Can you get too much healing?

[Crazy Jerome]

My answer is that the GM should be less predictable. If ever day, the characters face zero or 1 encounters, then of course they will go nova. And at that point, it really doesn't matter whether or not this is metagaming, based on social dynamics (the group just prefers it that way), or story reasons. Bottom line, GM is too predictable.

It does not follow that you need to have 3-5 encounters every day that you have encounters. Rather, you need to have more than one encounter in a day--just often enough to make the players question whether today is one of those days or not. And don't telegraph, too much, when that day arrives. With my players, I find that if I want to make them worry about something, 1 instance in 20 is usually enough. You might have a different ratio. Heck, after a bunch of 1 encounter days, you might find that occasionally having a really tough 2nd encounter is sufficient.

 

[CapnZapp]

The discussion is branching out in several directions, let's see if I can collect them.

Go back and read the OP. This isn't a case of the players going "oh no, we got dinged up, time to sleep". This is a case of the players going "oh crap, character X (and possibly Y) is out of healing surges, time to sleep".

CapnZapp is throwing a full day's worth of encounter at the party (give or take the extra difficulty inherent in over-large encounters) and then complaining about the party taking a break. Or, to be fairer to CapnZapp, this is a case where he wants to challenge the party, and cannot do so without throwing a full day's worth of encounter at them at once, and he wishes the party could keep going.

Yes. Thank you for giving me the benefit of the doubt.

I'm not complaining about the party taking a break - I'm describing what I see is a problem in having a hard choice between:
a) challenging my party only to see the game allowing my players to increase their healing abilities to the point where they can go "healing nova". (This isn't bitching about my players - who clearly take reasoned decisions - but about the game not allowing me to set up fewer encounters while keeping healing scarce).
b) adding in several non-challenging encounters. Sure, this is how the game's supposed to be run, but for our group this doesn't work (because this way of gaming requires much too much time, especially compared to the middling excitement and drama generated by all those "in between" fights)

So, the original topic, "can you have too much healing?" is one I'm inclined to answer "yes" and I don't see this generally contested among your various replies.

Ideally, maxing out on healing should be balanced by fewer options elsewhere. But from my (subjective) POV, it seems extra healing triggers are much more worth their while than some feat giving the odd +1 bonus. Yes, it's about damage, but with monster hp being so massive compared to their damage output, shaving off a single round of combat (at most) seems less valuable than being to keep the party defender or controller on their feet regardless of whom the monsters focus on. Extra "triggers" doesn't just mean added healing/staying power, it means added flexibility.

And that brings me to what I guess is my biggest problem with 4E as a whole.

I simply cannot muster the excitement I'm supposed to for healing surges.

They simply are too abstract, where their loss impacts the world and the character in absolutely no way whatsoever. Until you reach zero surges, of course.

When you reach zero surges your status is suddenly transformed from a cushioned and comfortable existence as an all-but-invincible superhero, to a rather vulnerable human being not that far removed from death, whose wounds simply can't be treated anymore.

And I must be a weak 4E player/DM because I see problems at both ends:
* In the first phase, when you still have surges left, you are almost untouchable. Even if the monsters swarm you and focus on only you, you can easily bounce back even from taking a severe beating (=losing almost all your hp or even all of them) provided your party is well stocked on healing "triggers" (i.e. Healing Words). This is a severe drain on the excitement of any given fight.
* In the second phase, when you're out of surges, the game completely transforms. Much more so that I want it to. Now suddenly you face a very real prospect of going down and not coming back up. It's not only that you're running out of internal steam, not even external healing works on you anymore. This is a rude awakening for any new player not paying attention when surges were explained. I fully understand if a player whose PC is at zero or one surges goes to great lengths to avoid combat, even to the point of sacrificing plot elements.

This is not because the game shows a deadly side, there are plenty of fantasy rpgs who are at least as deadly.

This is because the difference to the first phase is so shocking, so profound. Who in their right mind would want to go on at zero surges when they have vivid memories of being nigh-invincible just fifteen minutes ago?

And this ties into another problem I have - how extended rests are tied so strongly to the concept of "day". This is a quantifiable amount in the game which the characters have a lot of control over. I would far have preferred it if extended rests were tied to narrative concepts, i.e. "you can rest when the story tells you". As it is, the game hands out the choice to go on to the players. But there are two main flaws:
1) it isn't really a choice. Going on while you have surges left is a "yes, of course". Going on when somebody in the team is out of surges is an equally obvious "hell no". The difference in survivability and deadliness is simply much too great.
2) okay, so we don't like the players' choice. The solution then is even worse: taking the choice away. (This is where the "you must save the princess today" spiels enter the picture) Why then give the choice in the first place?

