[3.5] Making In-Combat Healing Worth It

[Skorj]

As a bit of a grognard, I like the flavor of clerics healing in combat in D&D. The problem of course in 3.5 is that it's almost never the most useful thing the cleric could be doing on any given round. From a crunch perspective, it seems to me that in a moderate-to-well optimized party, a healing spell is only worth casting in combat if it will take the target from nearly-dead to nearly-healed. As a baseline, the Heal spell seems worthwhile for the first few levels after you get it, though that's partially because of all the other things it cures.

So, crunch-wise, I'm thinking that if a healing spell heals around 80% of the target's HP, that's enough to make healing in combat a valid thing for a cleric to be doing, and that you'd want your best-level healing spell to do that for a high-CON fighter/barb, and your next-best healing spell to do likewise for a moderate-CON d8 HP class.

Of course, this would require significantly better Cure Wounds spells. I would do:
Cure Minor: d8 + WIS bonus
Cure Light: 2d8 + 1/CL (max 10 at CL10) + WIS bonus
Cure Mod: 3d8 + 2/CL (max 30 at CL15) + WIS Bonus
Cure Ser: 4d8 + 3/CL (max 60 at CL20) + WIS bonus
Cure Crit: 5d8 + 5/CL (uncapped) + WIS Bonus
Heal: 10/CL (uncapped) + other stuff Heal curesOf course, substitute casting stat bonus as appropriate, but the idea there is to improve the minumum healed by the lower-level spells, and a stat bonus scales in a nice way.

The specific crunch probably isn't that important, but what does the Playground think of the basic idea of significantly improving Cure Wounds spells? Obviously that would mess with the CR balance a bit, but it's not like that was finely tuned to begin with.

[Hyfigh]

Doesn't the Radiant Servent of Palor pretty significantly increase heals? If I recall they maximize and empower all heals they cast from a domain slot or something. Isn't that enough?:smallconfused:

[Doug Lampert]

As a bit of a grognard, I like the flavor of clerics healing in combat in D&D. The problem of course in 3.5 is that it's almost never the most useful thing the cleric could be doing on any given round.

And it still won't be, no matter how much you improve the cures.

Saving a character from near sure death is the ONLY healing thing that's worth wasting a standard action by a tier one character in combat on.

Since most rounds no one is facing near sure death due to HP loss...

The increase in Caster Level limits is only of use for out of combat healing. In combat healing will ALWAYS be a near top level slot (unless a low level slot is overkill), because the important cost is the action in combat, not the slot, so having decided it's worth an action you'll use a high level spell to make the otherwise wasted action count for as much as possible.

Make cure spells a swift action, and don't otherwise upgrade them at all. And the clerics will heal in combat, they'll even use low level slots to do it since this doesn't waste an action.

[Hyfigh]

And it still won't be, no matter how much you improve the cures.

Saving a character from near sure death is the ONLY healing thing that's worth wasting a standard action by a tier one character in combat on.

Since most rounds no one is facing near sure death due to HP loss...

The increase in Caster Level limits is only of use for out of combat healing. In combat healing will ALWAYS be a near top level slot (unless a low level slot is overkill), because the important cost is the action in combat, not the slot, so having decided it's worth an action you'll use a high level spell to make the otherwise wasted action count for as much as possible.

Make cure spells a swift action, and don't otherwise upgrade them at all. And the clerics will heal in combat, they'll even use low level slots to do it since this doesn't waste an action.

Yea, mine and then what he said... :smallbiggrin:

[Lateral]

Well, first off, if each healing spell heals ≥80% HP, clerics will still only prepare a few, for use just in case, and rely on other more cost-effective methods of noncombat healing. That's not what you wanted to change, though, so that's OK.

It does make healing in combat reasonably more viable- mainly because the cleric would use one standard action to heal his ally, then get back to Godzilla'ing. Thing is, D&D is still very offense-focused- it's almost always better to prevent damage than cure it. Also, these don't help much against higher-level enemies with BC abilities and certain kinds of debuffs (Heal can take care of some debuffs, but it's kind of not worth it.)

