Why healing is conjuration?

[ayvango]

If heal operates positive energy, then it should rather be evocation. If someone consider positive energy out of evocation energies range, then heal should be necromancy, since necromancy works with negative energy and its perfectly normal to shift its positive counterpart to it. If we think that heal just mends body, than like mending and repair light wounds it should be transmutation. Why conjuration of all things?

[Kurald Galain]

Because evocation is about explosives and necromancy is evil.

No, those aren't the official definitions but (too) many people associate it with that. So a spell that creates energy but not explosive energy and not evil energy has to be conjuration.

[CharonsHelper]

Because evocation is about explosives and necromancy is evil.

No, those aren't the official definitions but (too) many people associate it with that. So a spell that creates energy but not explosive energy and not evil energy has to be conjuration.

+1

In earlier editions I believe that it WAS necromancy, but they decided that it didn't fit the dark/creepy vibe that necromancy has going on.

[Silva Stormrage]

I swapped it back to necromancy in my campaign setting. It is mostly as others had said though, they designers didn't want healing to be in the "Evil" school of magic. Feel free to swap it around as you want for continuity

[Baby Gary]

I personally think it should be necromancy, as should every spell dealing with life/death. IMO necromancy is not the school of evil magic, but one of the harnessing positive and negative energy to do cool stuff. This still lets it have the deathy vibe with the spells that are already there but it also lets a necromancer do a few more cool things. Conjuration is not taking a bit hit by making all healing/ bringing back to life spells necromancy, and that doesn't suddenly make necromancy super powerful.

I also like that flavor wise. A necromancer is now someone who can tap into the positive and negative energy plane to do cool stuff. I am actually thinking of making a revision of necromancy that is more like what I just said, not your classical death and destruction stuff

[Zanos]

I think putting it back in necromancy fits better. The inflict spells are still in necromancy, and are the mirror for most healing spells.

It seems like the designers wanted to make necromancy the Evil spell school, but didn't go all the way.

[Kurald Galain]

It seems like the designers wanted to make necromancy the Evil spell school, but didn't go all the way.

It seems some of the designers wanted it to be Evil and others did not, so they ended up making it half-evil. Semi-evil. Quasi-evil. The margarine of evil. The Diet Coke of evil, just one calorie, not evil enough.

[Scots Dragon]

I think in AD&D 2E they're only listed as necromancy so we know how they interact with certain things in the spell-schools and resistance area, since priest spells aren't really organised by school but by their own set of groupings called spheres.

I kinda think it'd be worth bringing the priest spheres back for D&D 3.5E, since the spheres allowed for a whole bunch of different and unique priest types with their own spell lists based on which spheres they did or did not have access to.

[Boggartbae]

I think that all the schools assigned to all the spells need to be overhauled. The orb spells are more egregious than any cure spell, and invisibility should be abjuration, since it provides a purely defensive benefit. Also, why are Mage Armour and shield in different schools?

Schools of magic are just all over the place, and as much as I fantasise about enforcing some sort of regulation and consistency, it’s just too much work.

[Necroticplague]

If heal operates positive energy, then it should rather be evocation. Evocations are mostly about Force and Elemental energy. Positive and Negative are neither.



If someone consider positive energy out of evocation energies range, then heal should be necromancy, since necromancy works with negative energy and its perfectly normal to shift its positive counterpart to it. Necromancy deals with negative energy, not positive energy. There’s no reason to assume any kind of symmetry like that when Necromancy has no other positive energy spells I can find.


If we think that heal just mends body, than like mending and repair light wounds it should be transmutation. Why conjuration of all things?
Simply patching a body back together is only part of restoring the health of a living creature. A living creature is more than just its physical body (it has life forces and a soul), so simply affecting only the physical form (as transmutation does) is not enough. Meanwhile, a construct is nothing but its body and its animating force. The animating force will stick around as long as the body’s intact, so you only need to mend the body. It’s the same reason you can’t defibrillated someone once they’re already dead in real life, even if their body is intact: their vital spark is irretrievably gone. Meanwhile, a statue can be fixed back to be as good as new.

Healing is conjuration because it involves bringing force more vital force from elsewhere. You conjure it into being from the infinite wellspring of the PEP.

[ExLibrisMortis]

I think that all the schools assigned to all the spells need to be overhauled. The orb spells are more egregious than any cure spell, and invisibility should be abjuration, since it provides a purely defensive benefit. Also, why are Mage Armour and shield in different schools?
All these have fluff reasons to be in the schools they're in. I mean, they're not perfect, but the classification is right overall. Invisibility, in particular, is nothing like an abjuration. It is an illusion that makes it harder to see you (+40 to Hide, effectively), not a protective, warding, or counter-magic spell. Shield should probably be dual-school abjuration/evocation, like mage armour. Orb of force is dual-school evocation/conjuration, the rest are conjurations.

Fluff-based classification isn't conducive to good balance, but it shouldn't be disregarded because of that.

[Boggartbae]

All these have fluff reasons to be in the schools they're in. I mean, they're not perfect, but the classification is right overall. Invisibility, in particular, is nothing like an abjuration. It is an illusion that makes it harder to see you (+40 to Hide, effectively), not a protective, warding, or counter-magic spell. Shield should probably be dual-school abjuration/evocation, like mage armour. Orb of force is dual-school evocation/conjuration, the rest are conjurations.

Fluff-based classification isn't conducive to good balance, but it shouldn't be disregarded because of that.

Still the balance that I’m primarily concerned with though. classifying schools based on fluff isn’t conducive to good gameplay, especially since it gives the school that “makes things“ way too powerful

Idk, it’s not a big deal, but it just bothers me.

[Bohandas]

Because evocation is about explosives and necromancy is evil.

No, those aren't the official definitions but (too) many people associate it with that. So a spell that creates energy but not explosive energy and not evil energy has to be conjuration.

This. It's basically a plothole with no relevance to balance introduced purely for reasons of tone. My advice is to ignore it and treat healing spells as necromancy.

[Bohandas]

Still the balance that I’m primarily concerned with though. classifying schools based on fluff isn’t conducive to good gameplay, especially since it gives the school that “makes things“ way too powerful

Idk, it’s not a big deal, but it just bothers me.

In 3.0 different specializations cost a different number of opposing schools

[ayvango]

Evocations are mostly about Force and Elemental energy. Positive and Negative are neither.

So there are only two energy based schools: necromancy and evocation.

Conjuration is about physical things, it provides energy with forms. And healing has no material form, it is pure energy. So conjuration are misfit with its usage basic. Both Evocation and Necromancy matches basic using and differs only in particular energy habits.

