Author Topic: Revised Profession: Healer(s)  (Read 4688 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Eladan

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 114
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Revised Profession: Healer(s)
« on: January 05, 2022, 08:14:32 AM »
I realize that this topic had some discussion under a previous thread (https://ironcrown.co.uk/ICEforums/index.php?topic=20392.0), but I wanted to started a tangent to it under the Rolemaster branch of the forum to avoid confusion with Beta. Now that my life has completed a major time sink (graduate work), I am revisiting my project to bring old professions into RMU and have what I think may be a fresh look at healers in RM. For the purposes of this discussion, I'll call the various versions the Old Healer, the RMU Healer, and the New Healer.

There are a couple of core ideas to start with:

  • RM has traditionally had three pathways to magical healing - The Healer, who was most effective but suffered from playability in our games because it meant taking on other players' downtime; the Lay Healer, who as a Mentalism user was more effective in a combat role but was slightly weaker at healing; and Channeling users, who had access to the Law lists and could choose to divert some spell list development into healing.

    For my groups, this always seemed redundant. To that point, I've begun drafting a revision of the Healer that is essentially a combo of the old Lay Healer/Healer professions, with spell lists that have scaling options: self-healing is the default, and the spell becomes less effective when healing others, mirroring the old diffusion of power between the two professions.

    Here is an example of the Level 1 spell from my revised Blood Law:
    Flowstop IV – Caster can apply any three of the following options to a bleeding wound. Caster make take an option more than once. (II) indicates an option actually counts as two for tallying purposes. Multiple Flowstop spells may not be cast upon the same wound by the same caster.
    • (I) Stops bleeding on a wound bleeding up to 1 hit/round. After one hour, the clotting is permanent, but until the injury is actually healed by some means (e.g., Medicine maneuver), the target can engage in activity no more vigorous than walking without the bleeding resuming.
    • (I) Mend a wound bleeding up to 1 hit/round. This combined with the option above bypasses the need to rest for the hour.
    • (II) Cast this spell on a target up to 50 away. Taking this more than once increases the distance, not the number of targets.

    This method of "options" actually scales quite closely to healing as it is written in the current lists. At level 8, the RMU Healer can cast Clotting True, stopping all bleeding, but needing the hour of recovery time. On my list, a level 7 my version of Flowstop XII would essentially have the same effect, allowing the Healer to stop 10 hits/rd of bleeding on himself. How does this compare to a Lay Healer though? At level 12 a Lay Healer can cast Clotting True, while my New Healer can cast my version of Flowstop XVI at level 13, allow him to spend two "point" to cast the spell on someone else, and then stopping 14 hits/rd as a Clotting spell, or 7 hits/rd instantly. Granted, the progression of my version of Flowstop can be tinkered with, but I think there's something cool here.

    The concept here is to reduce the number of spells needed the healing lists, thereby allowing us to compress the number of healing lists required for someone to be effective at healing, and allowing the new Healer to have some build diversity. This brings me to my next point...
  • Promoting build diversity promotes professions - Very few of my players ever played healers, in part because they didn't want to be pigeon-holed as a utility to everyone else in the party. By compressing the lists using the spell mechanics I mention above, this leaves some room for the New Healer to diversify. If we can reduce the core physical healing spells down to 3-4 lists with the new open slots (since Clotting and Cut Repair no longer take two slots, there is room to combine Blood and Concussion, Organ and Nerve, etc.

    This leaves room for the New Healer to select his "specialty". If I limit professions to 6 Base lists, then he can decide whether to pick lists like "Mental Healing", "Spiritual Healing" (once the exclusive province of Clerics with Lifegiving), "Damage Deflection" (an experimental concept of mine providing shields and "extra life" to companions), or a gamut of other list concepts. In short, the New Healer can now be anything from a doctor/surgeon to battlefield medic, to something else, making the profession more appealing to more people.

I'm open to comments, concerns, critiques, and recommendations. I would also move the New Healer squarely into the realm of Mentalism, freeing up the Hybrid slot for my Revised: Astrologer (https://ironcrown.co.uk/ICEforums/index.php?topic=20055.0), but that's an OCD thing of mine...
"And it may be that Eru has set in me a fire greater than thou knowest."

Offline jdale

  • RMU Dev Team
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,099
  • OIC Points +25/-25
Re: Revised Profession: Healer(s)
« Reply #1 on: January 05, 2022, 09:54:10 AM »
I think the scaling is a good approach. We actually doubled up some flowstop/clotting spells to slip a little more utility into the lay healer lists.

