D&D 5E Is the Healer Feat Broken?

[Xeviat]

Yes, that is how Healer works, and I think that is why @Xeviat was calling it overpowered, because in their rankings, they believe a feat should only be as powerful as a single 1st level spell per short rest.

That is why most of my post was showing that that baseline is far too low for how feats are meant to operate. Personally, I think Healer is right about where you want it, it does it's job and is good enough you don't hate still having it by levels 12 and up.

I didn't say 1st level spell necessarily.

Just compare the amount of party wide healing Healer grants to, say, the survivability that Toughness grants.

Both Healer and Inspiring Leader are way more potent than Toughness. Even just using Healer on yourself, you get more oomph than +2 Con. If feats are balanced against ability scores, and +2 Con is universally good for everyone, then Healer is overpowered.

 

[Ashrym]

I find the healer feat is bonkers good at low levels. What the healer feat lacks is high punch big numbers at high levels from spells like heal, and the once per target per short rest is a bit restrictive, but it's a ton of extra healing regardless.

The 1st level vhuman with the healer feat in a party of 4 heals an average of 102 hp given 2 short rests. It's an average of 8.5 for each of the 4 characters 3 times. The hit dice for the classic fighter, cleric, rogue, and wizard has 15 hp of magical healing if the cleric uses both 1st level slots on cure wounds. The typical hit dice healing would be about 28 hp because there's only 1 hit die each at that level for 43 hp healing. The healer feat is the difference of 43 hp of healing versus 145 hp of healing. The kit is well worth the cost for a few kits for every party member to carry one. The onus moves to the DM to limit supply.

Using the same party at 2nd level and the healer feat increases to 114 hp. Another spell slot IF uses for healing moves up to 27.5 hp. Hit dice healing doubles up to 56 hp for 83.5 hp of average healing without the feat versus 197.5 hp healing with the feat. The healer feat still more than double healing at 2nd level.

Looking at 3rd level and the healer feat increases to 126 hp. The cleric can cast prayer of healing up to 2 times and cure wounds up to 4 times at this point and between the two spells is looking at 130 hp of healing. That's the benefit of of an efficient healing spell. It's not likely a cleric will use every spell for the most efficient healing, of course, and this is for argument's sake for the moment. It takes every spell the cleric has at 3rd level to even begin to compete with the healer feat. The feat is literally like adding the healing of a 3rd level cleric to the party. Hit dice healing also increases to 84 hp. The difference with feat vs without the feat becomes 340 hp of healing vs 214 hp of healing and still a huge jump.

At 4th level the number of hit dice exceeds the number of times the healer feat is used based on the 2 rest assumption. The healer feat is 138 hp, hit dice healing is 112 hp, and the cleric may bring in up to 194 hp using every spell on healing with the assumption of a WIS increase.

If a person looks at the healer feat at 4th level it looks really really good. It's massively better than any other healing available at those early levels. Each short rest worth of healing only looking at the healer feat is 11.5 hp per person per use while prayer of healing is 13 (or 12 if a feat is taken) hp per person but takes spell slots instead of cheap components. Based on those assumptions given the healer feat at 4th level still exceeds hit dice healing and a cleric needs to go out of his or her way to compete. In a campaign where more short rests become available or more individuals might be healed (like a wilderness or city based adventure) the amount of healing can increase drastically.

Hit dice healing in the above party doesn't match the healer feat until 6th level, and it takes 7th level to really start to pull ahead. The cleric using multiple party wide or higher slotted healing spells per short rest has an advantage at similar levels and the heal spell for a fast bigger number. By 12th level spells can outshine the healer feat. The feat is doing 19.5 average hit points of healing for 234 hp and hit dice have pulled well ahead for 336 hp of healing. By that point hitting a PC once each per short rest for ~20 each is still very good but not so over powered barring extra short rests or more potential targets.

Even up to 20th level the healer feat is worth 27.5 hp of healing per target with a short rest recharge. Song of rest is 6.5 hp per target. In the party of 4 PC's that adds up to 330 hp of healing. A paladin's lay on hands is 100 hp of healing. Mass cure wounds in a 5th level slot is 18.5 hp of healing for 74 hp of healing in that example. Prayer of healing in a 5th level slot is 27.5 hp per target but it takes 10 minutes instead of 4 actions.

The healer feat outshines class abilities and is easily comparable to healing spells. Change that to a party of 6 that takes 3 short rests and the feat heals 660 hp at 20th level for 2.4 healing kits worth of charges. At 27.5 hp per .5 gp cost when all it takes is each person to carry their own kit the feat is solid at any level. It's even hard to lose hp healing to over-heal based on static increases with only a d6 die

Since you won't be using Healer every round, grab some vials of acid or alchemist's fire (or even oil, if you're strapped for cash) to use with Fast Hands when you happen to have a spare bonus action.

