D&D 5E On the healing options in the 5e DMG

[MoonSong]

You're missing the reason for this argument though. See, the HP=Meet crowd needs to show that the way they are doing things is the same as it's always been done and that 4e is the outlier. If they don't show that, then suddenly 4e's no longer the outlier and their interpretation is. If that's true, then there is no real need to support their interpretation, because their interpretation has never actually been supported. Their whole argument centers on the idea that 4e has radically changed the game and that they are simply trying to get back to the way it was before.

OTOH, when you actually look at the quotes in the rules, suddenly 4e is no longer the outlier. 3e healing rates were very fast, perhaps slightly slower than 4e, but, not by much. 1e and 2e interpreted HP as "mostly mojo" and rejected the idea that characters got "meatier" as they gained levels. Suddenly, their entire line of reasoning for criticising every aspect of HP is in question because, if HP are "mostly mojo" in every edition of D&D, then things like Damage on a Miss isn't such a huge leap, dealing damage with non-physical attacks becomes perfectly plausible, minions make a fair bit of sense, and healing rates similar to 3e or 4e aren't out of line at all.

So, it does hinge very strongly on what Gygax said. The whole argument hinges on reinterpreting HP to be something that they never were - mostly meat with a believable healing pace.

I'm sorry, but no. HP=Meat don't need to prove it was the one true way, all we need to say is that we didn't suddenly pop up into existence out of nowhere and that all other editions satisfy us.
4e is an outlier because it is the one edition that enforces one specific interpretation of HP while all others let you interpret it however you wanted. You say 4e healing rates don't vary from late 3.5, but I don't believe that is a fair comparison, in 4e full overnight healing is the baseline, while in 3.5 the baseline is one quarter of your wounds at most, only getting into super quick healing when assisted and using bed rest for a full day. That it is impossible to go faster than the 4e baseline is another thing entirely -and a reason it is less satisfactory to be the healer-.

 

[TwoSix]

These are the sorts of things that don't work for me. The second, because a Heal check still works in an anti-magic field. The first, because I'm a non-heroic chump who has suffered some relatively major injuries (mostly soft tissue damage in the legs) which slowed me down a great deal, but would not have killed me even had I not received physiotherapy.

While I can't claim this is any sort of by-the-book interpretation, my own game use of antimagic field assumes that it shuts off the concentrated magical power of the sort that powers active spells and magic items, but does nothing to affect the low-level baseline magic that suffuses a fantasy world and allows dragons to fly, vampires to live, and high level fighters to survive falls off mountains.

 

[ruleslawyer]

I'm sorry, but no. HP=Meat don't need to prove it was the one true way, all we need to say is that we didn't suddenly pop up into existence out of nowhere and that all other editions satisfy us.

1e clearly doesn't, as pemerton's DMG quotes expressly show. 3e Unearthed Arcana also discusses the difference between "meat" hp and skill, luck etc in presenting the vitality and wounds variant.

The point that natural healing makes no sense if you assume that hp loss directly correlates to physical wounds is another problem. There isn't a single word in editions 1-3 about an implied setting feature whereby people heal injuries faster than in the real world. Moreover, unlike other RPGs, d&d has never imposed injury penalties for hp loss. In fact, certain 1e modules have traps that separately inflict injury penalties and are described as slicing tendons, severing fingers and whatnot.

In short, the hp as meat concept is simply unsupported except in your own minds. That's fine; there's no right or wrong way to adjudicate it. But until someone can provide at least one or two pieces of evidence to show that this is what hp represents, I'm not buying the contention that the game supports any definition other than "hp are part meat and part luck, skill, plot immunity, and metaphysical strength, and the ratio heavily favors the latter factors as characters acquire class levels." Moreover, were I to get properly lawyerly, I would point out that the 1e DMG sets forth an affirmative definition that is never contradicted or amended in subsequent material.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

You're missing the reason for this argument though. See, the HP=Meat crowd needs to show that the way they are doing things is the same as it's always been done and that 4e is the outlier. If they don't show that, then suddenly 4e's no longer the outlier and their interpretation is.

It always goes back to healing time. In older editions, it could take a month to heal. In 3E, it could take a week to heal under typical adventuring conditions (or as little as two days, if you have access to extraordinary healing care). In 4E, it could take at most six hours to heal, and that's if we accept healing surges as the new Hit Points; if we insist that Hit Points are Hit Points, and healing surges are something else entirely, then you can heal naturally and without magical aid in about five minutes - and you can do that ~twice per day, before you need to sleep for six hours.

The difference is in orders of magnitude. AD&D had reasonably-slow healing (for a world that encourages adventuring), and 3E was really starting to push the limit on what was hand-wave-able (although it mostly went un-noticed, in the face of easier magical healing), but 4E stopped even pretending that there was any meaningful physical component in there.

1e and 2e interpreted HP as "mostly mojo" and rejected the idea that characters got "meatier" as they gained levels. Suddenly, their entire line of reasoning for criticising every aspect of HP is in question because, if HP are "mostly mojo" in every edition of D&D, then things like Damage on a Miss isn't such a huge leap, dealing damage with non-physical attacks becomes perfectly plausible, minions make a fair bit of sense, and healing rates similar to 3e or 4e aren't out of line at all.

Nobody in this thread is suggesting that anyone gets "meatier" with level; at most, some people are suggesting that the mojo-component of HP is the factor by which people are more efficient about using what meat they have. Damage on a Miss is only acceptable if you start with a premise that you have two separate pools of HP, and some HP are composed entirelyof mojo, as compared to the meat:mojo ratio of every HP changing as you gain level (i.e. a low-level character might start with HP that are 90% meat and 10% mojo, and a high-level character might have HP that are 10% meat and 90% mojo, but neither possesses a single Hit Point that is entirely meat or entirely mojo).

