D&D 5E On the healing options in the 5e DMG

[Emerikol]

So, one day to fully heal any wound is perfectly acceptable then? Because that's what 3e did. I'm still baffled why 4e seems to be the breaking point for you. In 3e you healed 4 HP/level/day. A 5th wizard could never, at any level, take more than about three days to fully heal. The longest you could take to heal in 3e was 9 days. That's the absolute longest, and typically it was two or three days.

In AD&D it was considerably longer, with healing taking weeks if you dropped below zero HP and there was the possibility of permanent injury.

It would really, really help if you could be a LOT more specific about what you want. Pre-4e healing ran a huge variation.

I thought in 3e it was 1 hp/level/day. I didn't play 3.5e though so maybe they changed it there. That is about as fast as I'd want to go on healing. I was okay with 1e/2e healing as well.

My primary issue with 4e/5e healing is that it forces one view of hit points. I don't mind a system that supports all views. When a 10th level fighter can recover 55 hit points after a short rest, that is going too far for me. Emphasis on for me. I don't care how others play.

 

[Emerikol]

I never describe pc wounds as a bloody long gash or actual cutting. I normally just describe it as a "stinging blow or you feel the trolls teeth bite down on your hand and suddenly it grows numb.

I have found 4E and to a lesser extent 5E healing without magic only has issues if I describe the wounds as actual bloody wounds.

Of course people will have issues with taking long bloody gashes across their chest in one minute and buying that they heal naturally just a short while later. So don't describe them as such!

So change the way I've been playing for thirty plus years? No. To me just not playing 5e would be a preferable option. In fact just quiting roleplaying games entirely comes ahead of using the 4e/5e rapid heal approach. Of course that is not ever the choice. The discussion at the moment is about options and what we think of them in 5e.

 

[Hussar]

I thought in 3e it was 1 hp/level/day. I didn't play 3.5e though so maybe they changed it there. That is about as fast as I'd want to go on healing. I was okay with 1e/2e healing as well.

My primary issue with 4e/5e healing is that it forces one view of hit points. I don't mind a system that supports all views. When a 10th level fighter can recover 55 hit points after a short rest, that is going too far for me. Emphasis on for me. I don't care how others play.

I believe you would be mistaken there. 3e used the Heal skill just like 3.5. I don7t believe there is any difference there. Let me check. According to the 3e SRD:

Long-term Care: Providing long-term care means treating a wounded person for a day or more. If successful, the character lets the patient recover hit points or ability score points (lost to temporary damage) at twice the normal rate: 2 hit points per level for each day of light activity, 3 hit points per level for each day of complete rest, and 2 ability score points per day. The character can tend up to six patients at a time. The character needs a few items and supplies (bandages, salves, and so on) that are easy to come by in settled lands.

So, it's still 3 HP/level/day. So, it would take a little bit longer in 3e, say, probably, about 1 extra day. Our 5th d4 and d6 classes would need three days, rather than 2, to completely heal any wound and would still heal most wounds in 1 day.

IOW, no, sorry, you can keep pointing at 4e and 5e, but, that would be wrong. If you wanted slow healing, you have to start with 2e, which also allowed instant non-magical healing, but was limited to (IIRC) a d4 per day, in addition to normal healing rates.

Just out of curiosity, how can a fighter regain 55 HP after a short rest in 5e? He's got 5d10 healing doesn't he? Isn't it level/2 for HD? So, the absolute max, in 5e, he could heal after a short rest is 50 HP, and that would be extremely lucky. More likely he'd heal about 25-30 HP after a short rest and not be able to heal any more damage until a long rest. Given that you can simply change the rate at which HP and Hit Dice are recovered, modifying 5e (and 4e for that matter) is extremely simple.

I guess my question still remains, how much hand holding do you need? How much do you need the books to directly state that your chosen rate of healing is "good"? Considering that your chosen rate of healing hasn't actually been supported in the rules for about fifteen years or so, I would think that you would have found a work around already.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Just out of curiosity, how can a fighter regain 55 HP after a short rest in 5e? He's got 5d10 healing doesn't he? Isn't it level/2 for HD?

While I agree with your take on healing for the most part, I do want to point out that no, HD = level.

 

[Hussar]

While I agree with your take on healing for the most part, I do want to point out that no, HD = level.

See, this is what happens when I go by what my brain says, rather than reading. Oops. Ok, a 10th level fighter then likely could heal about 55 HP/day if he blows all his HD.

