Wounding and DR

[The Souljourner]

The thing is, a Heal check stops the wounding effect also, so it's not just magical healing, it's pretty much any healing. I think it's perfectly logical that someone who can come back from being mostly dead in a few minutes, can heal enough in one round so he stops losing blood from a nasty cut.

Oh, and about DR vs. wounding - if you make it through someone's DR, they have an open wound... it's not like you're getting hit again each time, there's just this open wound that's bleeding everywhere... DR doesn't help against that. So I would say the wounding effect ignores DR (but only comes into play if you actually have done damage with the wounding weapon to the creature).

Interesting thread... I'm starting an epic level campaign playing a dwarven defender, and it looks like I should probably grab fast healing ASAP.

-The Souljourner

 

[kreynolds]

Actually, I believe that Fast Healing is typically an Exceptional ability.

Usually it is, yes. Same goes for regeneration.

That would indicate that it is non-magical healing.

You're right. It is non-magical, but that's neither here nor there. Regeneration and Fast Healing is always treated as a cure spell for things like this.

Is it not this simple?

Nope. It's simpler.

 

[mkletch]

The thing is, a Heal check stops the wounding effect also, so it's not just magical healing, it's pretty much any healing.

No, wounding specifically mentions:

From the SRD, Magic Items (Weapons)
A weapon of wounding deals damage to a creature such that a wound it inflicts bleeds for 1 point of damage per round thereafter in addition to the normal damage the weapon deals. Multiple wounds from the weapon result in cumulative bleeding loss (two wounds for 2 points of damage per round, and so on). The bleeding can only be stopped by a successful Heal check (DC 15) or the application of any cure spell or other healing spell (heal, healing circle, and so on).

The cure spells are all of the Conjuration (Healing) type, so the mention of cure spells in redundant. It does not say that "automatic healing by an Exceptional ability" will remove the wounding damage. So, Fast Healing and Regeneration do not 'fix' wounding unless they come from a Conjuration (Healing) type spell or spell-like ability. Not even Supernatural Fast Healing or Regeneration will 'fix' wounding.

-Fletch!

 

[mkletch]

...but that's neither here nor there. Regeneration and Fast Healing is always treated as a cure spell for things like this.

Says who/where? "...treated as a cure spell for things like this." seem like a pretty weak argument. Force of personality does not change the rules. FH/Regen may seem to act like a cure spell, but the actual terminology in the game rules negates that opinion. Unless there is a specific errata or DnDFAQ item that says this, it is not the case (unless, of course, you rule-0 it). Wounding will counter-act fast healing or regeneration.

-Fletch!

 

[kreynolds]

So, Fast Healing and Regeneration do not 'fix' wounding unless they come from a Conjuration (Healing) type spell or spell-like ability. Not even Supernatural Fast Healing or Regeneration will 'fix' wounding.

Let me get this straight...a Heal check by a half-competent medic will stop my bleeding, but my own Fast Healing, which bumps up my CR all on its own, and heals me perfectly, does not?

I gotta disagree with ya' there. Something doesn't feel right about that.

 

[mkletch]

Let me get this straight...a Heal check by a half-competent medic will stop my bleeding, but my own Fast Healing, which bumps up my CR all on its own, and heals me perfectly, does not?

I gotta disagree with ya' there. Something doesn't feel right about that.

This is not psychoanalysis, and "feel" has nothing to do with it. The rules are there in black and white.

From the "feel" point of view, I actually agree with you. But I am, and play with some fairly competent rules lawyers. We don't actually let it get in the way of actual gaming sessions, but we hack over this kind of thing all the time between sessions. This is a classic case of "The rules say X. You are talking about Y. Y may be like X, but Y is not actually the same thing as X. Therefore it does not work. Unless there are errata..."

A heal check and most curing/healing spells are specific actions taken to stop the bleeding. Automatic healing is not covered. The 'regenerate X wounds' spells came after, and were not figured into the wording of this weapon. But, since they are Conjuration (Healing) spells, they are a loophole/exception.

 

[kreynolds]

Says who/where?

Here's an old question I sent off to the Sage a long while back. While the question itself doesn't completely pertain to this situation, the response seems to.

Wound (Ex): The damage a clay golem deals doesn't heal naturally. Only a heal spell or a Healing spell of 6th level or higher can heal it.

Can regeneration or fast healing heal this damage? In the case of a creature with regeneration, is the damage a clay golem deals subdual or lethal?

Consider fast healing or regeneration a healing spell of the appropriate level. A clay golem deals subdual damage to a regenerating creature.

I sent off another question, but this time I specifically mentioned Wounding weapons.

 

[kreynolds]

This is not psychoanalysis, and "feel" has nothing to do with it.

"Feel" has just as much to do with it as the rules. Where do you think "intent" comes from? Besides, the rules are not always black and white. For an example, see my previous post.

 

[mkletch]

Consider fast healing or regeneration a healing spell of the appropriate level. A clay golem deals subdual damage to a regenerating creature.

Note that he did not actually answer your question. Of what level? Any level? Level = HD of regenerating creature? I hate it when people answer the question I did NOT ask. Why is this clarification not in the FAQ?

AFAIK, the subdual damage inflicted by the golem will not heal. Thus, the golem can send the troll into a coma, but cannot actually kill it. I think that is consistent.

-Fletch!

 

[mkletch]

"Feel" has just as much to do with it as the rules. Where do you think "intent" comes from? Besides, the rules are not always black and white. For an example, see my previous post.

'Feel' has no place in a rules system. How can players make decisions with a reasonable sense of security if the DM can just 'feel' a different way today. The rules are there to govern both sides, to make a consistent game experience for all. So, if you go to a con, you won't get different rulings from different DMs.

If, where the rubber meets the road, you have to make a snap judgement to keep the game going, 'feel' plays into that situation. But that is not where we are now. Rules imply logic, structure.

-Fletch!