D&D 5E Whack-a-mole gaming or being healed from 0 hp

[Lanefan]

Why is it absurd? Are positive hp in triple digits absurd too?

Actually, for the most part, yes.

Lan-"in 35-ish years of doing this I've seen two PCs with 101+ h.p.; the first was overpowered within his game and the second flat-out broken in his"-efan

 

[Psikerlord#]

More generally: lingering injuries is solving a different problem.

Your problem is "being downed does not carry enough of a consequence". That is a fine problem to tackle, but I'm not the one having it.

My problem is "better to hold off healing until he's going down, since we then get rid of some damage". My problem is whack-a-mole. Nothing about lingering injuries make you want to stop healing the fallen. Nothing about penalizing the PC that takes damage chnges the fact that surplus damage disappears at 0 hp.

Lingering wounds did fix the whack-a-mole problem in my game. Because players don't want to get reduced to zero, they spend their healing preventing getting reduced to zero as their first option. They dont want to whack-a-mole - coz if they do, they have to make "death" save when they hit zero hp or suffer an injury roll... So injuries takes the incentive out of whack-a-moleing.

But I can see how using -10 HP will also work. Also, tradition. I think -10 hp might however make your game rather deadly, esp at higher levels with big handfuls of dice getting thrown about.

 

[MoonSong]

I would think that the easy solution then would be to get rid of Healing Word (since it is rarely used at other times for anything else). It would be bad enough to penalize any of your players who enjoy being the one to rescue a downed ally by removing the Healing Word spell so that they can no longer do that, but going beyond that into some of the suggestions here in this thread seems excessively punitive to your players. I know of players who like "saving the day by keep the team up". But, your table, your rules. Whatever floats your boat. I was merely suggesting that for the amount of frequency, any solution to "fix this" seems like killing an ant with a sledgehammer. Better to just ignore the ant. Good luck with whatever you decide.

Well, I happen to enjoy patching up others and let me tell you that Healing word is just cheap, there's not a lot of investment on it. As long ass cure wounds are still available, good riddance, Healing word is not that necessary for a healbot, you can't stack it with a cure spell so it isn't a tool to feel special saving your comrade's life, actually it devaluates your role by making it not cost a real action and not requiring physical contact.

 

[KarinsDad]

Well, I happen to enjoy patching up others and let me tell you that Healing word is just cheap, there's not a lot of investment on it. As long ass cure wounds are still available, good riddance, Healing word is not that necessary for a healbot, you can't stack it with a cure spell so it isn't a tool to feel special saving your comrade's life, actually it devaluates your role by making it not cost a real action and not requiring physical contact.

Sounds like sour grapes about a spell that isn't "good enough".

Just saving an ally's life is what is special. It doesn't matter which tool one uses to do that. You feel that Healing Word is a lousy tool for doing that? I'm not sure that the players whose PCs can then get up from the ground would always agree with that assessment. In our game, we do not bitch that the healbot did not do enough healing (or that the role should require the PC to actually move over and use physical contact, what the heck is that about? ), we are just kind of glad that she did (and that she also probably went over and smacked a foe for a bunch of damage at the same time, or cantriped some other heavily wounded foe, or used the help action, or dodge to give her allies time to recoup). D&D with Healing Word in it gives the healbot a lot more options than one without it.

And there have been an occasional "DM roll out his butt" AoE spells where Mass Healing Word was the bomb. Does one get rid of that spell too? If my PC is unconscious on the ground, he can't do much of anything. 4 hit points and he can pull out his heaviest stick and possibly try to help turn the tide of battle (or at least take another shot to the face and go unconscious again so that another PC doesn't take that shot to the face and can keep fighting).

 

[MoonSong]

Sounds like sour grapes about a spell that isn't "good enough".

Just saving an ally's life is what is special. It doesn't matter which tool one uses to do that. You feel that Healing Word is a lousy tool for doing that? I'm not sure that the players whose PCs can then get up from the ground would always agree with that assessment. In our game, we do not bitch that the healbot did not do enough healing (or that the role should require the PC to actually move over and use physical contact, what the heck is that about? ), we are just kind of glad that she did (and that she also probably went over and smacked a foe for a bunch of damage at the same time, or cantriped some other heavily wounded foe, or used the help action, or dodge to give her allies time to recoup). D&D with Healing Word in it gives the healbot a lot more options than one without it.

