Close Wounds -- Spell Compendium

[LaughingRogue]

There seems to be an issue in my group as to how exactly this spell works and how it does not work.

example 1.

An ally is hit and goes to -14, close wounds is cast and heals for 6 hit points, is the ally dead or alive?

Example 2.

An ally is hit and goes to -20, close wounds is cast and heals for 8 hit points, is the ally dead or alive?,

This if for DM clarification purposes, hope the playground will help,

LaughingRogue

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Close Wounds heals for 1d4+5. If you cast it right when they get hit, then it prevents that much damage from the hit instead.

If someone would be reduced to -14 and you Close Wounds for 6, they're at -8 and were never below -8 and thus still alive.

If someone would be reduced to -20 and you Close Wounds for 8, they're at -12 and were never below -12, but being below -10 they're still dead.

[Grendus]

Close Wounds heals for 1d4+5. If you cast it right when they get hit, then it prevents that much damage from the hit instead.

If someone would be reduced to -14 and you Close Wounds for 6, they're at -8 and were never below -8 and thus still alive.

If someone would be reduced to -20 and you Close Wounds for 8, they're at -12 and were never below -12, but being below -10 they're still dead.

Unless they use incarnum, in which case there's a soulmeld that could keep them alive iirc.

[Lans]

Their is an interpretation that if it is cast in response to damage that the damage is prevented in its totality

[maximus25]

Except you can't ever go below -10. That's the lowest you go, and you're dead.

[candycorn]

Except you can't ever go below -10. That's the lowest you go, and you're dead.

Incorrect.

Relevant rule (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/injuryandDeath.htm).


Effects of Hit Point Damage

Damage doesn’t slow you down until your current hit points reach 0 or lower. At 0 hit points, you’re disabled.

At from -1 to -9 hit points, you’re dying.

At -10 or lower, you’re dead.
Emphasis mine. Nothing prevents damage from bringing you below -10.

[ranagrande]

Except you can't ever go below -10. That's the lowest you go, and you're dead.
There are ways around that too though, like the Delay Death spell also found in the SpC.

[KillianHawkeye]

Except you can't ever go below -10. That's the lowest you go, and you're dead.

That is incorrect.

When your character’s current hit points drop to -10 or lower, or if he takes massive damage (see above), he’s dead.(emphasis added)

EDIT: damn ninjas! :smalleek:

[noparlpf]

CLOSE WOUNDS
Conjuration (Healing)
Level: Cleric 2
Components: V
Casting Time: 1 immediate action
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target: One creature
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Will half (harmless); see text
Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless)
Your ally falls from a crushing blow, but you don’t have time to reach him. You quickly speak words of power, and the worst of his injuries glow golden and begin to heal.
This spell cures 1d4 points of damage +1 point per caster level (maximum +5).
If you cast this spell immediately after the subject takes damage, it effectively prevents the damage. It would keep alive someone who had just dropped to –10 hit points, for example, leaving the character at negative hit points but stable. Used against an undead creature, close wounds deals damage instead of curing the creature (which takes half damage if it makes a Will saving throw).

The way I read it, it means that it effectively prevents the amount of damage that it cures because an immediate action is essentially no time. It doesn't prevent all of said damage.
The way one or two of the DMs here read it, if the character has just been reduced to -1 or lower and it's cast, it heals them as if they had 0 hp when it was cast.
For me, when I cast it it heals upwards of 20 damage anyway. The Healer I was playing the other day healed 24 damage with Close Wounds.

[Yvanehtnioj]

My cleric has the Feat, Augment Healing. This gives me a bonus to my spells that are Conj Healing, of an amount equal to 2x the level of the spell.

So when i have used Close Wounds on a comrade, I heal for 1d4 +5 (due to the max) + an additional 4 (2x the spell level of 2).

This means I heal for 1d4 +9, as an immediate action.



Which helped a lot when one of the party members would have at -14, without it.


=)

[Jack_Simth]

There's two readings on the spell in question, one significantly more powerful than the other.

