D&D 5E Another healing poll: what other types of healing do you want (or not want) to see?

Intended as an add-on to the [MENTION=91812]ForeverSlayer[/MENTION] healing poll, this one covers various other types of healing one might find in the game. What's your preferences?

"Magical herbs" would most commonly be used by Rangers - think of Aragorn in the first LotR movie trying to heal Frodo with athelas.

Lanefan

In real-life, herbs can be used to treat diseases and poisons, but not wounds. Aragorn's healing herbs didn't restore wounds, but held off the knife blades. It took Elrond's healers to actually remove the curse.

(I built Aragorn as a level 6 ranger in 4e, with the Ritual Caster feat and the Delay Affliction ritual. Elrond, being higher-level, could take the Remove Affliction ritual. Also something to create flash floods.)

(Psi)SeveredHead said:

In real-life, herbs can be used to treat diseases and poisons, but not wounds.

Click to expand...

On the contrary. I mean, what did you think a poultice was for? Entire herb gardens were grown for first aid use. There are books on this topic, classes you can take, even DVDs to buy. It's not as effective as modern medicine, but some of it does work pretty well, and was used that way for a long time in history, and still used by some.

I'm on board with all of those things being available, but limited or rare. I subscribe to the philosophy that if everyone is special, no one is. Healing should be special. It should be something that some people have, and that they have at some times. Not a default expectation. Not a right.

The outcomes being that it should be fairly normal and okay for PCs to be at less than optimal health for extended periods of time, and that there should be a large difference in recovery rate between a party with a healer or a healing item and a party that does not have those things.

if we're going to have the expectation that PC's will be less than nominal health for extended periods of time, then we have to change combat, a lot. 3e you simply can't do that. Not if you're using CR par or higher creatures. A CR par creature by and large can potentially kill a PC in a single round. It isn't very likely with a full HP PC, but it is generally possible. If your PC is at half HP going into a fight with a CR par creature, he should die pretty often.

If we absolutely have to have magical healing, I don't mind the clerics getting lots of it. Tracking hp does not make the game exciting for me. But, by the same token, wands of cure light wounds is something I never want to see in the game again. At that point, you might as well simply refresh HP at the end of each fight, because that's what CLW wands mean.

(Psi)SeveredHead said:

In real-life, herbs can be used to treat diseases and poisons, but not wounds. Aragorn's healing herbs didn't restore wounds, but held off the knife blades. It took Elrond's healers to actually remove the curse.

(I built Aragorn as a level 6 ranger in 4e, with the Ritual Caster feat and the Delay Affliction ritual. Elrond, being higher-level, could take the Remove Affliction ritual. Also something to create flash floods.)

Click to expand...

Aloe-vera is awesome for treating burns. Garlic oil was used as a antiseptic. Some herbs function as astringents and styptics to help stop bleeding.

A huge part of treating wounds is preventing infection. Things that have antibacterial properties promote healing. That's all neosporin is.

They aren't magical, they only help promote healing and prevent infection (which is what killed people a lot back then.) However, there is historical context for herbs being used to help treat wounds.

Hussar said:

if we're going to have the expectation that PC's will be less than nominal health for extended periods of time, then we have to change combat, a lot.

Click to expand...

Only in terms of reducing its frequency, for the most part; either that, or go to a model where you have a series of small battles rather than one or two big ones.

3e you simply can't do that. Not if you're using CR par or higher creatures.

Click to expand...

Which you don't have to do. Doesn't the 3e DMG recommend having a certain percentage of the battles be below (or well below) the party's par CR, with another amount about equal and a few higher? All you need to do is adjust the upper CR percentages down and away you go.

Lanefan

Hussar said:

if we're going to have the expectation that PC's will be less than nominal health for extended periods of time, then we have to change combat, a lot. 3e you simply can't do that. Not if you're using CR par or higher creatures. A CR par creature by and large can potentially kill a PC in a single round. It isn't very likely with a full HP PC, but it is generally possible. If your PC is at half HP going into a fight with a CR par creature, he should die pretty often.