So I'm having a real problem with surges. Either you have them or you don't. There isnt any interesting middle-ground where you have a realistic choice to weigh the benefits of continuing against reasonable drawbacks from being weakened. What good will it do to try to save the princess when healing won't rub off on you any longer?!

Compare this to Daily powers, where I really think WotC did a great job. This is a real success - in solving the novaing of 3rd edition.

Such a deep deep shame they first solved the 15-minute adventuring day and then added in back in in the shape of healing surges (though the problem has morphed into a much more insidious and perplexing form, where not everybody even realizes it's still there!)


---


So yes, I'm having problems getting my 4E campaign to click.

Characters have too many healing surges, or rather, too many triggers for healing surges - this makes them effectively invulnerable during any one encounter, resulting in yawns around the table. (And yes, this is only a problem if you have less time and patience than you're supposed to have)

At the same time, the game simply expects characters running low on surges to stop. At least, I can't interpret the vast gulf between the haves and the have-nots in any other way. It's almost as if there are two games in one, where the second game is one nobody wants to play.


---


What I need, what I would like to see, is the following:

A fix to the ability to nova. In 3rd edition it was fire and brimstone novaing. In my 4e game, it's healing triggers novaing.

A (much) more interesting drawback to running low on healing surges (than simply healing spells bouncing). (WotC solved the issue for spells with Dailies, why couldn't they have stayed away from replacing that with the even cruder surge implementation?)

A character without Dailies is weakened, yes, but certainly continuing is a real choice. He still has his Encounters, and he might still have Item powers.

A character without Healing Surges is simply the same, only suddenly he can't regain any damage in any way at all. In what way is that interesting? And in what way do you justify this character pressing on?




As an example of what I mean I'm considering the following:
* any character is limited to using two (or perhaps three) surges during any one encounter
* running out of surges is represented by some kind of penalty or drawback, but does not mean you can't use surges

In essence, putting a stop to practically endless surge uses during an encounter, but practically allowing endless surges throughout the day.

Yes, this is a reversal of how it's done today.

But putting a hard limit to surges within an encounter is fine to me. Indeed, it's outright desirable, because it brings back at least some theoretical possibility you might run out of hp. And running out of hp is of course the threat which all rpg combat is based upon for generating excitement and drama.

And likewise, removing the hard limit on surges outside encounters seems also to be a wholly positive rules change. It makes it possible to continue adventuring even if you don't want to from a resource stand-point, dissolving the 15-minute adventuring day. It makes it much easier for the DM to break the connection between "day" and extended rests too.

In essence, the decision to "stop for the day" (read "flee") is placed back within the encounter where it belongs. Instead of placing it between encounters and really not making it a choice at all.

Finally, about reasons for managing resources. If you feel you can't simply remove surges as an important limited resource (relying on running out of Dailies and magic item Dailies only) we can still have running out of surges give a penalty.

Just a reasonable penalty this time (and not "unable to regain hp"). Taking a -1 general penalty (much like the death penalty) is perhaps the simplest solution.

I experimented with a variant, giving -2 to attacks, skill checks and speed. But specifically not penalizing defenses or saves.

A completely different suggestion is that you lose access to one random Encounter Power of yours until you take an Extended Rest. This rule is perhaps more interesting in that you're not simply being given a blanket penalty - a penalty to everything doesn't make you act differently, use options and alternative powers. It just makes you worse. Losing random Powers could instead mean you're challenged to keep operating at peak efficiency, adding variety and making you think.

But these solutions we can discuss in other threads. I just wanted to briefly introduce them because I didn't want to appear as if I'm just bitching and moaning - I wanted to add some constructive solutions too.

 

[Doctor Proctor]

As an example of what I mean I'm considering the following:
* any character is limited to using two (or perhaps three) surges during any one encounter

I don't feel like responding to whole wall 'o text there, but this right here is at the core of the issue. No matter how much people multiclass, it only gives them a once per day healing power. So, if you have a party of 5 with 1 Cleric and 4 guys MCing to get a healing power, you have access to 6 heals in an encounter. If you do that though, you just burned through everything you have for the day, save for the recharging 2 heals per encounter the Cleric has. So, with that, they're pretty much done if the next encounter is going to be the same difficulty.

