Healing Spirit out of curve?

[Marcloure]

Healing spirit is a 2nd level spell present in XgtE for druid, rangers, and probably other classes. It's Concentration, up to 1 minute, and here is a paragraph of what it does:


Until the spell ends, whenever you or a creature you can see moves into the spirits space for the first time on a turn or starts its turn there, you can cause the spirit to restore 1d6 hit points to that creature (no action required). The spirit can’t heal constructs or undead.

When used in combat, I think it's a mediocre spell, but it heals an absurdity of HP when cast out of combat. In comparison to other similar spells:

Prayer of Healing - 2nd lvl; after 10 minutes of casting, heals up to 6 creatures an avarage of 14 HP (2d8+spell_mod).
Aura of Vitality - 3rd lvl; heals an avarage of 70 HP (20d6) distributed between party members (for 4 members, less than 20 Hp for each).
Healing Spirit - 2nd lvl; heals an avarage of 35 HP (10d6) of any number of ally creatures over 1 minute.

What do you think of its power? Is it really powerful or am I exaggerating? I think WotC just didn't think of it being used out of combat...

EDIT: Just found this image lol
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/347507008200507403/379736774139838465/23509031_1737196869655562_536880967883953509_o.png

[dejarnjc]

Stupidly powerful as is out of combat, almost 100% likely not the intent, should not be allowed to be used out of combat without homebrewing a rule change or waiting for an official errata.

[nickl_2000]

Yup, it lasts for 1 minutes (10 rounds). So, if you players are running in an out each PC can get 10d6 healing from a second level spell. Sounds to me like it's a spell my Druid needs to prepare.

[Dalebert]

Wow, I'm surprised this is a thing. I thought no one really cared about out of combat healing. I guess if you're not playing AL, standard healing potions aren't available for 50gp each? In AL games, folks just mark off a trivial amount of gold after a combat and they're healed up. The most amazing spell in the world isn't worth blowing a spell slot that should be saved for combats when you can heal up with a trivial amount of cash via healing potions.

Also, Prayer of Healing is ass. Always has been. My almost tier 4 cleric has never prepared it. It's clearly for ooc which is not worth spell slots. I'd say that's a poor comparison to gauge power level.

I would only use this spell in combat, and even then it has limitations that I suspect will make it not seem so amazing. I feel like you could use it tactically very effectively. If anything, it has the icing of being able to go ahead and heal up remaining dmg by the end but that's just icing.

[Talamare]

I'm personally cutting this down to 30 seconds.

5d6 puts it in line with Prayer of Healing doing 2d8+mod

Well, 17.5 vs 10~14, but at least it's closer


Edit - Suggestion on Page 2

Mearls has doubled down on it on Twitter (https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/929521362443497472) but I still have my doubts about this being originally intended.
I will likely houserule is to have 10 charges for now. But I feel like I can be convinced otherwise.

10 Charges, I like that. That's probably the best solution

Another option that isn't as good is to maybe make it cost the Caster's Reaction

[DivisibleByZero]

It doesn't work outside of combat.
It requires a creature to begin its turn inside of it. There are no turns outside of combat, so it does nothing, because the healing cannot be triggered.
It's an in-combat HoT.
That's the RAW. Do with that as you see fit. But by RAW it does nothing outside of combat because turns don't exist outside of combat.

Prayer of Healing is the out-of-combat Heal.

[Talamare]

It doesn't work outside of combat.
It requires a creature to begin its turn inside of it. There are no turns outside of combat, so it does nothing, because the healing cannot be triggered.
It's an in-combat HoT.
That's the RAW. Do with that as you see fit. But by RAW it does nothing outside of combat because turns don't exist outside of combat.

Prayer of Healing is the out-of-combat Heal.
Want to quote RAW?

Any fast paced situation can use Rounds & Turns.

[DivisibleByZero]

Want to quote RAW?

Any fast paced situation can use Rounds & Turns.

Are you going to tell me that a bunch of adventurers sitting around in a circle for one minute waiting for their HP to top off is a fast paced situation?

[lunaticfringe]

Are you going to tell me that a bunch of adventurers sitting around in a circle for one minute waiting for their HP to top off is a fast paced situation?

Being holed up in room with zombies about to break in is. I can see it as a between waves thing.

[Marcloure]

It requires a creature to begin its turn inside of it. There are no turns outside of combat, so it does nothing, because the healing cannot be triggered.

In D&D, a round is the name of a 6 seconds timestamp. In or out of combat, 6 seconds still pass and so do a round. A turn is the "perspective and action" of each character in those 6 seconds.
I don't see how it could be otherwise.

[DivisibleByZero]

Being holed up in room with zombies about to break in is. I can see it as a between waves thing.
I could see ruling that, sure. But in an instance such as that I'd also be counting rounds (and damage to the door accrued, or whatever) while the enemy attempts to break in. So really that's still combat in my mind.


In D&D, a round is the name of a 6 seconds timestamp. In or out of combat, 6 seconds still pass and so do a round. A turn is the "perspective and action" of each character in those 6 seconds in combat.
I don't see how it could be otherwise.
FIFY

Nope.

T im e
In situations w here keeping track of the passage of
time is important, the DM determines the time a task
requires. The DM might use a different time scale
depending on the context of the situation at hand. In
a dungeon environment, the adventurers’ movement
happens on a scale of minutes. It takes them about a
minute to creep down a long hallway, another minute
to check for traps on the door at the end of the hall, and
a good ten minutes to search the cham ber beyond for
anything interesting or valuable.
In a city or wilderness, a scale of hours is often more
appropriate. Adventurers eager to reach the lonely tower
at the heart of the forest hurry across those fifteen miles
in just under four hours’ time.
For long journeys, a scale of days w orks best.
Following the road from Baldur’s Gate to Waterdeep, the
adventurers spend four uneventful days before a goblin
am bush interrupts their journey.
In com bat and other fast-paced situations, the game
relies on rounds, a 6-second span of time described
in chapter 9

Default is that time is only tracked in Turns during combat (or in fast paced situations).

[Foxhound438]

It doesn't work outside of combat.
It requires a creature to begin its turn inside of it. There are no turns outside of combat, so it does nothing, because the healing cannot be triggered.
It's an in-combat HoT.
That's the RAW. Do with that as you see fit. But by RAW it does nothing outside of combat because turns don't exist outside of combat.

Prayer of Healing is the out-of-combat Heal.

well I guess you can't do anything outside of combat, because you don't have turns in which to take actions?

ps. to the OP, the spell is on the druid and ranger, not cleric. Doesn't fix the issue of its OP healing economy.

[Foxhound438]

but I do hope and expect that the spell gets patched to be one target per round.

[Marcloure]

ps. to the OP, the spell is on the druid and ranger, not cleric. Doesn't fix the issue of its OP healing economy.

Fixed that, thank you. I think I just read it assuming things.

[Vaz]

I could see ruling that, sure. But in an instance such as that I'd also be counting rounds (and damage to the door accrued, or whatever) while the enemy attempts to break in. So really that's still combat in my mind.


FIFY

Nope.

T im e
In situations w here keeping track of the passage of
time is important, the DM determines the time a task
requires. The DM might use a different time scale
depending on the context of the situation at hand. In
a dungeon environment, the adventurers’ movement
happens on a scale of minutes. It takes them about a
minute to creep down a long hallway, another minute
to check for traps on the door at the end of the hall, and
a good ten minutes to search the cham ber beyond for
anything interesting or valuable.
In a city or wilderness, a scale of hours is often more
appropriate. Adventurers eager to reach the lonely tower
at the heart of the forest hurry across those fifteen miles
in just under four hours’ time.
For long journeys, a scale of days w orks best.
Following the road from Baldur’s Gate to Waterdeep, the
adventurers spend four uneventful days before a goblin
am bush interrupts their journey.
In com bat and other fast-paced situations, the game
relies on rounds, a 6-second span of time described
in chapter 9

Default is that time is only tracked in Turns during combat (or in fast paced situations).

So the physically weakest member of the party picks up a stone from the floor, goes to throw a stone from the shortest long distance, initiates combat, says "I'm hostile to you", and then spends its time walking towards you 5ft a turn looking menacing... and then ends combat when everyone's full.

****ing what?

[JackPhoenix]

It doesn't work outside of combat.
It requires a creature to begin its turn inside of it. There are no turns outside of combat, so it does nothing, because the healing cannot be triggered.
It's an in-combat HoT.
That's the RAW. Do with that as you see fit. But by RAW it does nothing outside of combat because turns don't exist outside of combat.

Prayer of Healing is the out-of-combat Heal.

Get a rat in a bag, kick the bag to anger the rat, you're now in combat.

Wasn't there some rule saying that if the ability can be abused with bag full of rats, it's a bad ability?

[DivisibleByZero]

Get a rat in a bag, kick the bag to anger the rat, you're now in combat.

Wasn't there some rule saying that if the ability can be abused with bag full of rats, it's a bad ability?

I don't know about a rule referring to a bag of rats, but my ruling is to just drop rocks on anyone attempting to justify anything via a bag of rats. :smallwink:

[mephnick]

I think most DMs will just look at that and go "...nope." and the game will continue as planned until the errata comes out.

[LtPowers]

Wow, I'm surprised this is a thing. I thought no one really cared about out of combat healing. I guess if you're not playing AL, standard healing potions aren't available for 50gp each? In AL games, folks just mark off a trivial amount of gold after a combat and they're healed up. The most amazing spell in the world isn't worth blowing a spell slot that should be saved for combats when you can heal up with a trivial amount of cash via healing potions.

It's a level 2 spell, so it can be cast as early as level 3. Where are your AL characters adventuring that they have several thousand of GP already at level 3?

I mean, my level 3 character could buy a few potions after every adventure, but not enough to heal up after every combat.


Powers &8^]

[UrielAwakened]

It needs to affect one person per round.

That's the change that makes it a good spell but not a broken one.

[MrStabby]

In situations w here keeping track of the passage of
time is important, the DM determines the time a task
requires. The DM might use a different time scale
depending on the context of the situation at hand.


If the task at hand is healing d6 hp per turn then it makes sense that the DM uses a timescale of turns during that duration. This says the DM can use turns and nothing says the DM shouldn't. Given that using turns makes sense and not using turns doesn't, i would guess that most DMs (that allowed this spell) would use turns.

[Easy_Lee]

Still good in combat if you make a totem pole of gnomes.

To the combat vs out of combat bit, yeah I doubt anyone would rule that way except to be deliberately antagonistic. Players can just respond by starting a fight with each other or, as stated, a random CR 0, then just dodge repeatedly.

[DivisibleByZero]

i would guess that most DMs (that allowed this spell) would use turns.

And that's the thing.
DMs who allow this spell to be used OoC are making the Ranger a better OoC healer than the Cleric....
Clearly the intent is that this is an in-combat HoT.

[Tanarii]

It's a level 2 spell, so it can be cast as early as level 3. Where are your AL characters adventuring that they have several thousand of GP already at level 3?

I mean, my level 3 character could buy a few potions after every adventure, but not enough to heal up after every combat.Tier 2 characters will get in excess of 5000 gp per adventuring day for the party, if the campaign uses anything like the DMG guidelines. If they go full hobo (ie in AL), anyone that doesn't need to drop it on expensive material components can easily afford enough healing potions to heal to full after each and every combat (up to 100 for 4-5 combats for the party). Plus plenty left over for the occasional Revivify or Raise Dead.

Conversely, Tier 1 characters only bring in about 400 gp / adventuring day across the entire party. That's only enough for 8 potions per Long Rest, so about 2/battle if that's all you spend your cash on. (Unlikely in Tier 1.)

The real question is can you get access to that large number of potions? YMMV depending on your DM but keep in mind they're standard on the PHB table.

[SharkForce]

you guys aren't abusing it properly.

you need to have a grapple chain, where everyone grapples each other and pull each other into the area on each turn. that way, you each get healing on *everybody's* turn.

as an added bonus, grappling is an attack, which means it's combat, so there are definitely turns.

that would be way more abusive than weaksauce walking around into the area :P

[NaughtyTiger]

out of combat healing pretty cheap. between hit dice, bardic healing, prayer of healing, we are usually at full health between fights. this is wasted on out of combat.

even with 1 heal per round, that is 1 healing word per round. cheap.

[Geeknamese]

I could see ruling that, sure. But in an instance such as that I'd also be counting rounds (and damage to the door accrued, or whatever) while the enemy attempts to break in. So really that's still combat in my mind.


FIFY

Nope.

T im e
In situations w here keeping track of the passage of
time is important, the DM determines the time a task
requires. The DM might use a different time scale
depending on the context of the situation at hand. In
a dungeon environment, the adventurers’ movement
happens on a scale of minutes. It takes them about a
minute to creep down a long hallway, another minute
to check for traps on the door at the end of the hall, and
a good ten minutes to search the cham ber beyond for
anything interesting or valuable.
In a city or wilderness, a scale of hours is often more
appropriate. Adventurers eager to reach the lonely tower
at the heart of the forest hurry across those fifteen miles
in just under four hours’ time.
For long journeys, a scale of days w orks best.
Following the road from Baldur’s Gate to Waterdeep, the
adventurers spend four uneventful days before a goblin
am bush interrupts their journey.
In com bat and other fast-paced situations, the game
relies on rounds, a 6-second span of time described
in chapter 9

Default is that time is only tracked in Turns during combat (or in fast paced situations).

+1

I’m with DivisibleByZero on this one. It’s an in-combat only spell and game only goes to combat rounds and turns when the DM calls for it, usually by saying, “Roll for Initiative”. Combat and rounds only occur when the DM decides the game changes mode to martial combat or social “combat”. Kind of like the old Final Fantasy turn based console games.

If you need further proof go to Chapter 9 of the PHB describing order of combat:


A typical combat encounter is a clash between two sides, a flurry of weapon swings, feints, parries, footwork, and spellcasting. The game organizes the chaos of combat into a cycle of rounds and turns. A round represents about 6 seconds in the game world. During a round, each participant in a battle takes a turn. The order of turns is determined at the beginning of a combat encounter, when everyone rolls initiative. Once everyone has taken a turn, the fight continues to the next round if neither side has defeated the other.

That’s what my ruling would be. It’s obviously broken otherwise. *shrugs* Maybe the Healing Spirit can only be summoned forth when there is mortal danger.

[Arkhios]

So, druids simply can't have nice things in terms of healing?

That said, 5 feet square in size and the target to be healed must be within that square – not just adjacent to it – seems hardly overpowered to me. In or out of combat.

[Kane0]

Wasn't there some rule saying that if the ability can be abused with bag full of rats, it's a bad ability?

Yeah we really need a proper name for that.

Edit: Ratbag's Law: An ability that can be abused by a character with a bag of rats should be reconsidered.

[lunaticfringe]

Whatever I'm punching while I heal them, I should be able to out heal my punches on a ranger or druid. More fun that way.

[Potato_Priest]

So, druids simply can't have nice things in terms of healing?

That said, 5 feet square in size and the target to be healed must be within that square – not just adjacent to it – seems hardly overpowered to me. In or out of combat.

Out of combat everyone can just run through the square and then back in in the next 6 seconds, making a little overpowered rig-around-the-rosies game.

[Dalebert]

Are you going to tell me that a bunch of adventurers sitting around in a circle for one minute waiting for their HP to top off is a fast paced situation?

I'll tell you that because it obviously is. Whenever there is a time-sensitive situation of a minute or less, initiative and turns are called for, and that doesn't preclude the possibility of situations involving more than a minute.

"Guys, this spirit is only here for one minute! Get as much healing as you can!"

I agree that for a short time in tier 1 and maaaaaybe early tier 2, healing potions are more precious. A 2nd level slot is also very precious in those times. So that short time is the only time I would consider using this for ooc healing. I also don't give a flip as a DM if the party is willing to blow a 2nd level slot to heal up after combat.

[JellyPooga]

I simply don't see the issue. A 2nd level spell slot is a valuable resource; that's one less Heat Metal, Hold Person, Enhance Ability, Moonbeam, Pass Without Trace or Spike Growth. For the sake of healing the whole party for about 30hp? Much of which may be wasted on lower level characters. 2nd level has some real game-changer spells and this? This is not one of them.

Is it better than other healing spells? Out of combat, yeah, maybe. Is it going to win an encounter for you? Probably not. It's a nice luxury to "top off" your hp between encounters, but when it costs the same as skipping the next encounter entirely (PWT), for example, it's a cost that's simply not worth the value you get.

[Contrast]

It doesn't work outside of combat.
It requires a creature to begin its turn inside of it. There are no turns outside of combat, so it does nothing, because the healing cannot be triggered.
It's an in-combat HoT.
That's the RAW. Do with that as you see fit. But by RAW it does nothing outside of combat because turns don't exist outside of combat.

Prayer of Healing is the out-of-combat Heal.

This logic sort of works in game terms until anyone tries to cast any spell or use any ability which have defined action, bonus action, reaction casting times outside of combat. It also breaks in purely out of game logic terms.

Would you rule that casting haste on someone would achieve nothing in a 100m race because they weren't in combat and hence can't use the extra action to dash and only get to use their overland movement speed? If a 100m race takes place in structured time, why doesn't my racing back and forth to get as much healing as I can.

I would prefer a DM to tell me they're changing the spell than I can't use it in accordance with the spell description without punching a random passer by.

[agnos]

You guys are really downplaying how good this spell is in combat. Yes the out of combat healing is absolutely silly and especially so with Life Cleric making it 1d6+4. In combat this is a peremptory Healing Word. If someone is at 0, then they will be healed at the start of their turn and able to act. It lets you “pre-cast” a heal that you can move as necessary. The downside is that people can die before it will activate, but that’s not likely something you can usually prevent regardless. Let’s also compare it to Aura of Vitality which costs and action to cast and bonus actions to use; this is a bonus action to cast, a bonus action to use, and no action to activate. It’s far more action efficient.

[LeonBH]

I agree with agnos. This spell is better than Healing Word. It's better than Heroism. For one 2nd level slot, anyone can heal by just moving through a space.

Healing is not cost efficient because you're sacrificing your action economy and resources to reset the board to a previous state. You lose in the long run.