If we absolutely have to have magical healing, I don't mind the clerics getting lots of it. Tracking hp does not make the game exciting for me. But, by the same token, wands of cure light wounds is something I never want to see in the game again. At that point, you might as well simply refresh HP at the end of each fight, because that's what CLW wands mean.

Click to expand...

This has not been my experience. Generally, PCs have had to face CR+2 creatures for there to be a danger of one or more PC deaths. With equal CR creatures, the threat of death has generally only been a concern if a given party member is running on quarter hit points or so.

As to the poll, I'm content with just about everyone in the party having some sort of healing access outside of combat. At least to 50%, with limited ability to heal further (X times per day, % of hit points over time, etc.) I believe Clerics (and their ilk) should be the only ones who can do in combat healing - it should be rare, but worthy of giving up an action to perform.

And for whatever reason, I DESPISE wands or curing. I think it was because 3E made them too cheap and common. I'm fine with potions, so long as they aren't being guzzled like 32 oz. slurpees between combats.

While I am very happy with 4E's "two dimensional" healing, where a character's resistance to death comprises both "width" (hit points) and "depth" (healing surges), I do view this as just one possibility for a functional and enjoyable roleplaying game.

To be "functional", though, an RPG should be consistent in its general approaches to magical and "mundane" happenings. It's possible to be "subtle/realistic" or "gonzo" for either magical or mundane effects (including healing). 4E goes "gonzo" for both; hit points are used as a dramatic "reserve" of plot immunity, in effect (although you can imagine that effect in a myriad different ways, to suit your tastes) and as such recovery by "Second Wind" or between fights and by "leadership qualities" make perfect sense to me.

Systems that use subtle/"realistic" magic and "realistic" non-magical effects also work really well, for me. Systems that don't use hit points or classes and levels work best, here, I think, but some flexibility is possible. HârnMaster is the poster child, but RuneQuest, GURPS and Shadowrun can scrape in here, too.

What I find works poorly, for me, is mixing subtle/realistic "mundane" with gonzo magic. That just leads to a "Wizards (including variants like Clerics, Druids, etc.) Rule the World" trope that I find tiresome unless done well (as in Ars Magica, for example). I would probably say that subtle/"realistic" magic and gonzo "mundane" stuff would suit me poorly, too, but oddly enough no-one seems to have made a game with that approach...

Mid-period D&D - peaking with 3.x, I suppose - I found to push furthest towards the "subdued mundane/gonzo magic" model, which is why I responded so enthusiastically to 4E (along with the fact that the rules are straightfoward enough for me to actually know how they work, as opposed to simply memorising a whole mass of detail).

For DDN? Well, I hope it keeps the "level of gonzo" even between magic and non-magic - whatever general level it selects - and that it keeps a core rule engine that is easily comprehended in its entirety without memorising all the powers (spells and class features).

Healing fits into this overall picture in that I want the "mundane" and magical healing to be either both gonzo or both subtle/"realistic". Having magical healing work instantaneously and "mundane" healing work glacially slowly does not fulfill my wishes at all. On top of that, game considerations must be considered. Healing that is not limited by any important resource - whether it be "Wands of CLW", "Healing Potions" or "Healing Herbs" that cure 1d3 hp for 1gp a pop - makes a travesty of supposed in-game danger (which needs to be limited, but not non-existant).

So, in summary - I'll take both "magic" and "mundane" healing that has distinct game limits (i.e. uses character resources or exposes users to independent risk) and where both types are in balance regarding "gonzo-ness". Fluff it as you wish: healing herbs, poultices, laying on hands, flash miracles from a wand, "shouting back alive" - whatever. Ideally, just give a taste of the game-world process involved and let the players imagine it as suits their own imagination; trigger the imagination, don't try to force it into a specific mould.

Does that answer your question?

I prefer NPC clerical healing to have limited availability and to have magic items rare so that scroll and potions are uncommon and wondrous magic items capable of healing be very rare.

Depending on where the PCs are - such as a big city or capital with large and numerous temples, clerical healing and comsumable healing items might be more common.