Healing in combat SUCKS

[Bjarkmundur]

I've heard it time-and-time again that healing isn't a good use of your action in combat, and that "yoyo-healing" is the only real effective way to spend spell slots healing in combat.

If I were to get a player who'd want a more combat-active type healer, where the BEST course of action would be to heal, and the strategic option would be not to heal (instead of visa versa), do you think it can be done without breaking the game?

I was thinking about something along the lines of "When you use a spell slot of 1st level or higher to allow a creature other then yourself to regain hit points, you can instead give them twice the amount of temporary hit points for 1 minute."

This is obviously not useful out of combat but might help combat-healing become a viable option.
This is just a simple mock up to explain the idea, but do you think there's any merit to this train of thought? Is temporary hit points the solution?

I'd love to hear your opinions on the "healer" role in general. Is healing in combat maybe not as useless as I think it is? Would you ever use cure wounds just to "top off" a frontliner instead of casting an offensive/enabling spell? Do you see yourself as a 'healer' or 'support' when going for the druid and cleric archetypes most associated with healing spells?

[Trickery]

You can create a good in-combat healing build by taking one level of Life Cleric and 6 or more of Lore Bard, using magical secrets to steal Aura of Vitality. That nets you a solid minute of strong bonus action heals while you Vicious Mockery and Cutting Words people and help heal allies out of combat with Song of Rest.

Yoyoing is still effective, but this spell is likely to last longer than the combat does (typical combat is 3-5 rounds).

[Xihirli]

I've heard it time-and-time again that healing isn't a good use of your action in combat, and that "yoyo-healing" is the only real effective way to spend spell slots healing in combat.

If I were to get a player who'd want a more combat-active type healer, where the BEST course of action would be to heal, and the strategic option would be not to heal (instead of visa versa), do you think it can be done without breaking the game?

I was thinking about something along the lines of "When you use a spell slot of 1st level or higher to allow a creature other then yourself to regain hit points, you can instead give them twice the amount of temporary hit points for 1 minute."

This is obviously not useful out of combat but might help combat-healing become a viable option.
This is just a simple mock up to explain the idea, but do you think there's any merit to this train of thought? Is temporary hit points the solution? Is healing in combat maybe not as useless as I think it is? Would you ever use cure wounds just to "top off" a frontliner instead of casting an offensive/enabling spell?

Healing Spirit mixed with Disciple of Life is the best way to do in-combat healing in my experience, though it's even better out of combat. A cleric 1/ bard X or multiclass Cleric 1 /Druid X can both manage that.

[GlenSmash!]

If you want to avoid yo-yo healing, look at healing spirit. At least then the players have to walk into it.

[J-H]

It may be unoptimized, but the Life Cleric in my Party of 7 is firmly in the healbot role and seems to be fine with it.

[Hobbo Jim]

In general, I think the idea is that preventing damage is usually better than healing damage. This is usually why save or suck spells are so strong, and glass cannon is often a decent way to play - If you deal enough damage to kill the monster two turns earlier, then you "prevented" two rounds of damage. Action economy often makes healing not as good.

Another issue with healing is that damage as no real effect until you go down, at which point 1 point of healing is basically the same as any other amount, unless you heal so much that the monster can't 1 shot them anymore (but that's a bigly heal).

The final issue is gameplay - A lot of people don't like combats that drag on. Some combats last way too long already, and that's without healing. Add in healing, suddenly it's a game of attrition. Fun here and there maybe, but doing so every combat might be a bit much.


To fix these issues, Temp healing could be strong, but any healer should also probably have some utility to prevent damage or enhance/allow for damage if everyone is topped off. Counterspell, dispel, slow, haste, things like that. Then, going down will also probably need to have some changes. Penalties when you go below a certain health brings its own issues, and 5e explicitly got rid of negative health, so that's hard to change. An idea I just had while typing this is that maybe to make it more interactive you could give the healer paladin-esk auras, but they only work or work better if you're above half health or have temp hit points or something. That way, you can be interactive and actively want to keep them at more than just "not down."

[Dork_Forge]

Both Celestial Warlock and Circle of Dreams Druid offer this, a bonus action ranged heal that doesn't hinder casting with your main action. Alternatively twinning a healing spell is particularly effective in combat or as others have mentioned, Healing Spirit

[Grimmnist]

Healing is never going to be as effective as damage which makes sense, as others have said it would make combat drag out for far too long. To compare two spells Cure Wounds heals for 1d8 + mod (7.5 with a +3 mod) while Inflict Wounds deals 3d10 damage (16.5). That is over twice as much damage, though you can be resistant to the damage or the spell attack can miss. There are a few ways to cheat this math a little bit, Life Cleric gives a bonus to how much you heal and the spell Beacon of Hope makes it so for one minute rather than rolling the healing dice you just use the maximum roll. A level 5 life cleric with Beacon of Hope up would heal for 15 with a cast of Cure wounds, barely less than Inflict Wounds but you do have to spend a 3rd level spell slot to use Beacon of Hope.

[Nhorianscum]

I've heard it time-and-time again that healing isn't a good use of your action in combat, and that "yoyo-healing" is the only real effective way to spend spell slots healing in combat.

If I were to get a player who'd want a more combat-active type healer, where the BEST course of action would be to heal, and the strategic option would be not to heal (instead of visa versa), do you think it can be done without breaking the game?

I was thinking about something along the lines of "When you use a spell slot of 1st level or higher to allow a creature other then yourself to regain hit points, you can instead give them twice the amount of temporary hit points for 1 minute."

This is obviously not useful out of combat but might help combat-healing become a viable option.
This is just a simple mock up to explain the idea, but do you think there's any merit to this train of thought? Is temporary hit points the solution?

I'd love to hear your opinions on the "healer" role in general. Is healing in combat maybe not as useless as I think it is? Would you ever use cure wounds just to "top off" a frontliner instead of casting an offensive/enabling spell? Do you see yourself as a 'healer' or 'support' when going for the druid and cleric archetypes most associated with healing spells?

In the sort of campaign where intelligent evil enemies will step on your neck and beastial enemies just kill for food...

Yeah in combat healing has a niche and the yo-yo string gets cut real fast.

IE 3 kobolds vs PC at 0. It's our healing users turn

Healing word is a range vs the little sucker's damage and with advantage we're looking at extremely high chances of outright death. On the other hand a level 2 heal wounds will all but guarantee survival and will likely give our downed bro a chance to act killing the little buggers.

This applies to low HP PC's as well and scales with level.

[Willie the Duck]

I've heard it time-and-time again that healing isn't a good use of your action in combat, and that "yoyo-healing" is the only real effective way to spend spell slots healing in combat.

This is certainly not-wrong, but I do think it is sometimes overblown. Spending your main action to cast Cure Wounds in the middle of combat is almost never better than spending the same action trying to end the fight asap (and here the issue that, with cantrips and a decent 'help' mechanic in this edition, everyone who might cast a cure spell almost always has something to do that is 'effective enough.' There are no more "what am I going to do, shoot my crossbow at the 40 AC monstrosity for 1d8 damage? I might as well cast a cure." moments) .

Depending on your DM and campaign, particularly if (as everyone keeps suggesting on boards like this which they may well visit as well) the DM has taken steps to discourage relying on "yoyo-healing" (like having creatures attack downed PCs), then in-combat healing starts to make sense again, particularly if you can use ongoing spells and/or a bonus action to do it. The life-cleric lore-bard option is certainly a good one, but heck, a paladin who doesn't happen to have a constant use for their bonus action (so, not the one with Polearm Master) should consider having Aura of Vitality up and distribute healing that way. DMs who dislike how Healing Spirit works RAW might consider making it be more like Aura of Vitality as well, allowing the druid/ranger to pull the same trick. As others have said, Dreams Druid and Celestial Warlock (and glamour bard, and thief rogue with healer kit) also have great in-combat healing, and as long as the action they took to do it wouldn't otherwise have been spent to help end the fight, it is likely efficient. It's really the action that's the big issue, (although the Cure Wounds spell, too, is a big head-scratcher).

[darknite]

Like nuclear war, the best way to handle damage ... is not to be damaged at all.

[Amechra]

The issue is that damage outscales healing to such an absurd degree that the only time it's actually useful to heal someone is when they're around 0hp. It'd help if "spend an action on it" healing also gave the target a short term buff, or if over-healing someone did something cool.

