Augment Healing + Mass Lesser Vigor

[Mistwell]

They are both indirect, though you refuse to acknowledge it and that is why you see no similarity.

You seriously cannot see a difference between "this spell grants fast healing X" and "this spell cures you of X hit points?"

I see a difference in that the later grants it's healing over many turns. Both grant healing however. Neither is indirect.

It is the fast healing that is curing you, not the spell.

The fast healing is not it's own thing. It IS the spell. That's the entire spell, the effect of fast healing. Fast Healing in this case is shorthand for a mechanic, not itself an entity that is separate from the spell itself (like a summoning spell would be).

That the fast healing comes from the spell is indisputable, but the spell is not directly acting to heal you.

Of course it is.

If I give Peter 5 gp to pay Paul, and Paul then pays you 5 gp, have I given you 5 gp directly? No. I've merely enabled a series of events that resulted in your being paid 5 gp.

There is no intervening factor here however. There is no Paul in this case. Fast Healing is not it's own entity doing the healing, it's the spell itself doing the healing, using the mechanic of fast healing (and using the mechanic of hit points as well, and the mechanic of positive energy, and a few other mechanics).

 

[Slaved]

The Vigor spells heal no more than casting a Summon Natures Ally to Summon a Unicorn does. Each of them has an effect that can heal damage but that is not the same.

-- is not the same as 0.

 

[MithrasRahl]

Slaved, your line of argument is just wrong, not because I think it is (though I do), but because the FAQ says it is.

What you should be arguing is that this was not the intent of the Feat as written.

 

[Slaved]

The Frequently Asked Questions being wrong is not a new occurance and it being wrong no longer disturbs me.

 

[MithrasRahl]

Ok, fair enough, I can accept that. What I still don't understand is your line of logic that doesn't include any mention of Conjuration [Healing], despite it being a rather pretty important part of the Augment Healing description.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Even if you pretend the amount of damage healed by the spell is zero, that is still a number that can be added to.

There's a difference between a creature with a Con score of 0, and a creature without a Con score.

There's a difference between a character with a caster level of 0, and a character who has no caster level.

There's a difference between a spell that heals 0 damage, and a spell that does not heal damage.

Let's take a 3rd level ranger. He has no caster level. I give him an orange ioun stone, which grants a +1 bonus to caster level. He still has no caster level.

Let's take an 8th level ranger with the Mage Slayer feat. He has a caster level of zero. I give him an orange ioun stone, which grants a +1 bonus to caster level. He now has a caster level of 1.

Granting a bonus to a spell that doesn't heal damage has no effect. Granting a bonus to a spell that heals zero damage increases the amount of damage healed.

Let's consider a hypothetical 1st level Conjuration [Healing] spell that cures 1d6/2 levels. When cast by a second level character, it cures 1d6 points of damage. When cast by a first level character, it cures 0d6 points of damage. Contrast this with Remove Paralysis; the hypothetical spell heals 0 damage. Remove Paralysis doesn't heal damage.

With Augment Healing, the hypothetical spell would cure 0 + 2. Remove Paralysis, on the other hand, has nothing to add the bonus to.

Vigor doesn't heal you; it grants you the ability to heal yourself. Cast on someone who already has Fast Healing 5, it would grant no benefit. You're saying "When it says 'You gain Fast Healing 2', it actually means 'The spell cures you of 2hp each round'"... but you really do gain Fast Healing 2. And that's all the spell does - it grants you the special quality, Fast Healing 2.

If I Polymorph into a wolf and bite you for 1d6, it's not the Polymorph spell that dealt the damage to you. I did. All the Polymorph spell did was grant me a 1d6 Bite attack.

-Hyp.

 

[eamon]

So in your opinion, does an Augmented Remove Paralysis cure 4hp, and an Augmented Remove Blindness cure 6hp?

I'm personally of the opinion that Augment Healing does nothing for Vigor or for Remove Paralysis, but I'm content with a DM ruling that it affects both Vigor and Remove Paralysis.

