PDA

View Full Version : [3.5] Healing Hands. Why touch based healing?



Starsinger
2008-12-11, 04:26 PM
The majority of core healing spells in 3.5 are touch based, why? Is it because Clerics are fullplate d8 HD? Or is it a side affect of the Cleric's sizable defensive qualities?

In short: Why is healing limited to touch?

Morty
2008-12-11, 04:28 PM
Probably because otherwise in-combat healing would be too easy.

Epinephrine
2008-12-11, 04:30 PM
I don't think that there is an in-game reason given. Presumably, it has to do with the feel of the game, a desire for the healer to have to put him/herself at risk, and perhaps to imitate life, in that to tend to our wounded we need to be close to them.

Mechanically, there is no reason that it need be the case. One could simply houserule that cure spells are close range, and I doubt it would make much difference to the average game (though invisible, flying healers might be a real pain).

Fax Celestis
2008-12-11, 04:30 PM
It's to make a cleric have to make a choice about being safe and being helpful. Ranged touch spells would allow clerics to stand safely out of range and still tag the meleers with healing powers.

This is also why they have heavy armor proficiency.

starwoof
2008-12-11, 04:30 PM
Its a lot more dramatic when a holy man/woman places their hands over a wound than pointing a ray at it from across the room.

Pie Guy
2008-12-11, 04:33 PM
Its a lot more dramatic when a holy man/woman places their hands over a wound than pointing a ray at it from across the room.

Are you sure? You could make millions off selling a healing laser!

Greg
2008-12-11, 04:34 PM
Are you sure? You could make millions off selling a healing laser!
He said dramatic, rather than useful.

starwoof
2008-12-11, 04:35 PM
Are you sure? You could make millions off selling a healing laser!

You mean like this one?:smallbiggrin: (http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l121/starwoof2/tf2.jpg)

Rebonack
2008-12-11, 04:37 PM
Medic's healing laser is pretty awesome if you ask me.

That said, I favor giving healing spells a range of Close and allowing them to be cast as a swift action. That way the cleric can properly take part in combat and heal the party without feeling like a side-liner.

Also helps justify nerfing them into bard spell progression.

UserClone
2008-12-11, 04:43 PM
Once you give a healing spell range, it qualifies for some pretty wonky stuff, like chaining and the War Weaver's class abilities. Makes healing too freaking easy.

Telonius
2008-12-11, 04:47 PM
I'll go with "tradition" over mechanics being the primary reason the game designers made it a touch spell. I'm only aware of a couple real-world stories (either fictional, legendary, or "official religious") that involved divine healing at range. Either the deity heals you directly, or somebody touches you.

Starbuck_II
2008-12-11, 04:56 PM
I think the designers just want the Cleric to be touching people.
Because they liked Clerics and they drool over their Clerics "touching" females to heal them.

Maybe I'm just cynical. :smallbiggrin:

Zeful
2008-12-11, 05:01 PM
The majority of core healing spells in 3.5 are touch based, why? Is it because Clerics are fullplate d8 HD? Or is it a side affect of the Cleric's sizable defensive qualities?

In short: Why is healing limited to touch?

Most healing abilities in the fiction and myths that D&D is based have no ranged healing.

theterran
2008-12-11, 05:01 PM
If you want ranged healing, take the PrC Eldritch Disciple :smallwink:

Starsinger
2008-12-11, 05:03 PM
If you want ranged healing, take the PrC Eldritch Disciple :smallwink:

Yes it's a lovely class, but not exactly in the spirit of the question. I was more asking a "Why?" and less of a "How come?"

ForzaFiori
2008-12-11, 05:06 PM
In most stories, healers heal by placing their hands on a wound. That's how the paladin got "Lay on Hands" very few stories have ranged healing. DnD just went with the norm.

Tacoma
2008-12-11, 05:07 PM
It's tradition. It's been like that from the start, when there were just "Fighting-Man", Cleric, and Magic-User. And Hobbits were called Hobbits.

But we've seen the Cleric go from mainly a support and healing class to a Powered Medkit Tank of Destruction. It's really quite striking how the class has evolved. Fighters, Rogues, and Wizards fill pretty much the same roles they always did and don't step on each others' toes. But Clerics have become this thing.

