Treat Wounds: A Simple Fix

[Data Lore]

Roll Medicine when treating wounds. Compare the result against the Medium DCs on table 10-2. You heal the level corresponding to the rolled result times the patient's constitution modifier in hit points.

Example: Joe rolls Medicine when treating wounds on Virginia. He gets a result of 17. That corresponds to level 4 on the 10-2 table. The patient, Viginia, has a constitution score of 16. That is a constitution modifier of 3. 4 times 3 is 12. Virginia regains 12 hitpoints.

A roll of 1 restores no hit points and bolsters the patient against further uses of Treat Wounds.

If thats too much HP, compare against the Hard DCs.

[dnoisette]

Treat Wounds is already really strong the way it is, you shouldn't be able to restore any HP to the target if you can't roll at least the Medium DC for your level.

[Data Lore]

dnoisette wrote:

Treat Wounds is already really strong the way it is, you shouldn't be able to restore any HP to the target if you can't roll at least the Medium DC for your level.

I disagree. These scaling DCs are no bueno. It should not be harder to restore 1 hp at level 15 than it is at level 1.

[dnoisette]

Data Lore wrote:

I disagree. These scaling DCs are no bueno. It should not be harder to restore 1 hp at level 15 than it is at level 1.

Then fixing the scaling DCs again might be the answer.

I don't like the idea of having Treat Wounds always heal a certain amount of HP because you can spam it as much as you like.
Nothing will stop you from resting for 1 hour and using Treat Wounds up to six times.
Right now, if you do this, you can probably successfully heal the targets 3-4 times.
If you still heal some HP even on a failed check, you can afford to rest for half an hour and get back to the same amount of HP that would have previously required 1 hour.

I don't like having PCs begin an encounter with 2 HP but I also don't like the idea of them having full HP from resting just about 1-2 hours.

Even a time-sensitive scenario no longer requires strategic thinking if you can heal close to full HP in less than 2 hours.
It would have certainly made Chapter 2 much, much easier for my group and I really don't like that idea.

It should not be harder to restore 1 hp at level 15 than it is at level 1. I fully agree with that.
But then it's the skill DCs that require changing. Treat Wounds is working just fine.

[Data Lore]

dnoisette wrote:

Data Lore wrote:

I disagree. These scaling DCs are no bueno. It should not be harder to restore 1 hp at level 15 than it is at level 1.

Then fixing the scaling DCs again might be the answer.

Whatever the fix to this is, the PC should not have the same or greater chance to fail at a task at level 15 when he succeeded at that same task at level 1. If they address this correctly, the chance to succeed should dramatically increase and the chance to fail should become very very small (basically, 5%, or rolling a 1).

Even if you have the PC state at what "level" he is using his Medicine (effectively setting a difficulty and capping the amount he can heal), that will still lead to spamming. It will just take longer and it will slow down play as the player has to fiddle with the 10-2 table constantly to figure out the most efficient DC given how wounded PCs are (kinda how Battle Medic works now). That would be no fun and not actually solve anything.

The solution I shared would just cut out the middle man and let you just roll to determine how good the heal is. At low levels, there is still a good chance that you heal for nothing. Later, you may always succeed but there is a chance for a very low amount healed (and the 5% chance of a crit fail is always there).

If this must be limited further, here are some suggestions:
- Option A: Can only be healed once per hour (bolstered for one hour)
- Option B: Can only be healed with Medicine up to half health

Etc, etc...Its easy to limit this without leaning on RNG to determine if it even goes off irrespective of PC level.

[MaxAstro]

Data Lore wrote:

Whatever the fix to this is, the PC should not have the same or greater chance to fail at a task at level 15 when he succeeded at that same task at level 1.

I don't think this is the case. If you look at the new skill DC table and compare it to a well-built PC, your chances of making the check do seem to actually go up at higher levels. For example:

Level 1, 16 Wisdom, Trained in Medicine for a total +4 against DC 13: You have a 60% chance to succeed.