Now, if the encounters were NOT that hard, and you were designing them to have to have 4 encounters per day, things change. They can afford to spend about one daily heal per encounter, with any encounters that they don't need it for being "easy" ones that let them save up a little for the "hard" encounter at the end. Or the middle, or wherever you want it besides the beginning. Combine that one daily heal per encounter with the 2/encounter that the Cleric has and you'll now only be seeing 3 heals (give or take) per encounter.

Because the PC's know that there will be later encounters, they'll try to conserve healing as much as possible. You'll see more PC's getting down into the bloodied range, or dropping entirely. You'll start seeing death saves more frequently and you'll be seeing a lot of hard decision making when it comes to needing to either burn your Standard to stabilize someone, attack the last enemy to try and end the encounter or burn your daily heal to try and save the guy that's failed two death saves.

By going against the design paradigm of 4e you've created this situation that allows for the healing nova. But now because you're seeing the healing nova, you see the normal 4e design as impossibly easy because you expect your players to just nova when they get into trouble. Thing is, they can't nova if they're going to be doing more than one encounter per day, which is what you need to get them away from. As long as you're going with the one encounter per day model you'll be seeing this sort of nova effect. If it's not healing surges, it'll be non-surge healing (there is some things that do that, they're just less common). Or you'll be seeing a lot of magic items with daily powers that they go nova with. It won't change the equation because you're not changing the encounter design, you're just tying their hands to try and control how they go through them.

 

[Nail]

So, an honest question: Is "failing" a meaningful (or "legitimate" or "reasonable") choice (in gaming)?

In the context of this conversation and the specific examples under debate, yes.

Yep, basically. Even if all they're doing is choosing between pride and their character living, it's a choice.

Sure they are, provided you're not playing in game where failure = the world ends.

Some games even have mechanics for it.

Thanks, guys. Thought-provoking responses, all.

I have been a player in a similar situation, and it was endlessly frustrating to have to decide to 1) rest and get attacked by a wandering patrol, or 2) not rest and encounter a placed encounter.

This is similar to what I'm concerned about. DMs can easily take meaningful choice away from the PCs, especially if overly concerned about healing surges.

 

[KarinsDad]

So, the original topic, "can you have too much healing?" is one I'm inclined to answer "yes" and I don't see this generally contested among your various replies.

Ok, I'll contest it.

Frankly, I could care less if my players took multiclass Healing feats. It is extremely unlikely that they would use them all in a single encounter ever.

The fact that this might occur in someone else's game implies that the first or second encounter of the day is a n+2 or n+3 hard encounter. My players hang onto their dailies as much as possible, regardless of the source.

If I played in a group where that did not occur, I would first recommend it and then if that did not work, second keep throwing random or mobile encounters at the PCs until it sunk in.

There is a big push in our gaming community to have fewer encounters of harder difficulty and assuming that this equates to a challenge for the players. If a DM buys into that model, that's ok. But, do not be surprised if the players react to that model by doing things like purchasing healing powers with feats and nova-ing in an early encounter.

The best solution is to mix things up. Every single day should be different. Some days, multiple encounters, some days single encounter, some days, easy encounters, some days, harder encounters.

The only way to prevent players from taking extended rests when they should not is to incentivize them to not do so. Something as simple as taking the player leader(s) aside (most groups have one or more players that take slightly more control of the situation than some other players) and explaining the situation might work.

But, it takes effort on the DM's part as well. The DM has to put in the effort for multiple different encounter type on different days. He cannot fall into the easy trap of one or two hard encounters = a challenge that has been bandied about on the boards.

 

[mneme]

a) challenging my party only to see the game allowing my players to increase their healing abilities to the point where they can go "healing nova". (This isn't bitching about my players - who clearly take reasoned decisions - but about the game not allowing me to set up fewer encounters while keeping healing scarce).

Taking things from the top, you're trying to run a variant game -- where each day/adventuring session consists of a very small (possibly one) number of challenging encounters. That's cool -- you can do that with 4e.

It does require attention to encounter design, though.

Among other things, it means your players -should- be setting things up so they can healing nova -- running them out of healing abilities isn't really an important part of this variant (nor running them out of encounter powers/dailies).

So, the original topic, "can you have too much healing?" is one I'm inclined to answer "yes" and I don't see this generally contested among your various replies.

Are we reading the same thread? I saw a number of good responses and overall a feeling that you couldn't have too much healing (including one discussing encounter designs where the encounter was an extra-long chain of lesser apparent encounters -- that's one of the good ideas, though far from the only one).

Ideally, maxing out on healing should be balanced by fewer options elsewhere. But from my (subjective) POV, it seems extra healing triggers are much more worth their while than some feat giving the odd +1 bonus.