In case the spell fits neither energy school it should be assigned new school rather then being merged into a school that has nothing common with energies. If necromancy had branched from evocation as a special school dealing with negative energy, why another specific energy could not go the same route and establish standalone school?

It is still better then sticking with conjuration. And if 8 is mystic number that should be kept under all conditions, then Evocation is good to hold healing as parent and Necromancy as sibling.

[Shoreward]

As it turns out, mages are wrong about the origins of their own spells. What we call "healing" involves summoning invisible bacteria for rapid cell repair. Since these bacteria are intelligent, they dislike martial classes as much as the rest of us educated folk do, and so refuse to mend the dramatic scars on your half-orc companion despite their obvious ability to do so. Next time you heal or get healed, make sure to offer your thanks to our tiny friends.

Or your harshest vitriol. I can't tell you what to do with your life.

[Arkhios]

Evocation creates energy out of nothing.
Conjuration creates matter out of nothing.

While life can be seen as a metaphysical thing (energy), restoring hit points to an already living thing is a tad more physical thing (matter) for the most part (although, not all damaging effects leave visible wounds).

Necromancy (in case of raise dead) restores life to a dead person, wrestling with the forces of death makes is reasonable as necromancy.

[grarrrg]

Necromancy deals with negative energy, not positive energy. There’s no reason to assume any kind of symmetry like that when Necromancy has no other positive energy spells I can find.

See the other posts, Healing&friends used to be under Necromancy (2nd edition and previous).
You won't find any Positive Energy Necromancy spells in 3rd because they moved all of them, and made it a design decision going forward that "Necromancy has nothing to do with the living".

[Venger]

If heal operates positive energy, then it should rather be evocation. If someone consider positive energy out of evocation energies range, then heal should be necromancy, since necromancy works with negative energy and its perfectly normal to shift its positive counterpart to it. If we think that heal just mends body, than like mending and repair light wounds it should be transmutation. Why conjuration of all things?
in 3.0, healing spells (including raise dead/resurrection/etc the basic definition of necromancy) were all necromancy, then in 3.5, monte decided he didn't want wizards (especially conjurers) to have any disadvantages at all, so it was all rolled into necro so you could ban it without a second thought.

[Necroticplague]

See the other posts, Healing&friends used to be under Necromancy (2nd edition and previous). Yes, but how things operate in previous editions is irrelevant to how things currently operate. Currently, to the best of my knowledge, no positive-energy based spell are Necromancy. This is D&D 3e/3.5e/d20, not Older D&D/AD&D and Other Systems.


You won't find any Positive Energy Necromancy spells in 3rd because they moved all of them, and made it a design decision going forward that "Necromancy has nothing to do with the living".Which is exactly my point. Unless you count inflicting them with deleterious affects (via Negative infusion), which Necromancy has plenty of.

[Venger]

Yes, but how things operate in previous editions is irrelevant to how things currently operate. Currently, to the best of my knowledge, no positive-energy based spell are Necromancy. This is D&D 3e/3.5e/d20, not Older D&D/AD&D and Other Systems.

Which is exactly my point. Unless you count inflicting them with deleterious affects (via Negative infusion), which Necromancy has plenty of.

there are several. one prominent example is manifest life, but yes, they are quite rare.

[ayvango]

Evocation creates energy out of nothing.
Conjuration creates matter out of nothing.

While life can be seen as a metaphysical thing (energy), restoring hit points to an already living thing is a tad more physical thing (matter) for the most part (although, not all damaging effects leave visible wounds).

Well, if restoring hit points is a physical process (matter) than reducing them should also considered physical. Evocation are full of spells used for reducing hit points that has instantaneous duration just like healing instantaneous restore hit points. Another thing, necromancer could also restore hit points if he directs negative energy to undead and deplete hit points if negative energy is target at a living creature. Seems very similar to healing.

[Crake]

in 3.0, healing spells (including raise dead/resurrection/etc the basic definition of necromancy) were all necromancy, then in 3.5, monte decided he didn't want wizards (especially conjurers) to have any disadvantages at all, so it was all rolled into necro so you could ban it without a second thought.

Except wizards don't get any of those spells anyway, so what does it really have to do with wizards? The only difference is maybe whether or not you can access a spell through wish or not, but if you can't you can just make a scroll instead and pass it to the rogue with UMD, or the cleric with the magic domain.

[Jormengand]

Because WotC are fallible and do silly things sometimes.

[Fizban]

Because the schools of magic were designed for Wizards, and then later applied to Cleric spells. Since Wizards don't heal, those schools weren't seriously designed with room for healing spells. So originally they were crammed into necromancy because life/death, but then people went "eww necromancy" so they changed it to, uh, I dunno man maybe you summon positive energy power? Yeah sure let's go with that.

I think that's a reasonable line of thinking anyway.


I kinda think it'd be worth bringing the priest spheres back for D&D 3.5E, since the spheres allowed for a whole bunch of different and unique priest types with their own spell lists based on which spheres they did or did not have access to.
Incidentally, can you tell or link me to a good source of those spheres? I was tinkering on something a while back and someone just piqued my interest in it again, but I don't actually know what those old spheres were so I've not much to tinker from.

[Bohandas]

Evocation creates energy out of nothing.
Conjuration creates matter out of nothing.

While life can be seen as a metaphysical thing (energy), restoring hit points to an already living thing is a tad more physical thing (matter) for the most part (although, not all damaging effects leave visible wounds).

Necromancy (in case of raise dead) restores life to a dead person, wrestling with the forces of death makes is reasonable as necromancy.


So there are only two energy based schools: necromancy and evocation.

Conjuration is about physical things, it provides energy with forms. And healing has no material form, it is pure energy.

I think you've hit upon the crux of the problem. If they had got rid of positive and negative energy and just made healing spells conjure blood/flesh it would work as conjuration, but since healing magic still works entirely through woo it fits better in necromancy or evocation

[Coidzor]

Yes, but how things operate in previous editions is irrelevant to how things currently operate. Currently, to the best of my knowledge, no positive-energy based spell are Necromancy. This is D&D 3e/3.5e/d20, not Older D&D/AD&D and Other Systems.

It is incredibly relevant for establishing the context in which the decision was made, because 3.0 and 3.5 were not made in a vacuum.

[heavyfuel]

in 3.0, healing spells (including raise dead/resurrection/etc the basic definition of necromancy) were all necromancy, then in 3.5, monte decided he didn't want wizards (especially conjurers) to have any disadvantages at all, so it was all rolled into necro so you could ban it without a second thought.

Do wizards even have Conjuration (Healing) spells available to them? :smallconfused:

[Thurbane]

Do wizards even have Conjuration (Healing) spells available to them? :smallconfused:

The only one that springs to mind is Hoard Life (RoTD p.113): Sorcerer 4 (so technically no, not for Wizards).

