How Do you Feel About Healing Surges? (Read First!)

[CleverNickName]

For the third time today I'm going to link my explanation of healing surges and how the healing surge mechanic fits much better than a hit point mechanic for modelling a boxing match in the real world. (Yes, it is an action movie mechanic - but it fits for non-lethal wounds).

It's a well-written article, but I don't think you are going to change anybody's mind on the subject. Some of us will always prefer a certain style of game. That isn't an error that needs correction; it is a preference that needs accommodation.

 

[TerraDave]

I have soured on them as they are another gamey thing to keep track of.

It seems like there must be a way to get most of the benefits they provide without actually using them.

 

[NewJeffCT]

Love proportional healing values.

Don't care either way if 'surges per day' are used or not.

Although I also agree with Lanefan that restricting the sources of healing during combat is a good thing. The more healing that occurs during combat, the longer a fight takes. Remove all in-combat healing... go with just the hit points that brought you to the fight... and the game progresses faster.

interesting - while there is more in-combat healing in my 4E game than there was in my 1E/2E games, in combat healing is less common than it was in my 3.5E game. In 4E, the main healing power the party leader has is normally limited to twice per encounter, though there are likely some healing dailies as well. (not necessarily all of the dailies are healing, though.)

In 3.5E, my large party of PCs were firing off healing powers at least once per round (between the cleric, psion, paladin, the NPC cleric and the spellthief with a wand of cure light wounds) if not more often. Once the game got to higher levels, Swift action spells like Close Wounds and Quickened Cure Light or Cure Moderate were also pretty common to supplement standard action spells like Heal, Mass Heal, Revivify, etc.

 

[DEFCON 1]

interesting - while there is more in-combat healing in my 4E game than there was in my 1E/2E games, in combat healing is less common than it was in my 3.5E game. In 4E, the main healing power the party leader has is normally limited to twice per encounter, though there are likely some healing dailies as well. (not necessarily all of the dailies are healing, though.)

In 3.5E, my large party of PCs were firing off healing powers at least once per round (between the cleric, psion, paladin, the NPC cleric and the spellthief with a wand of cure light wounds) if not more often. Once the game got to higher levels, Swift action spells like Close Wounds and Quickened Cure Light or Cure Moderate were also pretty common to supplement standard action spells like Heal, Mass Heal, Revivify, etc.

Well, that makes sense then, doesn't it? If you only have a single leader in 4E but you had 4 healers plus the spellthief in 3.5, then of course you had more healing in 3.5. My 4E group had a warlord, cleric, paladin, ranger with cleric multiclass, and everyone had Second Wind. So we had lots of in-combat hit point recovery.

But my point actually cuts across all editions. Restrict in-combat healing regardless of the game, and the fights go quicker. I also daresay they go a little less recklessly, because if the tank PC knows he doesn't have a host of healing coming his way to make up for any bad or non-existant planning or tactics on his part... he might put a little more thought into the best way to approach a fight.

 

[nightwalker450]

But my point actually cuts across all editions. Restrict in-combat healing regardless of the game, and the fights go quicker. I also daresay they go a little less recklessly, because if the tank PC knows he doesn't have a host of healing coming his way to make up for any bad or non-existant planning or tactics on his part... he might put a little more thought into the best way to approach a fight.

As long as the tank is able to reduce plenty of damage (either through DR or misses), otherwise the tank might decide the best route is not to tank.

 

[DEFCON 1]

As long as the tank is able to reduce plenty of damage (either through DR or misses), otherwise the tank might decide the best route is not to tank.

Then by definition, the player isn't playing the tank, is he?

 

[Wiseblood]

There's a lot of Healing Surge bashing going on, and I just wanted to set the record straight.

This poll will use the following definition of healing surges:

Healing Surges have two components: Surges Per Day, which is a daily limit on how often a character can be healed by healing effects; and Surge Value, which ensures that each of said healing effects is worth at least 1/4 of the character's maximum hit points.

That's it. We're not talking about Second Winds, short rests, Warlord healing, or any of that. We're just talking about Surges Per Day and Surge Value as ways of regulating healing effects. Namely, that healing effects scale with the heal-ee's max HP, and healing effects cannot be used a million times a day.

So, how do you feel about healing surges?

I do not like them. They allow waayyy too much healing. In D&D the healing was regulated by time and magical resources. Resources usually limited to one character
HS gave the resources to everyone and magnified the amount exponentially. People complaining about the clw wand nonsense in 3e are using strawmen. The clw wands were made available because magic items were made more cheaply, more easily, earlier and transformed into a commodity. That is an availability issue related to other rules.


I want three kinds of hp recovery. Rest (second wind, short rest, or convalescence) magic, or medicine. Healing Surges are not D&D any more than 2e character kits. Novel eperiment take the good ditch the bad.

 

[Kynn]

In my mind healing surges look like this:

Fighter, bleeding, and tired growls and flexes...... all better.

That's not an example of a healing surge. That's an example of second wind.

 

[nightwalker450]

Then by definition, the player isn't playing the tank, is he?

I bring it up, because unless tanks have either adequate defenses, or adequate healing opportunities then it's not going to be a job anyone's really going to want.

In 4e (which the whole HS thing rotates around), tanks were more tanks by control ability... They had a bit more HP (usually 1 more per level.. give or take Con score difference), and defenses were such that they didn't always have the highest defense...

Basically if you take away the ability to heal, they will just control themselves to death... So other things are of course going to need to adjust.

 

[Herschel]

I played a shielding swordmage (coronal guard) from levels 1-15 and I give the designers credit they really made so a defender can do his job. my swordmage took some royal beatings and chewed through his surges at an astonishing rate not a bad thing imho after all his job was to take the hits away from others but it usually didn't take long for opponents to figure out that my mark was their problem and come calling. So what happens when your defender runs out of surges... game over.

I'd have liked to be a fly on the wall because even a moderately well-built Shielding Swordmage is not easy to hit or get through its surges if people are playing at all smart. You can only nerf one attack/round and only mark one enemy at a time prior to Paragon, which you can them mark 2 if they're close enough together. You'll definitely be taking more hits than other characters but it should not be exraordinarily out-of-ratio to other characters.