The Healing Spirit Nerf Was Overkill

[Captain Panda]

I have played a lot of Fifth Edition. An unhealthy amount, if I'm being honest. I've played and run games excessively both before and after Xanathar's, and I've seen games with excessive healing spirit conga-lining and without it. So I do understand why people didn't like healing spirit. With that said, in my opinion the nerf of healing spirit was a wild overcorrection. A "oh no, I'm drifting into the wrong lane, I'm going to jerk the steering wheel so hard I fly off a cliff" level overcorrection. I also believe a lot of the hate of healing spirit was people hopping on a bandwagon rather than actually having the spell adversely impact their game. Not all, mind, but a lot. Sometimes the community gets an idea in mind like "rangers suck" or "healing spirit is broken" and these ideas just stick, regardless of their truth or falsity.

First, I'm going to give my best steel man of the position to demonstrate I understand why people disliked healing spirit. Then I am going to explain my problems with this commonly-held position, why I think healing spirit as it was did not "break" the game, and why I think nerfing it into the ground has had an adverse impact on the game. Including, might I add, in ways that harm the very style of play that those who argue against healing spirit hold up as ideal.

Anti-Healing Spirit Steel Man: D&D is a game built upon attrition. You are supposed to fight 6-8 encounters in an adventuring day, and while none of the encounters on its own should be dangerous, the encounters should slowly wear down the resources of the party such that by the end, if they used resources unwisely, the party should regret that decision and feel worn, battered, and ****ty. Healing spirit removes this element from the intended style of play entirely. Rather than restoring health inefficiently and at great cost in spell slots (or just pushing forward while missing hp), healing spirit allows a party to fully reset hit points at the cost of a single low level slot.

Healing spirit is wildly out of sync with the rest of the healing options in the game and ensures the party will never suffer attrition due to their health bars being lowered. Even if everyone in the party loses half their health, boom, healing spirit lifts all the bars like it's World of Warcraft. Compare healing spirit to prayer of healing, which is a spell solely used for healing out of combat. It heals like ten times more, at least! Clearly healing spirit is a broken, unbalanced mess if it is so dramatically outperforming the dedicated 'out of combat' healing option. That's not to mention how badly it outperforms cure wounds, healing word, etcetera, etcetera. How could anyone not see it's broken?

My Response: Okay, that's my best effort putting forth a good approximation of the general arguments against healing spirit. If you think I got that wrong, please feel free to explain what I missed below. I'll try to break my disagreements with this general sentiment into a few key points.

1. Healing spirit did not harm the attrition of the game, it just changed it.

At level 3, when a druid first gets healing spirit (and 5 for a ranger), a level 2 slot is not a trivial expense. If your party gets messed up in a fight and you use healing spirit to fully heal everyone, that second level slot is something you will miss having. If you can, it's wiser to use hit dice as a resource before a spell slot. Further, most of the healing is wasted by over healing. Let's assume the party is a bit higher, level 9. At this point, sure, a level 2 slot doesn't mean a whole lot. You can use healing spirit to top everyone up and skip a short rest at a low cost. But is that a problem, at this level? By level 9 you should have enough gold to buy piles of healing potions. Since we're comparing to healing spirit we can also assume you have a druid or ranger, who can use yesterdays spell slots to provide goodberries to the entire party for 70hp. How much damage is the party realistically taking in?

I argue that the true attrition in D&D is not hit points, it's the other resources. Spells, action surge, and other rest abilities are what will stop a party from moving forward. Those are the resources they should be careful with. Nothing about healing spirit changes the fact that in a long dungeon delve, if the wizard has used every spell slot, you are going to have a harder time at the bottom. Healing spirit just means that the wizard will start the fight with full health before doing nothing but throwing cantrips.

2. Comparing healing spirit to prayer of healing is silly.

Prayer of healing is a horrible spell. It was horrible before healing spirit arrived to do the job it was supposed to do correctly, continued to be when healing spirit arrived, and still is now that healing spirit has been shanked. I won't claim I've never seen prayer of healing used, but it is extremely rare. There is almost always a better option. It's a ten minute cast, aside from the low healing it does, so it's competing pretty directly with short rests, which are just better, and does not perform its role well enough to waste a spell slot. Optimizers do not prepare this spell, and for good reason. Comparing healing spirit to prayer of healing is a bit like comparing a good damage spell (fireball) to something horrible (circle of death) and arguing that because circle of death does so badly, fireball needs to be dragged down to its level.

3. Healing spirit is not "broken."

It was over-tuned, yes, but not "broken." On my view for something to be "broken," it needs to trivialize difficult encounters in different contexts regularly. For example, summoning pixies and turning everyone into a t-rex is something I would classify as "broken."
If you are a level 5 party facing off against a group of ornery giants, healing spirit is not going to save you. It will ensure you have full health going into the fight, and then you'll get turned into jam and jarred for later consumption by the giants. Is the spike growth spell broken because in this same encounter, it can slow the giants down enough for you to escape, and potentially even let you kite the giants around and poke them with arrows while they shred their feet on your brambles? I would contend that it is not, it simply performs its function well. Spells have niches. Healing spirit was a very strong out of combat recovering option, and I actually agree it should have been scaled down a bit. But "a bit too strong" does not mean that the spell needed to be disemboweled.

4. Healing spirit helped prevent frustrating player retreats.

Let's assume the players are in The Temple of Nasty Things, delving away into the dungeon, and they don't have a ticking clock*. The players don't have healing spirit, or goodberries, or healing potions, or someone with aura of vitality, or any other way to recover lost hit points effectively. They get a third of the way through and wastefully spam cure wounds to top up their hp. Then they realize they're kind of spent on spell slots and decide to turn right around, leave The Temple of Nasty Things, put up a Leomund's Tiny Hut and get a nice, long nap.

I don't find that particularly satisfying as a player or as a dungeon master. You can discourage this behavior, give the players emotional stakes in the dungeon, but sometimes they are going to get tapped on resources and bail. From experience, I saw a lot of this before healing spirit was put into the game, and less of it afterwards. Healing spirit allows the party to spend a resource to keep the adventure flowing. It makes the ranger feel useful. It stops me from trying to think of things in the forest that can break into Leomund's Hut. It does this all while not actually helping the players all that much during combat itself.

*You can't always have a princess in the dungeon slowly being lowered into lava. Realistically, sometimes the players are going to have time.

5. Opportunity costs and book changes. Was this really necessary?

The designers goofed a bit and put in a spell that was more effective than they intended. It wasn't broken, but it was stronger than they thought when it was printed and caused a hostile (and, I argue, irrational) community reaction... so as an "errata" they go back and completely change the nature of the spell. There are now two versions of the spell. Errata is meant to be for clarifying wording and intent, not for nerfing spells. This is not an MMO where the nerf comes in and everyone gets it, some people who don't keep up with errata are going to walk into a session and find that one of the spells in the book they paid for has been changed. It isn't that the wording was unclear and they fixed it to make it clear, they dramatically changed the function of a spell due to community sentiment.

Now I'm not saying they shouldn't give people what they want, but one must consider that this does cause older books to have a spell that is no longer usable. Is this sort of thing something they should do? And if so, was healing spirit really the most broken spell in the game? Should they go in and do a balance patch and fix all of the things that are a bit out of whack? I'm of the opinion they should leave hard reworks like that to optional rules or a new edition. I am, for example, pleased they gave beast master rangers a pet fix. They did that without having to render previously printed, already purchased books out of date.

Conclusion

Look, I know healing spirit was a bit overtuned. I do. But considering that the base game has greatberry (life cleric+goodberry), aura of vitality, cheap healing potions, hit dice, and more, it wasn't so out of whack that it justified coming at the spell with a cleaver. I could understand them making a hard change that outright adjusts a printed rule/spell for something like a simulacrum chain, something truly game-breaking, but a more effective out of combat heal? One that is almost always going to do more than you really needed, anyway? I do not believe that it was justified, and it certainly not "errata," which is an error in print.

[QQinfinity]

I totally agree with basically everything you say.

I just wanted to add that I've been in arguments related to the greatberry ruling (disciple of life + good berry), and I find the inconsistency of how other similar features are ruled to be beyond infuriating. Star druid's Chalice Constellation is basically just a paraphrase of disciple of life yet it doesn't allow the same boosted greatberry and also doesn't work on aura of vitality like disciple of life either (not to mention the wildfire druid's version of healing boost).

Why couldn't WotC just make all similar features that boost healing work exactly like disciple of life and make it do extra healing on everything, or not at all like everything except disciple of life?

Disciple of Life
Also starting at 1st level, your healing spells are more effective. Whenever you use a spell of 1st level or higher to restore hit points to a creature, the creature regains additional hit points equal to 2 + the spell's level.

Chalice
A constellation of a life-giving goblet appears on you. Whenever you cast a spell using a spell slot that restores hit points to a creature, you or another creature within 30 feet of you can regain hit points equal to 1d8 + your Wisdom modifier.

Using a spell of 1st level or higher should EQUAL to casting a spell that uses a spell slot; since using a spell of 1st level of higher needs you to cast a spell using a spell slot anyway! But no, the ruling isn't the same, sigh.

[DarknessEternal]

What source contains a Healing Spirit nerf?

[Captain Panda]

What source contains a Healing Spirit nerf?

It's in the errata and all new printings of Xanathar's. That's part of why I'm annoyed, a lot of people who have the old book and think they can, y'know, use what's in it... they're going to be surprised when they try to use that spell.

[Ortho]

What source contains a Healing Spirit nerf?

Healing Spirit was errata'd back in early 2020. (https://media.wizards.com/2020/dnd/downloads/XGtE-Errata.pdf) There's now a limit to how many times the spirit can heal.

[Captain Panda]

So now, healing spirit at 2 with standard 16 wisdom does: 4d6, ~14 healing. Cure wounds is 2d8+3, ~12 healing.

Except cure wounds is a spell level lower, does instant healing, and doesn't break your concentration.

The spell just useless now. I don't know what WotC was even thinking with this change.

[Galithar]

So now, healing spirit at 2 with standard 16 wisdom does: 4d6, ~14 healing. Cure wounds is 2d8+3, ~12 healing.

Except cure wounds is a spell level lower, does instant healing, and doesn't break your concentration.

The spell just useless now. I don't know what WotC was even thinking with this change.

And now a healing spirit at level 3 with 18 Wisdom heals for 10d6 (35). Cure wounds at level 3 heals 3d8+4 (17.5)

Not useless, you're just cherry picking the worst situation for your comparison. It's still very potent, it's just no longer the best healing spell in the game.


I totally agree with basically everything you say.

I just wanted to add that I've been in arguments related to the greatberry ruling (disciple of life + good berry), and I find the inconsistency of how other similar features are ruled to be beyond infuriating. Star druid's Chalice Constellation is basically just a paraphrase of disciple of life yet it doesn't allow the same boosted greatberry and also doesn't work on aura of vitality like disciple of life either (not to mention the wildfire druid's version of healing boost).

Why couldn't WotC just make all similar features that boost healing work exactly like disciple of life and make it do extra healing on everything, or not at all like everything except disciple of life?

Disciple of Life
Also starting at 1st level, your healing spells are more effective. Whenever you use a spell of 1st level or higher to restore hit points to a creature, the creature regains additional hit points equal to 2 + the spell's level.

Chalice
A constellation of a life-giving goblet appears on you. Whenever you cast a spell using a spell slot that restores hit points to a creature, you or another creature within 30 feet of you can regain hit points equal to 1d8 + your Wisdom modifier.

Using a spell of 1st level or higher should EQUAL to casting a spell that uses a spell slot; since using a spell of 1st level of higher needs you to cast a spell using a spell slot anyway! But no, the ruling isn't the same, sigh.

I would argue that Disciple of Life is the ability that is out of line and should be brought down with an errata. 5e isn't designed to have a heal bot, and should embrace that instead of leaving a single ability that allows it effectively.

Your example shows me that they saw what the old wording allowed and fixed it in future abilities, but didn't take the appropriate step to fix the original.

[Kane0]

Agreed with thread title, I just rule it to activate once per round.

Good thing I still have my old-print book.

[Captain Panda]

And now a healing spirit at level 3 with 18 Wisdom heals for 10d6 (35). Cure wounds at level 3 heals 3d8+4 (17.5)

Not useless, you're just cherry picking the worst situation for your comparison. It's still very potent, it's just no longer the best healing spell in the game.


No, I was actually picking a typical use-case. As druids get aura of vitality now, you wouldn't upcast healing spirit to 3, you'd just cast that instead. It doesn't have the same irritating position requirements. If you scale healing spirit up to a 5th level slot (since aura of vitality doesn't scale) and assume 18 wisdom, you get 20d6. ~70 healing over the course of a minute, and burns your concentration. Compare to that mass cure wounds, 3d8+4 (~17.5) times six, so ~105 healing.

Except mass cure wounds is instant, has more convenient positioning requirements, and does not break concentration for a class that heavily depends on concentration. Healing spirit is no longer a spell most druids are going to prepare if they know about the update.

It was never the best healing spell in the game. If you just ate a dragon breath to the face, healing spirit is not going to save you, but the heal spell definitely can. If by 'best' you mean 'most efficient', it was very strong in that department, but even there it was outshone by goodberries summoned the previous day, which have a functional spell slot cost of nothing.



Your example shows me that they saw what the old wording allowed and fixed it in future abilities, but didn't take the appropriate step to fix the original.

Why do they need to "fix" books that people already paid for? Don't you see how that creates issues? They aren't sending out free, updated versions to people who think they still have a great spell.

(Yes, yes, I know they put errata on the internet for free, only nerds like us actually check that)


Agreed with thread title, I just rule it to activate once per round.

Good thing I still have my old-print book.

Once a round would have been a fair errata, because that probably is what they intended.

[Galithar]

No, I was actually picking a typical use-case. As druids get aura of vitality now, you wouldn't upcast healing spirit to 3, you'd just cast that instead. It doesn't have the same irritating position requirements. If you scale healing spirit up to a 5th level slot (since aura of vitality doesn't scale) and assume 18 wisdom, you get 20d6. ~70 healing over the course of a minute, and burns your concentration. Compare to that mass cure wounds, 3d8+4 (~17.5) times six, so ~105 healing.

Except mass cure wounds is instant, has more convenient positioning requirements, and does not break concentration for a class that heavily depends on concentration. Healing spirit is no longer a spell most druids are going to prepare if they know about the update.

It was never the best healing spell in the game. If you just ate a dragon breath to the face, healing spirit is not going to save you, but the heal spell definitely can. If by 'best' you mean 'most efficient', it was very strong in that department, but even there it was outshone by goodberries summoned the previous day, which have a functional spell slot cost of nothing.



Why do they need to "fix" books that people already paid for? Don't you see how that creates issues? They aren't sending out free, updated versions to people who think they still have a great spell.

(Yes, yes, I know they put errata on the internet for free, only nerds like us actually check that)

Again you're leaving out very critical pieces of information. Edit: clarification that you mentioned some of these in passing without giving credit to both sides. (Example you do call out Aura not scaling, but don't give credit to Spirit for being better in all but the narrow situation of healing with a third level slot and having no better bonus action.)
1. Combats are often, though not always, static. Of course this varies by table and may not be your case. This drastically sways things in favor of Healing Spirit over Aura of Vitality. One has an action economy cost, the other has a position cost (which turns into action economy if constantly moving giving g Healing Spirit a minor leg up)
2. Aura of Vitality doesn't scale. It is situationally more powerful when cast at level 3 only. If upcast or needing to use a lower level slot it immediately becomes inferior. (Special mention to a Divine Soul extending the spell making Aura better)
3. Unlike mass healing spells Healing Spirit can dump all 10d6 into one character. Versus the equivalent 1d4+4 to 6 characters. Not all parties are six characters, but assuming you have six targets that's an average of 35 versus an average of 6.5×6 or 39. So again, situational. (18 wis, level 3 spell slot)
4. Again comparing to a mass healing spell Mass Cure Wounds is 3d8+5 times 6 or 17.5 per target average total of 105. Healing Spirit is healing for 24d6 or average of 84. Finally, a 5th level spell is outperforming (by a meaningful amount) a second level spell being upcast. But ONLY if you can fully utilize the healing on 6 targets.(20 wis, level 5 spell slot)

All of this just shows that the spell is balanced now. I know that people don't like having their toy taken away, but it's good for the game. Large numbers of DMs (anecdotal based on conversations on forums) were nerfing the previous iteration. If you feel it's too much just buff it back into being the best healing spell (you used to have to go all the way up to spells like Mass Heal to truly outperform Healing spirit.)

Burst healing isn't useful in 5e compared to yo-yo healing.

[Witty Username]

And now a healing spirit at level 3 with 18 Wisdom heals for 10d6 (35). Cure wounds at level 3 heals 3d8+4 (17.5)

Not useless, you're just cherry picking the worst situation for your comparison. It's still very potent, it's just no longer the best healing spell in the game.


I would argue that when the spell is first available is when it sees the most use, and the fact a second level spell has difficulty competing with a first level spell is a moderate issue in of itself.

Also, the best heal spell has been and always will be tiny hut.

Again you're leaving out very critical pieces of information. Edit: clarification that you mentioned some of these in passing without giving credit to both sides. (Example you do call out Aura not scaling, but don't give credit to Spirit for being better in all but the narrow situation of healing with a third level slot and having no better bonus action.)
1. Combats are often, though not always, static. Of course this varies by table and may not be your case. This drastically sways things in favor of Healing Spirit over Aura of Vitality. One has an action economy cost, the other has a position cost (which turns into action economy if constantly moving giving g Healing Spirit a minor leg up)
2. Aura of Vitality doesn't scale. It is situationally more powerful when cast at level 3 only. If upcast or needing to use a lower level slot it immediately becomes inferior. (Special mention to a Divine Soul extending the spell making Aura better)
3. Unlike mass healing spells Healing Spirit can dump all 10d6 into one character. Versus the equivalent 1d4+4 to 6 characters. Not all parties are six characters, but assuming you have six targets that's an average of 35 versus an average of 6.5×6 or 39. So again, situational. (18 wis, level 3 spell slot)
4. Again comparing to a mass healing spell Mass Cure Wounds is 3d8+5 times 6 or 17.5 per target average total of 105. Healing Spirit is healing for 24d6 or average of 84. Finally, a 5th level spell is outperforming (by a meaningful amount) a second level spell being upcast. But ONLY if you can fully utilize the healing on 6 targets.(20 wis, level 5 spell slot)

All of this just shows that the spell is balanced now. I know that people don't like having their toy taken away, but it's good for the game. Large numbers of DMs (anecdotal based on conversations on forums) were nerfing the previous iteration. If you feel it's too much just buff it back into being the best healing spell (you used to have to go all the way up to spells like Mass Heal to truly outperform Healing spirit.)

Burst healing isn't useful in 5e compared to yo-yo healing.

This is all predicated on the theory that healing as is useful in comparison to other spell uses, Conjure woodland beings, Sleet storm, Wall of stone are all examples of spells that can mitigate damage and change the flow of a combat in superior way to all healing options on the Druid list including the old healing spirit. And it is among the worst spells on the ranger list now because of the wisdom requirement.
The issue with healing wasn't healing spirit is too good, it is that healing as is, is nearly useless.

[Galithar]

I would argue that when the spell is first available is when it sees the most use, and the fact a second level spell has difficulty competing with a first level spell is a moderate issue in of itself.

Also, the best heal spell has been and always will be tiny hut.

I just went through and proved it's usefulness far beyond the level you first gain access though.

It doesn't have difficulty competing though. It is close to the same healing applied differently. At level 3 your average d8 party member probably has around 25 health. Do you want to heal 4 of them for a little bit? Or one of them from almost down? It's a use case difference.

Oddly Healing Spirit later transitions to the "do you want to heal one person" spell in these comparisons as I outlined against the various mass heal spells.

Edit: Formatting

[Captain Panda]

Again you're leaving out very critical pieces of information.

No, I'm giving fairly standard examples of how this spell would be used. You accuse me of cherry picking the worst examples, but pointing out that the spell borders on useless the level you get it is not cherry picking. I scaled it up and compared it to mass cure wounds, and it's just blown out of the water. I don't think it's fair to ask to scale it any higher than that, because casting healing spirit (now or pre-nerf) higher than 5 is a pretty crazy proposition that never really happens.



3. Unlike mass healing spells Healing Spirit can dump all 10d6 into one character. Versus the equivalent 1d4+4 to 6 characters. Not all parties are six characters, but assuming you have six targets that's an average of 35 versus an average of 6.5×6 or 39. So again, situational. (18 wis, level 3 spell slot)


Mass healing word isn't a druid spell, but we can compare them for reference if you like. Not only is the max healing potential of mass healing word more (I don't think it is reasonable to argue healing spirit gets full use and then argue healing word doesn't, over healing is possible in both cases), but one does all its healing instantly, the other eats concentration for a minute. I think you're missing how big a deal that is for a druid. It hits multiple targets at once, and as you yourself just pointed out how big a deal yo-yo healing is in Fifth, that's another point in favor of mass healing word.



4. Again comparing to a mass healing spell Mass Cure Wounds is 3d8+5 times 6 or 17.5 per target average total of 105. Healing Spirit is healing for 24d6 or average of 84. Finally, a 5th level spell is outperforming (by a meaningful amount) a second level spell being upcast. But ONLY if you can fully utilize the healing on 6 targets.(20 wis, level 5 spell slot)


18.5 per target if we're assuming 20 wisdom, so 111. Though I will point out druids need their main casting stat a lot less, so it's entirely possible that the druid in question has 16-18. Regardless, at 20 I don't think it helps much. You're looking at 111 spot healing that doesn't break your concentration to dedicating your concentration to 84 healing over the course of a minute. Mass cure wounds is just hands down the better choice here. It was a spell that was good to prepare even when healing spirit was overtuned.

Granted, the two spells were never supposed to be in the same category. Healing spirit was intended as a slow, efficient heal and mass cure wounds was a big, fast, inefficient one. The fact that the big, fast, inefficient heal now outdoes the slow, efficient one that eats your concentration shows just how weak healing spirit has become.



All of this just shows that the spell is balanced now.


Not sure how, it had a niche (and was overtuned for said niche), but now it does not.

It's a bad level 2 heal, competes with a marginally better option at 3rd if the druid pumped wisdom instead of taking a feat. By the time you're hitting spell levels 4 and 5, those just aren't slots you want to be spending on out of combat healing, but if you spend your 5th level slot on it... it's still bad. And of course, you can reply that mass cure wounds assumes six injured allies, but by the same token you're assuming healing spirit is getting full usage. Is that more likely? Yes, actually, but the fact the you might get a higher usable percent of the lower number for the slower spell does not compensate for just how weak the spell is in its output now. The output of mass cure wounds isn't its advantage, it just has that in addition to the other ways it is better as a spell.

Healing spirit really doesn't even warrant a prepare slot anymore. It doesn't serve any role effectively enough.



I just went through and proved it's usefulness far beyond the level you first gain access though.


I disagree. Your own math found that the spell that was used as a slow, efficient drip heal has less potential throughput than the fast heals. The slow, efficient heal needs to have a clear advantage in overall healing over the fast heals to be competitive.

Out of combat, if you really boost wisdom and forgot to make goodberries and don't have access to healing potions and you used all your hit dice and you happened to prepare healing spirit... okay, maybe at that point you want to use it. More likely you probably just want a long rest.

In combat, it didn't see use pre-nerf and it's not going to now. It just does not compete with other druid concentration options in any way. In a combat situation, conjure animals not only doles out enormous damage, but also is more effective as a heal if the enemies direct attacks to the summons. Every single target attack aimed at a summon effectively "heals" the party by the damage of said attack.

Look, maybe this is theory for you, but I've actually played as and DMed for a lot of druids. Healing spirit just isn't competitive. It's bad out of combat, and it's abysmal in combat due to the concentration requirement. They could have used a scalpel, but instead they went for a chainsaw.

And what's worse, what slipped my mind until Witty Username pointed it out... this spell is bad for druids, but the poor rangers. I don't play rangers, but wow, what a kick to the ass they got with this one. At least they still have goodberries.

[clearstream]

So now, healing spirit at 2 with standard 16 wisdom does: 4d6, ~14 healing. Cure wounds is 2d8+3, ~12 healing.

Except cure wounds is a spell level lower, does instant healing, and doesn't break your concentration.

The spell just useless now. I don't know what WotC was even thinking with this change.
Bonus action and range, principally. The spell is still highly valuable, just not IMBA.

[clearstream]

And what's worse, what slipped my mind until Witty Username pointed it out... this spell is bad for druids, but the poor rangers. I don't play rangers, but wow, what a kick to the ass they got with this one. At least they still have goodberries.
I love this on a ranger. They have no other bonus action healing spell that has range, and can move about putting downed characters back on their feet.

Healing Spirit and Healing Word warp the game around them. Just read all the comments on 5e whack-a-mole gameplay. They're a principal cause of that gameplay. I think if you focus solely on the amount healed - your argument works - but that is not the reason players take these spells (or if they are, I believe they are under-appreciating the value of ranged healing using bonus actions).

EDIT I felt like you kind of misstate the argument for the change, also. Healing Spirit was being used for powerful out-of-combat healing, while it was intended to be effective in-combat healing. That was the issue. It was over-tuned for its out of combat use.

[Captain Panda]

I love this on a ranger. They have no other bonus action healing spell that has range, and can move about putting downed characters back on their feet.

Healing Spirit and Healing Word warp the game around them. Just read all the comments on 5e whack-a-mole gameplay. They're a principal cause of that gameplay. I think if you focus solely on the amount healed - your argument works - but that is not the reason players take these spells (or if they are, I believe they are under-appreciating the value of ranged healing using bonus actions).



Healing word is fantastic; it doesn't require concentration, it gets someone up with a first level spell. Whack-a-mole gameplay is a thing in 5e, but at least in my experience is somewhat overstated. Newer DMs may use a single strong enemy and ignore downed PCs. If you're facing a few smaller enemies played by an experienced DM who isn't pulling punches, I mean, even kobolds and goblins should be smart enough to smack downed PCs a couple times (two hits and you die) if you abuse the whack-a-mole in front of them.

Speaking primarily as a druid, healing spirit is not a spell to use for whack-a-mole purposes. If you are using your concentration for that in combat, you are playing far less effectively than you could be. As for rangers, you'll have a 14 in wisdom, right? So for a level 2 slot (and a valuable spell known) you get 3d6 healing that you can spread around for a bonus action. Good action economy, but you get that spell at level 5. 3d6 healing at level 5? I'm just not seeing it. I don't main a ranger, but I cannot imagine being a ranger, hitting level 5, and not only picking healing spirit as one of my four spells known, but also spending one of my only two level 2 slots to do 3d6 healing. My teammates typically aren't unconscious often enough for that to seem like a good idea to me.

To quote the author of one of the druid guides linked on this site: "Post-Errata: Worthless. Out of combat healing should now be done with Goodberries."