Or caltrops or ball bearing or etc; or pick some pockets with sleight of hand. Fast hands is good because fast hands is good, but it competes with other cunning actions. The healer feat isn't good because of fast hands. It's good because it significantly more healing than spell slots and hit dice combined in the first couple levels of the game, and a lot of healing regardless after that.

I ❤ fast hands. ;-)

 

[Chaosmancer]

I didn't say 1st level spell necessarily.

Just compare the amount of party wide healing Healer grants to, say, the survivability that Toughness grants.

Both Healer and Inspiring Leader are way more potent than Toughness. Even just using Healer on yourself, you get more oomph than +2 Con. If feats are balanced against ability scores, and +2 Con is universally good for everyone, then Healer is overpowered.

Again, so is Heavy Armor Mastery.

+2 Con is +4 hp if you get it at 4th level, in addition to the +1 to saves, maxing out at +20 hp. Heavy Armor Master is 3 hp every time you are attacked, which is 6 hp after two attacks, and beats 21 hp by the seventh attack you take.

Yes, they should be balanced in theory, but it is fairly easy to beat those bars.

 

[FrogReaver]

Well my level 6 Ranger Hunter uses SS, with 16 DEX a +1 bow and hunter he has got +9 to hit.

Still when no advantage or bless is going on I hesitate, and rightfully so, to use SS when the Mobs AC is 15+
And our DM does not communicate the mobs AC until we can guess it ourselves quite accurately.

Another reason for that, is that my ranger uses hunters mark and colossus slayer, so that adds +2d6 +1d8 for his two attacks if he hits with both (let us assume the mob is fresh). So if I miss with the first attack, I cannot apply colossus slayer even if the second one hits, because colossus requires the mob to be injured.

We are off topic but,

Rangers aren't particularly good at taking advantage of the -5/+10. It takes a bit more than the archery style to really make the -5/+10 feats shine. You need another fairly strong buff to accuracy. Also if you have alot of damage buffs then it becomes less effective. Rangers typically have no other accuracy buffs and alot of ways of buffing their attack damage. That actually makes them very poor candidates for the -5/+10 feats.

 

[FrogReaver]

There are a few circumstances that the Healer feat (especially as a bonus action) is really good.

1. Your DM runs very lengthy adventuring days without many options for resting
2. The DM likes to provide major setbacks/obstacles when you rest without completing a missions.

Outside of those 2 scenarios one main benefit Is that it allows your casters to save spell slots: Using a healer's kit to whack-a-mole heal someone back up saves resources your casters can turn toward offense. This becomes less important over time, as level 1 spell slots tend to become less effective as casters gain levels (a few notable exceptions exist though). Also, using it for out of combat healing in leiu of spellslots also alows casters to provide more offensive punch in encounters.

I think for the typical game the feat may not actually have that much impact on outcomes as the situations it will really help the most just don't come up that often. However, that can be said about most abilities. I think even at level 4+ the party will feel like the ability is very impactful even if it never actually saves their lives.

One thing I try to consider these days is: The party has X offensive capability, X healing capability, X Control Ability, etc. Typically, even a high focus on offensive optimization by a single character won't change the parties offensive capabilities that much. However, given that usually only 1-2 characters have any healing capability and even then it's fairly low - any buff to healing capability greatly increases the parties healing capabilities. Thus, I would lean toward enhancing the aspects of the party that you can relatively enhance the most as typically being more impactful.

 

[Ashrym]

We are off topic but,

Rangers aren't particularly good at taking advantage of the -5/+10. It takes a bit more than the archery style to really make the -5/+10 feats shine. You need another fairly strong buff to accuracy. Also if you have alot of damage buffs then it becomes less effective. Rangers typically have no other accuracy buffs and alot of ways of buffing their attack damage. That actually makes them very poor candidates for the -5/+10 feats.

Ensnaring strike grants advantage on attacks because of the restrained condition and adds ongoing spell damage as well. It's hard to build for that DC any time soon and DEX for archery at the same time, it takes concentration, and usually another class is better suited to spells like that but it is an option for a niche build (or lucky ability score rolling).

A ranger looking to create his own accuracy bonus can look at that spell once he or she has a decent save DC. Usually it's just easier to let someone else in the party grant bonuses.

 

[FrogReaver]

Ensnaring strike grants advantage on attacks because of the restrained condition and adds ongoing spell damage as well. It's hard to build for that DC any time soon and DEX for archery at the same time, it takes concentration, and usually another class is better suited to spells like that but it is an option for a niche build (or lucky ability score rolling).

A ranger looking to create his own accuracy bonus can look at that spell once he or she has a decent save DC. Usually it's just easier to let someone else in the party grant bonuses.

That spell has a lot of downsides. It's definitely not something I'd point to as drastically improving the ranger's output with the -5/+10 abilities.

Less effective against large creatures.
Must hit and enemy fail save before becoming active.
Competition with other spells like hunter's mark
Competition with bonus action attacks from weapon feats.

I'd love to see some numbers on it though. Maybe I'll run some in a bit.