Healing and Positive Energy

[Deepbluediver]

So this started out with a question in the 3.5 Rules thread, where I asked about sources of healing in D&D that WEREN'T from positive energy (or negative if you're undead). This was prompted by games like WoW where the Druid class heals with "nature-y" energy and the shaman's healing spells are water-themed. Water as the healing element is also a common trope in fantasy literature.

Responses for non-positive energy sources included the Vigor line of spells (from Complete Divine), the monk's Wholeness of Body feature, Empathic Transfer (psionic) and the Spellfire Wielder feat (from Faerun, I think).

I'm still unclear about Vigor- when I asked for clarification I got two very different replies.

I am positive it isn't positive. :smalltongue: It grants Fast Healing, and fast healing works the same way as natural healing. Undead can have fast healing (although not regeneration, because that requires a Con score), it's just this spell isn't a way to grant it to them. Probably due to it being conjuration (healing).

Vigor is positive energy at my table, since it's a Conjuration (Healing) spell.


So basically this thread has 4 questions I'd like to answer, and any other discussion arising from these topics is welcome.

1) Are there any non-positive based sources we've missed?
2) Do you think the Vigor line of spells are positive-energy based? Why or why not?
3) If you saw the widespread use of non-positive energy healing in a game, how would you react? Freak out? Not care? Something else?
4) What kind of unforseen implications might this sort of change to the mechanics have?

[OldTrees1]

1) Almost all healing other than the Cure Wounds and Inflict Wounds lines is not specified (although there are several exceptions that are specified).
2) I think Vigor heals the target so what it uses is target specific (so it would be positive energy for an Orc). This would be a lot clearer if it was a Necromancy(Healing) effect like Cure Wounds used to be.
3) I would freak out if there was widespread mismatched healing. But a world with lots of ice golems having widespread cold healing would not be too weird.
4) It would mean that healers can spontaneously heal different targets using the same spell.

[Rubik]

The crusader class from ToB has a few stances and strikes that heal, and they're mostly (Ex) and do not involve positive energy.

Negative energy heals undead and anyone with the Tomb Tainted Soul feat.

The Repair Damage line of spells (and a psionic power) heal constructs without positive energy.

Resting heals you.

Polymorph and Metamorphosis both heal you as if you've rested (which is one of the many reasons why the psychoactive skin of proteus is so awesome).

I believe certain monsters heal when exposed to one energy type or another. Heal when hit by electricity? Heal when hit by fire? Heal when hit by cold? IIRC, there's at least one monster that does each of those.

There's also the various ways of vampiric healing. The weapon special quality, Hostile Empathic Transfer, and various monster abilities that pull hp from an enemy and into oneself.

[Sacrieur]

1) Are there any non-positive based sources we've missed?

In PF, there's a spell called Infernal Healing (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/i/infernal-healing). I don't know if it exists in 3.5.



2) Do you think Vigor is a positive-energy spell? Why or why not?

No, because it doesn't say it is. It says "life energy".



3) If you saw the widespread use of non-positive energy healing in a game, how would you react? Freak out? Not care? Something else?

Why would it matter?



4) What kind of unforseen implications might this sort of change to the mechanics have?

None?

[Rubik]

Neither fast healing nor regeneration involve positive energy unless they're the effects of a spell (but only sometimes), the Plane of Positive Energy, or a positive energy creature.

[Sacrieur]

Neither fast healing nor regeneration involve positive energy unless they're the effects of a spell (but only sometimes), the Plane of Positive Energy, or a positive energy creature.

Yeah, a Tarrasque has regeneration that's Ex.

Who had the idea that all healing spells come from positive energy? How do you even come to that conclusion?

[Rubik]

Yeah, a Tarrasque has regeneration that's Ex.

Who had the idea that all healing spells come from positive energy? How do you even come to that conclusion?And there are undead with fast healing. Of course, undead on the Positive Energy Plane also receive fast healing from the positive energy, and they are, ironically enough, immune to the explosive effects of too many temp hp. They also receive fast healing on the Negative Energy Plane.

[Deepbluediver]

2) I think Vigor heals the target so what it uses is target specific (so it would be positive energy for an Orc). This would be a lot clearer if it was a Necromancy(Healing) effect like Cure Wounds used to be.
I am perfectly willing to rework the spells-schools to put ALL the positive/negative energy into Necromancy. But before I do that, I want to to know what, exactly, is going to end up there. So (just theoretically speaking here) should Vigor be Necromancy, or would you prefer to see it shifted to something like Transmutation instead?