I think Order Clerics have the right idea - you heal someone, and they get to make an attack.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Another issue with healing is that damage as no real effect until you go down, at which point 1 point of healing is basically the same as any other amount, unless you heal so much that the monster can't 1 shot them anymore (but that's a bigly heal).
More than anything else, this is the ultimate reason why healing stinks. There's no penalty to letting someone fall to zero as long as someone can heal them for 1 before their next turn. If 5e had a death spiral, where being at low hit points gives you penalties, healing would become more important.

[ad_hoc]

In the sort of campaign where intelligent evil enemies will step on your neck and beastial enemies just kill for food...

Yeah in combat healing has a niche and the yo-yo string gets cut real fast.

IE 3 kobolds vs PC at 0. It's our healing users turn

Healing word is a range vs the little sucker's damage and with advantage we're looking at extremely high chances of outright death. On the other hand a level 2 heal wounds will all but guarantee survival and will likely give our downed bro a chance to act killing the little buggers.

This applies to low HP PC's as well and scales with level.

Yeah, in a game with PC death against the rules then healing naturally isn't very important.

In many combats there will be 1 or 2 tough monsters but then a bunch of weaker ones.

A bunch of goblins are suddenly very scary when PCs are knocked low. Death is very quick if it is allowed.

[Contrast]

My advice is to suggest they play a glamour bard.

Their bardic inspiration is damn useful for keeping people alive and kicking and you get to keep spell casting (and moving people out of danger/setting up for AoE spells to boot!).

[BloodOgre]

When a player drops to 0 HP, use the optional lingering injuries table on page 272 of the DMG.

Or find some other side-effect that might persuade the PCs that dropping to 0 is a bad idea. Perhaps make healing spells only half effective on someone who has dropped to zero within the last 24 hours. Or after a creature drops to 0 hp, it can only recover up to half their hit points by any means in the first 24 hours and only recover 1 hit die of hp per day after that (they were mortally wounded. It should take time to recover).

[Amechra]

More than anything else, this is the ultimate reason why healing stinks. There's no penalty to letting someone fall to zero as long as someone can heal them for 1 before their next turn. If 5e had a death spiral, where being at low hit points gives you penalties, healing would become more important.

Or the reverse, where being at high health gave you extra coolness.

It's like how picking up the Master Sword in Zelda gives you an incentive to heal even if you are only missing half a heart.

[Nhorianscum]

Even in no-death games spells like Heal and Mass Heal are actually really strong in combat buttons.

Side note: The opening chapters of LMoP are great in deathable games.

[Keravath]

If you want to discourage yo-yo healing there are several ways you could home brew to work around it.

1) Some people impose a level of exhaustion each time you are brought back from zero hit points.

These take quite a while to get rid of so it is detrimental to allow a character to hit 0. This makes healing ahead of time more advantageous, except that healing is not a very efficient use of a spell slot. Usually, the monsters will do more damage in one hit than a 1st level spell can cure. Monsters usually have multiple attacks and often the action opportunity cost of the heal prevents the cleric from doing more damage (e.g. healing word vs activating spiritual weapon).

2) Some people might reduce to hit and damage in proportion to hit points lost/fraction remaining. This again makes it desirable to keep as many hit points as possible.

3) You could give an extra benefit to healing (like doing more or max hit points) making it a more efficient use of a spell slot but it still will be less than the typical damage from one monster with multi-attack.

You could combine some of these ideas or come up with something new.

[NNescio]

You want to be an MMO-style healbot?

Be Druid, grab Healing Spirit (from Xanathar's Guide To Everything). It summons a 5ft healing cube (well, a spirit) that can heal people (you get to choose who) for 1d6 when they walk through it (once per turn. Also procs when they start their turn in it). Summon it on the battlefield (or after combat, that works too), then have your allies shuffle through it to proc the heal then move off to keep the space clear. You can reposition the Spirit by using a bonus action.

(Beware of enemy battlefield control effects though, which can deny access to the Spirit. And also note that the Druid is usually better off dropping battlefield controls of its own, but if the player wants to play a Healbot, the Healing Spirit is kinda efficient enough to be used in battle, especially at lower levels.)

Also turn leftover slots into Goodberries for the next adventuring day, while you're at it.

Not enough? Go Circle of the Shepard (also XGtE) for the unicorn spirit (note that Healing Spirit only procs it once).

Still not enough? Dip Life Cleric for Disciple of Life. This (slightly more than) doubles the healing output of a L2 Healing Spirit (to 1d6 + 4).

[Yakmala]

A character is just as effective in combat at 1 HP as they are at 100 HP. So getting characters back on their feet quickly is far more important than keeping them "topped off" in combat.

Of all the party healer variants I've played, my favorite is a Thief with the Healer feat.


Use healing kit as a bonus action (via Fast Hands) while still getting in sneak attack.
Heal (action) > Move > Heal (bonus action) to get two downed party members back on thier feet in the same turn.
Gives a good amount of healing to each party member once per short rest.
Can get them back to 1 HP an unlimited amount of times.
No spell slots needed. Just make sure you buy enough healing kits. Your party will probably be more than happy to donate to the cause.
You get to be the party skill monkey, sneak attacker, stealther, trap disarmer and even face if you like, all while being the primary healer.

[Waazraath]

A short guide to healing in combat: http://minmaxforum.com/index.php?topic=6656.0

Older edition, but the main thoughts still hold I think. It doesn't suck, or is even bad per se, you just need to do it smartly (healing in combat, that is).

[Reevh]

More than anything else, this is the ultimate reason why healing stinks. There's no penalty to letting someone fall to zero as long as someone can heal them for 1 before their next turn. If 5e had a death spiral, where being at low hit points gives you penalties, healing would become more important.

Or where each time you got knocked unconscious you took a point of exhaustion.

But honestly, I kind of like that D&D 5E deemphasizes healing in combat. For most people I think it's not as much fun as doing damage or using a cool control spell or using the environment in an interesting way, or talking your way out of a fight. So I'm kind of OK with healing as it currently stands.

[Bjarkmundur]

Wow, all the big guns answer my thread. I better do this right!

I'll update this post with all my replies, just to try to keep the thread clean.

@Trickery
Oh, I like the Aura of Vitality trick. It definitely improves the combat-healing situation. And it's only a third-level spell which comes online rather quickly. Thanks for the tip!

@Xihirli
Healing Spirit definitely deserves a mention. I'm pretty sure it's the most frequently DM-nerfed spell in the game xD

@GlenSmash
Yoyo healing isn't a problem, and I have my own way of discouraging that (as does pretty much every DM).

@J-H
I'd love to hear more! Getting a reply from a player who's actively playing a character that is directly relevant to a thread topic is extremely rare and valuable!

@Hobbo Jim
I would love to start a thread regarding these points. There is much that can be said about exactly those issues, and even more about your interactive aura-like solution. Very interesting stuff!

@Dork_Forge
Yeah it seems to be that bonus action healing is where it's at. I love the warlock ability, as it is reminiscent of 4e style healing. I even grant my players the option of taking it as a feat!

@Grimmnist
'Never' isn't a term we use in a game this dynamic, my friend. There are countless ways of making it work, we just have to discover them! Imagine a no-multiclass game, where you could tack healing on to another ability. Maybe paladin heals whenever he smites, equal to the level of the spell slots times x? Maybe an evocation wizard can grant an allied creature temporary hit points if it is included in the area of effect of one of his spells? The possibilities are endless, it's just a matter of what works and what feels right, without introducing additional problems.

@Willie the Duck
You pretty much nailed it man. I think removing Healing Spirit and adding Aura of Vitality to a couple of spell lists is a great step in the right direction.

@Amechra
I'm ecstatic you replied, and your right. If you were to tack some sort of offensive buff/enabler to, let's say, Cure Wounds, what would you add?

@Grod
Oooooooooor death saving throws reset at the end of a long rest, and you receive one automatic failed death saving throw when you are reduced to 0 hit points ;)
I personally allow players to choose between an automatic death saving throw, or a minor lingering injury, to counteract how deadly this suddenly makes the game.

@Contrast
I hadn't even read Mantle of Inspiration! It's so good!