Well, now you can heal without actions, bonus actions, or even reactions. Imagine two spirits in adjacent squares for 2d6 healing per turn. Imagine the Battlemaster Fighter's Maneuvering Strike affording someone extra healing out of turn.

Imagine locking down the BBEG in place with grapples, and then moving into that space after the hit. A Goliath uses their reaction to reduce damage by 1d12+CON. Give this spell 3 rounds, and it can give everyone roughly the same benefits.

It blows because of concentration, thus precluding any concentration buffs in favor of healing (Enhance Ability: Cat's Grace). But I've done a kind-of-similar setup with a cool DM and Phantasmal Force. It saved us big time.

This is a strong spell.

[tsotate]

Default is that time is only tracked in Turns during combat (or in fast paced situations).
Fast-paced situations, such as having to cycle six people efficiently through the same space ten times each before the spell ends.

[Parra]

lets not forget that a clever BBEG or his minions can use it too in-combat, as in use the one the PC's cast.

[Knaight]

In combat this just means that we now have healing that isn't either basically useless or predicated on a somewhat ridiculous down-revive cycle. That's not a bad thing.

Out of combat I come down more on it being iffy, particularly once 2nd level spell slots stop being worth much.

[Jethro]

lets not forget that a clever BBEG or his minions can use it too in-combat, as in use the one the PC's cast.

Not quite. The spell says:

"Until the spell ends, whenever you or a creature you can see moves into the spirit's space for the first time on a turn or starts its turn there, YOU can cause the spirit to restore 1d6 hit points to that creature (no action required).

It doesn't work unless you want it to work.

On topic: This spell is bonkers good. WAY better in combat than out imo. Just place it under your tank and he/she is constantly healing. Up cast for serious healing. Concentration is the only real limitation. This spell alone makes Druids and support Bards stronger. Definitely the strongest spell in Xanathar's. I fully expect it to be nerfed in some way, but I also don't see it as game-breaking.

[Easy_Lee]

lets not forget that a clever BBEG or his minions can use it too in-combat, as in use the one the PC's cast.

No, the caster decides to heal the target, no action required. Can't use without the caster's permission.

[Zejety]

Mearls has doubled down on it on Twitter (https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/929521362443497472) but I still have my doubts about this being originally intended.
I will likely houserule is to have 10 charges for now. But I feel like I can be convinced otherwise.

[DarkKnightJin]

I simply don't see the issue. A 2nd level spell slot is a valuable resource; that's one less Heat Metal, Hold Person, Enhance Ability, Moonbeam, Pass Without Trace or Spike Growth. For the sake of healing the whole party for about 30hp? Much of which may be wasted on lower level characters. 2nd level has some real game-changer spells and this? This is not one of them.

Is it better than other healing spells? Out of combat, yeah, maybe. Is it going to win an encounter for you? Probably not. It's a nice luxury to "top off" your hp between encounters, but when it costs the same as skipping the next encounter entirely (PWT), for example, it's a cost that's simply not worth the value you get.

I'm with you in this. It's in the same boat as Prayer of Healing, basically. Looks nice on paper, but hardly ever worth it in practice.

[LeonBH]

To throw my opinion in the pile, this is power creep on the healing classes' end. It is way above the power curve among healing spells of its level.

[DivisibleByZero]

Fast-paced situations, such as having to cycle six people efficiently through the same space ten times each before the spell ends.

Once again, if you consider a bunch of adventurers standing around waiting for their moment to hop in and hop out a "fast paced situation" then more power to you.
Many upon many people will disagree, and will not be allowing this outside of combat at all. I am one of those people. Mainly because any spell which makes the party Ranger a better out of combat healer than the party's dedicated healer is a bad spell.

[PhoenixPhyre]

It's restricted to druids and rangers, right? No clerics?

Druids already are weaker healers than clerics (especially life clerics) with drastically reduced options (no prayer of healing. Rangers have so few slots that a 2nd level spell is a major investment for them. And if someone wants to dip 3 levels into druid for this...they're already giving up a whole lot (even as a cleric). I'm fine with it.

[Vaz]

Once again, if you consider a bunch of adventurers standing around waiting for their moment to hop in and hop out a "fast paced situation" then more power to you.
Many upon many people will disagree, and will not be allowing this outside of combat at all. I am one of those people. Mainly because any spell which makes the party Ranger a better out of combat healer than the party's dedicated healer is a bad spell.

Grapple a rat. Or cast it in the closing stages of monopoly.

[DivisibleByZero]

Grapple a rat.

I don't know about a rule referring to a bag of rats, but my ruling is to just drop rocks on anyone attempting to justify anything via a bag of rats. :smallwink:


Or cast it in the closing stages of monopoly.
Well obviously that would be in combat. :smallwink:

[Aett_Thorn]

Well obviously that would be in combat. :smallwink:

In combat, but basically the same as out-of-combat. If you're in no danger of taking any damage (the rat in a bag scenario), but have 'initiated' combat, then what difference is that from just being out of combat?

You're basically attributing a house rule (that people don't have the equivalent of turns outside of combat, which is ridiculous when you boil it down) and saying that by RAW, this spell isn't that good. Even though it really is when you apply any sort of logic to it.

Yes, it is using a second-level spell slot, which matters a bit in the low-level game. But at higher levels, this gets even better, because you're likely not wasting HPs of healing potential, and it can be upcast. Even if you require actual combat, and not the bag of rats scenario, then two players can just shoot each other with a blowgun, doing 1 damage per turn and ensuring that they get at least that much back. If there's an easy way to exploit it, I would say that you're just intentionally placing a burden on it that doesn't need to exist.

[Joe the Rat]

In combat, it's a reverse Moonbeam. Out of combat... it has some issues.

Let's look at by use.

Prayer of healing (using an assumed +4 castmod) is giving 13*6 = 78 hp "max" average, or 65 hp to the more typical Party of Five. It's good in comparison to an upcast cure wounds out of combat - take 10 minutes, cast up to six simultaneous cure wounds over range.

Aura of vitality is doling out 70hp in 2d6 packets on your turn to anyone in range - slightly more flexibility in combat targeting. Fair for noncombat (70 over a minute), but an upcast Prayer of Healing meets or beats on a party of 4 or more. (3d8+stat*party (17.5*party), party of 4=70 average). However you can dole out to more individuals, or focus Aura to give more to those who need more. Flexibility is part of the point.

Healing Spirit is doling out 1d6*10 rounds healing (35 average) to however many creatures pass through the magic pixie spot on their turns. If you upcast to 3rd, that's 2d6*10 rounds - same as Aura! But you can affect as many creatures as can move through home base on their turns.

Out of combat... if we're sticking to turns and rounds, do we stick to space requirements? The Spirit takes up a 5' cube of space, and affects creatures that move into it on their turn, or start their turn there. So for that 35-a-head healing, everybody has to run in and out of the space for a minute. That's going to be a lot of leaping the Beltane fire the party has to do to give heals to everyone. At the very least, your party looks ridiculous while trying to cheese it out.

Looking at the numbers, I suspect that devs ballparked this with the assumption that most rounds only one creature would benefit from the Spirit. If you want to bring it in line with the other spells for out of combat, here's an easy tweak: Out of combat, only one creature can benefit per round six second interval. That puts it on the same heal rate as Aura of Vitality (if you upcast to 3) which is not a horrible crime against the universe.

[DivisibleByZero]

In combat, but basically the same as out-of-combat. If you're in no danger of taking any damage (the rat in a bag scenario), but have 'initiated' combat, then what difference is that from just being out of combat?

That was in reference to the monopoly statement.
His remark was clearly a jest, as was my response.

The rat thing: Rocks fall. You don't get to game the system like that at my table. If you pull out a bag of rats in an attempt to justify ANYTHING, rocks fall.

[Talamare]

Mearls has doubled down on it on Twitter (https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/929521362443497472) but I still have my doubts about this being originally intended.
I will likely houserule is to have 10 charges for now. But I feel like I can be convinced otherwise.

10 Charges, I like that. That's probably the best solution

Another option that isn't as good is to maybe make it cost the Caster's Reaction

[Easy_Lee]

Players can just squeeze together and stand within the same 5 foot cube. Can't do that in combat but it'd be weird not to be able to do it outside of combat.

Or, like I said, just make a gnome totem pole. Gnotem pole!

[CantigThimble]

Also, Prayer of Healing is ass. Always has been. My almost tier 4 cleric has never prepared it. It's clearly for ooc which is not worth spell slots. I'd say that's a poor comparison to gauge power level.

Prayer of healing is basically 2 extra hit dice for your whole party. It's by far the most efficient healing per spell slot if you get the chance to use it. Has your party never run out of hit dice before?

[Talamare]

Players can just squeeze together and stand within the same 5 foot cube. Can't do that in combat but it'd be weird not to be able to do it outside of combat.

Or, like I said, just make a gnome totem pole. Gnotem pole!

Everyone gets on a Cart
Have the active Turn player push the Cart and himself thru it
Then he jumps onto the Cart

Next player does the same

# of Player * 10 * d6

~210 Healing per cast (with 6 people)

edit
210 Healing per cast... PER PLAYER
1260 Healing Total

[Joe the Rat]

Doesn't work. You only get the heal (caster permitting) if you start/enter on your turn - essentially once per round per creature, max.

[Talamare]

Doesn't work. You only get the heal (caster permitting) if you start/enter on your turn - essentially once per round per creature, max.
Assuming the quote from the first page is correct...

Until the spell ends, whenever you or a creature you can see moves into the spirits space for the first time on a turn or starts its turn there, you can cause the spirit to restore 1d6 hit points to that creature (no action required). The spirit can’t heal constructs or undead.


whenever you or a creature you can see moves into the spirits space for the first time on a turn

[Easy_Lee]

Assuming the quote from the first page is correct...

Until the spell ends, whenever you or a creature you can see moves into the spirits space for the first time on a turn or starts its turn there, you can cause the spirit to restore 1d6 hit points to that creature (no action required). The spirit can’t heal constructs or undead.


whenever you or a creature you can see moves into the spirits space for the first time on a turn

Bingo. Can do this with a cart, or with an old-fashioned grapple-ball. Everyone grapples everyone else and drags them through.

[nickl_2000]

Bingo. Can do this with a cart, or with an old-fashioned grapple-ball. Everyone grapples everyone else and drags them through.

At what point does the healing spirit that you summon look at you and say "This is to weird, even for me, I'm out" and poofs before the end of the spell?

[Talamare]

At what point does the healing spirit that you summon look at you and say "This is to weird, even for me, I'm out" and poofs before the end of the spell?

At that point, we go on a murderhobo quest into the spirit world to murder that healing spirit, and find a new one that we keep on a spectral chain

[nickl_2000]

At that point, we go on a murderhobo quest into the spirit world to murder that healing spirit, and find a new one that we keep on a spectral chain

Sorry to late, played that adventure last week. Ours is currently wearing dimension shackles

[Easy_Lee]

By the way, just so everyone knows, I'm joking about the grapple-ball. It technically works by the text as quoted, but isn't something I'd actually try or expect people to do in a typical game. Related:

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/909/991/48c.jpg

[UrielAwakened]

Can I just say I find it hilarious that when 4e had rules about things lasting until "end of the encounter" it was decried as too video-gamey by the 3.5 (and now 5e) fanbase, and now in 5e people are suggesting that this broken spell isn't broken because you can just arbitrarily declare "combat over" and the spirit ends before you can abuse it.

Just...as a guy who likes 4e more than 5e, this is a hilarious turn of events.

[LeonBH]

Really, the simple fix is to not allow the spell in your games. It's so broken, allowing it to exist is just senseless and produces a lot of issues about a bag of rats, falling rocks, a cart, and dimensional shackles.

[mephnick]

Can I just say I find it hilarious that when 4e had rules about things lasting until "end of the encounter" it was decried as too video-gamey by the 3.5 (and now 5e) fanbase, and now in 5e people are suggesting that this broken spell isn't broken because you can just arbitrarily declare "combat over" and the spirit ends before you can abuse it.

Just...as a guy who likes 4e more than 5e, this is a hilarious turn of events.

Yeah, attempting to justify it by saying "just make it used only in combat" is ridiculous. All spells should work the same in or out of combat and should be balanced that way. That's how D&D (barring 4e) works. And I'm a pretty gamist DM who has no problem supporting mechanics over role-play. It's still somewhat of a cornerstone of D&D I'm not willing to drop.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Honestly, if it’s as bad as it sounds, I’ll likely limit it to once per turn during combat (casters choice when it activates) and ban it out of combat.

Things could have been worse- they could have made it a ritual spell.

[Talamare]

The Limited # of Charges still seems like the best solution.

[Dalebert]

You guys are really downplaying how good this spell is in combat.

Disclaimer: I play almost exclusively AL games.

It is a really good spell for in combat. I still couldn't care less about out of combat healing. I'm trying to picture when I would ever cast this out of combat. The only time I can think of is in low levels for that very brief window of time when I've hit 3rd level but healing potions still seem expensive, so probably levels 3 to 6ish. Even then, it would be a rare circumstance. We'd have to be hurt really badly or it's more likely I have enough goodberries from the night before to patch people up pretty well. And even in that case, a short rest needs to not be an option. It's very rare that we use all of my goodberries as it is. It's VERY possible I would never cast this spell ooc.


Honestly, if it’s as bad as it sounds, I’ll likely limit it to once per turn during combat (casters choice when it activates) and ban it out of combat.

Agree. In a game when house rules are possible, I think that's a very reasonable change.


Things could have been worse- they could have made it a ritual spell.

Nah. I doubt they would ever make a healing spell a ritual. That would be like the only way to redeem the suckiness of Prayer of Healing if they wanted it to be a 10 minute heal spell, e.g. make it a minute to cast and make it a ritual, and they didn't even do that. I wish folks would stop comparing this to PoH. That spell sucks and always did suck and never deserved to be prepared. It's a bad example.

[Willie the Duck]

Can I just say I find it hilarious that when 4e had rules about things lasting until "end of the encounter" it was decried as too video-gamey by the 3.5 (and now 5e) fanbase, and now in 5e people are suggesting that this broken spell isn't broken because you can just arbitrarily declare "combat over" and the spirit ends before you can abuse it.

Just...as a guy who likes 4e more than 5e, this is a hilarious turn of events.

Look, the designers took a (relatively tame) position of rulings not rules, and felt that this was the appropriate way to address the insane implications of the most rules-lawyerly of interpretations of the games rules, and the fan base responded by saying, roughly, 'that's cute. hold my beer while I blow this whole thing up.'

I recognize the value of 4e, even though at the time it was put out I was just done with complex rulesets, and I also understand the value of good game rule design. But honestly, adding upon the burden basic requirements of game design such as 'has to be fun' and 'has to be simple enough to do at the gaming table' and 'has to be understandable to the new gamer' and so forth, adding the requirement of 'has absolutely no bizarre rules interpretations if taken to the logical extreme' to be a requirement that I would hold a game system to that I feel actually benefits anyone.

Now, I am not going to bother to pour through what EL and DBZ have posited as RAW because... I just don't care. I understand what they are doing, and the worst critique I have for them is along the lines of 'Yes, but so what?'/'And your point is?'/etc. Through over-analysis, eventually RAW disappears so far up it's own rear end that it can taste its own shampoo in the back of its throat.

There was a guy on Dragonsfoot a number of years ago who did the same thing (or well, actually a much worse thing, since he seemed to be obviously trolling and/or nuttier than trail mix, while EL and DBZ are clearly just having fun). First, he pointed out that in 1e, one week of game time was declared to take place during one week of real world time. So you couldn't stop the game mid-dungeon if your gaming session was going to run late, because one week would have to pass in the dungeon before your next gaming session, and your characters would clearly die of thirst or be eaten by monsters because you weren't able to declare their actions until next time. And if you didn't agree with him, why were you such a rules-breaker/why did you hate Gygax so much, etc.? Also had something very similar to this debate -- B/X magic missile had a duration of 1 turn (10 rounds). Was that a typo? Rest of the forum thought perhaps it was so you could cast it ahead of time, and then burst through the door and be able to use it on the occupants behind the door without risk of your spell being disrupted. According to this guy, no way-- until you burst through the door, you weren't in combat, and so time was measured in turns, not rounds. So your spell would still run out before your next available action. Eventually we all decided that he simply didn't have anything of value to add, and his admonitions that we were just mad that he showed us how wrong we were was just not worth caring about.

Again, not saying that of anyone here, just pointing out where RAW stops becoming something to care about.



The rat thing: Rocks fall. You don't get to game the system like that at my table. If you pull out a bag of rats in an attempt to justify ANYTHING, rocks fall.

I'm pretty sure I consider player trying to game bag-of-rats and DM trying to game in/out-of-combat-timing to be on equal footing, both in terms of level-of-cheese and of this-is-strictly-a-problem-that-exists-in-forum-debates,-not-any-real-game-table-I've-run-into.

[DivisibleByZero]

I'm pretty sure I consider player trying to game bag-of-rats and DM trying to game in/out-of-combat-timing to be on equal footing, both in terms of level-of-cheese and of this-is-strictly-a-problem-that-exists-in-forum-debates,-not-any-real-game-table-I've-run-into.
I agree with the latter, emboldened part.
With the former, my stance would be that trying to do something with turns and rounds in a situation where turns and rounds didn't exist is akin to pulling out a bag of rats.
The spell is for combat.
If you aren't in combat, just take a short rest. If your short rest is interrupted and combat begins, Healing Spirit away to your heart's content.

[Willie the Duck]

As to the actual OP subject, I have a few thoughts:

1) The problem/unrealism I think that is the worst part is the game logic where everyone can take turns dashing through a 5'x5' square once every 6 seconds, and that the magic of the game world incentivizes such things. That's the part of this whole rigmarole that I would address.

2) Are my gaming groups the only group that discovered that gold isn't useful for much (except those things money is actually good for) in this edition and, y'know, celebrated? We love that money is now able to be spent on castles and sailing ships and bribes and fancy clothes instead of keeping up with the magic item treadmill and so on and so forth, and therefore spending 500-1000 gp or more per mid-level combat on healing potions is not a trivial expenditure.