Level 20, 20 Wisdom, Master Medicine, +4 bonus from a magic item for a total +31 against DC 36: You have an 80% chance to succeed.

That's not even totally optimized; you could easily get that check to succeed on a 1 at level 20. And of course a higher level character is healing more hp while they are at it.

[Lyee]

What about:

Level 1, 16 Wis, Trained in Medicine for a total +4 against DC 13 (60%)
Level 20, 18 Wis, Trained in Medicine for a total +25 against DC 36 (45%)

Yes, if you invest a little you keep up or overtake it, but the above situation is entirely realistic for someone that considers Medicine their 4th most important skill (as you can't really push 4 skills up without being a rogue). They want to keep succeeding at it, even if they don't get better. Getting that much worse will feel bad.

[Fuzzypaws]

The best fix would be a scaling benefit based on how high you roll for the check. So instead of success against a scaling DC giving healing equal to the target's Con mod X healer's level, it might be:

Make a Medicine check against DC 15. On a success, the target recovers HP equal to its Con mod x its level, minimum 1 per level. For every point by which you beat the DC, add 1 to this healing.

[Data Lore]

Fuzzypaws wrote:

The best fix would be a scaling benefit based on how high you roll for the check. So instead of success against a scaling DC giving healing equal to the target's Con mod X healer's level, it might be:

Make a Medicine check against DC 15. On a success, the target recovers HP equal to its Con mod x its level, minimum 1 per level. For every point by which you beat the DC, add 1 to this healing.

That is a problematic and gamey solution. Ultimately, players can just spam low powered heals anyways if using that and there may be slow down as players constantly keep track of hps and try to game the most efficient, less risky option level to cast at (likely repeatedly referencing the table prior to rolling and asking folks what their hp is, etc).

Just let them roll, compare to the table and be done with it. Its faster in play and removes excessive gamism. The player always gets better and always benefits from investing in medicine. If that needs to be limited, put in a common sense limit like one of those I mentioned prior.

[Syndrous]

I really don't see this issue going anywhere. No matter how they resolve this it's not going to make the entire player base happy.

Most of the player base wants to not be forced to have a Cleric in a party, that much seems for certain. They added a way to avoid the Cleric at a reasonable rate of investment, they gave us a nifty skill use that can heal. They simultaneously uncapped the Alchemist as a healer option, due to the change with resonance and how it reacts with an Alchemist creating an elixer. This gives us 1 great in combat healer (Cleric) and 2 decent in combat healers (Paladin via Lay on Hands and Alchemist via Elixers).

They then give us a method of out of combat healing that is somewhat strong but requires a roll, buffing a skill which normally most parties would ignore.

They do this because the data that they have indicates the game is extraordinarily lethal, and we need the healing.

We, as a player base indicated we wanted this or something similar.

Stepping off of my soapbox to provide an actual idea to solving this.

Making a meaningful fix to this is actually easier than one would think. They partially provided it to us already. Paizo made the Wounded condition, but implemented it in a way I do not like.

I don't like the current iteration because being unconscious is already a penalty and should not have a status effect that is automatically added when you recover. Instead, Paizo should consider redesigning Wounded.

My version for home-brew games becomes the following:

Wounded - when the Treat Wounds activity is used to restore HP, the target of gains the Wounded condition. Wounded causes physical damage to cause 1 additional point of bleeding damage. Each application of Treat Wounds increases the threshold by 1 (to 2, 3, 4, etc). At Wounded 5, the severity of this condition worsens, causing your character to become Fatigued. At Wounded 10, you become unconscious.

Resting for 8 continuous hours reduces the Wounded condition by 1 severity level. Resting 24 continuous hours removes the Wounded condition completely. Using Alchemical Elixers, Magical Healing and Potion Healing can prevent your Wounded condition from increasing beyond Wounded 5. Only resting can fully remove the Wounded condition.

This creates a reasonable daily cap for Treat Wounds, adds a level of severity to injury and causes parties to heavily weigh whether to expend resources to heal, consider resting, or heal.

