Battle Standard of Healing and Healer's Brooch: overpowered healing?

[Ferghis]

...

I wanted to thank you for some particularly edifying posts: Thanks.

 

[Colmarr]

Using the Standard is using a power and it is a power that enables you or an ally to regain hit points. This says nothing about the power having to enable hit points right away or the PC actively doing it.

The power does nothing but create a zone. It's the zone that is the enabler, not "a power".

This combo does not work IMO.

Edit: I see that you and Zinovia somewhat touched on this issue. To clarify, I believe it does not work at all, not even in the first round.

Let me offer a comparison by analogy. If there were an item that said "When you use a power that enables you to damage an enemy... [the rest is irrelevant]", would it be triggered by having a summoned Jade Macetail attack an enemy?

In both cases, the "X" is "enabled" by something other than a power, so the criteria are not met.

 

[keterys]

Colmarr, are you also arguing that Flaming Sphere and Stinking Cloud don't count as the caster using a power that damages? How about all those summons they added? Summon Blade Angel, frex.

And how about whether Vigorous Cadence or Consecrated Ground heal?

It's very important in debates like this, if you're trying to argue RAW, to realize there's a line between RAI and Rules-as-it-should-be. The gut instinct is usually to say 'Of course that doesn't work, that's ludicrous'.

In this particular instance, there are well established arguments and threads on it, weighing in by customer service, a clear 'Healing' power as noted by its keyword, no restriction on item powers on the brooch, etc. It's definitely possible to argue it's bad for it to work that way. Hence when I linked the errata boards... but not RAW?

 

[KarinsDad]

If there were an item that said "When you use a power that enables you to damage an enemy... [the rest is irrelevant]", would it be triggered by having a summoned Jade Macetail attack an enemy?

Yup.

I think there is a reason WotC used the word "use" instead of "activate" in the terminology.

Unless of course your point is "you" vs. the Macetail. Even so, doesn't the caster still control the power? Can he not dismiss it? Can he not choose which foe the Macetail attacks?

Isn't he using the power when he has the Macetail attack?

 

[keterys]

And using his own actions to do it.

It's a step removed from, say, "I fire this bow. So the arrow hit you for damage, but I guess I didn't?" but not even all that distant a step with the way the item works in 4e.

 

[Colmarr]

Colmarr, are you also arguing that Flaming Sphere and Stinking Cloud don't count as the caster using a power that damages? How about all those summons they added? Summon Blade Angel, frex.

I can't comment on Stinking Cloud because I'm AFB and am not familiar with the power. For Flaming Sphere, the attack version is IIRC a standard action (both initially and in later rounds) so obviously the caster is 'using' the power to damage an enemy.

If you're talking about the auto damage simply for standing next to the sphere, then yes, I argue that that isn't 'using' the power to cause damage. The sphere is simply there. You aren't using it for anything at the time.

And how about whether Vigorous Cadence or Consecrated Ground heal?

Not familiar with Vigorous Cadence, but my position with Consecrated Ground is the same. The caster doesn't 'use' the power to heal hp, the caster uses the power to create a zone and the zone does the healing.*

It's very important in debates like this, if you're trying to argue RAW, to realize there's a line between RAI and Rules-as-it-should-be. The gut instinct is usually to say 'Of course that doesn't work, that's ludicrous'.

In ths case, I'm suggesting that the rules don't support the OP's interpretation and that some posters seem to assume that "enable" implies elasticity in causation. I disagree.

So that we're clear, I believe that per RAW drinking a healing potion would trigger the healer's brooch. Drinking the potion is using a power that enables you to heal.*

Triggering the effect of a planted banner is not "using a power".

*I'm aware that the character builder disagrees with me on this.

 

[Colmarr]

Yup.

I think there is a reason WotC used the word "use" instead of "activate" in the terminology.

But ultimately there is no evidence you can present which you can assert what those two terms mean in the context of the game rules, and what thought was given to which of them (or others) was chosen.

Ultimately, I believe that when a RAW debate reaches the point at which arguments revolve around what a certain non-defined term means, then the argument has gone as far as it reasonably can.

Isn't he using the power when he has the Macetail attack?

Aye, there's the rub. I say no. He's using a minor action to give another combatant a command.

I suspect I won't be able to convince you (plural) that I am "right" and I suspect you won't be able to convince me. I hope that the three of us have better things to do.

Personally, I just wanted to present the competing argument in this thread because it doesn't really seem to have been presented by anyone else.

 

[KarinsDad]

But ultimately there is no evidence you can present which you can assert what those two terms mean in the context of the game rules, and what thought was given to which of them (or others) was chosen.

Ultimately, I believe that when a RAW debate reaches the point at which arguments revolve around what a certain non-defined term means, then the argument has gone as far as it reasonably can.

That might be true except that you are the only one with the unique interpretation that the creature is not using the power.

PHB page 55

Zone: Powers that create lingering effects that extend over an area.

This is in the Effect Type section. Still a power. Still a healing power. Still a power that enables you or an ally to regain hit points. The term zone merely states that it is an area effect that that it is lingering. It states nothing about how effects stack.

Personally, I just wanted to present the competing argument in this thread because it doesn't really seem to have been presented by anyone else.

That's because it is pretty far out there. One has to use an interpretation that is not anywhere else in the rules to arrive at it.


The user of the power creates the zone. For powers with zones that can be moved, the user of the power moves the zone.

I find it made up (i.e. not anywhere in RAW) to say: "The zone is doing it, not the creature that originated it".

Effects come from powers.


A zone is merely a definition of area and duration. It doesn't control or do anything, the effect of the power is what is done.

 

[Mika]

I almost forgot another relevant detail: my character has taken the Channel Divinity: Healer's Mercy power, so she can trigger three healing surges per encounter. Plus, her medic's weapon allows her to use a daily item power to recover her Channel Divinity, which could allow for another heal.

I don't think that particular combination works. The daily power of Medic's Weapon gives you an additional use of Channel Divinity during an encounter, but not an additional use of a particular Channel Divinity power. For most divine characters, that would let you use your other Channel Divinity power.

 

[Colmarr]

KarinsDad, I'm not going to reply to all of your points. I acknowledge them and disagree with them, but consider some of them irrelevant to the very finite issues I have raised.

I will respond to these:

That might be true except that you are the only one with the unique interpretation that the creature is not using the power.

Seriously? "Me and my friends say you're wrong" That's you're argument?

That's because it is pretty far out there.

I disagree.

I find it made up (i.e. not anywhere in RAW) to say: "The zone is doing it, not the creature that originated it".

I find it "made up" to assume that:

(1) automatic effects from zones constitute "using" the power that created the zone;

(2) an item power "enables" something in circumstances where at least one other event (an ally spending a healing surge) and possibly two or more (whatever it was that triggered the surge) have to happen first; and

(3) a character can be said to "use" an item power if the item is no longer in the possession of the character.

Ultimately now, you are falling back on the same sort of arguments that Keterys suggested I was using. "That can't be right. It's silly!" RAW is RAW, and I think it's fair to say that there have always been some clear examples of silly RAW that were nevertheless RAW.

But like I said, I doubt one of us can convince the other.

You can walk away thinking I'm silly. I can walk away knowing you disagree with me. And everyone else in the thread can form their own opinion.