|
This might be a bit pedantic, but according to the rules for Fast Healing...
Some abilities grant fast healing, and some creatures have regeneration. A creature with either ability regains the listed amount of Hit Points each round at the beginning of its turn.
Since we don't track rounds outside of encounter mode, would that mean Fast Healing only works during combat? The obvious/common sense answer would be no, but it wouldn't be the first occurrence of things not working outside of combat. Example, rage, stances, etc. Anyone have any insight into the designer's intent?
This might be a bit pedantic, but according to the rules for Fast Healing...
Some abilities grant fast healing, and some creatures have regeneration. A creature with either ability regains the listed amount of Hit Points each round at the beginning of its turn.Since we don't track rounds outside of encounter mode, would that mean Fast Healing only works during combat? The obvious/common sense answer would be no, but it wouldn't be the first occurrence of things not working outside of combat. Example, rage, stances, etc. Anyone have any insight into the designer's intent?
I can't see any reason why fast healing would only function in combat. And the oracle battle mystery specifically gives fast healing only while in combat, which implies it otherwise works normally.
Also, encounter mode doesn't necessarily end when combat is over. You'd still potentially track it if someone was bleeding out unconscious or poisoned. Similarly, if a creature's fast healing needs a few rounds to get the health back to max, you can keep tracking it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And if the fast healing has a limited duration, you can simply multiply the fast healing amount by the remaining duration to get the total amount that it would heal. Then just add that rather than tracking it round by round outside of combat.
|
|
Structure
An encounter is played out in a series of rounds,
during which the player characters, adversaries, and
other participants in the encounter act in sequence.
You roll initiative to determine this order at the start
of the encounter and then play through rounds until a
conclusion is reached and the encounter ends. The rules
in this section assume a combat encounter—a battle—but
the general structure can apply to any kind of encounter.
Being pedantic you can argue by RAW - if someone is having any persistent effect that uses rounds then the encounter is not yet fully resolved.
At the table we tend to hand wave these ongoing effects if we think the danger is minimal. Even a persistent fire 1 (lesser alchemist fire) has a 2.8% chance to last for another 10 !! turns.
Someone close to or at 0 HP and still on fire? Oh yeah - we keep on rolling until it is resolved.
But do I really have a fighter with 50 HP left roll for 10 rounds to see if the fire stops? I have never seen it at any table. That just gets hand waved.
So technically in my view a player with a character which has fast healing would have the right to insist that the encounter isn't ended until his condition is fully resolved aka he is back to full HP.
In real life - hand wave and move on.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree, encounter mode isn't exactly the same as combat. Encounter mode is for doing anything where round by round precision is relevant, and combat is the most common example of that.
But a party in an chase scene to escape a rolling boulder isn't in combat, but encounter mode is certainly more appropriate than exploration mode.
I view it more as a sort of way of holding the "camera"; you could in the middle of an exploration say "let's do this round by round in encounter mode" and zoom back out when the fiddly bit is over. It's not a magical state of being that enables or disables abilities, it's just the most useful rules framework to run a particular scene.
Now, combat is a different thing. Barbarians can only rage in combat, because they need enemies to be angry at. Would I let a barbarian rage during a chase scene to escape an inanimate object like that boulder? Strictly speaking, no. Practically speaking? Maybe - for example if they had to smash their way through an obstacle, I can imagine that that boulder provides enough adrenalin to make it work.
|
|
I was just trying to wrap my head around the concept of unlimited, "free" healing that is provided by lay on hands and hymn of healing. Like stated upthread, the battle oracle's fast healing is specifically limited to "non-trivial" combat encounters so it has a built-in balancing effect. Where is the balancing effect for the two focus spells outside of the obvious—time?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I was just trying to wrap my head around the concept of unlimited, "free" healing that is provided by lay on hands and hymn of healing. Like stated upthread, the battle oracle's fast healing is specifically limited to "non-trivial" combat encounters so it has a built-in balancing effect. Where is the balancing effect for the two focus spells outside of the obvious—time?
I mean, it's time. It's just a cooldown limitation like Treat Wounds, you can only bump someone's HP every 10-20 minutes as a balancing factor for Exploration mode. During combat, Hymn of Healing restores more than Lay on Hands, but takes a few turns to give you all it's effect. But during Exploration? It takes time like Treat Wounds, so you have to spend time doing it instead of walking along progressing the plot.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, the real issue here is figuring out if time matters, and there's a variety of ways to approach that.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
In PF2, time IS the balancing factor. You have to make decisions about how you're going to spend those 10 minutes.