There seems to be an issue in my group as to how exactly this spell works and how it does not work.

example 1.

An ally is hit and goes to -14, close wounds is cast and heals for 6 hit points, is the ally dead or alive?

Explicitly yes, no question "If you cast this spell immediately after the subject takes damage, it effectively prevents the damage. It would keep alive someone who had just dropped to -10 hit points, for example." (Spell Compendium, page 48).


Example 2.

An ally is hit and goes to -20, close wounds is cast and heals for 8 hit points, is the ally dead or alive?,

This if for DM clarification purposes, hope the playground will help,

LaughingRogue
This is the one where there's a question. See, the same quote from before ("If you cast this spell immediately after the subject takes damage, it effectively prevents the damage. It would keep alive someone who had just dropped to -10 hit points, for example." from Spell Compendium, page 48) can be read two ways. One is that "the damage" specified in that quote refers to the initial section "This spell cures 1d4 points of damage +1 point per caster level (maximum +5)" (Spell Compendium, page 48). Grammatically, however, "the damage" refers to the most recent instance of "damage" in the preceding text - which would be the damage the subject is right now taking, not the amount healed. Which is, to say, all of it. The Ubercharger hits your friend who is currently at 1 HP for 10,000 points of damage, and "the damage" refers to what was just dealt (10,000 points - the hit itself), and it's all negated, leaving your friend at 1 HP. The collary to this reading, of course, being that if your -9 friend was hit for 1 HP of damage, then that maxed-out roll on Close Wounds still leaves your friend at -9 HP.

The technically-grammatically-correct reading is not a particularly balanced reading for most games, however, and so most DM's will say it just prevents the 1d4+4 that it would otherwise cure, so your case-2 friend is dead.

[Ormur]

That spell has seen some heavy use, both by PCs and NPCs, in an ongoing campaign and since it's an immediate action used it to cure the damage before or as it takes effect, possibly preventing death if the target isn't too far below -10 hp.

[Paul H]

Hi

I use Close Wounds a lot in 3.5 campaigns. Both for healing or attacking undead.

Curious how someone can get to cure 24 HP with it. I've got Augment Healing and cure D4+9.

Are they using Augment Healing as +2 HP/Caster level, not Spell level? (Seen this mistake before, when the feat first published).

Thanks
Paul H

[DarthCyberWolf]

Curious how someone can get to cure 24 HP with it. I've got Augment Healing and cure D4+9.

Are they using Augment Healing as +2 HP/Caster level, not Spell level? (Seen this mistake before, when the feat first published).

They were using the actual class Healer from Miniatures Handbook. They get a bonus to healing, don't remember how much though.

[Piggy Knowles]

Close Wounds is a very good spell - immediate action healing, doesn't require touch, etc. But people like to read the following line...


If you cast this spell immediately after the subject takes damage, it effectively prevents the damage.

..and claim that it means the damage is entirely prevented, in addition to it healing. This is a silly interpretation and I have never played with a DM who would rule this way, but there are a lot of silly people in the world. It remains a solid spell regardless, and one of the few healing spells that I feel is consistently worth preparing.

[Elitarismo]

There is a Bard song that provides bonuses to all Conjuration (Healing) spells equal to Perform ranks. With it you can get some decent results from Close Wounds.

[noparlpf]

Hi

I use Close Wounds a lot in 3.5 campaigns. Both for healing or attacking undead.

Curious how someone can get to cure 24 HP with it. I've got Augment Healing and cure D4+9.

Are they using Augment Healing as +2 HP/Caster level, not Spell level? (Seen this mistake before, when the feat first published).

Thanks
Paul H

Healer grants +Cha to healing spells. Augment Healing grants +2/spell level to healing spells. Magic of the Land grants a further +2/spell level.
So 1d4+5+7(Cha)+4(AH)+4(MotL) is 1d4+20.

[Jack_Simth]

Close Wounds is a very good spell - immediate action healing, doesn't require touch, etc. But people like to read the following line...



