Regeneration + Dependency... do you heal or not?
 

Regeneration and Draining both mention that regeneration does NOT heal damage taken from Draining.

However, Dependency has no such caveat. So, could you take massive levels of Dependency then completely counteract it with Regeneration? Now, I realize this is abuse and wouldn't do it or allow it if I'm reading it correctly... BUT there reason I am asking.

Assuming this "abuse" of the system is possible, what would be the accessibility percentage to make Regeneration NOT heal dependency related damage? I am working on a race with high levels of regeneration, however they are dependent on a substance or they eventually die regardless of their regeneration.

Re: Regeneration + Dependency... do you heal or not?
 

There's no need for an accessibility limitation; you are correct in your original assumption that Regeneration does not heal Dependency-related damage (in fact, Dependency really should say that natural healing can't heal that damage at all).

Re: Regeneration + Dependency... do you heal or not?
 

I don't know that it's always abusive. There are combinations I might let it through - mostly where the rates aren't closely balanced (i.e. I heal a little slower without this stuff, or my regeneration means a I don't die quite as fast without it). It's probably not the best way to do those, but it may not be worth the effort of changing if that's how somebody built something like that.

I'd call it -0%. There's stuff humans are dependent on that Regeneration logically doesn't help with (starvation for example) that don't lower the cost. Regeneration heals *wounds*, not everything that comes of your hit points is a wound.

Re: Regeneration + Dependency... do you heal or not?
 

Ah, ok so is this in an errata anywhere? I mean, while it COULD be construed as common sense, there are players and GMs out there that have no idea what "RAI" is, only "RAW" and so since neither dependency nor regeneration mention each other, and regeneration is a superish ability and not "normal" healing, one could argue that the book in no way says Dependency doesn't get regenerated. :(

I myself am the type of player that knows the RAW, but am willing to accept (usually) a RAI interpretation as long as it makes sense (as this does), but I still like to see errata for such things, as I said, because I know players and GMs who are RAW lawyers.

Ah, good point! I didn't even think about it that way. If dependency is treated as starvation, then yeah it as Langy said, just need to reference the starvation rules and... use common sense. :)