@BloodOgre and @Keravath
I spent weeks designing my ideal dying mechanic (found in my signature). Discouraging dying isn't as effective as encouraging healing, if we are looking at the healer archetype as a whole.
How about just slapping combat-specific effects to healing spells, such as "Whenever another creature allows you to regain hit points you have advantage on your next attack roll or saving throw until the end of your next turn" or maybe even "Deal extra 1d8 damage". That's simple and easy to remember.

@Yakmala
I've heard about the healer rogue, but never had it explained to me. I love it!

@Waazrath
Thanks for the guide!

@Reevh
I see your point. Adding something drastic to the game runs the risk of changing the entire experience.

Conclusion
Problem: Healing doesn't feel rewarded in a combat situation.
Solution:
1. Emphasize bonus action healing.
2. Add an offensive bonus effect to healing spells.
3. Discourage yoyo-healing
4.

[Ninjadeadbeard]

Off the top of my head, picking up Lore Bard and grabbing Healing Spirit is a fantastic way to go. Just slap it on the tank when they can hold a chokepoint and you're golden!

[KorvinStarmast]

I have found that, as a life cleric, the "Preserve life" channel divinity is an exception to the rule asserted in the title of this thread: I have found it very useful when an AoE goes off and a bunch of my party mates get hit with a bunch of damage.
One action and I heal two or three of them up to half of their max HP. When a party of hobgoblins with caster support in facint us, or a party of gnolls with caster support, it was an action well used.

It's not used in the first round very often, and if I have Spiritual Weapon already up I usually get to use it as my bonus action.

[Kane0]

There are good healing options there, Cure Wounds just isn't one of them. I give it an extra d8 and the ability to let a recipient spend a hit die as well.

[Nhorianscum]

I kinda like how healing spells actually scale with level over upcasting.

[Amechra]

Wow, all the big guns answer my thread. I better do this right!

@Amechra
I'm ecstatic you replied, and your right. If you were to tack some sort of offensive buff/enabler to, let's say, Cure Wounds, what would you add?


Wait, I'm a big gun? :smallwink:

I'm thinking stuff like handing out Resistance to damage for a turn, an extra saving throw against something like Hold Person, or some extra AC. Maybe you'd have a subclass (Blood Domain or whatever) that gave people some bonus damage on their next attack when you heal them.

If you made a healer Bard (College of Medicine?), you could have let them hand out a Bardic Inspiration die as part of casting Cure Wounds. Actually, you could get a pretty neat feature out of stapling healing onto handing someone Bardic Inspiration as an action...

[Xihirli]

I kinda like how healing spells actually scale with level over upcasting.

I think you have cantrips in mind.

[Nhorianscum]

I think you have cantrips in mind.

I was referring to spell levels.

[Nagog]

As someone who plays support/healer in most mediums, I agree that healing in 5e is a very dedicated role compared to most other mediums. As such, my favorite spell has quickly become Healing Spirit, as I can cast it and forget about it. As long as I keep it close enough to the tank/wounded ally, they'll survive. If they go down, as longas I maintain concentration they'll get back up (with like 1-6 hp, so not much but it's enough). Personally I wish there was something similar to Lucio in Overwatch where a class has an ability to have radial healing around them for a number of rounds per day (perhaps 1 minute per day or something?) so it doesn't take all of your effort to be the party healer.

[Bjarkmundur]

@Kane0
You know I'm a fan, and I do like the extra d8.

@Nhorianscum
As in, you get better healing spells as you level up? Is there a healing spell that scales with spell level I'm not aware of?

@Amechra
I suggest a bundled bonus, and you suggest making two new subclasses xD
Wouldn't offensive bonuses make more sense, seeing how we are talking about not letting battles get too long and preventing damage via slaying monsters?

@Nagog
I love it when more articulate people manage to explain what I feel. Dealing damage, being difficult to kill and having utility all seem like easier goals than becoming a good healer. Being a healer in 5e is definitely a dedicated role.
Between my personal opinions of removing Healing Spirit and giving more classes access to Aura of Vitality, what level spell would you suggest your Aura of Regeneration would be, and how much should it heal? I think it makes sense to have a small aura (10 feet), just as a trade-off to the auto-healing. At least get the person in the thick of the fight. Would you say it sounds like a 4th level spell?

[Amechra]

@Amechra
I suggest a bundled bonus, and you suggest making two new subclasses xD
Wouldn't offensive bonuses make more sense, seeing how we are talking about not letting battles get too long and preventing damage via slaying monsters?

I honestly would stay away from hard offensive bonuses, because they aren't super-thematic for the healer aesthetic. Plus defensive bonuses can give peoples incentives for more aggressive play.

---

One of the issues with 5e (and D&D in general) is that you have so much HP after you hit level 4 or so. You can fully expect that the party Wizard (who is comparatively squishy) will have 26 or so HP by that point, which means they can easily take 2-3 greataxes to the face without it actually dropping them. By design, you're probably healing less than one of those greataxe swings unless you're burning a 2nd level slot on your healing.

You could double the healing output of Cure Wounds without it being too terrible excessive. Bringing a party member back to full health from 0 HP in one or two casts would actually make it worth it.

[Xetheral]

Don't underestimate a healing ability of a Thief with the Healer feat. The ability to heal 1d6 + 4 + target level as a bonus action is a surprisingly large amount of hit points. I have a character with that combo in an 11th level party, so I can heal each party member of 16-22 damage once per short rest without using an action. It adds up really quickly.

[Xihirli]

@Kane0
You know I'm a fan, and I do like the extra d8.

@Nhorianscum
As in, you get better healing spells as you level up? Is there a healing spell that scales with spell level I'm not aware of?

@Amechra
I suggest a bundled bonus, and you suggest making two new subclasses xD
Wouldn't offensive bonuses make more sense, seeing how we are talking about not letting battles get too long and preventing damage via slaying monsters?

@Nagog
I love it when more articulate people manage to explain what I feel. Dealing damage, being difficult to kill and having utility all seem like easier goals than becoming a good healer. Being a healer in 5e is definitely a dedicated role.
Between my personal opinions of removing Healing Spirit and giving more classes access to Aura of Vitality, what level spell would you suggest your Aura of Regeneration would be, and how much should it heal? I think it makes sense to have a small aura (10 feet), just as a trade-off to the auto-healing. At least get the person in the thick of the fight. Would you say it sounds like a 4th level spell?

Healing Word, Cure Wounds and Healing Spirit all add one die per upcast slot. Only Healing Spirit’s is all that worth it.

[stoutstien]

I'm a fan of temporary hit points as my primary healing. That coupled with aid allows me to do me and only heal during combat very very rarely.

[Nagog]

@Nagog
I love it when more articulate people manage to explain what I feel. Dealing damage, being difficult to kill and having utility all seem like easier goals than becoming a good healer. Being a healer in 5e is definitely a dedicated role.
Between my personal opinions of removing Healing Spirit and giving more classes access to Aura of Vitality, what level spell would you suggest your Aura of Regeneration would be, and how much should it heal? I think it makes sense to have a small aura (10 feet), just as a trade-off to the auto-healing. At least get the person in the thick of the fight. Would you say it sounds like a 4th level spell?

Thank you for the compliment! I agree, limiting it to 10 feet makes for a good aura but not necessarily party-wide healing. As for the spell level, I'd say it depends on how much healing it does. I'd put 1d6 at 1st or 2nd level (Comparing to healing spirit being ethereal and movable separate from yourself to a wider range and having to be in harms way to activate it), however with the higher scaling of higher level spells, I'd consider 1d8 for 3rd or 4th level spells.

Preferably I'd have it as something like Channel Divinity for a paladin/cleric (preferably Paladin as Clerics already have a ton of healing spells) and have it scale with character level. As a spell, it's possible to exploit it and spam it (multiple overlapping auras from multiple casters for example), among other things, while Channel Divinity options are noticeably less spammable and much, much harder to exploit. That way, you can activate it and have it active and still attack/smite/buff with your action.

[BarneyBent]

I think it’s realistic. Combat is focused on killing or otherwise neutralising the enemy, that’s not a bad thing. Healing can and SHOULD be primarily a pre- and post-combat activity IMO.

Exceptions are some great spells like Healing Word, which with a bonus action allows you to pick a downed ally up and get them back into the fight, allowing them to take probably at a minimum another action, if not more, than if they’d remained down. Trading a bonus action for an ally’s multiple actions is a great trade, but pre-emptive healing is generally not worth it unless you know in advance the ally will go down.