..and claim that it means the damage is entirely prevented, in addition to it healing. This is a silly interpretation and I have never played with a DM who would rule this way, but there are a lot of silly people in the world. It remains a solid spell regardless, and one of the few healing spells that I feel is consistently worth preparing.

It is technically grammatically correct to read it that way.

It's much higher power than most DM's want a 2nd level spell to be at their table, but it is a technically grammatically correct interpretation of the spell.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

With regards to how an actual DM will rule this spell, you have two possibilities:

A. Close Wounds only prevents as much damage as it would have healed.

B. Close Wounds prevents the entire hit and heals the indicated amount in addition to that, which is why opponents will always cast this right after a particular PC Leap Attacks... Seriously, you're better off with A.

[Lans]

You could use B for Healers and A for everybody else

[BlueInc]

Is there an equivalent spell in Pathfinder? If not, this is a nifty little spell and I'll suggest it to a Cleric of mine.

[Jack_Simth]

You could use B for Healers and A for everybody else
That STILL wouldn't really make healers particularly playable... although it would make them popular... for everyone else.

[Lans]

That STILL wouldn't really make healers particularly playable... although it would make them popular... for everyone else.

It would give them usefull combat healing from level 3 on. Pretty playable by my count

[Paul H]

Hi

Don't thing there is a true equivalent in PF, but there is Channel Energy which heals in 30' radius, Stabilise which is an Orison (unlimited uses) that auto stabilises a target within short range. (Stabilise, not heal). There's also a Domain ability that grants D4+ (1/2CL) healing as touch attack if target is at negative HP.

All are std actions, unlike close wounds spell.

Thanks
Paul H

[Tyndmyr]

Healer grants +Cha to healing spells. Augment Healing grants +2/spell level to healing spells. Magic of the Land grants a further +2/spell level.
So 1d4+5+7(Cha)+4(AH)+4(MotL) is 1d4+20.

This is one of the ways I feel a Healer is undervalued. Yes, they'll never replace the cleric in general...but if you really want to make a dedicated combat healer...they're pretty fantastic with a bit of optimization.

[Alaris]

Okay, I believe the following about Close Wounds.

It is cast as an Immediate Action, and therefore can be used during another's turn, even in response to an action.

I believe it essentially PREVENTS the damage from being dealt, and therefore, if it keeps them above -10, then they were never below -10 as far as the game is concerned, and are still alive.

You're welcome.

[Elitarismo]

This is one of the ways I feel a Healer is undervalued. Yes, they'll never replace the cleric in general...but if you really want to make a dedicated combat healer...they're pretty fantastic with a bit of optimization.

The problems with that being that taking HP damage is one of the least threatening things that can happen to you, and simply being killed before you can be healed being a real possibility.

That, and a Cleric is better at healing than a Healer.

[Kansaschaser]

The problem I have with this spell is when it comes to poisons.

Since Close Wounds states that they never took the damage to begin with, if a PC was hit by a poison tipped dart and the dart only did 5 points of damage, then a Close Wounds that prevented the 5 points of damage would also prevent the poison effects. At least, that's how my players keep interpriting the spell.

[candycorn]

The problem I have with this spell is when it comes to poisons.

Since Close Wounds states that they never took the damage to begin with, if a PC was hit by a poison tipped dart and the dart only did 5 points of damage, then a Close Wounds that prevented the 5 points of damage would also prevent the poison effects. At least, that's how my players keep interpriting the spell.

And that is correct.

And yet another reason why poison isn't that great.

[Starbuck_II]

The problem I have with this spell is when it comes to poisons.

Since Close Wounds states that they never took the damage to begin with, if a PC was hit by a poison tipped dart and the dart only did 5 points of damage, then a Close Wounds that prevented the 5 points of damage would also prevent the poison effects. At least, that's how my players keep interpriting the spell.

Only if it was injury poison. Contact poison still hurts you even if you deny it from damaging (contact poison can be smeared on weapons too).