Halving healing per RAW?

[Cantriped]

I assume he meant Healing in general, not Simplified Healing in particular. Simplified Healing is pretty clearly useless of you halve its results as Steve Long intended.

 

I also still maintain that as far as CC/FHC is concerned, halving Healing is the house rule. Just like implementing classes of minds or exploding skills into categories would be.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Yeah the way simplified healing is defined by Steve Long, its useless and should be utterly ignored.  I am fine with the concept, but you should treat the results as character points for two reasons:

 

1) You don't half what's already being halved (if its treated as character points, you get the halving effect built in for stun at least).

2) You can use it for something other than Stun and body ala damage.  Treat each "body"  the die rolls as 2 character points and each "stun" as 1 character point.  Then you can heal 1-6 stun with the main roll and 5-10 Endurance with the secondary roll:

 

1 = 1 Stun (1 character point is 2 Stun, divide by 2 for "defensive power"), 0 Body

2-5 = 2-5 Stun, 5 END (2 character points are 10 END, divide by 2 for "defensive power")

6= 6 Stun, 10 END

 

Why 2 Character points per Body rolled?  So you get 1-2 body of effect with the healing roll, just like with an attack.  However, I suggest a different approach.

 

My advice, however is this: instead of 10 points for 1d6 simplified healing, buy d6-1 with Expanded Effect for Stun and Body at the same time for 7 points and get 1-5 Stun and 1-3 Body for cheaper.  Simplified healing is kinda easier to do, but its not as good a deal.

[Hugh Neilson]

And Endurance doesn't make any sense as a defense at any level or argument save one: it's too cheap to allow adjustment powers to be used straight up on.

 

That is pretty much why they became "defensive". I prefer that to the old, overpriced model.

 

As for Simplified Healing, 1d6 STUN healing would normally cost 10 points on its own. This adds about 1/2d6 BOD healing. That feels like about 15 points per 1d6, with no halving. They're linked, though - you have to use the STUN even if you only need to heal BOD, and vice versa. There's a bit of reduced END in there.

 

I don't think balance will crater at 1d6 for 10 points or 20 points (doubling the cost = halving the effect). I think 15 points actually feels about right, as it does more than a 1d6 STUN heal.

[Cantriped]

As for Simplified Healing, 1d6 STUN healing would normally cost 10 points on its own. This adds about 1/2d6 BOD healing. That feels like about 15 points per 1d6, with no halving. They're linked, though - you have to use the STUN even if you only need to heal BOD, and vice versa. There's a bit of reduced END in there.

Healing STUN 1d6 would normally restore 2-12 STUN (before halving); because Healing normally targets a number of CP worth of a characteristic equal to its result, not points of the characteristic itself. Ergo when choosing Simplified Healing (which is instead counted as Normal Damage like Blast) over Healing STUN you trade half of its potential result in STUN, for less than one-third of it's potential result in BODY (again before halving).

 

 

My advice, however is this: instead of 10 points for 1d6 simplified healing, buy d6-1 with Expanded Effect for Stun and Body at the same time for 7 points and get 1-5 Stun and 1-3 Body for cheaper.  Simplified healing is kinda easier to do, but its not as good a deal.

Wouldn't 1d6-1 Healing have a 1 in 6 chance of rolling 0 CP of effect? Therefore wouldn't rolling 1/2d6 (or 1d3) be more appropriate? Is there a minimum effect rule I'm forgetting about for Effect Rolls (Pathfinder has that)?

Thankfully I don't have to worry about this much with CC/FHC since they omit the concept of buying partial dice of anything but Killing Attacks (as far as I recall, can't say I've gone looking for them).

 

[Christopher R Taylor]

Wouldn't 1d6-1 Healing have a 1 in 6 chance of rolling 0 CP of effect? Therefore wouldn't rolling 1/2d6 (or 1d3) be more appropriate? Is there a minimum effect rule I'm forgetting about for Effect Rolls (Pathfinder has that)?

 

Well now I'm not sure, because I've always run d6-1 as being 1-5, not 0-5.  As in its 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

[Steve]

 

That is pretty much why they became "defensive". I prefer that to the old, overpriced model.