Do you Repair your shield? Do you Treat Wounds? Do you Refocus? Or do you even want to risk sitting still for 10 minutes?
In Society games this is pretty well handled by chaining encounters while making it clear how much time you have available.
In homegames it's a tool for GMs to plan either one big encounter for the day, or multiple weaker fights back-to-back.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lay on hands doesn't give fast healing, so it's not particularly relevant to the question posed, but yes, as Nefreet said: time is the limiting factor.
And regarding fast healing / regeneration in particular it's important to remember that in Golarion time doesn't just stop because you stop keeping track of it. "Rounds" and "turns" may not be happening, but the timescale underlying them is, they're just abstracted and sped up. So if something lasts for a minute and happens every round it still happens 10 times regardless of whether you're in encounter mode or exploration mode.
I was just trying to wrap my head around the concept of unlimited, "free" healing that is provided by lay on hands and hymn of healing. Like stated upthread, the battle oracle's fast healing is specifically limited to "non-trivial" combat encounters so it has a built-in balancing effect. Where is the balancing effect for the two focus spells outside of the obvious—time?
To me, Battle Oracle fast healing is noticeably weaker than any other healing feats and abilities a character can buy with character build. Because it isn't under the character's control.
Focus point healing is really good. It doesn't have a risk of failure and it only takes 10 minutes to recharge the focus point afterwards. Lay on Hands is better in-combat because it all happens at once. Hymn of Healing and Life Boost are better out of combat because they heal more. Lay on Hands can also be improved to remove a range of conditions too, which gives it a bit of an edge.
But all of these are weaker than the Medicine skill. The base Treat Wounds is maybe weaker than focus point healing because it can only be used once per hour. With Continual Recovery it pulls equal to the focus point healing on the time scale and still does noticeably more healing at low level. Once the character level and thus the focus spell level increase, the focus spell can end up doing more healing than just the base Trained level of Treat Wounds.
So that is what I see as the full balance of these focus point healing spells compared to Medicine skill healing: No risk of failing a roll like with Medicine skill healing. No additional build investment needed like with the Medicine skill feats and proficiency improvements. However, lower healing capacity than a fully decked out Medicine skill healing character.
So yeah, it just takes more time to bring everyone back up to full with a focus point healing spell. Medicine can do it faster if you build for it.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yep, this is all pretty much how I expected it worked. I just find it odd that we have all this effectively free healing given that (1) Pathfinder 1E eliminated the healing cantrip from v3.5 to specifically remove the unlimited out of combat healing mechanic, and (2) apparently Jason was not happy with the "abuse" of healing sticks (wands of healing) being spammed in org play for Pathfinder 1E and wanted to "correct" that for 2E, but then gave us things like lay on hands and hymn of healing.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yep, this is all pretty much how I expected it worked. I just find it odd that we have all this effectively free healing given that (1) Pathfinder 1E eliminated the healing cantrip from v3.5 to specifically remove the unlimited out of combat healing mechanic, and (2) apparently Jason was not happy with the "abuse" of healing sticks (wands of healing) being spammed in org play for Pathfinder 1E and wanted to "correct" that for 2E, but then gave us things like lay on hands and hymn of healing.
From my experiences, 10 minute healing bursts from Treat Wounds and focus spells are massively different than wands of cure light wounds in 1e.
With the wands of healing paradigm, parties were back to full health within about 2 minutes after each fight, a small amount of time that only really impacted them either if they had min/level buffs running or if they were low enough level that 750gp (in 1e gold) was a hindrance. They would heal in whatever room they fought immediately after the fights stopped, then push on.
With treat wounds my parties are now actively thinking about how they go about healing. They'll fall back to defensible locations, or possibly even leave the dungeon entirely before they stop to heal up. They'll set a time limit for themselves like 30 minutes to do all of their recovery (treat wounds and refocusing combined) before pressing onwards, and go forward low on HP or focus if they can't get to full in that time. They enter fights at less than full health significantly more often, and use that knowledge to adjust their tactics to more defensive ones.
I don't think the change is strictly an improvement on the old system, the old system resolved healing much quicker out-of-game because it required less strategic thought, but it is a pretty large shift in tone for my tables.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the biggest difference, outside the previously mentioned timescale, is that healing in PF2 is a character option you have to put at least some investment into, whereas wands of CLW were pretty inexpensive for any group to be able to function with past the lowest of levels.
Whether or not that's a good thing is a little muddier though, since it makes having some kind of healer significantly more important in PF2 than in PF1 (some would argue mandatory).
Basically every PF1e party in existence relied on wands of CLW. That wand was so necessary that imo it warped my vision of the Golarion setting.