So in short, healing in combat is generally not great, but is situationally fantastic. It means you actually have to think about when to heal versus when to take other actions, and take calculated risks, and that’s a very good thing.

Sure, Cure Wounds is rubbish in combat, but so is Tenser’s Floating Disk. Not all spells are combat spells and that’s ok.

[Ganders]

16-22 damage once per short rest without using an action

I don't think it'll ever heal 22 damage at that level. Also, I think it takes an action to do that, even for a thief. (The thief can do a regular use of a healer's kit as a bonus action though, to heal 1 hp.)

[Bjarkmundur]

@Amechra
Alright, staying away from offensive bonuses.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who finds HP in 5e to be an issue. My first real rulechange to be implemented was "Double HP at 1st level, half HP increase at level up".It has served me well. I think Kane0 has a similar rule where HP at 1st level is higher, but HP increase at level up is an unmodified Hit Dice result.
I actually might just double the healing on CW, if it is not too crazy, although I am hesitant to alter specific spells. Despite what people might assume from someone with a 16 page houserule document, I'd rather not make housrules hard to keep track of, for example which spell has been altered and which one hasn't.

@Xetheral
I just love that this build is as effective as it is. It sounds really fun, and I'm tempted to try it sometime. Perhaps with MoG's "Thug" houserule.

@Stoutstien
What's your experience with this, and what abilities did you use, primarily?

@Nagog
Due to the distribution of AoE healing spells, 4th level makes the most sense, but channel divinity even more so. The only problem I have with that is that Channel Divinity is 1/short rest, which is a lot. It would have to have a very small number of hit points. How does equal to your level sound? It could be more if it used up your concentration. Thoughts?

@BarneyBent
This is a popular opinion, and a very valid one at that. I'm glad this discussion is able to look at both (all) sides of the topic. I think we all agree that there should be some bonus action heals (such as Thief, Bard, Warlock and Aura of vitality) for combat scenarios and more effective out-of-combat healing methods that require an action. This is an important distinction and I'm glad we realized it early in this thread. Spending your action for one big heal is not effective, not designed to be effective, and doesn't need to be effective on combat. In combat, bonus action heals is where it's at.

[Nagog]

@Nagog
Due to the distribution of AoE healing spells, 4th level makes the most sense, but channel divinity even more so. The only problem I have with that is that Channel Divinity is 1/short rest, which is a lot. It would have to have a very small number of hit points. How does equal to your level sound? It could be more if it used up your concentration. Thoughts?


I could see it scaling in the same die/level as Martial Arts die for Monks, so 1d4-1d10. If you include Concentration, 1d6-1d12, however I'd lean away from Concentration if it's for a Paladin, as most of the non-instant smites are concentration, and if you're within 10 ft of the front lines for it to be useful, the probability of it lasting it's full duration gets smaller and smaller with higher levels, unless you're specifically built for concentration from front lines (either the Resilient (Con) feat or starting with a level of Sorcerer), both of which wouldn't fit the overall role.

One interesting effect on a Paladin could be that at level 6 you can swap out your defensive aura to double the healing for a round as a bonus action? Would allow for mass healing to a good degree, at the cost of being far more susceptible to AoE effects. What do you think?

[Nhorianscum]

Better as you gain access to better spells.

Eventually the good healing spells dramatically outpace incoming damage.

While ideally we'll just prevent enough damage to never need an in combat heal the likes of (again) heal and eventually mass heal can undo ambush disintegrates and Mswarms with a single action and then some.

There's also ally healing (looking at you conjure celestial) which is pretty meaty bang for your buck as a steady supply of "don't die" in combat along with "not healing" (true)poly, wish, animal shapes, etc.

Obviously the "best" heal is just upcast aid as it has no action cost for +15-+120 but we sometimes want a little bit of not-die.

[Xetheral]

I don't think it'll ever heal 22 damage at that level. Also, I think it takes an action to do that, even for a thief. (The thief can do a regular use of a healer's kit as a bonus action though, to heal 1 hp.)

It's 16-21. My mistake. And both uses of the healers kit require the 'Use an Object' action (all objects that require actions, except magic items, require the Use an Object action), so a thief can use either one as an action or as a bonus action.

Crawford has also confirmed that it works (https://mobile.twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/525714673614602241).

[SpawnOfMorbo]

I wonder.

Perhaps having characters heal up after every battle, much like Final Fantasy XIII or the Uncharted series, would fix healing in combat.

You would still need healing spells for combat, dire times require some healing. Healing word would still be quite useful. If you're at 0 hp at the end of combat you have to bebhealed and then expend a hit die to get your HP back.

However, you could risk it and not heal if you think the battle will be over soon.

Risk versus reward.

Some spells would need to be changed, yeah, but it would shift the cleric away from being a heal bot even more than it already has been. Healing during normal encounters wouldn't be that important BUT healing in boss/hard battles would still be a thing that's needed.

[Arcangel4774]

To draw on game mechanics from divinity original sin 2, many healing* spells cleanse debuffs. If you add debuffs like some sort of wound that damages the player each turn or hinders the player until healed, it would incentavise healing much the same way having heals buff the target do.

*the game works with shield mechanics and many spells im referencing increase or restore the shields.

[KillingTime]

Generally I think the system is working as intended.
Low level healing is deliberately weak, precisely because the cleric-as-healbot trope was tired and boring.
Those players who actively want to play a healbot can go life cleric.

Now I'll grant that there are still flaws.
Yo-yo healing word is effectively moderatated by adding exhaustion per time spent on the deck.
Cure wounds still sucks, even as a life cleric.
I do like the idea of having a hit dice mechanic...
Perhaps adding a cleric feature:
When you cast cure wounds, you may supplement the healing dice pool with any of your own unspent hit dice (from levels in cleric?).

What do you think?
Returns cleric to the place of primary combat healer without taking away any of its utility.
Gives powerful in-combat healing, but at a significant opportunity cost, so can't be spammed on every fight.
Solves cure wounds.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Generally I think the system is working as intended.
Low level healing is deliberately weak, precisely because the cleric-as-healbot trope was tired and boring.
Those players who actively want to play a healbot can go life cleric.

Now I'll grant that there are still flaws.
Yo-yo healing word is effectively moderatated by adding exhaustion per time spent on the deck.
Cure wounds still sucks, even as a life cleric.
I do like the idea of having a hit dice mechanic...
Perhaps adding a cleric feature:
When you cast cure wounds, you may supplement the healing dice pool with any of your own unspent hit dice (from levels in cleric?).

What do you think?
Returns cleric to the place of primary combat healer without taking away any of its utility.
Gives powerful in-combat healing, but at a significant opportunity cost, so can't be spammed on every fight.
Solves cure wounds.

I think "combat healer" was ever really popular because of videogames where the player was controlling a combat healer and other party members

Clerics are popular because they have cool fluff, some weapons, and are useful. They're also popular because people got pushed into the class.

I think a combat support class is a good idea, I don't think it needs to revolve around healing. 4e did an absolute fantastic job with the Cleric and the 5e Cleric would have been better if they took more notes from it (specifically some of the cantrips).

[KillingTime]

I think "combat healer" was ever really popular because of videogames where the player was controlling a combat healer and other party members

Clerics are popular because they have cool fluff, some weapons, and are useful. They're also popular because people got pushed into the class.

I think a combat support class is a good idea, I don't think it needs to revolve around healing. 4e did an absolute fantastic job with the Cleric and the 5e Cleric would have been better if they took more notes from it (specifically some of the cantrips).

D&D healing has been around a lot longer that the average rpg video game. The vast majority of rpg video games stole their tropes directly from D&D.

What 5e has done is make a fantastic job of filling out the role of the cleric so that it is a truly versatile and fun combat support character.
Where it may have slipped up is for people who genuinely would like to play a full combat healer.
Life cleric was their attempt to address that want, but even so, it still doesn't make combat healing beyond yo-yo tactics worth the spell slots.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

D&D healing has been around a lot longer that the average rpg video game. The vast majority of rpg video games stole their tropes directly from D&D.

What 5e has done is make a fantastic job of filling out the role of the cleric so that it is a truly versatile and fun combat support character.
Where it may have slipped up is for people who genuinely would like to play a full combat healer.
Life cleric was their attempt to address that want, but even so, it still doesn't make combat healing beyond yo-yo tactics worth the spell slots.