All in all, it's a decent healing bump- as long as you don't expect clerics to do it as a primary role. It makes in-combat healing an excellent minor role, tho, until your enemies start to have SLA's and debuff/BC abilities. What if, in addition to healing, the Cure X Wounds spells gave the target a free saving throw of some sort, or you made a CL check to negate the debilitating effect on that ally, and the Heal spell cured a wider array of conditions (including BC effects)?

Edit:


Make cure spells a swift action... the clerics will heal in combat, they'll even use low level slots to do it since this doesn't waste an action.
That would help too.

[Koury]

Make cure spells a swift action, and don't otherwise upgrade them at all. And the clerics will heal in combat, they'll even use low level slots to do it since this doesn't waste an action.

Huh. I actually like this idea. :smallsmile:

[Skorj]

Make cure spells a swift action, and don't otherwise upgrade them at all. And the clerics will heal in combat, they'll even use low level slots to do it since this doesn't waste an action.

Ahh, very nice! :smallbiggrin:

[Forged Fury]

Make cure spells a swift action, and don't otherwise upgrade them at all. And the clerics will heal in combat, they'll even use low level slots to do it since this doesn't waste an action.
Undead quake in even more fear. :)

[Jack Zander]

You can always cast shield other on your entire party at the beginning of the day. Then you can use your big cures on yourself once you take enough damage, and effectively prevent near 50% of all damage to your party. Everyone else can focus on offense while you just buff and heal from afar.

[Lateral]

...And free Quicken Spell on each cure means Cleric-Zilla'ing it up while you're at it.

@V: ...I can't tell if that was sarcasm or not. It seems reasonable to me, seeing as how healing still isn't a very effective option, but YMMV.

[Koury]

...And free Quicken Spell on each cure means Cleric-Zilla'ing it up while you're at it.

You want to spend all your swifts on Cure spells? Sweet, thanks for keeping your power level reasonable.

[Zaq]

I agree that making the Cure line a swift action will go a long way. You might also want to make it easier to use the spells at range.

[Fizban]

Instead of a swift action, why not make it a move action? That's enough to attack or cast another spell in the same round, or double heal if you really need to (or triple if you get an extra move action from somewhere), but it's not "free" like a swift action.

Regarding the undead, make it swift/move/whatever only on willing targets.

[stainboy]

If the spells stay Touch, you could easily rule that casting the spell is a swift action, but making the touch attack on an undead is still Standard because it's an attack.

Giving healing longer range might have unintended consequences. Once healing becomes useful, your tactical options to stop healers matter. Checking the cleric's movement is the only good option for a non-caster, and that option only works if healing is touch-only.

[Grommen]

You can always cast shield other on your entire party at the beginning of the day. Then you can use your big cures on yourself once you take enough damage, and effectively prevent near 50% of all damage to your party. Everyone else can focus on offense while you just buff and heal from afar.

Good idea. But can you imagine if the party got hit by a fireball or some other kind of mass damage spell, and they managed to fail a few saves. Even if the cleric only took half of everyones damage. O the misery....

Not to mention I still think you have to make concentration checks on the damage you take every round. That could add up.

[Jack Zander]

Good idea. But can you imagine if the party got hit by a fireball or some other kind of mass damage spell, and they managed to fail a few saves. Even if the cleric only took half of everyones damage. O the misery....

Every strategy has its weakness. Truly, this works better in smaller parties where the cleric is a dwarf with 18 Con and they take ample precautions to those sorts of things happening.

[HunterOfJello]

An easier fix could be weapons that can activate to cast held Conjuration(Healing) spells at a limited range similar to a Crusader's healing maneuvers. A Spell Storing weapon is a +1 enchant so make it a +2 or +3. It would be costly, and really only work once per fight, but it would be worth it.

The best in-combat healing is done by the Crusader, because he is still doing damage while healing (and can easily not have better maneuvers available at the time due to their funky recovery mechanic).

[Grommen]

Every strategy has its weakness. Truly, this works better in smaller parties where the cleric is a dwarf with 18 Con and they take ample precautions to those sorts of things happening.

I'm sure. Just struck me funny. I envisioned the party chuckling after taking a fireball and turning around to find their cleric a smoking husk in the corner, cause he absorbed everyone's damage.

