Augment Healing and Vigor spells

[Hypersmurf]

How do you want it to work? That Augment healing just doesn't help these vigor spells at all?

Right.

When you cast an Augmented Remove Blindness, the feat adds +4 to the damage healed by the spell, which is --. -- + 4 is --.

When you cast an Augmented Lesser Vigor, the feat should add +2 to the damage healed by the spell, which is --. -- + 2 is --. Lesser Vigor doesn't heal damage; it provides a creature with the Fast Healing ability.

-Hyp.

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

You could also say the damage healed is Zero instead of Null. 0 + 4 is 4, so suddenly Remove Blindness does that AND heals 4 points.

--fje

 

[Hypersmurf]

You could also say the damage healed is Zero instead of Null. 0 + 4 is 4, so suddenly Remove Blindness does that AND heals 4 points.

You could, but I'm inclined not to; D&D tends to draw distinctions between 'zero' and 'none' - there are significant differences between a bard who can cast 0 3rd level spells and a bard who can cast no 3rd level spells, or between a creature with a Con of 0 and a Con of --.

Remove Blindness isn't a spell that heals an amount of damage, where that amount happens to be 0; rather, it's a spell that doesn't heal damage.

-Hyp.

 

[Owen K.C. Stephens]

From my point of view, the vigor spells do heal damage, they just do so in a way that happens to have a game mechanical name (fast healing). If they were transformation spells, I'd feel they didn't heal but instead gave you a new ability. But as it is, I see them as conjuring healing energy, just like a clw, but giving it slowly over time rather than all at once.

Of course that's my opinion and how I'd handle things in my own games, and not much of an argument from a rules perspective.

 

[Sirea]

You could, but I'm inclined not to; D&D tends to draw distinctions between 'zero' and 'none' - there are significant differences between a bard who can cast 0 3rd level spells and a bard who can cast no 3rd level spells, or between a creature with a Con of 0 and a Con of --.

Remove Blindness isn't a spell that heals an amount of damage, where that amount happens to be 0; rather, it's a spell that doesn't heal damage.

First time someone makes a good case against my interpretation.

Personally I always felt it should add hitpoints to each and every Conjuration [Healing] spell, for the sake of simplicity and straightforwardness. So yeah, someone hit by a CLW gains +2 extra hp, a Remove Paralysis gains +4 hp, a Lesser Restoration +4hp, a Vigor +6hp, a Raise Dead +10hp, Regenerate +14hp, etc. (Assuming a cleric casting these btw, numbers may vary for other classes casting them.)

Not unbalanced, easy, straightforward. As rules should be, if they can be.

The current FAQ ruling regarding Vigor is neither fish nor flesh (although with my ruling it would function in exactly the same way, but so would all the other Conj [Healing] spells).

 

[satori01]

I am totally with Hyp on this one. Logically the spell should have no effect on those spells. FAQ or no FAQ, rule 0 wins here for me.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Rulewise, Hyp is precisely correct: no effect.

Flavorwise, I am against it as well. I prefer to see the various Vigor spells as genuinely different effects than the standard healing rather than just a different way to optimize the healing. Fast Healing feels different than channelling positive energy, so I would not add the bonus in.

Balancewise, I would just let them have it by extending the duration to include the precisely correct amount of extra healing. I want to keep the Vigor spells slow, so I am against frontloading with a bonus. Augment Healing is sufficiently defensive that a slight boost is not going to adversely effect the game, and it seems like nickel and diming too much to deny this to a PC who could easily have sound character concept reasons for having the boost.

Choose your poison.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

From my point of view, the vigor spells do heal damage, they just do so in a way that happens to have a game mechanical name (fast healing). If they were transformation spells, I'd feel they didn't heal but instead gave you a new ability. But as it is, I see them as conjuring healing energy, just like a clw, but giving it slowly over time rather than all at once.

Yes, and unfortunately, this also has the side effect of getting around the disadvantage of not being able to heal warforged fully.

We have a Warforged Juggernaut in our party who can't be healed at all, the cleric just prepares the vigor spells and gets full effect, since they are not immune to getting fast healing.

 

[DreamChaser]

Yes, and unfortunately, this also has the side effect of getting around the disadvantage of not being able to heal warforged fully.

We have a Warforged Juggernaut in our party who can't be healed at all, the cleric just prepares the vigor spells and gets full effect, since they are not immune to getting fast healing.

Except that J develop IMMUNITY to all spells of the Conjuration (Healing) sub-school which means they are immune to the vigor spells. This is very different from them being immune to cure spells. If they were immune to cure spells you would be right.

DC

 

[glass]

Rulewise, Hyp is precisely correct: no effect.

Flavorwise, I am against it as well. I prefer to see the various Vigor spells as genuinely different effects than the standard healing rather than just a different way to optimize the healing. Fast Healing feels different than channelling positive energy, so I would not add the bonus in.

Balancewise, I would just let them have it by extending the duration to include the precisely correct amount of extra healing. I want to keep the Vigor spells slow, so I am against frontloading with a bonus. Augment Healing is sufficiently defensive that a slight boost is not going to adversely effect the game, and it seems like nickel and diming too much to deny this to a PC who could easily have sound character concept reasons for having the boost.

I agree on all three counts.


glass.