 

As for Simplified Healing, 1d6 STUN healing would normally cost 10 points on its own. This adds about 1/2d6 BOD healing. That feels like about 15 points per 1d6, with no halving. They're linked, though - you have to use the STUN even if you only need to heal BOD, and vice versa. There's a bit of reduced END in there.

 

I don't think balance will crater at 1d6 for 10 points or 20 points (doubling the cost = halving the effect). I think 15 points actually feels about right, as it does more than a 1d6 STUN heal.

If you price it at 15 points per die, you could try having Simplified Healing work like an inverted killing attack. The points you roll on the dice is the amount of BODY healed, then you roll 1/2 d6 as a multiplier to see how much STUN is healed.

[jdounis]

Which numbers?

• 10CP per 1d6 Simplified Healing ... then divided by 2 for the halving rule?  (i.e. Effective 20CP per effective 1d6 Simplified Healing??

OR

• 10CP per 1d6 Simplified Healing ... with no application of the havling rule (i.e. House-ruled to ignore the halving rule)??

 

Your post wasn't clear on which numbers you mean, so I am asking for clarification.

 

 

 

 

Also due to rounding rules  Simplified Healing/Healing halved does not equal Effecttive 20CP per 1d6 ,more like 15CP ascending to 20 CP effective cost as dice count rises,  i know this is an artifact (also i have posted a question to Steve Long if rounding is affected by incremental cost of adjustment powers). 

[Surrealone]

To those fixated on Simplified Healing as a target to shoot down:

I stuck to Simplified Healing as an example ... ONLY because it was a) simpler than building out a 1d6 Healing Power with Expanded Effect when demonstrating effective costs once halving is considered, and b ) it was just as effective for exemplifying how expensive Healing is for how little it does when the halving rule is applied to it (when compared with the costs of damaging/attack powers that generate far more output for the same or less cost). 

 

Again -- I feel that Healing, by itself, should likely be a viable alternative to reducing damage using defenses; i.e. soak the damage then regenerate [a la 5e] or Heal it back rather than reducing what comes in.  But when the halving rule is applied, this is NOT the case ... since the required amounts of Healing are practically unaffordable when the halving rule is in play.

[Chris Goodwin]

All of the gyrations we're doing to get 1d6 of Simplified Healing that heals the amount of STUN and BODY shown on the dice... make it, in my view, no longer simplified.  

 

Better to just double the price of 1d6 and call it good, IMO.

[Surrealone]

^^^^  Except that 20CP for 1d6 of Simplified Healing (after doubling of price ... rather than 10 CP for 1d6 / 2) is anything but good when it comes to value for the CP paid ...

[Chris Goodwin]

^^^^  Except that 20CP for 1d6 of Simplified Healing (after doubling of price ... rather than 10 CP for 1d6 / 2) is anything but good when it comes to value for the CP paid ...

 

With the exception of taking advantage of the rounding, 20 points for 2d6 / 2 is the same as 20 points for 1d6.  But, I agree that 20 points for 1d6 is too much.  

 

I'm still going to GM it as 10 points for 1d6 Simplified, no halving.

[Hugh Neilson]

When 1d6 STUN Healing would cost 10 points, adding on BOD for free is a pretty sweet deal. Doubling the effect by removing the halving rule is even sweeter. However, Stun Healing is not a great deal. I could buy 1d6 STUN Aid for 6 points, which would generally have the same effect as 1d6 STUN healing.

 

Yes, the Aid has a fade rate and the Healing does not, but the fading Aid is unlikely to matter much in a single combat, and after the combat, the fade is offset by all STUN being recovered. And I can use the Aid again in the next combat on the same day, or use it before combat so the character starts with extra STUN.

 

The problem is not Healing or Simplified Healing, but that Healing something that recovers rapidly anyway is not very efficient.