I agree that their are far better things for a cleric to do than heal someone in the middle of a fight. Problem is that when the meat bags are about to die. You either heal them, or take their place getting hit. Sometimes you end up doing both.

Their are quite a few meta-magic feats that help out though. Their is one for casting at range, I can't think of the name at the moment. It's in the complete divine.

Also....Augment Healing, Empower, Maximize Spell, do pretty good.

The healing domain in Pathfinder gives casters Empower Spell for free on healing spells. That works out quite nice.

And it would not break my heart to uncap the Heal spell. Or just go back to the old days where it healed all but 1d4 hit points.

[gbprime]

Good idea. But can you imagine if the party got hit by a fireball or some other kind of mass damage spell, and they managed to fail a few saves. Even if the cleric only took half of everyones damage. O the misery....

This is what spells like Stalwart Pact are for. Cleric casts Shield Other to act as the HP sponge for several people, and if the party gets worked over, the Pact kicks in for emergency HP, then the cleric pops a Heal on himself.

I don't think making the healing spells more powerful or swift are a good idea though. Think about it... every other concept that you want to excel at takes some feats or PrC to make it efficient. Why should uber-healer be any different? Clerics can lay in some healing feats and class abilities and still have enough left over to hang with a T3 party in a role other than healing.

Primary cleric in our Tier 3 group is a healbot/buffer. She doles out the Righteous Wrath of the Faithful and Mass Bear's Endurance at the beginning of the fight and has shield other up for the two main melee damagers. She's got Augmented healing and a healing pool ready to fire should someone (like herself) get really worked over, and otherwise enjoys offensive spells.

(As the second cleric in that party, I cover Mass Resist Energy, Energy Aegis, and Swift Etherealness to keep the party from getting roasted, plus I cover the arcane caster with shield other. Interesting to note that I've never once cast a healing spell in combat in 12 levels, and spend most of my time either lobbing water elementals at people or using Telekinesis to tie them up (sometimes literally).

[Grommen]

An easier fix could be weapons that can activate to cast held Conjuration(Healing) spells at a limited range similar to a Crusader's healing maneuvers. A Spell Storing weapon is a +1 enchant so make it a +2 or +3. It would be costly, and really only work once per fight, but it would be worth it.

The best in-combat healing is done by the Crusader, because he is still doing damage while healing (and can easily not have better maneuvers available at the time due to their funky recovery mechanic).

We did that back in 1st and 2nd edition. Had daggers, hammers, etc that cast healing magic. Was pretty amusing to toss your "Dwarven Thrower" across the battle field smacking your friend in the back of the head nearly knocking him out, only to heal him for 50+ health.

[n00b killa]

Make cure spells a swift action, and don't otherwise upgrade them at all. And the clerics will heal in combat, they'll even use low level slots to do it since this doesn't waste an action.


That is EXCACTLY what they did on 4e (and I think it is awesome).

That being said, I like the fix on the OP. I might make use of it in the future.

[Kyouhen]

An easier fix could be weapons that can activate to cast held Conjuration(Healing) spells at a limited range similar to a Crusader's healing maneuvers. A Spell Storing weapon is a +1 enchant so make it a +2 or +3. It would be costly, and really only work once per fight, but it would be worth it.

The best in-combat healing is done by the Crusader, because he is still doing damage while healing (and can easily not have better maneuvers available at the time due to their funky recovery mechanic).

Well, there is that one amulet (I think it was the Amulet of Emergency Healing) that can heal as an immediate action with a 30' range. Problem is it only works on people who are at negative hp, and has limited uses per day. That and you're burning a neck slot to use it.

EDIT:
Also, spell-storing weapons? :smalltongue:

[boomwolf]

Saving a character from near sure death is the ONLY healing thing that's worth wasting a standard action by a tier one character in combat on.


And we ALL know that if you don't play tier 1 you suck at DnD and need to stop playing. [/sarcasm]

[Lateral]

And we ALL know that if you don't play tier 1 you suck at DnD and need to stop playing. [/sarcasm]

...:smallconfused:

Nobody said anything about that. Thing is, pretty much the only people that could cast healing spells are clerics, druids, and healers. Clerics and Druids have much more effective options (e.g. own the guy doing the damage), and healers are boring and they suck.