Ranged healing has some interesting ramifications, e.g. enemies may have hidden healers.

Reducing the number of required spell lists to treat all conditions is good and bad. The good is the character is more versatile. The bad is that it makes different kinds of injuries functionally the same. Adding functionality to the existing lists keeps it more distinct.
System and Line Editor for Rolemaster

Offline MisterK

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 655
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revised Profession: Healer(s)
« Reply #2 on: January 05, 2022, 10:25:05 AM »
Reducing the number of required spell lists to treat all conditions is good and bad. The good is the character is more versatile. The bad is that it makes different kinds of injuries functionally the same. Adding functionality to the existing lists keeps it more distinct.
I wouldn't say that - they are functionally distinct since their effect is distinct. They are only similar for healing purposes, but then again, it all depends on how much you want to emphasise the need to have a pocket healer in a group when that decision has significant side effects on the healing character - in other words, unless being a healer is as much fun as being any other class, you have a design issue. Healing is fully reactive, removes a significant part of a caster's noncombat versatility, has no offensive, defensive or utility impact in combat unless you make recovery instant (which is not the default setting), and , as with all other casters, eats up a significant part of DPs to sustain. That's a bit much for something that can only be seen as a necessary evil (as in : something you would rather do without, but can't for practical reasons).

Offline Eladan

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 114
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revised Profession: Healer(s)
« Reply #3 on: January 05, 2022, 10:49:09 AM »
I appreciate the encouragement on the scaling concept. There's some balance issues to consider in terms of how many "options" are available at each level.

Ranged healing already exists in game though, doesn't it? The Old/RMU Lay Healer and Channeling lists all have ranged healing. Those professions with more limited healing like the Monk, Paladin, etc don't really need their lists modified. I also don't necessarily see the concept of hidden healers as a bad thing. Any spellcaster sitting on the back line is likely to draw hostility, although casting from Mentalism does make it more subtle, which is something to consider...

I don't necessarily think that the compression has to trivialize the type of injuries... The scaling system can be adjusted to compress slots (and therefore lists), keeping spells to treat different ailments. Totally unthought-out example:

Bone/Cartilage Healing III (New) - Caster can apply any two of the following options to a Bone/Cartilage injury. Caster make take an option more than once. (X) indicates an option actually counts as X options for tallying purposes. Multiple spells may not be cast upon the same wound by the same caster.
  • (I) An injury to cartilage incurring a penalty up to -20 is cleaned, protected, and bound as effectively as if a successful Medicine maneuver was performed, and the target receives a +50 bonus on their recovery roll. Taking this more than once increases the penalty that can be treated.
  • (II) An injury to bone incurring a penalty up to -20 is cleaned, protected, and bound as effectively as if a successful Medicine maneuver was performed, and the target receives a +50 bonus on their recovery roll.
  • (II) Cast this spell on a target up to 50 away. Taking this more than once increases the distance, not the number of targets.

It essentially combines the two spells and allows us to add spells from another list. If we want to combine Bone healing with say Muscle healing, there are now of openings available.
"And it may be that Eru has set in me a fire greater than thou knowest."

Offline Eladan

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 114
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revised Profession: Healer(s)
« Reply #4 on: January 05, 2022, 11:09:42 AM »
@MisterK
Quote
... in other words, unless being a healer is as much fun as being any other class, you have a design issue.

I agree with this 100%. I don't mind playing utility/support characters, but I think I'm in the minority, and that seems to be the biggest issue with healing classes in general. There may be other ways to create an appeal to them, but I think this is a viable and effective way to do it. Compressing lists and offering others that create diverse roles in a group seems like a logical option in this ongoing project to revamp the old concepts into the RMU framework.
"And it may be that Eru has set in me a fire greater than thou knowest."

Offline OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol

  • Revered Elder
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,221
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revised Profession: Healer(s)
« Reply #5 on: January 05, 2022, 12:44:23 PM »
I agree with this 100%. I don't mind playing utility/support characters, but I think I'm in the minority, and that seems to be the biggest issue with healing classes in general.
Despite generally playing utility/support characters, one of my players is still very reluctant to play a Healer or even Lay Healer in RM2 because, whilst any other utility/support magic-using character may be able to do a lot of stuff (buff/debuff, minor healing, disguise, etc.) at the same time, the Healer/Lay Healer has to dedicated SIX whole spell lists on just one matter: healing.
It's especially glaring when one considers the Monk's base spell list, "Body Renewal", where the Monk (a semi-spell user of Essence!) can reattach a severed limb with only one spell whereas a Healer can do the same… using FOUR spells.
The world was then consumed by darkness, and mankind was devoured alive and cast into hell, led by a jubilant 紗羽. She rejoiced in being able to continue serving the gods, thus perpetuating her travels across worlds to destroy them. She looked at her doll and, remembering their promises, told her: "You see, my dear, we succeeded! We've become legends! We've become villains! We've become witches!" She then laughed with a joyful, childlike laughter, just as she kept doing for all of eternity.

