Cure/inflict wounds spells revision

[Kerrick]

Thanks, Hrothgar... you summed up the problem quite nicely. I think it was all the numbers that made your head spin. Apparently I misread your post. Sorry.

I figured my solution would be a bit complicated - that's why I wanted to ask for opinions. My solutions generally tend to be that way until I can refine them a bit.

Regarding basing extra healing on the target's HD: It could work, except that you'd have to know the target's HD. In the case of inflict spells, I don't seriously think the DM's going to just tell you... which means he'll have to figure it out himself, which makes more work for him. By basing it on caster level, the entire burden is on the caster (the player, most times).

Going back to my version: Would it be less complicated if I simply dropped the +1 point/level and made it (base dice + additional dice)? For example, cure light wounds would be 1d8 + 1d8/2 levels. You wouldn't lose a whole lot, overall; a cure serious at max level (L20) would heal/inflict 49 points instead of 74. This would power them down a bit, while still keeping them viable for their level, and lower the complexity factor.

 

[Hrothgar Rannúlfr]

Perhaps it's that the healing : total HP ratio decreases quite dramatically with level? I mean, for any given spell. So, lower level healing spells become more and more redundant.

But I don't really know. Just guessing.

Sounds good, Aus_Snow. Looks like you posted while I was typing.

 

[Hrothgar Rannúlfr]

Hey Hrothgar,

I've been thinking.
Given your analysis, maybe the best approach to handle the topic is by making cure/cause spells do 1d8 HP per spell-level, plus 1 HP per target's HD per spell level... plus the option of maximizing the effect with a casting time of 1 full round per target.
This would make them scale nicely, leave a random factor and add the tactical decision of whether to heal during combat or later on (depending on severity & urgency).

Something to think about. I haven't done the math, but this looks like the results might be close to what I had in mind.

Any insights into Kerrick's latest question?

 

[Hrothgar Rannúlfr]

Thanks, Hrothgar... you summed up the problem quite nicely.

You're welcome!

I think it was all the numbers that made your head spin.

Yeah... I felt like I was missing some of the info on the calculations, too.

Apparently I misread your post. Sorry.

No problem. Easy enough to do. Truth is, I don't think I wrote it as clearly as I could have, either.

I figured my solution would be a bit complicated - that's why I wanted to ask for opinions. My solutions generally tend to be that way until I can refine them a bit.

Regarding basing extra healing on the target's HD: It could work, except that you'd have to know the target's HD. In the case of inflict spells, I don't seriously think the DM's going to just tell you... which means he'll have to figure it out himself, which makes more work for him. By basing it on caster level, the entire burden is on the caster (the player, most times).

I thought of that, too. Perhaps, the spells should just heal their stated amounts plus a percentage of the target's max HP?

• CLW 1d8+X plus 20% max HP
• CMW 2d8+X plus 40% max HP
• CSW 3d8+X plus 60% max HP
• CCW 4d8+X plus 80% max HP

Then, the DM doesn't have to reveal anything about the target, at all.

But, question... Should a cleric really know the max HP or the number of HD anyone or anything has that he's trying to heal. In game, how does a cleric decide whether Cure Light Wounds is enough or if Cure Serious Wounds would be better? I mean, without metagaming? I mean a first level fighter that's taken a 7 point shot isn't really any more wounded than a 10th level fighter that's taken a 70 point shot. So, in game, why does the cleric know that he needs to cast Cure Light Wounds on one of them and Cure Critical Wounds on the other? Why does his friend that Cure Light Wounds saved from near death two years ago not get much help from the same spell, now???

Just thinking in print...

Going back to my version: Would it be less complicated if I simply dropped the +1 point/level and made it (base dice + additional dice)?

It might make it simpler. Let's have a look.

For example, cure light wounds would be 1d8 + 1d8/2 levels.

