Healing Spirit out of curve?

[Easy_Lee]

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



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

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

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

[Willie the Duck]

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

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

[JBPuffin]

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

[Easy_Lee]

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

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

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

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

[Estrillian]

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

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

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

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

[Lombra]

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

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

[DivisibleByZero]

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

You mean this?:

I mean, he also said:

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

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

[Tanarii]

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

[snip}

Or do I have it wrong?

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

DMG p 133:
You can hand out as much or as little treasure as you want. Over the course of a typical campaign, a party finds treasure hoards amounting to seven rolls on the Challenge 0- 4 table, eighteen rolls on the Challenge 5- 10 table, twelve rolls on the Challenge 11- 16 table, and eight rolls on the Challenge 17+ table.

Plus I used the tables.

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

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

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

[stoutstien]

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

[Easy_Lee]

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

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

Restore everyone's HP after an encounter? Unacceptable.

[Pex]

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

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

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

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

[Submortimer]

{{scrubbed}}

[mer.c]

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

Restore everyone's HP after an encounter? Unacceptable.

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

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

[DivisibleByZero]

it makes you an A$$hat.

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

[Submortimer]

Moreover, DBZ, look here:

From the PHB:

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


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


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


the book directly contradicts your argument

[mer.c]

Moreover, DBZ, look here:

From the PHB:

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


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


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


the book directly contradicts your argument

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

[Submortimer]

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

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

[DivisibleByZero]

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

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

I just need to put the proper information out there.

Let me know when that happens.

[Finieous]

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

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

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

[Submortimer]

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

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

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

From the PHB:

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

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

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

[Tanarii]

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

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

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

[DivisibleByZero]

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

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

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

This is probably where you call me names again.

[History_buff]

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

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

[Submortimer]

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

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

This is probably where you call me names again.

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

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

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

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

[DivisibleByZero]

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

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

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

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

This is probably where you call me names again.

[LordEntrails]

...But you do have to admit that disallowing it is no more invalid that allowing it, because the rules for Time absolutely, 100%, beyond a shadow of a doubt, support this decision.....

Nope. None of us do, because you are wrong.

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

Anyway, could not possibly disagree more with DivisiblebyZero. ...

Welcome. Good reason to join *G*

[Typhon]

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

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

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

[Dalebert]

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

That's fine. Your game.

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

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

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

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

[DivisibleByZero]

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

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

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

Written:

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

And then, in Chapter 9:

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

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

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

[LordEntrails]

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

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

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

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