[Kane0]

I love this on a ranger. They have no other bonus action healing spell that has range, and can move about putting downed characters back on their feet.

Healing Spirit and Healing Word warp the game around them. Just read all the comments on 5e whack-a-mole gameplay. They're a principal cause of that gameplay. I think if you focus solely on the amount healed - your argument works - but that is not the reason players take these spells (or if they are, I believe they are under-appreciating the value of ranged healing using bonus actions).

EDIT I felt like you kind of misstate the argument for the change, also. Healing Spirit was being used for powerful out-of-combat healing, while it was intended to be effective in-combat healing. That was the issue. It was over-tuned for its out of combat use.

... huh. Thats actually a fair argument and may have swayed me. I’ll have to grab my guineapig and think on that now

[clearstream]

Healing word is fantastic; it doesn't require concentration, it gets someone up with a first level spell. Whack-a-mole gameplay is a thing in 5e, but at least in my experience is somewhat overstated. Newer DMs may use a single strong enemy and ignore downed PCs. If you're facing a few smaller enemies played by an experienced DM who isn't pulling punches, I mean, even kobolds and goblins should be smart enough to smack downed PCs a couple times (two hits and you die) if you abuse the whack-a-mole in front of them.

Speaking primarily as a druid, healing spirit is not a spell to use for whack-a-mole purposes. If you are using your concentration for that in combat, you are playing far less effectively than you could be. As for rangers, you'll have a 14 in wisdom, right? So for a level 2 slot (and a valuable spell known) you get 3d6 healing that you can spread around for a bonus action. Good action economy, but you get that spell at level 5. 3d6 healing at level 5? I'm just not seeing it. I don't main a ranger, but I cannot imagine being a ranger, hitting level 5, and not only picking healing spirit as one of my four spells known, but also spending one of my only two level 2 slots to do 3d6 healing. My teammates typically aren't unconscious often enough for that to seem like a good idea to me.

To quote the author of one of the druid guides linked on this site: "Post-Errata: Worthless. Out of combat healing should now be done with Goodberries."
I guess our difference in assessment hinges on this: you are evaluating for total healing, I am evaluating for combat utility. Goodberries exemplify this tension: they are far more effective than healing spirit out of combat, but in combat they take an action and don't have the range. The spells serve different purposes.

It's true that monsters can hit a downed character a few more times to make them stay down. That's a good use of additional attacks that possibly couldn't reach a different target (e.g. from multiattack). I think one of the bugs in 5e is the inability for characters to go to negative HP, so that even if a creature spends more actions to put them on one save remaining, a single healing word undoes those actions. It creates a balancing problem for spells like healing spirit because any healing - even 1 point - can deliver a tempo advantage.

Anyway, I think for a house fix, one needs to be balancing healing spirit for in-combat use, because that is the intent of the spell. That means it does not need to compete with goodberries for out-of-combat healing efficacy.

[Galithar]

Edit: Decided to remove myself from the discussion. Carry on.

[Captain Panda]

I guess our difference in assessment hinges on this: you are evaluating for total healing, I am evaluating for combat utility. Goodberries exemplify this tension: they are far more effective than healing spirit out of combat, but in combat they take an action and don't have the range.

Have your familiar apply the goodberry and concentrate on a better spell. Genuine advice. There are multiple feats to get one and it's going to be better at yo-yoing while also being pretty useful in other ways in combat.



The spells serve different purposes.


I agree, that's actually a large part of the point I've been trying to make. Healing spirit isn't trash just because it heals for less, but because of the niche is fills and how it heals for less. Mass cure wounds was a good spell even when it was doing, at maximum, 1/3 of the potential healing of healing spirit because of the way the healing was distributed. It's instant, hits multiple targets, doesn't break concentration, *and* it outheals healing spirit. Yes, a higher level spell should be better, and it was and is better at what it does.

If healing or damage is slow, it needs to be more overall to compensate. If it isn't an aoe, such as when comparing mass healing word and healing spirit, it needs to be stronger to compensate. If a spell is concentration, it again needs to be stronger to compensate for that cost. Healing spirit is a slow, positional heal that eats concentration. It needs to be strong to compensate for those weaknesses. Right now it's a spell with poor overall healing, it's slow, it's cumbersome due to its positioning requirements. It fills no niche, in other words. I've stated this above, but will repeat: the slow, efficient, concentration heal should not be outstripped by the fast, inefficient spot heals in overall healing done. Mass cure wounds should not do more raw potential healing, even as a fifth level spell, than a spell that is slow and requires concentration. The spell "heal," before the nerf, was still a dramatically better spell than healing spirit because it did less healing, but it did a meaningful amount of healing instantly.

The druid list is extremely competitive regarding concentration and an underwhelming healing spell that matches a cure wounds? You're paying a heavy opportunity cost to get less healing, more slowly. As a druid, you are much better off just tossing out a healing word if someone gets downed than breaking your concentration on a real spell to do it with healing spirit. That was true even before the nerf.




It's true that monsters can hit a downed character a few more times to make them stay down. That's a good use of additional attacks that possibly couldn't reach a different target (e.g. from multiattack). I think one of the bugs in 5e is the inability for characters to go to negative HP, so that even if a creature spends more actions to put them on one save remaining, a single healing word undoes those actions. It creates a balancing problem for spells like healing spirit because any healing - even 1 point - can deliver a tempo advantage.


I think the yo-yo problem goes away the moment the DM takes off the kid gloves and hits unconscious players. Even if they do get up after a healing word, being one bad roll away from dying because the healer is after you in initiative is a dramatic experience. I don't have a problem with the healing word popping someone up. Yo-yoing happens when PCs don't have a kobold aiming karate kicks at their beanbag while they're unconscious. :biggrin:



Anyway, I think for a house fix, one needs to be balancing healing spirit for in-combat use, because that is the intent of the spell. That means it does not need to compete with goodberries for out-of-combat healing efficacy.

But even pre-nerf, healing spirit was not something that a character focused on playing optimally would do. I'm not speaking thematically, people can play however they like, but purely for combat effectiveness summoning something, laying down a spike growth, throwing down a wall, or using heat metal... these are all better things to do in a fight, and are likely to prevent the need to pick someone up with a heal in the first place. Again, I'm speaking as a druid, but I have to imagine a ranger has better things to concentrate on since they get even less out of the spell than druids do.

[Dork_Forge]

Have your familiar apply the goodberry and concentrate on a better spell. Genuine advice. There are multiple feats to get one and it's going to be better at yo-yoing while also being pretty useful in other ways in combat.


There's nothing RAW about feeding another creature a Goodberry or feeding one to an unconscious creature.

[Kane0]

Healing spirit was good as a Ranger spell because of their more limited list and slots, at least as far as total healing per spell slot goes. As an in combat spell you’d generally be using Hunters mark or some other conc spell

Pre nerf it really made the ranger feel more equal to the pally in healing capacity

[Captain Panda]

There's nothing RAW about feeding another creature a Goodberry or feeding one to an unconscious creature.

It's pretty clearly RAI, however, and Crawford has commented that he'd allow it. As he's the main rules architect, I think that settles RAI, which is what I prioritize. The idea that placing a berry in your own mouth and swallowing it has magical healing properties, but someone else popping it into your mouth does not, does not strike me as especially persuasive.

There are a lot of things that RAW don't explicitly have rules. I'll credit Treantmonk for this example: you can push and pull objects, that is explicitly mentioned and rules are present, but there is no rule on twisting objects. Therefore, you have no ability to twist things? I can't imagine any many DMs ruling that way.

[Dork_Forge]

It's pretty clearly RAI, however, and Crawford has commented that he'd allow it. As he's the main rules architect, I think that settles RAI, which is what I prioritize. The idea that placing a berry in your own mouth and swallowing it has magical healing properties, but someone else popping it into your mouth does not, does not strike me as especially persuasive.

The issue is being able to feed another person a berry within the confines of combat and being able to feed an unconscious, dying individual solid food at all.

I never claimed feeding someone else made the berry mundane, I am pointing out that there is no RAW basis for feeding other people berries and since the intent of the spell is clearly a food substitute, why would you assume that you could? Do you really thing an Owl or whatever feeding dying people magical berries and rapidly devaluing the prospect of death is RAI?

I think it was Mike Mearls that pointed out that pouring a potion down an unconscious person's throat and making them swallow a berry without choking are very different things.

If you're looking for RAI, the interpretation that makes a 1st level spell able to outstrip pretty much any other spell for healing value at 1st level and alllowing actionless healing via familiars doesn't seem like the conservative take.


There are a lot of things that RAW don't explicitly have rules. I'll credit Treantmonk for this example: you can push and pull objects, that is explicitly mentioned and rules are present, but there is no rule on twisting objects. Therefore, you have no ability to twist things? I can't imagine any many DMs ruling that way.

That's a ridiculous example, the push,pull,lift rules are about the capacity to do those things, not the ability to.

Yo-yo healing is something that particularly annoys me in 5e, partially because it perpetuates this false concept that anything else is a waste of time. This kind of nonsense is exactly what reinforces that.

This is entirely my home rule, but we're into RAI not RAW anyway, so why not: You need to make a Constitution saving throw for every berry you consume after the first. The save DC gets higher for every subsequent berry until you long rest. Why? Because it isn't a healing spell and people that treat it like that tend to ignore that a single berry is meant to sustain you for a day, then proceed to throw a week+ worth of food down their gullets to stack a tiny amount of hp that was clearly meant to show 'look, these berries sure are good for you!'

[Captain Panda]

If you're looking for RAI, the interpretation that makes a 1st level spell able to outstrip pretty much any other spell for healing value at 1st level and alllowing actionless healing via familiars doesn't seem like the conservative take.


Crawford would allow it, he's the head rules architect. In my view that makes it pretty clearly RAI. That said...




That's a ridiculous example, the push,pull,lift rules are about the capacity to do those things, not the ability to.


Hah, glad the ridiculous example isn't of my own creation then! But the point is simply that since there are no rules on how much capacity you have, clearly you must have none. Not a point I feel inclined to argue further, can stick to the goodberry itself.



Yo-yo healing is something that particularly annoys me in 5e, partially because it perpetuates this false concept that anything else is a waste of time. This kind of nonsense is exactly what reinforces that.


Well, I also hate yo-yo healing for an entirely different reason. My view is that if the party needs to start tossing out emergency yo-yo heals, they totally should, but that should not be the default tactic, that should be a frantic last resort to combat having gone sideways. The solution is to kick downed PCs in the face when they go down. If someone is down, you should have PCs trying to heal them. Nothing out of whack about that. But if people are regularly going down, the team might want to step back and reevaluate their combat tactics.



This is entirely my home rule, but we're into RAI not RAW anyway, so why not: You need to make a Constitution saving throw for every berry you consume after the first. The save DC gets higher for every subsequent berry until you long rest. Why? Because it isn't a healing spell and people that treat it like that tend to ignore that a single berry is meant to sustain you for a day, then proceed to throw a week+ worth of food down their gullets to stack a tiny amount of hp that was clearly meant to show 'look, these berries sure are good for you!'

No amount of hating goodberries and stomping on them is going to make healing in the middle of combat a good idea, though. In 5e it really isn't, unless you're picking someone up. There are some exceptions at higher levels, but if someone is at 3/4 health, tossing them a cure wounds is a waste of an action and a spell slot.

[Dork_Forge]

Crawford would allow it, he's the head rules architect. In my view that makes it pretty clearly RAI. That said...

'Crawford would allow it' amounts to 'no it isn't the rules, but as an independent DM I don't think it'd break anything'

That =/=RAI




Hah, glad the ridiculous example isn't of my own creation then! But the point is simply that since there are no rules on how much capacity you have, clearly you must have none. Not a point I feel inclined to argue further, can stick to the goodberry itself.

And it's imo, not a good point regardless of the example. Goodberry explicitly states that you can consume a berry as an action, there is no reason to assume that you can feed it to someone else, in the middle of fighting for your life, at all nevermind for that same action.

To make this more succint: Putting a single berry in my mouth takes me an entire action! ...Surely the same speed and coordination that I can feed myself with applies to carefully nursing the same bury down the gullet of my unconscious and dying friend there.

When you extrapolate that out to familiars, most of which do not have hands, doing the same thing, it's ludicrous (and that includes none chain or monkey familiars feeding potions too).


Well, I also hate yo-yo healing for an entirely different reason. My view is that if the party needs to start tossing out emergency yo-yo heals, they totally should, but that should not be the default tactic, that should be a frantic last resort to combat having gone sideways. The solution is to kick downed PCs in the face when they go down. If someone is down, you should have PCs trying to heal them. Nothing out of whack about that. But if people are regularly going down, the team might want to step back and reevaluate their combat tactics.


I can see that point of view, but there's a major roleplay and mechanical disconnect in my perception when both the PC and player say, yeah that single hp is good enough for you.


No amount of hating goodberries and stomping on them is going to make healing in the middle of combat a good idea, though. In 5e it really isn't, unless you're picking someone up. There are some exceptions at higher levels, but if someone is at 3/4 health, tossing them a cure wounds is a waste of an action and a spell slot.

Bad example is reinforcing your stance, you wouldn't bother healing someone that high up unless it was reasonable that they could go down before your next turn. For example a Wizard where 75% of their total hp doesn't really amount to that many hps anyway or a tank that is taking hits from the majority of the encounter for the party.

[SharkForce]

I will agree that healing spirit was overnerfed (I think 1 use per round would have been fine). I disagree that it was fine pre-nerf, or that it should ever be considered fine for a single spell to force the rest of the game to adapt to fit itself rather than the single spell being adapted to fit the game. I also disagree that because one bad design decision was made (life cleric + goodberries) that it justifies further bad design decisions; as others have said, if anything they should have corrected life cleric so that it doesn't make such an absurdly large difference in certain spells (and in my games, it is; you can get 13 hit points from a goodberry spell if you want, and for all I care you can spread the extra 3 points across the berries however you please, but no, you're not quadrupling the healing of an already-efficient spell with a level 1 ability that costs nothing).

to add another reason why pre-errata healing spirit was bad, healing spirit became a replacement for expending any other resources so long as a fight did not threaten a TPK or permanent damage. you either get TPK'd by not spending resources, or healing spirit is the most efficient way to solve the fight in every situation, and nothing else even comes remotely close. not only does this warp the game, but it makes the game less interesting. any other resource you might expend to come out of an encounter in good condition simply could not compare in efficiency. if I compare it to web - arguably the most powerful level 2 spell in the game in the category of crowd control - I would need to worry about enemies being able to make their saving throws. I would need to worry about concentrating on the spell in a dangerous situation. I have to worry about placing it where it won't hit my friends, but where it also won't let too many enemies just avoid it entirely. and even if it holds the enemy for the entire duration, there is still potential that I'll come out of an encounter down that level 2 spell slot, and also people in the party will be down hit points or will have needed to expend yet even *more* resources to avoid losing hit points. healing spirit doesn't worry about any of that. you don't even need to worry about making the decision whether this fight needs the resource at the start of the fight, when a spell would do the most good, because you can make it after the fight is over... depending on how comfortable you feel, it could even completely mitigate two or three encounters. you have perfect information when you use the spell, because all the information is available in the past; you don't ever have to wonder if this particular group would be hostile to you if you didn't cast a web while you have the chance, you can just use it after the fact if it turns out you need it, or don't use it if it isn't needed. it isn't just the best *healing* spell; it actually beats out other spells in their areas of specialty. in order to compete with healing spirit, web needed to prevent 10d6 (or more, see below) damage, PER CHARACTER. that is not reasonable, and frankly, having to make those difficult decisions about how many resources to spend is part of the fun of the game.

and no, healing via hit dice was never comparable. an hour is a lot longer than a minute, and hit dice are much more finite than spell slots (especially at higher levels) when used the way healing spirit is used. perhaps most importantly, hit dice are available to everyone, while pre-errata healing spirit meant that people who had the spell were playing a vastly different game than people who didn't have it.

I also can't agree that we need to compare healing spirit to a fully-utilized mass cure wounds. damage is rarely distributed evenly. healing word allowed you to heal everyone to full from essentially zero, meaning that regardless of who took the damage, after a fight the party is at full health. cure wounds will almost never have that kind of impact. technically, healing spirit even allowed other people to spend their action dragging another person through the area so that the other person can get an extra heal, in addition to people spending their reaction to move through on a different turn, which means 2-3 times 10d6 just out of a level 2 spell slot.


healing spirit was wildly overtuned to a point where it reshaped the game around itself. that was bad. now I would honestly agree that post-nerf it is a bit too weak, but that doesn't mean it didn't need a nerf in the first place.

[clearstream]

Have your familiar apply the goodberry and concentrate on a better spell. Genuine advice. There are multiple feats to get one and it's going to be better at yo-yoing while also being pretty useful in other ways in combat.
I am not quite following how our ranger or druid has a familiar? But if they do and their DM allows familiars to function that way, then why do they still need healing word?

Our owl takes the berry in her beak (free interaction), flies over to the downed character (move), and pops the berry in their mouth (which our DM is allowing as an action, I guess). The kobold or goblin who is standing over the downed character to finish them (per our earlier answer to whack-a-mole gameplay) possibly kills our owl (AC11, 1 HP). That is okay, because our prone character on 1 HP at their feet is going to take them out next turn.

[Captain Panda]

I will agree that healing spirit was overnerfed (I think 1 use per round would have been fine).


Then we fundamentally agree. I wonder what the rest of the text is for, given that. Not only do we agree that it was overnerfed, but I even agree with the proposed fix! (10d6 total for a level 2 spell, mind, is still a full heal for a group under level 5). I actually think that healing once a round was their original intent, so it would even be real, authentic errata and not a spell being mangled such that it no longer resembles what it is in previous prints that people already paid for.


I disagree that it was fine pre-nerf,


Didn't claim it was fine, stated it was overtuned but that the hate for it is exaggerated.


or that it should ever be considered fine for a single spell to force the rest of the game to adapt to fit itself


...and that's the exaggeration I was referring to.


rather than the single spell being adapted to fit the game. I also disagree that because one bad design decision was made (life cleric + goodberries) that it justifies further bad design decisions; as others have said, if anything they should have corrected life cleric so that it doesn't make such an absurdly large difference in certain spells


"Corrected life cleric." I just don't get the attitude that they should "correct" books that have been in print for years and have two versions of the same book floating around. Sounds like a bad idea, to me.



to add another reason why pre-errata healing spirit was bad, healing spirit became a replacement for expending any other resources so long as a fight did not threaten a TPK or permanent damage. you either get TPK'd by not spending resources, or healing spirit is the most efficient way to solve the fight in every situation, and nothing else even comes remotely close.


Yeah, that's just incorrect. Hit points are not your only resource. A wizard with no spell slots but full hp in the last room of a dungeon is still a pretty ineffective wizard. Healing spirit may slow the expenditure of spell slots, but you're still going to burn through them as you progress.



and no, healing via hit dice was never comparable. an hour is a lot longer than a minute, and hit dice are much more finite than spell slots (especially at higher levels) when used the way healing spirit is used. perhaps most importantly, hit dice are available to everyone, while pre-errata healing spirit meant that people who had the spell were playing a vastly different game than people who didn't have it.


I think that's another example of the exaggeration and groupthink I was talking about. Hit dice are useful only for healing, and a short rest also gives your party back necessary resources (action surge, wild shape uses, channel divinity). If you're low level and run out of hit dice and goodberries, the druid can wildly overheal the group with a level 2 spell slot. Sure, it only takes a minute, but you don't get back any important resources and it costs you a use of another spell instead.

Later in the game, in tiers 3 and 4, it is over tuned and affects gameplay because the amount of healing can actually be utilized fully. But at the levels most people seem to actually play? Total overreaction. People calculating how much it can heal if cast at level 6+? Who cares? No one ever used it at 6+. You only have so many hit points to heal, and there are a lot of ways to get them back.



healing spirit was wildly overtuned to a point where it reshaped the game around itself. that was bad. now I would honestly agree that post-nerf it is a bit too weak, but that doesn't mean it didn't need a nerf in the first place.

I mean, I state flatly that it was over tuned. My point, that I stated enough times that I am wondering if you read the OP, was that the correction was wild overkill and very clearly not "errata," but a patch. And again, that's the exaggeration I keep referencing. "OMG, SO BROKEN! WARPS THE ENTIRE GAME!"

No it didn't. That doesn't mean it was a well-implemented spell, clearly they didn't playtest it, but it didn't break the game. Having it gone also doesn't break the game, but it does set a bad precedent for treating products that have been released and paid for as playtest material they can change.



I also can't agree that we need to compare healing spirit to a fully-utilized mass cure wounds. damage is rarely distributed evenly. healing word allowed you to heal everyone to full from essentially zero, meaning that regardless of who took the damage, after a fight the party is at full health. cure wounds will almost never have that kind of impact.

Again, missing the point.

Post-errata healing spirit is a slow, concentration spell. It should therefore do more healing than a level 2 cure wounds. It should do more healing than a level 5 mass cure wounds if upcast to 5. That is not to say that mass cure wounds always heals for max, of course it doesn't. That's not to say healing spirit should be a "better" spell than mass cure wounds, high level spells should be better than upcast low spells. But 'better' in this case is not just a matter of numbers. Healing spirit also rarely heals for max, and yes, nerfed healing spirit has a higher percentage of effective healing than the aoe heals. That isn't the point.

The purpose of mass cure wounds is not to be an efficient heal, it's to be a large, inefficient emergency bandaid. Healing spirit is supposed to be a slow heal. It's concentration. Yet it consistently fails to meet the throughput of other healing options that lack its drawbacks in its nerfed state. Healing spirit now has all of the drawbacks of being a slow, plodding concentration spell and none of the benefits.

Consider this comparison: fireball vs. spirit guardians. Fireball does 8d6, spirit guardians does 3d8. One is slow and plodding, but does far more in the long run, as it should, because it is a concentration spell and it releases its damage payload over time, and can be interrupted, and can be evaded. Fireball is a one-and-done, so its initial damage is higher. This is how design works. If you give a spell heavy drawbacks, it needs to have benefits to compensate. Mass cure wounds outperforming healing spirit in raw healing potential is like fireball outperforming spirit guardians in raw damage potential, despite spirit guardians being a ten minute concentration spell. Obviously that would be ridiculous.

Mass cure wounds, even assuming only 70% of it goes through, does about the same as 100% of healing spirit go through. It does that instantly, to a group, without needing you to waste your concentration for a minute. Yes, it's a higher level spell, but it's also outperforming healing spirit in a niche that healing spirit is clearly supposed to occupy and that mass cure wounds does not occupy.

[Captain Panda]

I am not quite following how our ranger or druid has a familiar? But if they do and their DM allows familiars to function that way, then why do they still need healing word?


Ritual caster and magic initiate are both great feats. Druids can use a charge of wild shape to summon a familiar. Healing word is still a solid emergency pickup, no reason not to have multiple options available.



Our owl takes the berry in her beak (free interaction), flies over to the downed character (move), and pops the berry in their mouth (which our DM is allowing as an action, I guess).


Designer of the rules system says it works. The other gentleman above likened that to just any DM approving of it, but I don't agree that Crawford, lead rules designer for the game we're discussing, counts as just another DM opinion. To each their own.

Maybe this is me succumbing to the same groupthink I criticized earlier regarding hate of rangers and healing spirit, but I don't think my suggestion is at all strange or out of the ordinary. It's advice given in multiple guides, and didn't strike me as at all controversial. The Owlberry Delivery System didn't originate from me. Though I did just give it that awesome name.

I'd put a pouch of berries on the owl in advance, just a wee one, for convenience. Also makes the interaction more adorable.



The kobold or goblin who is standing over the downed character to finish them (per our earlier answer to whack-a-mole gameplay) possibly kills our owl (AC11, 1 HP). That is okay, because our prone character on 1 HP at their feet is going to take them out next turn.

If they hit the owl, great, one less attack on you. I'm sensing that you're being facetious, but yeah, that about sums it up. A character on his feet with one hit point is just as effective at hitting something as a character with a hundred hit points, and we are talking about hypothetical kobolds/goblins, they tend to die in one hit.

I'm not endorsing this as a plan to go in with, mind, just an emergency contingency. You should probably try not to get knocked out by kobolds. If you have a DM who's mean (like me), they will step on your head. That doesn't mean you shouldn't have plans in place to avoid dying if injured, or better yet, not end up on your back in the first place. If you have a team that regularly gets knocked out and your DM hates the Owlberry Delivery System (for some reason), I will concede that in that instance healing spirit might have a use.

[clearstream]

I mean, I state flatly that it was over tuned. My point, that I stated enough times that I am wondering if you read the OP, was that the correction was wild overkill and very clearly not "errata," but a patch.
For me the correction was mild overkill. So I am in partial agreement with you on that. They went further than I expected.


Post-errata healing spirit is a slow, concentration spell. It should therefore do more healing than a level 2 cure wounds. It should do more healing than a level 5 mass cure wounds if upcast to 5. That is not to say that mass cure wounds always heals for max, of course it doesn't. That's not to say healing spirit should be a "better" spell than mass cure wounds, high level spells should be better than upcast low spells. But 'better' in this case is not just a matter of numbers. Healing spirit also rarely heals for max, and yes, nerfed healing spirit has a higher percentage of effective healing than the aoe heals. That isn't the point.
You are saying that the amount healed is not enough, right? Yet much of your argument seems to me better addressed by tweaking the slowness, and perhaps the concentration. I guess it depends on what design space one feels most needs filling. Any thoughts on that?

[Captain Panda]

You are saying that the amount healed is not enough, right? Yet much of your argument seems to me better addressed by tweaking the slowness, and perhaps the concentration. I guess it depends on what design space one feels most needs filling. Any thoughts on that?

I'm saying that the amount healed is not enough given the limitations of the spell. It has placement more awkward than aura of vitality, does less healing than spot heals but over 2-6 rounds, and halts you from doing anything more useful.

If the concentration requirement on the spell wasn't present, the change would be fine (balance wise). I'd still object to them changing spells in a printed product, but the most glaring problem with the spell would be gone and I wouldn't see it as a trap, in combat.

[clearstream]

I'm saying that the amount healed is not enough given the limitations of the spell. It has placement more awkward than aura of vitality, does less healing than spot heals but over 2-6 rounds, and halts you from doing anything more useful.

If the concentration requirement on the spell wasn't present, the change would be fine (balance wise). I'd still object to them changing spells in a printed product, but the most glaring problem with the spell would be gone and I wouldn't see it as a trap, in combat.
They may be considering the matter of design space. Is there a genuine need for the spell, as you would have it?

How does one avoid simply displacing another spell with a stronger newcomer? The goal is surely not to power creep for power creep's sake, but to offer additional viable strategies.

[Dr. Cliché]

I don't mind it being nerfed but I think they went about it in entirely the wrong way.

Simply limiting it to healing once-per-round (which many were using as a house-rule anyway) would have fixed it completely without hammering it into the ground.

