D&D General What's the DC for a fighter to heal their ally with a prayer?

[the Jester]

Here's a simpler question along a similar theme: having already spent their action and bonus action, a player needs their character to move 35ft to get out of danger, but they only have 30ft of movement. Is there a test you would consider that would let them make the distance? For me the answer is yes: DC 13 Athletics check, failure condition is probably Prone, unless something else in the scenario seems like a better fit.

My answer remains pretty much "play by the rules".

A character wants to move more than their speed? Dash. That's not enough? Well, let's hope they make it to next round.

You can move your speed. Not your speed + 5'. I wouldn't allow a monster to do this (absent some special trait or something) either.

 

[the Jester]

You can't. Why are you assuming someone can? Why do you keep injecting a foolishly hyper-permissive DM into this?

Because I just replied to a post that was fine with druids using barbarian rage and so on.

If we followed your philosophy, we'd never have gotten any other classes but Fighting-Man and Magic-User. Cleric and Thief specifically evolved out of players asking to do improvised things. And if you prefer a more diegetic explanation: How do you think the first Wizards learned their spells? There had to be a first person to attempt to do something without formal training.

That's a very strange take. If we follow my philosophy, we would still have all the classes. There's a big difference between a new class and "my character can do stuff that is in other classes' wheelhouse."

As for the wizard, you're mixing up game rules with the game setting- we're talking about the one, not the other. It doesn't matter how the first wizard learned their spells. That's not the issue.

4. As I said earlier in the thread: Why do you play with players you don't trust? If DMs are supposed to be given such unreserved, universal trust instantly without any restrictions, why is it that players should be treated as horrific untrustworthy villains, rubbing their hands with twisted glee as they prepare to destroy all that their poor, beleaguered, hapless, put-upon DMs try to do with their absolute power?

That's just insulting. I trust my players, and I trust them not to try to cast cure wounds if they don't have access to it. Please refrain from further aspersions like this, I find it very insulting.

 

[the Jester]

A character doesn't need to take the Jump spell to be able to jump, nor the Charm spell to be able to make friends (even with angry people not inclined to be friendly). I don't see why praying needs to be in a radically different category.

But we're not talking about just praying. The fighter can just pray all they want. We're talking about healing.

 

[Voadam]

Fighter "I pray to the gods to heal dying character."

DM "Well dying character, lets see if fighter's prayers are answered enough to turn this mortal wound into a stabilized condition. Make your next death save."

Playing to find out the story is one option.

 

[Voadam]

Fighter "I pray to the gods to heal dying character."

Healing God "I gave every mortal the ability to stabilize dying characters with a wisdom medicine check, and this fighter can't be bothered to apply direct pressure? Where are my curses at?"

 

[Baron Opal II]

A character doesn't need to take the Jump spell to be able to jump, nor the Charm spell to be able to make friends (even with angry people not inclined to be friendly). I don't see why praying needs to be in a radically different category.

That seems like a false equivalence. You don't need the jump spell to jump 15 ft., but you do if you want to jump 45 ft.

The fighter can bind wounds with a healer's kit, but they need cure wounds to heal damage. Now, if everyone has the ability to invoke divine intervention on an 01 on % dice, that's something else also.

 

[pemerton]

One argument is that what clerics do is magic tied to power source and expericence and not just prayer.

This addresses a possible internal logic of the fiction, but not the balance of or dynamics of gameplay.

Why can't a 1st level cleric raise the dead? Why can't a 9th level one without the proper spell prepared or scroll at hand?

The standard answer, I think, would be game balance. Why raising the dead is deemed a high level effect is a further question. I think the answer is purely legacy, to do with the way character creation and the introduction of replacement characters worked in Gygax's game.

The argument seems to be that mechanics are protected niches, not classes.

Well, allowing some sort of successful check to have a prayer heal an ally doesn't seem to intrude on any protected mechanic. Skill checks are a general mechanic.

But we're not talking about just praying. The fighter can just pray all they want. We're talking about healing.

As per posts from @hawkeyefan, @Manbearcat and others upthread, healing in 5e D&D is a generic ability (eg WIS (Medicine) checks; Healer's Kits; etc). And likewise, as per my post upthread, in 4e.

Fighters aren't barred from being able to heal in either of those versions.

 

[Zubatcarteira]

In 5e, stabilizing a dying creature is the same power as the Spare the Dying Cleric cantrip, a DC 10 Medicine check, and one use of a Healer's Kit, so not a big feat.

If he actually follows a god and it's a dire situation, a DC 15 should be alright, maybe it upgrades to a Cure Wounds if he rolls well enough.

 

[cbwjm]

In 5e, stabilizing a dying creature is the same power as the Spare the Dying Cleric cantrip, a DC 10 Medicine check, and one use of a Healer's Kit, so not a big feat.

If he actually follows a god and it's a dire situation, a DC 15 should be alright, maybe it upgrades to a Cure Wounds if he rolls well enough.

You don't even need the healers kit, it's just a straight DC 10 Wisdom (Medicine) check to stabilise someone, it's not actually all that difficult to hit it. The healers kit just removes the need to make a check.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

You don't even need the healers kit, it's just a straight DC 10 Wisdom (Medicine) check to stabilise someone, it's not actually all that difficult to hit it. The healers kit just removes the need to make a check.

Right, I think if I was running 5e I might even just say to the fighter player "OK, you didn't bring a healer's kit, but if you pay some small cost (a libation, bleeding out an HD, something) you can basically have the benefit of one." That seems like an answer that would be pretty OK.

Honestly though, I feel like these simple "resource balance" answers, while they honor the concept of players needing to make resource decisions and build choices, don't extract maximum 'coolness' from the situation. I think this is a rather large lost opportunity and what separates ordinary play from really extraordinary play.

In other words, the above solution will work, and play will continue, and it will be little noted nor long remembered. OTOH if Death answers and bargains with the fighter and the consequences of the bargain shape his fate for the rest of the campaign to some degree, that feels like its falling more into the range of "wow, remember that time..." I mean, I've played a LOT of D&D, and I can tell you, there are only probably a few % of those games that I distinctly remember were super amazing.