HEAL spell?

[tbeard1999]

Originally Posted by Kirk

...I don't want to play D&D when I am in Cidri.

I do want to play a version of D&D in Cidri - deadlier and with an excellent tactical combat system. I don't think that the kinds of healing spells being discussed will make TFT characters as resilient as comparable D&D characters. But they may make classic dungeon crawls more tenable.

[Kirk]

Originally Posted by tbeard1999

I do want to play a version of D&D in Cidri - deadlier and with an excellent tactical combat system. I don't think that the kinds of healing spells being discussed will make TFT characters as resilient as comparable D&D characters. But they may make classic dungeon crawls more tenable.

Ah, that is definitely a religious difference between us. There is very little about D&D I like, I would never play it now, and only played it a few times in the mid 70s to give it a fair shake before dropping it at about the same time Melee showed up. I never enjoyed a single minute sitting at a D&D table, and would have quit playing even if TFT hadn't had taken its place.

[tbeard1999]

Originally Posted by Kirk

Ah, that is definitely a religious difference between us.

Yeah, and I recognize that I may not be in the majority. That's why I made a proposal for "cinematic" healing spells (i.e., good for dungeon crawls) and for non-cinematic healing spells (that should be fine for more "realistic" campaigns.

TFT was the first RPG that I ran - I played AD&D earlier.

Most of my players had Melee and Wizard, so it was an easy and inexpensive upgrade to play TFT. They really only needed the Melee weapons chart and the ITL talent list to get started. So 7 pages of photocopies and they were in business.

The entire ITL set cost $16, vs. $33 for the three AD&D hardbacks. This was important for high schoolers making $3.10 an hour part-time.

Anyhow, I ran dungeons from the beginning.

[Dave Crowell]

Originally Posted by tbeard1999

An average second level AD&D fighter with 11 hp will take an average of 1 hit in 4 rounds of combat against a comparable foe (at AC 4, a 2nd level enemy has a 35% chance of hitting him). He'll lose 4-5 hp in each hit, assuming a longsword is used. He can fight 2 combats like this - twice as many as his TFT counterpart - without any healing before being in serious danger.

But if he has a cleric in the party, he can probably count on getting 1-2 Cure Light Wounds spells, which heal an average of 4.5 hit points each. With one Cure Light Wounds spell, he can fight an average of 3 such combats before being at ~3 HP and in serious danger. If 2 Cure Light Wounds spells are available, he can fight an average of 4 such combats before being at ~3 HP and in serious danger.

Bottom line - a 2nd level AD&D fighter can have 3-4 times as many combats as his 32 point TFT counterpart.

I've consistently stated that I want the ability to recover more ST *between* combats, so that a classic dungeon crawl is practical in TFT.

This assumes a 1:1 ratio of clerics to fighters. A pattern not guaranteed.

It also over looks that a 2nd level cleric is very close to the fighting capability of a 2nd level fighter. Maybe even identical in everything but hit points, I don't have the DMG combat tables in front of me to see if the fighter has better "to hit" numbers yet. This increases the damage output of the party.

The cleric is also able to cast his Cure Light Wounds in combat with almost assured success. It does require the cleric to touch the fighter, so there is a chance that the spell is disrupted by an opponent hitting the cleric.

The ability to instantly heal half (on average dice rolls) of the fighter's hit points at a touch twice a day would be a complete game changer in TFT. Especially as there is no limit to the number of times the fighter can recieve this healing.

Although it adds a level of bookkeeping I think it is important for TFT to maintain some limit on the amount, or number of times, a character can recieve magical healing. Once per combat is probably easiest.

One healing from physiker, and one from magic would allow fighters to fight longer, but would still place a limit on how long. Setting that limit lower than AD&D, which I think is the feel most of us want for TFT.

[tbeard1999]

Originally Posted by Dave Crowell

This assumes a 1:1 ratio of clerics to fighters. A pattern not guaranteed.