This then shifts the ability from an unlimited use heal to one which allows a GM room to press the team, create tension from injury and use the narrative to prevent the party from wasting time.

[MaxAstro]

Lyee wrote:

What about:

Level 1, 16 Wis, Trained in Medicine for a total +4 against DC 13 (60%)
Level 20, 18 Wis, Trained in Medicine for a total +25 against DC 36 (45%)

Yes, if you invest a little you keep up or overtake it, but the above situation is entirely realistic for someone that considers Medicine their 4th most important skill (as you can't really push 4 skills up without being a rogue). They want to keep succeeding at it, even if they don't get better. Getting that much worse will feel bad.

I think part of the problem is that people have this idea that having a skill Trained is the same as putting a rank in it every level in PF1e, and I don't think it is.

If you have a skill Trained, then you invested in that skill exactly once, and then never spent character resources on it past that. That's more like putting a couple ranks in a skill in PF1e and then ignoring it, and expecting it to still compete.

Just like PF1e, if you want a skill to stay relevant, you need to continue putting character resources into it.

Unlike PF1e, skills stay more relevant without needing to keep putting resources into them, but they still fall behind. This makes sense to me. If a skill was only worth 1 skill rank to you, it wasn't that important and you deserve to not be keeping up with it.

EDIT: I will say that I think the Medicine DC and amount healed should be based on the level of the person you are treating, not your level.

I will also say that Assurance is a terrible feat that explicitly runs counter to PF2e's stated design goals, but that's not a problem with Medicine.

[NemisCassander]

I think the simplest fix is to base the DC on the target, not the user. This can be done one of two ways:

1) Base it on the level of the target. (Average of group if necessary.) This at least means high-level healers can (and do) heal low-level people easily. As they should.

2) Base it on the amount of healing that the healer wants to do. This is very similar to the OP, but removes the guaranteed success. Now it's not _just_ time, but an active tradeoff between guaranteed results and time. This also makes it (effectively) harder to treat low-Con characters as high-Con characters... which makes sense, does it not?

[Data Lore]

I'm telling you guys, just let them roll and compare the result to the table. Bam, no wasted points. People who dabble can still do something. People specialize are still better. No time wasted asking people their hps and then calibrating your heal or any such sillyness.

No muss, no fuss. Easy fix. Sensible limits can be placed on it. Everything doesnt have to be complicated and weird.

[Fuzzypaws]

I hardly think a low flat DC that gives better results as your check increases is complicated and weird. It let the dabbler still heal, while people at higher proficiency ranks can for instance multiply the initial healing for beating the DC.

[MaxAstro]

A PC ~can~ still only dabble, especially since Treat Wounds has no additional failure effect. In Lyee's example above, that level 20 dabbler still has a 45% chance to succeed and only a 10% chance to crit fail, which means they will take longer to heal the party, but on average still typically heal the entire party to full well before bolstering them.

[Data Lore]

Fuzzypaws wrote:

I hardly think a low flat DC that gives better results as your check increases is complicated and weird. It let the dabbler still heal, while people at higher proficiency ranks can for instance multiply the initial healing for beating the DC.

Healer "Hey, whats your HP?"

Dude A "I am down 20 points."

Healer "You?"

Dude B "I am down 35 points."

Healer "Hmm, let me do some math. Maybe I will try a 15 point heal. What are your con modifier?"

Dude A "+3"

Dude B "+2"

Healer "Ok, let me grab a calculator. Maybe another number is better."

DM "Screw this, roll initiative."

ONCE AGAIN...

Just roll the Medicine check, compare it to the table, tell people to multiply corresponding "level" result by their con and BAM. Done.

It can be limited to heal a "fair amount" one way or another (I mentioned some possibilities to that effect in an above post). But ease of use should be a goal here and players should always get better over time at Medicine (they should not get effectively worse).