Hmmm... Dropping the +1 per caster level part of the equations and replacing it with +1d8 per two caster levels... Cure Light Wounds at level 20 equals 1d8+10d8 or 4.5 times 11, on average (if I'm understanding, correctly). 49hp cured/inflicted on average. Cure Critical Wounds at 20th Level... 4d8+10d8 yields about 63 points cured. Can't see spending a 4th level spell for 14 more HP cured/inflicted on average. I'm probably misunderstanding something, though.

I still think you'd need a different formula for the various cure spells to make a more meaningful difference between them. Perhaps?

• CLW 1d8 plus 1d8 per 4 caster levels?
• CMW 2d8 plus 1d8 per 3 caster levels?
• CSW 3d8 plus 1d8 per 2 caster levels?
• CCW 4d8 plus 1d8 per caster level?

You wouldn't lose a whole lot, overall; a cure serious at max level (L20) would heal/inflict 49 points instead of 74. This would power them down a bit, while still keeping them viable for their level, and lower the complexity factor.

I don't follow the math in this last section, Kerrick. Sorry.

 

[Kerrick]

But, question... Should a cleric really know the max HP or the number of HD anyone or anything has that he's trying to heal.

Short answer? No. IMO, it's metagaming - hit points are an abstraction. If, for example, the mage is down to half his hit points, and the fighter is down to half hit points, they'd look the same - beat up, bruised, and bloody. There's no real indicator to say which one has more hit points, unless you'd actually seen them taking damage. Plus, a spell that cures up 80% (or even 60%!) of the target's hp is going to outclass heal.

Hmmm... Dropping the +1 per caster level part of the equations and replacing it with +1d8 per two caster levels... Cure Light Wounds at level 20 equals 1d8+10d8 or 4.5 times 11, on average (if I'm understanding, correctly). 49hp cured/inflicted on average. Cure Critical Wounds at 20th Level... 4d8+10d8 yields about 63 points cured. Can't see spending a 4th level spell for 14 more HP cured/inflicted on average. I'm probably misunderstanding something, though.

Yeah... you're forgetting the level caps (which is what I forgot to mention in my first post):

CLW: caps at L5
L1: 1d8.
L3: 2d8
L5: 3d8

CMW: Caps at L10
L3: 2d8 + 1d8
L4-5: 2d8 + 2d8
L6-7: 2d8 + 3d8
L8-9: 2d8 + 4d8
L10: 2d8 + 5d8

CSW: Technically L3 divine spells cap at L10, but I'd extend it to 15
L5: 3d8 + 2d8
L6-7: 3d8 + 3d8
L8-9: 3d8 + 4d8
L10-11: 3d8 + 5d8
L15: 3d8 + 7d8 (45 hp; not bad)

CCW: Caps at L20 (I'm going to skip a few levels in interest of brevity)
L7: 4d8 + 3d8
L12: 4d8 + 6d8
L18: 4d8 + 9d8
L20: 4d8 + 10d8 (63 avg. Compare to heal, which does 150.)

Does this make more sense now? Each spell, at its basic level, is equal to the spell below it at one level higher. For example, your basic CMW (CL 3)cures the same amount as CLW at CL 5; the basic CSW (CL 5) cures the same amount as as a CL 6 CMW; etc. This means that they're fairly comparable at first - a L5 caster can prepare some CLWs or CMWs and have pretty much the same effect - without outclassing the higher level spells, and all cure/inflict spells remain viable for far longer than the RAW versions.

 

[Hrothgar Rannúlfr]

Yeah... you're forgetting the level caps (which is what I forgot to mention in my first post):

Does this make more sense now? Each spell, at its basic level, is equal to the spell below it at one level higher. ... This means that they're fairly comparable at first - a L5 caster can prepare some CLWs or CMWs and have pretty much the same effect - without outclassing the higher level spells, and all cure/inflict spells remain viable for far longer than the RAW versions.