I blame the Rambo Medic movement in FPS games. Doesn't the thought of a medic with a minigun make you all salivate?

Anyway. You get some non-touch healing, like Healing Circle and Mass Cure X Wounds. But I don't recall at the moment whether those are self-range and large area of effect, or actually have a range value and an area of effect.

And I'm surprised there aren't more Regeneration or Fast Healing spells for Clerics. Makes sense to buff one guy to take care of his incidental healing needs throughout the fight so you can focus on other people.

I think an answer might be to get a magic item that does that Hand spell where you can deliver touch attacks through the Hand, and cast healing spells through it. Or get a feat so you can deliver touch attacks with a held item like a weapon or wand or shield, but then buy a telescoping rope that flies out and whaps the target and retracts, to a range of up to 300 feet or so. Instant range added to touch attacks.

EDIT: Typos

SurlySeraph
2008-12-11, 05:13 PM
Are you sure? You could make millions off selling a healing laser!

Awesomely, healing lasers already exist IRL. (http://www.cracked.com/article_16787_7-kickass-sci-fi-cancer-cures.html)

holywhippet
2008-12-11, 05:13 PM
I think an answer might be to get a magic item that does that Hand spell where you can deliver touch attacks through the Hand, and cast healing spells through it.


Spectral hand - yes, it would be very nice for a healer.

I think the touch mechanic is to persuade players not to charge off blindly, or allow the players/DM to isolate a character and beat the heck out of them.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-11, 05:28 PM
It's really quite striking how the class has evolved. Fighters, Rogues, and Wizards fill pretty much the same roles they always did and don't step on each others' toes.

No they don't. Rogues went from being, well, Bilbo Baggins to being the most hard-hitting "DPS" unit in the game, all in order to give them something better to do in combat.

Keld Denar
2008-12-11, 05:36 PM
From modern Christianity, Jesus and Co often were described as "placing hands" on the sick to heal them. The Bible is probably one of those ancient sources that D&D drew from during its inception, much the way they drew on legends of dragons and minotaurs and all that jazz.

Epinephrine
2008-12-11, 06:38 PM
Once you give a healing spell range, it qualifies for some pretty wonky stuff, like chaining and the War Weaver's class abilities. Makes healing too freaking easy.

Cure spells already qualify for the War Weaver's Eldritch Tapestry and Quiescent Weavings.

Tacoma
2008-12-11, 07:01 PM
No they don't. Rogues went from being, well, Bilbo Baggins to being the most hard-hitting "DPS" unit in the game, all in order to give them something better to do in combat.

A Thief used to be able to backstab for x2 damage at first level, up to x5 at high level. Fighters couldn't get 5 attacks per round unless hasted, but then the Thief would be doing two x5 attacks if hasted and the Fighter would be getting 4 standard ones.

When they introduced weapon specialization in Unearthed Arcana, Fighters and Rangers suddenly became awesome. They still didn't get 5 attacks per round but each attack became much better.

Add in all the handbooks and such, and a starting Fighter became much better at damage than a starting Thief. Thief just didn't evolve as fast.

Then 3E came out and they got to Sneak Attack with a flank or when someone was flat-footed instead of anytime from behind and hidden or the enemy was surprised. And the Sneak Attack started causing a ton of damage. So you're right that Rogues are more combat oriented in 3E.

But then again they still fulfill their traditional Thief roles. They just step on the Fighter's toes too much. Good point.

Fax Celestis
2008-12-11, 07:04 PM
A Thief used to be able to backstab for x2 damage at first level, up to x5 at high level. Fighters couldn't get 5 attacks per round unless hasted, but then the Thief would be doing two x5 attacks if hasted and the Fighter would be getting 4 standard ones. Backstab was an incredibly poorly worded ability. For one, it didn't work on creatures who didn't have backs.


But then again they still fulfill their traditional Thief roles. They just step on the Fighter's toes too much. Good point.
Being Useful In Combat != Stepping On The Fighter's Toes.

Rebonack
2008-12-11, 07:15 PM
Most healing abilities in the fiction and myths that D&D is based have no ranged healing.