4) It would mean that healers can spontaneously heal different targets using the same spell.
I think that really only makes a big different if the PC's party has multiple different creature types, but I'll keep it in mind.


Resting heals you.
Fair point- I guess I should have specified any sort of accelerated healing from sources like spells, special abilities, feats, etc.


I believe certain monsters heal when exposed to one energy type or another. Heal when hit by electricity? Heal when hit by fire? Heal when hit by cold? IIRC, there's at least one monster that does each of those.
I wouldn't have any problem with making that a base characteristic of all Elementals. It makes more sense to me than having constructs heal from different types of damaging spells.


There's also the various ways of vampiric healing. The weapon special quality, Hostile Empathic Transfer, and various monster abilities that pull hp from an enemy and into oneself.
Good point, though that feels more like HP-transfer than actual healing.


Why would it matter?
Getting people to adopt a change is easier if their first reaction is more like "huh, neat" instead of "ZOMG I CAN'T DEAL WITH THIS!"


None?
The answer is never "none". :smallbiggrin:
D&D is a tangled mess, and given the infinite creativity of players, the most innocuous of changes can have far-reaching effects that will inevitably come back to bite you in the ass at the least-convenient moment.

[OldTrees1]

Yeah, a Tarrasque has regeneration that's Ex.

Who had the idea that all healing spells come from positive energy? How do you even come to that conclusion?

The path to the conclusion (which is conclusion about rules/physics and not about RAW) would be roughly as follows:
Undead are powered by negative energy
->Thus life is powered by positive energy
->Thus healing comes from positive energy (except for undead which are the exception)

Of course, I think the existence of undead supports the idea for other exceptions.

[Sacrieur]

Getting people to adopt a change is easier if their first reaction is more like "huh, neat" instead of "ZOMG I CAN'T DEAL WITH THIS!"

You're not making any change, though.



The answer is never "none". :smallbiggrin:
D&D is a tangled mess, and given the infinite creativity of players, the most innocuous of changes can have far-reaching effects that will inevitably come back to bite you in the ass at the least-convenient moment.

You're not making any changes, though.

---

The healing spells were never positive energy to begin with, so you'd just be playing by the rules.



The path to the conclusion (which is conclusion about rules/physics and not about RAW) would be roughly as follows:
Undead are powered by negative energy

My book says "spiritual or supernatural forces".



->Thus life is powered by positive energy

Not necessarily, though. The logic here isn't very stable.



->Thus healing comes from positive energy (except for undead which are the exception)

Still, not necessarily.

---

I'm sorry this just seems terribly silly to me.

[Deepbluediver]

Who had the idea that all healing spells come from positive energy? How do you even come to that conclusion?
I asked because the only healing SPELLS my group ever used were the Cure Wounds ones. Vigor and it's ilk never made an appearance in our games. And I was mostly thinking about it's effect on humanoid-type PCs. Unless someone is playing an Iron Golem in your games, Fireball isn't normally considered a healing-spell.

A lot of the things people have mentioned are interesting effects, but they aren't really spells. What prompted the original line of thought where spells with names like Healing Wave, Voodoo Restoration (colored green), and Regrowth (with a leaf motif).

[nyjastul69]

You're not making any change, though.





---

The healing spells were never positive energy to begin with, so you'd just be playing by the rules.

The cure line of spells use positive energy.

[Rubik]

I am perfectly willing to rework the spells-schools to put ALL the positive/negative energy into Necromancy. But before I do that, I want to to know what, exactly, is going to end up there. So (just theoretically speaking here) should Vigor be Necromancy, or would you prefer to see it shifted to something like Transmutation instead?But there are plenty of effects that have nothing to do with positive or negative energy, and changing them to necromancy makes no sense. (Psionic) Repair Damage, non-spell regeneration, Polymorph, Mending (for intelligent objects), Body Adjustment, and many others.

[Sacrieur]

I asked because the only healing SPELLS my group ever used were the Cure Wounds ones. Vigor and it's ilk never made an appearance in our games. And I was mostly thinking about it's effect on humanoid-type PCs. Unless someone is playing an Iron Golem in your games, Fireball isn't normally considered a healing-spell.