What I object to is the ruling that if affects Vigor, but does nothing for Remove Paralysis, because I find that inconsistent.

This. Either it affects all conjuration[healing] or only to those that heal damage. Given the feats wording (which doesn't explicitly require the spell to actually heal damage), I'd tend to simply apply it to all conjuration[healing] spells.

In any case, the feat is badly written. As written, you might consider it to apply to lesser restoration's ability damage curing, which is almost certainly not intended.

 

[Mistwell]

Vigor doesn't heal you; it grants you the ability to heal yourself. Cast on someone who already has Fast Healing 5, it would grant no benefit. You're saying "When it says 'You gain Fast Healing 2', it actually means 'The spell cures you of 2hp each round'"... but you really do gain Fast Healing 2. And that's all the spell does - it grants you the special quality, Fast Healing 2.

I don't care about the rest of the issue because, as stated, I entirely do not buy that this is in any way an indirect heal.

Just because there is another limitation on the healing that is character dependent doesn't mean it doesn't heal you. For example, if you have max hit points, it doesn't give you any hit points. Nevertheless, the spell is attempting to directly heal you in a manner which is no more or less direct healing that cure light wounds. Fast Healing is short hand for how a mechanic works, and not a separate thing that is intervening to make the healing indirect.

If I Polymorph into a wolf and bite you for 1d6, it's not the Polymorph spell that dealt the damage to you. I did. All the Polymorph spell did was grant me a 1d6 Bite attack.

-Hyp.

Polymorphing into something else, or summoning something else, is a clear example of indirect. I do not see any comparison with this spell however. Those are clearly separate entities that intervene. There is no separate entity intervening, just a rules description meant to make things easy for any normal person reading the description, so you know how it mechanically functions (you can look up fast healing, and other spells can reference it as well, and hence you don't have to reprint that effect over and over again).

There is no Fast Healing Fairy you are summoning to heal you. There is no Fast Healing intelligence that comes down and heals you. There is no Fast Healing deity intervening to heal you, or Fast Healing magic item that heals you, or Fast healing object or entity or thing. It is not separate from the spell, but is the spell itself. It's direct - you cast the spell, and it heals you, unless something stops it from healing you (like max hit points, or another effect that doesn't allow it to stack, like anything else).

 

[Nifft]

IMHO, it's misleading to say "allows him to heal" or "enables him to heal". IMHO it's more accurate to just say "gives him the Fast Healing special ability".

I don't care about the rest of the issue because, as stated, I entirely do not buy that this is in any way an indirect heal.

Consider initiative order. When do the benefits of Fast Healing accrue?

IMC, Fast Healing works like it says in the book: the PC with fast healing gets hit points back at the start of his turn.

This is typically a different initiative tick than when the Cleric casts the spell.

So if Bob the Fighter had lost 20 hit points, and went on initiative order 5, then Cecil the Cleric (who goes on initiative order 15) would have two options:

1: cast cure light wounds on Bob on initiative 15 (Bob immediately gets HP back on tick 15); or
2: cast lesser vigor on Bob on initiative 15 (Bob gains Fast Healing, and will begin getting hit points back on tick 5).

This is an important distinction, because Bob could get hit for his last 10 hp between ticks 15 and 5, or the spell could be dispelled (in which case Bob would not have gained any benefit from that casting of lesser vigor).

Cheers, -- N

 

[jaelis]

So in your opinion, does an Augmented Remove Paralysis cure 4hp, and an Augmented Remove Blindness cure 6hp?

I'd be inclined to say yes, and I agree that it should be ruled consistently with the vigor spells. But I now do understand why someone would rule the other way.

As a counter to my own argument though, I could point to the blistering spell feat:
"This metamagic feat can be applied only to a spell that has the fire descriptor. A blistering spell deals an extra 2 points of fire damage per level of the spell."

If I apply this feat to a Summon Fire Elemental Swarm spell, who takes this extra damage?