Eh. Not always.

Off the top of my head I can think of examples of healing via:

Looking at a sanctified object.

Multiple examples of the healer simply speaking the word and the fellow within ear-shot being healed.

The healer speaking the word and a person miles away being healed.

The second one is actually the most common, really. At least as common as healing via laying on of hands. So no, there really isn't any reason for healing to be touch only from a mechanical or a source material basis.

Tacoma
2008-12-11, 07:28 PM
Backstab was an incredibly poorly worded ability. For one, it didn't work on creatures who didn't have backs.


Being Useful In Combat != Stepping On The Fighter's Toes.

I'm just saying that the original conception of the classes was:

Fighter: causes reliable damage round to round and can take a lot of hits
Cleric: heals damage and buffs the party
Thief: sneaks, opens locks and traps, picks pockets, does an occasional big hit
Magic-User: causes large damage or combat effect a few times a day, utility spells, but mostly throws darts

So if Cleric becomes a melee smasher, if the Rogue becomes a Sexy Shoeless God of War, they are retaining all their old abilities and roles but also entering into the Fighter's domain.

Magic-User went the way of the Blaster and the Batman instead. And now since he gets so many spells every day he can reliably do damage every round like the Fighter used to.

I'm not saying a Rogue fights as well as a Fighter. I'm just saying it's like giving Fighters the ability to max out one traditional Thief skill, letting them turn undead once a day, and giving them weak Arcane spell progression. Cleric and Rogue have bled into Fighter but Fighter hasn't bled into them.

Tacoma
2008-12-11, 07:34 PM
Eh. Not always.

Off the top of my head I can think of examples of healing via:

Looking at a sanctified object.

Multiple examples of the healer simply speaking the word and the fellow within ear-shot being healed.

The healer speaking the word and a person miles away being healed.

The second one is actually the most common, really. At least as common as healing via laying on of hands. So no, there really isn't any reason for healing to be touch only from a mechanical or a source material basis.

We get a stronger feeling of happiness from charity when we directly observe the gratitude of the receiver and there is some chance of repayment of the kindness. Take these examples in descending order of charitable happiness:

1: You give money for college to your sister in person and talk over lunch about her plans.
2: You work at a soup kitchen on Thanksgiving.
3: You load money into a vending machine so the next person gets a free drink.
4: You give some sandwiches to some bums in the park. For whatever reason they become aggressive and chase you away with vulgar comments and death threats.

Simply put, even if Clerics could heal from afar they would probably only heal by touch in person just because the recipient is most able to express gratitude and the Cleric most able to extract the greatest happiness from it.

Also note how difficult it is to get people to pay for car repairs once they've gotten their car back. You need them to pay before they get the car back, or else the power of payment is given to them instead of retained by you. In the same way, a Cleric should be present to offer the healing and stand there expecting payment. If the man miraculously recovers and the Cleric comes forth the next day at his door requesting payment, do you think the dude is going to want to pay? Will he pay it all? Right then? Maybe, but it's much less likely.

Eldariel
2008-12-11, 07:37 PM
To the OP: The hands of a king are the hands of a healer.

Kurald Galain
2008-12-11, 07:47 PM
But then again they still fulfill their traditional Thief roles. They just step on the Fighter's toes too much. Good point.

I think fighters lost their role in 3E. In earlier editions, their role was essentially "doing melee damage in combat". This role was superseded by the rogue, who could also be useful in non-combat situations, and fighters notoriously had little backup role. The role of "defending the caster" was surprisingly infeasible by the design of 3E (in part because of turn-based grid-based movement, and also not in the least because casters were more than capable of defending themselves). There's a clear line of inadvertent evolution here.

Even in 4E I'm not convinced there's much point to the four roles, other than what people assign to them. This is a bit circular reasoning, but it seems that the primary reason why "parties need a tank" is that everybody (including the DMs) assume that they do.