Even Simbul's Synostodweomer (MoF p. 119) [Sor/Wiz 7] is Transmutation, and doesn't have the Healing sub school.

[LuminousWarrior]

I actually support the idea of healing spells as necromancy effects. I actually had an idea for an wizard NPC that was part of a thought experiment. How to make a Good Necromancer? The conclusion I came up with is a semi-atheist wizard that was attempting to use arcane magic to mimic divine magic, using necromancy as a stepping stone to making true healing magic.

[ayvango]

Do wizards even have Conjuration (Healing) spells available to them? :smallconfused:
Arcane Disciple feat adds healing spells to your class spell list. They would remain Conjuration (Healing)

[Mordaedil]

There's still a handful of positive energy type spells left in the necromancy line actually.

There's Undeath to Death and Undeath's Eternal Foe which grants a bunch of immunities to negative energy effects by infusing the subject with positive energy.

Really, cure spells and raise spells makes more sense to be in the necromancy line than conjuration line, the only arguments to contrary I can think of being that you create or teleport in flesh to replace old flesh or call the subjects soul to your side to raise the dead.

[Ashtagon]

Back in 1e/2e days, healing was in the Necromantic school. 3e changed that. This much is common knowledge.

Aside from the "some designers wanted necromancy to be the 'evil' school but only did a half-hearted job of it" theory, something else worth noting is that, back in 1e/2e days, the most significant game rule interaction that schools of magic had was in how they interacted with the planes, as illustrated by Manual of the Planes and various Planescape books.

(There were specialist wizards introduced in 2e in the Complete Wizard book (broadly equivalent to the specialist wizard option in the 3.0/3.5 PHB books). As I recall, they weren't popular in the day. The same chapter in the 2e PHBR book that defined these specialist wizard subclasses also encouraged DMs to create new subclasses, re-assigning spells from existing specialist wizards or assigning spells to multiple specialist wizards as desired. (It was left undefined what would happen if a spell was only assigned to a DM-created school and an adventure was happening on a plane that affected spells based on school of magic.) The PHBR also introduced kits (sets of optional class features). Some of these defined preferred or barred specialist wizard subclasses, but nothing beyond that. However, given that 1e/2e wizards had no access to the healing spells regardless of school, it's pretty much a diversion.)

[Kurald Galain]

[COLOR="#A9A9A9"](There were specialist wizards introduced in 2e in the Complete Wizard book
They're in the PHB. It surely depends on the area, but getting an extra spell of each level per day almost doubles your magic ability (especially as they didn't get bonus spells from high ability scores in 2E) so it was very popular where I played.

The best schools in 2E were transmutation and evocation because they had way more spells than anything else in the game. One of the aims of the Compllete Wizard handbook was to print enough divination and necromancy spells to make these specializations viable.

While the classification in 3E isn't perfect, it is much better than in 2E (which had teleportation under transmutation since "it alters your position"...)

[Ashtagon]

They're in the PHB. It surely depends on the area, but getting an extra spell of each level per day almost doubles your magic ability (especially as they didn't get bonus spells from high ability scores in 2E) so it was very popular.
...

And as I noted, it's an aside in the overall discussion, since the only 2e game effect for having healing spells in necromancy was how it interacted with the planes.

[Mordaedil]

I mean, given the move of healing spells to the conjuration school, they technically shouldn't affect undead anymore, since it's fixing the flesh now, not manipulating positive energy like a necromancer would.

I find it strange what traditions they hold on to hardcore and others they let go without second thought.

[Crake]

I mean, given the move of healing spells to the conjuration school, they technically shouldn't affect undead anymore, since it's fixing the flesh now, not manipulating positive energy like a necromancer would.

I find it strange what traditions they hold on to hardcore and others they let go without second thought.

I always figured it was conjuring positive energy from the positive energy plane? Raw positive energy fixes flesh, as noted by the fact that being on the positive energy plane and being exposed to raw positive energy that way heals you. It's not like it's conjuring flesh and applying it to your body or something?

[SangoProduction]

It seems some of the designers wanted it to be Evil and others did not, so they ended up making it half-evil. Semi-evil. Quasi-evil. The margarine of evil. The Diet Coke of evil, just one calorie, not evil enough.

I always get confused whether people mean "calorie" or "Calorie" (food calorie), when they say "calorie".

[weckar]

I always get confused whether people mean "calorie" or "Calorie" (food calorie), when they say "calorie".

You mean kilocalories, right? A 'large calorie'?

[The_Iron_Lord]

I always figured it was conjuring positive energy from the positive energy plane? Raw positive energy fixes flesh, as noted by the fact that being on the positive energy plane and being exposed to raw positive energy that way heals you. It's not like it's conjuring flesh and applying it to your body or something?

This has always been my position too, though I wouldn't object to the healing spells being moved to Evocation. But Necromancy doesn't really make sense to me because it rarely deals with positive energy, so giving it what are basically the quintessential positive energy spells seems strange.

[Zanos]

I always figured it was conjuring positive energy from the positive energy plane? Raw positive energy fixes flesh, as noted by the fact that being on the positive energy plane and being exposed to raw positive energy that way heals you. It's not like it's conjuring flesh and applying it to your body or something?
That's the excuse, yeah. But getting raw negative energy and throwing it into people is Necromancy instead of Conjuration(Hurting).

[Kurald Galain]

At this point, it's probably worth mentioning that after 3E, the wizard specializations dropped abjuration and divination in favor of pyromancy (not the same as evocation), nethermancy (not the same as necromancy), two distinct types of illusion, full moon, and dark moon.

So yeah, the eight schools are not so bad :smallbiggrin: There's still room for improvement though, and I'd personally say the best fit for healing is Transmutation (as in, reshaping flesh to be whole again).

[Malimar]

There's still room for improvement though, and I'd personally say the best fit for healing is Transmutation (as in, reshaping flesh to be whole again).
Indeed, the repair X damage line is Transmutation.

Me, I leave cure X wounds as conjuration as default but would allow people to research necromancy, evocation, or transmutation versions if it were important, which it isn't.

[Bohandas]

That's the excuse, yeah. But getting raw negative energy and throwing it into people is Necromancy instead of Conjuration(Hurting).

And fire or electricity is evocation

[Bohandas]

I kinda think it'd be worth bringing the priest spheres back for D&D 3.5E, since the spheres allowed for a whole bunch of different and unique priest types with their own spell lists based on which spheres they did or did not have access to.

That's a really good idea

[Nifft]

That's the excuse, yeah. But getting raw negative energy and throwing it into people is Necromancy instead of Conjuration(Hurting). This.

It is just an excuse.