I much prefer PF2e healing where the source of healing has different flavors depending on the character's life choices.
For myself, there is little difference from PF1 to PF2 out of combat healing past the time scale. People say 'I'm going to heal', they pick their method, a montage happens and everyone is healed: the exact montage is just flavor IMO. I had a character [Razmiran Priest] in PF1 that used a wand to heal but made it look like she was praying and casting spells... Didn't change the effect, but altered the "flavor". No matter if it's PF1 or PF2, the only time the flavor is static is if you don't change it.
|
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yep, this is all pretty much how I expected it worked. I just find it odd that we have all this effectively free healing given that (1) Pathfinder 1E eliminated the healing cantrip from v3.5 to specifically remove the unlimited out of combat healing mechanic, and (2) apparently Jason was not happy with the "abuse" of healing sticks (wands of healing) being spammed in org play for Pathfinder 1E and wanted to "correct" that for 2E, but then gave us things like lay on hands and hymn of healing.
My take on it is that when they started with the PF2 playtest they wanted to get rid of easy cheap healing. And this was happening against a backdrop of Starfinder being pretty successful and people asking "why don't you do it like that?"
Eventually they caved/pivoted/had an epiphany and quite drastically changed their approach. On launch PF2 had Treat Wounds and Lay On Hands unlimited healing right in the CRB. Besides that, you also had an implementation of focus spells and cantrips that was a lot more generous than it was in the playtest.
What this points to for me is a turn away from the attrition-based threat model we inherited from D&D 3.x, where you were supposed to have about four level-appropriate encounters that ran down your daily spells and other resources so that the last fight would be a bit of a nailbiter.
Except in practice, the 3.x attrition model just didn't work. Some groups play on weekday nights and like to have just one or two fights per session with some RP and days of travel in between. Others want to do a massive dungeon crawl with a dozen encounters. Or after fighting one or two encounters and nova-ing, the party would contrive some extradimensional hideout to sleep and continue with full resources the next day - the 15 minute adventuring day.
PF2 changes that significantly. Cantrips don't run out, and focus spells are hard to nova away because they're basically encounter powers, not daily powers. Healing isn't rationed on a daily basis (like Starfinder resolve) but based on amount of time in between encounters. There are still some daily resources (notably, Divine Font Heal spells), but in the bigger picture, their role has been scaled back.
So now the balance of the game doesn't depend nearly as much on the amount of encounters you have per day. If you have one encounter per day, the balance will work out. If you have six encounters, the balance will also work out.
While Paizo maybe didn't like easy healing at first, I think they made their peace with it and instead embraced it as an opportunity to develop some setting aspects. Lost Omens Legends spends quite some attention on the development of non-divine medical practice for example.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For myself, there is little difference from PF1 to PF2 out of combat healing past the time scale. People say 'I'm going to heal', they pick their method, a montage happens and everyone is healed: the exact montage is just flavor IMO. I had a character [Razmiran Priest] in PF1 that used a wand to heal but made it look like she was praying and casting spells... Didn't change the effect, but altered the "flavor". No matter if it's PF1 or PF2, the only time the flavor is static is if you don't change it.Though I agree with this solution, a homebrew flavor solution is no different than a homebrew mechanics solution to offer different outlets of PF1e healing. PF2e doesn't require homebrew fixing in this regard, which I consider better.
None of it is homebrew though: if I heal someone with a spell while holding a stick or I go through the motions of casting while using the wand, the optics are the same. Same as if someone dances for their Somatic and sings for their Verbal: nothing but the flavor changed. Switching flavor up isn't homebrew in the least. The flavor examples in the PF1 books weren't exclusive by any means. I often reflavored traits, feats and other aspects of the game and was never told I was homebrewing as I never touched the mechanics. For instance, no one cared if I took the trait Bullied and described it as bully or boxer or scrapper as the mechanics didn't change.
And just to point out, Razmiran Priest had a specific mechanic to fool others into thinking the caster was using divine magic with items. I rarely found anyone with an issue with wands though, so it wasn't taken for that reason.
Yep, this is all pretty much how I expected it worked. I just find it odd that we have all this effectively free healing given that (1) Pathfinder 1E eliminated the healing cantrip from v3.5 to specifically remove the unlimited out of combat healing mechanic, and (2) apparently Jason was not happy with the "abuse" of healing sticks (wands of healing) being spammed in org play for Pathfinder 1E and wanted to "correct" that for 2E, but then gave us things like lay on hands and hymn of healing.My take on it is that when they started with the PF2 playtest they wanted to get rid of easy cheap healing. And this was happening against a backdrop of Starfinder being pretty successful and people asking "why don't you do it like that?"