[boomwolf]

Soo...paladins, rangers, and bards are officially pure-melee now? something changed?

[ericgrau]

The most common fear of PCs is not losing a fight, i.e. TPK, but losing a party member. In these cases healing is worth it. It reduces your chances of winning the fight, an expendable commodity for most PCs, in exchange for not losing a party member. Heck, if losing a PC to HP damage isn't the sole risk your party is facing 95% of the time (except against unusual encounters), then your DM is making the fights way too easy or way too hard. The only alternatives are splatbook spells for optimizers that save PCs from death in other ways, and even then you better get close fast to make up for not dealing with the problem sooner.

Making healing stronger than it is so that it is useful to do nothing but heal, rather than only in emergencies, makes it BORING. It's already unpopular for those who try it in D&D, suboptimal as it may be. You know how hard it is to find a party priest in WoW? Not saying tweaking out a healing priest can't be fun for a handful, but for your average Joe it's a slow and dull way to fight.

[Sucrose]

Soo...paladins, rangers, and bards are officially pure-melee now? something changed?

Their healing is fairly insignificant compared to full divine casters, and they're generally not expected to heal in the middle of combat unless, again, someone will die otherwise. They're all better off killing the source of the hurt, rather than dealing with the symptoms.

Edit: The original statement was that Tier 1's have better things to do than heal damage, typically. Thing is, that's true for Tier 2-5, as well.

[Kyouhen]

Actually, spell-storing and quick draw could be handy for ranged healing anyway. Keep a backup main weapon and a few spell-storing daggers full of healing, and when someone really needs a heal you can drop your main weapon then do a full attack where the first attack is tossing a healing dagger, and everything else is you drawing your backup and beating the enemy with it.

[Volthawk]

Soo...paladins, rangers, and bards are officially pure-melee now? something changed?

Well, Paladins and Rangers have delayed spell access and half CL, so Paladins can only start healing at level 4 with CLW, healing 1d8+2, once or twice a day, although they do have Lay on Hands which helps a little. Rangers have to wait until level 8 before getting any healing spells. So yeah, Paladins and Rangers aren't that good healers.

As for Bards, Bardic Music eats up standard actions, and they get limited spells known anyway, so perhaps they would want to use them on spells other than healing?

[Endarire]

As I have learned from playing Clerics, playing with various "healer" classes, and DMed for them:

If you want to effectively heal in combat, play a Crusader! Really. They smash faces, tear people apart, and make them apologize for things they didn't do while healing people with their maneuvers and stances.

I played with a mixed optimization group at level 8. I had Crusader's Strike, Revitalizing Strike, and Martial Spirit. My group entered a "challenging" fight unbuffed and me at half HP. I alone kept the party conscious. I -could- have tried more damaging maneuvers, but healing people kept them up and made them feel special.

As a Cleric, the only time I healed in combat was when I expected someone to die, or I had nothing better to do with my turn. My favorite combat healing spell is close wounds (Spell Compendium 48) which is a small amount of IMMEDIATE ACTION ranged healing.

There's a saying: "An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of remedy." That is especially true in D&D. If you want your party to take fewer hits, provide foes with more targets. Treantmonk reminds us that summoning works well (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19872758/Mastering_the_Malconvoker).

D&D 3.5 combat isn't much a tug-of-war. It's a DPS race and BC race.

[The Glyphstone]

Well, Paladins and Rangers have delayed spell access and half CL, so Paladins can only start healing at level 4 with CLW, healing 1d8+2, once or twice a day, although they do have Lay on Hands which helps a little. Rangers have to wait until level 8 before getting any healing spells. So yeah, Paladins and Rangers aren't that good healers.

As for Bards, Bardic Music eats up standard actions, and they get limited spells known anyway, so perhaps they would want to use them on spells other than healing?

Standard actions, plural? Unless you're a really high-level bard, it'd be a single standard action per fight to begin Inspire Courage, and you can maintain it indefinitely without actions. Lyrical Spellcasting lets you cast without dropping the song, too.

Can Bards benefit from Knowstones?

[Endarire]

All spontaneous arcane classes can benefit from Knowstones, but a Bard must have made a Knowstone with a Bard spell.