 

If I buy 1d6 of BOD Healing, I will roll 1 – 6 CP, and heal 1, 2 or 3 BOD, due to the halving effect. 1d6 of Simplified Healing will normally only heal 1 BOD, with a small chance of 2, so it is nowhere near as good as 1d6 Heal Bod. The added STUN improves it, but the Stun would have recovered anyway after the combat, so it’s not really as valuable – would you buy 4d6 of Stun Healing?

 

Viewing the STUN as an ancillary bonus, because STUN healing is already overpriced, I’d say simplified healing with no halving of the roll is reasonably priced despite costing far less than 2d6 of STUN aid (to net 1d6 after halving) and ½ d6 of BOD healing to average 1 BOD healed.

 

If I was going to spend 20 points, I would spend it on 2d6 BOD healing, not 2d6 of simplified healing, even if the latter was not halved. Healing STUN is simply far less valuable.

[Surrealone]

Healing STUN is simply far less valuable.

Except for those times when Healing STUN is the difference between the team brick being up and useful ... or down and out.  Then it's stupidly valuable...

 

I don't know about your games, but in the ones I've seen throughout the years, only the grittiest games have much in the way of BODY damage ... likely because it's patently unheroic to do piles of BODY damage (regardless of whether a KA was the cause).  Thus, I'd argue that in most games Healing BODY is far less valuable than Healing STUN simply because far less BODY damage tends to get through defenses.

[Lucius]

 

I remember when Healing first appeared - Champions III I think it was - and I thought, why do we need this? The game already has Regeneration and the Usable on Others Advantage.

 

For that matter, you can put Usable on Others on RECovery.

 

Now of course Healing has a unique function: recovering from things like Drains of other abilities.

 

But even that can be accomplished without Healing:

 

Healing Aid: (Total: 30 Active Cost, 20 Real Cost) Aid 1d6, Any Ability that has been reduced or decreased. (+1/2), Delayed Return Rate (points return at the rate of 5 per 5 Years; +3 1/2) (30 Active Points); Only Restores To Starting Values (-1/2) (Real Cost: 20)

 

If that seems expensive, consider this Healing Power built to work similarly:

 

Healing : (Total: 30 Active Cost, 30 Real Cost) Healing BODY 1d6, Any ability that has been reduced or decreased (+1/2), Decreased Re-use Duration (1 Turn; +1 1/2) (30 Active Points) (Real Cost: 30)

 

And consider that the Aid can be used each phase instead of each turn.

 

Lucius Alexander

 

Healing a palindromedary

[Christopher R Taylor]

Healing stun is actually very valuable in most games, especially Fantasy.  If someone is being knocked out, that surge of 4d6 stun puts them right back in the game.  Bob takes a 2d6 KA to the face, oops that's a 40 stun hit!  Well that's okay because now you cast your heal and he's awake again (this is why I usually bundle stun and endurance together, not stun and body).  Body healing seems more vital because you don't die if you're unconscious (at least, not immediately) but you tend to take a lot less body than stun in combat, even in heroic games.  Body you usually heal out of combat in my experience.

[Cantriped]

...

Healing Aid: (Total: 30 Active Cost, 20 Real Cost) Aid 1d6, Any Ability that has been reduced or decreased. (+1/2), Delayed Return Rate (points return at the rate of 5 per 5 Years; +3 1/2) (30 Active Points); Only Restores To Starting Values (-1/2) (Real Cost: 20)

...

And consider that the Aid can be used each phase instead of each turn.

...

 

First; Aid is subject to its own Maximum Effect rules. Second; Aid, Drain, and Damage don't cancel each other out (they stack). Third; unlike actual Healing, Aid never "naturalizes", so you can't put Delayed Re-Use on it to for it to naturalize faster.

Once you hit the target with 6 CP worth of the Aid power described above to a given Game Element (or 3 CP worth of STUN or BODY due to the Halving), you have to wait 5 years for those points to Fade. During which time the Power's effect lingers, effectively negating the first 6 CP worth of Drain or Damage to that Game Element the character suffers (by returning the Game Element to its Starting Value). This 6 CP worth of negation returns as the Drain Fades or the Damage Heals... This power functions nothing like actual Healing, and more like some kind of strange form of Ablative, Usable By Other, Resistant Defense.