3) I've never crunched the expected gold intake per level (is that available, anyone know?), but I feel that getting plate mail is something that usually happens in the 5-6 level range. Thus it is then that you are expected to have 1500 gp of unspent money, which is the equivalent to 30 healing potions, or 210 hp, avg., of healing. Are my gaming groups that out of line with the norm in terms of income? Does everyone else rake in so much cash that finding a 2nd level spell that replaces costly healing potions for ooc healing a solution in search of a problem?

[mer.c]

I'll just be limiting it to charges, OR making it a once-per-round thing. That should keep in in line with comparable options for other classes and balance it in and out of combat with no need for ridiculous rulings. It's a cool spell, but it really feels like they brain farted on the balance.

On the subject of potions, it's not necessarily a given that you'll have access to infinite out-of-combat healing by Tier 2. Personally I find that does't fit all campaign settings, and I don't like to completely remove that part of resource management. Always up to the DM and dependent on the adventure setting of course, but I'd be cautious about just assuming that after level 6 everyone always has access to infinite out-of-combat healing.

[Willie the Duck]

I'll just be limiting it to charges, OR making it a once-per-round thing. That should keep in in line with comparable options for other classes and balance it in and out of combat with no need for ridiculous rulings. It's a cool spell, but it really feels like they brain farted on the balance.

I'm not sure if it is a brain fart, or just a "we're not responsible if you want to run a Tippy-verse" mentality. This is roughly equivalent to the fire-brigade railgun, and I think the designers have just sighed and shook their heads at this kind of thinking for some time now.

[KillingTime]

i think the biggest problem I have with this thread is that so many players expect to have an unlimited supply of healing potions.
In my group we have a few potions each for emergencies even to relatively high levels.
Healing spells are also for emergencies - ie getting fellows off the deck with healing word.

For all your other needs you have short and long rests.

Otherwise where is the threat coming from?
If you can reliably heal yourself and your comrades back up to full health after each and any significant encounter then where's the fear of dying?
Where's the sense of peril having fought off one wave of bad guys, and not knowing if you'll be able to survive another wave?
And I know you have to suspend disbelief to a certain extent to even play the game, but do the D&D worlds you inhabit have supermarket shelves stacked high with healing potions?

In relation to the spell, I can see most DMs ruling that each party member can have one or two hits of the d6 when out of combat. The thought of everyone conga dancing through the spell every 6 seconds for a minute is too ridiculous to even bother contemplating.

[Dalebert]

...therefore spending 500-1000 gp or more per mid-level combat on healing potions is not a trivial expenditure.

There's something wrong with your party's builds or tactics if you're getting hurt that badly every combat. I'm assuming it's a fairly rare thing that you both have a really rough fight that hurts lots of people that much AND you can't take a short rest before the next combat. In my experience, I buy minimum of 10 potions per tier for a character, more if possible, and they're like insurance. They make me feel better. In reality I drink probably two per game on average and some particularly challenging games I'll actually burn through 10 of them.

That said, how much are any of those luxuries you can buy with that gold actually worth if you're not alive to enjoy them? Healing potions are extremely helpful to your survival and thus relatively cheap for what they offer. Try thinking of them as potions of extra spell slots. If you use slots for healing when you could have drunk a relatively low-cost potion to do the same, then you don't have a slot that could prevent a lot of dmg later by either killing mobs faster, crowd-controlling them, or buffing your allies--whatever combat benefits those slots would have allowed you to accomplish and whatever harm they could have prevented. The best healing is avoiding the dmg in the first place.


I've never crunched the expected gold intake per level (is that available, anyone know?), but I feel that getting plate mail is something that usually happens in the 5-6 level range.

Sure, that's not terribly far off, but that's in the window I described. Similarly I think wizards deserve a little extra leeway for being miserly in those levels as they're trying to scribe a few extra spells which is also expensive. The moment you've got that plate mail under your belt, I expect tanks to be blowing any and all extra cash on that minimum 10 per tier cache of healing potions. After you have that, you can breath more easily and just spend the cash to replace them as you use them which won't take that much if you're built reasonably smart and you play reasonably smart. You know, things like not blowing spell slots on ooc healing!

[Tanarii]

3) I've never crunched the expected gold intake per level (is that available, anyone know?), but I feel that getting plate mail is something that usually happens in the 5-6 level range. Thus it is then that you are expected to have 1500 gp of unspent money, which is the equivalent to 30 healing potions, or 210 hp, avg., of healing. Are my gaming groups that out of line with the norm in terms of income? Does everyone else rake in so much cash that finding a 2nd level spell that replaces costly healing potions for ooc healing a solution in search of a problem?
Did it up thread. Starting with Tier 2 hoards, the party brings in over 5000gp per adventuring day. (2.4 adventuring days gives 3 hoards, on average). How they spend that is obviously their choice, but that means up to 100 healing potions per adventuring day for the party.

I know IMC players use their money for other things, like lifestyle expenses, and to accomplish things in game like bribes, hiring marc armies, saving or pooling for towers/castles. But even so potions of healing are relatively plentiful for OoC healing. Not "heal to full after each fight" plentiful, but still abundant.

[Dalebert]

Not "heal to full after each fight" plentiful, but still abundant.

Really? That's my general policy. Heal to full or nearly so after each fight. Life is way more valuable than the cash for PoH and the actions you have in combat are also precious. Why wait until you're in a fight and taking dmg to heal someone? The fuller you are to start with, the less likely you are to be in that desperate situation to make party members use their precious actions and precious slots to heal you instead of focusing on ending the battle.

[CantigThimble]

Wow, in the games I've played people barely have enough money for the armor, horses, spell components and bribes they need, dropping a grand on healing is pretty much out of the question. Everyone keeps a few potions around, but those aren't for regular healing, those are for emergencies when they can't rest or the cleric is down.

[Geeknamese]

Yeah, attempting to justify it by saying "just make it used only in combat" is ridiculous. All spells should work the same in or out of combat and should be balanced that way. That's how D&D (barring 4e) works. And I'm a pretty gamist DM who has no problem supporting mechanics over role-play. It's still somewhat of a cornerstone of D&D I'm not willing to drop.

Not sure what’s so ridiculous about it. If people are ok with fighters only being able to parry or trip people a certain number of times before they mysteriously are unable to do so anymore or any of the limited per short or long rest abilities that make no logical sense or hit dice or Healing or any other gamist mechanics which apparently doesn’t detract from the play experience, then what is wrong with saying the spell only works in combat? DM Ruling: The power of the Healing Spirit only functions when the party is at risk of true and immediate mortal danger.

Boom! Done!

[CantigThimble]

Not sure what’s so ridiculous about it. If people are ok with fighters only being able to parry or trip people a certain number of times before they mysteriously are unable to do so anymore or any of the limited per short or long rest abilities that make no logical sense or hit dice or Healing or any other gamist mechanics which apparently doesn’t detract from the play experience, then what is wrong with saying the spell only works in combat? DM Ruling: The power of the Healing Spirit only functions when the party is at risk of true and immediate mortal danger.

Boom! Done!

Ehhh, I really don't like mechanics that encourage people to artificially drag out combat and leave enemies alive for longer.

I'd either limit it to one person per turn or just make it 1-2 hp instead of 1d6. Or just not allow the spell in the first place.

[Willie the Duck]

There's something wrong with your party's builds or tactics if you're getting hurt that badly every combat. I'm assuming it's a fairly rare thing that you both have a really rough fight that hurts lots of people that much AND you can't take a short rest before the next combat.

Well, you are right that I was using the upper expected boundary, not the median. However, your DM(s) and mine seem to have different ideas on how often one finds themselves in a situation where you cannot hide somewhere to lick ones' wounds. We do plenty of dungeon dives, where alerted enemies may move the adventure goalpost (treasure, hostages, macguffin) if we rest, or there's nowhere safe, or the wandering monster chart is sufficiently dangerous that resting might not be advisable. Or, there is simply nowhere to long rest, so eventually we run out of hd, and then the short rests are limited to what our healer feat gives, Inspiring leadership, and some short-rest powered curative spells


In my experience, I buy minimum of 10 potions per tier for a character, more if possible, and they're like insurance. They make me feel better. In reality I drink probably two per game on average and some particularly challenging games I'll actually burn through 10 of them.

That actually sounds pretty similar. But sometimes we also find ourselves having drunken 10 potions and someone has just been mauled below what healer feat and remaining hd can heal, and then we have to make hard decisions.


That said, how much are any of those luxuries you can buy with that gold actually worth if you're not alive to enjoy them? Healing potions are extremely helpful to your survival and thus relatively cheap for what they offer. Try thinking of them as potions of extra spell slots. If you use slots for healing when you could have drunk a relatively low-cost potion to do the same, then you don't have a slot that could prevent a lot of dmg later by either killing mobs faster, crowd-controlling them, or buffing your allies--whatever combat benefits those slots would have allowed you to accomplish and whatever harm they could have prevented. The best healing is avoiding the dmg in the first place.

And the best preparation is to have as many options on the table is possible. If the best way to preserve hp is to cast buffs or crowd control, you do that. If it is to use ooc healing spells, you do that. If it is to use the potions you brought, you do that. If it is to bribe the seer to give you a map that routes you around the dangerous enemy encampment, you do that. D&D has been about managing precious resources and making hard decisions for as long as I've been playing it.

[tsotate]

If you pull out a bag of rats in an attempt to justify ANYTHING, rocks fall.
Yet another TPK caused by one of the characters explaining his life-saving cancer research. And right after the one caused by explaining why the party buys so much pet food, too. :(

[Willie the Duck]

Yet another TPK caused by one of the characters explaining his life-saving cancer research. And right after the one caused by explaining why the party buys so much pet food, too. :(

Those poor invasive species researchers! My God there were no survivors!

[Tanarii]

Really? That's my general policy. Heal to full or nearly so after each fight. Life is way more valuable than the cash for PoH and the actions you have in combat are also precious.
Bribes, hiring mercs, and owning fortifications also keep the Pcs alive. Among other things that they can and do spend money on. But those are the biggest three.

Edit: spending money on an aristocratic lifestyle has other benefits beyond mere survival, of course. But who wants to merely survive? :smallwink:

[Kane0]

I'd probably just change the 'once per turn' to 'once per round', presumably on your turn. That way you don't get Healing Spirit conga lines, and it's worth about 35 HP per cast over the whole minute. Still much better than upcasting Cure Wounds but doesn't beat Aura of Vitality.

But if you're super worried you could always just add a material component cost. 100-150gp should do it.

[Psikerlord]

Where does this spell come from?

[Kuulvheysoon]

Where does this spell come from?

It's one of the new spells being released in Xanathar's Guide to Everything. I believe that it's a Druid/Ranger 2nd level spell.

[Marcloure]

Can I just say I find it hilarious that when 4e had rules about things lasting until "end of the encounter" it was decried as too video-gamey by the 3.5 (and now 5e) fanbase, and now in 5e people are suggesting that this broken spell isn't broken because you can just arbitrarily declare "combat over" and the spirit ends before you can abuse it.

Just...as a guy who likes 4e more than 5e, this is a hilarious turn of events.

Even in 4e powers that worked "until the end of encounter" would last for 5 minutes if casted out of combat.

[Psikerlord]

It's one of the new spells being released in Xanathar's Guide to Everything. I believe that it's a Druid/Ranger 2nd level spell.
ah ok thanks. Splat book power creep then!

[Danielqueue1]

A few aditional things to consider.

If an enemy cannot reliably land 3 hits on a an ally every round, this spell makes that creature nigh un-killable to anything but insta-kill effects.

Bad guys hit ally,
bad guys hit again for automatic crit and 2 death saving throw failures.
Healing spirit is placed over ally
Allies turn starts, they heal for 1d6. they use half their movement to stand up. attack as normal
repeat.

now a situation where this happens every round without fail is pretty rare, and intelligent enemies may wise up after a repetition or two, but this can be used and abused depending on the situation. most encounters I've run into both as a player and a DM, the enemy pay more attention to the people who are actively trying to kill them than the people who are unconscious at least until a round or two has passed or if the enemy is experienced dealing with healers. and generally only intelligent creatures know to go after the healer in the first place.

((yes I know there are exceptions that's why I said generally))

also consider a druid with a 1 level dip into life cleric.
goodberries now give 4 hp a piece and this spell now heals for 1d6+4 per tick. that's right that's .5 hp per tick better on average than a healing potion. is a second level spell slot worth more than the 500 gp in healing potions that it would take to replicate this for a single target? is it worth the 1000 gp for two people moving back and forth? is it worth the 2500 gp for a party of five doing a conga line?

(I know the odds of a whole party of 5 needing 10d6+40 HP is rare, but this is an exercise in exploring the potential.)

I don't Have xantar's Guide, but if this spell scales, it could heal up whole parties using left over slots very easily. if it is a +1d6 per level, then a 3rd level slot with a single level in life cleric would heal on average 120 HP over its duration if you keep it down to a single target per round. It would take hitting 4-5 enemies with a lightning bolt to do the same damage. and lets be honest. Party health is worth more than Mob health.

Is this spell going to break the game? no. Will multi class characters make this spell way out of whack with the scale of other healing spells of similar spell level? verily!

[Vaz]

ah ok thanks. Splat book power creep then!

Oh god, here we go.

[Lombra]

It doesn't work outside of combat.
It requires a creature to begin its turn inside of it. There are no turns outside of combat, so it does nothing, because the healing cannot be triggered.
It's an in-combat HoT.
That's the RAW. Do with that as you see fit. But by RAW it does nothing outside of combat because turns don't exist outside of combat.

Prayer of Healing is the out-of-combat Heal.

Welp.

https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/930607373588209664

It looks like the designers have different interpretations from yours.

[Vaz]

Welp.

https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/930607373588209664

It looks like the designers have different interpretations from yours.
I mean the designers have different interpretations from the rules they write themselves

[DivisibleByZero]

Welp.

https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/930607373588209664

It looks like the designers have different interpretations from yours.

They can have any interruption that they want.
This spell is op compared to other spells of that level when used outside of combat.
I'll say it again, any spell that makes a ranger a better ooc healer then a cleric is a bad spell.
I won't be using it at all, and if I do allow it then it will be in combat only, so my interpretation doesn't have to match theirs.
Fairly certain I've made they clear already.
All of these rules are optional. None of them are core.

[Danielqueue1]

Dividebyzero; please note that everyone knows the point you are trying to make. you don't like the spell. we get it. but saying that rounds don't exist outside of combat is on par with saying that minutes don't exist while travelling. you don't keep track of them, but they are still there. you can house rule all you want. you can say no to using things in your games no one will stop you. but you constantly say that things are against the rules when they are merely against what you would like.

you do not have to be in combat to take turns. you don't need to be in a stressful situation to be healed. and 12 house cats is not a level appropriate encounter for a level 1 wizard (last one is a joke). I agree with you that the spell can be misused. I disagree with your claim that the laws of magic change completely and fundamentally depending on whether two people are angry at each other at the time the spell is cast.

please remember to differentiate your opinion from the actual wording of the rules.

[mephnick]

LOL "We'll keep our eye on it"

Just admit you ****ed up Crawford. This one doesn't take months of play-testing to figure out.

[Lombra]

They can have any interruption that they want.
This spell is op compared to other spells of that level when used outside of combat.
I'll say it again, any spell that makes a ranger a better ooc healer then a cleric is a bad spell.
I won't be using it at all, and if I do allow it then it will be in combat only, so my interpretation doesn't have to match theirs.
Fairly certain I've made they clear already.
All of these rules are optional. None of them are core.

I was just pointing out that even designers think that it is unreasonable to forbid the use of turn-based actions out of combat/stressful situations.

I'm with you on the spell being out of balance, I wouldn't use it out of combat if I ever pick it.

[DivisibleByZero]

I was just pointing out that even designers think that it is unreasonable to forbid the use of turn-based actions out of combat/stressful situations.

I'm with you on the spell being out of balance, I wouldn't use it out of combat if I ever pick it.

No, that isn't what they're saying.
"We'll keep our eye on it" does not say that they think it's unreasonable. It says that it isn't what they intended, but that the concerns are valid enough to potentially warrant further review.


please remember to differentiate your opinion from the actual wording of the rules.

Please remember that the actual wording of the rules states:

T im e
In situations w here keeping track of the passage of
time is important, the DM determines the time a task
requires. The DM might use a different time scale
depending on the context of the situation at hand. In
a dungeon environment, the adventurers’ movement
happens on a scale of minutes. It takes them about a
minute to creep down a long hallway, another minute
to check for traps on the door at the end of the hall, and
a good ten minutes to search the cham ber beyond for
anything interesting or valuable.
In a city or wilderness, a scale of hours is often more
appropriate. Adventurers eager to reach the lonely tower
at the heart of the forest hurry across those fifteen miles
in just under four hours’ time.
For long journeys, a scale of days w orks best.
Following the road from Baldur’s Gate to Waterdeep, the
adventurers spend four uneventful days before a goblin
am bush interrupts their journey.
In com bat and other fast-paced situations, the game
relies on rounds, a 6-second span of time described
in chapter 9

The DM might use a different time scale depending on the situation at hand, but the default time scale is that rounds and turns are only in combat.
That isn't my opinion. That's what the book says.

[Estrillian]

Did it up thread. Starting with Tier 2 hoards, the party brings in over 5000gp per adventuring day. (2.4 adventuring days gives 3 hoards, on average). How they spend that is obviously their choice, but that means up to 100 healing potions per adventuring day for the party.

I am curious as to how you arrive at that figure. I'm not seeing why there necessarily should be any hoards in an adventuring day. A Hoard implies that you have defeated, not only a large number of foes, but that you have defeated those foes in some sort of lair or home area where they might have a hoard, and that it makes sense in the game that they have had some way to gather said hoard.