A lot of the things people have mentioned are interesting effects, but they aren't really spells. What prompted the original line of thought where spells with names like Healing Wave, Voodoo Restoration (colored green), and Regrowth (with a leaf motif).

Oh. Well you needn't be concerned about the game mechanics breaking.



The cure line of spells use positive energy.

Which makes them an exception?

The vast majority of healing abilities aren't.

[OldTrees1]

I am perfectly willing to rework the spells-schools to put ALL the positive/negative energy into Necromancy. But before I do that, I want to to know what, exactly, is going to end up there. So (just theoretically speaking here) should Vigor be Necromancy, or would you prefer to see it shifted to something like Transmutation instead?


I think that really only makes a big different if the PC's party has multiple different creature types, but I'll keep it in mind.

I wouldn't have any problem with making that a base characteristic of all Elementals. It makes more sense to me than having constructs heal from different types of damaging spells.

I see control of life energy as the realm of necromancy(the school of the door dividing life and death). So I would default to putting all healing effects (including Vigor) there unless they have a good thematic excuse. Transforming into a Troll would be Transmutation despite the indirect healing.

Yeah there is unlikely to be much change. That was the only thing I could think of and you noticed it is a rare case.

Elementals being healed by various other thematically appropriate energies makes sense. It even lets an Evoker play healer in the same manner a Necromancer can heal their ghoul pack.

[Rubik]

There should be an ACF that allows necromancer wizards to spontaneously cast positive energy healing spells a la clerics (but allowing for the Vigor line and a few others; Cure X Wounds is a terrible spell line).

[Deepbluediver]

You're not making any changes, though.
---
The healing spells were never positive energy to begin with, so you'd just be playing by the rules.
The Cure Wounds spells specifically call out that they are channeling positive energy. The Vigor spells don't, but they do say they need to target a living creature, so I wasn't certain if the omission was intentional or a typo, and if it had been officially clarified anywhere.

I didn't want to delve into proposed changes much because this isn't the Homebrew forum, but I also want to explore any potential problems or outcomes BEFORE I start rewriting large chunks of the most basic assumptions upon which the gameworld rests.
If the conclusion was "yeah everything you want already exists, you just hadn't heard about it" that would be great. From what I'm hearing though, that's not exactly the case.


Not necessarily, though. The logic here isn't very stable.
...
Still, not necessarily.
...
I'm sorry this just seems terribly silly to me.
The definition of "life" in D&D is at least a little flexible, and I'm perfectly fine with defining some life as positive energy-based and other life as based on other primal forces.

In the core rules negative energy heals Undead and positive energy heals almost everything that isn't undead or a construct. I'm perfectly fine with more varieties of healing, I just want to be sure I don't do it in a way that screws something else up, like removing any sense of danger whatsoever from combat.

[Rubik]

The Cure Wounds spells specifically call out that they are channeling positive energy. The Vigor spells don't, but they do say they need to target a living creature, so I wasn't certain if the omission was intentional, or a typo, and if it had been officially clarified anywhere.I would suggest that the Vigor line is more boosting one's metabolism if it was Transmutation. Even as Conjuration (Healing) [which makes no sense at all for healing spells], or Necromancy, flooding the body with positive energy to boost cellular metabolism could work. Undead and constructs tend not to have metabolisms, though.

[Sacrieur]

The Cure Wounds spells specifically call out that they are channeling positive energy. The Vigor spells don't, but they do say they need to target a living creature, so I wasn't certain if the omission was intentional, or a typo, and if it had been officially clarified anywhere.

Best to assume if something doesn't say something, it doesn't include it.



I didn't want to delve into proposed changes much because this isn't the Homebrew forum, but I also want to explore any potential problems or outcomes BEFORE I start rewriting large chunks of the most basic assumptions.
If the conclusion was "yeah everything you want already exists, you just hadn't heard about it" that would be great. From what I'm hearing though, that's not exactly the case.

So you want to change everything into positive energy?



The definition of "life" in D&D is at least a little flexible, and I'm perfectly fine with defining some life as positive energy-based and other life as based on other primal forces.

Just because positive energy heals you doesn't mean life energy is based on it.

[Deepbluediver]

But there are plenty of effects that have nothing to do with positive or negative energy, and changing them to necromancy makes no sense. (Psionic) Repair Damage, non-spell regeneration, Polymorph, Mending (for intelligent objects), Body Adjustment, and many others.
I never said I'd move all "healing" spells to Necromancy, I said I'd move the positive and negative energy spells. That requires accurately identifying what spells are using positive and negative energy though.