There's no coherent explanation which can cleanly justify 3.x spell placement.

Even if you wanted to buy the excuse, you still get Necromancy spells like false life which behave much like the Positive Energy plane.

[PaucaTerrorem]

You're conjuring/creating new flesh, right?:smallbiggrin:

But in all seriousness, we all know that 3.x spell schools aren't not the best designed. So what does it matter?
If you're a player looking for an optimization loophole just talk to your DM about it.
If you're the DM and you don't like how it's set up, change it and inform your players.

[flare'90]

FWIW, 5e puts cure spells in evocation, since they manipulate (positive) energy.

[grarrrg]

FWIW, 5e puts cure spells in evocation, since they manipulate (positive) energy.

They were Necromancy, moved to Conjuration, moved to Evocation...
So by D&D 11th edition we should expect Cure spells in Divination?

[Nifft]

They were Necromancy, moved to Conjuration, moved to Evocation...
So by D&D 11th edition we should expect Cure spells in Divination?

Divination version: "Ah-ha! I knew in advance that I'd need this band-aid!"

[ExLibrisMortis]

They were Necromancy, moved to Conjuration, moved to Evocation...
So by D&D 11th edition we should expect Cure spells in Divination?
Well, I suppose...

A lot of effects have reasons to be in different schools depending on how the spell accomplishes said effect.



Abjuration
Ward or shield a create against existing wounds? More of a preventive school, really.


Conjuration
Draw positive energy from the Positive Energy Plane directly, or summon a unicorn.


Divination
See into the wound, know how to cure it. +yes to Heal.


Enchantment
You're better off without that leg anyway. It was holding you back! (http://oglaf.com/delusionist/) (this particular one not NSFW, but beware)


Evocation
Manipulate or create positive energy.


Illusion
Placebo effect. aka shadow conjuration/evocation


Necromancy
Manipulate the energies of death, except the other way 'round.


Transmutation
Change wounds into healthy flesh.

[Thurbane]

I always figured it was conjuring positive energy from the positive energy plane? Raw positive energy fixes flesh, as noted by the fact that being on the positive energy plane and being exposed to raw positive energy that way heals you.

That was my assumption as well; I mean, aside from the obvious "necromancy is eeeevil" thing the devs were going for...

[Ashtagon]

The summoning version of healing spells is a bit creepy, mind you.

[noob]

You could also have an illusion healing spell that makes illusory flesh and few people is going to make the difference between the 60% illusory flesh and the real flesh(the same way people do not recognize a simulacrum from a real person or recognize an illusory fireball from a real one)
someone who lost all limbs and got them healed back by an illusion will still have 40% chance of interacting normally with an object or with a person who succeeded a save against the illusion(unless you make super cool illusory flesh like the one of a simulacrum)

[Mordaedil]

I see why people explain it away like that and it's true that is how they justify it, but again, it's kinda justifying something that had no need to be justified prior to 3e.

We're applying the logic backwards. Putting it in evocation makes just as much sense honestly. But its home is necromancy and that won't change no matter what future editions do.

Well, unless they drop schools of magic to adopt the MTG cards so that the settings bleed over, and wizards become planeswalkers instead.

[noob]

Except that in magic the gathering at start there was no planeswalkers : there was wizards and artificers.
A planeswalker is a particular thing and players were wizard at start(then they got switched to planeswalkers because it is supposed to be some form of upgraded wizard or artificer)
So by that logic if dnd is merged with magic the gathering then we might keep wizards and artificers and have planeswalker as a prc or template.

[grarrrg]

Except that in magic the gathering at start there was no planeswalkers : there was wizards and artificers.
A planeswalker is a particular thing and players were wizard at start(then they got switched to planeswalkers because it is supposed to be some form of upgraded wizard or artificer)

Actually the players were Planeswalkers from the very beginning, but they weren't necessarily referred to as "Planeswalkers".
(and pre-mending Planeswalkers were often times god-like in power, but then apocolypses, and 'cosmic reset button' and now I just use lowercase planeswalkers, and...)

[Mordaedil]

Oh god that was a joke

[Melcar]

If heal operates positive energy, then it should rather be evocation. If someone consider positive energy out of evocation energies range, then heal should be necromancy, since necromancy works with negative energy and its perfectly normal to shift its positive counterpart to it. If we think that heal just mends body, than like mending and repair light wounds it should be transmutation. Why conjuration of all things?

So... the reason afaik, is that is simple conjures up or basically summons positive energy from the positive energy plane...


What I hate more, that the vigor spell line actually gives fast healing, so that should be transmutation.

What is also a problem is the inconsistency of how positive energy works. Like, the simple jist is that positive energy heals living and damages undead. However that is not the case in all aspects. The Radiant Servant of Pelor has a positive energy burst that only damages undead.

Overall I believe it comes down to sloppy design or more precisely inconsistencies of different designers. Personally I have rectified this when I DM...

[Rijan_Sai]

What is also a problem is the inconsistency of how positive energy works. Like, the simple jist is that positive energy heals living and damages undead. However that is not the case in all aspects. The Radiant Servant of Pelor has a positive energy burst that only damages undead.

Overall I believe it comes down to sloppy design or more precisely inconsistencies of different designers. Personally I have rectified this when I DM...

It gets even worse when you consider that the Positive Energy Plane (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/planes.htm#positiveEnergyPlane) itself, the source of all healing and bane of the existence of undead, is actually (one of) the greatest boon(s) to undead in the game!
(Note: For the purpose of these quotes, and to save some space, for the most part only the relevant parts have been kept.)


Positive-Dominant (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/planes.htm#positiveDominant)

Major positive-dominant planes go even further. A creature on a major positive-dominant plane must make a DC 15 Fortitude save to avoid being blinded for 10 rounds by the brilliance of the surroundings. Simply being on the plane grants fast healing 5 as an extraordinary ability. In addition, those at full hit points gain 5 additional temporary hit points per round. These temporary hit points fade 1d20 rounds after the creature leaves the major positive-dominant plane. However, a creature must make a DC 20 Fortitude save each round that its temporary hit points exceed its normal hit point total. Failing the saving throw results in the creature exploding in a riot of energy, killing it.


(Undead (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/typesSubtypes.htm#undeadType)) Traits

An undead creature possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature’s entry).
•No Constitution score.
•Immunity to any effect that requires a Fortitude save (unless the effect also works on objects or is harmless).


Fast Healing (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#fastHealing)

A creature with fast healing has the extraordinary ability to regain hit points at an exceptional rate. Except for what is noted here, fast healing is like natural healing.

At the beginning of each of the creature’s turns, it heals a certain number of hit points (defined in its description).