Offline Eladan

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 114
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revised Profession: Healer(s)
« Reply #6 on: January 05, 2022, 01:21:46 PM »
That's why limiting the healing lists to say 3 lists, and then having 5-7 more to pick from with different specializations would be excellent. They can all be framed to model different healing archetypes. Consider the following:
  • The Discipline priest from WoW, which specialized in Shield spells to supplement their healing,
  • Battlefield medics with buffs to combatants,
  • Healing specialists, in the vein of Elrond, who are capable of advanced healing,
  • Damage-based or dark healers, who can damage others and transfer life/health.
There are more I'm sure, but you allow players to pick three more lists that can point their character in one of these archetypal directions, and now the profession seems much more appealing. I can live with the healing spread over 3 lists if the relative power is greater than the professional lists (Monk, Paladin, etc) but asking a profession to dedicate their entire development is perhaps a bridge too far.
"And it may be that Eru has set in me a fire greater than thou knowest."

Offline OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol

  • Revered Elder
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,221
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revised Profession: Healer(s)
« Reply #7 on: January 05, 2022, 02:12:19 PM »
Honestly, just getting rid of the RM2 "Transferring Ways" in RMSS was already a good idea, as it used to be a whole spell list with little use (in my current game, the healer is the Monk with his "Body Renewal"… with just the "spacial skills" background option, which allows him to cover 80% of what a Healer may, in just one spell list and one BGO!
Honestly, giving the Healer's spells a range, say 1 dam or so, making them instant spells, and allowing him to even do the same as the other healing lists but in a couple lists, would suddenly increase his usefulness by a large margin.
The world was then consumed by darkness, and mankind was devoured alive and cast into hell, led by a jubilant 紗羽. She rejoiced in being able to continue serving the gods, thus perpetuating her travels across worlds to destroy them. She looked at her doll and, remembering their promises, told her: "You see, my dear, we succeeded! We've become legends! We've become villains! We've become witches!" She then laughed with a joyful, childlike laughter, just as she kept doing for all of eternity.

Offline Vladimir

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 154
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revised Profession: Healer(s)
« Reply #8 on: January 05, 2022, 04:37:54 PM »
  In the current campaign a new player wanted to play a Paladin and started going over the Cleric's spell lists...I then pointed out the Paladin's lists and the GM suddenly remembered why he didn't allow Paladins -He considered the class over powered (if played right...or wrong). The Paladin is what a Healer should be, with a single comprehensive list of all-around spells instead of several lists if specific spells for specific injuries...and he could fight, using a slew of other useful spells.
  My GM seems to love allowing inexperienced players OP characters, just for the entertainment value, such as the lycanthrope who eventually got killed by the party because he didn't bother to tell the party that he had problems when the full moon was out. Unfortunately, I missed that session.
When the Master governs, the people
are hardly aware that he exists.
-Lao Tzu

Offline OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol

  • Revered Elder
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,221
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revised Profession: Healer(s)
« Reply #9 on: January 05, 2022, 06:16:50 PM »
There's a reason why Eladan mentioned them. The Monk's "Body Renewal", the Paladin's "Laying on Hands" and the Arcane "Arcane Healing" are example of what the Healer's lists should have been (in better versions for the two former) instead of six spell lists…
The world was then consumed by darkness, and mankind was devoured alive and cast into hell, led by a jubilant 紗羽. She rejoiced in being able to continue serving the gods, thus perpetuating her travels across worlds to destroy them. She looked at her doll and, remembering their promises, told her: "You see, my dear, we succeeded! We've become legends! We've become villains! We've become witches!" She then laughed with a joyful, childlike laughter, just as she kept doing for all of eternity.

Offline EltonJ

  • Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 377
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revised Profession: Healer(s)
« Reply #10 on: January 05, 2022, 06:28:22 PM »
There's a reason why Eladan mentioned them. The Monk's "Body Renewal", the Paladin's "Laying on Hands" and the Arcane "Arcane Healing" are example of what the Healer's lists should have been (in better versions for the two former) instead of six spell lists…

Perhaps the same for the Lay Healers?