Since one of the strengths of the HP game mechanic is that you don't need to track two separate pools of points which recover at different rates, every point needs to be consistent with meat if meat is going to be any component whatsoever.

 

[Michael Morris]

I'm not willing to read all 40 pages of this, but I figured I'd throw my 2 cents in. It has been my experience as a frequent cleric player that if the magic healing works quickly and baseline healing is slow, as in 1e/2e and to a lesser extent in 3e/3.5e/Pathfinder, the cleric player gets browbeat into starting the day topping off everyone's hit point totals and rarely, if ever, gets to go through a day with his full spell progression.

While those options may well be more "realistic", they prohibit the player of the healer in the party from doing much of anything else with their magic. Such realistic options can only work if magic healing is given some form of limitation to prohibit the top off in the morning.

And, frankly, not being able to use a quarter to half my spell progression for anything other than keeping the party alive just isn't any fun. And the lower the party's level, the worse it gets.

 

[Sailor Moon]

I'm not willing to read all 40 pages of this, but I figured I'd throw my 2 cents in. It has been my experience as a frequent cleric player that if the magic healing works quickly and baseline healing is slow, as in 1e/2e and to a lesser extent in 3e/3.5e/Pathfinder, the cleric player gets browbeat into starting the day topping off everyone's hit point totals and rarely, if ever, gets to go through a day with his full spell progression.

While those options may well be more "realistic", they prohibit the player of the healer in the party from doing much of anything else with their magic. Such realistic options can only work if magic healing is given some form of limitation to prohibit the top off in the morning.

And, frankly, not being able to use a quarter to half my spell progression for anything other than keeping the party alive just isn't any fun. And the lower the party's level, the worse it gets.

I disagree.

Not really sure what's stopping you to be honest. Old edition clerics were basically warriors with divine magic, and unless your players were extremely reckless, you weren't always healing them left and right so it's a bit of an exaggeration that has been done to death. Want to save your spells? Buy potions, scrolls, and a wand or two, you would also most likely find them as part of treasure.

With 3rd edition and Pathfinder we have Spontaneous Healing along with potions and wands. Use Magic Device is available to all classes in PF.

 

[MoonSong]

I'm not willing to read all 40 pages of this, but I figured I'd throw my 2 cents in. It has been my experience as a frequent cleric player that if the magic healing works quickly and baseline healing is slow, as in 1e/2e and to a lesser extent in 3e/3.5e/Pathfinder, the cleric player gets browbeat into starting the day topping off everyone's hit point totals and rarely, if ever, gets to go through a day with his full spell progression.

While those options may well be more "realistic", they prohibit the player of the healer in the party from doing much of anything else with their magic. Such realistic options can only work if magic healing is given some form of limitation to prohibit the top off in the morning.

And, frankly, not being able to use a quarter to half my spell progression for anything other than keeping the party alive just isn't any fun. And the lower the party's level, the worse it gets.

Well, this is quite a YMMV thingy here, and part of the discussion you missed. But a chunk of it was Saelorn and I telling others how we found this kind of setting very rewarding on its own. Actually just dedicating a quarter of spell slots to healing would mean I'm not healing enough. Basically we like realisitc healing rates because they enable magical healing out of combat to be special and not just a matter of convenience. Funny how ones personal unfun is another's paradise.

 

[Michael Morris]

I have a personal policy of not debating with anyone who uses the terms "realism" or "realistic" in connection with any fantasy game. It's a fun ghost to chase sometimes, but it's utterly unattainable. I learned that a long time ago.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Also "realism" is a misstatement.

If you buy that hp represent some tolerance to actual physical damage as well as (some to mostly) skill, luck, karma, and endurance, then surges or 5e HD are a more accurate simulation of recovery, since only a small portion of hp should necessitate full-on chirurgery or magic. Surges, HD, or other recovery mechanisms should only stop working with respect to a small portion of Hp which require extensive healing time or magic. OTOH you think that hp damage is primarily physical injury, then healing rates are only "realistic" if you've made the game world radically different from our Earth such that broken bones, ruptured veins etc impose no hindrance to combat or movement AND heal in days rather than months.

The actual metrics under discussion here are FASTER vs SLOWER, nothing more. If you wanted more simulationist, you would either need to adopt a vitality vs wounds system or make all damage inflict injury penalties, take months to heal, have a chance of NOT healing unless Magic is used, and bring risk of disease (ie infection).

Personally, since 1e I have found it most desirable to count hp damageas superficial bruises and cuts, fatigue, and general erosion of plot immunity right up until 0, and force system shock rolls for serious injury at that point. (I also used a critical hits system in 1e/2e that yielded actual serious injuries causing anything from penalties to ability damage to disease to death.) honestly I wish the surge system had come along sooner!

 

[The Crimson Binome]

OTOH you think that hp damage is primarily physical injury, then healing rates are only "realistic" if you've made the game world radically different from our Earth such that broken bones, ruptured veins etc impose no hindrance to combat or movement AND heal in days rather than months.

The basic conceit of abstract wounds is that it's totally possible to break bones etc, but we choose to not model them in detail because that would be a lot of work (determining the specific injuries and tracking the penalties), and because it makes for unsatisfying gameplay (the downward spiral, where the first injury essentially takes you out of the fight). Abstract wounds also heal more quickly, because we don't want to play a game of extended convalescence.

To make a long story short, those sorts of abstractions don't bother most people in the meat camp. YMMV, obviously.