If you defeat 5 Hobgoblin scouting patrols in an adventuring day, I wouldn't expect any of them to have a hoard because they are scouts. If you defeat a bandit ambush they won't have a hoard — they were trying to steal your hoard! If you defeat an Ogre who lurched into your village at night you'll be lucky if it has more than a sack with a goblin leg in it. And so on. Sure, if you confront a cult leader in his own base and kill him then maybe he has a hoard somewhere nearby, unless of course he was poor, or had only just arrived, or kept his money at the Zhentarim bank, or blew it all on spell components, or what have you.

I get that some campaigns are very generous with money. People constantly talk about their spare 1000s of gold and how meaningless it is, because the game doesn't have anything to spend it on. But not all campaigns are like this, and I am not sure it is even the default (plenty of other people seem bemused on these forums when big mounds of gold are mentioned). There isn't a "Gold by Level" table in 5E, just extrapolations from the treasure tables that are based (I think) on implicit assumptions about number of hoards vs. number of encounters.

Or do I have it wrong?

[PhoenixPhyre]

Estrillian, there is text at the beginning of the "Treasure" section of the DMG about how many hordes per tier the "average" party will encounter. I'm pretty sure those are WAG numbers, not system requirements though. It isn't WBL like 3e/4e had, but if you're conventionally dungeon-crawling, they kinda make sense.

I also would be interested in seeing how it breaks down in published adventures though.

[sightlessrealit]

After reading the thread, I can only say so what's the problem? The spell is fine as is.

[CantigThimble]

After reading the thread, I can only say so what's the problem? The spell is fine as is.

In campaigns where healing is an important limited resource, it is far more efficient than any other healing spell. To the point where practically every other healing ability is irrelevant. It restores an average of 35 hit points to any number of creatures in one minute while the next most efficient option, prayer of healing restores an average of 12 hit points to 6 creatures in 10 minutes.

In campaigns where healing isn't a limited resource it's completely irrelevant.

[Talamare]

No, that isn't what they're saying.
"We'll keep our eye on it" does not say that they think it's unreasonable. It says that it isn't what they intended, but that the concerns are valid enough to potentially warrant further review.



Please remember that the actual wording of the rules states:


The DM might use a different time scale depending on the situation at hand, but the default time scale is that rounds and turns are only in combat.
That isn't my opinion. That's what the book says.

"We'll keep our eye on it"
The only thing that says is that they will keep their eye on it.
It says nothing about their reason nor motivation.

As you quoted, any fast paced situation uses rounds, as what the book says.
6 People Coordinating to Perfectly Dance thru the Healing Spirit can be argued as a Fast Paced Situation.
Vague Statements are Vague.

[EvilAnagram]

I think the best solution is to treat it as having 8 charges. It works for combat healing, it's not useless out of combat, and it doesn't overshadow Prayer of Healing.

[Submortimer]

It doesn't work outside of combat.
It requires a creature to begin its turn inside of it. There are no turns outside of combat, so it does nothing, because the healing cannot be triggered.
It's an in-combat HoT.
That's the RAW. Do with that as you see fit. But by RAW it does nothing outside of combat because turns don't exist outside of combat.

Prayer of Healing is the out-of-combat Heal.

What?

No. This is the worst kind of semantics. By that logic, you cannot do anything that requires an action outside of combat, because combat is the only scenario where what you do is measured in actions.

You ABSOLUTELY can cast Healing Spirit outside of combat, and it will heal you for 10d6.

Does this make druids the best out of combat healers in the game?

Yep.

Know how many games I've run or played in where somone picked a class just so they can heal Well?

Zero.

Edit: Relevant text.

from the PHB:

"Your Turn

On your turn, you can move a distance up to your speed and take one action. You decide whether to move first or take your action first. Your speed — sometimes called your walking speed — is noted on your character sheet."

By your logic, you cannot take actions outside of combat, because this is the only spot in the book where it tells you when you can take an action.

[DivisibleByZero]

"We'll keep our eye on it"
The only thing that says is that they will keep their eye on it.
It says nothing about their reason nor motivation.

As you quoted, any fast paced situation uses rounds, as what the book says.
6 People Coordinating to Perfectly Dance thru the Healing Spirit can be argued as a Fast Paced Situation.
Vague Statements are Vague.

To the first point, why are you telling me that? He's the one that made declarations of their motivation by stating that the designers don't think it's unreasonable. I was merely responding in kind.
As to your second point, that would be a matter of DM discretion, and that doesn't change the fact that default is very clearly stated as rounds and turns happening in combat. They even added a blurb stating that the DM might use a different time scale depending on the situation at hand, which is precisely what would need to happen if you're going to deviate from the norm, that norm being that rounds and turns are for combat.

[Lombra]

No, that isn't what they're saying.
"We'll keep our eye on it" does not say that they think it's unreasonable. It says that it isn't what they intended, but that the concerns are valid enough to potentially warrant further review.

For him to reckon it as a problem, means that for his ruling that it is a problem. For the problem to exist, the spell must be cast and be useful out of combat, which is not in line with your ruling about turns not existing out of combat.

He could have said "turns don't exist out of combat" but he didn't, so his ruling includes the possibility for out of combat turn-based actions to be possible.

The fact that the spell concerns him, means that your reading is not reasonable in the eyes of the designer Jeremy Crawford.

[mer.c]

For him to reckon it as a problem, means that for his ruling that it is a problem. For the problem to exist, the spell must be cast and be useful out of combat, which is not in line with your ruling about turns not existing out of combat.

He could have said "turns don't exist out of combat" but he didn't, so his ruling includes the possibility for out of combat turn-based actions to be possible.

The fact that the spell concerns him, means that your reading is not reasonable in the eyes of the designer Jeremy Crawford.

I mean, he also said:


Healing spirit is exceptionally effective outside combat…

So he explicitly shot down the “Turns don’t exist outside of combat” argument.

[Finieous]

LOL "We'll keep our eye on it"

Just admit you ****ed up Crawford. This one doesn't take months of play-testing to figure out.

Yeah, I get that "we ****ed up" isn't the message you want to be sending on social media before most people even have your new book, but come on...you're not fooling anyone.

They should just own up and go ahead and errata it so we don't have to let a thousand house rules bloom. Just fix it.

I also have to say that when you can credibly argue that healing and recovery are so easy that hit points are effectively irrelevant as a resource, the game has strayed quite a distance from where I'd like it to be. I understand that changing player preferences are driving it in that direction, but I increasingly feel that it's Not My Game(tm). I'm probably just overreacting, but...blah.

[Arguss]

Divine Soul learning Healing Spirit can be dangerous.... :smallfrown:

Extended Healing Spirit? Maybe..

[Easy_Lee]

Alright, let's take an example in play. Your players just had a combat and have at least one minute to recover. Do they have time to just take a short rest instead?

In my experience, situations where one minute of rest is possible but one hour of rest isn't are surprisingly uncommon. And even in those situations, players often find some method to get their rest - such as by using a Tiny Hut, which has a casting time of one minute. Coincidence?

Time in D&D doesn't work the same as time in real life. It's what the DM decides it is. Therefore, the effectiveness of the spell depends entirely upon the DM's style. There's no reason to be upset by it.

[DivisibleByZero]

The fact that the spell concerns him, means that your reading is not reasonable in the eyes of the designer Jeremy Crawford.
What?
He wouldn't say that he needed to keep an eye on it if he thought that reading was unreasonable. What you're saying makes no sense.
If he thought that were unreasonable, he would have simply said No, and would not have stated that he'd need to keep an eye on it. Stating that he'll need to keep an eye on it 100% verifies that he considers it reasonable. Maybe not what he first intended, but reasonable.

[mephnick]

Alright, let's take an example in play. Your players just had a combat and have at least one minute to recover. Do they have time to just take a short rest instead?

In my experience, situations where one minute of rest is possible but one hour of rest isn't are surprisingly uncommon.

A short rest doesn't heal every PC 10d6HP for the cost of a single spell slot from one player. It's basically saving every single PC ALL of their hit dice every single day for a negligible cost.

[Finieous]

A short rest doesn't heal every PC 10d6HP for the cost of a single spell slot from one player. It's basically saving every single PC ALL of their hit dice every single day for a negligible cost.

It's getting to the point where they can just say, "Characters heal up to full after every combat," video-game style. Hit points just become an in-combat health bar.

[Arguss]

sniff:smallsigh:

[Easy_Lee]

Like I said, it depends on your experience, then. I've never seen hit dice become a major concern, especially not in 5e with short rest resources and purchasable healing potions. But if you're trying to run a gauntlet where healing is scarce and every point of damage you take counts, then yeah the spell is great in that case.

And would you feel justified banning the spell in your campaign? Would you be upset that a player thought of the spell? Again, that depends on the DM. Some DMs actually like it when their players find a simple solution to what the DM thought would be a major problem.

So again, there's no reason to be mad about the spell, especially given that it's less broken than many other spells out there, such as summon spells or Tiny Hut - long rest at will.

[Cybren]

Alright, let's take an example in play. Your players just had a combat and have at least one minute to recover. Do they have time to just take a short rest instead?

In my experience, situations where one minute of rest is possible but one hour of rest isn't are surprisingly uncommon. And even in those situations, players often find some method to get their rest - such as by using a Tiny Hut, which has a casting time of one minute. Coincidence?

Time in D&D doesn't work the same as time in real life. It's what the DM decides it is. Therefore, the effectiveness of the spell depends entirely upon the DM's style. There's no reason to be upset by it.

I think having a minute to rest but not an hour is exceptionally common. A minute isn't that long. A minute is "let's catch our breath and pick up the gear we dropped" amount of time.

[Finieous]

I think having a minute to rest but not an hour is exceptionally common. A minute isn't that long. A minute is "let's catch our breath and pick up the gear we dropped" amount of time.

A minute is less time than it takes to search the room and take all the wallets after a fight. Might as well heal everyone up to full while we're at it.

[Easy_Lee]

I refer back to my main point, which everyone has so far ignored: the strength of the spell depends on the DM's style. Maybe it's broken in your campaign. It wouldn't be broken in one of mine.

And I repeat, compare this spell out of combat to Tiny Hut. A pair of wizards can chain-cast Tiny Hut for infinite long rests and invulnerability (edit: or a single elf wizard after the trance errata). A single wizard can do so with a one-minute delay each time. That's a third level spell. Healing Spirit is far from the most powerful spell out there.

[Willie the Duck]

And would you feel justified banning the spell in your campaign?

I for one wouldn't ban it. I would declare that it works for the first creature you want healed that entered that space each turn, or just flat out say, "yes you can use it out of combat (because no one really plays like you can't use round-based spells outside of combat), but you are not doing some bizarre dance-line routine where you all pass through the same space once every six seconds." But again, this it the kind of thing that only is a problem in online think-pieces, AFAICT.


Would you be upset that a player thought of the spell?

Never. This is like Simulacrum + Wish (or choose your own other example)-- a painfully obvious exploit that I fully expect most of my players to stumble over whilst pouring over this book. If they do memorize this spell, however, I will lean over and say, "remember when you giggled like a madman when you discovered <X>, and you were super excited until you found out that everyone had discovered the same? Yeah, this is one of those moments. And just like then, I'm not going to let you run roughshod over the game. So here is how we are going to play this spell...<see paragraph above>."

[Easy_Lee]

I for one wouldn't ban it. I would declare that it works for the first creature you want healed that entered that space each turn, or just flat out say, "yes you can use it out of combat (because no one really plays like you can't use round-based spells outside of combat), but you are not doing some bizarre dance-line routine where you all pass through the same space once every six seconds." But again, this it the kind of thing that only is a problem in online think-pieces, AFAICT.



Never. This is like Simulacrum + Wish (or choose your own other example)-- a painfully obvious exploit that I fully expect most of my players to stumble over whilst pouring over this book. If they do memorize this spell, however, I will lean over and say, "remember when you giggled like a madman when you discovered <X>, and you were super excited until you found out that everyone had discovered the same? Yeah, this is one of those moments. And just like then, I'm not going to let you run roughshod over the game. So here is how we are going to play this spell...<see paragraph above>."

See my previous post. The spell is only broken in some campaigns.

You're the DM. You don't need to limit player options. If you think really hard, you can counter or copy anything the players do.

[Willie the Duck]

You don't need to limit player options. If you think really hard, you can counter or copy anything the players do.

Yes, but some things it is preferable to preemptively disallow rather than respond in kind*, depending, as you say, on your campaign.
*for instance, in my 3e campaigns we arranged it such that neither PCs nor their opponents would be using 'scry-and-die,' rather than it becoming a MAD scenario.

[JBPuffin]

As DM, I'd totally let that spell work in that way. Players at my tables rarely figure out those sorts of cheats, but since I like my party able to clear a dungeon in a single go, it sounds bloody amazing.

[Easy_Lee]

As DM, I'd totally let that spell work in that way. Players at my tables rarely figure out those sorts of cheats, but since I like my party able to clear a dungeon in a single go, it sounds bloody amazing.

See, this is my point. The spell is fine in some campaigns with some DMs. It just depends.

Any spell can be broken - meaning exceptionally powerful - in the correct context. Subtle Metamagic is my favorite example, as a wide variety of spells become extremely powerful in certain contexts when there's no evidence of who cast them.

In short, we can't say a given spell is broken (at least, none of the published ones) without knowing the context of the campaign.

[Estrillian]

Estrillian, there is text at the beginning of the "Treasure" section of the DMG about how many hordes per tier the "average" party will encounter. I'm pretty sure those are WAG numbers, not system requirements though. It isn't WBL like 3e/4e had, but if you're conventionally dungeon-crawling, they kinda make sense.

I also would be interested in seeing how it breaks down in published adventures though.

I did a count through of all the treasure in PotA recently on another thread (where people were talking about their 10s of 1000s of excess gold). From that I'd conclude that there are very few Hoards, approximately 1 or 2 per dungeon, with the biggest concentrations of treasure being hidden at the bottom of pools of water or in the form of Queen Aerisi's Jewellery.

From the pools of water case I'd conclude that while a hoard might exist, that doesn't mean that a party is bound to find it even if they do complete the relevant encounters. I'd also conclude that the module designers didn't follow that average.

[Lombra]

What?
He wouldn't say that he needed to keep an eye on it if he thought that reading was unreasonable. What you're saying makes no sense.
If he thought that were unreasonable, he would have simply said No, and would not have stated that he'd need to keep an eye on it. Stating that he'll need to keep an eye on it 100% verifies that he considers it reasonable. Maybe not what he first intended, but reasonable.

At this point I have to believe that my english (which probably is too poor for what I want to communicate) isn't enaugh to convey my point to you, so let's just drop it here. Anyways, @mer.c got what I was intending to point you at.

[DivisibleByZero]

At this point I have to believe that my english (which probably is too poor for what I want to communicate) isn't enaugh to convey my point to you, so let's just drop it here. Anyways, @mer.c got what I was intending to point you at.

You mean this?:

I mean, he also said:

So he explicitly shot down the “Turns don’t exist outside of combat” argument.

He didn't shut down the FACT that the PHB explicitly states that rounds and turns are a product of combat under normal circumstances. He basically said that if "The DM might [wants to] use a different time scale
depending on the context of the situation at hand" (which is stated right above the FACT that rounds and turns are a product of combat) that he's more than welcome to, and that this then becomes an exceptional OoC healing spell.
I mean, seriously, I'm quoting directly from the PHB and you're disputing it.
Rule it however you want to, but my not allowing it outside of combat based on that fact is no more invalid than your allowing it would be.

[Tanarii]

I am curious as to how you arrive at that figure. I'm not seeing why there necessarily should be any hoards in an adventuring day. A Hoard implies that you have defeated, not only a large number of foes, but that you have defeated those foes in some sort of lair or home area where they might have a hoard, and that it makes sense in the game that they have had some way to gather said hoard.

[snip}

Or do I have it wrong?


Estrillian, there is text at the beginning of the "Treasure" section of the DMG about how many hordes per tier the "average" party will encounter. I'm pretty sure those are WAG numbers, not system requirements though. It isn't WBL like 3e/4e had, but if you're conventionally dungeon-crawling, they kinda make sense.DMG p 133:
You can hand out as much or as little treasure as you want. Over the course of a typical campaign, a party finds treasure hoards amounting to seven rolls on the Challenge 0- 4 table, eighteen rolls on the Challenge 5- 10 table, twelve rolls on the Challenge 11- 16 table, and eight rolls on the Challenge 17+ table.

Plus I used the tables.

Thus the words "if the campaign uses anything like the DMG guidelines" in my initial post #24 on page 1 (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=22565116&postcount=24). However, I didn't include the words "on average", and I should have. Certainly the 18 hoards for Tier 2 might be bunched up in groups of six in a row each during levels 6, 8 & 10. Or even combined into one big hoard at level 10, right before you hit Tier 11.

Or the DM might just ignore the recommended guidelines completely. As it specifically calls out, "You can hand out as much or as little treasure as you want."

I wouldn't say they are WAG numbers, because they aren't a guess, they are a recommendation. But they are definitely not a system requirement. They are numbers the DMG is recommending to DMs, after stating they can hand out as much or as little as you want. (If the WAG statement is in relation to published WotC / official play adventures and modules, fair enough. No clue how well they line up.)

[stoutstien]

My favorite part about this of all the spells in this Splat book, people are complaining about a healing spell. It actually made me giggle.

[Easy_Lee]

My favorite part about this of all the spells in this Splat book, people are complaining about a healing spell. It actually made me giggle.

Invalidate an encounter with hypnotic pattern, stinking cloud, a summon spell, or related? That's fine. Skip an encounter with clever use of Invisibility or teleportation?
Also find.

Restore everyone's HP after an encounter? Unacceptable.

[Pex]

I'll tell you that because it obviously is. Whenever there is a time-sensitive situation of a minute or less, initiative and turns are called for, and that doesn't preclude the possibility of situations involving more than a minute.

"Guys, this spirit is only here for one minute! Get as much healing as you can!"

I agree that for a short time in tier 1 and maaaaaybe early tier 2, healing potions are more precious. A 2nd level slot is also very precious in those times. So that short time is the only time I would consider using this for ooc healing. I also don't give a flip as a DM if the party is willing to blow a 2nd level slot to heal up after combat.