I'm absolutely aware of D&D's history and the connection to games like Final Fantasy. That doesn't change anything though. If anything, it made it worse because the developers of D&D would have looked at these videogames, things that are much more popular than D&D, and tried to mimic it going forward. D&D may have been first, but has a long history of trying to keep up with videogames (Diablo and WoW for example).

People have a healer in Final Fantasy because it's useful, however the player isn't just playing the healer. They're playing the black mage, the warrior, and the 4th wheel too.

I've played a lot of Clerics.

A lot of Clerics.

And it seems that each time the devs make a Cleric they think that beimg a combat medic is why people take the class. Yes, some people do, but many take for other reasons.

To fix the issue with healing, you need to make healing more rewarding. Have it all be a bonus action (cure wounds would be touch, healing word would be ranged), have it tacked on to cantrips in some way (damage an enemy, ally is healed, ally can only heal like this once per battle), make it where healing also give Inspiration, or make it where healing in battle is only for the tough fights (auto healed HP after battles).

People seem to think HP damage is some sort of punishment or a good way to pace the game and I don't think HP needs to be a measure in such a way. You can punish characters in other ways. I like to give temporary "wounds" like disadvantage on their next attack, disadvantage on next ability check, impose advantage on a saving throw, or other things... Though I typically fluff it up "the trap hit you and now you're a bit dizzy as you see kobolds run toward you, your aim and focus seem a bit off".

HP damage and healing is the bare bones boring way to "punish" characters.

[KillingTime]

You're missing the point entirely.
Some people WANT to play a healbot.
5e does not support this build. Life cleric goes some way towards it, but the basic limitations of the lower level heal spells keep it sub-optmal regardless.

[KorvinStarmast]

I think it’s realistic. Combat is focused on killing or otherwise neutralising the enemy, that’s not a bad thing. Healing can and SHOULD be primarily a pre- and post-combat activity IMO.

Exceptions are some great spells like Healing Word, which with a bonus action allows you to pick a downed ally up and get them back into the fight, allowing them to take probably at a minimum another action, if not more, than if they’d remained down. Trading a bonus action for an ally’s multiple actions is a great trade, but pre-emptive healing is generally not worth it unless you know in advance the ally will go down.

So in short, healing in combat is generally not great, but is situationally fantastic. It means you actually have to think about when to heal versus when to take other actions, and take calculated risks, and that’s a very good thing.

Sure, Cure Wounds is rubbish in combat, but so is Tenser’s Floating Disk. Not all spells are combat spells and that’s ok. This post really covers the bases. As a Life Cleric, I thank you. (And yes, I took magic initiate Druid to get Goodberry and shillelagh and guidance from Druid list).

What 5e has done is make a fantastic job of filling out the role of the cleric so that it is a truly versatile and fun combat support character. Yes, but I like the yo yo thing, mechanically, because it means that the Other Player Gets to get Back Up And Play Some More, not just watch everyone else ... especially at low level. (This edition tried very hard to be newbie friendly. That feature, yo yo healing, caters to that).

the developers of D&D would have looked at these videogames, things that are much more popular than D&D, and tried to mimic it going forward. An interesting case or recursion. :smallsmile: [/QUOTE] As to "punishing" characters by having damage done to them, one of the key pillars of this adventure game is that the PC can die. Without the fear of death, or at least being on death's door, it loses some of its tension and energy.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

An interesting case or recursion. :smallsmile: As to "punishing" characters by having damage done to them, one of the key pillars of this adventure game is that the PC can die. Without the fear of death, or at least being on death's door, it loses some of its tension and energy.




Fear of death still happens when you don't use HP as a punishment.

You can actually have better fights because you know where your player's HP will be at the start.

So if you use debuffs, essentially, as the punishment for doing really stupid things or failing you still can out those characters in a challenging fight you planned without worrying a one shot will kill them needlessly.

So a character jumps down a wall that is 20 feet, instead of taking damage, they have their speed reduced to 20' (from 30') until the end of their next short rest. This is still a scary punishment for characters and can be very dramatic, but the kobolds around the corner aren't going to one shot the character.

You can still die in combat from HP damage, but a cleric can save the healing for tough fights. Thiugh at this point a DM could throw a bunch of tougher fights at the party instead of a bunch of meaningless fodder.

[LudicSavant]

You're missing the point entirely.
Some people WANT to play a healbot.
5e does not support this build. Life cleric goes some way towards it, but the basic limitations of the lower level heal spells keep it sub-optmal regardless.

Who told you the Life Cleric was suboptimal? And why did you believe them?

[PhoenixPhyre]

Oddly, I find that my players don't abuse the "yo-yo" thing very much. For a few reasons, I think.

1. They strongly don't like missing turns. And it's pretty rare, IMX, for the turn order to be such that they can always get picked up without missing a turn. This means that they have a strong inclination to keep their health above 0.
2. They (especially my teenagers) treat their characters as being real people. And real people don't know their HP or know that they are fine. So they start squawking at about half HP, and are more inclined to avoid risks. Defensive abilities, feats, etc. are much more common for them than offensive ones. Basically, they don't push mechanical knowledge down to the character level (don't meta-game[2]).

Is this "suboptimal" (measured strictly numerically)? Sure. Is it the natural thing for them to do, and in good keeping with the fiction[1]? Absolutely.

[1] Real people don't fight like robotic death machines. Getting hit hurts, and being close to death is not a comfortable experience.

[2] for me, the essence of (bad) meta-gaming is making decisions for the character based on the fact that it's a game. Treating the character like a playing piece, not a person. And "character is fully aware of mechanics and game-side rules" is a prime example of this IMO. YMMV.

[Bjarkmundur]

I was going to but this comment in spoilers, but PhoenixPhyre elegantly bridged the gap to make it relevant to this discussion. Thanks for that :)

What he described is how I feel the game should be played, and it bothers me that there is a discrepancy between what feels like the 'natural way' to play a roleplaying game (like the heroes are people) and its mechanics. Mechanics should encourage putting yourself in the role of your character, not discourage it.


This edition tried very hard to be newbie friendly. That feature, yo yo healing, caters to that. :smallsmile:

I love that this got mentioned. You're absolutely right, yoyo-healing does make the game more forgiving. But, is it the right way to make the game more forgiving? I mostly feel the dying mechanic, as written, only serves to disassociate the player from his character. Much in a same way you feel something is off when you see a CGI character in the same shot as a non-CGI character, and its skin is just a liiiiiittle bit too glossy. It breaks the illusion by being completely removed from the flavor and theme of the game and its narrative. We have amazingly cool and flavorful things in our world, but I feel like how death is handled comes a bit short of the overall aesthetic of the game.

- Ah you take 5 hits from a longsword.
- What happens? :O
- Nothing, but be careful, the next hit might have us looking at the rules for dying
- Oh no!
- ....
- You take a fireball to the face!
- OMG! What happens?
- You are unconscious, but if someone gives you one hit point of healing you are completely fine.
- Can the Rogue use a healer's kit?
- Yes, and you'll be completely unfazed by the fireball that blew up in your face!
- Oh thank lord. What about these death saving throws?
- Oh, nevermind them, you'll either be instakilled by a dagger or healed before they come into play. They come back after this fight anyways.
- Oh thank god I wasn't in any REAL danger.
- Oh the danger is real!
- What? How?
- You see, if you don't receive healing, i'll kill you with a dagger!
- But the fireball didn't hurt at all?
- Well you fainted.
- But I didn't die? Besides, if you're gonna kill me before I get the chance to act anyways, can't we at least make it awesome and just say the fireball blew me into bits? That way I can at least go out like a hero, and it'll be an amazing story!
- No, these are the rules. You were at 4 hp, you took 15 damage from the fireball, and now you're at 0.
- *blank stare*
Can my character at least do something to get a miraculous heroic recovery? I have all these spells and features and...
- No, your unconscious.
- But... ugh.

With the lower levels catering to the "Local Hero" archetypes, I feel like the drama would be better served if we take a lesson from some of the 'Mundane Hero' movie- and pop culture tropes we all know and love. This mainly referring to moments when the hero goes down but is not dead. He's not even all that wounded, it's just apparent that he's "one step closer to death". There is always that dramatic moment where you think the hero is defeated, but then does something miraculous to regain the upper hand. It adds drama, and a ton of it.