[MrStabby]

I have played a lot of Fifth Edition. An unhealthy amount, if I'm being honest. I've played and run games excessively both before and after Xanathar's, and I've seen games with excessive healing spirit conga-lining and without it. So I do understand why people didn't like healing spirit. With that said, in my opinion the nerf of healing spirit was a wild overcorrection. A "oh no, I'm drifting into the wrong lane, I'm going to jerk the steering wheel so hard I fly off a cliff" level overcorrection. I also believe a lot of the hate of healing spirit was people hopping on a bandwagon rather than actually having the spell adversely impact their game. Not all, mind, but a lot. Sometimes the community gets an idea in mind like "rangers suck" or "healing spirit is broken" and these ideas just stick, regardless of their truth or falsity.

First, I'm going to give my best steel man of the position to demonstrate I understand why people disliked healing spirit. Then I am going to explain my problems with this commonly-held position, why I think healing spirit as it was did not "break" the game, and why I think nerfing it into the ground has had an adverse impact on the game. Including, might I add, in ways that harm the very style of play that those who argue against healing spirit hold up as ideal.

Anti-Healing Spirit Steel Man: D&D is a game built upon attrition. You are supposed to fight 6-8 encounters in an adventuring day, and while none of the encounters on its own should be dangerous, the encounters should slowly wear down the resources of the party such that by the end, if they used resources unwisely, the party should regret that decision and feel worn, battered, and ****ty. Healing spirit removes this element from the intended style of play entirely. Rather than restoring health inefficiently and at great cost in spell slots (or just pushing forward while missing hp), healing spirit allows a party to fully reset hit points at the cost of a single low level slot.

Healing spirit is wildly out of sync with the rest of the healing options in the game and ensures the party will never suffer attrition due to their health bars being lowered. Even if everyone in the party loses half their health, boom, healing spirit lifts all the bars like it's World of Warcraft. Compare healing spirit to prayer of healing, which is a spell solely used for healing out of combat. It heals like ten times more, at least! Clearly healing spirit is a broken, unbalanced mess if it is so dramatically outperforming the dedicated 'out of combat' healing option. That's not to mention how badly it outperforms cure wounds, healing word, etcetera, etcetera. How could anyone not see it's broken?

My Response: Okay, that's my best effort putting forth a good approximation of the general arguments against healing spirit. If you think I got that wrong, please feel free to explain what I missed below. I'll try to break my disagreements with this general sentiment into a few key points.

1. Healing spirit did not harm the attrition of the game, it just changed it.

At level 3, when a druid first gets healing spirit (and 5 for a ranger), a level 2 slot is not a trivial expense. If your party gets messed up in a fight and you use healing spirit to fully heal everyone, that second level slot is something you will miss having. If you can, it's wiser to use hit dice as a resource before a spell slot. Further, most of the healing is wasted by over healing. Let's assume the party is a bit higher, level 9. At this point, sure, a level 2 slot doesn't mean a whole lot. You can use healing spirit to top everyone up and skip a short rest at a low cost. But is that a problem, at this level? By level 9 you should have enough gold to buy piles of healing potions. Since we're comparing to healing spirit we can also assume you have a druid or ranger, who can use yesterdays spell slots to provide goodberries to the entire party for 70hp. How much damage is the party realistically taking in?

I argue that the true attrition in D&D is not hit points, it's the other resources. Spells, action surge, and other rest abilities are what will stop a party from moving forward. Those are the resources they should be careful with. Nothing about healing spirit changes the fact that in a long dungeon delve, if the wizard has used every spell slot, you are going to have a harder time at the bottom. Healing spirit just means that the wizard will start the fight with full health before doing nothing but throwing cantrips.

2. Comparing healing spirit to prayer of healing is silly.

Prayer of healing is a horrible spell. It was horrible before healing spirit arrived to do the job it was supposed to do correctly, continued to be when healing spirit arrived, and still is now that healing spirit has been shanked. I won't claim I've never seen prayer of healing used, but it is extremely rare. There is almost always a better option. It's a ten minute cast, aside from the low healing it does, so it's competing pretty directly with short rests, which are just better, and does not perform its role well enough to waste a spell slot. Optimizers do not prepare this spell, and for good reason. Comparing healing spirit to prayer of healing is a bit like comparing a good damage spell (fireball) to something horrible (circle of death) and arguing that because circle of death does so badly, fireball needs to be dragged down to its level.

3. Healing spirit is not "broken."

It was over-tuned, yes, but not "broken." On my view for something to be "broken," it needs to trivialize difficult encounters in different contexts regularly. For example, summoning pixies and turning everyone into a t-rex is something I would classify as "broken."
If you are a level 5 party facing off against a group of ornery giants, healing spirit is not going to save you. It will ensure you have full health going into the fight, and then you'll get turned into jam and jarred for later consumption by the giants. Is the spike growth spell broken because in this same encounter, it can slow the giants down enough for you to escape, and potentially even let you kite the giants around and poke them with arrows while they shred their feet on your brambles? I would contend that it is not, it simply performs its function well. Spells have niches. Healing spirit was a very strong out of combat recovering option, and I actually agree it should have been scaled down a bit. But "a bit too strong" does not mean that the spell needed to be disemboweled.

4. Healing spirit helped prevent frustrating player retreats.

Let's assume the players are in The Temple of Nasty Things, delving away into the dungeon, and they don't have a ticking clock*. The players don't have healing spirit, or goodberries, or healing potions, or someone with aura of vitality, or any other way to recover lost hit points effectively. They get a third of the way through and wastefully spam cure wounds to top up their hp. Then they realize they're kind of spent on spell slots and decide to turn right around, leave The Temple of Nasty Things, put up a Leomund's Tiny Hut and get a nice, long nap.

I don't find that particularly satisfying as a player or as a dungeon master. You can discourage this behavior, give the players emotional stakes in the dungeon, but sometimes they are going to get tapped on resources and bail. From experience, I saw a lot of this before healing spirit was put into the game, and less of it afterwards. Healing spirit allows the party to spend a resource to keep the adventure flowing. It makes the ranger feel useful. It stops me from trying to think of things in the forest that can break into Leomund's Hut. It does this all while not actually helping the players all that much during combat itself.

*You can't always have a princess in the dungeon slowly being lowered into lava. Realistically, sometimes the players are going to have time.

5. Opportunity costs and book changes. Was this really necessary?

The designers goofed a bit and put in a spell that was more effective than they intended. It wasn't broken, but it was stronger than they thought when it was printed and caused a hostile (and, I argue, irrational) community reaction... so as an "errata" they go back and completely change the nature of the spell. There are now two versions of the spell. Errata is meant to be for clarifying wording and intent, not for nerfing spells. This is not an MMO where the nerf comes in and everyone gets it, some people who don't keep up with errata are going to walk into a session and find that one of the spells in the book they paid for has been changed. It isn't that the wording was unclear and they fixed it to make it clear, they dramatically changed the function of a spell due to community sentiment.

Now I'm not saying they shouldn't give people what they want, but one must consider that this does cause older books to have a spell that is no longer usable. Is this sort of thing something they should do? And if so, was healing spirit really the most broken spell in the game? Should they go in and do a balance patch and fix all of the things that are a bit out of whack? I'm of the opinion they should leave hard reworks like that to optional rules or a new edition. I am, for example, pleased they gave beast master rangers a pet fix. They did that without having to render previously printed, already purchased books out of date.

Conclusion

Look, I know healing spirit was a bit overtuned. I do. But considering that the base game has greatberry (life cleric+goodberry), aura of vitality, cheap healing potions, hit dice, and more, it wasn't so out of whack that it justified coming at the spell with a cleaver. I could understand them making a hard change that outright adjusts a printed rule/spell for something like a simulacrum chain, something truly game-breaking, but a more effective out of combat heal? One that is almost always going to do more than you really needed, anyway? I do not believe that it was justified, and it certainly not "errata," which is an error in print.


I agree with a lot of your points, but not your conclusion. I think your points are in some cases true but just have little bearing on whether healing spirit deserved the nerf it did.

1. Healing spirit did not harm the attrition of the game, it just changed it.
Absolutley right it changed it. This doesn't mean it didn't change it into something worse. The reason people complain is not because there is no attrition but because the attrition is less fun, less balanced.

There is a tension within the game between resource based abilities and at-will abilities and this puts its finger on the scales considerably. In any fight where the party isn't facing a TPK or the realistic prospect of character death the challenge is to get through with enough resources to survive the tougher encounters that might follow. A lot of classes have damage mitigation tools like cutting words, ancestral guardian rage, the aid spell and so on. If HP loss is basically a negligable loss of party resources as the party can recover these so easily through a single spell then these abilities and these classes and this playstyle becomes devalued unless every fight is an epic one that needs the abilities... which then tips the balance heavily towards the resource focussed classes that can have a bigger impact in a smaller number of fights. Attrition as it is without HS supports avalued playstyle thatmany enjoy in a way that attrition with HS doesn't. So yeah, I absolutely 100% agree that it has changed attrition.

2. Comparing healing spirit to prayer of healing is silly.
Again I absolutely agreewith the headline. Comparing a healing spell to another that is on a class most strongly associated with healing and that requires a 10 min investment to cast is silly. Prayer of healing should blow HS away. It should be a silly comparison. I also think that PoH is good in some attritional games where HD for HP recovery are a very limited resource.


3. Healing spirit is not "broken."
"Broken" is a silly thing to look at, not least because it means different things to different people. More importantly it tends to preceed a common falacy -> X is not broken therefore X should be allowed. Pick a definition of "Broken" that is sufficiently damning, say it isn't that bad then say therefore it should be allowed. The better criterion is if the presence of that ability makes the game better or worse for everyone, not just the one taking that ability. You can make the game worse without breaking it.

This also comes accross as very much a player perspective rather than a DM perspective; it seems to see only one side of the issue and looks at what happens rather than what could have happened. When I DM I can work round most things, but they have an effect elsewhere. Like in the previous example I can shift the focus of encounters to bigger encounters rather than attritional days to bring healing spirit in line with other spells, but this in turn means a) I don't get to run the campaign I wanted to with the same world/evolution of factions and characters and problems; I have to run what fits with the shifted balance and b) It changes other elements of the balance in the game.

So yeah, original healing spirit wasn't "broken", it was just bad for the game.

4. Healing spirit helped prevent frustrating player retreats.
So healing spitit does help prevent retreats. Whether such things are "frustrating" is subjective. Do you want to play a game where you never have to decide to retreat? Where you can never fail? Where stepping back to survive is a meaningful choice as it is actually possible for your PCs to die? If so, retreat is part of that game. If not then I can see your point - you chose not to play that more lethal syle of game because you don't like retreating and this spell is consistent with that. I actually don't have a problem with that. What I do have a problem with is one person getting to decide for the whole party that they don't want to play that style of game by taking one spell. This really comes down to game-style preference.


5. Opportunity costs and book changes. Was this really necessary?
I have a lot of sympathy with your point here. It sucks to have a spell or a feature changed out underneath you. Yes people can have different perspectives and it can be tough to keep up with errata.

I think the spell was causing enough problems and distorting the game enough to justify this; I certainly have enjoyed games more both prior to healing spirit and after the fix to it. Obviously this is a small sample of people and games and there is no shortage of other explanations but it seems a decent enough fix.


I think that part of the fix was also made with future content in mind. The ranger was is a bad place when healing spirit got out and a lot of work and buffs were being made to bring the class into line. HS was one, the more powerful subclasses from Xanathar's were others. Then I think that the fixes to Healing Spirit came as other changes were being contemplated tot he ranger; the kind we saw with alternative class features.

[Frogreaver]

I'm saying that the amount healed is not enough given the limitations of the spell. It has placement more awkward than aura of vitality, does less healing than spot heals but over 2-6 rounds, and halts you from doing anything more useful.

If the concentration requirement on the spell wasn't present, the change would be fine (balance wise). I'd still object to them changing spells in a printed product, but the most glaring problem with the spell would be gone and I wouldn't see it as a trap, in combat.

I don’t find it fair to compare a 2nd level spell to a 3rd level or higher spell at all. Even upcast level 2 spells are routinely worse than level 3+ spells.

IMO. If healing spirit would have started off the way it was errated people would go - it’s a situationally strong healing option for the Druid That is still fairly efficient for slot level for out of combat healing along with a nice in combat whack a mole value. That’s cool. Solid spell. The only issue is that it started out super strong and people hate when their toys are taken away. IMO.

[KorvinStarmast]

Prayer of Healing: 2nd-level evocation Casting Time: 10 minutes
Range: 30 feet Components: V Duration: Instantaneous


Up to six creatures of your choice that you can see within range each regain hit points equal to 2d8 + your spellcasting ability modifier. This spell has no effect on undead or constructs. At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 3rd level or higher, the healing increases by 1d8 for each slot level above 2nd. It's a decent out of combat spell. In a party of six PC's, (and also a paladin's steed) after a tough fight, 2d8+4 (we were fifth level) for all of us was a very nice boost ... and ... since I was playing a life cleric, we added the disciple of life bonus. :smallbiggrin: (Which made each party member and the steed heal 2d8 +8.

But, that's out of combat.

One of the reasons I like Life clerics is the other feature: Preserve Life

As an action, you present your holy symbol and evoke healing energy that can restore a number of hit points equal to five times your cleric level. Choose any creatures within 30 feet of you, and divide those hit points among them. This feature can restore a creature to no more than half of its hit point maximum If spiritual weapon is already up, nice to get a couple of allies up off the floor with an action while whacking with spiritual weapon ... during a fight ... granted, it does prevent turning undead before you take your next short rest.

[Keravath]

And now a healing spirit at level 3 with 18 Wisdom heals for 10d6 (35). Cure wounds at level 3 heals 3d8+4 (17.5)

Not useless, you're just cherry picking the worst situation for your comparison. It's still very potent, it's just no longer the best healing spell in the game.



I would argue that Disciple of Life is the ability that is out of line and should be brought down with an errata. 5e isn't designed to have a heal bot, and should embrace that instead of leaving a single ability that allows it effectively.

Your example shows me that they saw what the old wording allowed and fixed it in future abilities, but didn't take the appropriate step to fix the original.

I would argue that there is nothing wrong with Disciple of Life. At all.

In 99% of situations, disciple of life represents a very small but maybe useful boost to healing and since healing in 5e is generally a bad strategy due to the amount of damage received exceeding significantly the hit points that can be restored by spells and the hard base at 0 hit points. (That is a topic for another thread).

The only complaints I have ever seen about disciple of life occur in two instances ...

1) Combination of disciple of life and goodberry for a mutlclass life cleric/ranger or life cleric/druid. Some DMs allow it, some don't. It is specifically called out by the Sage Advice Compendium as being allowed.
2) Combined with the pre-nerf healing spirit :) .. Disciple of life combined with healing spirit turns every d6 into d6+4 actually more than doubling the average damage restored by the spell. Honestly, it is still a good combination with the post-nerf healing spirit too.

Having just DMed a campaign with a druid/cleric creating massive numbers of goodberries, I still don't think it is "broken". Characters just start every encounter with full hit points. That is all. That is also all that the pre-nerf healing spirit tended to do. Yes, it requires the DM to make adjustments to encounters if they were originally designed based on attrition of hit points and resources over the course of the adventuring day.

However, I've never really found that tactic in DMing to work very well on a regular basis. If you push the players to very low resource levels and hit points, one of two things happen, the players turtle up and find a place for a long rest to restore resources or if that isn't possible then there will be more encounters with the party at reduced resources and luck will play a much larger role leading to an increased probability of character's dying or a TPK occurring.

Anyway, the bottom line for me ... Disciple of Life is not broken, the original healing spirit wasn't broken but it did make healing between combats much less resource intensive. However, I am also fine with the revised version, it isn't that big a deal either way in my opinion.

[Segev]

If the DM is having troubles because of healing spirit, then Leomund's tiny hut will utterly wreck his games.

[Frogreaver]

If the DM is having troubles because of healing spirit, then Leomund's tiny hut will utterly wreck his games.

It’s a lot easier to have the world change in an 8 hour span than in a 1 minute span. Which is to say - tiny hut isn’t nearly the issue that quick resource recovery abilities tend to be.

[clearstream]

If the DM is having troubles because of healing spirit, then Leomund's tiny hut will utterly wreck his games.
Segev's law: If the number of problematic things is greater than one, then the number of problematic things that should be fixed equals zero.

[Cybren]

No ones gonna contest the weird assertion that 10 minutes is somehow the same as 60 minutes?

[Segev]

It’s a lot easier to have the world change in an 8 hour span than in a 1 minute span. Which is to say - tiny hut isn’t nearly the issue that quick resource recovery abilities tend to be.

In my experience, it's rarely so easy to have it change in a manner that the PCs dislike, unless you have a very immediate timer. Give them a timer that's ticking towards a more-distant thing, and they'll keep going with confidence in their time-management skills. Or simply not caring about the deadline if it doesn't impact them personally enough.

Moreover, the "dreaded" pile-on from all the dungeon monsters discovering it isn't all that threatening when they can use it as "Leomund's tiny archery blind" and a fortress that all but the caster can run in and out of. As a ritual, it can even be recast well before it runs out.

This isn't complaining about Leomund's tiny hut. But it is acknowledging that it poses a significant problem for DMs who rely on resource attrition to the point that a full-heal spell is unacceptable. (Though I agree that it being a full-party full-heal for one level 2 spell slot likely was NOT intended; if it were, it'd have had behavior more like prayer of healing, just with actually worth-while amounts of healing.) Random encounters are usually how you prevent parties from stopping and resting for a full day aver a "15 minute adventuring day." Leomund's tiny hut makes random encounters that don't withdraw into easy XP and loot, as they can't actually hurt the PCs. It does make dispel magic on monsters and NPC enemies scarier, but that's just a resource requirement the DM has to give things if he wants to use the same tactics he did before the party got the spell.

In that light, healing spirit at least expends a resource and prevents the PCs from replenishing all of them.

[MrCharlie]

Errata is not bad. If you don't like an Errata, don't use it.

Just wanted to say that because it's rapidly devolved into another of those discussions, and I feel the need to make it clear that I disagree with that echo chamber.

Healing spirit was a classic example of a spell needing errata. It healed more than any other spell out of combat in any circumstance, and a comparable amount in combat.

All that said, it's now use poor, and the fix is probably to tune it back a bit-the once per round limiter would have been ideal, but that ship has sailed. I'd just accept the rare situations where plopping it on someone and yo-yoing them through deaths door for five rounds is ideal as its niche.

[clearstream]

I'd just accept the rare situations where plopping it on someone and yo-yoing them through deaths door for five rounds is ideal as its niche.
That's an interesting thought. The tick per turn is not a bug, but a useful feature.

Our combats typically run from 2 to 10 rounds. The spell ticks at start of turn. For three or four rounds, each time the character is downed, they get back up again and take an action. Of course, attacks while they are down will likely be crits, so creatures with three or more attacks between them might still be able to kill them. Creatures with one or two attacks will struggle, however.

[JackPhoenix]

Designer of the rules system says it works.

No, he says he would allow it in his game. That's not the same as saying it works by RAW or RAI. Not the first, nor the last time one of the designers says he would allow a thing that goes against the rules.

[DarknessEternal]

Hahahaha, that errata is asinine.

I'll just keep using the printed version since it's perfectly fine.

[MaxWilson]

I don't mind it being nerfed but I think they went about it in entirely the wrong way.

Simply limiting it to healing once-per-round (which many were using as a house-rule anyway) would have fixed it completely without hammering it into the ground.

From experience with that house rule, it is not nearly enough. It's still game-distorting.

Post-nerf healing spirit still has an interesting niche in pop-up healing and multi-target healing (similar to Mass Healing Word), if your DM is using vanilla PHB rules on never going below zero HP. Remember that it's still a bonus action spell which repeatedly heals whoever enters or starts their turn in its space, and it's movable. It's better than Aura of Vitality at in-combat healing, and has a better action economy than Cure Wounds. In some ways it's equivalent to the 7th level Regeneration spell (prevent your buddy from losing his turn, regardless of the initiative order, unlike Cure Wounds/Healing Word) , just with concentration.

This is the niche the designers apparently originally intended for it--it's not SUPPOSED to be an Aura of Vitality competitor, it's a Mass Healing Word competitor, better in some ways and worse in others.

Pre-nerf it was all that and ten times more, which was ridiculous. Other PCs didn't even need to spend spells or abilities on most encounters, it was more efficient to just burn HP and heal them with Healing Spirit even on a bog-standard Moon Druid who isn't specialized for healing. (At least Aura of Vitality takes effort to acquire, unless you play with Tasha's rules.)

The only thing I agree with the OP on is that the Healing Spirit nerf was a patch, not mere errata.

[TyGuy]

Where do you guys stand on the proposed house rule from right after WotC realized their mistake?

It was [2xCasting mod] number of ticks.
I liked and still like that fix best.

[Segev]

Really, for the use-case it seemed designed for (in-combat healing), I think it should have permitted the expenditure and rolling of 1 hit die per instance of healing, and you heal that much. It now has a cost that keeps it from being the best out-of-combat healing around, but a boon to permit hit dice to be used in combat-time.

[Captain Panda]

I agree with a lot of your points, but not your conclusion. I think your points are in some cases true but just have little bearing on whether healing spirit deserved the nerf it did.


Well it deserved a nerf. The one it got simply tossed the spell's viability into a wood chipper.



A lot of classes have damage mitigation tools like cutting words, ancestral guardian rage, the aid spell and so on. If HP loss is basically a negligable loss of party resources as the party can recover these so easily through a single spell then these abilities and these classes and this playstyle becomes devalued unless every fight is an epic one that needs the abilities... which then tips the balance heavily towards the resource focussed classes that can have a bigger impact in a smaller number of fights.


That's a really good point, and is totally fair, accurate, and true in my experience. I'll concede that one.



4. Healing spirit helped prevent frustrating player retreats.
So healing spitit does help prevent retreats. Whether such things are "frustrating" is subjective. Do you want to play a game where you never have to decide to retreat? Where you can never fail? Where stepping back to survive is a meaningful choice as it is actually possible for your PCs to die? If so, retreat is part of that game. If not then I can see your point - you chose not to play that more lethal syle of game because you don't like retreating and this spell is consistent with that. I actually don't have a problem with that. What I do have a problem with is one person getting to decide for the whole party that they don't want to play that style of game by taking one spell. This really comes down to game-style preference.


I think that framing is inaccurate, or misses my point.

What frustrates me about player retreats when I DM isn't that it implies that the group has failed. If the group gets halfway through, is exhausted, and realizes their outgunned and retreats, I think that's great. Come back later when you're stronger. However, typically when the group retreats they then pop tiny hut, and then I am forced to either contrive some nonsense to attack them in the forest (next to nothing can get through that hut, so it really is a reach and all involved know that, including me) or sigh heavily, give them an annoyed look, and inform them that they get a rest in. Then they're back to full, and have all their resources back and not just their hp. So either the dungeon has just been made a lot easier (trivial, if they're willing to do it more than once), or I have to artificially scale things up to compensate for these Sleepy Johnny's who need their blanky and pillow after ten minutes in the Crypt of Haunted Monkeys, or whatever it is.

I try to discourage this, I can make sure the monsters inside the dungeon are ready to ambush them if the party does this repeatedly, I can have them make off with the treasure so the dungeon is empty, but these solutions don't always work. Undead are too dumb to do that, for example, as are constructs, both fairly common enemy types. Maybe this is just subjective, but I strongly prefer just having the ranger throw down a cloud of healing and having them push forward than having to deal with long rest spam. For my games it solved a real problem I'd had in the past.



5. Opportunity costs and book changes. Was this really necessary?
I have a lot of sympathy with your point here. It sucks to have a spell or a feature changed out underneath you. Yes people can have different perspectives and it can be tough to keep up with errata.

I think the spell was causing enough problems and distorting the game enough to justify this; I certainly have enjoyed games more both prior to healing spirit and after the fix to it. Obviously this is a small sample of people and games and there is no shortage of other explanations but it seems a decent enough fix.


I think that part of the fix was also made with future content in mind. The ranger was is a bad place when healing spirit got out and a lot of work and buffs were being made to bring the class into line. HS was one, the more powerful subclasses from Xanathar's were others. Then I think that the fixes to Healing Spirit came as other changes were being contemplated to the ranger; the kind we saw with alternative class features.

Well, to each their own. I don't think breaking the spell this badly was necessary even if they were dead set on caving and nerfing the spell, and in principle I do not think that rendering major parts of previously printed products significantly worse is a good practice. At least not unless they're going to send people free copies with updates if they start making more major changes.

[MaxWilson]

What frustrates me about player retreats when I DM isn't that it implies that the group has failed. If the group gets halfway through, is exhausted, and realizes their outgunned and retreats, I think that's great. Come back later when you're stronger. However, typically when the group retreats they then pop tiny hut, and then I am forced to either contrive some nonsense to attack them in the forest (next to nothing can get through that hut, so it really is a reach and all involved know that, including me) or sigh heavily, give them an annoyed look, and inform them that they get a rest in. Then they're back to full, and have all their resources back and not just their hp. So either the dungeon has just been made a lot easier (trivial, if they're willing to do it more than once), or I have to artificially scale things up to compensate for these Sleepy Johnny's who need their blanky and pillow after ten minutes in the Crypt of Haunted Monkeys, or whatever it is.

It sounds like your real problem is that you're treating Leomund's Tiny Hut, a 3rd level ritual, as if it has the same "It is immune to all damage" clause as Wall of Force. It's a hut, made out of force, but if you treat it like a hut (sturdy but not invulnerable), and run adventures according to gameworld logic (which means sometimes there will be consequences to a 24-hour delay, like kidnappers getting away or monsters concentrating their strength), it's not problematic.

IME, most WotC-ish adventurers are built around monsters senselessly defeating themselves in detail by scattering themselves around in penny packets, two ogres here and a troll there and some ghouls over here and a mummy lord and two mummies there. If the players give the monsters 24 hours to notice their presence and concentrate their forces (evacuate treasure, dig ditches, block doors, send messengers to the nearby gnoll clan, etc.), the players will have lost the element of surprise, and fighting the ogres, troll, ghouls, mummies, and mummy lord all at once is a lot harder than fighting them separately.


I think that part of the fix was also made with future content in mind. The ranger was is a bad place when healing spirit got out and a lot of work and buffs were being made to bring the class into line. HS was one, the more powerful subclasses from Xanathar's were others. Then I think that the fixes to Healing Spirit came as other changes were being contemplated tot he ranger; the kind we saw with alternative class features.

If only future content had learned the lesson. But no, Tasha's rules give out Aura of Vitality to every druid and cleric in the game. I mean, at least they gated it behind a "this is not automatic" clause and a "you must consult with your DM" clause, but still, it's likely to have much the same power-creepy effect on gameplay that Healing Spirit v1 did although not quite as early or quite as bad... one more reason not to use Tasha's I guess.