DMs exist who just can't stand it that PCs might be at full hit points for the non-first combat of the day and sometimes even the first combat of the non-first day of adventure arc. It's irrelevant to them the party used resources to achieve it; they absolutely hate it.

[Submortimer]

{{scrubbed}}

[mer.c]

Invalidate an encounter with hypnotic pattern, stinking cloud, a summon spell, or related? That's fine. Skip an encounter with clever use of Invisibility or teleportation?
Also find.

Restore everyone's HP after an encounter? Unacceptable.

Difference being skipping an encounter is skipping an encounter - with plenty of room for DMs to work around. This level of OoC healing for a paltry resource investment actually removes an entire layer of resource management, along with completely outclassing existing options, with much more limited in-game counterplay. As evidenced by the range of DM decisions on how many healing potions the party has access to, that's an important part of a lot of campaigns.

I'll just be tweaking it to make it 1 target per turn or max 10 charges. That keeps it a very useful spell without removing HP attrition from the campaign, so it's no big problem for me.

[DivisibleByZero]

it makes you an A$$hat.

I'm not going to respond to anything you just said, because you don't know how to say it without name calling, or without deliberately sidestepping the filters.

[Submortimer]

Moreover, DBZ, look here:

From the PHB:

Suffocating
A creature can hold its breath for a number of minutes equal to 1 + its Constitution modifier (minimum of 30 seconds).


When a creature runs out of breath or is choking, it can survive for a number of rounds equal to its Constitution modifier (minimum of 1 round). At the start of its next turn, it drops to 0 hit points and is dying, and it can't regain hit points or be stabilized until it can breathe again.


For example, a creature with a Constitution of 14 can hold its breath for 3 minutes. If it starts suffocating, it has 2 rounds to reach air before it drops to 0 hit points.


the book directly contradicts your argument

[mer.c]

Moreover, DBZ, look here:

From the PHB:

Suffocating
A creature can hold its breath for a number of minutes equal to 1 + its Constitution modifier (minimum of 30 seconds).


When a creature runs out of breath or is choking, it can survive for a number of rounds equal to its Constitution modifier (minimum of 1 round). At the start of its next turn, it drops to 0 hit points and is dying, and it can't regain hit points or be stabilized until it can breathe again.


For example, a creature with a Constitution of 14 can hold its breath for 3 minutes. If it starts suffocating, it has 2 rounds to reach air before it drops to 0 hit points.


the book directly contradicts your argument

Hope there's no bag of angry rats down there with them or they'll be in trouble! :smalltongue:

[Submortimer]

I'm not going to respond to anything you just said, because you don't know how to say it without name calling, or without deliberately sidestepping the filters.

That's fine. I don't need you to. I just need to put the proper information out there. I don't care if you ignore me, I just don't want you being..how you've been while still being 100% wrong in both the RAW and RAI interpretations of the rules.

[DivisibleByZero]

Moreover, DBZ, look here:
the book directly contradicts your argument

The book directly contradicts nothing.
In combat and other fast-paced situations, the game relies on rounds, a 6-second span of time described in chapter 9
That (suffocating for X amount of time, where you die in 3.... 2.... 1....) is quite clearly a fast paced situation, and thus falls under the rounds/turns umbrella exactly like combat.


I just need to put the proper information out there.

Let me know when that happens.

[Finieous]

DMs exist who just can't stand it that PCs might be at full hit points for the non-first combat of the day and sometimes even the first combat of the non-first day of adventure arc. It's irrelevant to them the party used resources to achieve it; they absolutely hate it.

Yeah, some of us totally play D&D wrong.

Incidentally, given my play-style preferences, this spell is a problem for me as a player or DM. It's not the first or only design element in 5e related to healing and recovery that clashes with my preferred play style, but it makes the preexisting ones even worse.

[Submortimer]

The book directly contradicts nothing.
In combat and other fast-paced situations, the game relies on rounds, a 6-second span of time described in chapter 9
That (suffocating for X amount of time, where you die in 3.... 2.... 1....) is quite clearly a fast paced situation, and thus falls under the rounds/turns umbrella exactly like combat.

And a minute casting of a healing spell can be construed as a fast-paced situation.

Moreover, as I said twice before, the only time the book tells you you can take an Action is in the Combat chapter, during your turn.

From the PHB:

"On your turn, you can move a distance up to your speed and take one action. You decide whether to move first or take your action first. Your speed — sometimes called your walking speed — is noted on your character sheet.

The most common actions you can take are described in the "Actions in Combat" section later in this chapter. Many class features and other abilities provide additional options for your action."

Do you also argue that you cannot ever cast any spell or perform any task requiring the use of an Action outside of combat? If not, you are cherry-picking.

[Tanarii]

Yeah, some of us totally play D&D wrong.God forbid some people might not like a CaS play-style, with each adventuring day not being an indivisible challenge that doesn't depend on what comes before it, right?

Pex actually said "the party used resources to achieve it", but I can't pass up an opportunity to straw man his argument to the opposite extreme. :smallbiggrin:

[DivisibleByZero]

Do you also argue that you cannot ever cast any spell or perform any task requiring the use of an Action outside of combat? If not, you are cherry-picking.

It's not cherry picking.
It's taking what is a ridiculously OP spell OoC and relegating it to in combat only, so that it's no longer OP.
And that ruling is completely supported by the rules about Time.

You don't have to like it. You don't have to agree with it. You don't have to rule that way. But you do have to admit that disallowing it is no more invalid that allowing it, because the rules for Time absolutely, 100%, beyond a shadow of a doubt, support this decision.

This is probably where you call me names again.

[History_buff]

I actually registered for the forum just to reply to this topic. Longtime lurker.

Anyway, could not possibly disagree more with DivisiblebyZero. That position is the worst kind of semantics and quite frankly is rife with the potential for disagreement and table friction between players and the dm. I don't believe the position that you can't use a spell out of combat because there "are no turns" outside is a reasonable one. It just logically does not follow.

[Submortimer]

It's not cherry picking.
It's taking what is a ridiculously OP spell OoC and relegating it to in combat only, so that it's no longer OP.
And that ruling is completely supported by the rules about Time.

You don't have to like it. You don't have to agree with it. You don't have to rule that way. But you do have to admit that disallowing it is no more invalid that allowing it, because the rules for Time absolutely, 100%, beyond a shadow of a doubt, support this decision.

This is probably where you call me names again.

It IS cherry picking. You are ignoring the fact that, if the game worked the way you are assuming it does, you cannot use any ability or cast any spell that requires and Action outside of combat.

And the Time rules most certainly do not support that. They only state that the game uses a round aas a 6 second span of time when it needs to, not that these 6 second span of time don't exist.

Because we know a round is 6 seconds, we know 10 rounds passes over the course of a minute. Since the spell states that you gain the effect by starting your turn in the area, we know that it requires no other interaction other than just sitting there to gain the benefit. The spell lasts for a minute, so 10 rounds pass, 10 turns for each character pass uneventfully, and everyone heals because the Druid is a friendly guy.

This is how the rules say the game works. If they did indeed work the way you think they do, you couldn't do something as simple as cast ​feather fall when you jump off a cliff.

[DivisibleByZero]

Jumping off a cliff is the same as suffocating. You're about to die in 3.... 2.... 1.... and is a fast paced situation.

Rule it however you want to.
I'm just going to repeat this and then tell you to have a nice day.

It's not cherry picking.
It's taking what is a ridiculously OP spell OoC and relegating it to in combat only, so that it's no longer OP.
And that ruling is completely supported by the rules about Time.

You don't have to like it. You don't have to agree with it. You don't have to rule that way. But you do have to admit that disallowing it is no more invalid that allowing it, because the rules for Time absolutely, 100%, beyond a shadow of a doubt, support this decision.

This is probably where you call me names again.

[LordEntrails]

...But you do have to admit that disallowing it is no more invalid that allowing it, because the rules for Time absolutely, 100%, beyond a shadow of a doubt, support this decision.....
Nope. None of us do, because you are wrong.


I actually registered for the forum just to reply to this topic. Longtime lurker.

Anyway, could not possibly disagree more with DivisiblebyZero. ...
Welcome. Good reason to join *G*

[Typhon]

The anger in this thread reminds me of the total hatred the concept of a healing cantrip created. I get not wanting to minimize the hit point resource management, because it breaks the barrier of disbelief. However, loading up on healing potions like you are prepping for a kegger, is pretty much the same outcome. I am equally forced into disbelief over limitless cantrips in general, but that is just my thoughts and opinions.

I think the most effective, if not most efficient, fixes listed are either make it charges (10) or flat once a round usable. It is a base level 2 spell, static to a 5ftx5ft square area, and only lasts one minute (10 rounds) whether anyone steps into the area or not. So max possible is 10d6 under these changes.

Not game breaking and preserves the life clerics healing champion status. Now if people would quit trying to make the warlock a warrior class.

[Dalebert]

It's taking what is a ridiculously OP spell OoC and relegating it to in combat only, so that it's no longer OP.

That's fine. Your game.


And that ruling is completely supported by the rules about Time.

Not at all. Just rule that way if you feel the need. Don't proclaim it to be the RAW. That's absurd. You're trying to create this bizarre metagame concept of a binary trigger of in-combat vs. out-of-combat. The use of turns is just a mechanic that is used to figure out what different creatures can do when they have a limited amount of time to do those things. Any situation where time is relevant is a situation that calls for rolling initiative and using turns, e.g. one minute to make use of a spell effect.


You don't have to like it. You don't have to agree with it. You don't have to rule that way. But you do have to admit that disallowing it is no more invalid that allowing it, because the rules for Time absolutely, 100%, beyond a shadow of a doubt, support this decision.

Saying it over and over again with escalating enthusiasm is not an argument. I'm not sure why your so invested in convincing people this is the RAW instead of just saying "I think it's too powerful and I'm going to disallow it in my games."

[DivisibleByZero]

Not at all. Just rule that way if you feel the need. Don't proclaim it to be the RAW. That's absurd.

It's certainly not contradictory to what RAW says.
Claiming that it is is what's absurd.

I'm telling you that the book says this and that when read straight, without reading between the lines, that's what it says.
You're reading between the lines and telling me that's why it isn't RAW.

Written:

Time
In situations where keeping track of the passage of time is important, the DM determines the time a task requires. The DM might use a different time scale depending on the context of the situation at hand. In a dungeon environment, the adventurers’ movement happens on a scale of minutes. It takes them about a minute to creep down a long hallway, another minute to check for traps on the door at the end of the hall, and a good ten minutes to search the cham ber beyond for anything interesting or valuable.
In a city or wilderness, a scale of hours is often more appropriate. Adventurers eager to reach the lonely tower at the heart of the forest hurry across those fifteen miles in just under four hours’ time.
For long journeys, a scale of days w orks best. Following the road from Baldur’s Gate to Waterdeep, the adventurers spend four uneventful days before a goblin am bush interrupts their journey.
In combat and other fast-paced situations, the game relies on rounds, a 6-second span of time described in chapter 9

And then, in Chapter 9:

The Order of Combat
A typical com bat encounter is a clash between two sides, a flurry of w eapon swings, feints, parries, footwork, and spellcasting. The game organizes the chaos of com bat into a cycle of rounds and turns. A round represents about 6 seconds in the game world. During a round, each participant in a battle takes a turn. The order of turns is determined at the beginning of a com bat encounter, when everyone rolls initiative. Once everyone has taken a turn, the fight continues to the next round if neither side has defeated the other.

My interpretation is 100% RAW.
Your interpretation is based on the first italicized statement, which may or may not be true at each DM's discretion, "depending on the context of the situation at hand."

If you want to argue that Turns and Rounds exist outside of combat, show me where it says that.
Until then, my interpretation is 100% RAW, whether you like it or not.

[LordEntrails]

...
I think the most effective, if not most efficient, fixes listed are either make it charges (10) or flat once a round usable. It is a base level 2 spell, static to a 5ftx5ft square area, and only lasts one minute (10 rounds) whether anyone steps into the area or not. So max possible is 10d6 under these changes.

Not game breaking and preserves the life clerics healing champion status. Now if people would quit trying to make the warlock a warrior class.
Yea, simple. Other than forced movement (which I would have a table ruling to disallow), it's easy to say a 5ft square means one target per round. One target per round means 10d6. Not a problem for me.

As for DBZ's... fanaticism, we've all read what you have quoted 3 or 4 times now. Please stop wasting space and bits by continuing to say the same things over and over again. To put just a couple of holes in your argument and pulling from your quote;
- Who's to say the duration of a spell is not a "fast paced situation"?
- No where do the rules say or suggest that the DM can not use rounds outside of combat. It simple says they are the mechanism for use during combat. And actually, the rules suggest that rounds should be used outside of combat when it says "and other fast paced situations".

[Dudewithknives]

Yea, simple. Other than forced movement (which I would have a table ruling to disallow), it's easy to say a 5ft square means one target per round. One target per round means 10d6. Not a problem for me.

As for DBZ's... fanaticism, we've all read what you have quoted 3 or 4 times now. Please stop wasting space and bits by continuing to say the same things over and over again. To put just a couple of holes in your argument and pulling from your quote;
- Who's to say the duration of a spell is not a "fast paced situation"?
- No where do the rules say or suggest that the DM can not use rounds outside of combat. It simple says they are the mechanism for use during combat. And actually, the rules suggest that rounds should be used outside of combat when it says "and other fast paced situations".

Just give it up, he will never, under any circumstances admit he is wrong.

The same thing happened earlier this week with the Eldritch Smite rules, even when Jeremy Crawford himself, said he was wrong, he still argued about it.

[DivisibleByZero]

- Who's to say the duration of a spell is not a "fast paced situation"?
- No where do the rules say or suggest that the DM can not use rounds outside of combat. It simple says they are the mechanism for use during combat. And actually, the rules suggest that rounds should be used outside of combat when it says "and other fast paced situations".

The DM says whether it is or not. Not the player.
No, the rules do not say that you can't use rounds and turns outside of combat. But they do explicitly say that this is the norm, and that anything outside of that is the DM's choice.
Once again, show me where it says that they do exist outside of combat. It doesn't say that anywhere. You can rule that if you want to, but it doesn't actually say it.

If the DM chooses to go with what's actually written? Then my interpretation is 100% RAW.
You're assuming the DM uses timing other than that directed by the book simply because the book says that he can choose to. The logic fault is yours, because he could just as easily choose to go with what is actually written.

[TekDragon]

See my previous post. The spell is only broken in some campaigns.

You're the DM. You don't need to limit player options. If you think really hard, you can counter or copy anything the players do.

It isn't about breaking the campaign. It's about breaking the other players. You do understand that D&D is a GROUP activity, right?

It's about taking every out-of-combat healing ability every other character has, combining them together, and then exceeding it.

A druid casting Healing Spirit at Level 3 can do more healing to a 6 man party than they can get from:

- A bard using Song of Rest
- A cleric casting Prayer of Healing
- a paladin casting Aura of Vitality
- A character using the Healing feat

COMBINED.

Your argument is akin to WotC releasing a class that does 5x Rogue's sneak attack damage every single round, and you saying "well, a DM can adjust the HP". Sure, the DM can do that. That doesn't change the fact that this PC is now doing more damage than every other PC combined in the party. But you don't seem to care that every other player is now going "what's the point?" because you're only fixated on your campaign.

C'mon, man.


The DM says whether it is or not. Not the player.
No, the rules do not say that you can't use rounds and turns outside of combat. But they do explicitly say that this is the norm, and that anything outside of that is the DM's choice.
Once again, show me where it says that they do exist outside of combat. It doesn't say that anywhere. You can rule that if you want to, but it doesn't actually say it.

If the DM chooses to go with what's actually written? Then my interpretation is 100% RAW.
You're assuming the DM uses timing other than that directed by the book simply because the book says that he can choose to. The logic fault is yours, because he could just as easily choose to go with what is actually written.

No offense, dude. But what the hell are you talking about? Where in any of the rules does it say that 1 round = 6 seconds only applies to combat?

[DivisibleByZero]

No offense, dude. But what the hell are you talking about? Where in any of the rules does it say that 1 round = 6 seconds only applies to combat?
Why do I have to keep explaining this?

It doesn't say that it ONLY applies to combat anywhere.
What it does say is that this (combat and fast paced situations) is the norm, and that further explanation can be found in Chapter 9 (wherein combat is explained).
It also says that a DM can choose to change the timing of things if he wants to.

What it does not say, anywhere, is that this is required or expected.
"The DM can choose to change things up from the norm described here"
and
"Everyone should just assume that this is always changed no matter what"
are two very different things.

I'm not saying that it only applies to combat. I'm saying that it only applies to combat, and anywhere else that the DM says it applies.
Note that this is not anywhere else that the player says it applies.
If the DM says that it doesn't apply anywhere else, then it doesn't. It's his call. Not yours.

[Submortimer]

The DM says whether it is or not. Not the player.
No, the rules do not say that you can't use rounds and turns outside of combat. But they do explicitly say that this is the norm, and that anything outside of that is the DM's choice.
Once again, show me where it says that they do exist outside of combat. It doesn't say that anywhere. You can rule that if you want to, but it doesn't actually say it.

If the DM chooses to go with what's actually written? Then my interpretation is 100% RAW.
You're assuming the DM uses timing other than that directed by the book simply because the book says that he can choose to. The logic fault is yours, because he could just as easily choose to go with what is actually written.

You still have not spoken to the fact that, if the rules work as you say they do, then you can clearly not perform any action or bonus action outside of combat, because the rules only ever state that you can do those things within a turn.

That means you cannot cast fly to get over a ravine, or control flames to stoke a bonfire, or water breathing before diving into a lake, or the clearly out-of-combat spell catnap.


And If you want the clearest contradiction to your case, see regenerate:

You touch a creature and stimulate its natural healing ability. The target regains 4d8 + 15 hit points. For the duration of the spell, the target regains 1 hit point at the start of each of its turns (10 hit points each minute).

Those parentheses aren't there because it's special, it's to clarify how many turns happen in one minute.

[Captain Panda]

Why do I have to keep explaining this?


