How accessible should Healing be?

[slaughterj]

Originally posted by Markdoc

In my games I want healing to be relatively accessible, but not overly powerful. In other words I want PCs to have access to some healing when they really need it, but not so much that they rely on it.

 

The two recomended methods for applying healing are not suitable for this this. The worst version (you can apply healing per wound) takes too much book-keeping and makes healing too powerful. Heavily armoured characters often end up with many little wounds which can all be washed away in a few seconds, ready for the next battle.

 

The alternate approach (healing can be applied per day) is still powerful: even major wounds can be cleaned up with a day or two rest.

 

My approach was to define the maximum amount of healing that could be done as that maximum that a PC could have "on" at any one time.

 

So a healer with 2d6 healing could give Bob the barbarian 12 points back, in any combination, but once Bob was carrying 12 points of "healed" body he could get no more help until he had naturally healed back some body.

 

Here's how it works: Bob the barbarian gets in a fight one day and takes 7 BOD. Chas the Cleric heals him back up. Bob the barbarian is now carrying 6 BOD of healing. He can't get any more until he has rested long enough to heal 1 BOD naturally: then Chas can give him 1 more point of healing (bringing him back to 6 points of healing.)

 

This requires a player to track two numbers: how much BOD he has and how much healing he has had. But it does 3 things I like.

 

1. It makes healing really useful, when you gotta have it, but it's not something to waste, since it cannot be used repeatedly in a short period of time.

2. It makes even fairly puny healers useful to have around: they can essentially double the speed of healing, since even once they have done their maximum healing, for every BOD you naturally heal they can give you another one.

3. It makes having 6d6 Healing (for example) really impressive, whereas under the "heal each wound" approach that was nearly pointless.

 

cheers, Mark

 

I tend to not have heavily-armored games (esp. in Lankhmar) or much healing going on (esp. in swords & sorcery), so the method I posted works for the setting in which it is used. Consequently, even somebody with a Chainmail Hauberk can get hit with a 12 BODY attack from time to time and still be sucking with a 6 BODY wound, or even worse when they run into the big baddies with 3D6K attacks or take a head or vitals hit.

 

Obviously where healing is more accessible than when I run games, small healing (1-2D6) will clear up a lot if done on a per-wound basis. But it seems your players need to track more than 2 things, not two: BODY healed, BODY healed naturally, BODY left, etc.

[Markdoc]

>>>> But it seems your players need to track more than 2 things, not two: BODY healed, BODY healed naturally, BODY left, etc.<<<<

 

Ummm.....no. You need to track Body left and Body healed. Strictly speaking, *I* track those things, since I write BOD totals and healing totals in my little black book at the end of each session, along with specific notes like "Kawasu lost his sword in the moat" or "the party is out of arrows" to make sure everything is clear at the beginning of the next session. But that's it. When a character heals naturally, it adjusts his "Body left" total (up one) and "Body healed" total by the same amount (down one) so book-keeping is minimal.

 

Of course I am not saying that this system should be used for every FH game: for a high fantasy game, healing per day or even per wound is perfectly appropriate - in my Masters of Luck and Death game, some characters had regeneration, which rather renders the whole thing moot.

 

But for a gritty game, where I wanted combat to be serious but not necessarily immediately lethal, this system has served me well. For the vast bulk of my previous game, the players were running around in clothes - no armour at all - or a light chainmail vest worn under their clothes and covering only the torso (def 4, since there was little padding underneath plus it was made of very fine links).

 

It means the players know that one unlucky hit will probably not kill them, since even a dice of healing will stop them from bleeding to death (although it can happen: if you 16 BOD to the unarmoured vitals, as did one player, then it's way too late for any healing) but they also know that they cannot just launch into combat willy-nilly. Even a knife wound for 3 BOD becomes a serious issue, if it can't be healed for a week.

 

This approach puts a premium on blocking, dodging and having a really good CV :-)

 

cheers, Mark

[slaughterj]

Originally posted by Markdoc

>>>> But it seems your players need to track more than 2 things, not two: BODY healed, BODY healed naturally, BODY left, etc.<<<<

 

Ummm.....no. You need to track Body left and Body healed. Strictly speaking, *I* track those things,

 

That's a matter of semantics. When I do the per wound method, here's what needs to be kept up with:

Actual BODY - same for you

Wounds incurred - you don't do this (not much to do since wounds usually don't happen but on average on 2 different days)

When wounds incurred - same for you (deals with REC times) but broken down by wound for me (usually just wing it roughly)

BODY healed - few methods of healing for me and usually are pursued immediately, so little for me to keep up with, but you have to handle healing and the natural healing to allow more healing

 

Not sure if I missed anything, but it seems as if our methods in practice vary little in complexity. Further, I prefer the per-wound method for several reasons:

1. I think a person will heal more quickly from 3 3BODY wounds than from 1 9 BODY wound.

2. If wounds are kept track of, but aren't healed on a per-wound basis, things get screwy because there's the issue of how you allocate the healing - obviously this matters only in so far as one keeps track of wounds. Even if the wounds are not tracked separately though, my example in #1 is still applicable.

3. The per-wound method can be useful for rpg purposes ("Hey, I hurt my unknown assailant in the arm, and your arm is bandaged...") - sure, you don't need to maintain the wounds to have this info, but it makes it easier.

 

Obviously everyone should and will use what works best for them This method is what I use for gritty swords & sorcery FH with little healing - I might go with the truly simple for a D&D-ish FH.

 

Originally posted by Markdoc

But for a gritty game, where I wanted combat to be serious but not necessarily immediately lethal, this system has served me well. For the vast bulk of my previous game, the players were running around in clothes - no armour at all - or a light chainmail vest worn under their clothes and covering only the torso (def 4, since there was little padding underneath plus it was made of very fine links).