Unlike regeneration, fast healing does not allow a creature to regrow or reattach lost body parts. Unless otherwise stated, it does not allow lost body parts to be reattached.

A creature that has taken both nonlethal and lethal damage heals the nonlethal damage first.

Fast healing does not restore hit points lost from starvation, thirst, or suffocation.

Fast healing does not increase the number of hit points regained when a creature polymorphs.
Note that, unlike Regeneration (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#regeneration), Fast Healing has no requirement for a CON score.

What does this mean? Put together:
1)We see that undead only take damage from positive energy effects that specifically state that they harm undead, not positive energy in general.
2)Undead are fully capable of having the Fast Healing(Ex) ability.
3)Undead are immune to any effects that require a Fort save, but that do not affect objects.
Thus, undead are able to "live" and thrive on the PEP, with HP in the NI range, based upon how long they've been there!

To the topic: yeah, I agree that Healing spells should be under Necromancy*. (I also think that Orb spells should be under Evocation, though mechanically unchanged... (WHAT?!? Evocation without SR? BLASPHEMY I say!))

*It works in other systems (http://arcanum.wikia.com/wiki/Spell_Colleges)!
◾ Black Necromantic - Contains spells that negatively affect the life force of a creature.
◾ White Necromantic - Contains spells that positively affect the life force of a creature.

[Nifft]

To the topic: yeah, I agree that Healing spells should be under Necromancy*. (I also think that Orb spells should be under Evocation, though mechanically unchanged... (WHAT?!? Evocation without SR? BLASPHEMY I say!))

Yeah the (Creation) sub-school should be a descriptor instead -- i.e. [Creation] -- and should appear on some Conjuration, Evocation, and Transmutation spells.

What I'd do about the Orb spells:
- (Lesser) Acid Orb can stay Conjuration. Call it Melf's (Lesser) Acid Orb, perhaps, as justification.
- (Lesser) Fire/Cold/Lightning Orb move to Evocation.
- Remove the (Lesser) Sonic / Force Orb spells entirely.

None of the Orb spells allow SR; all of them function the same. It's just that if you ban Evocation you only get Acid, which is still pretty good but way more situational than having all the Orbs.

[Thurbane]

What I hate more, that the vigor spell line actually gives fast healing, so that should be transmutation.

Seems most spells that give fast healing are Conjuration (Healing), but I found two exceptions:

- Incarnum Vigor (MoI) is Transmutation (Incarnum), and gives fast healing 1.

- Snowsong (Fr) is Enchantment (Compulsion), and gives feat healing 1 (as well as other effects).

[Melcar]

It gets even worse when you consider that the Positive Energy Plane (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/planes.htm#positiveEnergyPlane) itself, the source of all healing and bane of the existence of undead, is actually (one of) the greatest boon(s) to undead in the game!
(Note: For the purpose of these quotes, and to save some space, for the most part only the relevant parts have been kept.)






Note that, unlike Regeneration (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#regeneration), Fast Healing has no requirement for a CON score.

What does this mean? Put together:
1)We see that undead only take damage from positive energy effects that specifically state that they harm undead, not positive energy in general.
2)Undead are fully capable of having the Fast Healing(Ex) ability.
3)Undead are immune to any effects that require a Fort save, but that do not affect objects.
Thus, undead are able to "live" and thrive on the PEP, with HP in the NI range, based upon how long they've been there!

To the topic: yeah, I agree that Healing spells should be under Necromancy*. (I also think that Orb spells should be under Evocation, though mechanically unchanged... (WHAT?!? Evocation without SR? BLASPHEMY I say!))

*It works in other systems (http://arcanum.wikia.com/wiki/Spell_Colleges)!
◾ Black Necromantic - Contains spells that negatively affect the life force of a creature.
◾ White Necromantic - Contains spells that positively affect the life force of a creature.

WHO ARE THE FOOLS WHO MADE THE POSITIVE ENERGY PLANE DO FAST HEALING! Obviously is should heal you every round not give you an Ex ability! That will be changed in my campaign now!

[Necroticplague]

WHO ARE THE FOOLS WHO MADE THE POSITIVE ENERGY PLANE DO FAST HEALING! Obviously is should heal you every round not give you an Ex ability! That will be changed in my campaign now!

Well, they already have one mechanic for 'you heal a set amount every round', so why not re-use it? 'You gain Fast Haeling 5' and 'you regain 5 hit points every round, barring HP lost from some things' are the same, while the former takes up fewer words and doesn't require being as thorough, because the words and thoroughness have already been used on Fast healing's description.

[grarrrg]

Oh god that was a joke

So do we put the straight up Cure spells in Green or White then? I mean, there are solid arguments for either one, but at the end of the day one gets claim on "Cure Light Wounds" and the other doesn't.

Of course, Black would get all the "damage enemy>heal yourself" life drain stuff.
Blue can have limited amounts, but only as part of Polymorph type effects, which would likely be Fast Healing related.
Red is right out.

[ericgrau]

Have you noticed how many conjuration (healing) spells there are? Especially on the cleric list. It's quite a big subschool. It should just be its own school, a sort of opposite of necromancy. Just call it healing.

Necromancy could just as easily be evocation or transmutation.

Really they didn't see it as quite big enough to make another school, especially a school that wizards don't really get many spells for if any. So they needed to force fit it into somewhere where it wouldn't get much notice.

Having healing necromancers is also a bit of a bother. If anything healing is supposed to be anti-undead and anti-necromancy. It kinda works just because arcane necromancers don't get the spells. And because clerics can mostly do both.


Well, they already have one mechanic for 'you heal a set amount every round', so why not re-use it? 'You gain Fast Haeling 5' and 'you regain 5 hit points every round, barring HP lost from some things' are the same, while the former takes up fewer words and doesn't require being as thorough, because the words and thoroughness have already been used on Fast healing's description.

Because now they need explain why not undead. And need explain mean less word dumb not smart.

[Dimers]

Incidentally, can you tell or link me to a good source of those spheres? I was tinkering on something a while back and someone just piqued my interest in it again, but I don't actually know what those old spheres were so I've not much to tinker from.

This (http://www.purpleworm.org/rules/) is free and legal. The full list can be found in either the Tome Of Magic tab (which shows Elemental Sphere spells both together and separate) or the Player's Option: Spells & Magic tab (where they're only separate).

All
Animal
Astral
Chaos
Charm
Combat
Creation
Divination
Elemental, Air
Elemental, Earth
Elemental, Fire
Elemental, Water
Guardian
Healing
Law
Necromantic
Numbers
Plant
Protection
Summoning
Sun
Thought
Time
Travelers
War
Wards
Weather

[Necroticplague]

Because now they need explain why not undead. And need explain mean less word dumb not smart.
1. Er, can you explain what you mean by the second sentence? That reads like a word salad, and I can't understand what you're trying to say.
2. They have that problem either way. Healing isn't intrinsically damaging to undead. That's a special exception that the Cure X Wounds spells specifically make, not any kind of general rule.

