanent magical item. They carry charges and must be replenished. The ring being discussed way back in the OP is a permanent magical item, which while they can be lost, stolen, destroyed etc., are all much more permanent than a wand with charges. If I decide that for an upcoming adventure I wish to challenge the parties resources in healing it is much easier for me to arrange for a shortage of CLW wands than to render the ring unavailable and open that avenue up.


Wow, this is an old and dusty tome....
I know this is a radical thought, but why not an NPC cleric instead of this Ring of Bank Account Clearing? You don't have to give the NPC a share of the loot and keep him out of battle. Raise the cleric up in level as needed. Give the cleric magic items as needed, but only because it is an NPC. Then if someone actually wants to play a cleric (ha ha) you have one.


Kayerloth wrote:

Don't have much to add but a reply in general to the "wand of cure light wounds accomplishes the same thing" line of thought.

Sort of, the wands are not a permanent magical item. They carry charges and must be replenished. The ring being discussed way back in the OP is a permanent magical item, which while they can be lost, stolen, destroyed etc., are all much more permanent than a wand with charges. If I decide that for an upcoming adventure I wish to challenge the parties resources in healing it is much easier for me to arrange for a shortage of CLW wands than to render the ring unavailable and open that avenue up.

1d8+5 healing ONCE PER DAY does not in any way impede you from challenging their resources. Seriously. Even if it can get up to 6 people out of combat. Unless you want to play a game where the party tries to survive with absolutely no healing ever. That's equivalent to a days rest with long term care for a low level party.

101 to 129 of 129 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Ring of Cure Light Wounds All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.