[meandean]

in principle I do not think that rendering major parts of previously printed products significantly worse is a good practice. At least not unless they're going to send people free copies with updates if they start making more major changes.WotC doesn't think that's good practice either. Look at the conniptions they've gone through with the ranger. Imagine you're totally new to the game and buy the PHB and Tasha's. Do you think you could figure out how a ranger works? Your head is already reeling from 300 pages of brand-new PHB terminology and concepts. Then you're asked to interpret three pages of dense, carefully worded "options" that allegedly work alongside some of these crazy rules you barely understand to begin with, but in reality replace those rules.

If that wouldn't be quite the challenge for you, you should probably get a job as a technical writer. But hey, at least WotC never said that something people paid for has become outdated, right?

They've made it clear, both in words and action, that they're not going to invalidate printed material unless they screwed up so badly as to break the game beyond repair. They just thought Healing Spirit was such a case. You disagree that it was, which is fine. That doesn't change the fact that, in their own minds, that's still the criteria.

[Captain Panda]

You disagree that it was, which is fine. That doesn't change the fact that, in their own minds, that's still the criteria.

It's actually pretty clear they didn't think so, because they made multiple points saying that it healing lots out of combat is fine, and that they assume players will go into fights with full hp. They did this nerf not because they thought the spell was broken, but because there was a loud community uproar. Which there was.

[MaxWilson]

It's actually pretty clear they didn't think so, because they made multiple points saying that it healing lots out of combat is fine, and that they assume players will go into fights with full hp. They did this nerf not because they thought the spell was broken, but because there was a loud community uproar. Which there was.

So... feedback from actual players persuaded WotC to change their minds and decide despite initial skepticism that the spell was breaking the game badly enough to actually rewrite it? Sounds like the spell was really broken. They haven't even rewritten Simulacrum despite it being incredibly broken (maybe because it's high-level and WotC doesn't believe high-level play actually occurs often).

[Captain Panda]

So... feedback from actual players persuaded WotC to change their minds and decide despite initial skepticism that the spell was breaking the game badly enough to actually rewrite it? Sounds like the spell was really broken. They haven't even rewritten Simulacrum despite it being incredibly broken (maybe because it's high-level and WotC doesn't believe high-level play actually occurs often).

Simulacrum is broken... but AWESOME! It's a high level spell, leave wizards alone.

[KorvinStarmast]

Simulacrum is broken... but AWESOME! It's a high level spell, leave wizards alone. If our campaign lasts that long, my lore bard will take it when magical secrets allows her two.

"Hey, look at me, and get a load of my gorgeous twin sister!" More fun than a barrel of monkeys, say I.

[ProsecutorGodot]

If our campaign lasts that long, my lore bard will take it when magical secrets allows her two.

"Hey, look at me, and get a load of my gorgeous twin sister!" More fun than a barrel of monkeys, say I.

I'm shocked that our Sorcerer hasn't Wished for one because unless I'm completely forgetting it, our DM did not veto that use.

In fact, knowing the DM and the player of the Sorcerer for as long as I have, the DM would probably be overjoyed to see the Sorcerer making more sound decisions finally at level 18. Then he'd probably kill the combo.

On thread topic: our currently on extended hiatus SKT campaign had any and all threats of encounter fatigue killed and buried by the Ranger having HS. I believe I've mentioned this before (in a different thread) but HS played a significant role in enabling us to successfully assassinate the Frost Giant leader.

We weren't reasonably prepared for the encounter in retrospect but the fact that we could storm their stronghold without pausing for more than a minute to fully heal after an encounter moved us into position faster than news could travel about intruders.

If I could recognize at the time that this spell was so powerful, that campaign being my very first extended campaign into DND, then it was probably an issue. With the experience I have now, I'd be drooling to have a Ranger or Druid on hand to fill up our current parties ring of spell storing with one that functioned pre-errata. An easily accessible 2nd level healing spell that outperforms anything our 18th level party has at the moment? I can carry two of them?

[SharkForce]

...and that's the exaggeration I was referring to.
if the game fundamentally changes for groups that have the spell, how is the spell *not* warping the game around itself?


"Corrected life cleric." I just don't get the attitude that they should "correct" books that have been in print for years and have two versions of the same book floating around. Sounds like a bad idea, to me.
news flash: there already *are* multiple versions of the book floating around. I think we're up to at least 3, at this point. this is nothing new to the industry, or even to D&D; things get corrected because the quality of your product matters.
I have AD&D 2nd edition books that are different from my friend's copy of the books. different page numbers, sometimes the rules in each book are different, and frankly, so far as I'm concerned I would rather have a company that thinks it is important to have the best product possible than a company that is concerned that we might be completely and utterly incapable of functioning unless every single line in our books is identical.


Yeah, that's just incorrect. Hit points are not your only resource. A wizard with no spell slots but full hp in the last room of a dungeon is still a pretty ineffective wizard. Healing spirit may slow the expenditure of spell slots, but you're still going to burn through them as you progress.
never said they were, so yes, that complete and utter fabrication of pure BS that you just invented is indeed false. I said that you can use healing spirit to reduce an entire encounter down to the question of how many hit points it will cost if you don't expend other resources, and if that answer is anything less than "all of them", healing spirit allows you to reduce the entire cost down to a single spell slot, probably a relatively low level one at that, by simply choosing to expend no other resources. now kindly stop putting words in my mouth.


I think that's another example of the exaggeration and groupthink I was talking about. Hit dice are useful only for healing, and a short rest also gives your party back necessary resources (action surge, wild shape uses, channel divinity). If you're low level and run out of hit dice and goodberries, the druid can wildly overheal the group with a level 2 spell slot. Sure, it only takes a minute, but you don't get back any important resources and it costs you a use of another spell instead.

Later in the game, in tiers 3 and 4, it is over tuned and affects gameplay because the amount of healing can actually be utilized fully. But at the levels most people seem to actually play? Total overreaction. People calculating how much it can heal if cast at level 6+? Who cares? No one ever used it at 6+. You only have so many hit points to heal, and there are a lot of ways to get them back.
you don't need any of those other resources unless the encounter is dangerous enough to cost all your hit points when you have a spell like healing spirit around. it does the job more efficiently and has all kinds of massive advantages in how effective it is. it makes the game less fun if you play it that way, but that's hardly an argument to keep the spell around in its original form either.

as to being a full party heal at 10d6... no. it isn't. not even close. I recently started to DM for my two nephews. between their two characters at level 2, they had almost 50 hit points. they've just hit level 3, and logically they'll have around 70 or more now. a 2-person level 3 party already has *far* more than 35 hit points. in a party of 4 or 5, it isn't implausible that they'll have more than 35 hit points combined at level *one*.



I mean, I state flatly that it was over tuned. My point, that I stated enough times that I am wondering if you read the OP, was that the correction was wild overkill and very clearly not "errata," but a patch. And again, that's the exaggeration I keep referencing. "OMG, SO BROKEN! WARPS THE ENTIRE GAME!"

No it didn't. That doesn't mean it was a well-implemented spell, clearly they didn't playtest it, but it didn't break the game. Having it gone also doesn't break the game, but it does set a bad precedent for treating products that have been released and paid for as playtest material they can change.
the game was explicitly designed to be a game where you can go into a dungeon, have several encounters over the course of an adventuring day, and gradually run out of resources making those challenges actually mean anything. if you double the resource efficiency of your resource expenditure with the introduction of a single spell, you have functionally removed that style of play from the game. if you take it to the point where basically one person can pay for the full day's resources solo, that's killed it to the point where not only is that style of play dead, but it is blindingly obvious to anyone watching who's doing it.


Again, missing the point.

Post-errata healing spirit is a slow, concentration spell. It should therefore do more healing than a level 2 cure wounds. It should do more healing than a level 5 mass cure wounds if upcast to 5. That is not to say that mass cure wounds always heals for max, of course it doesn't. That's not to say healing spirit should be a "better" spell than mass cure wounds, high level spells should be better than upcast low spells. But 'better' in this case is not just a matter of numbers. Healing spirit also rarely heals for max, and yes, nerfed healing spirit has a higher percentage of effective healing than the aoe heals. That isn't the point.
I'm not sure why I should care. the spell was far too good at what it did. it needed nerfing. it is better for the health of the game that the spell never existed than it is for the spell to exist in anything even remotely approaching the state that it was in. if the spell never existed, D&D would be perfectly fine. when the spell was introduced, it ruined a style of play that the game is explicitly supposed to be designed to handle. if they had literally removed the spell entirely and said that it no longer exists, it would not be any significant loss to the game. if they made the spell not that great, I frankly can't say that I particularly care. it is good enough even in its current form to not be an absolute trap spell, so quite frankly, it's current form is not really an issue worth worrying about, any more than, say, demanding a massive buff to longstrider. is longstrider amazing? nope. is it a spell that every person should be excited to have access to? nope. is it good enough that if someone takes it, it does what it promises and doesn't screw them over? yes. that's about the state of the revised healing spirit. decent enough if someone chooses it without spending too much time analyzing what is the absolute best spell possible. it could have been a little stronger, but the fact that it isn't stronger doesn't really hurt the game, so it isn't really a bother.

in contrast, the way the spell used to be *was* a problem. they probably overreacted a little. but it really isn't a big deal. it is better for the state of the game that they overnerf than undernerf, in that case.

if that means some people will never ever use it under any circumstances, oh well. it's a single spell that is not particularly iconic or important to the genre. if it remains unimproved from its current state, that's perfectly fine, just like it's perfectly fine for erupting earth to be basically worse at its job than fireball. D&D has an abundance of "meh" spells. I see no reason to get worked up over the idea that a spell that was absurdly overtuned should become mediocre instead of becoming a more reasonable "best in role".

[clearstream]

I'm not sure why I should care. the spell was far too good at what it did. it needed nerfing. it is better for the health of the game that the spell never existed than it is for the spell to exist in anything even remotely approaching the state that it was in. if the spell never existed, D&D would be perfectly fine. when the spell was introduced, it ruined a style of play that the game is explicitly supposed to be designed to handle. if they had literally removed the spell entirely and said that it no longer exists, it would not be any significant loss to the game. if they made the spell not that great, I frankly can't say that I particularly care. it is good enough even in its current form to not be an absolute trap spell, so quite frankly, it's current form is not really an issue worth worrying about, any more than, say, demanding a massive buff to longstrider. is longstrider amazing? nope. is it a spell that every person should be excited to have access to? nope. is it good enough that if someone takes it, it does what it promises and doesn't screw them over? yes. that's about the state of the revised healing spirit. decent enough if someone chooses it without spending too much time analyzing what is the absolute best spell possible. it could have been a little stronger, but the fact that it isn't stronger doesn't really hurt the game, so it isn't really a bother.

in contrast, the way the spell used to be *was* a problem. they probably overreacted a little. but it really isn't a big deal. it is better for the state of the game that they overnerf than undernerf, in that case.

if that means some people will never ever use it under any circumstances, oh well. it's a single spell that is not particularly iconic or important to the genre. if it remains unimproved from its current state, that's perfectly fine, just like it's perfectly fine for erupting earth to be basically worse at its job than fireball. D&D has an abundance of "meh" spells. I see no reason to get worked up over the idea that a spell that was absurdly overtuned should become mediocre instead of becoming a more reasonable "best in role".
That's part of what I intended to allude to with questions about design space. For me to care that the spell is no better than "meh", I'd like to first know what open design space it is filling that can genuinely benefit play.

If HS is strictly worse than another spell filling the same design space, just cast that other spell.

[Segev]

To be fair, if the spell is meant to be rendered worthless by the nerf, then they really should have just been honest and removed it, rather than nerfed it to be a trap option. (I do not think the intent was to render it worthless; I think the over-reaction did not achieve their goals.)

If you agree that it's now a trap option, you should agree with the OP that the nerf was bad, even if you think it was better than leaving the spell as it was.

[clearstream]

To be fair, if the spell is meant to be rendered worthless by the nerf, then they really should have just been honest and removed it, rather than nerfed it to be a trap option. (I do not think the intent was to render it worthless; I think the over-reaction did not achieve their goals.)

If you agree that it's now a trap option, you should agree with the OP that the nerf was bad, even if you think it was better than leaving the spell as it was.
It hasn't so far been a trap option for the Druid in my campaign. And I suppose that could reveal something. Each table is specific: those theoretically better spells are not available to every group.

The party I DM has
-- Scout rogue 7th
-- Glamour bard 7th
-- Battle Master fighter 7th
-- Circle of Land druid 6th
-- Arcane Trickster rogue 6th

With their options being - healing potion, healing word, goodberry (but no familiars) and healing spirit - the party has so far found the spell useful. Maybe at higher levels that will change.

[ProsecutorGodot]

To be fair, if the spell is meant to be rendered worthless by the nerf, then they really should have just been honest and removed it, rather than nerfed it to be a trap option. (I do not think the intent was to render it worthless; I think the over-reaction did not achieve their goals.)

If you agree that it's now a trap option, you should agree with the OP that the nerf was bad, even if you think it was better than leaving the spell as it was.

I'd find it hard to argue it's any more of a trap option than Cure Wounds is. To be clear, I don't think either are.

Healing is generally inefficient but I can't think of a healing spell that is completely worthless. The spell still stands out to me as being on the more efficient side of healing spells.

[Osuniev]

I think the new Healing Spirit is still a really good Healing Spell. It is supposed to be used IN COMBAT, of course. In combat, it's often much better than most other options (Cure Wounds, potions...) because it doesn't cost an action and can be done at range. Any comparison with other spells that doesn't acknowledge that os either dishonest, or missed a part of the spell...

Yes, it's more expensive in terms of cost/ressource than Healing Word. Well, good thing : HW is a bit too good.

Healing Spirit is still good for a Druid which goes in animal shape, or for a ranger who doesn't have Healing Word.

Just because the spell is now less useful OUT OF COMBAT means the fix is working as intended.


Also, I'm a DM who plays with Gritty Realism and does games of attrition.Healing Spirit pre-errata should have destroyed most challenges in my last 2 campaigns. Was it fixable ? Of course. But I'm still glad my players didn't have it, and that I don't need to ban/houserule the spell any more.

[KorvinStarmast]

[QUOTE]Yes, it's more expensive in terms of cost/ressource than Healing Word. Well, good thing : HW is a bit too good.
It's just right. :smallyuk:

Healing Spirit is still good for a Druid which goes in animal shape, or for a ranger who doesn't have Healing Word. Concur. My gloom stalker took it, the party got benefit from it.

[Captain Panda]

I'd find it hard to argue it's any more of a trap option than Cure Wounds is. To be clear, I don't think either are.

Healing is generally inefficient but I can't think of a healing spell that is completely worthless. The spell still stands out to me as being on the more efficient side of healing spells.



I think the new Healing Spirit is still a really good Healing Spell. It is supposed to be used IN COMBAT, of course. In combat, it's often much better than most other options (Cure Wounds, potions...) because it doesn't cost an action and can be done at range. Any comparison with other spells that doesn't acknowledge that os either dishonest, or missed a part of the spell...

Healing Spirit is still good for a Druid which goes in animal shape, or for a ranger who doesn't have Healing Word.


No, healing spirit is a trap spell that should be avoided. These are both takes that are from people who clearly don't play druids. Not saying that to be mean, but I do think it's made obvious from the arguments here.

"Oh boy, what a great spell, it's a ranged bonus action heal! So much better than cure wounds! I can concentrate on it as a bear!"

If you're level 5+ and concentrating on the current healing spirit in a fight, you have fallen into a trap option. No, not hyperbole, I mean that. Healing spirit is just not a spell it is worth casting in combat, and this was true before it got chucked into the garbage disposal.

Concentration spells are how druids impact combat. That's why a spell like erupting earth, which is a terrible pick for a wizard, is a great pick for a druid: spells that are decent and don't have the concentration tag are great because you can cast them without it preventing you from doing your actually useful things, and if the spell has a concentration tag it needs to be very solid to even be considered. Look at what else you could be doing for your team if you picked a decent concentration spell:

Heat metal: You'll do damage with no save, and if you target a weapon the target is either going to be disarmed or swinging at a disadvantage. One or two misses from that and you have out "healed" healing spirit, and done decent damage.

Spike growth: If you can catch even a couple enemies without strong ranged attacks in this at a bit of distance, you can stop them cold. At bare minimum it's easy to use to slow something down so it has to dash for a turn and take some damage. One ogre gets caught by this for one turn and you have outperformed healing spirit in damage prevented.

Conjure Animals: And if you have this one, this is what you should be concentrating on. It lasts an hour, you should be able to get 3-4 fights of usefulness out of this. That's 3-4 combats you have a wall of meat to protect you in addition to doing top tier dps for the level.

Further, healing spirit does not let you immediately heal as a bonus action as people seem to keep suggesting. You can move the spirit as a bonus action, they are not healed until the start of their turn or they move into the spirit. Know what that means? It means you better hope that Johnny the Injured Fighter goes before the three ornery kobolds, because if there is a conspicuous healing blob hovering over Johnny's prone form and then the kobolds go, they are going to repeatedly kick Johnny in the face. You can't yo-yo a corpse. Aura of Vitality can yo-yo, healing spirit is not going to serve the same function reliably.

[MaxWilson]

Further, healing spirit does not let you immediately heal as a bonus action as people seem to keep suggesting. You can move the spirit as a bonus action, they are not healed until the start of their turn or they move into the spirit. Know what that means? It means you better hope that Johnny the Injured Fighter goes before the three ornery kobolds, because if there is a conspicuous healing blob hovering over Johnny's prone form and then the kobolds go, they are going to repeatedly kick Johnny in the face. You can't yo-yo a corpse. Aura of Vitality can yo-yo, healing spirit is not going to serve the same function reliably.

This is actually an advantage if you're using PHB initiative. How often have you seen a situation like this:

Initiative order is Fighter, Healer (e.g. Bard, Cleric), Monster.

Fighter goes down to 0 HP.
Healer heals Fighter with Healing Word (or whatever). Fighter is still prone.
Monster knocks Fighter down to 0 HP again (with advantage because prone), then attacks the healer.
Fighter makes a death save. Doesn't get to do anything else.
Healer heals Fighter if not dead.
Monster knocks Fighter down to 0 HP again. Etc.

It's really frustrating as a cleric to be in a situation where the initiative order, of all things, is preventing you from cooperating effectively with your allies. Wouldn't it be great if you could somehow delay your Healing Word to (almost) guarantee that the Fighter will get a turn (get to stand up, Dodge, Second Wind, attack back, etc.)? Healing Spirit does that.

And of course it's not just for Fighters. If you're a Beastmaster Ranger who wants to make sure your Giant Poisonous Snake doesn't go down permanently during a fight, cast a Healing Spirit with your bonus action on the Giant Poisonous Snake and keep on shooting at the bad guys. This appears to the intended usage of Healing Spirit, judging from WotC employee Tweets when the spell was first released. It's a combat buff.

[Captain Panda]

This is actually an advantage if you're using PHB initiative. How often have you seen a situation like this:

Initiative order is Fighter, Healer (e.g. Bard, Cleric), Monster.


But using your own example, this is a horrible initiative setup to use healing spirit.

Fighter starts at 0 hp.
Healer throws down healing spirit.
Monster kicks fighter in the face just once.
Fighter rolls under a 10.

Now your fighter is dead. If you used healing word, the fighter is unconscious. Did he get to swing? No. Is he dead? Also no.

[Segev]

Does healing word have an obvious visual component that says who the target was and what it did? Or is all the kobolds see is the cleric uttering a prayer, and ... nothing happening? The fighter literally can't stand up until his turn, anyway, so lying there playing dead seems a safe bet, as opposed to deliberately drawing attention to the fact that he's going to stand up after the kobolds act.

[MaxWilson]

But using your own example, this is a horrible initiative setup to use healing spirit.

Fighter starts at 0 hp.
Healer throws down healing spirit.
Monster kicks fighter in the face just once.
Fighter rolls under a 10.

Now your fighter is dead. If you used healing word, the fighter is unconscious. Did he get to swing? No. Is he dead? Also no.

By your own example, if the monster is going to kick downed fighters in the face, any other healing spell is also bad: if the monster kicks the fighter in the face twice, Fighter is equally dead.

But if the monster is one that only attacks active targets, Healing Spirit lets the Fighter have a turn. That's its niche. The fact that it's a bonus action heal is just gravy on top: the healer can encourage the monster to attack him instead of the unconscious fighter by e.g. shooting it twice with Sharpshooter, if he's a Ranger.

Will you still deny that the spell has a niche?


Does healing word have an obvious visual component that says who the target was and what it did? Or is all the kobolds see is the cleric uttering a prayer, and ... nothing happening? The fighter literally can't stand up until his turn, anyway, so lying there playing dead seems a safe bet, as opposed to deliberately drawing attention to the fact that he's going to stand up after the kobolds act.

DM's call. 5E leaves many, many things undefined, and detecting the condition/HP/etc. of a character or monster is one of them. Can you fake failing a saving throw against Hold Person? Ask your DM. Can you pretend to drop to 0 HP and fall over prone when wounded? Again, ask your DM. (This would actually be a tactically good move against missile fire even if you didn't play dead. You impose disadvantage on any other incoming missile fire.)

[Captain Panda]

By your own example, if the monster is going to kick downed fighters in the face, any other healing spell is also bad: if the monster kicks the fighter in the face twice, Fighter is equally dead.

But if the monster is one that only attacks active targets, Healing Spirit lets the Fighter have a turn. That's it's niche. The fact that it's a bonus action heal is just gravy on top: the healer can encourage the monster to attack him instead of the unconscious fighter by e.g. shooting it twice with Sharpshooter, if he's a Ranger.

Will you still deny that the spell has a niche?


Yep, still denying it. You should absolutely not prepare this spell under any circumstances. If the niche of a spell has to assume a monster is nice and stops hitting you when you're down, you don't need to worry so much about healing in any case. And yeah, if the monster can hit the fighter to knock him down and then hit him twice, he'll die. So you have a monster with three attacks and they all need to hit for that to work. But if you use healing spirit and the fighter is still down, all you need is two hits, one if the fighter has already failed a save. If you're going to yo-yo heal, you want a heal that heals *now*, not at some point that is uncertain on initiative. Healing word is also a spell level lower and doesn't stop you from concentrating on something decent. You might have a fighter who is dying because you weren't concentrating on a good spell in the first place.

[Frogreaver]

Yep, still denying it. You should absolutely not prepare this spell under any circumstances. If the niche of a spell has to assume a monster is nice and stops hitting you when you're down, you don't need to worry so much about healing in any case. And yeah, if the monster can hit the fighter to knock him down and then hit him twice, he'll die. So you have a monster with three attacks and they all need to hit for that to work. But if you use healing spirit and the fighter is still down, all you need is two hits, one if the fighter has already failed a save. If you're going to yo-yo heal, you want a heal that heals *now*, not at some point that is uncertain on initiative. Healing word is also a spell level lower and doesn't stop you from concentrating on something decent. You might have a fighter who is dying because you weren't concentrating on a good spell in the first place.

Let’s actually compare healing spirit to other level 1 and 2 spells shall we? No level 1 or 2 spell favorably compares to level 3+ spells.

Everything that is good at spell levels 1 and 2 is good only because it applies in a small niche of circumstances.

[KorvinStarmast]

And of course it's not just for Fighters. If you're a Beastmaster Ranger who wants to make sure your Giant Poisonous Snake doesn't go down permanently during a fight, cast a Healing Spirit with your bonus action on the Giant Poisonous Snake and keep on shooting at the bad guys. This appears to the intended usage of Healing Spirit, judging from WotC employee Tweets when the spell was first released. It's a combat buff. If only they'd have made that clear at the outset, but I will say that "all of your spells are concentration" is one of the annoying things for both bard and druid to manage. (In My Experience)

But if the monster is one that only attacks active targets, Healing Spirit lets the Fighter have a turn. That's it's niche. The fact that it's a bonus action heal is just gravy on top: the healer can encourage the monster to attack him instead of the unconscious fighter by e.g. shooting it twice with Sharpshooter, if he's a Ranger.

Will you still deny that the spell has a niche? My Ranger took it and our party was glad he did. We did not have a druid.

Yep, still denying it. You should absolutely not prepare this spell under any circumstances. There are a variety of cases where I'd cast it, particularly if I have allies helping us. Keeping the allies up means more targets for the enemy to choose from ... at levels 2 through 4. That said, as we get to higher levels there is usually a different concentration spell I'd rather have up if I am a druid. (And no, it ain't barkskin). But, as spell slots get exhausted, and you get yet another encounter, having this in a low level slot may be a very nice choice to keep your party upright.

Situational, not "must have"

[Captain Panda]

Let’s actually compare healing spirit to other level 1 and 2 spells shall we? No level 1 or 2 spell favorably compares to level 3+ spells.


I compared it to several spells of equal or lower level and only one that is higher level. Summon beast, heat metal, spike growth are all also level 2 and are all better than healing spirit to have prepared for almost any adventuring day. Cure wounds is a better heal, as is healing word, as you can cast those while conjure animals is active. The relevant point about conjure animals isn't that it's competing with healing spirit for spell level, but that it's competing with healing spirit for concentration, which again, for a druid, is a cost that is difficult to overstate.

[KorvinStarmast]

Let’s actually compare healing spirit to other level 1 and 2 spells shall we? No level 1 or 2 spell favorably compares to level 3+ spells.

Everything that is good at spell levels 1 and 2 is good only because it applies in a small niche of circumstances. FWIW, our Swords Bard still uses Tasha's hideous laughter at level 8. :smallbiggrin: His spell save DC is kinda high, what with him having a 20 Charisma.

[Pex]

Attrition comes in by PCs using up their resources as the game day progresses. Being low on hit points is not a requirement. If original Healing Spirit was a bother it was because it was a level too low or made a druid spell, stealing a bit from the cleric's thunder. It is not the cleric's exclusive job to heal nor be the only thing he does, but it was fine he was the best at it and Healing Spirit took him down a notch. The conga line mantra unfortunately made a bad visual as well. However, I will never accept the DM fear of a party being at max hit points for the non-first combat of the day. The bad guys are, why can't the PCs? They're down the resources spent in earlier combats. That is enough.

[MaxWilson]

Yep, still denying it. You should absolutely not prepare this spell under any circumstances. If the niche of a spell has to assume a monster is nice and stops hitting you when you're down, you don't need to worry so much about healing in any case. And yeah, if the monster can hit the fighter to knock him down and then hit him twice, he'll die. So you have a monster with three attacks and they all need to hit for that to work.

Correction: two attacks.

One to knock him to 0 HP, one to inflict two death crits. Since the Fighter rolls less than 10 on the death save (your assumption, not mine), he's now dead.


The relevant point about conjure animals isn't that it's competing with healing spirit for spell level, but that it's competing with healing spirit for concentration, which again, for a druid, is a cost that is difficult to overstate.

That's true of pretty much every druid spell: Conjure Animals is better whenever it's applicable, except if your DM rules that Pixies are CR 1/4 and that you can choose them, and then Conjure Woodland Creatures is sometimes even better.

