D&D 5E Healing, range and action economy

[CapnZapp]

Hiya,

Anyone else feeling the healing options available to clerics are a bit... wonky?

This is how I would have understood it.

To gain maximum healing, you need to:
1) spend your action
2) close to touch range

If either or neither of those two things are true, you can still heal, but with roughly half effect for each lacking criteria. That is:
a) if you only spend a bonus action, you get half healing
b) if you heal at range, you get half healing
but
c) if you use a bonus action to heal at range, you get quarter healing

But this isn't true.

Is it just me, or do Healing Word give incredible bang for the buck?

Despite using only your bonus action, you still get to heal at range for half healing?

Or, the other way around: you can choose to spend your action to heal, but you must close to touch range, and Cure Wounds only gets you double the healing of Healing Word?

Thoughts?

 

[DaveDash]

I'd probably never use Cure Wounds in combat over Healing Word. In fact I don't think I have.

Heal and Mass Heal however, I've used quite a bit. That's when healing spells start to become action economy efficient.

One thing to note Clerics have a busy bonus action, Spiritual Weapons, extra attacks (War Priest), etc.

 

[CapnZapp]

Would you agree Cure Wounds gives too little extra compared to Healing Word, considering you 1) need to close to touch range, and 2) need to spend your action, DaveDash?

 

[DaveDash]

Would you agree Cure Wounds gives too little extra compared to Healing Word, considering you 1) need to close to touch range, and 2) need to spend your action, DaveDash?

Yep I agree. Even if you factor in scaling up spell slots to say, 5th level slots, you're still looking at 27.5 damage (Cure Wounds) vs 17.5 (Healing Word). Those 10hp really aren't worth losing the action / moving out of position.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Saying that a healing spell cast as a bonus action OR ranged should heal half seems a bit arbitrary. You could just as easily say that a healing spell with one but not both should heal 3/4.

The great thing about Healing Word is its convenience. Having range is a great thing, because sometimes you can't get to your target. The bonus action is a cherry on top, since there will be plenty of times that you'll have another use for your bonus action, plus it means you can't cast any other non-cantrip spells this turn. Frankly, I'd probably still use Healing Word even if it only healed 1 hp.

Without negative hp, the amount healed is largely irrelevant. There are plenty of monsters that can do 28 damage in a single round, so much of the time it won't make a difference whether you cast Healing Word or Cure Wounds. The point of healing your ally is so that your side doesn't lose a character-worth of actions.

Of course, if negative hp were a factor, I'd say that low-level healing (pre-Heal) in its current state is insufficient. Using a 5th level slot (that you first gain access to at 9th level) to heal what a CR 5 (elemental) can put out in a single round simply isn't worth it.

In its current state, combat healing is usually not worth it (prior to level 11), but for the most part you don't need it (except to get someone above 0 hp). If you make it necessary, then I believe it would have to be improved somewhat. Of course, that could have consequences elsewhere in the system...

 

[Tony Vargas]

Despite using only your bonus action, you still get to heal at range for half healing?

Or, the other way around: you can choose to spend your action to heal, but you must close to touch range, and Cure Wounds only gets you double the healing of Healing Word?

Thoughts?

Healing is a little inconsistent in 5e because party composition can make such a big difference in the total amount available. Overnight healing, though, is always there as a fall-back.

But, no, I don't think Healing Word is out of line. Healing can often be done out of combat, when the restrictions on Cure Wounds don't matter, and amount healed is the prime consideration. Tapping HD requires an hour, so CW fills in when HD are unavailable. Healing Word represents less healing but conserves the Cleric's action. Thing is HW might get soemone up only to have them promptly dropped again, so it's also only going to be useful situationally.

 

[Chocolategravy]

3 levels of sorcerer and you can fire cure spells 30 feet. Because a dragon had it's way with your ancestor.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

3 levels of sorcerer and you can fire cure spells 30 feet. Because a dragon had it's way with your ancestor.

There's no reason to believe that it was non-consensual. Princesses (and princes) frequently fall in love with dragons. It's not weird at all.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Or, the other way around: you can choose to spend your action to heal, but you must close to touch range, and Cure Wounds only gets you double the healing of Healing Word?

The problem is that Cure Wounds doesn't give double the healing of Healing Word, because your spellcasting modifier is likely to be a positive number, and because 1d8 is less than twice of 1d4. They even have the same minimum, where minimum healing is an extremely important variable to take into consideration.

Cure Wounds should heal 2d4 + twice your spellcasting modifier, and then it would be balanced because Healing Word would give half healing.

 

[Celtavian]

I didn't play a cleric in our first campaign. My buddy did. We were stuck in 3E combat healing mentality where cure light wounds was your only low level option.

After playing a cleric myself, I've changed to the healing word is superior camp. I've done this for reasons other than action economy. In 3E/Pathfinder the cleric (especially at low levels) was a fairly weak combatant, so focusing his slots on healing and removing debuffs from stronger combat classes like martials and arcane casters was an efficient use of spell resources given the difficulty of our combats. That isn't the case in 5E.

In 5E the cleric is as strong in combat as most other classes. So focusing spell slots and actions on healing alone is an inefficient use of spell resources. Healing Word allows the cleric to heal, while focusing potent combat actions on attacking, thus allowing your group to end the fight quicker. I was quite surprised when the party was down to two members out of five (the cleric and warlock/fighter) to see the cleric cast spiritual guardians, spiritual weapon, and start casting sacred flame while wearing +1 half-plate with a shield and decimate the room of enemies. I had picked her up Resilient Con and boosted her Con to 15. The cleric tore that room up at 7th level. It was illuminating. Now I understand why their spell list is limited. You have to be careful giving clerics any more than they have. In 5E the cleric is a power class and you have to be careful with it. You give it too much and C-zilla is back.

Better to build the cleric for combat and use healing word[/I in 5E than cure wounds. You can build a crazy tough cleric in this edition. You could build a pretty tough cleric in 3E/Pathfinder, but martials and arcane casters were still for the most part tougher for most levels. In 5E the cleric is one of the stronger classes from beginning.