The other things you mention are arguably spells who's primary function is something else, and just happen to include a healing component under certain circumstances.


Which makes them an exception?

The vast majority of healing abilities aren't.
I'm perfectly happy to hear about any and all sources of HP restoration, but with regards to spells and other spell-like affects, the range seems much more limited. For the purpose of this discussion, I'm thinking of "healing" as something that generates HP where there was none before.


There should be an ACF that allows necromancer wizards to spontaneously cast positive energy healing spells a la clerics (but allowing for the Vigor line and a few others; Cure X Wounds is a terrible spell line).
I don't object to that in principle, but in terms of balance channeling large amounts of positive and negative energy is one of the few things a Wizard CAN'T do. I can't really see how giving them this ability would make them any more OP than they already are, but it's something to keep in mind.

The simplest thing I can think of to let Wizards act as healers would be to simply add a few additions to their spell-list. Maybe Give them the Cure and Inflict spells, but at a higher level than for Clerics.

[Rubik]

The simplest thing I can think of to let Wizards act as healers would be to simply add a few additions to their spell-list. Maybe Give them the Cure and Inflict spells, but at a higher level than for Clerics.Ugh. You could move the entire Cure and Inflict line down a level (or even two), and it still wouldn't be overpowered. Move all the Cure spells down a level, give clerics the ability to channel the Vigor line and several of the other healing spells (disease, poison, blindness/deafness, etc, and the Raise Dead and the Heal lines), and then give necromancers the ability to channel Cure and Inflict spells, regardless of alignment, and add the Heal and Harm spells to the necromancer's list (but not spontaneous channeling thereof). Also give Necromancers more undead-centric spells, especially for controlling the undead they've raised.

I honestly don't see any issues at all. It's not like Necromancy is anywhere near Transmutation or Conjuration, even with the addendums.

[Greenish]

For the purpose of this discussion, I'm thinking of "healing" as something that generates HP where there was none before.So things like Raise Dead? :smalltongue:

[Necroticplague]

Conjuration (Healing) doesn't intrinsically have anything to do with positive energy. Unless it specifically says it uses positive energy to do something, it doesn't. Thus, Vigor works perfectly normally on undead and constructs, people with tomb-tainted souls, and so on. Same with spells like

As for seeing it? Not sure I'd notice or give a crap. The point of a healing spell is that it puts your farther away from being dead. How it does so is something that frankly, i don't give two craps about. If it uses Fire to reinvigorate my tissues, or Negative to let some of cells operate when they would otherwise be dying (which sounds like why False Life is Necromancery, come to think of it), or Ooze to renew my blood, don't really care, long as it helps me pull my foot out the grave.

Eh.......none really. Only thing I can think of that might be effected in the slightest would be Warforged and similar constructs, who will now have a much easier time finding healing (but they could already repair themselves nonmagically, so it's a minor change at best).

[Deepbluediver]

I would suggest that the Vigor line is more boosting one's metabolism if it was Transmutation. Even as Conjuration (Healing) [which makes no sense at all for healing spells], or Necromancy, flooding the body with positive energy to boost cellular metabolism could work. Undead and constructs tend not to have metabolisms, though.
I think there are good arguments you could make for both ways of doing things.
Personally I like replacing the Cure Wounds spells on the druid's list with a more complete (i.e. homebrewed) line of Vigor spells or something like them, just to emphasize difference between the classes.

If you make Vigor a transmutation spell, then it's just up to the GM to decide what has a metabolism, and they can do it on a case-by-case basis. For example, a vampire is undead, but it needs to feed. And what about a fire Elemental? AFAIK D&D treats it just like a humanoid in terms of most positive/negative spell-effects, but there's good reasons for it to be different.


Best to assume if something doesn't say something, it doesn't include it.
I don't like to assume if I don't have to. As I pointed out in my original post, two people where making very different assumptions about the same spell.


So you want to change everything into positive energy?
No, not at all. On the contrary, I was thinking about designing spells that acted like Cure Wounds but without the positive-energy flavor.


Just because positive energy heals you doesn't mean life energy is based on it.
It was just a thought experiment- sort of like how IRL we know of life as carbon-based, but scientists have speculated about the existence of other sorts of creatures such as silicon-based lifeforms.