Offline Eladan

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 114
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revised Profession: Healer(s)
« Reply #11 on: January 05, 2022, 07:10:55 PM »
@OLF
Quote
The Monk's "Body Renewal", the Paladin's "Laying on Hands" and the Arcane "Arcane Healing" are example of what the Healer's lists should have been (in better versions for the two former) instead of six spell lists…

Bingo. To be fair, I’m not sure if the answer is to condense it all into one list (like the OP semi lists) or to make sure that the effectiveness is spread out over several lists, but the point is that healing as a spell concept is problematic. It actually reminds me of the problem that Warrior Mages had in RM2 with an elemental attack list with the best spells from every Mage list.
"And it may be that Eru has set in me a fire greater than thou knowest."

Offline jdale

  • RMU Dev Team
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,099
  • OIC Points +25/-25
Re: Revised Profession: Healer(s)
« Reply #12 on: January 05, 2022, 08:36:47 PM »
The semi professions pay for that versatility in that most healing is higher level for them (and self-healing in mentalism is of course only for yourself). They are undoubtedly good lists but you probably wouldn't rely on a paladin for all of your party's healing.
System and Line Editor for Rolemaster

Offline Eladan

  • Initiate
  • *
  • Posts: 114
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revised Profession: Healer(s)
« Reply #13 on: January 05, 2022, 09:06:16 PM »
@Jdale
Quote
The semi professions pay for that versatility in that most healing is higher level for them
I don't disagree, but some of these all encompassing lists basically are a time-gated way to being as good as some of the pure spell users. To my mind, even at higher levels, a semi should never be quite as good as a pure anything, whether Arms user or Pure spellcaster. Granted, a Paladin's PP costs will always be higher, but ultimately they can cure most of the same ailments at high level as a Healer who needs 3 lists (or worse, 5-6 lists in the current system) to do the same. Without trying to sound too critical, I'm just not comfortable with that form of balance.

I'm not proposing a full rewrite; it's far too late in the game to think that would be a reality. This is more a thought experiment that I'm considering for my own house rules, but I think it empowers healing classes across the board. As OLF rightly notes, the Transference list was certainly a clunky mechanic. I also don't wholly depart from the concept of a Healer who takes injuries onto himself where his healing is more effective, but I agree that ranged healing is a staple in virtually every other RPG (at least for healing centered classes), so it should be more standardized for a primary Healing class.

Aside: Is the RM Healer (not the Lay Healer) directly influenced by Stephen R. Donaldson's healers in his Thomas Covenant: The Unbeliever series? It looks like the timelines for publication sync up, in which case the concept of the Healer profession might simply be a freeze-frame of a particular time in the genre, and worth casting aside unless we really look at whether the class is worth playing.
"And it may be that Eru has set in me a fire greater than thou knowest."

Offline jdale

  • RMU Dev Team
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,099
  • OIC Points +25/-25
Re: Revised Profession: Healer(s)
« Reply #14 on: January 05, 2022, 10:25:08 PM »
I'm not sure of the origin of the transference Healer. I think it also appears in Elfquest, which started in 1978. Many other examples https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EmpathicHealer although I didn't check the dates on many of those -- although I'm pretty sure their example under religion predates RM. ;)   I do see, though, an example in a Star Trek episode (of all things) from 1968.

In RMU, 1 rank in each of 3 base lists will cost a pure caster 3 DP, whereas 1 rank in a base list will cost a paladin 3 DP. The pure caster will probably have 10-12 lists, while a semi will probably have 3. So allocating a single base list to healing is a big deal for a semi. And then the spell lists are really not equivalent. For example the paladin's Holy Healing has Cut Repair III at 13th level, while the closed channeling list Blood Law has it at 9th, the Lay Healer Blood Mastery list has it as 5th (Healer too but theirs works subconsciously as a bonus). The paladin never gets any Healing True spells, which means their healing of wounds always takes hours, while the channeling lists do get those spells permitting healing in rounds.

So, I don't have any concerns about the balance of the paladin list against other healing. I think the issue about making a character who heals fun to play is much more important. As I noted, we did add some utility to those lists to try to serve that purpose, but that's not the only possible approach and I don't mean to discourage creating some alternatives.
System and Line Editor for Rolemaster

Offline Cory Magel

  • Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,615
  • OIC Points +5/-5
  • Fun > Balance > Realism
Re: Revised Profession: Healer(s)
« Reply #15 on: January 05, 2022, 10:46:22 PM »
We've had players run a Healer and they are incredibly useful.  The drawback is they tend to have virtually no real offensive ability.