Eventually they caved/pivoted/had an epiphany and quite drastically changed their approach. On launch PF2 had Treat Wounds and Lay On Hands unlimited healing right in the CRB. Besides that, you also had an implementation of focus spells and cantrips that was a lot more generous than it was in the playtest.
Yeah...for context, if I recall the start of the playtest correctly, you couldn't even heal with *potions or wands* without spending a very limited daily resource, and Treat Wounds wasn't even a thing, or at least was much less effective. (I seem to recall it being added in revision 2 or 3, anyway.) They really didn't want people having "free" unlimited healing...or at least were testing how well that worked, and whether people liked it. These were the same documents that had signature skills, after all, and I refuse to believe they had signature skills in the game because they thought it was a great idea rather than something to stress-test.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Faking divine magic with items, other types of spells and subterfuge is literally how razmiran priests operate though. It's part of the setting.
We can agree to disagree. From my point of view, past a certain point, such as not descriptively relying on a magic wand during the healing process, such change becomes flavor homebrew.
Here is a quote from the Director of Brand Strategy on taking Hunter’s Eye where the fluff said "Your parents had you blessed by Erastil as a youth, and you are a prodigy with a bow". It wasn't just my opinion but that of a Paizo staff member.
First, does the character have to have been blessed by Erastil (a primarily rural, LG deity) to get this, or is that just one possible reason why someone would be good with a bow in this way?No, that's just flavor text and one possible explanation for the mechanical benefits the trait grants.
Flavor text is just that, especially in PF1 where there isn't 1 setting only: Golarion isn't built in as the only setting as it is in PF2.
Faking divine magic with items, other types of spells and subterfuge is literally how razmiran priests operate though. It's part of the setting.That line of thinking did cross my mind as well. PF1e Razmiran healing + deception is still relying on CLW wands, which just goes to show how pervasive they are as healing in PF1e setting.
But your complaint was "I much prefer PF2e healing where the source of healing has different flavors depending on the character's life choices." There where different flavors between things like I mentioned or even items like Boots of the Earth that offered infinite healing if you have the time. The flavor was there but the 'CLW' hate mostly obscured it.
Maybe you misunderstand my point. I don't consider modifying flavor text to singularly constitute flavor homebrew.
I don't consider speaking or singing differently to be flavor homebrew for verbal components or dancing to be flavor homebrew for somatic components.
I consider more drastic flavor changes that illustrate the source of the power to be something different to be flavor homebrew.
I think it's more that we disagree on what is flavor homebrew: most of your examples I disagree with: there is no way most targets would know that CLW healing is different from other types of healing so it doesn't matter past the optics. Was it Ki, divine healing or a poultice you just used? You could do all the same motions you do for those with the wand. As such, how can it be homebrew? The source illustrated obviously in most cases.
All of these flavor changes are innocuous for a majority of scenarios. But there are edge cases: what if the party never finds a magic shop? What if the party is in a non-wilderness area for an extended period of time? What if the party is in an anti-magic field or an enemy caster prepares to counterspell the CLW?
I don't really understand the question. The mechanics work the same with or without flavor changes. Enemies roll the same rolls it ID and counter. Buying items works the same. Ect. It's just like losing a component pouch and not finding anyplace to buy another.
PF2e actually supports multiple out of combat healing channels that handle the above smoothly. There's more than 1 option, is all I'm saying.
I disagreed with you saying there where different "flavors" of out of combat healing, which I still disagree with you on for PF1 not having [even with wands]. Now if we talk about frequency of out of combat and variety of differing mechanics then yes, PF2 wins out.
Also regarding boots of the earth, I'll admit I forgot about that item, probably because it's from inner sea gods, which was a book unavailable in the PF1e prd back when that site was online.
They where the ultimate in cheap [5000gp] out of combat healing the whole party could use. Infernal Healing where also nice for wands as every caster could use them so even arcane one could carry the healing wand.
My table didn't use them because we sticked to the prd, which compared to the srd, was imo faster and didn't intermix results from core Pathfinder books and 3rd party books, though it did mean both infernal healing and boots of the earth never showed up in our games.
The PRD was pretty awful: it was full of contradictions as it went on print run errata so if something was printed in different books and only one was updated, you got different answers/rules depending on what book was referenced. I can't count the number of times I had issues with people pointing to wrong stuff in the prd and saying it was right because it WAS in the official PRD. :P
I went for archives of nethys which kept to official pathfinder only plus it listed books so if you wanted to exclude official books you could. Plus it was allowed to use pathfinder names unlike the for profit sites floating around, which just made things so much easier to find.