And there have been an occasional "DM roll out his butt" AoE spells where Mass Healing Word was the bomb. Does one get rid of that spell too? If my PC is unconscious on the ground, he can't do much of anything. 4 hit points and he can pull out his heaviest stick and possibly try to help turn the tide of battle (or at least take another shot to the face and go unconscious again so that another PC doesn't take that shot to the face and can keep fighting).

No, Healing word is just a cheap spell, the spell you take when you are reluctant to heal others. I don't dislike it because it heals little, that is its saving grace. The spell is just cheap, it lowers the stakes and removes all difficulty out of healing a fallen teammate. In other editions, you must hurry to reach them, and you risk taking a hit when trying to heal them, but with healing word, that is just an afterthought, you can keep smacking heads and not bother moving from your place, you don't risk getting hurt, so there's no meaningful risk on that and it isn't as satisfactory. If you want to play a healbot, healing word is just not for you, healing word is for warriors that sometimes heal, cure wounds is for healers who mean it.

 

[KarinsDad]

No, Healing word is just a cheap spell, the spell you take when you are reluctant to heal others. I don't dislike it because it heals little, that is its saving grace. The spell is just cheap, it lowers the stakes and removes all difficulty out of healing a fallen teammate. In other editions, you must hurry to reach them, and you risk taking a hit when trying to heal them, but with healing word, that is just an afterthought, you can keep smacking heads and not bother moving from your place, you don't risk getting hurt, so there's no meaningful risk on that and it isn't as satisfactory. If you want to play a healbot, healing word is just not for you, healing word is for warriors that sometimes heal, cure wounds is for healers who mean it.

From an Action Economy POV, Cure Wounds is the subpar choice here.

The PC healing is doing that instead of contributing to the fight. So in addition to the risk you mention, he's using up an action so that the PCs can get an additional action next round. But since he is risking himself in the process, what it effectively does is:

This round: -1 PC action, potential +1 (or more) NPC OA
Next round: +1 PC action or possibly +0 PC action

It's effectively a losing strategy. The best net gain is +0 PC actions after two rounds. The earliest it can have a gain in action economy is usually 2 rounds later and by then, the fight might even be over. What good is a healbot that lowers the number of PC actions per round? That's the opposite of his job.

The incentive with only having Cure Wounds available is to just let the guy stay unconscious in many scenarios. This type of game is not conducive for having a healbot in the group. If I'm a healbot, my role is to keep everyone standing. It's not to only do so with some type of faux heroism of rushing to my downed ally's side. Given a choice between a healbot limited to Cure Wounds and a healbot that can cast Cure Wounds or Healing Word situation depending, I'll enjoy playing the latter more because the latter has more options to contribute and can make less straight jacketed decisions.

In fact my favorite healbot spell in 5E is Aura of Vitality because it allows me to distribute healing every round and still contribute offensively. Heroism is another good one, but it comes from the damage mitigation instead of the healing arena.

 

[MoonSong]

From an Action Economy POV, Cure Wounds is the subpar choice here.

The PC healing is doing that instead of contributing to the fight. So in addition to the risk you mention, he's using up an action so that the PCs can get an additional action next round. But since he is risking himself in the process, what it effectively does is:

This round: -1 PC action, potential +1 (or more) NPC OA
Next round: +1 PC action or possibly +0 PC action

It's effectively a losing strategy. The best net gain is +0 PC actions after two rounds. The earliest it can have a gain in action economy is usually 2 rounds later and by then, the fight might even be over. What good is a healbot that lowers the number of PC actions per round? That's the opposite of his job.

The incentive with only having Cure Wounds available is to just let the guy stay unconscious in many scenarios. This type of game is not conducive for having a healbot in the group. If I'm a healbot, my role is to keep everyone standing. It's not to only do so with some type of faux heroism of rushing to my downed ally's side. Given a choice between a healbot limited to Cure Wounds and a healbot that can cast Cure Wounds or Healing Word situation depending, I'll enjoy playing the latter more because the latter has more options to contribute and can make less straight jacketed decisions.

In fact my favorite healbot spell in 5E is Aura of Vitality because it allows me to distribute healing every round and still contribute offensively. Heroism is another good one, but it comes from the damage mitigation instead of the healing arena.