Not to blow my own horn here, but I feel my dying mechanic (see signature), and the yoyo-discouraging mechanic associated with it, serves the game far better as a newbie-friendly yet dramatic storytelling tool. It borrows directly from the pop culture trope described above; where the hero gets a chance to 'fight through the pain', although multiple defeats in a short time period (before next long rest) results in death. This is very different from the current method of no chance of fighting through the pain and a single point of healing removes all failed death saving throws. Even then, death saving throws are recovered at the end of a short rest, so it adds no weight to the adventuring day as a whole.

I can see how yoyo-healing makes the game more forgiving, but that does not address the fact that being an unconscious hero is unfun, and removes a lot of the drama of being in a life-or-death situation by ignoring any consequences of getting hit with a fireball to the face. Don't get me wrong, long term effects also unfun, but with good flavor even a minor effect is enough bring life to what should be a dramatic moment. [/SPOILER]

[KillingTime]

Who told you the Life Cleric was suboptimal? And why did you believe them?

It's sub-optimal as a combat healer, because even with life cleric domain buffs, combat healing is intrinsically sub-optimal.
It's a great character class across the board.

[Bjarkmundur]

It's sub-optimal as a combat healer, because even with life cleric domain buffs, combat healing is intrinsically sub-optimal.

This is the entire reason for this thread. Helping a hurt ally; a friend in need, something that comes natural to all of use, should not be suboptimal. You don't know how many people get hurt during accidents in real life because people ran in to save a victim before securing their on safety. Throwing away everything to aid a wounded friend should be encouraged, if anything. At least have some viable options for people who want to play that way; most of whom are good, emphatic people who physically feel bad when their friend's FICTIONAL CHARACTER is in pain xD

[BaconChest]

Oddly, I find that my players don't abuse the "yo-yo" thing very much. For a few reasons, I think.

1. They strongly don't like missing turns. And it's pretty rare, IMX, for the turn order to be such that they can always get picked up without missing a turn. This means that they have a strong inclination to keep their health above 0.
2. They (especially my teenagers) treat their characters as being real people. And real people don't know their HP or know that they are fine. So they start squawking at about half HP, and are more inclined to avoid risks. Defensive abilities, feats, etc. are much more common for them than offensive ones. Basically, they don't push mechanical knowledge down to the character level (don't meta-game[2]).


Even with meta-gaming, I find this comment rings pretty true for the parties I've played in, and means in-combat healing will always have a role to play. The crucial thing to me is "do you care about this particular character?". Because if you do, you're not going to want to risk going down, lest damage rolls and death saves screw you.

So sure, it might be more efficient for the party's chances of victory to deal damage, but only if you consider victory to be destroying your enemies rather than keeping the whole party alive. When I'm playing a cleric, I look at the situation on my turn and think about whether going for the jugular is the least risky play right now, or if it might be better to redistribute hit points a little first.

Example: If the Fighter is at 10 HP, the Rogue is at 30 HP, I'm at 25 HP and the Wizard is at 20 HP, and there are 3 goblins left who do say around 5-7 damage on a hit. I can use my turn to try to kill an enemy, maybe even two, and I'll probably succeed! But if I fail and the three goblins all gang up on the fighter, some bad rolls could see that fighter be down on deaths door. Whereas if I heal the fighter back up to even 15 HP, suddenly it becomes incredibly unlikely that a disaster wave overwhelms any individual party member and ends in their death.

I honestly don't think there's an issue with in-combat healing in 5e, except for specifically Cure Wounds being a bad spell.

[KillingTime]

Example: If the Fighter is at 10 HP, the Rogue is at 30 HP, I'm at 25 HP and the Wizard is at 20 HP, and there are 3 goblins left who do say around 5-7 damage on a hit. I can use my turn to try to kill an enemy, maybe even two, and I'll probably succeed! But if I fail and the three goblins all gang up on the fighter, some bad rolls could see that fighter be down on deaths door. Whereas if I heal the fighter back up to even 15 HP, suddenly it becomes incredibly unlikely that a disaster wave overwhelms any individual party member and ends in their death.

That's a real edge case though.
I'm sure we can all contrive situations where a judicious use of healing would be effective, but it's far more likely that the character will be either a) too close to zero to bother, or b) too far away from zero to bother.




I honestly don't think there's an issue with in-combat healing in 5e, except for specifically Cure Wounds being a bad spell.
This is the crux of it.
Unfortunately - if cure wounds was simply better at what it does, then suddenly the cleric goes from having lots of viable options, to only having one mechanically optimal thing to do; and then we're back into healbot territory.
There needs to be an opportunity cost associated with combat healing to make it a viable tactical option rather than a pointless waste of resources (yo-yo healing aside).

[SpawnOfMorbo]

That's a real edge case though.
I'm sure we can all contrive situations where a judicious use of healing would be effective, but it's far more likely that the character will be either a) too close to zero to bother, or b) too far away from zero to bother.



This is the crux of it.
Unfortunately - if cure wounds was simply better at what it does, then suddenly the cleric goes from having lots of viable options, to only having one mechanically optimal thing to do; and then we're back into healbot territory.
There needs to be an opportunity cost associated with combat healing to make it a viable tactical option rather than a pointless waste of resources (yo-yo healing aside).

Make Cure Wounds a bonus action "touch" and keep Healing Word a bonus action "ranged" and things seems to work out.

The cleric can heal but it doesn't take away from doing cool things.

[jaappleton]

Healing in combat does suck, but nowhere near as bad as Strahd.

[erikun]

If you think healing in combat sucks, then you should see what happens when you aren't healing in combat. :smalltongue:

As for the actual topic, combat healing is less effective than outright preventing damage. At low levels of D&D, I find that Shield of Faith (and in earlier versions, Protection from Evil) to be excellent spells at low levels. +2 AC is great when everybody has a low to-hit chance at 16AC is considered good. It can turn people into an absolute wall that can avoid scary amounts of damage at times. The tricky part is in managing your resources; if you blow the spell on a short fight or one where not many attacks happened, it might not be available for a critical heal or a combat where it is necessary. At slightly higher levels, around 4th or 5th in D&D5e, I find that Bless starts becoming the buff of choice to throw out. To-hit starts to outstrip AC and when enemies are rolling 24+ regularly, then it doesn't matter too much what armor anyone is wearing. But being able to give your top three characters bonuses on attacks means that they're almost always going to hit, and killing off the enemy is so much more effective than trying to heal 1d8+4 per turn.

So one of the keys to making healing not-suck is to give some viable options other than healing. I haven't found them all yet, as I've been playing D&D5e mostly by ear and trying out various stuff to see what works. Shield of Faith works best if you have a single frontline attacker, or at least just one somewhat low-AC character to buff up. It doesn't work if you are trying to keep several low-AC characters alive, though. Bless works well when you have two or three really high offense characters on the team, and probably less so if you are trying to buff yourself. "Hit the enemy with my Paladin" certainly is the most effective playstyle here. Perhaps it's just me, but I do like the resource management sort of style where I have to pick and choose which spells are the most useful for the job with each combat.

Another option is giving the healer something else to do. I love Spiritual Weapon for this. Regardless of what else I'm doing, I still get the chance to whack something in the head. It allows the healer to still participate in combat past just casting one heal and patting themselves on the back. The biggest concern is the resource management factor: spending a 2nd level spell slot for 1d8+4 damage a turn isn't the most efficient, so it's a judgement between if this will be effective or just a waste of a spell slot. I've found that the D&D5e Sacred Flame cantrip to be kind of useless in this regard, since a lot of times it feels like it's just asking the DM to roll and have nothing happen. I haven't had the chance to play around with Spirit Guardians yet.

As for healing, D&D5e Cleric has a good number of options. The tricky part is if you have enough spell slots of all of them. Cure Wounds is good and the most efficient in combat healing. Healing Word is necessary if you just can't reach a character and they absolutely need healing that turn (say, at two death saves). Prayer of Healing is amazing and absolutely takes care of any HP problems assuming there isn't a huge imbalance in damage being dealt around the party, although that's asking for a spell slot to something that's effectively a ritual in casting length.