Frankly, because you're being pedantic and obnoxious. It would be much simpler to just say "I don't like that this spell is above the power curve and will react to stifle my players attempting to use it as it is written." Your insistence that your ruling is RAW because it isn't stated explicitly anywhere that a DM can't or shouldn't spell time out of combat differently than in combat is what is annoying... pretty much everyone else in the thread from what I can tell. The DM can rule whatever he or she likes at the table, and players who don't like it can find a new DM, but that does not mean the rulings are RAW or reflect the intended spirit. Mearls has flatly said that yes, the healing spirit works out of combat. You are very clearly wrong about the design intent here.

[dejarnjc]

People should just not engage with DBZ in discussions like this. He/she's like this in 75% of the threads I see him/her in. Just ignore. Live and let live.

Feel free to point out when and why he/she's wrong for others benefit but once that's done there's no need to insist on getting the last word.

[Geeknamese]

Geez...you only see this level of stubbornness and anger in gaming threads (and disputes with significant others) lol. I think DBZ’s point boils down to, if the player is going to rules lawyer a spell to do something ridiculous like play musical chairs/congo line a broken spell that the designer obviously sees possible issue with, then the DM can play the same game and use this strict literal reading of the Time rules to say no. Does it make any sense that a spell can be used in combat but can’t be used out of combat? No, but you can narratively explain it to get by. It’s no more illogical and just as gamist as hit points, hit dice, superiority dice, etc.

For my own table, I would just say no to the spell or compromise and say it can’t be used out of combat because that would be broken.

[DivisibleByZero]

Geez...you only see this level of stubbornness and anger in gaming threads (and disputes with significant others) lol. I think DBZ’s point boils down to, if the player is going to rules lawyer a spell to do something ridiculous like play musical chairs/congo line a broken spell that the designer obviously sees possible issue with, then the DM can play the same game and use this strict literal reading of the Time rules to say no. Does it make any sense that a spell can be used in combat but can’t be used out of combat? No, but you can narratively explain it to get by. It’s no more illogical and just as gamist as hit points, hit dice, superiority dice, etc.

Finally, someone gets it.

For my own table, I would just say no to the spell or compromise and say it can’t be used out of combat because that would be broken.
Which is what I said to begin with.

[History_buff]

The act of casting a spell makes time constraints matter and triggers your "RAW" interpretation of "fast-paced".

It's not like the spell will fizzle simply because its cast out of combat because turns don't exist. That's an absurd outcome.

If the rules can be read in such a way that makes more sense than an alternate interpretation, then the one that makes more sense should control.

[MadBear]

Short Version: I agree with DBZ

Long Version: He's not claiming that the rules only work in combat. He's not saying that the way you rule it is wrong. He's saying the rules give the DM the leeway to rule it however it best fits their campaign, which in his means it doesn't work.

I'm really not seeing why there is such confusion and misrepresentation of peoples positions......

[Easy_Lee]

It isn't about breaking the campaign. It's about breaking the other players. You do understand that D&D is a GROUP activity, right?

It's about taking every out-of-combat healing ability every other character has, combining them together, and then exceeding it.

A druid casting Healing Spirit at Level 3 can do more healing to a 6 man party than they can get from:

- A bard using Song of Rest
- A cleric casting Prayer of Healing
- a paladin casting Aura of Vitality
- A character using the Healing feat

COMBINED.

Your argument is akin to WotC releasing a class that does 5x Rogue's sneak attack damage every single round, and you saying "well, a DM can adjust the HP". Sure, the DM can do that. That doesn't change the fact that this PC is now doing more damage than every other PC combined in the party. But you don't seem to care that every other player is now going "what's the point?" because you're only fixated on your campaign.

C'mon, man.

Out of combat healing is not combat. It's only one small part of the game. And last I checked, this spell stacks with everything you mentioned. Notably, song of rest doesn't require a spell slot, the Healer feat is quite useful in combat on some characters (especially rogues) and also doesn't require a spell spot, and aura of vitality is arguably more useful in combat. Same goes for prayer of healing.

So, I don't see this as the huge problem some are making it out to be. I have less problem with this than summoning 8 axe beaks as an action for a full hour at level 5, or turning into a brown bear at level 2.

[sightlessrealit]

In campaigns where healing is an important limited resource, it is far more efficient than any other healing spell. To the point where practically every other healing ability is irrelevant. It restores an average of 35 hit points to any number of creatures in one minute while the next most efficient option, prayer of healing restores an average of 12 hit points to 6 creatures in 10 minutes.

In campaigns where healing isn't a limited resource it's completely irrelevant.

So, whats the problem?

[CantigThimble]

I think a lot of arguments on here could be cut down to half the size if people would stop trying to insist that the way they want to play the game is 'RAW' or 'correct'. It doesn't matter in the slightest if the way you want to play the game is RAW or not. It only matters how you want to play the game and why you think that way of playing the game would make for a better experience. For some reason a few people prefer an ocean of pedantry about RAW to saying "I'm not going to do that because I don't like it and I think it would make the game less fun."


So, whats the problem?

Do you honestly not see anything wrong with this or are you being obtuse to prove a point? This is a sincere question, I'm having trouble telling telling the difference and I just want the conversation to move forward productively.

[DivisibleByZero]

Short Version: I agree with DBZ

Long Version: He's not claiming that the rules only work in combat. He's not saying that the way you rule it is wrong. He's saying the rules give the DM the leeway to rule it however it best fits their campaign, which in his means it doesn't work.

I'm really not seeing why there is such confusion and misrepresentation of peoples positions......

I know, right?
Neither way is wrong. The rules allow for both readings.
People just like to push my buttons and argue with anything I type, no matter what it is.

[CantigThimble]

Short Version: I agree with DBZ

Long Version: He's not claiming that the rules only work in combat. He's not saying that the way you rule it is wrong. He's saying the rules give the DM the leeway to rule it however it best fits their campaign, which in his means it doesn't work.

I'm really not seeing why there is such confusion and misrepresentation of peoples positions......

If he had actually lead with that instead of this:


It doesn't work outside of combat.
It requires a creature to begin its turn inside of it. There are no turns outside of combat, so it does nothing, because the healing cannot be triggered.
It's an in-combat HoT.
That's the RAW. Do with that as you see fit. But by RAW it does nothing outside of combat because turns don't exist outside of combat.

Prayer of Healing is the out-of-combat Heal.

I think everyone would have agreed with him.

If that was what you meant from the start you should really phrase it differently if you don't want people arguing with you.

[Tanarii]

Long Version: He's not claiming that the rules only work in combat. He's not saying that the way you rule it is wrong.That's precisely what he said. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=22564694)

He claimed "It doesn't work outside of combat.
It requires a creature to begin its turn inside of it. There are no turns outside of combat, so it does nothing, because the healing cannot be triggered."
&
"That's the RAW. Do with that as you see fit."

[LordEntrails]

So, how come everyone is ruling that they read this spell to mean it affects everyone in the party at the same time?

From what others have written, it affect a 5 foot square. In combat, baring special situations, only one medium sized creature can occupy a 5 foot square at a time. I don't see any reason to change this out of combat.

If the above is agreed upon, then this spell does 1d6/round x 10 rounds of healing (total, not to each creature). Is that really broken?

Song of Rest is probably not going to give that much healing on average, but it could do a lot more in special cases. Everything else, with the caveat already mentioned, seem to be similar.

[CantigThimble]

So, how come everyone is ruling that they read this spell to mean it affects everyone in the party at the same time?

From what others have written, it affect a 5 foot square. In combat, baring special situations, only one medium sized creature can occupy a 5 foot square at a time. I don't see any reason to change this out of combat.

If the above is agreed upon, then this spell does 1d6/round x 10 rounds of healing (total, not to each creature). Is that really broken?

Song of Rest is probably not going to give that much healing on average, but it could do a lot more in special cases. Everything else, with the caveat already mentioned, seem to be similar.

It triggers whenever a creature first enters the area, so you don't need to stand in it you can just walk through it and get the same benefit. Your entire party can just each walk through it on their respective turns.

[Dudewithknives]

So, how come everyone is ruling that they read this spell to mean it affects everyone in the party at the same time?

From what others have written, it affect a 5 foot square. In combat, baring special situations, only one medium sized creature can occupy a 5 foot square at a time. I don't see any reason to change this out of combat.

If the above is agreed upon, then this spell does 1d6/round x 10 rounds of healing (total, not to each creature). Is that really broken?

Song of Rest is probably not going to give that much healing on average, but it could do a lot more in special cases. Everything else, with the caveat already mentioned, seem to be similar.

It happens when you enter the square as well as if you start there, so people could just walk through the light and keep going to get the healing, so it could heal multiple people evert turn.

Personally I do not see a problem with great put of combat healing, I do however slightly understand why people complain why it is only druid and ranger normally and not all divine classes, but it does make sense thematically.

Cleric/Paladin somewhat for in combat healing.
Druid/ranger for out of combat healing.

[Laurefindel]

See, this is my point. The spell is fine in some campaigns with some DMs. It just depends.

Any spell can be broken - meaning exceptionally powerful - in the correct context. Subtle Metamagic is my favorite example, as a wide variety of spells become extremely powerful in certain contexts when there's no evidence of who cast them.

In short, we can't say a given spell is broken (at least, none of the published ones) without knowing the context of the campaign.

I agree with the above. For many groups, this spell will not break the game.

But even if the spell is not broken, it is appears to be out of curve with other healing spells. When an option is clearly supperior to all others, other options cease to be options altogether and that, I have a problem with.

For what it's worth, my mind is not set on that one, but like many, my first impression is that this spell obsoletes more content than it adds to the game.

[MadBear]

That's precisely what he said. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=22564694)

He claimed "It doesn't work outside of combat.
It requires a creature to begin its turn inside of it. There are no turns outside of combat, so it does nothing, because the healing cannot be triggered."
&
"That's the RAW. Do with that as you see fit."

That's fair (hard to keep track of everything said is 6 pages). So I was definitely wrong, when I said he didn't say that.


He did also clarified more thoroughly in his next post after that one. He even added that it wasn't just combat, but also other face paced events, as well as give page number and reference of what he was talking about.

[DivisibleByZero]

That's fair (hard to keep track of everything said is 6 pages). So I was definitely wrong, when I said he didn't say that.


He did also clarified more thoroughly in his next post after that one. He even added that it wasn't just combat, but also other face paced events, as well as give page number and reference of what he was talking about.

Yes.
I did say that in my first post. But nothing I said in that first post was wrong. That is indeed what the raw states.
That interpretation is perfectly valid.
The Raw just also allows for a DM to deviate from it.

[Pex]

The anger in this thread reminds me of the total hatred the concept of a healing cantrip created. I get not wanting to minimize the hit point resource management, because it breaks the barrier of disbelief. However, loading up on healing potions like you are prepping for a kegger, is pretty much the same outcome. I am equally forced into disbelief over limitless cantrips in general, but that is just my thoughts and opinions.

I think the most effective, if not most efficient, fixes listed are either make it charges (10) or flat once a round usable. It is a base level 2 spell, static to a 5ftx5ft square area, and only lasts one minute (10 rounds) whether anyone steps into the area or not. So max possible is 10d6 under these changes.

Not game breaking and preserves the life clerics healing champion status. Now if people would quit trying to make the warlock a warrior class.

Certainly no cost healing can cause problems. Metagame it could make players feel invulnerable and do stupid things. Resource management is part of the fun of play. If the players choose to use it to gain full health why should it bother the DM? It's their characters. For 5E specifically that does lead to the issue of players wanting to rest after every combat. Does the DM have a say in that? Yes because then it's not about the healing but gaming the system. The players are metagaming in a bad way. However, presuming situations like that are not happening, if players want to cast healing spells and/or spend money on available healing potions and/or someone uses Healer Feat and/or someone uses Inspiring Leader feat, that's not for the DM to condemn. Could one particular resource, in this thread's example the Healing Spirit spell, be too powerful? Since I don't have the book yet I can only answer the hypothetical with no judgment on the spell itself. It's possible, yes. It takes a 6th level spell slot to heal 70 hit points so there are means of comparison. However, something considered being too powerful should not rely on the concept that the party is at full health for the non-first combat of the day.

[Captain Panda]

It takes a 6th level spell slot to heal 70 hit points so there are means of comparison.

I don't think that that's a fair basis for comparison. Sure, the healing spirit in ideal circumstances will outheal "heal," but only over a minute, out of combat. Heal is to recover from a heavy hit in the middle of combat, and can really turn the tide of a fight. Healing Spirit doesn't have the same function, it's just a spell that allows a party to heal a lot over a minute.

Granted, it is extremely high on the power curve, but so are lots of things. Is it really the job of every DM to re-balance D&D? I don't mean closing loopholes that were clearly unintended. This is not a simulacrum/wish loop cheese. This won't break a game. By taking this away you're just taking a cool toy away from rangers and druids.

[Tanarii]

Granted, it is extremely high on the power curve, but so are lots of things. Is it really the job of every DM to re-balance D&D? This is not a simulacrum/wish loop cheese. This won't break a game.60d6 of out of combat healing for a 6 person party in one minute, for a 2nd level slot? To put it in cash value, that's 1500 gp worth of potions of healing. To compare to another spell that's designed to be out of combat in the same slot, Prayer of Healing, it's 3x as effective in 1/10th the time.

So yes. It is pure cheese by any objective comparison.

[SharkForce]

I don't think that that's a fair basis for comparison. Sure, the healing spirit in ideal circumstances will outheal "heal," but only over a minute, out of combat. Heal is to recover from a heavy hit in the middle of combat, and can really turn the tide of a fight. Healing Spirit doesn't have the same function, it's just a spell that allows a party to heal a lot over a minute.

Granted, it is extremely high on the power curve, but so are lots of things. Is it really the job of every DM to re-balance D&D? I don't mean closing loopholes that were clearly unintended. This is not a simulacrum/wish loop cheese. This won't break a game. By taking this away you're just taking a cool toy away from rangers and druids.

when cast out of a level 6 spell slot like a heal spell, healing spirit heals 5d6 per person able to trigger it per round.

all it takes is one halfway decent round where your party is reasonably mobile and you're going to match 70 HP in a single round (just takes 4 people), without cheesy exploits (which can dramatically increase the healing, but which are also extremely cheesy and obvious so probably a relatively minor concern), and the spell will have another 9 rounds left to do the exact same thing all over again.

it may or may not break your game. but it does far more than anything else that is remotely similar, and in that sense, is unbalanced.

[MadBear]

Is it really the job of every DM to re-balance D&D?.

yes and no. It's the DM's job to determine what works well for their campaign/group. 5e give you the rough framework, and it's up to you to populate and make it work as you see fit. In general, this isn't a problem, it's really just here on these forums where all of our different interpretations clash and there's no king DM to give a hard and fast ruling, that it seems frustrating/difficult.

In this case, there's valid reasons to both allow and not allow it. In my group, I wouldn't allow it at all out of combat, but that's because my world is gritty and managing your spells as resources is part of the fun, and this spell would ruin it in some ways.

In some peoples groups, it sounds like it'd be fine, and no problem at all, so why worry about it.

[LordEntrails]

It triggers whenever a creature first enters the area, so you don't need to stand in it you can just walk through it and get the same benefit. Your entire party can just each walk through it on their respective turns.

Unless you rule otherwise. And it;s a simple ruling to say it can only affect one creature per turn (which I agree is not the way the spell is written).


It happens when you enter the square as well as if you start there, so people could just walk through the light and keep going to get the healing, so it could heal multiple people evert turn.
...
And if my players tried this in combat, every NPC on the field would also walk through it. Usually I have many more NPCs than PCs so it would be the last time my party tried such a thing.


...
it may or may not break your game. but it does far more than anything else that is remotely similar, and in that sense, is unbalanced.

I agree that this spell is poorly realized. But I don't see it being worth all the angst. It is easily fixed by say one creature per round or not allowing it in the first place.

People have to expect things to be over and under powered from time to time. This is what we get when we demand more options, more crunch etc. Adapt and roll with it folks.

[DivisibleByZero]

Unless you rule otherwise.

So you're perfectly fine with ruling otherwise when you decide it's convenient, but when I say that I do not want to exercise the option presented to the DM to deviate from what the rules state, and instead read the words literally to keep a spell from being OP compared to others of its type and level, it's the apocalypse and I'm wrong.
I get it.

[ThePolarBear]

... and aura of vitality is arguably more useful in combat. Same goes for prayer of healing.

While i do agree in general with "to each campaing their own balance", Prayer of Healing with its 10 minute cast time is clearly not meant to be an in-combat spell. I mean, long running battlefield scenarios COULD see it as an in-combat spell... but... :D

The problem is that, as written, it's not each single ability or spell - its them COMBINED.

Alone, a spell of 2nd level is on par with resources that have the same (or higher ceiling) requirements, that hinge on other features being availlable and spent (charges, Hit Dice, time), are limited in use (1/rest, HD/long rest, spell slot) or are straight out better in a one on one comparison. And usually, its more than one point for each singular resource to be smashingly obliterated in effectiveness for an out of combat use of the spell, where other resources cannot even be used as in-combat to begin with.

Considering the same scenario (campaign, time, slot availlability...) but switching caster... there is no situation that i can think of where an out of combat Healing Spirit does not outperform a Prayer of Healing in effectiveness. They go from "useless" to "unnecessary", but the effectivness of H.S. starts to appear "good" much earlier, stays there longer, and falls into "unnecessary" much later.
It's not a "it is slightly better if x or y, it might be a good idea to leave situation x or y to the ranger/druid". It is so good that i can see Life Clerics going for it - goodberry is on the list, too.

And your discussion about "Tiny hut"... yeah, you can. However you aren't really going anywhere. You are not adventuring and to spend a long rest you still need a 24 hour investment which IS the limiting factor for such an use of a spell. It obviously is a feature of some campaigns, but in those there's little need for anything that's not a supernova character and it is not the design assumption (time limits being listed as something to keep in mind when designing encounters and campaigns).
While it is better to keep in mind that such situations exist, it is also worth discussing the case where the issues actually manifest themselves.