That helps. It makes more sense, now that I understand that there are level caps and have an idea as to what you've in mind for them. I, also, like how the next higher level spell is comparible in power to the spell it replaces.

It still leaves some of the other problems that I've mentioned, but at least the spells grow with the power of the healer.

 

[Hrothgar Rannúlfr]

... - hit points are an abstraction. If, for example, the mage is down to half his hit points, and the fighter is down to half hit points, they'd look the same - beat up, bruised, and bloody. There's no real indicator to say which one has more hit points, unless you'd actually seen them taking damage.

There's probably a good way to explain it, but it's escaping me, right now. Something along the lines of describing the one as clearly having taken damage that would have killed any mortal man, yet, somehow, he's hanging on.

Plus, a spell that cures up 80% (or even 60%!) of the target's hp is going to outclass heal.

True. I didn't look at heal before posting. Just throwing out suggestions at a way around that particular problem. The percentages are naturally subject to adjustment.

Overall, I think your version with the level caps is workable.

 

[Hawken]

I think Nonsi had the right idea. I was going to suggest almost what he suggested before I even saw his post.

Just make the Cure/Inflict spells work like this:

Target is healed 1d8hp per spell level + additional hit points equal to 1 per HD of the target creature/spell level (min of +1 per spell level). If the target creature's HD are less than d8, reduce the number of per HD hp to 3/4 per HD for d6 HD and 1/2 per HD for d4 HD. If the target creature's HD are d10, increase number of per HD to 1.5; and if target has d12 HD, increase number of per HD to 2. If the target is multiclassed, use the HD value of the class with the most levels (or the higher HD if equal levels).

Example: 12th level characters, amounts healed w/CLW:
Wizard (d4 HD): 1d8 + 6hp.
Rogue (d6 HD): 1d8 + 8hp.
Monk (d8 HD): 1d8 + 12hp.
Fighter (d10 HD): 1d8 + 18hp.
Barbarian (d12 HD): 1d8 + 24hp.

Those same characters would be healed the following with CCW:
Wizard: 4d8 + 24hp.
Rogue: 4d8 + 36hp.
Monk: 4d8 + 48hp.
Fighter: 4d8 + 72hp.
Barbarian: 4d8 + 96hp.

This means those characters are healed somewhere around 15-25% of their HP per spell level of healing/hurting once Con modifiers/feats are factored in, and assuming an average roll of hp per HD. Everyone regardless of race or class would now be healed roughly the same proportionate amount of hit points with these spells.

D10 HD creatures heal more (+50% gain with only a 25% higher maximum HD over the baseline d8 HD), and d12 HD creatures heal even more (+100% gain with only a 50% higher maximum HD over D8 HD), but this is accounted for by the fact that these classes/HD monsters tend to be tougher and able to take more punishment (have higher Con scores more often than lower HD races/classes). However, the proportion of healing should be roughly the same.

Undead (d12 HD, and NO Con) are more intensely affected by these spells than other d12 HD beings (that typically have Con scores with a positive value), but that is reasoned away by their increased susceptibility to divine powers.

 

[Kerrick]

I think Nonsi had the right idea. I was going to suggest almost what he suggested before I even saw his post.

Just make the Cure/Inflict spells work like this:

That's way too complicated. Think about it - you have to know

a) how many HD the target has;

b) what kind of HD the target has;

c) which multiplier to use.

With "xd8 + 1d8/2 caster levels", all you have to know is your caster level. The amount you cure/inflict can easily be noted on the character sheet, which greatly speeds up play.

 

[Hawken]

Think about it - you have to know

No, you don't. As a player, all you need to know is how many d8s to roll. And the answer (still) is: 1d8 per spell level.

The rest, the DM already knows and can inform the target (if a PC), or that PC can already have figured out how much else is healed beyond the d8s. And if its an NPC, the DM's already got that covered.

The formula isn't as simple, but it is more proportionate and relative to the target and their injuries.