Can a Wizard make a Healing Spell?

[Mallus]

Imagine the reverse -- a cleric with fireball or lightning bolt or other wizard standards. But that's my game -- YMMV.

I can do more than imagine the reverse, I can play on a weekly basis.

Thanks to the Domain mechanic, my cleric of Mouqol [Travel, Trickery] has access to a slew of what used to 'wizards only' standards like "Fly", "Invisibility", "Dimension Door", "Teleport", "Confusion", etc.

Plenty of Domain spells come for the Arcane list. Do you do away with that in your games? [not that there's a problem if you do...].

I think the idea of making a few weaker [and/or higher level] Divine analogs to Arcane spells [and vice-versa] is fine. I did it frequeently way back when in 2nd Edition, when I created a homebrew with 17 speciality clerical orders, andneeded to use the mages spell list to create appropriate lists for them.

[edit] Also, there really isn't any good in-game rational for the restriction against arcane healing. If arcane magic can instantaneously reorganize one living thing into another [say via Polymorph], then it aught to be able to fix a boo-boo or two...

 

[Nifft]

Wizards already have Summon [Good] Outsider With Cure Spells, so I don't see the need for them to have any direct Cure spells.

-- N

 

[Nifft]

Plenty of Domain spells come for the Arcane list. Do you do away with that in your games? [not that there's a problem if you do...].

I mostly do do away with this -- I've re-written the Domain spell lists, and all Arcane spells on Domain lists are at least 1 level higher than they are for Arcane casters. Trickery starts with Sanctuary, for example, which fits the flavor and is already a Cleric spell.

-- N

 

[dren]

Here's what I do:

Positive Energy Surge, Minor
2nd level Spell
Inflict 1d10 dmg on undead if you are successful with a touch attack, restore 1d6+1 dmg on mortal creatures. If caster fails saving throw they take 1 temp con dmg. (Resist: Fort DC 13)

Positive Energy Surge, Medium
3rd level Spell
Inflict 2d10 dmg on undead if you are successful with a touch attack, restore 2d6+2 dmg on mortal creatures. Caster takes 2 temp constitution dmg. (Resist: Fort DC 15)

Positive Energy Surge, Serious
4th level Spell
Inflict 3d10 dmg on undead if you are successful with a touch attack, restore 3d6+3 dmg on mortal creatures. Caster takes 1 voluntary constitution dmg, or 3 temp constitution dmg if they fail their save (Resist: Fort DC 17)

Positive Energy Surge, Critical:
5th level Spell
Inflict 4d10 dmg on undead if you are successful with a touch attack, restore 4d6+4 dmg on mortal creatures. Caster takes 2 voluntary constitution dmg, or 4 temp constitution dmg if they fail their save (Fort Resist: DC 19)

----------------------------------
It's less than a cleric's healing, so the party should be less inclined to use restoration spells. Note that undead do not get a save for half dmg. This spell also works to "heal" or restore constructs.

 

[Mallus]

I mostly do do away with this -- N

How's that working out?

See, I come at it from the opposite angle. While I like the Domain mechanic, it really doesn't go far enough for my tastes. I don't care what list a spell comes from, I'm more interested in making an individual cleric's spells reflect their gods ethos/sphere of influence. I don't like how similar clerics end up, no matter who they worship. I'm slowly talking myself into going back to my 2nd ed. solution; a seperate [and smaller] spell list for each gods priesthood...

 

[humble minion]

A summon monster spell used to call in a couple of positive energons (yag-ya or yeg-yi, I can never remember) is a good way of letting your wizard heal.

There is a fair bit of illogic in the wizard spell list for the sake of game balance. Examples: wizards being able to cause disease (contagion) but not cure it, Polymorph Any object being able to turn a mushroom into a tarrasque, but not a +1 dagger into a +1 shortsword, and so on. It's annoying sometime, but I suppose that's the price you pay for not having a Mage-esque magic system where incredibly game-breaking stuff is almost trivial if you can justify it with twisty enough logic.

I would, with a few reservations, let wizards heal. A lot would depend on the world I was gaming in. I would, however, put healing spells in the Necromancy school (spells dealing with the manipulation, creation, and destruction of life-force, according to the PHB), both to prevent Conjuration getting even more powerful, and to make necromancy a little more attractive to wizards who are not necessarily of the bwahahaaa-ARISE-my-unliving-minions! variety.

 

[Nifft]

How's that working out?

It works fine so far. We've had two Clerics and one Druid (who took a Domain as a Feat).

I've been using the Spontaneous Domains variant since long before UA, and when you make them spontaneous, it's really important that you not include all those Sor/Wiz spells.

Here's my Domain listing:

http://klimt.cns.nyu.edu/~fishman/DnD/DHE/domains3.5.shtml

-- N

 

[apsuman]

In Tome and Blood, there was a salve that a wiz or sor could make with their alchemy skill that would heal some minor (I think d8) damage.

In *GENERAL* the best damaging spells and especially the direct damaging spells are found in the arcane camp. To keep some balance, I would have any heaking spells from the arcane side of the map be less effective than the divine healing spells of the same level. For example, heal 1d4+1/level (max +5) as a third level spell. Would that suck as a third level spell? Maybe. Would some casters think it would be great to get the spell? Sure.

All this, imho.

 

[apsuman]

Oh, and one more thing, if you summon 8 (i think it's 8) formian workers they can together cast cure light wounds. So, once again a very ineffective way to arcane cure.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Actually 8 formian workers can perform a cure serious wounds every round as a full round action.

Unfortunately they seem to have been pulled from the Summon Monster lists AFAIK.