[LordEntrails]

So you're perfectly fine with ruling otherwise when you decide it's convenient, but when I say that I do not want to exercise the option presented to the DM to deviate from what the rules state, and instead read the words literally to keep a spell from being OP compared to others of its type and level, it's the apocalypse and I'm wrong.
I get it.
No you don't get it.
It has nothing to do with how to handle the ruling. In that most everyone in this thread agrees more or less.

It has 100% to do with you standing on your soap box and demanding you are right. That you are the one true prophet and what you say is "the whole complete and unquestionable truth".

If you want to discuss the spell great. If you want to preach, argue or troll, please don't.

[Tanarii]

It has 100% to do with you standing on your soap box and demanding you are right. That you are the one true prophet and what you say is "the whole complete and unquestionable truth".
That's part for the course for many posters. You either have to accept it and ignore it, or block. Or end up getting pissed off a lot.

[DivisibleByZero]

{{scrubbed}}

[LordEntrails]

{{scrubbed}}
As I said, please discuss the spell.

[Pex]

I don't think that that's a fair basis for comparison. Sure, the healing spirit in ideal circumstances will outheal "heal," but only over a minute, out of combat. Heal is to recover from a heavy hit in the middle of combat, and can really turn the tide of a fight. Healing Spirit doesn't have the same function, it's just a spell that allows a party to heal a lot over a minute.

Granted, it is extremely high on the power curve, but so are lots of things. Is it really the job of every DM to re-balance D&D? I don't mean closing loopholes that were clearly unintended. This is not a simulacrum/wish loop cheese. This won't break a game. By taking this away you're just taking a cool toy away from rangers and druids.

You're being too literal, but I see how it could happen. I wasn't meaning to compare Healing Spirit to Heal specifically. The point was a benchmark was established - a 6th level slot equals heal 70 hit points. I could have used Cure Light Wounds to say a 1st level slot is worth 1d8 + casting modifier worth of healing for an action. To make it a bonus action you lower the die to a d4 vis a vis Healing Word. With an established frame of reference you can then deduce for yourself whether you think Healing Spirit is too powerful or not given its level and ability. I'm not arguing it is or it isn't. I already said I don't have the book so I can't comment on it specifically until I see the spell for myself. My point was if you are going to declare it too powerful do so on its own merits not because some DM somewhere absolutely hates it the party is at full health for the non-first combat of the day which Healing Spirit could facilitate happening. The party can already do that if they want without that specific spell, and a DM should not get upset by that happenstance.

[DivisibleByZero]

{{scrubbed}}

[tsotate]

And if my players tried this in combat, every NPC on the field would also walk through it. Usually I have many more NPCs than PCs so it would be the last time my party tried such a thing.
The caster chooses whether or not a character is healed by it, so your NPCs are free to waste their move like that, but would be better served stopping in it, so that the PCs can't enter the square until the caster moves it on his turn.

[Scyrner]

I might rule it that a character can benefit from the effect of the spell (out of combat) a number of times equal to their total number of hit dice.

I don't see it as a super huge problem, though, as most of the out of combat healing at my tables tends to be handled by the Druid and Ranger having piles of Goodberries from having cast the spell a bunch before their last long rest.

[Lord Vukodlak]

Probably the quickest answer to this is to add the requirement the subject must start and end his turn within the square to benefit and only one subject can benefit at a time. Or it costs a bonus action from the caster to activate the healing. If only one person per round can benefit from the spell its now less powerful then the third level spell aura of vitality.


Default is that time is only tracked in Turns during combat (or in fast paced situations).
The reason you only track turns in combat is because outside of those situations its not necessary and would otherwise bog down the game. But if you have an active spell that does something every round then it becomes necessary.

You've just cast a spell that lasts only one minute, it is now a fast paced situation because you only have a short amount of time to benefit from that healing.
Not good enough?
While Sam stands on the healing font, Bob and Jack continually use the shove action against each other back and forth. Its now a combat situation even if the combat is harmless and stupid.
Saying the spell only works in combat because rounds only exist in combat is stupid and meta-gammy and you can't fault the PC's for doing the same in return.

Its fine to rule the spell only works in actual life or death combat, but that's a personal DM ruling and not RAW in anyway shape or form. By your logic if I'm hit by an acid arrow spell that's going to deal damage for three rounds but we kill all the enemies before the end of the round i won't take additional damage because the damage is every round but there are no rounds outside of combat.

[Easy_Lee]

Huh, never noticed prayer of healing's cast time. Alright, that spell sucks. But regardless, I don't think that being better than PoH makes this spell OP.

Then again, Cure Wounds is also pretty crap. Healing spells are bad in general aside from a few choice ones and specific builds (life cleric + lore bard). So I still don't have much issue with this. It's a strong out of combat healing option, but that's pretty niche as far as things go.

[DivisibleByZero]

Its fine to rule the spell only works in actual life or death combat, but that's a personal DM ruling and not RAW in anyway shape or form. By your logic if I'm hit by an acid arrow spell that's going to deal damage for three rounds but we kill all the enemies before the end of the round i won't take additional damage because the damage is every round but there are no rounds outside of combat.

I'm going to say this one more time.
It is a personal DM decision to allow it outside of combat, as the rules for time state that rounds and turns exist in combat and anywhere else the DM determines.
The reverse, of only allowing turns and rounds inside of combat, is not a personal DM decision. That's the literal RAW.
You can rule either, and both are perfectly acceptable readings. One is literal. One uses the blurb in the time rules about DM discretion.
But your statement about which is RAW and which is a personal DM decision is backwards.

I have cited the relevant written rules multiple times.
Not one person has cited whatever relevant rules they believe exist to dispute it. They're all just arguing. But they are not citing written rules.
If you want claim that what I said was not RAW, and you want to to dispute the written rules that I have cited, then cite the written rule which disproves it.
That's not an unreasonable request. But it's something that no one has done yet.
If you can do that, if you can cite a written rule disproving what I have said, then you will be correct about the RAW.
If you cannot do that, then the written rules that I have cited prove the RAW.
If you're so sure they I'm wrong, then point to the page and the passage in the book that says I am.
I have pointed to my pages and passages numerous times.
It's your turn.

I have been saying that both are acceptable readings. You are all saying that I'm wrong. So prove it. Page and passage, please.
If you're all so certain, then this should be easy, but we're 7 pages in and it hasn't happened.

[Talamare]

I'm going to say this one more time.
It is a personal DM decision to allow it outside of combat, as the rules for time state that rounds and turns exist in combat and anywhere else the DM determines.
The reverse, of only allowing turns and rounds inside of combat, is not a personal DM decision. That's the literal RAW.
You can rule either, and both are perfectly acceptable readings. One is literal. One uses the blurb in the time rules about DM discretion.
But your statement about which is RAW and which is a personal DM decision is backwards.

I have cited the relevant written rules multiple times.
Not one person has cited whatever relevant rules they believe exist to dispute it. They're all just arguing. But they are not citing written rules.
If you want claim that what I said was not RAW, and you want to to dispute the written rules that I have cited, then cite the written rule which disproves it.
That's not an unreasonable request. But it's something that no one has done yet.
If you can do that, if you can cite a written rule disproving what I have said, then you will be correct about the RAW.
If you cannot do that, then the written rules that I have cited prove the RAW.
If you're so sure they I'm wrong, then point to the page and the passage in the book that says I am.
I have pointed to my pages and passages numerous times.
It's your turn.

I have been saying that both are acceptable readings. You are all saying that I'm wrong. So prove it. Page and passage, please.
If you're all so certain, then this should be easy, but we're 7 pages in and it hasn't happened.

Page 1, 7th post


It doesn't work outside of combat.
It requires a creature to begin its turn inside of it. There are no turns outside of combat, so it does nothing, because the healing cannot be triggered.
It's an in-combat HoT.
That's the RAW. Do with that as you see fit. But by RAW it does nothing outside of combat because turns don't exist outside of combat.

Prayer of Healing is the out-of-combat Heal.



Any fast paced situation can use Rounds & Turns.

Now focus on the thread

[DivisibleByZero]

Page 1, 7th post

Now quiet down

All you're doing is quoting them the rules that I have already given you back at me.
Find something which tells me that rounds and turns explicitly exist outside of combat in a manner that is not at the DM's discretion.
And I'm not talking about posts from this thread. I'm talking about something in the rulebook.
I'm telling you that the RAW can be read in a literal manner so that rounds and turns only exists inside of combat unless the DM decides otherwise. You are telling me that I am wrong. Find something in the rulebook that proves it.
7 pages and it still hasn't happened. So make it happen.

[Talamare]

All you're doing is quoting them the rules that I have already given you back at me.
Find something which tells me that rounds and turns explicitly exist outside of combat in a manner that is not at the DM's discretion.
And I'm not talking about posts from this thread. I'm talking about something in the rulebook.
I'm telling you that the RAW can be read in a literal manner so that rounds and turns only exists inside of combat unless the DM decides otherwise. You are telling me that I am wrong. Find something in the rulebook that proves it.
7 pages and it still hasn't happened. So make it happen.

That happened within the 1st page, before expanded your argument to include it because I called you out on it.
So this "concrete" ground upon which you claim to stand on; has already been shaken.

If you want to stride the narrow bridge claiming that turns only exist in combat.
Then you're also establishing that actions only exist in combat, since they are explained in the same section of the book.
The list of things that breaks upon this realization is a tower of babel that shatters any attempts for an argument you will try to make that it is embarrassing that this is the road you chose.

Allow me to illuminate your theory with a simple spell.
It is called the Light spell.
For starters, if turns only exist in combat. Then you have no turns to take an action to use the Light spell.
Meaning it can only be used in combat. Which brings us to the next point you made; that all spells instantly end upon the end of combat?
So now that we have finished casting our spell, that was suppose to last an hour. Tis gone?

The final piece of RAW in the book is for spells with long casting times.
Your understanding of the rules have established that you may only use spells during combat. I would love to see 10 minute spells (or even 1 hour spells) attempted to be cast in combat.
Oh, did the combat end before you finished casting? I guess you don't get the spell.


When you cast a spell with a casting time longer than a single action or reaction, you must spend your action each turn casting the spell,

[DivisibleByZero]

You are once again misrepresenting what I say.
I never said that's about that spells can only be cast in combat, I said the rules can be read so that turns in rounds only exist in combat and anything beyond that is at the DM's discretion.
You are taking my statement and applying it to other areas and other things that I didn't actually say. That was a closed case.
We were discussing that one spell. You are attributing the thing that I said to apply to absolutely every part of the game. That is not what I said.
If you take a literal reading of what the rulebook actually says, then every single word that I said in that first post is true. 100%.
Anything beyond that is at the DM discretion, and is therefore not raw in the strictest sense.

I am still waiting for you to quote a page and passage which explicitly states that rounds turns exist outside of combat in a manner that is not in the DM's discretion.
All you have done so far is extrapolate be from A. If B is possible therefore A must be true.
That is not an explicit statement in the rulebook, that is an extrapolation on your part.

[Angrythrowawy]

In situations where keeping track of the passage of time is important, the DM determines the time a task requires. The DM might use a different time scale depending on the context of the situation at hand.

You have used this reference several times, apparently without reading it. As soon as a player casts Healing Spirit, regardless of whether combat is or is not happening, keeping track of the passage of time is important. The DM /must/ determine the timing tasks require, this is not discretionary, and the context of the situation at hand is that a player has cast a spell that makes reference to timing in rounds. Therefore, the passage of time is kept track of in terms of rounds, as that is the context, RAW.

Now, stop derailing the thread please, some of us were more interested in the spell.

[DivisibleByZero]

You have used this reference several times, apparently without reading it. As soon as a player casts Healing Spirit, regardless of whether combat is or is not happening, keeping track of the passage of time is important. The DM /must/ determine the timing tasks require, this is not discretionary, and the context of the situation at hand is that a player has cast a spell that makes reference to timing in rounds. Therefore, the passage of time is kept track of in terms of rounds, as that is the context, RAW.

Now, stop derailing the thread please, some of us were more interested in the spell.

There you go extrapolating again.
That is not your decision to make. That is the DM's decision to make. It says so right in the rule that you just quoted.

[Typhon]

So after further review of the spell as presented in the book. It is fully intentioned as an amazing combat healing spell and reminds me very much of the Diablo 2 druid spirits. It also looks in some respects like a poor man's regeneration, only without all the other perks of that spell.

First off it is mobile if the caster wishes, able to move 30' as a bonus action by the caster. Second, as written, it does allow for any number of healings per round equal to how many creatures can pass through it in that round. Third, the healing is fully caster controlled option, so much potential for creating inner party strife. Fourth, it is a 5'x5'x5' cube, which for something intangible is so cheese worthy. Finally, healing per character/creature is 1d6 (3.5 avg) per interaction and limited to the creature/PC using it's turn to get to that same space.

Does this allow for some serious cheese? Dear God yes. Is it really any worse than watching people trying to eliminate hp as fast as possible? Not really.

Some thoughts though. Limit it to either once a round or so many charges as suggested for out of combat, that keeps it inline for most. In combat or if mc life cleric, let it stand as worded. I say that because out of combat, imagine using this spell to help heal a plague stricken village or help a regiment in war to hold a line. Those are heavy RP situations where this spell flourishes, but only if the creatures turn and the spirit are in the same or share a place during that turn.

PCs are always looking to cheese things to their advantage, as are DMs. If the players have it and can do it so can the bad guys.

As an additional thought, how op would a reverse version of this spell be? Like if instead it was Reaper's Harvest with a per round interaction save vs CON for half dmg no additional saves if still in the same square. If that spell would be ok, then this spell is fine.

[DivisibleByZero]

Look, I'm not saying that you have to read it that way.
I'm not even saying that you *should* read it that way.
I'm saying the rules support reading it that way, and any DM who does so is within his rights. As such, my statement is true to the RAW.

[Typhon]

Look, I'm not saying that you have to read it that way.
I'm not even saying that you *should* read it that way.
I'm saying the rules support reading it that way, and any DM who does so is within his rights. As such, my statement is true to the RAW.

That is enough. We get it. Your interpretation and understanding. We hear you. That is how you will handle it. Check. Other DMs will choose their own way. Enough.

The whole game is a game, and it is a social agreement held between all participants. Rock your RAW all day, no one cares. RAI is always just an interpretation. Fun, socializing, and communication are all the rules that really matter.

Now, please stop hammering away about your perspective. Let others form their own decisions.

[DivisibleByZero]

Now, please stop hammering away about your perspective. Let others form their own decisions.

It's not my perspective. It's what the words printed in the rule book state.
I'll stop hammering when people stop telling me that my statement that either reading is acceptable is wrong.
After the name calling and the attacks I've recieved, I'm invested.
I'm still waiting for someone to quote a rule from the book proving me wrong, as you are all claiming.

[Submortimer]

All you're doing is quoting them the rules that I have already given you back at me.
Find something which tells me that rounds and turns explicitly exist outside of combat in a manner that is not at the DM's discretion.
And I'm not talking about posts from this thread. I'm talking about something in the rulebook.
I'm telling you that the RAW can be read in a literal manner so that rounds and turns only exists inside of combat unless the DM decides otherwise. You are telling me that I am wrong. Find something in the rulebook that proves it.
7 pages and it still hasn't happened. So make it happen.

I'm sure you're not paying attention to me anymore, but that's fine. Someone can quote me so you can respond to the one problem you haven't given a proper answer to:

If you choose to read the rules this way, the game breaks down because Actions no longer exist outside of combat. That's your right as a DM, but it is far and away not the intent, nor the collectively understood reading of the rules, and that matters in a game like D&D.

Even outside of that, with your ruling, you cannot:

cast message outside of combat as it no longer has a duration (since the duration of the spell is 1 round).
use the weather prediction function of druidcraft (since the duration of that ability is 1 round)
command an unseen servant to do anything (since the spell reads "Once on each of your turns as a bonus action, you can mentally command the servant to move up to 15 feet and interact with an object. The servant can perform simple tasks that a human servant could do, such as fetching things, cleaning, mending, folding clothes, lighting fires, serving food, and pouring wine. Once you give the command, the servant performs the task to the best of its ability until it completes the task, then waits for your next command.")
affect a creature with zone of truth outside of combat (since it uses the same wording as healing spirit)


I bring these up specifically because the useage for each is not generally (or in the case of unseen servant, ever) considered a combat scenario, nor could be considered a "fast paced scenario".

This is specifically telling in the case of unseen servant as it is a ritual spell, designed to be cast outside of combat: if turns do not exist outside of combat, you cannot command an unseen servant to do anything, and if you consider the 1 hour duration of unseen servant to be a "fast paced situation", then the 1 minute duration of healing spirit ​MUST be.

Edit: Also, as an aside, I apologize for insulting you earlier. That was not good debate decourm.

[Typhon]

{{scrubbed}}

[MadBear]

If you choose to read the rules this way, the game breaks down because Actions no longer exist outside of combat. That's your right as a DM, but it is far and away not the intent, nor the collectively understood reading of the rules, and that matters in a game like D&D.


What you are saying is only true, if the DM is keeping his ruling consistent across all aspects of the game, which not every DM does. You are assuming, because he rules the spell to work this way, that he must make a similar ruling for every other spell. I believe he's pointing out that you don't need this to be the case. It makes your game world less consistent, but there's not reason it must be the case.

[Chaosmancer]

What you are saying is only true, if the DM is keeping his ruling consistent across all aspects of the game, which not every DM does. You are assuming, because he rules the spell to work this way, that he must make a similar ruling for every other spell. I believe he's pointing out that you don't need this to be the case. It makes your game world less consistent, but there's not reason it must be the case.

No idea why I'm jumping into this pit, but I feel like it so there.

Isn't it a bigger problem if he's not being consistent with the rules on this. If he claims turns don't exist for my ranger spell out of combat, but he does allow turns to exist for a wizard spell out of combat, how am I as a player supposed to feel about that?

Should I assume other spells which reference actions, turns, and rounds do or do not apply outside of combat? Should I ask for a ruling on every spell? Wouldn't it be much simpler to houserule a single spell because you think it is too powerful instead of inconsistently applying the rules of timing and the defintion of a turn?