Healing is great. But even if you have unlimited healing, it's not the be all and end all; if you don't take the monsters down, you run out.

I simply cannot muster the excitement I'm supposed to for healing surges.

They simply are too abstract, where their loss impacts the world and the character in absolutely no way whatsoever. Until you reach zero surges, of course.

I don't feel the difference re HP, personally. Not really seeing the difference, actually--being at 1 hp is just (well, until you add "bloodied") like being at full hp, except that you fall over when you get hit. So in 4e, surges are your health, hp are you distance from immediately losing. Which -is- the big deal here; you don't have to run people out of surges/healing to make them sweat, in fact, you shouldn't have to.

When you reach zero surges your status is suddenly transformed from a cushioned and comfortable existence as an all-but-invincible superhero,

You do realize that PCs in 4e can just die, right? When I play 4e, the question isn't "do I have the healing left to bring PC X back?" It's "do I heal PC X who has lost 1/4 of her hp, and waste the ability/action/surge, or do I wait for her to be more damaged? What's the chance of her getting knocked down and either killed or missing her action?"

The way you make your PCs sweat (or, for that matter, kill them; if you want challenging encounters on this level, you pretty much have to kill PCs) isn't surge attrition; attrition is what tells the PCs that it's time to rest for the day; that's what surges are for--to provide a counterbalance to the "save all our dailies for the final encounter" push that daily powers encourage in games that are expected to hit a good number of encounters per day. Instead, it's making sure that the monsters, if they let HP get too low and don't control the monsters properly, will kill someone; not bloody them, not knock them unconcious -- kill them.

First, remember that a brute can kill a nearly undamaged controller on a crit. They do that.

Second, if the monsters are going up against a party of healers, they -aren't- going to just ignore the rogue who got knocked down and let her get healed -- they're going to keep pounding her until the brains come out. Maybe they won't manage to quite do enough damage and a PC will get time to give her healing; mabye they will and the PCs will try to use their healing earlier (but you better believe they'll think they were challenged). But fundamentally, 4e is about action economy and tempo; not running people out of abilities; they have -lots- of abilities, and the game isn't designed for them all to get used up in one encounter. If they are going to, the encounter needs to be a bit tougher -- but a tough encounter will be tough even if they finish it off before they run out of encounter abilities and healing abilities; it's about risk, not about attrition.

Such a deep deep shame they first solved the 15-minute adventuring day and then added in back in in the shape of healing surges (though the problem has morphed into a much more insidious and perplexing form, where not everybody even realizes it's still there!)

As I mention above, I think that healing surges are necessary to keep healing in check with unlimited "spells" per day -- in a game where attrition is a real issue (it shouldn't be if you're effectively running a day-sized encounter or two per session!)

That said, I think it would be interesting to add some rituals that deal with the "out of surges" issue -- mabye somthing like:

Health Transference
Healing
Level 1
15 minutes
Target: Two willing characters
Cost: (the cost of a L-5 item where L is the level of the recieving character)
Effect: Transfer any number of healing surges between the two characters; character cannot have more healing surges after recieving this ritual than their maximum.

Health Replenishment
Healing
Level 3
10 minutes
Target: One character
Cost: (the cost of a L-3 item where L is the level of the recieving character)
Effect: The character regains a healing surge.

I don't see any reason, in the right group, that you shouldn't be able to spend time and money to take a character from 0 healing surges to 1 (thus from "cannot get healing" to "can get a little healing"); I wouldn't be surprised if Wizards offered something like this at some point -- the key being that the cost for doing this must be significant (or parties will just switch over to doing this all the time, particularly if they also print rituals that regain dailies, etc--you want these to be such that they can let the party overspend for the crucial endgame fight, or where there can be scrolls of Health Reprlenishment left around in adventures that don't really give the party a chance to rest, but NOT where every party starts every fight at full power because the treasure they'll get in the fight will far more than exceed the cost of doing so (see: wands of cure light in 3e).

 

[Herschel]

Another tactic that may help is changing up targeting by monsters. Focused fire makes sense for intelligent baddies, but some times have them pair up. Then the party's focus fire is more efficient and they burn fewer surges because damage is distributed more evenly. Next encounter, unload on the rogue. The sneaky little bastage deserves it.

 

[Nail]

I'm describing what I see is a problem in having a hard choice between: ...(snip)....

b) adding in several non-challenging encounters. ...

FWIW, I think your primary "problem" is here. You have a certain image in your mind of what a "non-challenging encounter" is. I think (and others here have posted this too) that your perception is off.