It's a good candidate for the best Tier 2 spell in the whole game, and one of the top 5 spells in all of 5E.

[Valmark]

Correction: two attacks.

One to knock him to 0 HP, one to inflict two death crits. Since the Fighter rolls less than 10 on the death save (your assumption, not mine), he's now dead.

That's if the monster crits on the second attack, otherwise they'll need three attacks to inflict two death failures. Unless I misunderstood you.

[Captain Panda]

Correction: two attacks.
That's true of pretty much every druid spell: Conjure Animals is better whenever it's applicable, except if your DM rules that Pixies are CR 1/4 and that you can choose them,


Well, pixies *are* cr 1/4, that requires no ruling, that's RAW. That said, yeah, pixies are busted.



It's a good candidate for the best Tier 2 spell in the whole game, and one of the top 5 spells in all of 5E.

Hell yes it is! This is why people play druids! All hail the king of the jungle!

So if you are level 5+, and can only concentrate on one spell, it isn't healing spirit. Spell obsolete. You could say that's true of other level 2 spells, and you would be... partially correct.

However, I think even on the assumption you are level 4 or you are out of higher level slots that healing spirit is still a trap pick because druids also have great level 2 spells. I actually am trying to be charitable and think of a context in which healing spirit is better to show why it's rare and silly to prepare it assuming that sort of thing is going to happen, but my creativity is actually failing me. I can't think of any situation where you want healing spirit over summon beast, heat metal, or spike growth. Presumably you have healing word and goodberries to do your emergency bandaids, leave that job to those better spells and concentrate on something good.

[Avonar]

That's if the monster crits on the second attack, otherwise they'll need three attacks to inflict two death failures. Unless I misunderstood you.

An attack within 5ft on an unconscious creature is an automatic crit.

[Captain Panda]

An attack within 5ft on an unconscious creature is an automatic crit.

You beat me to it. This.

A lot of people who say healing word is overpowered forget that all a DM has to do to break the habit of relying on yo-yoing is kick them in the face while unconscious. Hell, even doing that once puts someone at a 45% chance to die if they have to roll a save before someone heals them.

[MaxWilson]

---- yes it is! This is why people play druids! All hail the king of the jungle!

So if you are level 5+, and can only concentrate on one spell, it isn't healing spirit. Spell obsolete. You could say that's true of other level 2 spells, and you would be... partially correct.

Not just level 2 spells, pretty much every druid spell that requires concentration including excellent spells like Polymorph and Wrath of Nature. "They nerfed Healing Spirit so hard that it's worse than Conjure Animals" isn't much of a statement since everything is worse than Conjure Animals.


However, I think even on the assumption you are level 4 or you are out of higher level slots that healing spirit is still a trap pick because druids also have great level 2 spells. I actually am trying to be charitable and think of a context in which healing spirit is better to show why it's rare and silly to prepare it assuming that sort of thing is going to happen, but my creativity is actually failing me. I can't think of any situation where you want healing spirit over summon beast, heat metal, or spike growth. Presumably you have healing word and goodberries to do your emergency bandaids, leave that job to those better spells and concentrate on something good.

Spike growth is excellent against hordes of melee monsters.

Heat metal is decent against a single tough creature that wears armor, like a Duergar Despot.

Summon Beast is an okay-ish standin for Arcane Eye or Find Familiar.

Healing Spirit is an okay-ish way to keep someone alive in a fight against a single tough creature if your DM uses vanilla RAW "no negative HP" death saves, especially if you pre-cast it before someone goes down. Unlike Healing Word it doesn't fail in strange ways when the target has better initiative than the healer. Rangers don't have access to Healing Word anyway so it's Hobson's choice: Healing Spirit or nothing.

They're all niche spells, and all pretty decent in their niche.

[Witty Username]

Spike growth doesn't feel very niche to me, unless "good in combat" is a niche. Unless you deal with flying and ranged enemies on a regular basis, spike growth is good against enemies, One tough enemy it will deal some damage and give you a round or 2 to kill it, Since 3 rounds is a good estimate of average combat length, that is all you really need. Also Summon beast is, as I understand, a good way to add damage and impart battlefield control, less enemy dependent more environment dependent than spike growth I would guess.
I feel like I need to explain my reasoning on that last point, Summon beast I feel since it can move and be summoned as a flying creature gives it more flexibility to be useful against flying and ranged attackers, however since it is a creature its battlefield control is limited according to terrain needing hallways, doorways, enclosed spaces and such. Spike Growth on the other hand is useful battlefield control as difficult terrain in of itself somewhat agnostic to the environment, since even if they go around it is still buying time and therefore mitigating damage. However, flying enemies and ranged attackers are not affected much by difficult terrain. Therefore, spike growth is less affected by the environment and Summon Beast is less affected by the type of enemy. In comparison to each other at least.

To the main point, The new healing spirit is only useful in a reasonably well controlled battlefield as a pick up for downed party members, well controlled because the target needs to be safe enough to receive the healing, and the caster needs to be safe/sturdy enough to keep concentration until the heal arrives. Then again, I realize this assessment is only really applicable in games where downed party members are semi-frequent and the DM is willing to attack downed party members.

This may get into why I value the old healing spirit less than other people, I trust mitigation more than healing, I would rather prevent damage being done so I prefer spells to avoid, control, and shorten combat.
--
So, I have a thought that doesn't really fit with the above. Healing word, is pretty comparable to healing spirit, healing spirit heals more and can heal multiple targets while healing word is immediate healing and doesn't require concentration. Now, healing word is a good spell, however if it can perform better than a spell intended to be an upgraded version I feel that is an issue. following in with this thinking, would the new healing spirit as a 1st be a reasonable compromise? I think my only concern would be the strong up cast, and that maybe an adjustment to that to add the number of heals made instead of improving the actual heal amount would be in order.

[MaxWilson]

So, I have a thought that doesn't really fit with the above. Healing word, is pretty comparable to healing spirit, healing spirit heals more and can heal multiple targets while healing word is immediate healing and doesn't require concentration. Now, healing word is a good spell, however if it can perform better than a spell intended to be an upgraded version I feel that is an issue. following in with this thinking, would the new healing spirit as a 1st be a reasonable compromise? I think my only concern would be the strong up cast, and that maybe an adjustment to that to add the number of heals made instead of improving the actual heal amount would be in order.

No, that would not be a reasonable compromise. Healing Word prevents you from casting other non-cantrips on every round you heal someone, and it heals less total damage than Healing Word does too (up to 6d6(21) for Healing Spirit vs. up to d4+5 (9) for Healing Word, or d8+5 (11) for Cure Wounds). Level 1 Healing Spirit would be the undisputed king of 1st level healing spells starting from PC level 1. That's not a compromise, it's virtual coup d'etat.

[Witty Username]

No, that would not be a reasonable compromise. Healing Word prevents you from casting other non-cantrips on every round you heal someone, and it heals less total damage than Healing Word does too (up to 6d6(21) for Healing Spirit vs. up to d4+5 (9) for Healing Word, or d8+5 (11) for Cure Wounds). Level 1 Healing Spirit would be the undisputed king of 1st level healing spells starting from PC level 1. That's not a compromise, it's virtual coup d'etat.
The blood is returning to my frontal lobe, I am realizing I said a stupid.

I think I would still want healing word for this situation though:
initiative
1. Druid
2. Ogre A in melee range of the fighter
3. Ogre B in melee range of the fighter
4. the fighter a 0 hp.
But that is more an expression of my frustration with using healing spirit in combat, rather than any judgement of its power level in comparison to healing word.

[Frogreaver]

So if you are level 5+, and can only concentrate on one spell, it isn't healing spirit. Spell obsolete. You could say that's true of other level 2 spells, and you would be... partially correct.

99% of spells in the game are obsolete with that logic.


However, I think even on the assumption you are level 4 or you are out of higher level slots that healing spirit is still a trap pick because druids also have great level 2 spells.

There's a bunch of extremely niche level 2 spells

Heat Metal is niche
Spike growth is niche

Healing Spirit is much less niche than those spells

[Witty Username]

Let’s actually compare healing spirit to other level 1 and 2 spells shall we? No level 1 or 2 spell favorably compares to level 3+ spells.

Everything that is good at spell levels 1 and 2 is good only because it applies in a small niche of circumstances.
On the druid list?
Entangle, Faerie Fire, and Moon beam. I would also argue Pass without trace, starting every combat as an ambush in the next hour is really good generally.
On the ranger list?
Hunter's mark and Rope Trick(I know it is only for gloom stalkers but it is probably the best 2nd level recovery spell).

Now you may disagree, but I would argue that healing spirit is worse than all of these spells, and none of them are more niche then it. All of them are spells many people are willing to use all the time.

[ProsecutorGodot]

On the druid list?
Entangle, Faerie Fire, and Moon beam. I would also argue Pass without trace, starting every combat as an ambush in the next hour is really good generally.
On the ranger list?
Hunter's mark and Rope Trick(I know it is only for gloom stalkers but it is probably the best 2nd level recovery spell).

Now you may disagree, but I would argue that healing spirit is worse than all of these spells, and none of them are more niche then it. All of them are spells many people are willing to use all the time.

Faerie Fire and Moonbeam are both only okay without their fringe use cases, which are very niche (exposing invisibility or shapechangers respectively for those possibly unaware)

Rope Trick also relies on expending further resources to actually be a "recovery" spell. In instances where you don't have those resources, Rope Trick is pretty pointless, perhaps a functional way to hide but not useful beyond that.

Are those all useful spells that I would want to have prepared? Certainly. Will I use them "all the time"? Probably not.

Healing Spirit, on the other hand, was something that I would have used at every possible opportunity between encounters where I needed to restore a medium to large amount of hitpoints. Even for just a single party member it was much more efficient to use healing spirit and restore them to full than to use an upcasted Cure Wounds or Rope Trick so that they could spend hit die.

The change has made it so that it's not obviously the best choice. It's still a good choice, I think that's been demonstrated well enough by now.

[MaxWilson]

The change has made it so that it's not obviously the best choice. It's still a good choice, I think that's been demonstrated well enough by now.

Eh... I wouldn't call it "good", personally, just "not terrible." It's about as good as Darkvision, Earthbind, Gust of Wind or Barkskin and better than Dust Devil or Flame Blade. It's not in the top five 2nd level Druid Spells any more, let alone the top two (Healing Spirit v1 and Pass Without Trace).

IMO this is a good thing. Pass Without Trace can be disruptive if you intentionally abuse it (e.g. combo with Invisibility or Skulker, plus optionally Nimble Escape/Cunning Action), but Healing Spirit v1 was so good it made Shield look bad even if you did absolutely nothing to optimize around it. It was sort of the equivalent of giving out Fireball as a 2nd level spell to Rangers and Druids: it's hard for it NOT to distort gameplay.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Eh... I wouldn't call it "good", personally, just "not terrible." It's about as good as Darkvision, Earthbind, Gust of Wind or Barkskin and better than Dust Devil or Flame Blade. It's not in the top five 2nd level Druid Spells any more, let alone the top two (Healing Spirit v1 and Pass Without Trace).

Framing it like that isn't bad I guess, a decent spell to have prepared for the situations when it is a good option. Would you agree at least that it rates higher for a Ranger than a Druid?

[SharkForce]

Attrition comes in by PCs using up their resources as the game day progresses. Being low on hit points is not a requirement. If original Healing Spirit was a bother it was because it was a level too low or made a druid spell, stealing a bit from the cleric's thunder. It is not the cleric's exclusive job to heal nor be the only thing he does, but it was fine he was the best at it and Healing Spirit took him down a notch. The conga line mantra unfortunately made a bad visual as well. However, I will never accept the DM fear of a party being at max hit points for the non-first combat of the day. The bad guys are, why can't the PCs? They're down the resources spent in earlier combats. That is enough.

I feel like sometimes you miss an important part of the equation.

PCs having all the options to trivialize things limits the ways you can play the game. yes, player agency is important, but the DM is a player too, and the PCs having things that are excessively strong limits the DM's player agency.

in this case, healing spirit was removing one option of how to play the game. yes, it was perfectly fine if you exclusively had extremely difficult fights where each and every time you enter combat, the PCs are going to nearly die.

but that is not the only way to play D&D. in fact, the game is explicitly designed to be played in a different way. the fact that it accommodates the style where every fight is a life-and-death struggle is an extra benefit, not the one true way to play the game.

for games where you have multiple easier challenges, healing spirit breaks that. it was far too efficient for what it did, and it removed any meaning or challenge in the game. in order for that style of play to work, resources over the course of a day must be balanced, and if there is something that lets you stretch them two or three or four times as far in that situation, it removes all challenge, tension, and, frankly, fun, from the game.

denying players access to things *can* improve the game, especially when those things are bad for the game. this spell ruins one style of play, and quite frankly, it is not important to the game that it exist. it doesn't enable any new styles of play, it doesn't play an important story role, and as such, it is better for the game that it goes, and it doesn't matter even the tiniest shred who is losing their shiny toys.

in essence, this would be like if DMs got a new book where every single monster had their HP and damage doubled but their CR did not change at all. that isn't healthy for the game, whether some DMs like it or not, and whether it works just fine for some DMs (probably DMs that want to have every individual encounter be a life-and-death struggle) or not. taking that option away doesn't even remove that option; your DM can put more monsters or tougher monsters into every encounter to get their game to a point where every fight is a life-and-death struggle, just like how if you want to have a game where you recover to full health in between every fight, you don't need a published spell to do it; you can just declare that every fight everyone gets back full health.

players losing toys is not always a bad thing. sometimes it is a good thing to lose those toys, because a specific toy causes problems, and even if some subset of players like that thing, it can improve the game overall for that thing to be gone.

or, to put it another way: the "bad guys" are always at full resources because they are designed to be substantially weaker than the party already, and to do that you need to know exactly what resources are available to them at any given time. remember, a deadly-rated fight is supposed to be a fight that stands any chance at all of killing a single PC, if the party make bad decisions or get fairly unlucky. the NPCs are designed with full resources because the fights are designed to already be unfair to them. you could, of course, reduce their resources, but then you should also reduce their effective CR (and I think it would be interesting to see a DM's guild project where someone creates monsters and NPCs that are down on resources with appropriately lowered CR so that DMs have a resource to pit the party against things that are not at full resources, but that's not what the monster manual is).

[MaxWilson]

Framing it like that isn't bad I guess, a decent spell to have prepared for the situations when it is a good option. Would you agree at least that it rates higher for a Ranger than a Druid?

Yes, due to concentration issues on druid and Extra Attack/Sharpshooter/etc. on the Ranger. This is sort of balanced out by the fact that Rangers tend to have low Wisdom compared to druids, but even with Wis 14 that's still three rounds of ranged pop-up healing that a Ranger can give to someone (if the DM is playing by vanilla RAW on negative HP) without disrupting their Sharpshooting. It's a good choice for e.g. a 7th level party fighting an Iron Golem.

[Witty Username]

Yes, due to concentration issues on druid and Extra Attack/Sharpshooter/etc. on the Ranger. This is sort of balanced out by the fact that Rangers tend to have low Wisdom compared to druids, but even with Wis 14 that's still three rounds of ranged pop-up healing that a Ranger can give to someone (if the DM is playing by vanilla RAW on negative HP) without disrupting their Sharpshooting. It's a good choice for e.g. a 7th level party fighting an Iron Golem.

Pre-Tasha's I may have strongly disagreed, Post-Tasha's I mildly disagree. Mostly because a Ranger is more incentivized to have a moderate to high wisdom score then it used to be, so it is more in line with the druid then it was before. However, I think the ranger is less able to hold back spell slots for healing then the druid is simply because of the reduced number that they get.

Then again I may be speaking from a bias as I don't like the new healing spirit generally.

[MaxWilson]

Pre-Tasha's I may have strongly disagreed, Post-Tasha's I mildly disagree. Mostly because a Ranger is more incentivized to have a moderate to high wisdom score then it used to be, so it is more in line with the druid then it was before. However, I think the ranger is less able to hold back spell slots for healing then the druid is simply because of the reduced number that they get.

Then again I may be speaking from a bias as I don't like the new healing spirit generally.

I don't particularly like the new Healing Spirit but I hated (and loved) Healing Spirit v1 and am glad to see it gone. I would have been equally happy if they'd simply deleted the spell from Xanathar's but I'm okay with keeping it around as a niche healing spell that works better for Rangers than Druids.

[Witty Username]

in this case, healing spirit was removing one option of how to play the game. yes, it was perfectly fine if you exclusively had extremely difficult fights where each and every time you enter combat, the PCs are going to nearly die.

but that is not the only way to play D&D. in fact, the game is explicitly designed to be played in a different way. the fact that it accommodates the style where every fight is a life-and-death struggle is an extra benefit, not the one true way to play the game.

for games where you have multiple easier challenges, healing spirit breaks that. it was far too efficient for what it did, and it removed any meaning or challenge in the game. in order for that style of play to work, resources over the course of a day must be balanced, and if there is something that lets you stretch them two or three or four times as far in that situation, it removes all challenge, tension, and, frankly, fun, from the game.

Doesn't healing spirit just make the adventuring day longer in this case instead of the encounters without tension, so your party can handle two dungeon floors without a deadly encounter instead of one (insert your preferred numbers)? I mean you are still using resources, so you still can have tension. It just will be over a longer period, and gives you more freedom to hound a party during their rests with random encounters without worrying that they will die if they don't get a rest.
For the moment, assuming the is a problem, this feels to me like mostly a tier 2 problem, tier 1 healing spirit is taking up 2nd level spells which are your in case of emergency ammo, tier 3 healing spirit won't be a full heal any more and is starting to fall behind monster damage and tier 4 where tension gets unceremoniously drowned in the bathtub regardless of your build decisions. tier 2 the healing is a full heal, it is not coming at a cost of dramatically reducing your encounter options.

Also, I am skeptical on 5e's delivery of tension in the first place. the adventure guidelines in the dmg always seem unsatisfying to me when I play with them, And not in a "healing spirit made everything too easy" kind of way, my table doesn't use it much, in a "we have gone 5 sessions without taking damage" kinda way.

[SharkForce]

Doesn't healing spirit just make the adventuring day longer in this case instead of the encounters without tension, so your party can handle two dungeon floors without a deadly encounter instead of one (insert your preferred numbers)? I mean you are still using resources, so you still can have tension. It just will be over a longer period, and gives you more freedom to hound a party during their rests with random encounters without worrying that they will die if they don't get a rest.
For the moment, assuming the is a problem, this feels to me like mostly a tier 2 problem, tier 1 healing spirit is taking up 2nd level spells which are your in case of emergency ammo, tier 3 healing spirit won't be a full heal any more and is starting to fall behind monster damage and tier 4 where tension gets unceremoniously drowned in the bathtub regardless of your build decisions. tier 2 the healing is a full heal, it is not coming at a cost of dramatically reducing your encounter options.

Also, I am skeptical on 5e's delivery of tension in the first place. the adventure guidelines in the dmg always seem unsatisfying to me when I play with them, And not in a "healing spirit made everything too easy" kind of way, my table doesn't use it much, in a "we have gone 5 sessions without taking damage" kinda way.

old healing spirit was basically always a full heal. it's an easy ~70 hit points per character even out of a level 2 spell slot just by using your reaction to move. by the time that isn't enough, level 3 spell slots aren't that uncommon, and now you're getting up to 140.

as for how much longer the day goes, I'd consider double to be on the small side. also, it will be incredibly dull, because as I've already pointed out, all those abilities you would otherwise use become something you shouldn't use because it's wasteful.

in more practical terms, jamming 6-8 encounters into a session is difficult but not impossible. 12-16 encounters (or more, because everyone else also has their own resources) could easily take 3 sessions. if you give me 3 sessions of something *that* tedious, there probably isn't going to be a 4th session.

now if this was all over something that was actually *important* to the game, that added some significant value, then fine, it might be worth worrying about. but this spell isn't important. it isn't bringing anything new or exciting to the game. it was making a style of play invalid randomly based on whether you have a druid or ranger in the party or not, and it was several times more efficient than any other remotely similar spell in the game, which is terrible for game balance. again, if this spell had never existed, we would not be missing out on anything at all. it doesn't do anything clever, or fun, or exciting, or special, it just does a boring thing several times better than anything else even remotely like it.

the new version is not that powerful, and frankly, that's perfectly fine. it doesn't need to be the best spell at what it does. lots of other spells are also not the best at what they do, and they're perfectly fine as well. if it had been a little stronger, it also wouldn't be broken any more, but frankly, it doesn't even need to exist, so who cares if it's just a middle-of-the-pack mediocre spell that isn't particular exciting. it doesn't matter. this is not a pillar holding up the game, it was a millstone around the neck of the game; nobody should care whether the millstone was shrunk down into a bead that is too tiny to put onto the necklace you want to wear, the important information is that the millstone is not crushing anyone under its weight any more.

if your group wants your party to heal to full between fights automatically, just make a house rule.

[MaxWilson]

Cogently argued, SharkForce. Well said.

[Witty Username]

old healing spirit was basically always a full heal. it's an easy ~70 hit points per character even out of a level 2 spell slot just by using your reaction to move. by the time that isn't enough, level 3 spell slots aren't that uncommon, and now you're getting up to 140.

as for how much longer the day goes, I'd consider double to be on the small side. also, it will be incredibly dull, because as I've already pointed out, all those abilities you would otherwise use become something you shouldn't use because it's wasteful.

in more practical terms, jamming 6-8 encounters into a session is difficult but not impossible. 12-16 encounters (or more, because everyone else also has their own resources) could easily take 3 sessions. if you give me 3 sessions of something *that* tedious, there probably isn't going to be a 4th session.

now if this was all over something that was actually *important* to the game, that added some significant value, then fine, it might be worth worrying about. but this spell isn't important. it isn't bringing anything new or exciting to the game. it was making a style of play invalid randomly based on whether you have a druid or ranger in the party or not, and it was several times more efficient than any other remotely similar spell in the game, which is terrible for game balance. again, if this spell had never existed, we would not be missing out on anything at all. it doesn't do anything clever, or fun, or exciting, or special, it just does a boring thing several times better than anything else even remotely like it.

the new version is not that powerful, and frankly, that's perfectly fine. it doesn't need to be the best spell at what it does. lots of other spells are also not the best at what they do, and they're perfectly fine as well. if it had been a little stronger, it also wouldn't be broken any more, but frankly, it doesn't even need to exist, so who cares if it's just a middle-of-the-pack mediocre spell that isn't particular exciting. it doesn't matter. this is not a pillar holding up the game, it was a millstone around the neck of the game; nobody should care whether the millstone was shrunk down into a bead that is too tiny to put onto the necklace you want to wear, the important information is that the millstone is not crushing anyone under its weight any more.

if your group wants your party to heal to full between fights automatically, just make a house rule.

Isn't it only 35 healing per character? average of 10d6?

[Galithar]

Isn't it only 35 healing per character? average of 10d6?

Using a readied action (Dash) you can move through the Spirit on someone else's turn allowing it to heal you again. So it heals for 20d6 if you do the silly Healing Spirit dance running back and forth through it with readied actions and movement.

Edit: Fixing Autocorrects.

[Witty Username]

Using a readied action (Dash) you can move through the Spirit on someone else's turn allowing it to heal you again. So it heals for 20d6 if you do the silly Healing Spirit dance running back and forth through it with readied actions and movement.

Edit: Fixing Autocorrects.

Don't readied actions only exist in combat though? Otherwise we would just ready actions all the time and always go first in combat?

P.S Also, isn't it technical raw that you cannot move on a readied action, that whole movement is not an action so you can't ready it?

[Galithar]

Don't readied actions only exist in combat though? Otherwise we would just ready actions all the time and always go first in combat?

That's a determination for your DM to make. I don't think that 5e makes a distinction between actions in combat and actions out of combat. A shove is a shove whether initiative has been rolled or not (if it hasn't this will likely prompt it).

I personally say a readied action should always be a thing, or should never be a thing. That's a whole different rules discussion.

I will say you start the "bag of rats" arguments if you try to say you can't do something in combat that you can out of combat. By that I mean character collecting small, nearly harmless creatures to "start a fight with" to prompt an initiative roll and then just not kill them. Now the DM has a new thing to argue against that players can keep modifying. What if two players simply say they are going to fish fight each other? Preferably a caster at full health with no STR punching a Barbarian or equally tanky person. Now they are in combat and the rest of the party can act as such.

[SharkForce]

I will say you start the "bag of rats" arguments if you try to say you can't do something in combat that you can out of combat. By that I mean character collecting small, nearly harmless creatures to "start a fight with" to prompt an initiative roll and then just not kill them. Now the DM has a new thing to argue against that players can keep modifying. What if two players simply say they are going to fish fight each other? Preferably a caster at full health with no STR punching a Barbarian or equally tanky person. Now they are in combat and the rest of the party can act as such.

nah, if you're going to go full silly, just grapple/shove the most injured people through the healing spirit.

but yeah, if there's no reactions outside of combat, it's gonna be awful hard to cast featherfall for a pit trap.

[clearstream]

Using a readied action (Dash) you can move through the Spirit on someone else's turn allowing it to heal you again. So it heals for 20d6 if you do the silly Healing Spirit dance running back and forth through it with readied actions and movement.

Edit: Fixing Autocorrects.
SFAIK the Dash action increases your speed by an amount equal to your speed. A character still has to take a move to benefit from that speed increase, of they might do something else that checks speed, like jump.

The speed increase lasts until the end of your current turn, so there are corner-cases where readying a Dash is relevant - for example the reaction College of Glamour bards can give players - Healing spirit shenanigans isn't such a case, however.

[Galithar]

SFAIK the Dash action increases your speed by an amount equal to your speed. A character still has to take a move to benefit from that speed increase, of they might do something else that checks speed, like jump.

The speed increase lasts until the end of your current turn, so there are corner-cases where readying a Dash is relevant - for example the reaction College of Glamour bards can give players - Healing spirit shenanigans isn't such a case, however.

I don't have time to look up the exact wording, but readying a dash action explicitly allows you to move up to your speed by using your reaction after the trigger occurs.

Edit: Well I found a moment at work and went to look it up... and indeed can't find the passage I thought existed. Can someone else confirm if it's there or not? I was certain it was in a book, but it might just be that all of my groups have always run it that way so over time I assumed it was in the book.

2nd edit: Regardless the shove or grapple drag tactic that SharkForce mentioned certainly enables the shenanigans. A DM can choose to shut them down, but old HS and RAW allowed it.

3rd Edit: Found it! I was mistaken in my use of the term Dash though.

Then, you choose the action you will take in response to that trigger, or you choose to move up to your speed in response to it.

[clearstream]

I don't have time to look up the exact wording, but readying a dash action explicitly allows you to move up to your speed by using your reaction after the trigger occurs.

