Rapid Healing and Regeneration

[Jeminai]

Vaevictus is absolutely corect. Regeneration already includes Rapid Healing (and all of its benefits) as part of its cost. B 79, last sentence of first paragraph under Regeneration.

Case closed.

[Bruno]

Originally Posted by Jeminai

Vaevictus is absolutely corect. Regeneration already includes Rapid Healing (and all of its benefits) as part of its cost. B 79, last sentence of first paragraph under Regeneration.

Case closed.

Uh, that's not the problem.

The problem is Very Rapid Healing, which is not part of Regeneration, and costs more than Slow Regeneration, and yet has less benefit as written.

[davidtmoore]

Originally Posted by aesir23

IIRC, Slow Regeneration didn't exist in 3e. It started at 1/Hour for 25.

Did it not? I haven't looked at 3e for a while.

Then this is a whole new inconsistency, specially introduced just for 4e.

[Not another shrubbery]

Originally Posted by aesir23

IIRC, Slow Regeneration didn't exist in 3e. It started at 1/Hour for 25.

It did, Compendium I lists it. Supers may be the original source. I remember earlier discussions, probably on GURPSnet, about the same issue [VRH vs. SlowRegen.].

[Vaevictis Asmadi]

Thanks for that link. I hadn't seen that and while I agree that +10 to avoid crippling doesn't seem helpful, I don't know as much about GURPS as Kromm and others.

Originally Posted by aesir23

If you eliminate Very Rapid Healing, than I think you need to include something like Extra Hit Points +10 (Only for determining healing rates -n%) to fill the niche of doubling all healing rates (or in this case, increasing them by 1).

I think -50% to -60% would probably be a good starting point.

Ever since I read RPK's post about using VRH to double regeneration rates I've used it often with great success. But I agree, there are still some weird results (like VRH + Slow Regeneration having the same cost as Regular Regeneration).

That's why I don't want to eliminate VRH, and also because VRH+R(S) forms a nice intermediate between Slow and Regular Regeneration (which are more than an order of magnitude apart).

But since Regeneration (Slow) already includes Rapid Healing, it only costs 10 pts to add VRH on top, so the combination is 20 pts. At only 5 less than Regular Regeneration, it's still overpriced!

If you combine RPK's doubling of all HP healing with Kromm's +5 to resist bleeding, it gets better, but by itself it still isn't worth as much as Slow Regeneration, especially if you don't use bleeding rules (though in that case you really can just ignore VRH).

One possibility is to extend RPK's interpretation to include every possible way that you would regain 1 HP. For example, if First Aid is used on someone with VRH, they regain 2 HP instead of 1. If someone casts a healing spell on you, the effect is doubled. Would that make it worth 15 pts by itself?


Here's another possibility: to recover 1 HP every 12 hours, buy Regeneration (Very Slow) at 10 pts. To recover 1 HP every 6 hours (or every 3 hours?) buy Regeneration (Slow) for 15 or 20 pts. Then just get rid of Very Rapid Healing. The only problem with that is that Regeneration is still exotic, which VRH isn't, so that takes away character options for some concepts.

[trooper6]

Originally Posted by Bruno

Uh, that's not the problem.

The problem is Very Rapid Healing, which is not part of Regeneration, and costs more than Slow Regeneration, and yet has less benefit as written.

Except that Regeneration is exotic, so no normal human is going to be able to buy Regeneration in games I run. In that case, Very Rapid Healing is awesome.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by trooper6

Except that Regeneration is exotic, so no normal human is going to be able to buy Regeneration in games I run. In that case, Very Rapid Healing is awesome.

Well, so long as the opportunity cost of being something that can have regeneration is more than 5 points, anyway

[trooper6]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Well, so long as the opportunity cost of being something that can have regeneration is more than 5 points, anyway

I run lots and lots of games where the players are humans. Only humans. So there is no opportunity cost to be something that can have regeneration...you can't.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by trooper6

I run lots and lots of games where the players are humans. Only humans. So there is no opportunity cost to be something that can have regeneration...you can't.

Well, certainly there's no need to worry about comparison if one of them isn't on the table at all.

Except that it makes it pretty clear that one of those costs is just not right. As has been otherwise established up-thread.

[Edges]

It's a small point and won't tip the scales, but note:

A +5 to HP recovery rolls improves your chance of getting a critical success. This makes it more likely to heal 4 HP in a day with VRH than with Regeneration (slow).