[jdounis]

^^^^  Except that 20CP for 1d6 of Simplified Healing (after doubling of price ... rather than 10 CP for 1d6 / 2) is anything but good when it comes to value for the CP paid ...

 

Hello,

 

 Standard Effect Simplified Healing heals 2 Stun & 1 Body after halving and rounding, against pre-Errata Standard Effect Simplified Healing of 3 Stun & 1 Body has an effectiveness ratio of 2 CP / 2.5 CP = 0,8  so i think that Standard Effect Simplified Healing is a viable option even after the new Errata. Of course basing effectiveness on a system artifact(rounding) is not something classy. 

[Hugh Neilson]

Except for those times when Healing STUN is the difference between the team brick being up and useful ... or down and out.  Then it's stupidly valuable...

 

I don't know about your games, but in the ones I've seen throughout the years, only the grittiest games have much in the way of BODY damage ... likely because it's patently unheroic to do piles of BODY damage (regardless of whether a KA was the cause).  Thus, I'd argue that in most games Healing BODY is far less valuable than Healing STUN simply because far less BODY damage tends to get through defenses.

So I can buy 6d6 Healing Stun for 60 points, which works only once a day on the Brick (OK, I can squeeze a bit more out if I roll higher the second time). Or I can buy 10d6 Aid to Stun and the team brick gets an average of 35 STUN back, rather than 21, and a second use will top him out to 60 where the Heal will likely only get a few more points.

 

In the next battle, I can Aid him again to full effect, even if it is the same day and the Heal is stuck with that low re-use. Healing of STUN and END is not efficient because they already recover rapidly.

 

Healing stun is actually very valuable in most games, especially Fantasy.  If someone is being knocked out, that surge of 4d6 stun puts them right back in the game.

Or 6 1/2 f6 Aid (39 AP vs 40 AP for 46d Healing) can have even more impact, with better re-use potential.

[Chris Goodwin]

If it matters, for STUN and END Healing I house rule that there's no max, and that it's fully cumulative just for that reason.

[Steve]

Healing STUN is best used when the target is in negative STUN to get around the slowed recoveries. Heroman recovers a lot more slowly on his own at -30 STUN than he does at 5 STUN. A few dice of Healing accelerates his recovery from unconsciousness.

[Surrealone]

Healing of STUN and END is not efficient because they already recover rapidly.

Not always.  (See below.) 

 

Moreover, neither of them recovers rapidly in combat without someone burning actions ... which is where Healing STUN (and potentially END) suddenly seems highly efficient (i.e. while in combat) despite the insane costs imposed by RAW (20 CP for a full 1d6 after considering the halving rule?!).

 

i.e. If Brickman is in combat, at 10 STUN, will not get a chance to take a recovery without being hit, and another hit will likely drop him below 0 STUN -- HealerGirlfriend can heal Brickman to bring his STUN total up so that Brickman keeps on bricking ... without waiting for post-seg-12 ... and without getting nailed by his opponent while trying to take a recovery (which would, of course, eliminate his ability to take that recovery ... due to the hit during the recovery). 

 

Healing STUN is best used when the target is in negative STUN to get around the slowed recoveries. Heroman recovers a lot more slowly on his own at -30 STUN than he does at 5 STUN. A few dice of Healing accelerates his recovery from unconsciousness.

Spot-on.  This is one relatively common scenario Hugh just flippantly ignored or took for granted -- where STUN and END recovery do NOT occur rapidly.  (My scenario, above, is another scenario ... where STUN recovery simply doesn't occur rapidly enough.)

[Christopher R Taylor]

Even when they do recovery naturally, in the middle of a fight, that 1 free REC per turn isn't enough to keep you on your feet in a tough battle.  If you take a recovery, you're 0 DCV.  Its a good way to keep people on their feet.  Body damage, on the other hand, tends to be lower in my experience at least and less desperate in a fight.  It takes a long time to recover, but it also is typically less of an issue.  The stun you take from a hit is around 3 times the body suffered, and stun multipliers are before defenses.