Edit: Well I found a moment at work and went to look it up... and indeed can't find the passage I thought existed. Can someone else confirm if it's there or not? I was certain it was in a book, but it might just be that all of my groups have always run it that way so over time I assumed it was in the book.

2nd edit: Regardless the shove or grapple drag tactic that SharkForce mentioned certainly enables the shenanigans. A DM can choose to shut them down, but old HS and RAW allowed it.
It really doesn't work in the most intuitive way. It literally adds to your speed.

EDIT I just realised that readying a Dash action on your turn can't help with features like scout rogue skirmish or glamour bard mantle of inspiration! It just causes a conflict of what you will use your reaction for!

I'm not denying that actions and features that move you through the spirit in someone else's turn permit shenanigans. Only responding about the RAW on Dash.

[Galithar]

It really doesn't work in the most intuitive way. It literally adds to your speed.

EDIT I just realised that readying a Dash action on your turn can't help with features like scout rogue skirmish or glamour bard mantle of inspiration! It just causes a conflict of what you will use your reaction for!

I'm not denying that actions and features that move you through the spirit in someone else's turn permit shenanigans. Only responding about the RAW on Dash.

I found the passage I was talking about. I edited into my last post. I was mistakenly using the term dash, but you can explicitly ready movement as an action per the Ready section in the PHB.

[MaxWilson]

nah, if you're going to go full silly, just grapple/shove the most injured people through the healing spirit.

but yeah, if there's no reactions outside of combat, it's gonna be awful hard to cast featherfall for a pit trap.

And arguments like these are exactly why Healing Spirit v1 RAW is so toxic. It shouldn't matter whether you can ready actions outside of combat or start a combat against a rat in a shoebox!

How that spell ever got published as written I will never understand. Maybe it was a last-minute change?

[KorvinStarmast]

How that spell ever got published as written I will never understand. My guess is: some nitwit put decaf into the office coffee maker that morning, and the editor's brain lacked the needed caffeine to process information correctly. :smallyuk:

[clearstream]

I found the passage I was talking about. I edited into my last post. I was mistakenly using the term dash, but you can explicitly ready movement as an action per the Ready section in the PHB.
Yup, the RAW gives an example of readying a move. Again, I was speaking only to the Dash RAW.

A character could move through the spirit, and then ready a second move through the spirit using their action (and in due course, their reaction).

[Witty Username]

How that spell ever got published as written I will never understand. Maybe it was a last-minute change?
I think they thought about it as a aura buff in combat, and didn't think about out of combat time. Possibly because they just assumed you would take a rest. The errata is evidence that the out of combat use was unintentional at least.
And these are the same people responsible for twilight cleric. Balance is clearly a secondary concern.

I will concede the reaction stuff, I was mostly wanting a number clarification. It does change my opinion to the previously argument applies to tier 3 as well as tier 2.
However, I am still incredulous that spending resources to extend an adventuring day isn't just replaced by it being two adventuring days separated by a long rest or using resources to trivialize an encounter. Unless you also use the variant rules so that long rests are not a full heal. Then again I have been making and running dungeon floors for the last month or two, so my mind may be anchored in the unbounded timetable.

[SharkForce]

I think they thought about it as a aura buff in combat, and didn't think about out of combat time. Possibly because they just assumed you would take a rest. The errata is evidence that the out of combat use was unintentional at least.
And these are the same people responsible for twilight cleric. Balance is clearly a secondary concern.

I will concede the reaction stuff, I was mostly wanting a number clarification. It does change my opinion to the previously argument applies to tier 3 as well as tier 2.
However, I am still incredulous that spending resources to extend an adventuring day isn't just replaced by it being two adventuring days separated by a long rest or using resources to trivialize an encounter. Unless you also use the variant rules so that long rests are not a full heal. Then again I have been making and running dungeon floors for the last month or two, so my mind may be anchored in the unbounded timetable.

if it's bad for the game when it is used, and your expectation is that people just won't use it to do what it's great at in the first place, then we're right back to the question:

who cares if it was nerfed "too much"? it is now mediocre, neither terrible nor amazing. it is in no way important to the game that this spell should be featured, so if it shows up in only some peoples' games, that sounds perfectly fine. a problematic feature was replaced with a completely unremarkable one. to me, that sounds like a major improvement.

[Theodoxus]

Yup, the RAW gives an example of readying a move. Again, I was speaking only to the Dash RAW.

A character could move through the spirit, and then ready a second move through the spirit using their action (and in due course, their reaction).

Curious what the trigger would be for their readied action... "Once I run through the Spirit, I ready an action to run through it again!" Dubious.

On topic, thanks to Covid, I haven't run a game in over a year, so haven't used the errata nor seen HS in action for a long time. But my players, who expressly know about the conga-line shenanigans, never did it out of respect for the the RAI of the spell itself. They tended to use it like HW, as a whack-a-mole spell. The party ranger loved it, and if we ever get to play in person again, I'm going to ignore the errata, because I'm not using AL rules.

I always find it odd when a forum post about an opinion ends up in a semi-heated argument over who's opinion is correct, when every DM has the prerogative to run the spell as they like, unless they're explicitly running AL. Now, maybe there's an unwritten rule (or written and I somehow missed it) that all discussions on the Playground for 5E are implied to always be "AL Legit". But I kinda doubt that.

4 pages on a nerf that can be ignored seems excessive. Just my own opinion though.

[MaxWilson]

Curious what the trigger would be for their readied action... "Once I run through the Spirit, I ready an action to run through it again!" Dubious.


"After someone else has run through it." Anyone who had a ready action to run through on your turn has already done it, so this will happen on someone else's turn.



On topic, thanks to Covid, I haven't run a game in over a year, so haven't used the errata nor seen HS in action for a long time. But my players, who expressly know about the conga-line shenanigans, never did it out of respect for the the RAI of the spell itself. They tended to use it like HW, as a whack-a-mole spell. The party ranger loved it, and if we ever get to play in person again, I'm going to ignore the errata, because I'm not using AL rules.

If your players were using it like HW, for whack-a-mole, you probably won't even notice a difference post-errata. It still works for that.

[Witty Username]

who cares if it was nerfed "too much"? it is now mediocre, neither terrible nor amazing. it is in no way important to the game that this spell should be featured, so if it shows up in only some peoples' games, that sounds perfectly fine. a problematic feature was replaced with a completely unremarkable one. to me, that sounds like a major improvement.
I think the crux of this argument is people in one camp believing the new spell is mediocre and one camp that believes the new spell is terrible. I personally think the combination of not healing much and healing over an extended period keeps it from being useful outside of a situation that every option in combat is geared to avoid and that other spells already do arguably better, making it terrible.

[MaxWilson]

I think the crux of this argument is people in one camp believing the new spell is mediocre and one camp that believes the new spell is terrible. I personally think the combination of not healing much and healing over an extended period keeps it from being useful outside of a situation that every option in combat is geared to avoid and that other spells already do arguably better, making it terrible.

When a PC goes down, do you want the Ranger to know Healing Spirit, or not? I.e. what's the better Ranger spell for this situation? (Rangers don't have Healing Word.)

[Witty Username]

When a PC goes down, do you want the Ranger to know Healing Spirit, or not? I.e. what's the better Ranger spell for this situation? (Rangers don't have Healing Word.)
When you are concentrating on a spell do you want cure wounds or not? I.e. what's the better Ranger spell for this situation? (Rangers don't have Healing Word.)
I like Cure wounds and good berry (assuming you can feed others berries, if not just ignore that option and move on) for that situation and I don't have to use my 2nd level spell slots for them. Sure you take off an action but if you are concentrating on a spike growth or entangle(thank you kindly tasha's) keeping a horde of monsters at bay, is it more important to attack twice or maintain concentration?

[qube]

(on healing domain + goodberry)

It's pretty clearly RAI, however, and Crawford has commented that he'd allow it. As he's the main rules architect, I think that settles RAI, which is what I prioritize.
...
Crawford would allow it, he's the head rules architect. In my view that makes it pretty clearly RAI

So, euhm... on healing spirit, Crawford didn't only tell us what he'd allow or not - he told us how much healing was intended


If healing spirit has felt too effective in your game, try this house rule, which holds the spell to our expectations for it: the spell ends once the spirit has restored hit points a number of times equal to twice your spellcasting ability modifier (minimum of once).
~~ Crawford, Sage Advice twitter, nov 15, 2017

And, yes, using your non-cherry picked "typical use-case." (lvl 2 spell with 16 stat), that makes it still significantly worse then greatberry (as it does only 21 healing, concentration spell, non-instant) ... but apparently, this is so by design. By Crawford's design

(that the errata nerved it even more, I can only presume this is because they viewed the initial intended behavior as still to powerful when playtested).

[Valmark]

I was thinking- isn't Healing Spirit still the best spell when you have one or two wounded people only?

So, all the numbers are averages and when I rounded up, so some numbers are slightly unbalanced against Healing Spirit.
Assuming 20 in the casting stat it heals 21 hp.
Cure Wounds at the same level heals 14 hp and scales worst, so it's out of the run.
Healing word heals 10 hp, same story as CW.
Prayer of Healing heals 84 hp if you have all the targets. On a single character it'd be worst.

At level 3 Healing Spirit now heals 42 hp.
Prayer of Healing heals 111 hp but heals 19 hp on a single character, so you need three wounded people to outheal Healing Spirit.
We have Aura of Vitality here- that heals 70 hp, so beats Healing Spirit. But it doesn't scale.
There is also Mass Healing Word- that's an average of 48 hp if you have six targets. If you have five it's already worst. And scales worst.

At level 5 (which is when you get Mass Cure Wounds) Healing Spirit is healing for 80 hp.
Prayer of Healing heals for 165 but heals a single target for 28 only- you need three targets to out-heal Healing Spirit.
Mass Healing Word heals for 75 hp, so it's beaten.
Mass Cure Wounds heals for 111 hp but only 19 each- you need five targets to out-heal Healing Spirit. It scales better though.

Finally, at level 6 you get Heal which... Heals less then how much Healing Spirit was healing one level before, so it's forgettable.
You understand by now the theme- the only two spells that heal more by now are Healing Spirit and Mass Cure Wounds, which all need multiple targets to work.

Yes, many of the spells mentioned are meant for combat (for example Heal) but if you're out of combat and you don't have to heal many people Healing Spirit is actually your best choice before level 5 and after level 8.

[Witty Username]

I was thinking- isn't Healing Spirit still the best spell when you have one or two wounded people only?

There is Leomund's tiny hut and Morde's magnificent mansion which are not healing spells but can accomplish the same effect by guaranteeing a long rest, which is infinite out of combat healing at 5th level on. So it is more one or two wounded people only and are under some amount of time pressure or sense of urgency.

Edit: also, rope trick can make short resting safe the calcutaion would probably be something like
1d8 per level of the party member being healed, plus any short rest recovered abilities.
so like 3d8 (13.5) for one 6d8(27) for 2 at level 3. So, one or two wounded people that have already taken a short rest to recover hit points/under time pressure. Or recovering hp from one person with time pressure.

[MaxWilson]

When you are concentrating on a spell do you want cure wounds or not? I.e. what's the better Ranger spell for this situation? (Rangers don't have Healing Word.)
I like Cure wounds and good berry (assuming you can feed others berries, if not just ignore that option and move on) for that situation and I don't have to use my 2nd level spell slots for them. Sure you take off an action but if you are concentrating on a spike growth or entangle(thank you kindly tasha's) keeping a horde of monsters at bay, is it more important to attack twice or maintain concentration?

Cure Wounds and Goodberry seems redundant. You'll get d8+2ish (6.5) out of a Cure Wounds (2 spell points), or 3d6 (10.5) out of a Healing Spirit (3 spell points), making Healing Spirit the better deal as well as having better action economy and range. Goodberry is more efficient out of combat (but risks giving you diabetes) but awful in combat, especially by RAW--some DMs apparently allow you to force-feed it to others like a healing potion, which makes it good for pop-up healing but still with worse action economy and range than Healing Spirit. (Some DMs apparently even let the wizard's familiar force-feed it to others for pop-up healing with no action economy cost, but whatever, that's on them.)

I agree that Spike Growth (a.k.a. Poor Man's Fireball) and Entangle are lovely but I don't think a spell needs to be clearly better than Spike Growth or Pass Without Trace to be better than Cure Wounds. If you're a 7th level party fighting a pair of Venom Trolls and a PC goes down to troll claws, is it worth dropping concentration on Spike Growth to cast Healing Spirit and keep attacking? IMO yes. The trolls have taken about all the Spike Growth damage they're going to take (and Venom Trolls actually make Spike Growth more painful for the party than for the trolls anyway, at short range), and you'll probably benefit more from inflicting ~35 HP of Sharpshooter damage now than 6d4 or whatever over the next round. On the other hand, if you're fighting a dozen Adult Kruthiks, you want to keep Spike Growth up at all costs (unless they start burrowing). Which one you want up depends on the situation.

Edit: Also, what sane ranger wants to run into the middle of his own Spike Growth to Cure Wounds on somebody fighting a Venom Troll? You'll probably break your own concentration and then you'll be stuck in melee, taking poison damage from the troll every time it's wounded.

[ProsecutorGodot]

There is Leomund's tiny hut and Morde's magnificent mansion when are not healing spells but can accomplish the same effect by guaranteeing a long rest, which is infinite out of combat healing at 5th level on. So it is more one or two wounded people only and are under some amount of time pressure or sense of urgency.

That takes 8 hours, and aren't exactly infallible. Tiny Hut has features that help you hide it, but it isn't invisible or impossible to find. It's not actually all that practical inside a dangerous area because if you're spotted an ambush becomes your wakeup call. It's a glorified tent that's given a lot more credit than its due.

Magnificent Mansion is more likely to keep you safe, but is also able to be dispelled if a creature is able to see the door and can cast dispel magic.

I think time is an important resource to note as well, touting these two as the end all be all things of "rest to heal" smacks heavily of 15 minute adventuring days which isn't really what I want out of the game. It was about the only positive thing that came out of the old version was that its existence encouraged our party to be proactive even when we left a fight a bit injured instead of sitting down for 8 hours because the "world ending plot point" was going to wait for us.

[Valmark]

There is Leomund's tiny hut and Morde's magnificent mansion which are not healing spells but can accomplish the same effect by guaranteeing a long rest, which is infinite out of combat healing at 5th level on. So it is more one or two wounded people only and are under some amount of time pressure or sense of urgency.

Edit: also, rope trick can make short resting safe the calcutaion would probably be something like
1d8 per level of the party member being healed, plus any short rest recovered abilities.
so like 3d8 (13.5) for one 6d8(27) for 2 at level 3. So, one or two wounded people that have already taken a short rest to recover hit points/under time pressure. Or recovering hp from one person with time pressure.

Yeah I assumed rests weren't available- those trivialize all magical healing.

Also those are far from being guaranteed, but that's a discussion for another thread.

[Witty Username]

Cure Wounds and Goodberry seems redundant. You'll get d8+2ish (6.5) out of a Cure Wounds (2 spell points), or 3d6 (10.5) out of a Healing Spirit (3 spell points), making Healing Spirit the better deal as well as having better action economy and range. Goodberry is more efficient out of combat (but risks giving you diabetes) but awful in combat, especially by RAW--some DMs apparently allow you to force-feed it to others like a healing potion, which makes it good for pop-up healing but still with worse action economy and range than Healing Spirit. (Some DMs apparently even let the wizard's familiar force-feed it to others for pop-up healing with no action economy cost, but whatever, that's on them.)

I agree that Spike Growth (a.k.a. Poor Man's Fireball) and Entangle are lovely but I don't think a spell needs to be clearly better than Spike Growth or Pass Without Trace to be better than Cure Wounds. If you're a 7th level party fighting a pair of Venom Trolls and a PC goes down to troll claws, is it worth dropping concentration on Spike Growth to cast Healing Spirit and keep attacking? IMO yes. The trolls have taken about all the Spike Growth damage they're going to take (and Venom Trolls actually make Spike Growth more painful for the party than for the trolls anyway, at short range), and you'll probably benefit more from inflicting ~35 HP of Sharpshooter damage now than 6d4 or whatever over the next round. On the other hand, if you're fighting a dozen Adult Kruthiks, you want to keep Spike Growth up at all costs (unless they start burrowing). Which one you want up depends on the situation.

I am not sure I like healing spirit against venom trolls at all, I think the best result is attack twice and then healing spirit or cast healing spirit and disengage/dodge? so I force the downed party member to fail two death saving throws then heal them so they have 3 hp to run for their life, even if I don't attack the troll can make three attacks giving them a good chance of killing the downed party member, even if the heal arrives before their turn. And that is all assuming one venom troll not two. All of this applies to cure wounds too, so it is not in comparison there, it is more initiative agnostic but doesn't change that that party member is pretty likely dead.

[MaxWilson]

I am not sure I like healing spirit against venom trolls at all, I think the best result is attack twice and then healing spirit or cast healing spirit and disengage/dodge? so I force the downed party member to fail two death saving throws then heal them so they have 3 hp to run for their life, even if I don't attack the troll can make three attacks giving them a good chance of killing the downed party member, even if the heal arrives before their turn. And that is all assuming one venom troll not two. All of this applies to cure wounds too, so it is not in comparison there, it is more initiative agnostic but doesn't change that that party member is pretty likely dead.

I don't understand why damaging the troll and healing your buddy to 3 HP so he can stand up and Shield/Misty Step/Disengage/Attack/Dodge/Wildshape/whatever doesn't seem superior to you to letting the troll make three attacks unopposed. What is the alternative you're comparing it to? Surely not Spike Growth.

That Healing Spirit lasts multiple rounds is just a bonus on top in case your buddy goes down again.

[Captain Panda]

I don't understand why damaging the troll and healing your buddy to 3 HP so he can stand up and Shield/Misty Step/Disengage/Attack/Dodge/Wildshape/whatever doesn't seem superior to you to letting the troll make three attacks unopposed. What is the alternative you're comparing it to? Surely not Spike Growth.

That Healing Spirit lasts multiple rounds is just a bonus on top in case your buddy goes down again.

Healing word has the same benefit of getting your buddy standing without having to break you concentration. If the troll is already in your face, yeah, spike growth is a waste. There are still better concentration options.

Summon beast. Have the beast use its action/movement to drag your unconscious friend a bit away and stand between the troll and your injured party member.

Even these examples that are meant to favor healing spirit really don't work. First, they're a bit niche and atypical. Fights don't just start with a teammate unconscious and you not concentrating on something. If the fight gets there, something went wrong, and the fact that you aren't concentrating on something good might be why. Assuming you're against a troll, and you have an unconscious teammate, why weren't you concentrating on something before that? Sure, once you're in that state spike growth won't help, but it could have helped earlier, along with half a dozen other great spells.

All of these attempts to paint healing spirit as anything but useless are convincing me more and more it's impossible to give realistic examples of when the spell is useful.

[MaxWilson]

Healing word has the same benefit of getting your buddy standing without having to break you concentration. If the troll is already in your face, yeah, spike growth is a waste. There are still better concentration options.

Aside from the initiative issues, I repeat: Rangers don't have Healing Word.


Even these examples that are meant to favor healing spirit really don't work. First, they're a bit niche and atypical. Fights don't just start with a teammate unconscious and you not concentrating on something. If the fight gets there, something went wrong, and the fact that you aren't concentrating on something good might be why. Assuming you're against a troll, and you have an unconscious teammate, why weren't you concentrating on something before that? Sure, once you're in that state spike growth won't help, but it could have helped earlier, along with half a dozen other great spells.

All of these attempts to paint healing spirit as anything but useless are convincing me more and more it's impossible to give realistic examples of when the spell is useful.

The fight doesn't have to start with a unconscious PC. If a 7th level party fights two Venom Trolls, having somebody go down at some point is not that surprising. Venom Trolls are pretty tough. (Combat-optimized PCs can be pretty tough too but not all PCs are, and players who are very good at tactics are also somewhat rare.)

If you concentrate on Spike Growth early on, that's one of your three 2nd level slots for the day, and even if you were concentrating on it before, it still makes sense to drop it for Healing Spirit once someone goes down. I'm not going to argue with you further about this--if you can't see why continuing to concentrate on Spike Growth at that point isn't helpful, me telling you again isn't going to change your mind. You're determined to see Healing Spirit as completely useless in all circumstances no matter what.

[Captain Panda]

Aside from the initiative issues, I repeat: Rangers don't have Healing Word.

Ouch, yeah, poor rangers. Again, coming at this as a druid. They still have summon beast, though. Bonus action command the pet to shove a berry in their mouth, or if your DM dislikes the Owlberry Delivery System (boo on them), a healing potion works. 3d6 total healing vs. a brawling monkey pet that has 30hp and can toss out 12 damage haymakers every round and also play medic.

Yes, I'd rather have a monkey nursing my wounds than healing spirit. :biggrin:

[Xetheral]

Attrition comes in by PCs using up their resources as the game day progresses. Being low on hit points is not a requirement. If original Healing Spirit was a bother it was because it was a level too low or made a druid spell, stealing a bit from the cleric's thunder. It is not the cleric's exclusive job to heal nor be the only thing he does, but it was fine he was the best at it and Healing Spirit took him down a notch. The conga line mantra unfortunately made a bad visual as well. However, I will never accept the DM fear of a party being at max hit points for the non-first combat of the day. The bad guys are, why can't the PCs? They're down the resources spent in earlier combats. That is enough.

(Emphasis added.) SharkForce already replied, but I think the bolded section is a misunderstanding that's worth discussing explicitly. SharkForce's concern with the original version of Healing Spirit was that there won't be any other resources spent in earlier combats. Rather than use resources to end fights faster (and therefore take less HP damage), parties with access to Healing Spirit v1 can instead adopt a combat style where they only use basic attacks and cantrips. Sure, they'll take more HP damage that way, but all those HP come back with a single post-combat casting. Then, when the party reaches a climactic encounter, they have full HP and all of their limited-use resources save only for the slots spent on Healing Spirit.

As SharkForce points out, this problem only occurs in games that feature lots of un-losable fights meant solely as resource sinks. But that style is indeed explicitly supported (and arguably even promoted) by 5e, and SharkForce makes (what I find to be) a persuasive argument that the original version of Healing Spirit wrecks that style of play.


Goodberry is more efficient out of combat (but risks giving you diabetes) but awful in combat, especially by RAW--some DMs apparently allow you to force-feed it to others like a healing potion, which makes it good for pop-up healing but still with worse action economy and range than Healing Spirit. (Some DMs apparently even let the wizard's familiar force-feed it to others for pop-up healing with no action economy cost, but whatever, that's on them.)

Out of curiosity, what's your in-game reason for prohibiting force-feeding goodberries but allowing it for potions? Is it just that goodberries are solid whereas potions are liquid?

[MaxWilson]

Out of curiosity, what's your in-game reason for prohibiting force-feeding goodberries but allowing it for potions? Is it just that goodberries are solid whereas potions are liquid?

I start by asking, "Why do these things take an action to consume in the first place, instead of an object interaction?" For goodberries I'll assume that you don't just pop a berry (or twelve) in your mouth, you have to DO something (e.g. chew it twelve times) in order for it to have its magic effect.

For potions, I tend to assume that the action involved is more about readying the potion for consumption, e.g. opening it, shaking it, and exposing it to air for three seconds before consuming.

Since force-feeding food to an unconscious target is, in general, dangerous, I don't love the idea of allowing force-feeding at all, but in the interest of the Principle of Least Surprise (for the players) via sticking to RAW wherever possible, I don't mind inventing this rationale for why someone else can shake the potion for you, etc. But they can't chew for you.

[Captain Panda]

If you concentrate on Spike Growth early on, that's one of your three 2nd level slots for the day, and even if you were concentrating on it before, it still makes sense to drop it for Healing Spirit once someone goes down. I'm not going to argue with you further about this--if you can't see why continuing to concentrate on Spike Growth at that point isn't helpful, me telling you again isn't going to change your mind. You're determined to see Healing Spirit as completely useless in all circumstances no matter what.

In this hyper-specific scenario, if we assume:
1. Spike growth is no longer effective as the trolls have left its effective range and closed with you.
2. Derpy McDerp the fighter has been knocked out by the troll.
3. You have a DM who will not allow your monkey to administer bandaids or, alternatively, you have no bandaids to administer.

Yeah, in that case healing spirit is a good spell to cast. It isn't useless in that case, it's good. I contend that getting into that position should be rare, hopefully, and that you should not make one of your.. (goes to check)
..five spells known healing spirit on the off chance you run into a situation like this. There are situations where the 'find traps' spell is useful as well, but I do not think that it's a spell you should even consider taking.

On a side note, a level 7 ranger knows five spells? Wow, that's pitiful. You poor rangers, I'm so sorry. They did you wrong.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Out of curiosity, what's your in-game reason for prohibiting force-feeding goodberries but allowing it for potions? Is it just that goodberries are solid whereas potions are liquid?

One is allowed by the items description, the other isn't. Goodberry is plenty strong without the ability to force-feed them.

[MaxWilson]

In this hyper-specific scenario, if we assume:
1. Spike growth is no longer effective as the trolls have left its effective range and closed with you.
2. Derpy McDerp the fighter has been knocked out by the troll.
3. You have a DM who will not allow your monkey to administer bandaids or, alternatively, you have no bandaids to administer.

Yeah, in that case healing spirit is a good spell to cast. It isn't useless in that case, it's good. I contend that getting into that position should be rare, hopefully, and that you should not make one of your.. (goes to check)
..five spells known healing spirit on the off chance you run into a situation like this. There are situations where the 'find traps' spell is useful as well, but I do not think that it's a spell you should even consider taking.

On a side note, a level 7 ranger knows five spells? Wow, that's pitiful. You poor rangers, I'm so sorry. They did you wrong.

Condition #1 isn't necessary.

Condition #2 isn't rare.

Condition #3 is just RAW. Seems like it shouldn't be uncommon but maybe I'm the only one who doesn't allow it, who knows. Having a monkey administer potions costs potions, has initiative issues and fragility issues (the monkey can be killed by the troll before it even acts), and frankly I'm not even seeing a reason why you'd expect the spirit to be able to open a bottle anyway--it's not even a real monkey and it does PIERCING damage with its attack, unlike a real Ape (bludgeoning damage), so it clearly doesn't act like a monkey.

So, it's useful to a Ranger in a deadly situation. Seems like a reasonable spell.

[Witty Username]

I don't understand why damaging the troll and healing your buddy to 3 HP so he can stand up and Shield/Misty Step/Disengage/Attack/Dodge/Wildshape/whatever doesn't seem superior to you to letting the troll make three attacks unopposed. What is the alternative you're comparing it to? Surely not Spike Growth.

That Healing Spirit lasts multiple rounds is just a bonus on top in case your buddy goes down again.