But, again, this is so easy to adjust. No healing on an extended rest and HD only come back 1/day. Easy peasy, done. Go even further, a Heal check is required to bring back 1 HD - simulates having a doctor. Otherwise, you have to make some sort of save to get that HD back. Failed saves could even result in lowering current HP - you aren't recovering from your wounds, but, rather, you're getting worse.

Why is this a problem?

 

[MerricB]

See, this is what happens when I go by what my brain says, rather than reading. Oops. Ok, a 10th level fighter then likely could heal about 55 HP/day if he blows all his HD.

Hit dice are modified by the Con modifier.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

But, again, this is so easy to adjust. No healing on an extended rest and HD only come back 1/day. Easy peasy, done.
[...]
Why is this a problem?

If those are the dials we have to work with - HP healed and HD recovered per long rest - then the smallest amount of natural healing possible would be 0hp and 1hd per long rest.

Spending one hit die is enough to bring a level 1 character from 1hp up to full. That's "way too fast" for someone who wants slow healing.

 

[pemerton]

I think that change took away something for some people. For instance, in my campaign, I view things as existing whether or not the PCs interact with them. In my DM's imagination canvas, them thar hills are full of ogres, even if the PCs never visit. It's a similar thing with slower natural healing. Even if it rarely comes up, it represents the "physics" of the setting.

"Healing" has two meanings in D&D: the meaning it has in the real world (people - in the case of D&D, imaginary people - recover from their injuries); and its technical meaning (recovery of hit points).

The two events don't have to coincide. A fighter having his/her hit points restored to maximum is fully healed in the technical sense (no mor hp to regain). But nothing says that s/he has fully healed in the ordinary English sense - s/he may still have injuries. It's just that they aren't debilitating his/her performance.

"Slow natural heaing" is about recovery from injury. "Rapid hit point recovery" is about the technical issue of hit point restoration, especially for PCs. There is no reason why you can't mix the two. My 4e camaign certainly does.

If those are the dials we have to work with - HP healed and HD recovered per long rest - then the smallest amount of natural healing possible would be 0hp and 1hd per long rest.

Spending one hit die is enough to bring a level 1 character from 1hp up to full. That's "way too fast" for someone who wants slow healing.

I don't see why. For intance, you could say that it takes a week's rest to spend a hit dice (say, 1 week short rest and 1 month long rest). That will give you a hit point recovery rate comparable to AD&D. (In AD&D, 1 month's rest restores all lost hit points.)

 

[Hussar]

If those are the dials we have to work with - HP healed and HD recovered per long rest - then the smallest amount of natural healing possible would be 0hp and 1hd per long rest.

Spending one hit die is enough to bring a level 1 character from 1hp up to full. That's "way too fast" for someone who wants slow healing.

Considering you spend what, one, maybe two sessions at level 1 in 5e, this isn't a major deal. If it really bothers you, you could always make the adjustments that Pemberton suggests. Or, heck, reduce the size of a Hit Die - instead of tying it to class, tie it to race for example. Small, physically weaker races, like say elves or halflings only get d4, medium sized, rather standard races get d6, beefy races get d8 and really damn big races get d10. Whatever you like.

My point here is that if you don't like the default, it's far, far too easy to change. Considering that this is meant to be something of the hobby car edition of the game where house rules and whatnot are to be expected, why is this even a problem?

 

[GameOgre]

So change the way I've been playing for thirty plus years? No. To me just not playing 5e would be a preferable option. In fact just quiting roleplaying games entirely comes ahead of using the 4e/5e rapid heal approach. Of course that is not ever the choice. The discussion at the moment is about options and what we think of them in 5e.

Even back in AD&D I tried to never describe pc wounds as physical cuts and actual wounds. Hit points were vague and as much physical wounds as luck and skill. The game broke down to a silly totally unbelievable(to me) level if I thought of them as how much physical damage the human body can take. Let someone hit you with a real life sword as hard as they can swing it and tell me you could take that multiple times.

Nope, Hit points were always just a game mechanic designed to keep our adventurers up and on their feet that represented far far more than physical wounds.

5E's generic approach works for me and my post was in response to those stating that this method of playing was unrealistic or unjustifiable because how could someone heal bloody wounds in such a short time.

My response was that you needed to alter your descriptions of wounds in order to make it work, if you are unwilling to do so I have no issue with that.




Do whatever works for you!

With that said, obviously no one really wants to use a realistic system like in real life where the effects of a simple dagger strike can kill, cripple or possibly maim you for life. You want realistic healing times? Try a year or two for anything but superficial skin surface wounds.