 

It means the players know that one unlucky hit will probably not kill them, since even a dice of healing will stop them from bleeding to death (although it can happen: if you 16 BOD to the unarmoured vitals, as did one player, then it's way too late for any healing) but they also know that they cannot just launch into combat willy-nilly. Even a knife wound for 3 BOD becomes a serious issue, if it can't be healed for a week.

 

This approach puts a premium on blocking, dodging and having a really good CV :-)

 

cheers, Mark

 

Ah, and as I mentioned, I use my for gritty games, namely Lankhmar FH, where armor being worn would make one appear up to no good, thus PCs typically have sectional rPD2 leather (cuirass under shirt type of thing) at most, especially due to stealth issues. So, many of the same issues arise, but I likely have less healing than you along with the light armor, so perhaps the per-wound method I use is useful to compensate. Regardless, the wounds are often quite severe (had 2 party members get hit with 7 BODY vitals shots in the same phase, from regular joes with 1D6+1K swords vs. 150pt Heroes, which resulted in immediate surrender and capture...), and take quite some time to heal even under a per-wound method.

[Legendsmiths]

Well, here's the system I use and my players actually dig it.

 

1. Track BODY wounds individually.

 

2. If a wound is impairing, add "!". If disabling, add "!!".

 

Now, healing dice, whether actual body healing or simple healing, must heal a wound all-or-nothing. This means that minor wounds are simple to heal, major wounds are not.

 

Because of the all or nothing nature I allow multiple attempts at healing. STUN in this case is irrelivant (maximum anyway) and simple healing will always heal STUN even if the BODY of the wound is not.

 

Impairing wounds require an extra 2d6 to heal, disabling 4d6. So, a person who takes a 7 pt impairing wound (i.e. they failed the CON roll), will require enough simple or body healing to restore 7+ BODY at a single use, plus an additional 2d6. If I used 9d6 simple healing, I would roll 7d6 and hope to generate 7 BODY.

 

Wait a minute, you say. 9d6 simple healing is 90 active points.

 

Yes it is. This system is designed so that low-power healers will be able to deal with non-impairing/disabling wounds of up to 7-8 BODY, assuming BODY healing (i.e. 5d6 BODY healing restores 5d6 cp of BODY).

 

I haven't decided what to do with someone who is at -50 STUN and whether 3d6 simple healing applied repeatedly can restore them to the concious. I'm more focused on BODY anyway.

 

We've been playing with this for a while and significant wounds have been quite dramatic and fun.

[Mr. Negative]

Originally posted by mudpyr8

We've been playing with this for a while and significant wounds have been quite dramatic and fun.

 

I don't want to play in your campaign.

 

Seriously though, I appreciate all of the input here. Several of the ideas have been very useful/appropriate to my conception (particularly the emphasis on individual wounds, and the idea of herbal/alchemical "Healing".

 

It's also nice to know so many people are enjoying "low healing" campaigns, as it always seems like "Fight-Heal-Fight-Heal" games are the norm.

[Legendsmiths]

Yeah, fight-heal-fight gets old. There's nothin' quite like gettin' a 14 point disabling wound to the head, suffering brain damage, and then having the party petition the temple of "healing" to perform the necessary mojo to heal. Not to mention it took a boatload of cash.

 

'course that's what you get for "leaping into the fire" as it were.

[slaughterj]

Originally posted by Captain Obvious

As slaughterj mentioned, he and I have played together in just this sort of campaign, and he has already gone over most of my methods (plus a few of his own). One more thing I have to add: Build all (or most common forms anyway) magical healing as an Aid to REC. Coupled with the healing 1 BODY every 30/REC days rule, healing still takes time, even magically, but with magical healing, a disabling wound won't keep a character out of action for TOO long....

 

Interesting idea on the AID to REC there, I'll have to run the math to see how I like that. BTW, what sort of similarities/differences do we have exactly?

[Chris Goodwin]

Originally posted by mudpyr8

2. If a wound is impairing, add "!". If disabling, add "!!".

 

I'm stealing that one!

[Captain Obvious]

Originally posted by slaughterj

Interesting idea on the AID to REC there, I'll have to run the math to see how I like that. BTW, what sort of similarities/differences do we have exactly?

 

Well, we both keep track of wounds separately, we both allow for non-magical healing techniques (although, I'm a little less kindly about than you are...the NPC healers still have to make their rolls), and I would have built that alchemical salve you described as a REC Aid...

 

More similar than different overall.

 

Oh, by the way, mudpyr8, I like your method for marking impairing and disabling wounds. I'm all over it.

[Legendsmiths]

On the issue of impairing and disabling wounds, I do want to say that I do not apply a penalty to the CON roll to avoid the effects. So, if a character takes an 11 pt disabling wound to the arm and then makes a straight CON roll they simply have an 11 pt wound. We felt that an 11 pt wound was punishment enough. That still requires a significant number of active points in Healing to repair.

[slaughterj]

Originally posted by Captain Obvious

Well, we both keep track of wounds separately, we both allow for non-magical healing techniques (although, I'm a little less kindly about than you are...the NPC healers still have to make their rolls), and I would have built that alchemical salve you described as a REC Aid...

 

More similar than different overall.

 

NPC healer rolls - I figured the dedicated physicians would take extra time and have at least a 14- anyway, so 90%'s good enough for me

 

Salve - I'd be interested in your particular REC Aid formulation, I just went with something rough and ready, still took overnight and didn't do TOO much (Players hate it when they paid 10 rilks for it, and only got 1 BODY on the 1D3 )