If healing spirit has felt too effective in your game, try this house rule, which holds the spell to our expectations for it: the spell ends once the spirit has restored hit points a number of times equal to twice your spellcasting ability modifier (minimum of once). #DnD https://t.co/o5pnvl2fLd
— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 29, 2017
the “twice your spellcasting ability” refers to the number of times it heals or to the number of hit points healed? The number of times.
— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 29, 2017
I am quite certain that your proofreading squad is first-rate. That wasn’t a slam or a put-down.
It’s just that different brains notice different things. Zero defects is the goal, right? Indeed, which is why many people from different academic backgrounds review each of our manuscripts. Unfortunately, things sometimes slip through, and then we correct them.— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 29, 2017
I'm going to keep the spell as is. If one spell "breaks" my game, I'm not DMing – I'm just passively adjudicating.
I think the spell is exactly what it needs to be, math or no math. I don't rely on my PCs lacking HP to challenge them. 💖💖💖
— Justin Ray Glosson (@ivstinus) November 29, 2017
We actually balance the game assuming player characters are at full health. We have to do that, since an encounter could happen at any point. An extra powerful healing spell doesn't unbalance the game. But it can disrupt what feels right to a group. That's what concerns us. #DnD https://t.co/W60qevhfUh
— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 29, 2017
I can understand that and thank you for your dedication, but my reply was more engineered at a negative comment posted by someone else – my apologies.
I love the theme of the spell, and while I can see major differences compared to “prayer of healing,” druid healing! Yay! 😉 Oh, I didn't think you were being negative. I was pointing out that your instincts are right about how the game is designed. 😀
— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 29, 2017
This seems like an odd decision given the common encounter structures that are used in nearly every game I’ve played; that is: minions & toughs, then a boss. The structure you’re referring to is adventure design, not combat design.
— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 30, 2017
Its a baffling concept, (was trained from 3.5, which was presented as a game of attrition) but I guess it makes sense. After a fight the players heal to full via hd anyway. The adventuring day is a mix of excitement and attrition. That’s not the same thing as designing combat systems.
— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 30, 2017
So if I give Acererak wish and have him use it to cast this spell at 8th level, how big of a jerk would I be as a DM? What about if he casts time stop first? I'd just be laughing that Acererak is wasting a wish on this spell.
— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) November 30, 2017
What is the point of all the resting mechanics that are part of the core game then if it seems the default assumption is full hit points for everyone? Certain tabletops work like that with a refresh between encounters, why did you not go that direction with 5e?
— Marc Sharma (@LeMarcSharma) November 30, 2017
The rest rules in D&D help create a certain narrative tempo and are part of our adventure/campaign design, not to be confused with combat design and the design of other subsystems. Tiring out is an important part of the adventuring narrative. #DnD https://t.co/JyLRKwDYss
— Jeremy Crawford (@JeremyECrawford) December 1, 2017