They heal far better and faster.  The balance is that they have to transfer some wounds to themselves, but the benefit there is most their self healing works while unconscious.  In a game as deadly as Rolemaster that is huge.

So I'd say they are an excellent profession, it's just that most players don't like the almost entirely defensive nature of them.  We solved this with Talent Law and giving Healer characters some kind of offensive ability.  We never found it unbalancing as, if no one needed to be healed, they were merely a passable combatant and if someone did need healing they weren't contributing offensively.
- Cory Magel

Game design priority: Fun > Balance > Realism (greater than > less than).
(Channeling Companion, RMQ 1 & 2, and various Guild Companion articles author).

"The only thing I know about adults is that they are obsolete children." - Dr Seuss

Offline MisterK

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 655
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revised Profession: Healer(s)
« Reply #16 on: January 06, 2022, 12:03:49 AM »
We've had players run a Healer and they are incredibly useful.  The drawback is they tend to have virtually no real offensive ability.

They heal far better and faster.  The balance is that they have to transfer some wounds to themselves, but the benefit there is most their self healing works while unconscious.  In a game as deadly as Rolemaster that is huge.
The immense drawback being that they are unconscious. From a character perspective, that means you cannot heal mid-fight, it's just too dangerous for so many reasons. From a player's perspective, that means you're out of the *game* for the whole time.

I wouldn't want that for any player, even one I don't like.

Offline Cory Magel

  • Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,615
  • OIC Points +5/-5
  • Fun > Balance > Realism
Re: Revised Profession: Healer(s)
« Reply #17 on: January 06, 2022, 12:40:05 AM »
You don't have to be unconscious, but you can be.  We've had healers absorb wounds that would have dropped the melee fighters and killed them, then the Healer self healed.  Their heal spells are powerful, they'll be back up pretty quickly.
It's a powerful profession played right, you just have to LIKE being a healing focused character.
- Cory Magel

Game design priority: Fun > Balance > Realism (greater than > less than).
(Channeling Companion, RMQ 1 & 2, and various Guild Companion articles author).

"The only thing I know about adults is that they are obsolete children." - Dr Seuss

Offline Hurin

  • Loremaster
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,347
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revised Profession: Healer(s)
« Reply #18 on: January 06, 2022, 12:52:35 AM »
Personally, I like the concept of consolidating the lists necessary to heal any injury to 3 lists, as an alternative to the core healing lists (a kind of variant or optional system if you will). I would probably (using Channeling healing lists as a guide) combine Concussion's Way with Blood Law; Bone Law and Muscle Law; and then keep Nerve & Organ Law. This frees up the healer to take other lists that give them a chance to shine offensively in combat.

I'm not quite as enthusiastic about making the healing spells ranged or instantaneous. I say that because one thing I appreciate about RM healing is that it really isn't very effective in combat. I actually like that. What that does is free up the healer to do other things in combat. If you've ever played a Cleric in DnD, you've probably felt the party pressure to spend your turn healing others rather than doing something offensive. This is a real problem in DnD. 4th Edition solved it by making healing effectively an instant ('minor') action, but 5e has gone back to the old system, and the old problem has resurfaced. 5e then compounds the problem by eliminating negative hit points, making in-battle healing extremely effective, such that close combats usually come to resemble games of whack-a -mole, where characters keep going down to 0, then up to high numbers, then back down and up and down and up again. It gets quite ridiculous. This is why Clerics can't have nice things.

Rolemaster has largely solved this problem by making healing more of a post-combat thing. It is usually better in combat to take an offensive action than to start a slow healing process on an ally that will not help in the battle. That to me is actually a very good thing.
'Last of all, Húrin stood alone. Then he cast aside his shield, and wielded an axe two-handed'. --J.R.R. Tolkien

'Every party needs at least one insane person.'  --Aspen of the Jade Isle

Offline MisterK

  • Senior Adept
  • **
  • Posts: 655
  • OIC Points +0/-0
Re: Revised Profession: Healer(s)
« Reply #19 on: January 06, 2022, 02:53:58 AM »
I agree with Hurin on the non-instant effect, only if the healer can actually be reasonably effective in combat without resorting to healing spells (since they are not instant effect, they cannot be used for in-combat utility or defense). This means that healers use their healing spells during combat only in actual emergencies (to prevent someone from dying *during* combat), but beyond that are not combat healers - and, as such, must have other capabilities.

I fully support healing list consolidation (not that this is a surprise to anyone :)) for pure and hybrid healing professions.