[Hugh Neilson]

Healing STUN is best used when the target is in negative STUN to get around the slowed recoveries. Heroman recovers a lot more slowly on his own at -30 STUN than he does at 5 STUN. A few dice of Healing accelerates his recovery from unconsciousness.

Why would Aid not work just as well, if not better? Both Healing and Aid bypass the recovery process, providing a short-term boost to an ability.

 

Heroman is at -30 STUN and we hit him with 60 AP of STUN Healing - he gets an average of 21 STUN back. A second attack might get him a few more, but since it has to beat the previous roll, it's pretty limited. In a second combat later today, that Healing is useless (absent a house rule to make it useful again, like Chris', or simply ruling that natural healing/recovery can supplant the healing - if you would already be at full STUN had Healing not been used, it can be used again).

 

Heroman is at -30 STUN and we hit him with 60 AP of STUN Aid- he gets an average of 35 STUN back. A second attack will likely top him up to a total of 60. In a second combat later today, that Aid works just as well as it did in the first combat - that Aid has long since faded and the STUN come back through normal recoveries.

 

If we add in Chris' house rule, the Heal can also be used in the second battle. It's still lucky to add 25 STUN using two attack actions, compared to the 60 the same AP in AID are virtually assured of.

 

The advantage of Healing is that it does not fade, so if the character would have been down 15 BOD for several weeks, that drawback is alleviated. STUN and END do not remain down for several weeks.

 

Moreover, neither of them recovers rapidly in combat without someone burning actions ... which is where Healing STUN (and potentially END) suddenly seems highly efficient (i.e. while in combat) despite the insane costs imposed by RAW (20 CP for a full 1d6 after considering the halving rule?!).

 

i.e. If Brickman is in combat, at 10 STUN, will not get a chance to take a recovery without being hit, and another hit will likely drop him below 0 STUN -- HealerGirlfriend can heal Brickman to bring his STUN total up so that Brickman keeps on bricking ... without waiting for post-seg-12 ... and without getting nailed by his opponent while trying to take a recovery (which would, of course, eliminate his ability to take that recovery ... due to the hit during the recovery). 

 

Spot-on.  This is one relatively common scenario Hugh just flippantly ignored or took for granted -- where STUN and END recovery do NOT occur rapidly.  (My scenario, above, is another scenario ... where STUN recovery simply doesn't occur rapidly enough.)

I did not ignore (flippantly or otherwise) the merits of being able to add a big STUN boost in the middle of combat, to an unconscious ally or one just low on STUN. You, however, are ignoring (deliberately or through oversight) the twin realities that:

 

- in combat, Aid will have the same benefit as Healing, at a lower cost (or more points boosted for the same AP cost);

- once combat ends, Aid will be able to be re-used in very short order, but Healing will not.

[Surrealone]

- in combat, Aid will have the same benefit as Healing, at a lower cost (or more points boosted for the same AP cost);

The unqualified, blanket statement of yours that I just quoted is patently false in 5e games -- wherein Healing and Aid are both 10 CP per 1d6 without regard to the halving rule.  Keep in mind that while I'm familiar/fluent with 6e, I'm a 5er player and, as a reminder, this thread pertains to both 5e and 6e games (as evidenced by the fact that I took the time to quote from both in the original post) ... and you made a blanket statement applicable to both.  Thus, I didn't ignore your statement, at all.  Rather, it's simply not a correct/accurate statement for both 5e and 6e games.

 

While you mentioned Aid's fade rate, you did it in terms of out-of-combat scenarios ... which seems to be how you're thinking of using both powers.  In combat, the fade rate means using Aid has an additional cost in the form of -required- repeat uses (to match the effects of Healing wherein the Healed points didn't fade in the same amount of time) in multi-turn combat scenarios ...which are quite common in Heroic games consisting of lower SPD characters.  Such re-use of in-combat Aid may be a fair tradeoff when Aid is 6CP per 1d6 as in 6e, but it's a bad deal in 5e where Aid is the same 10CP per 1d6 as Healing.

[Christopher R Taylor]

Aid's absolute effect negates its value for healing if you use very long fade rates to simulate it having a permanent effect.