Well I can think of a few things.
Re-actively:
If I am a beast master or have summon beast, summon or command my beast to grab and drag them away. if the beast takes an AOO, it won't effect the tactic and make the PC a less tempting target.
I could shove grapple the troll to get it out of melee range. healing spirit would be good in this case. So that may be the better solution then my previous thought.
Upcasting cure wounds does get to 2d8+number (I think +3 would average to 12) which if it can eat one of the claw attacks before the party member drops it will have been worth it in comparison, possible if the troll rolls low and/or I roll high.
Proactively:
Spike growth does by a round or two before a venom troll would reach melee range giving low health party members a chance to abscond before the troll downs them. The scenario assumes of course that this is either round 2-3 or I didn't get a chance to cast it anyway.
I already covered summon beast but if it can be uses to slow the approach of the venom trolls it could prevent a party member from being downed.
Protection from Poison, is maybe one of the most niche spells on the ranger list but it is great against enemies that deal poison damage. I think I am less likely to take it post Tasha's, but I still may as a single class ranger some of the time.
Take out a melee weapon and be the front line for the combat, this will hurt but not as bad as a party member getting dropped.

This is all of course assuming I go, troll goes, party member I am trying to heal goes. If it is the other way around any amount of hp will get the job done of course given a disengage action.
And in case I am making too much of a monster attacking a downed party member, I would still prefer a spell that didn't require concentration in this assumption if the troll could attack me its next turn.

But this touches on my overall opinion of healing, it doesn't matter until someone is actually downed most of the time because of amount healed vs damage received.
Take a 6d6(21) healing spirit. take a venom troll, even assuming a 19 AC(45% chance to hit), it will be doing 19.8 damage a round on average. assuming it gets its trigger damage once that's 28.8 damage.
Take spike growth generating difficult terrain. about 30ft wide maybe more less depending on the area. the troll will need to dash to clear it meaning 1 less round of attacks and some damage, effectively turning 28.8 damage to 0(maybe 9 if and only if the troll ends within 5ft of the party). Note at this point I am using spike growth as a example of a class of spells now, not a direct comparison any spell that makes a large enough area of difficult terrain accomplishes this. And most of the logic applies to disables and de buffs that block attacks and
Damaging spells, can accomplish this to if they do enough damage to shorten the combat, admittedly less a thing for ranger but this is a general opinion through the lens of ranger not a specific to ranger opinion.
In essence the tactics to avoid damage are superior to healing it after the fact. I am using healing spirits numbers because they are quick at hand today, I think this applies to all healing spells to an extent(except mass heal, the hard no on the subject of a damaged party). Note, I think this is true in absence of whether or not the nerf on healing spirit was justified.
If this is not true for the games you play, that's fine I am sure my sample size is small, if you think this is a feature not a bug, that is also fine, Its not like healing being good matters much to overall game play.

Edit: Jesus Christ, I need to be less wordy.

[Captain Panda]

Condition #1 isn't necessary.

Condition #2 isn't rare.

Condition #3 is just RAW. Seems like it shouldn't be uncommon but maybe I'm the only one who doesn't allow it, who knows. Having a monkey administer potions costs potions, has initiative issues and fragility issues (the monkey can be killed by the troll before it even acts), and frankly I'm not even seeing a reason why you'd expect the spirit to be able to open a bottle anyway--it's not even a real monkey and it does PIERCING damage with its attack, unlike a real Ape (bludgeoning damage), so it clearly doesn't act like a monkey.


How dare you, my monkey is a real boy. He does piercing damage because he has a vicious bite, too!

More seriously, the intent of 'summon beast' is to give you freedom in what the beast looks like. And not solid because it's a spirit? It's solid enough to hit for 11 damage. Further, if the summon is knocked out by the troll, it just healed the party for roughly 30hp.

Condition 1 is necessary in my view. If the troll has not closed with you, spike growth and they have to dash, takes a turn away from them, deals damage. Generally a better move for the cost.
Condition 2 isn't rare, I agree. I do not agree this condition alone is sufficient for the spell to be good, however.
Condition 3 is pretty rare in my experience. I've genuinely never met a DM, outside of forums, who wouldn't allow this. I consider it firmly RAI, but yeah, not RAW. Doubt we'll convince one another on this point, so probably not one worth debating.



costs potions


Okay, this might just be a difference in experiences and another reason I didn't see healing spirit as that big a deal, despite being overtuned. Are potions rare in typical campaigns? My understanding is most groups spend a lot of their gold on healing potions. I did a random level 5 treasure hoard and got 83 healing potions worth of raw coin. Maybe this one is just a me thing, but I've heard that even in AL you get people drowning in healing potions.

[Xetheral]

I start by asking, "Why do these things take an action to consume in the first place, instead of an object interaction?" For goodberries I'll assume that you don't just pop a berry (or twelve) in your mouth, you have to DO something (e.g. chew it twelve times) in order for it to have its magic effect.

For potions, I tend to assume that the action involved is more about readying the potion for consumption, e.g. opening it, shaking it, and exposing it to air for three seconds before consuming.

Since force-feeding food to an unconscious target is, in general, dangerous, I don't love the idea of allowing force-feeding at all, but in the interest of the Principle of Least Surprise (for the players) via sticking to RAW wherever possible, I don't mind inventing this rationale for why someone else can shake the potion for you, etc. But they can't chew for you.

Thanks for sharing! The action vs object-interaction discrepancy I'd just chalked up to OOC balance issues, and therefore hadn't felt the need to justify in-game at my table. Given that you have, your in-game explanation makes lots of sense.


One is allowed by the items description, the other isn't. Goodberry is plenty strong without the ability to force-feed them.

That was why I asked only about the in-game explanation. Rules/balance wise I don't have an opinion yet (I haven't had players try to force-feed goodberries to anyone before, so I haven't thought about it) and if I do ultimately decide to allow one but not the other I'd want an in-universe explanation for the disparity. MaxWilson's approach is a good one, given how they've already detailed the mechanics of the action for potion-drinking and goodberry-eating at their table. I haven't done so at mine--the description of the action is simple consumption in both cases--so I'd probably need a different in-game explanation.

[Dork_Forge]

Out of curiosity, what's your in-game reason for prohibiting force-feeding goodberries but allowing it for potions? Is it just that goodberries are solid whereas potions are liquid?

Not Max, but I share his ruling:

In terms of head canon, it just doesn't make sense forcing a berry down an unconscious and dying person's throat in the heat of combat. Even in calm times it seems a bit silly, even senzu beans required the Z fighter to eat them.

In terms of RAW: It's just not supported at all

In terms of RAI: I don't think it is, it just makes Goodberry and even more powerful 1st level spell, when I believe it wasn't meant to be used for healing to begin with. (I think that it's a mistake of a spell altogether)

In terms of Balance: Just no, it trivialises going down more than it already is, 5e permits a pop up culture that some people choose to embrace. I don't like the RP or mechnical implications of that and don't see the need to bend the rules to make death even less likely than it already is.

Side note: I wouldn't allow any familiar that doens't have hands to administer a potion either, idc what the rules say about creatures feeding creatures potions, it just doesn't make sense and isn't the intended use of the spell.

[Captain Panda]

even senzu beans required the Z fighter to eat them.

Pretty sure there were instances of giving heavily injured Z fighters beans while they were knocked out.

[SharkForce]

I don't see much need to be excessively worried about druids casting the spell. druids have a ton of options for spells, and can change them out every day. if healing spirit isn't good for them as a full spellcaster, the druid can simply prepare a different spell. just like it doesn't matter much if, say... protection from evil isn't very valuable to most wizards (due to protecting only a single target and costing concentration and having a large and varied spell list to choose from), when that spell is instead quite useful for someone else (eldritch knights being a prime example... and, in all probability, even some wizards who just prioritize that kind of thing).

[Segev]

When a PC goes down, do you want the Ranger to know Healing Spirit, or not? I.e. what's the better Ranger spell for this situation? (Rangers don't have Healing Word.)

Given that Rangers have limited spells known, I am not sure I'd want the Ranger wasting a known spell slot on healing spirit with the new version. Having run a game with the old version, it definitely was "full heal the party after combat for a second level spell slot" - but that was quite the investment for the party Ranger.

If the nerfed healing spirit is in play, I think a Ranger would be better off taking a different spell known. If he must have some sort of contribution to healing, lesser restoration is likely to come up about as often as when the nerfed healing spirit would be useful, and will have more relevance to plot (helping NPCs with problems they otherwise can't solve) and will likely be something to which the party will say, "Thank goodness we have that," when it does come up. If you're looking for combat effective contributions that take Concentration, the aforementioned spike growth is going to do far more in most combats to keep PCs from needing as much healing.

Pass without trace or silence will also open more options to a party than a minor amount of healing, and used wisely will likely prevent the need for healing in a number of cases.

I almost mentioned rope trick being a better option, too, but that's a subclass-only thing, so isn't really relevant to this discussion.

In all, the only thing healing spirit had going for it over other 2nd level spell choices for Rangers was that it was a post-combat full-heal. I get that people are focused on it yo-yo healing somebody who goes down as a bonus action, but as has been pointed out, it's an obvious marker on a downed ally that he's not likely to stay downed, so it's encouragement to finish him if the enemies were otherwise inclined to leave them to make death saves. (That said, the ranger could cast the spell as a bonus action, then, as his action, pick up his ally and walk the ally into the space, I suppose. How this is better than cure wounds, though, for this purpose, I am unsure. Maybe because it could theoretically be a tag-team effort with a second character who is nearer-by and does the hauling of the downed ally into the space?)

If the healing spirit did its curative effect on a creature into whose space it moved or was conjured, then it would be a bit better, and maybe its nerfed limitation could be acceptable...maybe. 1d6 per round as a bonus action during combat isn't awful, especially if you can also get bonus healing from other allies dedicating part of their movement to swooping through it.

Better ways to cap its healing would still have been:

Make it permit the expenditure and rolling of a hit die, healing the amount plus the con mod of the character doing the expenditure. Now there's a cost to it but it's still faster than short resting AND it's useful in combat.
Make it limit how many times total a given character can benefit from it, possibly limited to the level of the spell slot from which it's cast. Max 2d6 healing to any one PC is still a really nice healing effect - even in combat - if the PCs can maneuver to benefit from it and you can spend a bonus action to move it over allies.
Greatly reduce its duration, perhaps to a number of rounds equal to the spell slot used ot cast it (2 minimum, since it's a second level spell).

I would also alter it, with any of the above changes, such that it operates once per turn, rather than once per creature per turn, and it can trigger on your turn when you conjure it into a creature's space or move it into a creature's space.

[clearstream]

In all, the only thing healing spirit had going for it over other 2nd level spell choices for Rangers was that it was a post-combat full-heal. I get that people are focused on it yo-yo healing somebody who goes down as a bonus action, but as has been pointed out, it's an obvious marker on a downed ally that he's not likely to stay downed, so it's encouragement to finish him if the enemies were otherwise inclined to leave them to make death saves. (That said, the ranger could cast the spell as a bonus action, then, as his action, pick up his ally and walk the ally into the space, I suppose. How this is better than cure wounds, though, for this purpose, I am unsure. Maybe because it could theoretically be a tag-team effort with a second character who is nearer-by and does the hauling of the downed ally into the space?)

If the healing spirit did its curative effect on a creature into whose space it moved or was conjured, then it would be a bit better, and maybe its nerfed limitation could be acceptable...maybe. 1d6 per round as a bonus action during combat isn't awful, especially if you can also get bonus healing from other allies dedicating part of their movement to swooping through it.
Per RAW I thought that was exactly what it does. If a creature starts its turn in the spirit, you can heal it. That creature doesn't have to move themselves into it... the spirit can move onto them.

Foes should probably be finishing downed characters anyway, due to healing word. What I find is that if they stop to finish a fallen character - not always the best option when there are others still standing - they can usually strip two death saves. If that character were inside a healing spirit then that could feasibly save them... forcing the foe to spend further turns trying to finish them.

[Amdy_vill]

So I agree that the nerf was overkill and I personally think I didn't need a nerf but it definitely was broken. 5e just has a really bad healing system. it's like the crusader's crossbow in FT2. it's overpowered and broken not because it is inherently broken strong but because all the other options are so weak in comparison. A healing spirit is like this. 5e just does not have a healing system that can keep up with mid to high-level combat and healing spirit could. but is so much more powerful than most other simple ways for healing. there are more efficient healing strategies but their more complex than just use this spell.

[Segev]

Per RAW I thought that was exactly what it does. If a creature starts its turn in the spirit, you can heal it. That creature doesn't have to move themselves into it... the spirit can move onto them.My proposed change means that the creature doesn't have to wait for its turn for you to choose to have the healing spirit heal them. You cast the spell as a bonus action and have it appear in their space, and you can choose to have it heal them. On later turns, you move it into somebody's space, and it can heal them.

This does require that you either make it only work on your turn, or limit it to once per round per character, though. I think the latter is slightly better, since I think the idea was that you set up a point for allies to work around/near in order to get healing on their own terms/turns.

But the key change here is that you cast the spell, and the target you cast it over gets healed immediately, making it actually work for yo-yo healing rather than giving a marker for enemies to come and kill your friend before his turn comes up.


Foes should probably be finishing downed characters anyway, due to healing word. What I find is that if they stop to finish a fallen character - not always the best option when there are others still standing - they can usually strip two death saves. If that character were inside a healing spirit then that could feasibly save them... forcing the foe to spend further turns trying to finish them.The difference is that healing word is not an obvious "if you don't finish them in the next six seconds, they're getting back up" flag, while healing spirit is.

[MaxWilson]

Given that Rangers have limited spells known, I am not sure I'd want the Ranger wasting a known spell slot on healing spirit with the new version. Having run a game with the old version, it definitely was "full heal the party after combat for a second level spell slot" - but that was quite the investment for the party Ranger.

If the nerfed healing spirit is in play, I think a Ranger would be better off taking a different spell known.

As long as it's a dilemma driven by opportunity cost, that's fine. Rangers can't have all spells simultaneously (and neither can anyone else). It would be a problem if the Ranger NEVER was in a situation where you wished they could cast Healing Spirit (just as a wizard will NEVER miss not having Witch Bolt), but if Darkvision, Beast Sense, and Healing Spirit aren't taken because Protection From Poison, Pass Without Trace and Spike Growth are even better for this ranger (e.g. there are plenty of other healers in the party and the ranger already has Darkvision), that's fine.


In all, the only thing healing spirit had going for it over other 2nd level spell choices for Rangers was that it was a post-combat full-heal. I get that people are focused on it yo-yo healing somebody who goes down as a bonus action, but as has been pointed out, it's an obvious marker on a downed ally that he's not likely to stay downed, so it's encouragement to finish him if the enemies were otherwise inclined to leave them to make death saves. (That said, the ranger could cast the spell as a bonus action, then, as his action, pick up his ally and walk the ally into the space, I suppose. How this is better than cure wounds, though, for this purpose, I am unsure. Maybe because it could theoretically be a tag-team effort with a second character who is nearer-by and does the hauling of the downed ally into the space?)

It's also better because it heals the downed ally twice: if another monster hits your buddy again before his turn and he hits 0 HP again, he heals again at the start of his turn and therefore still gets an action. Cure Wounds doesn't do that for you, it just leaves him at 0 HP and dying.

[tKUUNK]

great write-up in the original post. thanks for taking the time.

[Segev]

As long as it's a dilemma driven by opportunity cost, that's fine. Rangers can't have all spells simultaneously (and neither can anyone else). It would be a problem if the Ranger NEVER was in a situation where you wished they could cast Healing Spirit (just as a wizard will NEVER miss not having Witch Bolt), but if Darkvision, Beast Sense, and Healing Spirit aren't taken because Protection From Poison, Pass Without Trace and Spike Growth are even better for this ranger (e.g. there are plenty of other healers in the party and the ranger already has Darkvision), that's fine.That's just it: I don't really see a point where the opportunity cost is worth it, here. There might be some rare occasion where witch bolt would be perfect on a wizard (perhaps the fire elemental they're fighting is immune to his firebolt and the consistent round-to-round damage of witch bolt would be more welcome than a single-shot damaging first-level spell), just as there might be some rare occasion where healing spirit is something you wistfully wish your Ranger had instead of another spell despite the fact that he uses each of his other spells far more frequently than he would use healing spirit, but that still means the opportunity cost of learning healing spirit isn't worth it. (Heck, a wizard preparing witch bolt not only merely gave up one of a lot more spells prepared that day, but also could ditch it again tomorrow if he doesn't like it, after all.)

Opportunity costs, like any costs, need to be worth paying.


It's also better because it heals the downed ally twice: if another monster hits your buddy again before his turn and he hits 0 HP again, he heals again at the start of his turn and therefore still gets an action. Cure Wounds doesn't do that for you, it just leaves him at 0 HP and dying.I suppose. For a 2nd level spell, the opportunity cost of a spell known, your bonus action, your action, your Concentration, and proximity that renders the range of the spell largely useless, you can use it to get a slightly lesser effect as you would casting a first level spell twice without losing Concentration on something else. Admittedly, the second "casting" is off-turn without spending your reaction, but given what you've already paid for this....

[MaxWilson]

That's just it: I don't really see a point where the opportunity cost is worth it, here. There might be some rare occasion where witch bolt would be perfect on a wizard (perhaps the fire elemental they're fighting is immune to his firebolt and the consistent round-to-round damage of witch bolt would be more welcome than a single-shot damaging first-level spell), just as there might be some rare occasion where healing spirit is something you wistfully wish your Ranger had instead of another spell despite the fact that he uses each of his other spells far more frequently than he would use healing spirit, but that still means the opportunity cost of learning healing spirit isn't worth it. (Heck, a wizard preparing witch bolt not only merely gave up one of a lot more spells prepared that day, but also could ditch it again tomorrow if he doesn't like it, after all.)

Opportunity costs, like any costs, need to be worth paying.

I suppose. For a 2nd level spell, the opportunity cost of a spell known, your bonus action, your action, your Concentration, and proximity that renders the range of the spell largely useless, you can use it to get a slightly lesser effect as you would casting a first level spell twice without losing Concentration on something else. Admittedly, the second "casting" is off-turn without spending your reaction, but given what you've already paid for this....

But the Wizard would (should) never spend one of his spell picks on Witch Bolt in the first place. And Toll the Dead or Chill Touch or Ray of Frost would still be better than Witch Bolt.

An archery Ranger playing by RAW on capping damage at HP should consider Healing Spirit unless there are already lots of healers in the party. That's a niche. It's not a terrible one. When you fight a Fire Giant, Purple Worm, or other big solo monster you'll be glad you have the option in case anyone goes down. Can it be useless? Sure, like Pass Without Trace can be useless if the DM never lets stealth matter. It's a middle of the pack spell. (Too bad Rangers only get a handful of picks.)

[MaxWilson]

That's just it: I don't really see a point where the opportunity cost is worth it, here. There might be some rare occasion where witch bolt would be perfect on a wizard (perhaps the fire elemental they're fighting is immune to his firebolt and the consistent round-to-round damage of witch bolt would be more welcome than a single-shot damaging first-level spell), just as there might be some rare occasion where healing spirit is something you wistfully wish your Ranger had instead of another spell despite the fact that he uses each of his other spells far more frequently than he would use healing spirit, but that still means the opportunity cost of learning healing spirit isn't worth it. (Heck, a wizard preparing witch bolt not only merely gave up one of a lot more spells prepared that day, but also could ditch it again tomorrow if he doesn't like it, after all.)

Opportunity costs, like any costs, need to be worth paying.

I suppose. For a 2nd level spell, the opportunity cost of a spell known, your bonus action, your action, your Concentration, and proximity that renders the range of the spell largely useless, you can use it to get a slightly lesser effect as you would casting a first level spell twice without losing Concentration on something else. Admittedly, the second "casting" is off-turn without spending your reaction, but given what you've already paid for this....

But the Wizard would (should) never spend one of his spell picks on Witch Bolt in the first place. And Toll the Dead or Chill Touch or Ray of Frost would still be better than Witch Bolt.

An archery Ranger playing by RAW on capping damage at HP should consider Healing Spirit unless there are already lots of healers in the party. That's a niche. It's not a bad one. When you fight a Fire Giant, Purple Worm, or other big solo monster you'll be glad you have the option in case anyone goes down. Can it be useless? Sure, like Pass Without Trace can be useless if the DM never lets stealth matter. It's a middle of the pack spell. (Too bad Rangers only get a handful of picks.)

[Segev]

But the Wizard would (should) never spend one of his spell picks on Witch Bolt in the first place. And Toll the Dead or Chill Touch or Ray of Frost would still be better than Witch Bolt.

An archery Ranger playing by RAW on capping damage at HP should consider Healing Spirit unless there are already lots of healers in the party. That's a niche. It's not a terrible one. When you fight a Fire Giant, Purple Worm, or other big solo monster you'll be glad you have the option in case anyone goes down. Can it be useless? Sure, like Pass Without Trace can be useless if the DM never lets stealth matter. It's a middle of the pack spell. (Too bad Rangers only get a handful of picks.)

I dispute the assertion that the wizard - who has far more possibility to add a spell to his spellbook and far more spells prepared per day than the Ranger will ever know - has less reason to learn witch bolt as a pseudo-cantrip than the Ranger has to learn (the nerfed) healing spirit. Wizards often have only one damage cantrip. Expecting that he'll have both firebolt and chill touch is not entirely reasonable, especially when a wizard's whole schtick is that he is about learning new spells to shore up weak spots (so seeking a "cantrip-like" first level spell could be reasonable). Witch bolt does fill this niche: it's one spell slot for round-after-round of damage that is comparable to a cantrip's damage, at least at levels 1-5. (Don't get me wrong, it's a terrible spell and the additional limitations make it worse than a cantrip even if it didn't cost a spell slot.)

Rangers have very few spells known, and not too many spells per day. A second level spell is very valuable to them. Far more than a generic "spell prepared" is to a wizard.

I don't think you'll be particularly more glad for healing spirit than you would a simple healing potion, and the times you'll want to use them will be about as rare. By 5th level, healing potions shouldn't be so rare that you can't use them when a nerfed healing spirit would be worth casting.

Essentially, the case you make for witch bolt never being worth it for a wizard is the case for healing spirit, as nerfed, never being worth it for a Ranger. Except the Ranger is even more sharply limited on the resources the opportunity cost of healing spirit represents than the wizard is for the resources the opportunity cost of witch bolt represents. So your argument, applied consistently, would actually be that Rangers have even less reason to take healing spirit, as nerfed, than wizards have to take witch bolt.

[MaxWilson]

(A) I dispute the assertion that the wizard - who has far more possibility to add a spell to his spellbook and far more spells prepared per day than the Ranger will ever know - has less reason to learn witch bolt as a pseudo-cantrip than the Ranger has to learn (the nerfed) healing spirit. Wizards often have only one damage cantrip. Expecting that he'll have both firebolt and chill touch is not entirely reasonable, especially when a wizard's whole schtick is that he is about learning new spells to shore up weak spots (so seeking a "cantrip-like" first level spell could be reasonable). Witch bolt does fill this niche: it's one spell slot for round-after-round of damage that is comparable to a cantrip's damage, at least at levels 1-5. (Don't get me wrong, it's a terrible spell and the additional limitations make it worse than a cantrip even if it didn't cost a spell slot.)

Rangers have very few spells known, and not too many spells per day. A second level spell is very valuable to them. Far more than a generic "spell prepared" is to a wizard.

(B) I don't think you'll be particularly more glad for healing spirit than you would a simple healing potion, and the times you'll want to use them will be about as rare. By 5th level, healing potions shouldn't be so rare that you can't use them when a nerfed healing spirit would be worth casting.

Essentially, the case you make for witch bolt never being worth it for a wizard is the case for healing spirit, as nerfed, never being worth it for a Ranger. Except the Ranger is even more sharply limited on the resources the opportunity cost of healing spirit represents than the wizard is for the resources the opportunity cost of witch bolt represents. So your argument, applied consistently, would actually be that Rangers have even less reason to take healing spirit, as nerfed, than wizards have to take witch bolt.

(A) Since we both agree that Witch Bolt is a terrible spell and isn't worth a spell pick (you're focusing on acquiring it through other means), let's skip this point and move on to (B), which is the crux of the matter: how broad is Healing Spirit's niche?

(B) Action economy, cost, range, and reliability make Healing Spirit superior to a healing potion. How rare this is depends of course on how often PCs go down, which is a function of both encounter difficulty and PC power (including both player skill and player willingness to powergame).

If you're in a game where PCs go down at all, and the DM is using vanilla RAW on capping damage at HP--the same conditions under which Healing Word is useful--then Healing Spirit is useful too, sometimes better. Let me give you a hypothetical:

You're in a 7th level party and you're a Wood Elf Hunter Ranger (4/3 slots). The other PCs are a Paladin of Devotion 7, Illusionist 7, and Hexblade 7.

You're Dex 18 with Archery style + Sharpshooter. You know Absorb Elements, Zephyr Strike, Pass Without Trace, Spike Growth, and Healing Spirit.

You're in a fight against two Fire Giants, and one Fire Giant is dead but the Paladin in melee with the second Fire Giant (40' away from you) is at only 9 HP. The Hexblade is blasting away with Eldritch Blast and the Illusionist is plinking with Ray of Frost. You can shoot the Fire Giant twice and cast Healing Spirit (thereby guaranteeing that the Paladin will be at positive HP next round), or... the DM offers to let you swap out Healing Spirit for another spell if you do it right now. What other spell do you want more?

This isn't a niche situation, and it doesn't have to be a Fire Giant--any big monster with Multiattack 2 will do. (A key point: Healing Spirit happens at the beginning of a turn, so even if they have 2 failed death saves from an auto-crit, they still come back to life and get a turn without risk of dying to a third failed death save!) Against ranged or spellcasting monsters it's even better--you could keep the paladin alive against three Spirit Nagas hurling Lightning Bolts or Fireballing Flameskulls because those spells can't auto-crit.

[Segev]

(A) Since we both agree that Witch Bolt is a terrible spell and isn't worth a spell pick (you're focusing on acquiring it through other means), let's skip this point and move on to (B), which is the crux of the matter: how broad is Healing Spirit's niche?

(B) Action economy, cost, range, and reliability make Healing Spirit superior to a healing potion. How rare this is depends of course on how often PCs go down, which is a function of both encounter difficulty and PC power (including both player skill and player willingness to powergame).

If you're in a game where PCs go down at all, and the DM is using vanilla RAW on capping damage at HP--the same conditions under which Healing Word is useful--then Healing Spirit is useful too, sometimes better. Let me give you a hypothetical:

You're in a 7th level party and you're a Wood Elf Hunter Ranger (4/3 slots). The other PCs are a Paladin of Devotion 7, Illusionist 7, and Hexblade 7.

You're Dex 18 with Archery style + Sharpshooter. You know Absorb Elements, Zephyr Strike, Pass Without Trace, Spike Growth, and Healing Spirit.