[Melcar]

Well, they already have one mechanic for 'you heal a set amount every round', so why not re-use it? 'You gain Fast Haeling 5' and 'you regain 5 hit points every round, barring HP lost from some things' are the same, while the former takes up fewer words and doesn't require being as thorough, because the words and thoroughness have already been used on Fast healing's description.

So creatures with fast healing are inherently positive energy loaded? In my veiw there has to be consistency. Either positive energy heals, or give fast healing. If it gives fast healing then all creatures with fast healing should be either from the Positive Energy Plane...

From a quick google search, the following creatures have fast healing:

Ethereal Doppelganger (MM2) - FH8
Firbolg (MM2) - FH3
Fomorian (MM2) - FH5
Vampiric Ixitxachitl (MM2) - FH5
*Spirit of the Land (MM2) - FH10
Windghost (MM2) - FH3
Harssaf (MM3) - FH3
Odopi (MM3) - FH7 (or elder FH9)
Lifeleech Otyugh (MM3) - FH5
*Ragewalker (MM3) - FH5
Runehound (MM3) - FH3
Shrieking Terror (MM3) - FH5 (five-headed) or FH10 (ten-headed)
Summoning Ooze (MM3) - FH5
Trolls (MM3) - FH8 (cave troll), FH5 (forest), FH9 (mountain)
*Avatars of Elemental Evil (MM4) - FH5
*Bloodfire Ooze (MM4) - FH5
Ogre Guard Thrall (MM4) - FH5
Zern (MM4) - FH5
Zern Blade Thrall (MM4) - FH2
Elemental Mage (MM5) - FH5 (Ken-kuni), FH10 (Ken-li or Ken-Sun)
Thoon Infiltrator (MM5) - FH5
Madcrafter of Thoon (MM5)- FH5
Thoon Elder Brain (MM5) - FH10
*Zeitgeist (CityScape) - FH10
*Fang Dragon, Ancient or older (Draconomicon) - FH2
Battle Dragon, Old or older (Draconomicon) - FH2
Chaoswyrd (Dragon Compendium) - FH10
Venom Ooze (Drow of the Underdark) - FH3
*Genius Loci (Epic Level Handbook) - FH50
*LeShay (Epic Level Handbook) - FH10
Mu Spore (Epic Level Handbook) - FH10
*Ruin Swarm (Epic Level Handbook) - FH15
Vermiurge (Epic Level Handbook) - FH10
Bonespear (Fiend Folio) - FH5
Darkweaver (Fiend Folio) - FH3
Fossergrim (Fiend Folio) - FH5
*Rukanyr (Fiend Folio) - FH5
Chilblain (Frostburn) - FH10
Ectoplasmic Vermin (Ghostwalk) - FH1 (any size)

Chulcrix (Price of Courage\Dragonlance) - FH5
Dolghast (Magic of Eberron\Eberron) - FH5
Dekanter Goblin (Monsters of Faerun\Forgotten Realms) - FH3
*Rock Wyrm (Silver Marches\Forgotten Realms) - FH1
*Banelar Naga (Serpent Kingdoms\Forgotten Realms) - FH2
Nagahydra (Serpent Kingdoms\Forgotten Realms) - FH15
Dung Snake (Serpent Kingdoms\Forgotten Realms) - FH1
Glacier Snake (Serpent Kingdoms\Forgotten Realms) - FH1
Impervigen (Dangerous Denizens\Kingdoms of Kalamar) - FH2

[Necroticplague]

So creatures with fast healing are inherently positive energy loaded? No, and I'm not sure how you'd extrapolate that from my argument.


In my veiw there has to be consistency.
There is consistency. 'You heal for X HP every round' is consistently Fast Healing.



Either positive energy heals, or give fast healing.
That's a bit like saying 'either negative energy inflicts negative levels, or it animates undead'. There's no reason a whole energy should only be able to do only one thing, and it's perfectly reasonable to have it able to do both.


If it gives fast healing then all creatures with fast healing should be either from the Positive Energy Plane...
Even assuming your previous logic made any sort of sense (it doesn't), this wouldn't follow from it. Just because association with an energy grants a trait, doesn't mean all creatures with that traits are associated with that energy. Just as you can do fire damage without being linked to fire, so to can you have fast healing without being linked to Positive.

On a relevant note, Vivacious creatures actually do have Fast Healing.


From a quick google search, the following creatures have fast healing:

Ethereal Doppelganger (MM2) - FH8
Firbolg (MM2) - FH3
Fomorian (MM2) - FH5
Vampiric Ixitxachitl (MM2) - FH5
*Spirit of the Land (MM2) - FH10
Windghost (MM2) - FH3
Harssaf (MM3) - FH3
Odopi (MM3) - FH7 (or elder FH9)
Lifeleech Otyugh (MM3) - FH5
*Ragewalker (MM3) - FH5
Runehound (MM3) - FH3
Shrieking Terror (MM3) - FH5 (five-headed) or FH10 (ten-headed)
Summoning Ooze (MM3) - FH5
Trolls (MM3) - FH8 (cave troll), FH5 (forest), FH9 (mountain)
*Avatars of Elemental Evil (MM4) - FH5
*Bloodfire Ooze (MM4) - FH5
Ogre Guard Thrall (MM4) - FH5
Zern (MM4) - FH5
Zern Blade Thrall (MM4) - FH2
Elemental Mage (MM5) - FH5 (Ken-kuni), FH10 (Ken-li or Ken-Sun)
Thoon Infiltrator (MM5) - FH5
Madcrafter of Thoon (MM5)- FH5
Thoon Elder Brain (MM5) - FH10
*Zeitgeist (CityScape) - FH10
*Fang Dragon, Ancient or older (Draconomicon) - FH2
Battle Dragon, Old or older (Draconomicon) - FH2
Chaoswyrd (Dragon Compendium) - FH10
Venom Ooze (Drow of the Underdark) - FH3
*Genius Loci (Epic Level Handbook) - FH50
*LeShay (Epic Level Handbook) - FH10
Mu Spore (Epic Level Handbook) - FH10
*Ruin Swarm (Epic Level Handbook) - FH15
Vermiurge (Epic Level Handbook) - FH10
Bonespear (Fiend Folio) - FH5
Darkweaver (Fiend Folio) - FH3
Fossergrim (Fiend Folio) - FH5
*Rukanyr (Fiend Folio) - FH5
Chilblain (Frostburn) - FH10
Ectoplasmic Vermin (Ghostwalk) - FH1 (any size)

Chulcrix (Price of Courage\Dragonlance) - FH5
Dolghast (Magic of Eberron\Eberron) - FH5
Dekanter Goblin (Monsters of Faerun\Forgotten Realms) - FH3
*Rock Wyrm (Silver Marches\Forgotten Realms) - FH1
*Banelar Naga (Serpent Kingdoms\Forgotten Realms) - FH2
Nagahydra (Serpent Kingdoms\Forgotten Realms) - FH15
Dung Snake (Serpent Kingdoms\Forgotten Realms) - FH1
Glacier Snake (Serpent Kingdoms\Forgotten Realms) - FH1
Impervigen (Dangerous Denizens\Kingdoms of Kalamar) - FH2
Minor nitpick: some of those are Regeneration, not Fast healing.