No assumption is guaranteed. But I assumed 2 fighters, 1 cleric, 1 thief and 1 magic user.

A 2nd level cleric with a Wisdom of 14+ will have 4 first level spells. It's reasonable to assume he'd have 2 cure light wounds and could easily take 4 on a dungeon crawl. With 2 fighters, that's 1-2 cure light wounds each.

It also over looks that a 2nd level cleric is very close to the fighting capability of a 2nd level fighter.

I don't see the relevance of this. The cleric IS inferior to the fighter. At 2nd level he has 2 less hit points on average. His mace does 1d6; the fighter's longsword does 1d8 - 29% more average damage (3.5 vs 4.5). The fighter has access to a variety of missile weapons and polearms as well. The fighter's ThAC0 is 19 (I use the expanded option of increasing fighter ThAC0 by 1 per level rather than by 2 per 2 levels); the Cleric's is 20.

Of course, "very close" can mean different things to different people.

The cleric is also able to cast his Cure Light Wounds in combat with almost assured success. It does require the cleric to touch the fighter, so there is a chance that the spell is disrupted by an opponent hitting the cleric.

The ability to instantly heal half (on average dice rolls) of the fighter's hit points at a touch twice a day would be a complete game changer in TFT. Especially as there is no limit to the number of times the fighter can recieve this healing.

Good thing I didn't suggest that. Anyhow, I think you're making my point for me - that an AD&D fighter can reasonably expect to survive significantly more battles than the TFT fighter (2 vs 1 in the example I gave). This is exacerbated by even low level spells like cure light wounds (3-4 vs 1 in the example I gave).

Although it adds a level of bookkeeping I think it is important for TFT to maintain some limit on the amount, or number of times, a character can recieve magical healing. Once per combat is probably easiest.

One healing from physiker, and one from magic would allow fighters to fight longer, but would still place a limit on how long. Setting that limit lower than AD&D, which I think is the feel most of us want for TFT.

<shrug> That's what I did. My cinematic healing spells are substantially inferior to their AD&D counterparts.

Minor Healing - 2 points healed on average; Cure Light Wounds - 4.5
Major Healing - 4 points healed on average; Cure Serious Wound - 10
Critical Healing - 6 points healed on average; Cure Critical Wounds - 16.5

If you have a Master Physicker, each of these numbers can be increased by one. Note too that Minor Healing gives no more benefit than a physicker's healing powers. In the spell's current form, you can use it in combat. But a typical low level wizard will have a substantial chance of failing to cast the spell. (And as I noted, I wouldn't be opposed to changing them so that the healing doesn't take effect for several minutes, which would effectively preclude use in combat.)

Also, the maximum healing with the Minor Healing spell is 3 points of damage (and that assumes you have a Master Physicker around, which is unlikely at lower levels). If you assume a ST11-12 fighter, you're healing a maximum of 25%. Without a Master Physicker, it's 17%. And the figure cannot be healed again unless he takes additional damage. This is already allowed in TFT with physickers and master physickers.

The most powerful spell, Critical Healing, heals 6 points; 7 if you have a Master Physicker. Since that's an IQ 16 spell, I'd assume that the this wizard would be part of a pretty powerful adventuring party. But even if the average fighter's ST is 12, this spell, with a physicker will heal 58% of the fighter's starting ST. Again, the figure cannot be healed again unless he takes additional damage.

And while there are an infinite variety of slightly different options, the spells I proposed accomplish my primary goal - allow TFT characters greater healing between combats.

I am also very skeptical of making healing easy during combat. The TFT combat system takes a fair amount of time, but is manageable. I'd be very reticent to do anything that would tend to make combats go longer. Also, I like the fact that each TFT combat is still relatively deadly.

[Terquem]

Limiting the total availability of "magical" healing has always seemed to me to give TFT a different feel altogether from other conventional role playing games

I like the idea that characters can survive, hopefully, one encounter, but need to make serious choices about what to do if they have another encounter before a time to rest is had.