I haven't tried multiclassing, so I'm not familiar with Druid, Bard, or Warlock options in that regard. I've not seen yo-yo healing as a concern given that things are going terribly wrong if somebody drops to 0 HP and they've lost whatever concentration effects they had going when that happens. Plus, being prone and (if not standing on the ground) dropping their weapons is a major problem. Maybe I've been lucky and my groups have been more RP-y than some, but I haven't run into the specific problems that a lot of people seem to have a concern with.


[EDIT] As an aside, I'm not sure if temporary hit points really resolve any situations I've been in. Giving temp HP rather than healing is really just putting the action in a different position in the turn order. Typically, you'd end up doing that immediately before combat, or on the first round, with the characters you expect to deal damage. The negative aspect is that it might be a wasted spell slot, although it's usually very easy to determine who will be attacked in most fights. Really, I've found that temp HP is just a "spend one spell before the fighting really begins" sort of situation so it doesn't affect the actions or options the healer has during the fight. If their non-healing options are terrible, then they're going to be terrible if they cast a heal in combat or cast a temp HP spell beforehand.

[tatsuyashiba]

I've heard it time-and-time again that healing isn't a good use of your action in combat, and that "yoyo-healing" is the only real effective way to spend spell slots healing in combat.

If I were to get a player who'd want a more combat-active type healer, where the BEST course of action would be to heal, and the strategic option would be not to heal (instead of visa versa), do you think it can be done without breaking the game?


My friend is playing a high level Wizard (Diviner)/Paladin, laying out plenty of smites. Turns out he’s an amazing healer too without spending combat actions. The main healing abilities he uses:

Aid spell (2nd level, Paladin/Cleric):

Choose up to three creatures within range. Each target's hit point maximum and current Hit Points increase by 5 for the Duration.

At Higher Levels: When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 3rd level or higher, a target's Hit Points increase by an additional 5 for each slot level above 2nd.

Lasts 8 hours. Cast as a 4th or 5th level spell for 20-25 extra HP each.

Inspiring leader feat:

You can spend 10 minutes inspiring your companions, shoring up their will to fight. When you do so, choose up to six friendly creatures (which can include yourself) within 30 feet of you can can see or hear you and can understand you. Each creature gains temporary hit point equal to your level + your Charisma modifier. A creature can't gain temporary hit points in this way again until they finish a short or long rest.

At 15th level (we are in high tier campaign now), this is 17 extra hp per party member refilled on short rest. Combined with the previous ability, we walk into combat with nearly 50 extra HP each.

[KillingTime]

At 15th level (we are in high tier campaign now), this is 17 extra hp per party member refilled on short rest. Combined with the previous ability, we walk into combat with nearly 50 extra HP each.

You can't combine sources of Temp HP.



So one of the keys to making healing not-suck is to give some viable options other than healing. I haven't found them all yet, as I've been playing D&D5e mostly by ear and trying out various stuff to see what works. Shield of Faith works best if you have a single frontline attacker, or at least just one somewhat low-AC character to buff up. It doesn't work if you are trying to keep several low-AC characters alive, though. Bless works well when you have two or three really high offense characters on the team, and probably less so if you are trying to buff yourself. "Hit the enemy with my Paladin" certainly is the most effective playstyle here. Perhaps it's just me, but I do like the resource management sort of style where I have to pick and choose which spells are the most useful for the job with each combat.

No-one says that clerics don't have loads of other options in combat.
The problem is that the one option they're famous for (for good or ill), is sub-optimal.
Until you reach high tier play, the only in-combat healing you're ever likely to see is yo-yo healing word.

[stoutstien]

You can't combine sources of Temp HP.



No-one says that clerics don't have loads of other options in combat.
The problem is that the one option they're famous for (for good or ill), is sub-optimal.
Until you reach high tier play, the only in-combat healing you're ever likely to see is yo-yo healing word.

Aid and heroes' feast both stack with each other and THP. they are worded as increasing max and current HP.

Aid + inspiring leader is a great passive healing combo

[LudicSavant]

You can't combine sources of Temp HP. Aid isn't temporary HP.

[SpawnOfMorbo]

Healing in combat does suck, but nowhere near as bad as Strahd.

Relevant user profile picture.

[jaappleton]

Relevant user profile picture.

He's not even a Blackula!

[GlenSmash!]

He's not even a Blackula!

Man, I specialize in hunting black vampires, I don't know what the P.C. name for that is!

[Contrast]

[EDIT] As an aside, I'm not sure if temporary hit points really resolve any situations I've been in. Giving temp HP rather than healing is really just putting the action in a different position in the turn order. Typically, you'd end up doing that immediately before combat, or on the first round, with the characters you expect to deal damage. The negative aspect is that it might be a wasted spell slot, although it's usually very easy to determine who will be attacked in most fights. Really, I've found that temp HP is just a "spend one spell before the fighting really begins" sort of situation so it doesn't affect the actions or options the healer has during the fight. If their non-healing options are terrible, then they're going to be terrible if they cast a heal in combat or cast a temp HP spell beforehand.

This is why I suggested glamour bard to OP.

Bonus action to give out THP to Cha number of people Cha times per short rest. And they get to make a move without generating opportunity attacks. And because its an action, not a spell your action is still free for a levelled spell if need be. Plus as a bard you get Song of Rest.

I'm playing a glamour bard at the moment and had originally picked up Inspiring Leader but actually can be ask my DM if I could swap it out because I was finding often loads of THP were going to waste because I'd already topped everyone up. So if you're focusing heals then Healer would be a better shout I think.

The main problem with THP is that they don't wake the unconscious of course meaning you have to fall back on Healing Word. Its very galling when you're used to 'healing' 4 people for 8HP as a bonus action and then casting a spell to suddenly have to spend a spell slot to heal one person for 1d4+4 and only be able to cast a cantrip :smallbiggrin:

[Ganders]

(all objects that require actions, except magic items, require the Use an Object action)

Crawford has also confirmed that it works (https://mobile.twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/525714673614602241).

I would argue that there's a reason the second bullet in the Healer feat is written differently than the first. And 'spend one use of' is not the same as a normal use of the kit. Something you can do only once per rest is not a normal use-an-object action. The feat specifically says you can use an action to (do unique thing). That you need supplies to (do that thing) is beside the point.

Regarding the Crawford quote, I would argue that a feat is also "its own thing", not a generic object to be used. Also that Crawford quote only says that magic items are an exception, it doesn't say magic items are the only exception.

In a similar vein, I would argue that a rogue can't use the Grappler feat to pin as a bonus action, or use the Martial Adept feat to do a maneuver as a bonus action, even when using a non-magical sword for the maneuver.

Similarly, the Chromatic Orb spell requires a very specific non-magical item (a diamond) to work, but it still counts as a 'cast a spell' action, not a 'use an object' action. I figure the Healer feat action still counts as a 'use a special ability' action rather than 'use an object', even though it uses up part of your healer's kit.

[Chalkarts]

It may be unoptimized, but the Life Cleric in my Party of 7 is firmly in the healbot role and seems to be fine with it.

I'm working on a Warforged Life Cleric that's literally a heal bot.

[sandman102]

In my most recent campaign I was a dedicated healing bard. Healer feat, Aura of Vitality, even got the DM to rule that the radiant soul ability could be added to healing rather than damage.

In my own estimation, I felt I made a really good healer.

However, my strategy of hanging in the back that worked well enough, failed utterly when the DM presented a large map, two young dragons (40/80 speed), and few places to hide.

My build almost now-worked in the inverse, where I had done a good job of keeping my party up until then and them not having to worry about me, that when we faced creatures that went. after. the. healer, my party pretty much abandoned me as that what we've always done as a group...

I died first, and the rest soon followed.


Now then, I think the problem is that healing is both effective, 1 point in any capacity brings a character up to consciousness, and in-effective; few, if any, spells make a substantial difference heal-wise.

I think healing does it's best when it's done as a bonus action (Healing Word, Aura of Vitality, Mass Healing Word, Thief with the Healer Feat), because it's then not taking a significant amount of resources in terms of spell level/actions to get the basic need out of healing ~ 1 point of healing.

[Xetheral]

I would argue that there's a reason the second bullet in the Healer feat is written differently than the first. And 'spend one use of' is not the same as a normal use of the kit. Something you can do only once per rest is not a normal use-an-object action. The feat specifically says you can use an action to (do unique thing). That you need supplies to (do that thing) is beside the point.

Regarding the Crawford quote, I would argue that a feat is also "its own thing", not a generic object to be used. Also that Crawford quote only says that magic items are an exception, it doesn't say magic items are the only exception.