[ericgrau]

1. Er, can you explain what you mean by the second sentence? That reads like a word salad, and I can't understand what you're trying to say.
Exactly. Letting rules be confusing just so they can be shorter isn't a good thing.

[Necroticplague]

Exactly. Letting rules be confusing just so they can be shorter isn't a good thing.

There's nothing ambiguous or confusing about what having Fast healing 5 means unless you lack familiarity with very basic game concepts and research skills.

[Rijan_Sai]

Really, the whole thing could have been avoided with one word:

Major positive-dominant planes go even further. A living creature on a major positive-dominant plane...

It worked well enough for Negative-dominant (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/planes.htm#negativeDominant) planes

On minor negative-dominant planes, living creatures take 1d6 points of damage per round. At 0 hit points or lower, they crumble into ash.

Major negative-dominant planes are even more severe. Each round, those within must make a DC 25 Fortitude save or gain a negative level. A creature whose negative levels equal its current levels or Hit Dice is slain, becoming a wraith. The death ward spell protects a traveler from the damage and energy drain of a negative-dominant plane.

[Melcar]

There's nothing ambiguous or confusing about what having Fast healing 5 means unless you lack familiarity with very basic game concepts and research skills.

Ok... So for me its simply that raw positive energy should not just give an ex abilty but simply heal. When it gives the already very specifically defined ex ability fast healing, its healing undead as well! I don't like the fast that positive energy apparently can give the fast healing ex ability. IMO it should be continues healing! Why does it matter you say, because fast healing is a specific defined thing.

So for me there is inconsistencies. The problem is that the traits of raw positive energy has not been defined, therefore it can do everything. I dont like that!

If both living and undead ar caught in ANY positive energy of any form, the living should be affected by some healing and the undead som harming effect. Thats not actually what happens!

[Bohandas]

Really, the whole thing could have been avoided with one word:

"Major positive-dominant planes go even further. A living creature on a major positive-dominant plane..."

It worked well enough for Negative-dominant (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/planes.htm#negativeDominant) planes

"On minor negative-dominant planes, living creatures take 1d6 points of damage per round. At 0 hit points or lower, they crumble into ash.

Major negative-dominant planes are even more severe. Each round, those within must make a DC 25 Fortitude save or gain a negative level. A creature whose negative levels equal its current levels or Hit Dice is slain, becoming a wraith. The death ward spell protects a traveler from the damage and energy drain of a negative-dominant plane."


Which brings up another issue, which is that the problems aren't perfectly reversed between living and undead. An undead critter on the positive energy plane ought to lose hit dice.

[ngilop]

If heal operates positive energy, then it should rather be evocation. If someone consider positive energy out of evocation energies range, then heal should be necromancy, since necromancy works with negative energy and its perfectly normal to shift its positive counterpart to it. If we think that heal just mends body, than like mending and repair light wounds it should be transmutation. Why conjuration of all things?

Up until 3rd edition. healing was necromancy

Its just when 3rd ed came out the designer thought conjuration was the weakest of schools and so decided to slap a bunch of spells in it to 'shore up' its weaknesses.

It makes much more sense to be in necromancy and is easy enough to fix to correct it.

[Kurald Galain]

Its just when 3rd ed came out the designer thought conjuration was the weakest of schools

That sounds unlikely. Do you have a source on that?

(the weakest school in 2E is divination, and 3E's designers knew that: this is why diviners only get one opposition school instead of two)

[ngilop]

That sounds unlikely. Do you have a source on that?

(the weakest school in 2E is divination, and 3E's designers knew that: this is why diviners only get one opposition school instead of two)

My sources I guess are more my guesses as to why they took all these spells from necromancy and evocation/invocation and gave them to conjuration. also took spells fr0m invocation/evocation and gave them to enchantment....but that's another story or another time

divination only has 1 opposition school not because its weak, but because it has no 'blasty mc blast blast' powers.

the creators of 3rd edition really had ZERO idea what they were doing when they created the new ruleset and whats his face (I want to say Monte Cook, but I could be wrong) only came out with the 'dumb people play fighters and smart people with system mastery will play wizards' as a cop out.. not as a mater of fact. and only after ton of people said 'hey this is not balanced anywhere near close to what you said, yo."


also.. I pesent the Orb of X spells that are conjuration instead of evocation as well as dozens of other that should be evocation but instead are conjuration cuz its weak.

they (the creators) just don't understand that using a 4th level spell slot to summon a creature that can cast a 3rd level spell twice then enter melee is a lot better than another spell that does Xd6 in Y shape with Z energy.

[Necroticplague]

Ok... So for me its simply that raw positive energy should not just give an ex abilty but simply heal. When it gives the already very specifically defined ex ability fast healing, its healing undead as well! I don't like the fast that positive energy apparently can give the fast healing ex ability. IMO it should be continues healing!
Fast Healing is continuous healing. That's literally exactly what the ability does, and that's all it does.

The problem of healing undead is still one that would exist if you replaced Fast Healing with the equivalent in long form. The problem, as somebody else so kindly points out, is that they don't say 'living creatures....' in the description of positive-dominant, and has nothing to do with that it grants Fast Healing.


So for me there is inconsistencies. The problem is that the traits of raw positive energy has not been defined, therefore it can do everything. I dont like that! Again, this is different from Negative Energy being able to both inflict negative levels, and inflict fatigue.....how? Yes, energies can be used to do several things. A power that lets you quench a fire to nothing uses fire energy just as much as the fireball that started it in the first place.

Or, to use a real-world example, like how electricity can both make a magnet move and to zap something.


If both living and undead are caught in ANY positive energy of any form, the living should be affected by some healing and the undead some harming effect. That's not actually what happens!
Being harmed by positive energy isn't a universal trait of undead. That is something very specific to Cure spells (and some others), not healing in general. Note that undead traits say nothing about positive energy in any way.