Bonecrusher Doc
2008-12-11, 07:58 PM
Basically any health care profession teaches that physical contact is important for a patient's sense of well-being, from traditional Western medicine to alternative therapies like reiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reiki). Doing ranged healing instead of laying on hands would be like having a gourmet 5-star chef's meal, but instead of being served at a nice restaurant, you're pulling it out of the freezer and nuking it in the microwave. It might still taste great, but it's just the wrong... presentation? Hmm, that's not quite the word I'm looking for.

But speaking of healing lasers, here's some more! (warning: slightly graphic)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faYpG_IOi08&feature=related

Rebonack
2008-12-11, 08:23 PM
Tacoma said:
Stuff about personal gratification.

Clerics are trained in combat. As can be seen from their weapon and armor proficiencies on top of their BAB progression. Why would they want to waste time walking over to their injured buddy through the thick of combat when they can just heal them from waaaay over here whilst providing the Rogue a flanking partner?

To get warm fuzzies from touching the half-dead fighter?

How does that even begin to make senses?

Tacoma said:
Stuff about payment for healing.

What kind of cleric in an adventuring party is going to charge their buddies for healing them? We're talking about character classes here, not lone wandering healer types. The examples I provided in my last post are from various Biblical stories. And like the Fellow providing the divine healing in said stories I would imagine that pretty much any Good-aligned DnD gods would be rather miffed if their clerics were demanding a pouch-full of gold every time they heal a peasant of leprosy.

So yeah, sure. If you're playing a Neutral or Evil cleric of some kind and wandering around by yourself bereft of a party then sure, you would want to get the guy with the knife in his gut to cough up some gold before you heal him. But that doesn't preclude healing magic making more sense from a standpoint of source material, tactical expediency, and out and out utility if it can be used from a distance.

Do note that even with a range of Close our Evil cleric for higher can still heal someone who is standing right next to him if he so desires.

Kaiyanwang
2008-12-12, 06:14 AM
I would second the reasoning about tradition. In legends, stories and religions, most supernatural healing is bringed by contact (I would add remove blindness and similar things to these).

The armoured cleric was a consequence of the need of a melee healing. (Maybe the Clericzilla was a consequence of "well, I've a weapon and an armor...and I'm a willing person...").

About the rogue stepping on the Fighter's toes... yes, in 3.x he does it in a lot of times, but the sneak attack remains situational as was before (creature immune to critical hits, to flank, uncanny dodge, and so on). Simply, the damage output and the "SA situations" are more. And anyway, a warrior-type character is more able to absorb damage (i.e., to stand still), compared to a rogue.

Caster defense... even in earlier editions, divine caster were not so squishy. About arcane casters.. depends the way you play them and how smart is the DM (/Kaiyanwang casts energy immunity: fire).

Maybe I'm wrong, but I think that the concept of the warrior-type character as "sticky", was not so common the time 3.0 came out. It came later, with MMORPGs mainly. As I said before in these boards, the Fighter would "slay away" things from party members to fill his defender role (I said would: someone like me I't fine with fighters, someone else no, I'm talking about design intent so no flamethrowers please:smallsmile:)

Anyway, the idea of sticky fighter is largely accepted and so came 4th edition defenders. If you are fine with them, they fill their role well (a 3rd edition fighter would sometimes drive MAD to do the same things).

Back on topic: Touch healing makes combat more exiting (and there are ways to range heal without houserule. High level healing spell do it anyway).

Mercenary Pen
2008-12-12, 06:19 AM
Touch-based healing- particularly the Paladin's 'Lay on Hands' is designed to be vaguely synonymous with healing cultures (and forms of prayer) around the world that involve either physical contact or physical proximity...

RebelRogue
2008-12-12, 06:43 AM
Am I the only one thinking "well, you do know they fixed this in 4th Ed", right now? I been thinking that quite often when people complain about stuff here lately!

RPGuru1331
2008-12-12, 07:19 AM
The majority of core healing spells in 3.5 are touch based, why? Is it because Clerics are fullplate d8 HD? Or is it a side affect of the Cleric's sizable defensive qualities?

In short: Why is healing limited to touch?

So you can deliver your h ealing with a slap. PArticularly with a female cleric patently not interested in the rest of the party.

KillianHawkeye
2008-12-12, 08:05 AM
I'd like to see a lecherous cleric who tried to cop a feel every time he healed someone. On both genders, doesn't matter, just compulsively does it to everyone.