I can see why this spell is being called too strong. I'm fine with it at the moment because my parties healers are a druid and a ranger who almost never think about healing, and since they are going after very powerful enemies I'm glad this spell might get them thinking about healing and using it more. Later games I may need to houserule it because of tone concerns, but since most people tell me in combat healing is pointless, I like seeing a spell that could be used in the capacity.

[Lombra]

{{scrubbed}}

[Willie the Duck]

{{scrubbed}}

[Lombra]

I will point out that the decision to waste time on this goes to everyone. The people who cannot help themselves but keep this alive. This isn't quite the same as a troll situation, but it's the same feeding of behavior by continuing to engage it. These things thrive because they are engaging in a car-wreck-like fashion, but it is basically feeding a bad habit. I'm not saying that like I'm any better, but I think we should recognize our part in picking this scab (or choose your own analogy).

Of course, everyone contributes, because it's a discussion, and the outcome (good or bad) is the result of the combination of all efforts together. I do believe tho that if he immediatly wrote something like "yeah my ruling is unreasonable and the spell is problematic", pages would have been saved, and since he's the one who brought it up, I choose to put the blame on the firestarter rather than the flammable trees.

[dejarnjc]

Why do you care? Do you believe that there is a potential outcome where DBZ won't walk away from this thread believing himself 1) the singular person who is 'right,' 2) unjustly attacked and persecuted, and 3) somehow noble in his actions? Are you worried there might accidentally be someone walking away from this thread that finds the no rounds out of combat line of reasoning applicable to anything? No, this is going down just like the DF thread I alluded to earlier. Everyone sees what is going on at the same time.

Ahh a voice of wisdom.



In regards to the actual spell being discussed. I have play tested in my regular game having 10 charges with the spell and it works fairly well with that homebrew fix.
It's definitely more powerful than aura of vitality though even with that fix which is one thing to consider.

I also play-tested another fix, having to use one's reaction to trigger the healing and honestly, that fix works quite well too. To be honest, it's probably the most "balanced" fix I've seen but I don't enjoy it as much because then the spell really starts to just feel like another Aura of Vitality.

[JackPhoenix]

I'm not going to respond to anything you just said, because you don't know how to say it without name calling, or without deliberately sidestepping the filters.

Well, calling you a 4$ hat is silly, but it's not sidestepping filters. Though he could work on his writting, he forgot spaces, and pressed the shift key too early when typing the price.

[Mikal]

Sorry if this has been previously mentioned... but the healing on this is even worse.
Based on the wording, the heal affect occurs whenever someone enters the field on any specific turn, or starts its turn there.

This means that you not only get the conga line of healing on your actions, but on the druids if they use their bonus action they can have the 30 ft. movement rate of the spirit spritz an extra dose of healing on them.

So instead of 1d6+4 or higher, it's now 2d6+8...

[Vaz]

Sorry if this has been previously mentioned... but the healing on this is even worse.
Based on the wording, the heal affect occurs whenever someone enters the field on any specific turn, or starts its turn there.

This means that you not only get the conga line of healing on your actions, but on the druids if they use their bonus action they can have the 30 ft. movement rate of the spirit spritz an extra dose of healing on them.

So instead of 1d6+4 or higher, it's now 2d6+8...

Hence the grapple teacups.

[Easy_Lee]

Hence the grapple teacups.

And gnome-balls. But like I said earlier, I don't expect any DM to actually allow that.

[Mikal]

Hence the grapple teacups.

I missed that. So we're up to a coordinated waltz to maximize the heals now ? Interpretive dance as medicine FTW...

Does that mean Party Size+1 Heals per round then now then? (Using the Druid's BA)

[ThePolarBear]

Hence the grapple teacups.


And gnome-balls. But like I said earlier, I don't expect any DM to actually allow that.

Both don't work, since moving is not the same as being moved. See: AoO. Anything that says "moves" requires willing expenditure of movement. Which is different from "enters". See: Moonbeam.

Edit: Assuming that it says "moves" like i read earlier in the thread.

[Easy_Lee]

Both don't work, since moving is not the same as being moved. See: AoO. Anything that says "moves" requires willing expenditure of movement. Which is different from "enters". See: Moonbeam.

Edit: Assuming that it says "moves" like i read earlier in the thread.

I think the text is "enters" like other AoEs, but I could be wrong.

[Mikal]

I think the text is "enters" like other AoEs, but I could be wrong.

Nope. This one specifically says moves into the space.
I guess that also kills the Bonus Action move heal blitz...

[MadBear]

Wouldn't it be much simpler to houserule a single spell because you think it is too powerful instead of inconsistently applying the rules of timing and the defintion of a turn?

Absolutely, I agree with you, that it'd be easier to house-rule. I'm was merely saying that the argument that the rules break down, isn't a valid reply, because it's making assumptions that shouldn't be made.

[Easy_Lee]

Nope. This one specifically says moves into the space.
I guess that also kills the Bonus Action move heal blitz...

That's probably for the best, in spite of gnome-balls.

[Mikal]

That's probably for the best, in spite of gnome-balls.

You just like saying gnome-balls...

[Tanarii]

Why do you care? Do you believe that there is a potential outcome where DBZ won't walk away from this thread believing himself 1) the singular person who is 'right,' 2) unjustly attacked and persecuted, and 3) somehow noble in his actions? As someone that has ended up 'defending' himself from an entire thread of people who are 'wrong' many times, I'll say it's remarkably easy to start off by making a bold and agressive and often irrational statement, then end up perceiving myself as defending my statements from people who are irrationally in their wrongness and lashing out at me, unable to see where I'm actually attacking others far more reasonable counterpoints. And to keep spiraling down the rabbit hole if I don't walk away from the thread.

I blame coffee personally. :smallamused:

[Easy_Lee]

You just like saying gnome-balls...

What's wrong with that? They're tiny, fuzzy, and roll all over the place.

The gnomes, that is.

[SharkForce]

That's probably for the best, in spite of gnome-balls.

well, we still have readied movement cheese.

[Dudewithknives]

I'm not really seeing the problem here in the first place I am all for anybody getting a new spell that greatly increases healing. if you're the class that gets it, congratulations you just got another great spell that can pretty much heal up most of the group during one minute of downtown, if you're a class that didn't get it, congratulations now you don't have to waste a spell healing it because the other guy can do it, and waste his spell levels on it, everybody wins.

[Typhon]

Why do you care? Do you believe that there is a potential outcome where DBZ won't walk away from this thread believing himself 1) the singular person who is 'right,' 2) unjustly attacked and persecuted, and 3) somehow noble in his actions? Are you worried there might accidentally be someone walking away from this thread that finds the no rounds out of combat line of reasoning applicable to anything? No, this is going down just like the DF thread I alluded to earlier. Everyone sees what is going on at the same time.

Actually, I was trying to salvage the part of the thread where we had an actual point and got back to that point. I dislike long drawn out arguments that consist of I am right and you are wrong. To do that, I thought I would do something rather ingenious, and talk to another player as if they were an actual person somewhere in the world. Did I anticipate any of the limited options you presented me? Not in the slightest. Did I hope that DBZ might calm down enough to allow discussion of the spell to pick up? That was pretty much all I wanted. Did I hope it would allow the thread to go back to talking about Healing Spirit? By Jove, yes.

Now I understand you may have been enjoying the show and eating your popcorn, but I like discussions about actual subjects and not arguments centered on semantics that drag the entirety of the subject down. I have posted other things concerning the spell, just to actually try and get back to the topic. Sorry if morality, maturity and a desire to actually discuss a topic upsets you.

On a side note, how many of each race goes into filling 5'x5'x5' cubes? Line up 30 with the highest number and multiply that number times 10, and that is how many hit points you can heal in one minute. At least if you want to see an ungodly number for cheese factor. Contortionists are allowed.

[Pex]

As someone that has ended up 'defending' himself from an entire thread of people who are 'wrong' many times, I'll say it's remarkably easy to start off by making a bold and agressive and often irrational statement, then end up perceiving myself as defending my statements from people who are irrationally in their wrongness and lashing out at me, unable to see where I'm actually attacking others far more reasonable counterpoints. And to keep spiraling down the rabbit hole if I don't walk away from the thread.

I blame coffee personally. :smallamused:

Don't make me jealous I'm not having your undivided attention.

[Captain Panda]

Back on topic: Yes, the spell is more powerful than other spells of a similar level. I don't think that can be contested.

Does it require a nerfing? I don't really think it does. Fireball is stronger than the DMG guidelines suggest a spell of its level should be. Polymorph is stronger than a lot of level four spells. Spells aren't all perfectly equal. I don't think it's the job of the DM to totally rebalance D&D. If you go through and try to tweak and fiddle with the entire book, you risk ruining the game experience with an avalanche of house rules. The healing spirit "exploit" is only a way to efficiently recover. It's not the end of the world. A lot of people seem to cry 'broken' way too easily.

[Danielqueue1]

one thing to note considering the power of the spell.

a fourth level character (3 druid 1 life cleric) will do more healing on average over a minute to a single target than the 6th level heal spell. I know the heal spell only takes a single action, I know the heal spell also gets rid of disease, blindness and deafness, but a fourth level character getting 75hp average out of a 2nd level slot is notable.

1d6+4 gives an average of 7.5 per round for 10 rounds.


Other than spells that deal damage over multiple rounds, the lowest level spell CAPABLE of dealing more damage than this spell heals on average to a single target over its duration (with one level in life domain cleric) is Lightning arrow cast at level 4 hitting the target and the target fails their save and all dice roll maximum possible damage.

the first spell that averages the same or better damage in a single instance is Disintegrate at 6th level for a break even 10d6+40. That being said an upcast 6th level Healing spirit with life domain cleric will average 255 hp over its duration.

the only healing spells that can match this healing power at same level is regenerate at 7th level or power word heal on a creature with 400 HP that was reduced to 10 hp or less. (even higher if the Healing spirit user's dice are favorable.)

Disclaimer; All of these calculations are done assuming single targets. I only considered spells from the PHB for comparison purposes. I did not include spells that deal damage over multiple rounds because call lightning would crush all under its 300d10 power (400d10 on a stormy day.)

[Typhon]

Exactly.

By the way, how many gnomes do fit in a cube that measures 5'x5'x5'?

[LordEntrails]

Nop, I've already said everything I need to say about the spell.
I want to talk about how I've been treated in his thread, by you and a few others....
Enjoy. In case you are interested, this is as far as I read in your post.

[LordEntrails]

The caster chooses whether or not a character is healed by it, so your NPCs are free to waste their move like that, but would be better served stopping in it, so that the PCs can't enter the square until the caster moves it on his turn.

I don't have the book yet so I can't read. But from what others said above about the spell, it says "every creature" That means the caster does NOT get to decide.

Can someone who has the book please clarify exactly what the spell says please?

[Dudewithknives]

I don't have the book yet so I can't read. But from what others said above about the spell, it says "every creature" That means the caster does NOT get to decide.

Can someone who has the book please clarify exactly what the spell says please?

It says you can heal them, and it is no action to do so.

[Willie the Duck]

Now I understand you may have been enjoying the show and eating your popcorn, but I like discussions about actual subjects and not arguments centered on semantics that drag the entirety of the subject down. I have posted other things concerning the spell, just to actually try and get back to the topic. Sorry if morality, maturity and a desire to actually discuss a topic upsets you.

Where did you get that from what I said? My suggesting we end this fruitless back-and-forth is evidence of being upset by maturity? That's a new one, I'll give you that.


The healing spirit "exploit" is only a way to efficiently recover. It's not the end of the world. A lot of people seem to cry 'broken' way too easily.

I don't think anyone has meant to suggest that it is 'broken' on an 'can't be allowed to exist in a game' kind of way like an infinite wish loop or the like. Merely that it (with exploit) is far and away the best OOC healing (and likely disruptive in a game setting where hp attrition and careful resource usage are important parts of the game and game pacing).

[Datalore]

Ya, I won't this allow this in my games. I would maybe consider it if it was temp hp.

[Danielqueue1]

Exactly.

By the way, how many gnomes do fit in a cube that measures 5'x5'x5'?

an object half the dimensions of another similarly shaped object takes up 1/8th the space.
for the sake of stoutnes, rounding, and such, let us say that gnomes take up 1/4 the space of a human
A phone booth is generally a 3'x3' square. a 5'x'5 is a little less than 3x the area of a 3x3.
The world record for humans shoved in a phonebooth is 25. none of the humans involved were affected by dwarfism

so the number of gnomes that could fit in a 5'x5'x5' cube would be approximately 300

Healing spirit cast on this group by a fourth level character with 3 levels in druid and one level in life domain cleric who chose to activate it on each of the gnomes' turns would heal 300d6+1200 per round. If this travesty of flesh would hold still for 1 minute, the caster would heal an average of 22,500 hit points over the duration of the spell. For those of you who have a hard time working with large numbers, that would be enough healing to bring 41 Ancient Red Dragons from unconscious to full health with enough left over to do the same to 28 commoners. who will be quite cross that you picked the 41 dragons first. a fourth level character would be able to cast this spell 3 times.

[Danielqueue1]

An ancient green dragon who escaped the party's clutches with only 1 hp could be reliably healed back to full by an optimized 5th level healer in 4 minutes. (only 30% chance of less than full. only 5% chance of more than 15 away from full)

Said healer would still have 1 second level spell slot and all of its first level slots left for when the dragon gets done with her second encounter with the party. (probably leaving the fight a little earlier because of the close call she just had.) Assuming this optimized healer then cast Healing spirit again and used all of his spell slots for goodberry (also empowered by life domain.) he could then heal said dragon for an average of 245 HP over the next 4 minutes (unless the dragon could eat the berries as legendary actions, then it would be 1 minute). Said druid would then still be able to wild-shape and fight like any other 3rd level moon druid if there is a party left for the final encounter. (not much for a high level party but still a bear is a bear)

lets not forget any other minions an ancient green dragon may have at its beck and call.

If you are playing with a DM that likes having spellcasters, you may find this spell troublesome in enemy hands. 3 dragon fights with less than five minutes in between each sounds... fun?

[Idkwhatmyscreen]

Just bring a 10x10 Pinwheel on your adventures and strap everybody to at the end of each combat

The druid can spin it while everybody heals, you only need to make one full rotation every six seconds to get the maximum benefits

Jokes aside, healing is not game-breaking. You fight the same at 1 hit point as you do at full. (Granted having the party at full HP for every battle is going to get tiresome at some point)

I think that you have to wait for the druid to abuse it before you ban it, as it is a fine spell otherwise

A small tweak would be to have druid make a concentration check for each person after the first on a turn to see if he heals them. A grapple chain of gnomes is rather distracting after all.

[Zalabim]

As an additional thought, how op would a reverse version of this spell be? Like if instead it was Reaper's Harvest with a per round interaction save vs CON for half dmg no additional saves if still in the same square. If that spell would be ok, then this spell is fine.
Sort of like Create Bonfire, but of course people don't conga line through a bonfire voluntarily.

As someone that has ended up 'defending' himself from an entire thread of people who are 'wrong' many times, I'll say it's remarkably easy to start off by making a bold and agressive and often irrational statement, then end up perceiving myself as defending my statements from people who are irrationally in their wrongness and lashing out at me, unable to see where I'm actually attacking others far more reasonable counterpoints. And to keep spiraling down the rabbit hole if I don't walk away from the thread.

I blame coffee personally. :smallamused:
I never do this. I also don't drink coffee. You might be onto something with this.

[CantigThimble]

I never do this. I also don't drink coffee. You might be onto something with this.

I used to do this, and I used to drink a lot more coffee than I do now.

I think we've solved it, a direct correlation between internet arguments and coffee. Although, the question is, does coffee make you argue on the internet or does arguing on the internet make you drink coffee?

[mephnick]

I was arguing on the internet long before my job got me hooked back on to coffee.

I think the correct correlation is probably free time. I get into a lot fewer forum fights now that I've started writing posts and then deleting them thinking "I don't have time to defend myself against the response."

[Pex]

I used to do this, and I used to drink a lot more coffee than I do now.

I think we've solved it, a direct correlation between internet arguments and coffee. Although, the question is, does coffee make you argue on the internet or does arguing on the internet make you drink coffee?

Drinking coffee makes you poop, so the former.

[LibraryOgre]

The Mod Wonder: Hey, look, let's lock this for a moment while I set it on fire, hmm?

[LibraryOgre]

The Mod Wonder: And let's reopen it. Try to do a little bit less asserting that other people aren't reading what you're writing, are trolling, or are otherwise arguing in poor faith. Also, try to do a little bit less arguing in poor faith... stop trying to tell others what their arguments are, and step away from arguments that aren't going anywhere, mmm-kay?

[Coffee_Dragon]

Let this mod intervention be a lesson to all who would speak ill of coffee

[Dudewithknives]

On topic.

Is the spell crazy powerful for its level? Absolutely.

However it is amazingly good healing that is only really spectacular out of combat.

Is is really bad that people have great out of combat healing?

As I said before:

If you get the spell, congratulations, the group will love you for for your efficient out of combat healing.
If you don't get the spell, congratulations, you do not have to spend your spells healing the party out of combat any more and can save up for more utility and combat related things.

Everyone rejoice.

[Easy_Lee]

Let this mod intervention be a lesson to all who would speak ill of coffee

I have no ill will for coffee. It keeps me awake and regular.

[Dudewithknives]

I have no ill will for coffee. It keeps me awake and regular.

I have twin 1 year Olds at home, coffee is like little cups of gold.

Forget Pablo Escobar, you want to take down the true Columbian drug kingpin, aim at Juan Valdez.

[Ivellius]

Is is really bad that people have great out of combat healing?

If you view hit points as a resource that needs to be managed throughout the adventuring day, then yes. If it doesn't matter to you, why not just let your player characters heal to full after every combat? Even the game itself doesn't assume that, but Healing Spirit gets us pretty close.

[Vaz]

I have twin 1 year Olds at home, coffee is like little cups of gold.

Forget Pablo Escobar, you want to take down the true Columbian drug kingpin, aim at Juan Valdez.

As a father of triplets, I can confirm that Columbian pure cut with Bourbon Coffee is the good stuff to get you going.