It's entirely possible to have an encounter that is both fun and challenging to your players, without even causing 1 hp of damage. Not even 1.

It might be instructive if you (the OP) posted what you think a "non-challenging encounter" would be. I think you've called them "filler encounters" as well? Post what you think one of these would look like, as it would look like in your own campaign, with your players.

 

[Lauberfen]

Thinking about it some more, I'm wondering about the maths behind the problem.
You have 5 players. They have can spend about 10 surges before they need to second wind or use potions.

Now, your characters should have 6-15 surges each. Damage is not spread equally in a party, granted, so let's be extreme and assume only 2 characters need to spend surges. It's also fair in that case to assume these are defenders, so should have 9-15 surges each. The way I see it, They can still only use 12 surges or so between the two of them, leaving them about half their surges each.

If this is the kind of level where their stopping for an extended rest, then there is something seriously wrong with them, and you need to take steps as described above to make it less easy to rest.

The fact is, at half surges, a party should be good for another 2-3 encounters, unless they are seriously challenging.

Perhaps the problem is that if you throw a second encounter at them as hard as the first, then it's too tough? However, the gap between their surges to spend per encounter, and + their dailies shouldn't be that big- at most about 5-6 surges. What I'm saying is they should still be able to take another encounter, just this time they'll need to spread damage across the whole party, use second wind and maybe potions. This might teach them not to go nova in the first encounter of the day.

So in summary- 1: are they literally running out of surges after 1 encounter? If so how?
2: If not, they can surely take several encounters per day, even if the first is relatively easy because they go crazy on powers.
3: If they still have surges and are resting, then you'll have to add incentives not to rest.

One further point- I absolutely disagree about surges being all or nothing- Clearly there is little difference until you have 5 or less surges. However 3 surges is already noticebaly different than 4, and 2 is different again- it's like in third when you're cleric's down to one healing spell- I'd want to make sure I didn't have any big fights before I could rest. The only difference between 1 and 0 is that it's harder to be healed with 0- you're still limited to around your hit point total.

 

[Doctor Proctor]

That said, I think it would be interesting to add some rituals that deal with the "out of surges" issue -- mabye somthing like:

Health Transference
Healing
Level 1
15 minutes
Target: Two willing characters
Cost: (the cost of a L-5 item where L is the level of the recieving character)
Effect: Transfer any number of healing surges between the two characters; character cannot have more healing surges after recieving this ritual than their maximum.

Health Replenishment
Healing
Level 3
10 minutes
Target: One character
Cost: (the cost of a L-3 item where L is the level of the recieving character)
Effect: The character regains a healing surge.

Actually, there's an item in the AV that lets you do essentially that. It's a waist slot item called a Healer's Sash (p 166). As an At-Will you or an adjacent ally uses a Healing Surge but gains no benefit. This adds a charge to the sash. As an Immediate Reaction encounter power, when an ally suffers damage you can expend a charge from the sash and they gain HP equal to that of a healing surge plus an extra 1d6 (scales to 2d6 at level 21).

This is a great item for either a Defender, or a back row PC that doesn't get hit a lot. You add a charge or two to it (it resets to 1 charge after an extended rest, max of 5 at one time) and you can now provide some emergency healing to another PC that might be low on surges. It's a great way to spread around surges.

What I'm saying is they should still be able to take another encounter, just this time they'll need to spread damage across the whole party, use second wind and maybe potions. This might teach them not to go nova in the first encounter of the day.

Yes and no. CapnZapp seems to be seems to be running really hard encounters that force the PC's to blow through a lot of surges. That means that if they take on another encounter after that, there's a good chance they might not survive because they had to blow all of their daily healing triggers just to stay alive, and therefore will only have access to a handful of heals. Sure, they can supplement with Healing Potions, but those heal a fixed amount of damage and many times can actually be worse than your surge value. This means that they'll burn through their remaining surges even faster, and won't get very effective healing out of them.

So, say they have PC's, one Cleric and 4 MCing into Cleric. If, in the first encounter, they blow through both Healing Words and 3 of the daily heals, then in the next encounter they'll only have access to the two Healing Words and 1 daily heal. So they're at a little over half the healing capacity (5 heals burned in the first, max of 3 left in the second).

If we also assume that the Cleric has more than just Healing Word, and that Second Wind was used on multiple characters along with possibly some Healing Potions, it's entirely likely that a character might be below 50% of his surges. If so, he cannot take the same amount of damage in the second encounter because of the reduced healing effectiveness due to relying on Healing Potions. As such, it's very risky and someone will probably die. So why go on? It just makes more sense to rest at that point.