KKL
2008-12-12, 08:07 AM
So you can deliver your h ealing with a slap. PArticularly with a female cleric patently not interested in the rest of the party.

"I-it's not like I like you or anything. It's just more convienant to keep you alive! Hmph!"

That'll work fine.

Evil DM Mark3
2008-12-12, 08:07 AM
I always assumed it was a biblical/christian inspired reference. More then on saint, and Jesus, healed others by touching them.

Tempest Fennac
2008-12-12, 08:09 AM
The ironic thing about Bonecrusher's comment is that I seem to get my best Reiki results when sending it over the intenet then I do using a standard "lay on hands" approach. (The online methoid involves both me and whoever I'm sending the Reiki to focussing on the problem vanishing.)

Ascension
2008-12-12, 08:30 AM
Am I the only one thinking "well, you do know they fixed this in 4th Ed", right now? I been thinking that quite often when people complain about stuff here lately!

Given that Starsinger is (IIRC) one of the more vocal 4E proponents on the boards I'm guessing this is mostly a "Why can't 3.5 do what 4E can do?" thread, similar to Starsinger's previous attempt to find a 3.5 "laser cleric" build (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=97022).

The answer is simply that the 3.5 and 4E clerics are different. Don't try to make them be the same.

Starsinger
2008-12-12, 11:21 AM
Given that Starsinger is (IIRC) one of the more vocal 4E proponents on the boards I'm guessing this is mostly a "Why can't 3.5 do what 4E can do?" thread, similar to Starsinger's previous attempt to find a 3.5 "laser cleric" build (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=97022).

The answer is simply that the 3.5 and 4E clerics are different. Don't try to make them be the same.

This is something that's been sort of bothering me for a while. It never bothered me back when I played 3e (before the .5 y'know) because it was the rule and was just how things were. And then I played 3.5 and it didn't bug me too much, because it was the rule and how things still were. And then I played other games where there was some form of ranged healing, and it mostly didn't bother me because "D&D was different". And then 4e came along and did it, quite frankly, right, and I wondered, what took them so long? And then it started to bug me, I mean sure you could get ranged healing in 3e and 3.5 by jumping through a few hoops (including one hoop which isn't available for like 15 levels), which is the real rub innit? How many hoops do you have to jump through to get what you want?

Hence the laser cleric thread, but I suppose if it ends up looking like 4e, it's suddenly unacceptable to want to play a character the way you'd like. :smallsigh:

But thanks, Ascension for being so helpful with the discussion at hand.

Mystral
2008-12-12, 11:44 AM
If you want a healing laser, take a level in the hierophant class.

Not only do you get a healing laser, you get a buffing laser, a slay living laser, a harm laser, an inflict laser...

Tempest Fennac
2008-12-12, 12:33 PM
Also, you can improve the Healing Domain to cast 1 Cure spell/level at Close Range each day (page 32 of http://crystalkeep.com/d20/rules/DnD3.5Index-Classes-Base.pdf ).

Starsinger
2008-12-12, 12:36 PM
Thanks for all of that guys, but I'm not asking for how to get ranged healing, I was really asking "Why?'

DM Raven
2008-12-12, 12:44 PM
The touch mechanic forced the cleric to wade into the fray. You had to be aware of your position in relation to your allies and stay in a sort of protected middle area if you wanted to keep everyone safe. They didn't want clerics just sitting in the back of the party and spamming heals until the battle ended. I guess the 3.5 designers thought this was more challenging or something. I much prefer the 4.0 style where the priest is involved with the battle and healing ability is granted regardless of powers chosen.

Saph
2008-12-12, 12:45 PM
Thanks for all of that guys, but I'm not asking for how to get ranged healing, I was really asking "Why?'

I think it's been pretty much answered already with "tradition". In the majority of myths, legends, and fantasy stories with magic healing, it's done at touch range.

But if you want another reason, it also ties in with the real world - medicine and first aid is a very up-close-and-personal sort of thing. In real life, to heal or tend to someone you lean right in next to them and touch them, so they kept the same thing with spells.

So, there you go.

- Saph