While I do agree that positive-dominance should have specified it only applies to living people, I find the reasons you seem to be quibbling over it either completely irrelevant and petty (fast healing), or utterly baffling (energy does multiple things).

[grarrrg]

(the weakest school in 2E is divination, and 3E's designers knew that: this is why diviners only get one opposition school instead of two)
"Healing in Conjuration, cause weak" could still be true, just that it's hard to shove random-ish spells into Divination and still have them make sense.
Most other schools have a bit more flexibility in what can make sense.

[Nifft]

"Healing in Conjuration, cause weak" could still be true, just that it's hard to shove random-ish spells into Divination and still have them make sense.
Most other schools have a bit more flexibility in what can make sense.

Healing is idiomatic of Divine magic, therefore it's in Divination.

[Melcar]

Fast Healing is continuous healing. That's literally exactly what the ability does, and that's all it does.

Considering fast healing is like natural healing, it inherently does not run on positive energy. Fast Healing has nothing to do with positive energy.



The problem of healing undead is still one that would exist if you replaced Fast Healing with the equivalent in long form. The problem, as somebody else so kindly points out, is that they don't say 'living creatures....' in the description of positive-dominant, and has nothing to do with that it grants Fast Healing.

If the positive energy plane were to heal you, then undead would be harmed! Now fast healing heals undead. That's counter intuitive.



Again, this is different from Negative Energy being able to both inflict negative levels, and inflict fatigue.....how? Yes, energies can be used to do several things. A power that lets you quench a fire to nothing uses fire energy just as much as the fireball that started it in the first place.

I think positive energy should be positively poisonous to undead. Btw... can you heal living creatures with negative energy?



Being harmed by positive energy isn't a universal trait of undead. That is something very specific to Cure spells (and some others), not healing in general. Note that undead traits say nothing about positive energy in any way. Well... I think it should be!


While I do agree that positive-dominance should have specified it only applies to living people, I find the reasons you seem to be quibbling over it either completely irrelevant and petty (fast healing), or utterly baffling (energy does multiple things).

I respect your views on this matter. I just don't particularly like the ways positive energy is defined, nor how it interacts with undead. I feel like there is something wrong!

[noob]

In libris mortis undead are quite specifically said as healing themselves by draining the positive energy of people under its various forms and throwing it into the negative energy place thus increasing entropy.
It would make sense for them when receiving positive energy continuously to have them heal(since they can throw the positive energy in the negative energy plane through the conduit that animate them)
The cure line as well as heal deals damage because you throw a whole lot of energy over a very short amount of time on one given location of the body.
While positive energy from the positive energy plane enters creatures at a constant rate and is spread among all the surface of the creature(and not just on a surface the size of a hand) and thus heal undead because they work as conduits toward the negative energy plane onto positive energy and strengthen when doing so.

So it 100% makes coherent fluff to have the positive energy plane heal the undead and it would also make sense those undead get the evolved template at a higher rate while in the positive energy plane(since they use a whole lot their connection to the negative energy plane for increasing entropy by sending positive energy through their link at a much higher rate than if they were just drinking the blood of humans or whatever)
The burst vs continuous aspect is furthermore suggested by the fact that the positive energy plane gives temporary hp at a rate comparable to the one of an undead draining energy as fast as possible(for example a vampire draining blood)

[ericgrau]

Undead run on negative energy and the description of the positive energy plane says that it is nearly devoid of undead. Not overrun with million temporary HP super undead. There are numerous examples of positive energy harming undead specifically because it's positive energy. The fast healing thing is clearly an oversight and a mistake.

Anyway on to something more on topic:

Healing is idiomatic of Divine magic, therefore it's in Divination.

Healing is clearly enchantment because they've managed to convince us it's conjuration for so long.
Healing is clearly an illusion because you're really just repairing living tissue by replacing cells. It looks like a miracle when really you're just doing repair work.

[Dimers]

Healing clearly can't be necromancy, since necromancy is the art of gaining guidance or pregnistication from the dead (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necromancy), not manipulation of positive/negative energies. Stop calling me a necromancer, dammit! I'm a viviturgist!

[ayvango]

Healing clearly can't be necromancy, since necromancy is the art of gaining guidance or pregnistication from the dead (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necromancy)
But it was!

[ayvango]

How about promoting healing to a standalone school and demoting abjuration to sub-school?

[ericgrau]

I'd just making healing part of abjuration. One of the cleric's main jobs is super abjurer anyway. And it fits with being protective.

[Bohandas]

In libris mortis undead are quite specifically said as healing themselves by draining the positive energy of people under its various forms and throwing it into the negative energy place thus increasing entropy.
It would make sense for them when receiving positive energy continuously to have them heal(since they can throw the positive energy in the negative energy plane through the conduit that animate them)
The cure line as well as heal deals damage because you throw a whole lot of energy over a very short amount of time on one given location of the body.
While positive energy from the positive energy plane enters creatures at a constant rate and is spread among all the surface of the creature(and not just on a surface the size of a hand) and thus heal undead because they work as conduits toward the negative energy plane onto positive energy and strengthen when doing so.

So it 100% makes coherent fluff to have the positive energy plane heal the undead and it would also make sense those undead get the evolved template at a higher rate while in the positive energy plane(since they use a whole lot their connection to the negative energy plane for increasing entropy by sending positive energy through their link at a much higher rate than if they were just drinking the blood of humans or whatever)
The burst vs continuous aspect is furthermore suggested by the fact that the positive energy plane gives temporary hp at a rate comparable to the one of an undead draining energy as fast as possible(for example a vampire draining blood)

Perfectly coherent if we ignore the fact that they're harmed by positive energy and instinctively flee from it etc and that that passage was just an asspull because the game designers realized that vampires make absolutely no sense under the planescape cosmology but even with the asspull that still don;t make any sense because we're still left with the fact that they're harmed by positive energy, instinctively flee from it, etc etc.

[Bohandas]

Being harmed by positive energy isn't a universal trait of undead. That is something very specific to Cure spells (and some others), not healing in general. Note that undead traits say nothing about positive energy in any way.

Specifically it's idiomatic to positive energy healing spells. That said you are technically correct as regards to interactions between healing and the undead; the repair damage series, for example, does nothing to them IIRC

[Necroticplague]

Specifically it's idiomatic to positive energy healing spells. That said you are technically correct as regards to interactions between healing and the undead; the repair damage series, for example, does nothing to them IIRC

Conduit of Life also heals undead (assuming the caster is undead), and specifically uses positive energy.

[grarrrg]

Healing clearly can't be necromancy, since necromancy is the art of gaining guidance or pregnistication from the dead (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Necromancy), not manipulation of positive/negative energies. But it was!
(psst! blue text is usually used for sarcasm/joking)