[Zarkias]

Suggestion (Changes indicated in bold ):

TREAT WOUNDS
Requirements You must use healer’s tools (see page 186).
Each Hit Point that you heal using this action costs 1 Silver Piece as a replacement for used components in your healer's tools. If you ever run out of money, adjust at will the Hit Point recovered to match the Silver Pieces eventually used. Using this action without a minimum of 1 Silver Piece in your inventory results in a critical failure.

You spend 10 minutes treating up to your Intelligence modifier (minimum 1) injured living creatures (targeting yourself as one of them, if you so choose), then attempt a Medicine check. The DC is usually the medium DC for your level, though the GM might adjust this DC due to circumstances, such as trying to rest during volatile weather or when treating magically cursed wounds. A given creature can be subject to only one Treat Wounds attempt per 10-minute period, so two characters can’t treat the same target’s wounds simultaneously.

Success: You treat the patients’ wounds. Each patient recovers Hit Points equal to its Constitution modifier × your level or equal to just your level, whichever is higher.
Critical Success: As success, but double the healing at no extra money cost.
Failure: You don't treat the patients' wounds. For each patient treated, you have to spend Silver Pieces equal to its Constitution modifier x your level or equal to just your level, whichever is higher.
Critical Failure: As Failure, and the patients are bolstered against your Treat Wounds.

[MaxAstro]

Ew. That is WAY too expensive on a failure. It shouldn't cost more to fail to heal someone than it does to successfully heal them.

[Ghilteras]

Treat Wounds should just be limited to 2 times per every rank you have in Medicine per day so if you are Untrained you cannot do it, Trained you do it 2 times per PG per day, Expert 4 times per PG per day, Master 6, Legendary 8

Spamming it without limit and rolling up to 6 times per use makes no sense as it's incredibly boring and Adventure Paths rarely takes into account time sensitive quests and it becomes an extra burden for the GM.

[Shinigami02]

Ghilteras wrote:

Treat Wounds should just be limited to 2 times per every rank you have in Medicine per day so if you are Untrained you cannot do it, Trained you do it 2 times per PG per day, Expert 4 times per PG per day, Master 6, Legendary 8

Spamming it without limit and rolling up to 6 times per use makes no sense as it's incredibly boring and Adventure Paths rarely takes into account time sensitive quests and it becomes an extra burden for the GM.

Where are you getting "rolling up to 6 times per use" from? You roll once, and if you succeed that 1 roll you affect up to 6 people.

[Ediwir]

I'm just sort of annoyed that the DC increase relative to your level does not equal the skill increase relative to your level for routine / average skills.
If training isn't enough to keep up with average tasks, what's the whole point?

[WhiteMagus2000]

So far my group has had no issues with Treat wounds. With only a modest investment the party barbarian had a 50% chance to succeed at level 1 and will end up being 55 or 60% at level 20. Seems like a reasonable cost in time and a couple skill increases. Yes, someone is going to have to invest in it, but that doesn't seem much different than how someone has to invest in diplomacy or intimidate and someone is going to need to take arcana. I think barbarian is glad to have an important out of combat job.

[Gloom]

NemisCassander wrote:

I think the simplest fix is to base the DC on the target, not the user.

For the most part this is usually how skill challenges are supposed to work. Treat Wounds just happens to have overly specific wording. I think it was written with the intent that you would only be using it to heal up your party.

[MagicSN]

I like the Treat wounds action. Before it existed, a healer basically was mandatory. Most of the parties I played with over the last years (we did not play Pathfinder, but 5e) was without Healer. Nobody in our group likes playing a healer, or if, then occassionaly. I think forcing that "there needs to be a dedicated healer" is bad.

and Treat Wounds fixes this. It basically is the "Short Rest", inofficially. Still I'd think it would be good to get rid of the dice-roll. Rolling dice rince&repeat is boring (pretty sure in my group we will get rid of the dice-roll).

As to "abusing it", maybe an idea is that the persons being healed need to use a Resonance point? (maybe not for a one-time-use, this would be too "heavy" I think, but maybe for 3x or such?)