You are just proving me right, I said the spell is too cheap, too easy, too detached. By making the act of healing so easy and riskless, you devaluate the role of the healer. The so called faux heroism you mention is the moments you look forward to, the ones with the biggest risk and the best emotional reward -what is more memorable? "I fought through a horde of undead to reach my friend the paladin before it was too late and then I helped him back on his feet", or "I sneezed and put him back in the fight"?. Healing word is just "press heal in the remote", almost like a chore. When you play a healbot -and mean it-, Healing a downed ally is the contribution, not something you do "instead of a real contribution", or "in addition to the real contribution", everything else you do is "stay out of trouble and alive in case they need me", not the real reason you are playing.

Aura of vitality is a nice spell, you still use bonus actions to heal, but you need to be closer, use an action, concentration, and the healing doesn't overshadow cure wounds, not to mention higher in level. Healing word is just cheap, and I would retrain to something else the moment my party members forced me to prepare it. Yes I can be in favor of the warlord and still be very traditionalist when it comes to healing.

 

[Gillywonka]

I run a little more grim of a game. Anytime you go negative CON in HP, you are dead. If you go negative HP, but not past your CON, you still make your death saves. If you make 3, you live, but you are at 3 exhaustion levels. Additionally, just because you fall down due to 0 HP, doesnt mean the thing you are fighting isnt going to give you a coup de grace. It's changed the dynamic. The PCs are quicker to use healing before going into combat, are hesitant to go into combat, they go into combat smarter if not trying to avoid it altogether if possible.

 

[Hussar]

I'm a little confused here. Depending on the initiative order, healing word may or may not be a big deal. If any baddies go between the cleric and the healed PC, then it's pretty much a given that you just smack the PC down again - he's prone, unarmed, and has 1 HP. Didn't the cleric just paint a giant bullseye on the PC?

And, beyond that, why aren't people targeting the cleric? No healing word when your cleric is bleeding on the ground.

I'm really not seeing the problem here. The only time this becomes a very effective tactic is if you heal the PC, then the PC goes before any enemies. But, even then, the PC has to stand up and move away, probably using a disengage action to do so. Otherwise, he gets his swings and then promptly drops again. Who cares if you get the PC to 1 HP? That's exciting isn't it? Can you get away from the combat long enough to get some real healing and get back into the fight?

And, if you're prone, with 1 HP, the baddy has a better chance of getting that crit and possibly killing you outright, depending on how much damage the baddie can do. If the baddie can do your Max HP +1, you won't need any healing afterward.

 

[KarinsDad]

You are just proving me right, I said the spell is too cheap, too easy, too detached. By making the act of healing so easy and riskless, you devaluate the role of the healer. The so called faux heroism you mention is the moments you look forward to, the ones with the biggest risk and the best emotional reward -what is more memorable? "I fought through a horde of undead to reach my friend the paladin before it was too late and then I helped him back on his feet", or "I sneezed and put him back in the fight"?. Healing word is just "press heal in the remote", almost like a chore. When you play a healbot -and mean it-, Healing a downed ally is the contribution, not something you do "instead of a real contribution", or "in addition to the real contribution", everything else you do is "stay out of trouble and alive in case they need me", not the real reason you are playing.

Aura of vitality is a nice spell, you still use bonus actions to heal, but you need to be closer, use an action, concentration, and the healing doesn't overshadow cure wounds, not to mention higher in level. Healing word is just cheap, and I would retrain to something else the moment my party members forced me to prepare it. Yes I can be in favor of the warlord and still be very traditionalist when it comes to healing.

If you say so.

Personally, it sounds like your definition of a healbot is someone who takes one for the team because he's an idiot. He's heroic because he risked something. That is not my definition of heroism (even though I do understand that it is the definition for some people).

The player whose PC you healed probably doesn't get more of an emotional charge because you healed his PC one way over another. Healing potion. Healing Word. Cure Wounds. Aura of Vitality. What matters to him is that his PC is conscious.

As Tony Stark said "I'd rather just cut the wire". Work smarter instead of harder. I get an emotional charge out of the teamwork and success aspect of it. I get the Paladin conscious AND I take out one of the Undead to further help/protect my team.

The faux heroism. Meh.