I like, and have introduced, healing naturally in less time, and have always liked the "healer's kit" concepts of many games, with a limited number of uses that restore strength at a fixed rate, never random, per use.

It just seems to me that when magical, player character available healing spells are introduce it always leads to abuse of the system, or the feeling that someone must play a healer (which is a false premise, in my opinion). I like the feel of a game that puts serious decision making on when to fight and when to run away in the player's court.

[larsdangly]

Originally Posted by Terquem

Limiting the total availability of "magical" healing has always seemed to me to give TFT a different feel altogether from other conventional role playing games

I like the idea that characters can survive, hopefully, one encounter, but need to make serious choices about what to do if they have another encounter before a time to rest is had.

I like, and have introduced, healing naturally in less time, and have always liked the "healer's kit" concepts of many games, with a limited number of uses that restore strength at a fixed rate, never random, per use.

It just seems to me that when magical, player character available healing spells are introduce it always leads to abuse of the system, or the feeling that someone must play a healer (which is a false premise, in my opinion). I like the feel of a game that puts serious decision making on when to fight and when to run away in the player's court.

This is spot on. There are hundreds of fantasy roleplaying games on the market, and only a few lucky ones are distinctive enough in their feel during play that you would miss them if they were gone. TFT is one of those distinctive games, and part of what makes it distinctive is that you die when someone brains you with a pole axe, and there is almost nothing under the sun that will bring you back. I also find it distinctive and enjoyable that healing exists in the game, but it is modest in its effects and mostly in the hands of high-skill characters rather than magicians or priests.

Also, well armored characters should not turn their nose up at a master physicker; 3 points of healing per wound goes a long way when you have 5+ points of armor! It is quite plausible to play TFT as originally published and get into a half dozen or more fights per day. Its just that they have to be fights you win, and you have to be sufficiently well armored that you rarely take more than 3 points of damage per 'mishap'.

An important detail about the Physicker talents: it is ambiguous as to what constitutes a 'mishap', and therefore how many times per day one character can benefit from non magical healing. If you rule one 'mishap' means all damage you take from any source in a given fight or scene, then things get a bit tricky. If one 'mishap' is a single blow/fall/arrow/etc., then you are in much better shape. A simple house rule that lets you play the game as-is and dungeon crawl to your heart's content: Allow a physicker one attempt to heal each individual injury. If you are a goof ball who runs around without armor this won't keep you alive very long. But well armored characters will get patched up as good as new more often than not.

[Jim Kane]

Excellent post Terquem, you summed up my feeling perfectly.

To add: the purpose of levels within a labyrinth is more than a vertical matter, it is one of graded difficulty. Ideally handled on both ends, PC's would play within their scale, and not rely on *easy-healing* to enable them to artificially delve too deep, too far, and too long therein - which feeds the demand-cycle for more liberal healing.

JK

[JLV]

I agree with Tarquem in theory, but the devil is in the details. The question becomes what the "limits" on magical healing actually are.

Currently, there is NO magical healing (other than potions or scrolls, and rings of regeneration).

I believe there should be SOME additional magical healing available (and that Steve gets pretty close to where I think the right amount is).

Others want massive amounts of magical healing available; but I disagree on multiple counts (removal of risk, acceleration of attribute bloat, monty haulism, etc).

[Dave Crowell]

I think we are on the same page. I like that TFT combat is gritty, hurts, and is potentially deadly. Increasing the availability of healing between combats should have the efect of making longer periods of adventuring more survivable. If you can heal faster between fights you can afford to get in more fights between periods of extended rest and healing. It still keeps individual fights a significant risk to be weighed against the potential reward. No (or very limited) magical instant healing during the fight.

I like that combat hurts. I fighter who has taken most of his hits does not fight as well as he did when he was fresh. This is in sharp contrast to a lot of RPGs where a fighter fights just as well at 1 HP as he did at 50 HP. He is just more likely to die if he gets hit.