Ugh.
*snip*
I honestly don't see any issues at all. It's not like Necromancy is anywhere near Transmutation or Conjuration, even with the addendums.
Ok, good to know, though in terms of balance I actually would prefer to move in the OTHER direction- make all casters less powerful. If I decided that if healer-wizards and shapeshifting-clerics are a thing I want in my games, there will need to be trade-offs in some other fashion.


So things like Raise Dead? :smalltongue:
And there we go. Thank you very much for proving why I said earlier that "D&D is a tangled mess".
I'm trying to be open any any particular mechanic that comes up with relation to this topic intentionally because it can be so hard to define. No one's mentioned potions or the Heal skill, for example, even though I'd like to see both of those be more viable options compared to your box-of-bandaids cleric or druid.

[Svata]

So things like Raise Dead? :smalltongue:

At some point there was HP there. What you're looking for is Polymorph Any Object.

[Rubik]

Ok, good to know, though in terms of balance I actually would prefer to move in the OTHER direction- make all casters less powerful. If I decided that if healer-wizards and shapeshifting-clerics are a thing I want in my games, there will need to be trade-offs in some other fashion.Problem is, making healing better doesn't do much to empower casters -- in fact, it empowers non-casters, as it'll be easier for them to keep their hp topped up, which is generally their only cap on how much they can do for the day.

It hardly does anything to casters at all, especially since healing wands are a thing.

[Deepbluediver]

Conjuration (Healing) doesn't intrinsically have anything to do with positive energy. Unless it specifically says it uses positive energy to do something, it doesn't. Thus, Vigor works perfectly normally on undead and constructs, people with tomb-tainted souls, and so on.
The rules for Lesser Vigor say it has to target "one living creature", so while a humanoid with TTS might be valid, an undead wouldn't. Mass Lesser Vigor though just specifies creatures in an area, so I've seen the argument made that it's perfectly acceptable to cast it on undead, despite what logically just looks like a formatting issue.
Altering the spell's schools or defining if it uses positive energy or not would resolve that disagreement.


If it uses Fire to reinvigorate my tissues, or Negative to let some of cells operate when they would otherwise be dying (which sounds like why False Life is Necromancery, come to think of it), or Ooze to renew my blood, don't really care, long as it helps me pull my foot out the grave.
That sounds like the origin-story for roughly 1/3rd of superheroes/villians. :smallwink:

There's also a spell called "False Vigor", but apparently it's Illusion [shadow].


At some point there was HP there. What you're looking for is Polymorph Any Object.
It's people like you who make game-designers curl up with a bottle of whiskey and cry themselves to sleep at night. :smallbiggrin:


Problem is, making healing better doesn't do much to empower casters -- in fact, it empowers non-casters, as it'll be easier for them to keep their hp topped up, which is generally their only cap on how much they can do for the day.

It hardly does anything to casters at all, especially since healing wands are a thing.
There are a LOT of reasons why D&D 3.5 is imbalanced. I can't fix everything at once though, and it's hard to homebrew in a vacuum specifically because everything is related in some way to everything else.
Today I've chosen to think about healing.

That being said, I try to keep juggling in my head the various directions I'm thinking of heading for everything at once, otherwise you end up in an infinite circle of rebalancing mechanics one at a time.

[Necroticplague]

The rules for Lesser Vigor say it has to target "one living creature", so while a humanoid with TTS might be valid, an undead wouldn't. Mass Lesser Vigor though just specifies creatures in an area, so I've seen the argument made that it's perfectly acceptable to cast it on undead, despite what logically just looks like a formatting issue.
Altering the spell's schools or defining if it uses positive energy or not would resolve that disagreement.

Derp. Missed that. Lesser version still works on Living Constructs, though.

[Rubik]

Derp. Missed that. Lesser version still works on Living Constructs, though.Since living constructs receive half-healing from Conjuration (Healing) spells, how does that affect the Vigor line?

[Necroticplague]

Since living constructs receive half-healing from Conjuration (Healing) spells, how does that affect the Vigor line?

It doesn't. Vigor doesn't heal you, it grants you Fast Healing. The resultant healing is a result of you having fast healing, not from the spell.

[OldTrees1]

Since living constructs receive half-healing from Conjuration (Healing) spells, how does that affect the Vigor line?

Normally it does nothing. If you have the feat that adds +2hp/spell level, then they would heal half that(+1hp/spell level).