Lay on Hands - Is it so Handy?

[alanpossible]

It would have been all too easy to word it concisely and get the basic idea across. Simply say something like "target regains hp = its healing surge value. This ability uses up one of your healing surges. You may not use this ability if you have no surges remaining".

The designer seemed to be shooting himself in the foot by wording the ability in such a roundabout manner and causing all this confusion.

And then you have to deal with the equal number of confused newbie Paladins saying "But I USED a healing surge. Using a healing surge gives me hit points so I heal the target AND myself."

Some concepts are hard to express unambiguously. It becomes even harder if you want to cover every possible use of something and harder still if you want it to be easy to follow. I won't even get in to the issue of people who are unfamiliar with the knowledge domain.
Look at legalese. It's generally designed to be all-covering and unambiguous and we still employ expensive lawyers to interpret it for us, to make sure we've understood it and make sure we're following it as written.

Personally, I find those RAW to be fine. If your other interpretation were correct, what would be the point of a power? Who would ever use a power to drain their healing surges for no benefit? If it wasn't intended that the Paladin could heal themselves, it would say "Target: One ally" or "Target: One creature, except the caster". Clearly, the only other possibility is that the Paladin can heal themselves with it. That has to be the RAI.

 

[Runestar]

And then you have to deal with the equal number of confused newbie Paladins saying "But I USED a healing surge. Using a healing surge gives me hit points so I heal the target AND myself."

But would people actually misinterpret this? Your take seems more like an intentional attempt at finding holes in what I feel is otherwise a fairly clear-cut and straightforward ruling, and less so of an honest inability to comprehend just what the designer is trying to express. It is clear that the power simply lets you use your healing surges to fuel your ability to heal others. In the very least, there is no ambiguity as to whether you can heal yourself or not.

Or I could just add a footnote at the end reminding players that they do not regain hp a 2nd time for any healing surges expended this way.

 

[alanpossible]

But would people actually misinterpret this?

I don't know. I've never misinterpreted the lay-on-hands rule, so it seems clear to me that what one person thinks is obvious is problematic for other players.

But there are two competing issues here:
1) Misinterpretation. The rules say too much. You have to read through verbose phrasing to understand exactly what is meant, and it trips up the reader ("you don't have to not consider avoiding losing your cover unless you don't have to prevent the loss of non-existent invisibility")

2) Misunderstanding, when the rules assume you know how something should be applied and the information to too sparse to understand exactly what they mean ("the monsters can see the player until the player regains stealth").

You seem to be arguing that the lay-on-hands rule currently suffers from problem 1, and I'm suggesting that perhaps if you remove anything, it might fall in to problem 2. There may not be any middle ground and certainly it's subjective.

Your take seems more like an intentional attempt at finding holes in what I feel is otherwise a fairly clear-cut and straightforward ruling, and less so of an honest inability to comprehend just what the designer is trying to express. It is clear that the power simply lets you use your healing surges to fuel your ability to heal others. In the very least, there is no ambiguity as to whether you can heal yourself or not.

Your accusation is true
But to be fair, one of my players thought that's how healing surges worked - every time one of your healing surges vanishes (no matter how), you gain hit points. He seemed to think it was a way of tracking huge numbers of hit points.

However, I was trying to raise a point. I don't feel the designers wrote anything to be purposefully obfuscated, and there's a tradeoff between writing too much and too little. I don't know whether your suggested rephrasing is sufficient or not, because I have the unfair advantage of having understood the rule before I read your version.

But as I say, it's subjective. I feel the original description is both obvious and unambiguous for the simple reason that there is no reasonable alternative for how it should work

 

[Khime]

Given the general MMO-ish route that 4E seems to lean toward, and given the number of times my WoW Paladin has used his Lay on Hands ability on himself (often accidentally, the target dying an instant before I hit the buttom), I somehow never considered that it couldn't be used on the caster.

 

[Jhaelen]

Given the traditional D&D route that 4E seems to lean toward, and given the number of times my 3E Paladin has used his Lay on Hands ability on himself, I somehow never considered that it couldn't be used on the caster.

 

[hopeless]

From what I read so far it sounds like the paladin can spend one of their healing surges to heal another character, please let me know if I'm wrong here since oh hold on let me see... nope.
You get to use this ability as many times as you have a wisdom modifier with a minimum of 1 and heal no hp merely spend a healing surge to heal another character.
So you don't use it on yourself since then you would be only using a healing surge as any other character can.
Hope that helps.

 

[1of3]

Your accusation is true
But to be fair, one of my players thought that's how healing surges worked - every time one of your healing surges vanishes (no matter how), you gain hit points. He seemed to think it was a way of tracking huge numbers of hit points.

The problem could have been prevented by making a special vocabulary, like "use a healing surge" vs. "loose a healing surge". Similar to Magic where cards can be played and discarded.

 

[Iku Rex]

I think this thread is a good place to repost some observations from the "Core Handbook Errors Discussion" thread.

(Concerning clarity and intent in the PHB.)

***

The fluff description says that a paladin can "grant their comrades additional resilience with a touch of their hands and a short prayer". No mention of using the ability on yourself.

The Healing Hands feat says that when you "use the lay on hands power, the affected ally regains additional hit points equal to your Charisma modifier". "Ally" doesn't include yourself in 4.0 so if you can target yourself with lay on hands this is an oddly worded feat.

And some powers, like the cleric's Cure Light Wounds or the wizard's Jump have "Target: You or one creature", which is unnecessary if "One creature" includes yourself.

***