You're in a fight against two Fire Giants, and one Fire Giant is dead but the Paladin in melee with the second Fire Giant (40' away from you) is at only 9 HP. The Hexblade is blasting away with Eldritch Blast and the Illusionist is plinking with Ray of Frost. You can shoot the Fire Giant twice and cast Healing Spirit (thereby guaranteeing that the Paladin will be at positive HP next round), or... the DM offers to let you swap out Healing Spirit for another spell if you do it right now. What other spell do you want more?

This isn't a niche situation, and it doesn't have to be a Fire Giant--any big monster with Multiattack 2 will do. (A key point: Healing Spirit happens at the beginning of a turn, so even if they have 2 failed death saves from an auto-crit, they still come back to life and get a turn without risk of dying to a third failed death save!) Against ranged or spellcasting monsters it's even better--you could keep the paladin alive against three Spirit Nagas hurling Lightning Bolts or Fireballing Flameskulls because those spells can't auto-crit.

I would argue that the Ranger is likely keeping spike growth (why doesn't the one we're looking at here know hunter's mark?) up and will see dropping it (which is keeping the giant at bay OR causing him damage) in favor of 1d6 healing that may not be necessary as a tactically-unwise move. In a more likely situation, the Ranger knows hunter's mark and has used his bonus action to shift it to the remaining giant and attacked it with his two ranged attacks.

So, to answer your question: in that VERY MOMENT, I can't see why switching from healing spirit to hunter's mark is a desirable move, but I can absolutely see it as being the spell I chose instead of healing spirit back at the start of the fight, if the DM gave me the choice then. Or back when I made the character, when I actually had the choice.

Even in that very moment, the only reason healing spirit seems at all optimal is because I've apparently not cast any spells that are using my Concentration despite this being ostensibly a challenging fight that has us worried the Paladin might go down this round.

[MaxWilson]

(C) I would argue that the Ranger is likely keeping spike growth (why doesn't the one we're looking at here know hunter's mark?) up and will see dropping it (which is keeping the giant at bay OR causing him damage) in favor of 1d6 healing that may not be necessary as a tactically-unwise move. In a more likely situation, the Ranger knows hunter's mark and has used his bonus action to shift it to the remaining giant and attacked it with his two ranged attacks.

(A) So, to answer your question: in that VERY MOMENT, I can't see why switching from healing spirit to hunter's mark is a desirable move, but I can absolutely see it as being the spell I chose instead of healing spirit back at the start of the fight, if the DM gave me the choice then. Or back when I made the character, when I actually had the choice.

(B) Even in that very moment, the only reason healing spirit seems at all optimal is because I've apparently not cast any spells that are using my Concentration despite this being ostensibly a challenging fight that has us worried the Paladin might go down this round.

(A) Hunter's Mark has pretty bad damage and I would generally discourage its use, but even if you had been using Hunter's Mark all along to kill the first Giant, will you agree that at that point when the paladin is at 9 HP, dropping Hunter's Mark for Healing Spirit (to keep the paladin alive) is better than keeping Hunter's Mark for the extra +d6 (or unlikely +2d6)? If you still disagree then we should discuss further.

(B)/(C) I disagree. Keeping Spike Growth up on the Paladin and Giant is IMHO clearly inferior to attacking twice and keeping the Paladin alive. Even if you previously used Spike Growth as part of how you killed the first giant, at this point its utility is gone. The Giant will kill the paladin and then start killing the other PCs.

What assumptions are you making differently than I am, to make Spike Growth more valuable than Healing Spirit/saving the paladin's life?

To answer your question about Hunter's Mark, I find it's usually a bad use of concentration in tough fights and a bad use of resources in easy fights. Since Rangers have so few spells known, it doesn't make the cut. Dropping Goodberry from the Ranger in question was already painful, justified only by the fact that Healing Spirit is almost as good at healing as Goodberry is, and dropping something like Zephyr Strike or Pass Without Trace in favor of Hunter's Mark is just not something I could justify to myself.

[Segev]

(A) Hunter's Mark has pretty bad damage and I would generally discourage its use, but even if you had been using Hunter's Mark all along to kill the first Giant, will you agree that at that point when the paladin is at 9 HP, dropping Hunter's Mark for Healing Spirit (to keep the paladin alive) is better than keeping Hunter's Mark for the extra +d6 (or unlikely +2d6)? If you still disagree then we should discuss further.

(B)/(C) I disagree. Keeping Spike Growth up on the Paladin and Giant is IMHO clearly inferior to attacking twice and keeping the Paladin alive. Even if you previously used Spike Growth as part of how you killed the first giant, at this point its utility is gone. The Giant will kill the paladin and then start killing the other PCs.

What assumptions are you making differently than I am, to make Spike Growth more valuable than Healing Spirit/saving the paladin's life?

To answer your question about Hunter's Mark, I find it's usually a bad use of concentration in tough fights and a bad use of resources in easy fights. Since Rangers have so few spells known, it doesn't make the cut. Dropping Goodberry from the Ranger in question was already painful, justified only by the fact that Healing Spirit is almost as good at healing as Goodberry is, and dropping something like Zephyr Strike or Pass Without Trace for Hunter's Mark is just not something I could justify to myself.

I generally find that doing more damage to the enemy prevents more damage than healing. 1d6 pop-up healing isn't going to be all that relevant enough of the time, especially since the giant could just remove the paladin from the healing spirit's space if that were really a concern. (Grappling is a thing, and falling damage could potentially do 9 points from the giant's head height, and the giant can make sure the paladin falls prone somewhere your healing spirit isn't. You can move it, but then the giant gets another turn to deal with the paladin before your spirit activates.

Is that how it'd play out? Maybe not, but we can't assume better optimization of resources on the Ranger's side than on the Fire Giant's.

Spike growth controls where the giant can go, or forces ongoing damage.

Honestly, I don't see how zephyr strike is in any worth casting, especially for an archer. It's 1d8 force damage for your concentration and a spell slot, once. Not provoking AoOs is meh for an archer, which is why he didn't already have it cast in the example you gave. I really like my mobility, but this costs concentration for what is essentially a round of extra damage and extra movement. Best use I can think of is with a Gloomstalker where you know a fight's upcoming so you can really burst that first round.

Hunter's mark is an extra d6 every attack, and while it's not more mobility, it's not requiring you to run into melee and run around in melee in order to make it useful. And it's actually surprisingly useful with fleeing enemies, or with enemies who like to strike-and-fade. (It's just extra damage against a fire giant, admittedly.)

While I agree that it might be nice to have a spell-based healing, the way healing spirit is set up, it just doesn't help the way it needs to to make it worth the second-level spell slot, let alone space on the Ranger's limited known-list.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Honestly, I don't see how zephyr strike is in any worth casting, especially for an archer. It's 1d8 force damage for your concentration and a spell slot, once. Not provoking AoOs is meh for an archer, which is why he didn't already have it cast in the example you gave. I really like my mobility, but this costs concentration for what is essentially a round of extra damage and extra movement. Best use I can think of is with a Gloomstalker where you know a fight's upcoming so you can really burst that first round.
Honestly, I think Zephyr Strike is pretty fantastic for an archer. You get to "dash", disengage and have advantage in the same bonus action. I also think you're underestimating the utility in a spell that makes you ignore opportunity attacks for 1 minute, you can't be pinned down unless you're completely surrounded or lose concentration.

I don't know why you would want to have it cast in advance, you'd spend the spell slot without knowing whether you needed any of that mobility. It's a reactionary spell, you cast it when you need to be aggressive with your action but don't like that the Fire Giant has entered melee range against you.

I personally see it a bit similarly to Absorb Elements, which this Ranger also has. It's a useful tool to have, it can situationally prevent a lot of damage. Nobody suggests that Absorb Elements is bad because it adds mediocre (often resisted by whatever dealt it) damage. Zephyr Strike, in this case, also has proactive uses though.

Hunter's mark is an extra d6 every attack, and while it's not more mobility, it's not requiring you to run into melee and run around in melee in order to make it useful. And it's actually surprisingly useful with fleeing enemies, or with enemies who like to strike-and-fade. (It's just extra damage against a fire giant, admittedly.)
Is the bolded here in reference to Zephyr Strike? Nothing about Zephyr Strike is required to be melee, not sure what you mean here.

While I agree that it might be nice to have a spell-based healing, the way healing spirit is set up, it just doesn't help the way it needs to to make it worth the second-level spell slot, let alone space on the Ranger's limited known-list.
I'm less and less impressed by Hunter's Mark (and Hex) the more I play. Ranger's have got a pretty versatile set of tools, limiting your concentration to just Hunter's Mark is a pretty mediocre choice imo. Having these two spells also tends to incentivize you not to make use of other concentration spells (like Spike Growth) for X amount of bonus D6 damage.

I also prefer to think of it this way: does the extra damage I deal with Hunter's Mark deal more damage than the Paladin, or really any party member who would be saved by Healing Spirit? The answer is almost certainly no.

[Captain Panda]

(A) Hunter's Mark has pretty bad damage and I would generally discourage its use,


Strong disagree. Hunter's Mark is a small but consistent multi-fight damage boost. Those extra dice add up over multiple fights. It's only a level one spell, so it's a cheap way to get that extra damage. And compared to healing spirit? It's not even a contest which is going to get more value for a ranger. If your ranger is level 9 and has Conjure Animals, that should come first obviously, but for the first eight levels Hunter's Mark is a fine option.


Dropping Goodberry from the Ranger in question was already painful, justified only by the fact that Healing Spirit is almost as good at healing as Goodberry is,

Healing Spirit, as it is now, does not even approach Goodberry.

The berries last 24 hours, so you can use yesterday's slots for healing. These hit points are restored at no virtually no cost (maybe a riskier rest overnight because you're down on spell slots if a wild pack of murder monkeys attack), and that is even more efficient than pre-nerf Healing Spirit, while they last. Now? With Healing Spirit doing 3d6? Goodberry just wins.

If you have the type of DM who hates pop-up healing and won't allow the Owlberry Delivery System, putting a big neon sign above an unconscious friend that says "He's about to get up!" strikes me as a way to make sure he dies. The giants in your example can attack twice, with +9 and advantage. In they highly likely event they hit twice, that is a dead party member.



I also prefer to think of it this way: does the extra damage I deal with Hunter's Mark deal more damage than the Paladin, or really any party member who would be saved by Healing Spirit? The answer is almost certainly no.

That's operating under the assumption your healing spirit will actually save the paladin, which is a point that I do not believe has been established as a certain outcome. Two hits, dead paladin, and now the giant (intelligence 10) has a big, obvious warning sign that if he doesn't finish the job the paladin is going to start smiting him again. The spirit seems to me in this situation to be just as likely to get the paladin killed as to save him.

With pop-up healing, you want it now. Are we also assuming that the paladin goes first in initiative? If so, alright, this can work in that case. Strikes me as a very unreliable spell considering that is not something you can count on.

[Segev]

Honestly, I think Zephyr Strike is pretty fantastic for an archer. You get to "dash", disengage and have advantage in the same bonus action. I also think you're underestimating the utility in a spell that makes you ignore opportunity attacks for 1 minute, since you can choose to forego the latter 2 bonuses to keep that one for the full duration, you can't be pinned down unless you're completely surrounded.If you're an archer, it's pretty hard to get pinned down like that anyway, though I'll grant it's at least niche useful. It might be worth the opportunity cost to know it for the combination of all three effects it gives, expanding its niche uses to cover a few more cases.


I don't know why you would want to have it cast in advance, you'd spend the spell slot without knowing whether you needed any of that mobility. It's a reactionary spell, you cast it when you need to be aggressive with your action but don't like that the Fire Giant has entered melee range against you.Why have it have a duration if you're not going to cast it until you need the speed and damage? Again, I suppose using it to pull back from melee if melee comes to you isn't awful, and I think it more likely to do what you want it to when you cast it than healing spirit will, though, at least.

I just foresee it being a dead spell on a spell list, never getting used because it isn't worth the spell slot.


Is the bolded here in reference to Zephyr Strike? Nothing about Zephyr Strike is required to be melee, not sure what you mean here.You were just discussing the only effect it has between the round you cast it and the round you burn it for extra speed and +1d8 force damage on an attack. If you're not running around in melee, it's doing nothing except being a pre-cast buff for one round. Not awful, but it eats Concentration and doesn't do much while doing so. Spike growth is a much better use of Concentration, even if we disagree on the usefulness of hunter's mark.


I also prefer to think of it this way: does the extra damage I deal with Hunter's Mark deal more damage than the Paladin, or really any party member who would be saved by Healing Spirit? The answer is almost certainly no.
Over the course of play? Almost certainly "yes," considering how often healing spirit will really buy more rounds of up-time for your Paladin or whoever.

The problem is that healing spirit is awkwardly timed, doesn't do much healing (so isn't worth having if you're not using it for pop-up healing), and with the nerf isn't worth using after combat. I fully acknowledge the nerf is wise since they didn't want it to be used after combat, but they screwed up entirely in writing it for what it is they DID want it for.

I've proposed previously in this thread three alternatives that would, I think, achieve their goals better than either official version of the spell. But as-is, it's not 100% useless, but it's going to be useful so rarely - and when useful, actually succeed at doing its job even more rarely - that it's a bad investment of a precious spell known.

[ProsecutorGodot]

That's operating under the assumption your healing spirit will actually save the paladin, which is a point that I do not believe has been established as a certain outcome. Two hits, dead paladin, and now the giant (intelligence 10) has a big, obvious warning sign that if he doesn't finish the job the paladin is going to start smiting him again. The spirit seems to me in this situation to be just as likely to get the paladin killed as to save him.

We're operating under that assumption because that's the highlight. The alternative here is just having Hunters Mark, which occasionally gives you bonus damage. I would rather have the opportunity to save the Paladin when this situation occurs than be helpless.


If you're an archer, it's pretty hard to get pinned down like that anyway, though I'll grant it's at least niche useful. It might be worth the opportunity cost to know it for the combination of all three effects it gives, expanding its niche uses to cover a few more cases.

Why have it have a duration if you're not going to cast it until you need the speed and damage? Again, I suppose using it to pull back from melee if melee comes to you isn't awful, and I think it more likely to do what you want it to when you cast it than healing spirit will, though, at least.

I just foresee it being a dead spell on a spell list, never getting used because it isn't worth the spell slot.
The same could be said about Shield, never get hit never cast it, or Absorb Elements, or Counterspell, or Revivify. When a spell has a niche use case you should evaluate it under the assumption that the use case can/will happen. It's not unheard of for the Archer to be caught in a compromising position and this has a relatively low opportunity cost for most Ranger's.


You were just discussing the only effect it has between the round you cast it and the round you burn it for extra speed and +1d8 force damage on an attack. If you're not running around in melee, it's doing nothing except being a pre-cast buff for one round. Not awful, but it eats Concentration and doesn't do much while doing so. Spike growth is a much better use of Concentration, even if we disagree on the usefulness of hunter's mark.
That depends entirely on the position of the Spike Growth at this stage of the battle, if its no longer an obstacle it's not worth your concentration anymore. If we assume that Spike Growth is well position and my Ranger would benefit from the disengage portion of Zephyr Strike in the same moment, I would also probably maintain Spike Growth and opt instead to disengage if that spell is valuable enough.


Over the course of play? Almost certainly "yes," considering how often healing spirit will really buy more rounds of up-time for your Paladin or whoever.
I'm not as concerned over how much damage Hunter's Mark will or has done for the entirety of a campaign. My poor opinion of the spell comes from how often I've seen Hunter's Mark drop after having done little/no damage because the Ranger found a better spell to concentrate on (Spike Growth again as an example, since we agree on this being a useful spell) and now they've lost that spell slot. Even worse is when the Ranger drops Hunter's Mark after taking a hit.


I've proposed previously in this thread three alternatives that would, I think, achieve their goals better than either official version of the spell. But as-is, it's not 100% useless, but it's going to be useful so rarely - and when useful, actually succeed at doing its job even more rarely - that it's a bad investment of a precious spell known.
I don't agree that Ranger even has all that many good choices for spells known. That may seem contradictory to what I said earlier about them having a versatile tool set, but I mean versatility in practice not in choice. There are a lot of spells that are on the Ranger's list that are sub par, I think Healing Spirit (and Zephyr Strike) still manage to stand out as better choices in comparison.

[Segev]

There are a lot of spells that are on the Ranger's list that are sub par, I think Healing Spirit (and Zephyr Strike) still manage to stand out as better choices in comparison.

I agree that they have a lot of bad spells, and a few good ones. I do not agree that nerfed healing spirit is good enough to take on a Ranger. Is it good enough to cast every now and again if you have it? Maybe. But you'd have to be given it by something like a subclass choice that you're picking up for other reasons, and this is just a sort-of ribbon add-on to make it worthwhile for a Ranger to have.

[MaxWilson]

I generally find that doing more damage to the enemy prevents more damage than healing. 1d6 pop-up healing isn't going to be all that relevant enough of the time, especially since the giant could just remove the paladin from the healing spirit's space if that were really a concern. (A) (Grappling is a thing, and falling damage could potentially do 9 points from the giant's head height, and the giant can make sure the paladin falls prone somewhere your healing spirit isn't. You can move it, but then the giant gets another turn to deal with the paladin before your spirit activates.

Is that how it'd play out? Maybe not, but we can't assume better optimization of resources on the Ranger's side than on the Fire Giant's.

Spike growth controls where the giant can go, or forces ongoing damage.

(B) Honestly, I don't see how zephyr strike is in any worth casting, especially for an archer. It's 1d8 force damage for your concentration and a spell slot, once. Not provoking AoOs is meh for an archer, which is why he didn't already have it cast in the example you gave. I really like my mobility, but this costs concentration for what is essentially a round of extra damage and extra movement. Best use I can think of is with a Gloomstalker where you know a fight's upcoming so you can really burst that first round.

Hunter's mark is an extra d6 every attack, and while it's not more mobility, it's not requiring you to run into melee and run around in melee in order to make it useful. And it's actually surprisingly useful with fleeing enemies, or with enemies who like to strike-and-fade. (It's just extra damage against a fire giant, admittedly.)

While I agree that it might be nice to have a spell-based healing, the way healing spirit is set up, it just doesn't help the way it needs to to make it worth the second-level spell slot, let alone space on the Ranger's limited known-list.

(A) Interesting solution. I'm not going to argue with you about whether grappling permits lifting the grappled target 20' off the ground (vs. dragging as the grappler moves, which is clearly allowed). Arguendo let's say it does. I don't personally think "paladin with two or three failed death saves and a giant who takes an extra d6 or 2d6 of damage" is a better outcome than "grappled paladin with zero failed death saves", but de gustibus I suppose. At any table where this level of freeform is allowed I would also expect Fire Giants to be allowed to jump clear out of a Spike Growth zone without taking any damage, but maybe I'm wrong. It is definitely an interesting solution, good on you for inventing it.

(B) It's a bonus action which grants you advantage on your Sharpshooter attack (i.e. for most intents and purposes it's basically a third attack as a bonus action, against a high-AC target like a Fire Giant) which also prevents you from having disadvantage on your ranged attacks (important for a Sharpshooter) AND gives you extra movement to get out of melee AND gives you d8 force damage as a bonus.

With Dex 18 and Archery, the Ranger's expected damage against AC 18 is 13.4 DPR. Hunter's Mark would raise that to 16.2, an increase of 2.8. Zephyr Strike raises it to 20.86, an increase of 7.46, worth 2.66 rounds' worth of Hunter's Mark. In both cases the damage is moderately unimportant, but Zephyr's Strike gives that damage to you as a fringe benefit (with no range limit and only one bonus action)--the main benefit is the mobility. (And that mobility, among other things, keeps you alive long enough to be around to the backup healer if the primary healer, e.g. the Paladin, goes down.)

I guess we just have different opinions about Hunter's Mark. Oh well.


If you have the type of DM who hates pop-up healing and won't allow the Owlberry Delivery System, putting a big neon sign above an unconscious friend that says "He's about to get up!" strikes me as a way to make sure he dies. The giants in your example can attack twice, with +9 and advantage. In they highly likely event they hit twice, that is a dead party member.

Fire Giant attack #1: hits, knocks paladin down to 0 HP.
Fire Giant attack #2: auto-crit, counts as 2 failed death saves.
Paladin: gets back up and attacks the fire giant.

Did you misread the scenario and think both Fire Giants are still alive?


I'm not as concerned over how much damage Hunter's Mark will or has done for the entirety of a campaign. My poor opinion of the spell comes from how often I've seen Hunter's Mark drop after having done little/no damage because the Ranger found a better spell to concentrate on (Spike Growth again as an example, since we agree on this being a useful spell) and now they've lost that spell slot. Even worse is when the Ranger drops Hunter's Mark after taking a hit.

Similarly, this is my experience with bardlocks/sorlocks and Hex. It might be partly because I'm a cheapskate though--if I can win an easy fight by spending only a Shield or an Expeditious Retreat spell instead of HP, I'd rather do that than nova with Hex AND HP. (And in a bigger fight of course I'm concentrating on something bigger, like Hypnotic Pattern, Fear, or Animate Objects.)

+d6 per attack just isn't a game-changer.

[Captain Panda]

Fire Giant attack #1: hits, knocks paladin down to 0 HP.
Fire Giant attack #2: auto-crit, counts as 2 failed death saves.
Paladin: gets back up and attacks the fire giant.

Did you misread the scenario and think both Fire Giants are still alive?

No, I am assuming one giant. I think where I'm missing it here is that you are operating under the assumption the paladin is going to get the healing and get up before he is attacked, and that has about a 50/50 chance of happening. If you are in a situation where the paladin is first in initiative, I concede that this works. If the giant is first in initiative, the paladin is probably dead.

[MaxWilson]

No, I am assuming one giant. I think where I'm missing it here is that you are operating under the assumption the paladin is going to get the healing and get up before he is attacked, and that has about a 50/50 chance of happening. If you are in a situation where the paladin is first in initiative, I concede that this works. If the giant is first in initiative, the paladin is probably dead.

Then you're making a rules mistake. If the giant goes first then this happens:

Fire Giant attack #1: hits, knocks paladin down to 0 HP.
Fire Giant attack #2: auto-crit, counts as 2 failed death saves.
Paladin: (healed by Healing Spirit) gets back up and attacks the fire giant.

If the giant goes second then this happens:

Paladin: attacks the giant.
Fire Giant attack #1: hits, knocks paladin down to 0 HP.
Fire Giant attack #2: auto-crit, counts as 2 failed death saves.
Paladin: (healed by Healing Spirit) gets back up and attacks the fire giant.

It doesn't matter who goes first. The giant would have to have three attacks in order to kill the Paladin.

Edit: or are you using a non-vanilla initiative system where you reroll every round? No shame in that--vanilla PHB initiative is the worst thing about 5E--but if so you need to clarify that you roll initiative every round. People reading this thread have no way to know you're using an initiative rule variant if you don't say so.

[Captain Panda]

Then you're making a rules mistake. If the giant goes first then this happens:
It doesn't matter who goes first. The giant would have to have three attacks in order to kill the Paladin.


Okay, just to be fully clear on the scenario:
Paladin is unconscious on the ground.
Ranger goes.
Giant goes.
Paladin goes.

Is this an accurate assessment of the scenario presented? If not, I did miss something.

Wait, went back and read, I did miss something. I missed that the paladin was at 9hp. I thought he was down.

My argument assumed the paladin was already down, since Healing Spirit does not heal instantly, it heals when you move into it or at the start of your turn. So paladin isn't getting that 1d6 until the giant has had a chance to flatten him if he is already down. If he's just one hit from being down, yeah, this scenario works. You need three swings to kill the paladin.



Edit: or are you using a non-vanilla initiative system where you reroll every round? No shame in that--vanilla PHB initiative is the worst thing about 5E--but if so you need to clarify that you roll initiative every round. People reading this thread have no way to know you're using an initiative rule variant if you don't say so.

Nope, I am not. I would definitely point that out if I was.

[Xetheral]

I just foresee [Zephyr Strike] being a dead spell on a spell list, never getting used because it isn't worth the spell slot.

It's interesting just how far apart peoples' opinions on spells can be. :) In my mind, Zephyr Strike is one of the best panic-button spells in the game. At the cost of a bonus action, for one round you effectively get to Action Surge twice to be able to dash and disengage, while still getting all of your attacks, one of which also gets advantage and also gets bonus damage. And if you need to, you can even keep concentrating on it for action-free disengage for up to 10 rounds afterwards. It's the ultimate spell for enabling fighting retreats.

If it didn't require concentration I'd consider it the best first-level spell in the game. Even with concentration, I consider it among the best. Tactically speaking, it's similar to a double-range Misty Step that comes with advantage and bonus damage on an attack, and is an entire spell level lower, at the cost of ending concentration on any other concentration spell.

Then again, dashing and disengaging and fighting retreats are quite common at my table, and so the ability to do all three at the same time is incredibly appealing. If those options don't see as much use at your table, I can understand why the spell would be less appealing.

[MaxWilson]

It's interesting just how far apart peoples' opinions on spells can be. :) In my mind, Zephyr Strike is one of the best panic-button spells in the game. At the cost of a bonus action, for one round you effectively get to Action Surge twice to be able to dash and disengage, while still getting all of your attacks, one of which also gets advantage and also gets bonus damage. And if you need to, you can even keep concentrating on it for action-free disengage for up to 10 rounds afterwards. It's the ultimate spell for enabling fighting retreats.

If it didn't require concentration I'd consider it the best first-level spell in the game. Even with concentration, I consider it among the best. Tactically speaking, it's similar to a double-range Misty Step that comes with advantage and bonus damage on an attack, and is an entire spell level lower, at the cost of ending concentration on any other concentration spell.

Then again, dashing and disengaging and fighting retreats are quite common at my table, and so the ability to do all three at the same time is incredibly appealing. If those options don't see as much use at your table, I can understand why the spell would be less appealing.

I agree with everything except double-range. Misty Step and Zephyr Strike, plus 30' of movement, both get you 60' away from trouble (plus the 5' away that you were initially).

Zephyr Strike also combos nicely with Longstrider.

[Xetheral]

I agree with everything except double-range. Misty Step and Zephyr Strike, plus 30' of movement, both get you 60' away from trouble (plus the 5' away that you were initially).

Zephyr Strike also combos nicely with Longstrider.

Good point on the range--I'd overlooked that.

[Witty Username]

Honestly, I don't see how zephyr strike is in any worth casting, especially for an archer. It's 1d8 force damage for your concentration and a spell slot, once. Not provoking AoOs is meh for an archer, which is why he didn't already have it cast in the example you gave. I really like my mobility, but this costs concentration for what is essentially a round of extra damage and extra movement. Best use I can think of is with a Gloomstalker where you know a fight's upcoming so you can really burst that first round.

It can work like a poor man's misty step, if you need to reposition. Also, it is disengage for as long as you maintain concentration. I think a melee build it is more reasonable (getting at back lines or such), but it could be useful if you need your own escape/fall back option but the rest of the party is covered. I would prefer something to provide the party something, but if the party is covered, one must protect one's own ass.
Probably swap out if you get misty step.