In a similar vein, I would argue that a rogue can't use the Grappler feat to pin as a bonus action, or use the Martial Adept feat to do a maneuver as a bonus action, even when using a non-magical sword for the maneuver.

Similarly, the Chromatic Orb spell requires a very specific non-magical item (a diamond) to work, but it still counts as a 'cast a spell' action, not a 'use an object' action. I figure the Healer feat action still counts as a 'use a special ability' action rather than 'use an object', even though it uses up part of your healer's kit.

So, you agree with me that using a healer's kit requires the 'Use an Object' action, and therefore a Thief can use a healer's kit as a bonus action? But you're also arguing that using the Healer feat doesn't require using the healer's kit (only expending a use of the kit) and therefore must be some action other than 'Use an Object'?

Frankly, arguing that it's possible to expend a use of a healer's kit without using the kit seems somewhat bizarre to me. And Crawford was very explicit that a Thief can use a healer's kit as a bonus action (in the context of a question about the Healer feat, no less).

Additionally, your comparisons seem inapt. The Grappler feat doesn't involve an object at all, so there is no reason to think it would require the Use an Object action. The Martial Adept feat cross references the Battlemaster rules for Manuevers, most of which don't require any action at all (a few require a reaction). And unlike a healer's kit, the diamond for Chromatic Orb doesn't have a text entry specifying that its use requires an action, so I see no reason to think it would require the Use an Object action.

Finally, from a balance perspective, there are very few objects in the game that require the Use an Object action in the first place, and many of them are single-use and quite expensive. I don't see any need to nerf Fast Hands (and thus the Thief subclass) by arguing that the Healer feat does not involve using a healing kit.

[opaopajr]

Easiest fix against "Meatball Surgery" ("whack-a-mole") is: Death Saves AND Negative HP are on until Resting. :smallsmile: Short/Long Rests erases Negative HP. Any Stabilized Unconscious creature recovers as normal (pops back up to 1 HP in 1d4 hours, ignores Neg HP).

Doesn't dip into Exhaustion -- which does a fantastic job emulating Wounds suck-spiral from other RPGs -- and is pretty easy bookeepping.

(By the time players have so much Neg HP, no one is going to bother healing them. Instead healing would be front-loaded, done before they go down. And instead of counting Neg HP, you have Death Saves and Stabilize to wave away all that counting. Two Great Tastes That Go Great Together! :smallcool:)

[KillingTime]

I definitely think there's milage in the use of cure wounds to spend hit dice... Either the cleric's or the recipient.
The hit dice mechanic is really underused imo, and as a finite resource it would put the breaks on healing swinging too far back.


Aid isn't temporary HP.

My bad... 🙄

[Nhorianscum]

Easiest fix against "Meatball Surgery" ("whack-a-mole") is: Death Saves AND Negative HP are on until Resting. :smallsmile: Short/Long Rests erases Negative HP. Any Stabilized Unconscious creature recovers as normal (pops back up to 1 HP in 1d4 hours, ignores Neg HP).

Doesn't dip into Exhaustion -- which does a fantastic job emulating Wounds suck-spiral from other RPGs -- and is pretty easy bookeepping.

(By the time players have so much Neg HP, no one is going to bother healing them. Instead healing would be front-loaded, done before they go down. And instead of counting Neg HP, you have Death Saves and Stabilize to wave away all that counting. Two Great Tastes That Go Great Together! :smallcool:)

One of my players brought this "fix" up in CoS.

My reply verbatim was "You've gone through 3 PC's and the party is at level 4."

[jaappleton]

One of my players brought this "fix" up in CoS.

My reply verbatim was "You've gone through 3 PC's and the party is at level 4."

As someone playing CoS, this hit me harder than what’s in Old Bonegrinder :smalltongue:

[Tanarii]

I've found the most common problem with healing in combat is bad math. People who fail to understand that healing is 100%, and damage has a hit chance or saving throw. For example:

Healing is never going to be as effective as damage which makes sense, as others have said it would make combat drag out for far too long. To compare two spells Cure Wounds heals for 1d8 + mod (7.5 with a +3 mod) while Inflict Wounds deals 3d10 damage (16.5). That is over twice as much damage, though you can be resistant to the damage or the spell attack can miss.

[Nhorianscum]

As someone playing CoS, this hit me harder than what’s in Old Bonegrinder :smalltongue:

Oh wait till you meet BabaOrbitalRailgun with a DM who isn't pulling punches.

"Ok everyone reroll"

"But we won that last fight, and were walking in an empty field, with no initiative or anything"

"Yup, TPK"

[jaappleton]

Oh wait till you meet BabaOrbitalRailgun with a DM who isn't pulling punches.

"Ok everyone reroll"

"But we won that last fight, and were walking in an empty field, with no initiative or anything"

"Yup, TPK"

I did.

.....three of us came with new characters the next session.

We were level four when we stumbled across her.

[Nhorianscum]

I did.

.....three of us came with new characters the next session.

We were level four when we stumbled across her.

Never too early to start learning how to flip houses in Ravenloft!

[opaopajr]

One of my players brought this "fix" up in CoS.

My reply verbatim was "You've gone through 3 PC's and the party is at level 4."

Well Ravenloft is supposed to be a Deep Ethereal nightmare plane, so that is par for the course. :smallcool: Within reason, of course.

But this topic is about aesthetics. Some don't want "meatball surgery," some don't want "wound suck-spirals." Is the answer: play Ravenloft with a ruthless GM? No. :smalltongue:

That answer is a non-answer to tailoring the rules to fit one's desired table aesthetics. That answer is telling someone which campaign they should play and how to run their table. Two very different purposes. :smallwink:

It's like saying, "how can I make these clothes work for my body shape?" and replying "a little black dress goes with every occasion." :smallbiggrin: It's well intentioned, but not really helpful. :smallsmile:

[Ironheart]

I think my favorite way of handling this is a homebrew of Lingering Injuries made by Mark Sherlock Hulmes. (https://yogscast.fandom.com/wiki/High_Rollers_D%26D/Homebrew) Essentially, instead of automatically gaining injuries when you hit 0, you would make a Con saving throw to determine if you got an injury (DC 10 or half damage, whichever is higher). Otherwise, injuries can be cured magically with lower level spells than regenerate- but they come with costly components.

At higher levels of play, this makes monsters with larger damage single attacks more dangerous than they were before. If they manage to take the player to 0, then it doesn't matter how hearty they are- they will likely gain an injury. Adding injuries that can inhibit spellcasters (locking out verbal components after they break their jaw as an example) can add more weight to deciding to heal someone after they hit 0 and before.

From 'by the books' perspective, DM's can simply use monsters that have advantage when players are below a certain threshold of their max hitpoints, typically half. Sahuagin have the Blood Frenzy trait, and perhaps more of those types of monsters can encourage players to be more careful when engaging monsters when they're wounded.

These are nontypical fixes, tho.

[Bjarkmundur]

@Chalkats
I appreciate that pun!

@opaopajr
I actually use a rule similar to this. Death Saves last until long rest. It's worked wonders so far, although a bit dangerous at times. I agree that exhaustion sucks. I don't like that mechanic at all.

@Tanarii
You are actually right! I hadn't accounted for hit chance :O

@Ironheart
I use a similar lingering injury mechanic, looking forward to checking out that link! Might be more stuff for me to steal ^^
Although Blood Frenzy does encourage top-off heals, I don't think its a very healthy mechanic to make into a general rule. Making it a common mechanic, however, might be very interesting. Players will likely pick up on this by the third session a player takes damage and you describe how one of the bad-guys' "Eyes turns red and his head turns to you". I've done similar things, using the same mechanic over multiple sessions, and watching the players pick up on it and learn to tactically play around it is just as much fun for me as it is for them. Thanks for your input, it was appreciated! :D

[Angelmaker]

If you feel your players don't value healing as much as you think they should: track their total negative hitpoints received during a day: if it reaches half their their negative hit point maximum, they die, just like if they were coup de graced. This will certainly make clear to them that they do not want to get in the negatives any given time.

Then again, I also feel like healing should be valued by players on a non-mechanical level. Whenever we have a healer around, my characters usually invite him/her to stay at inns for free at my character's cost, or similar, despite the machanical implementation of healing in the game.