5
\$\begingroup\$

To me, it does not make sense, but nothing in the feat's description mentions that the target creature receiving the healing (aka the patient) needs to be immobile.

Does a patient need to be immobilized before attempting the 2nd bullet point healing from the Healer feat?

\$\endgroup\$
19
\$\begingroup\$

No

As an action, you can spend one use of a healer’s kit to tend to a creature and restore 1d6 + 4 hit points to it, plus additional hit points equal to the creature’s maximum number of Hit Dice. The creature can’t regain hit points from this feat again until it finishes a short or long rest.

Nowhere does it mention that the target needs to be immobile or that this has to be done outside of combat. D&D is not a realism simulator and it doesn't really matter that realistically,you wouldn't be able to bandage a person while they are dodging and weaving through a combat scenario. Realistically, you could also bandage somebody more than once if they have multiple wounds.

For gameplay balance, it has been decided that you can use the action at any point, but only once per short/long rest. Houseruling that you can only do it outside of combat while they are immobile is a perfectly valid houserule, but it'll ensure that nobody in their right mind will take the feat as it turns it from a pretty good healing feat to a very mediocre feat at best.

\$\endgroup\$
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ As it takes an Action and the amount healed is OK-ish, it isn't that bad IMO to restrict use to outside combat. Our last two games have had someone with Healer feat, and it got used out of combat more often than in combat, because of the usual issue of doing damage to opponents being more effective. The feat is definitely better though if it can be used in combat, and we do use it that way too, mainly to conserve spell slots or potions which would otherwise get used in emergencies. If I had to guess I would say 75% of use was outside combat though, so not terrible if that was the rule \$\endgroup\$ – Neil Slater Dec 9 '19 at 8:55
  • \$\begingroup\$ @NeilSlater If you block its use in combat, you'll no longer be able to bring people back into the fight if they go down, which is a huge nerf to the feat. I agree that generally speaking, it's better to kill an enemy than it is to heal somebody, but if somebody is down on the ground, being able to bring them back up in a single action without having to use any 'real' resources is invaluable. \$\endgroup\$ – Theik Dec 9 '19 at 9:00
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Noone said that that the alternative is "cannot be used in combat". It seems to me more like "cannot be used on someone active in melee". An unconscious target is still and someone far from the fray could just stay still for a moment. \$\endgroup\$ – Szega Dec 9 '19 at 9:20
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Your last sentence is not true, in my experience. but it'll ensure that nobody in their right mind will take the feat as it turns it from a pretty good healing feat to a waste of your feat slot our group's cleric never used it in combat, and yet we were still using it at level 13/14 when the campaign was put on hold. The cleric picked it up at level 4 (he was a dwarf). It is a very good feat no matter who takes it. \$\endgroup\$ – KorvinStarmast Dec 9 '19 at 13:56
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Yeah, it's a great feat for a non spell caster, to be sure. I just think that you overstated the case there. nobody in their right mind is IMO overkill on that point. \$\endgroup\$ – KorvinStarmast Dec 9 '19 at 14:08
9
\$\begingroup\$

The patient doesn't need to be immobile

Rules do what they say they do.

  1. As an action, you can spend one use of a healer’s kit to tend to a creature and restore 1d6 + 4 hit points to it, plus additional hit points equal to the creature’s maximum number of Hit Dice. The creature can’t regain hit points from this feat again until it finishes a short or long rest. (PHB, Ch 6, Feats, Healer {errata added})

Healer does not say that the patient needs to be immobile, so they do not need to be.

If you start thinking about the "realism" then you are going down a rabbithole.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ This answer is getting a ton of downvotes, I tried to reword it to be as clear as possible a few times, but people still seem unhappy with it. If someone could leave a comment and let me know why, then I can improve it. \$\endgroup\$ – jgn Dec 9 '19 at 9:33
  • \$\begingroup\$ I added the relevant rules text to highlight that one does not see text about immobile. (I also note that one down vote = 1000+ pounds or more. Your "tons of downvotes" with down vote tally at 2 informs that estimate 8^D ) \$\endgroup\$ – KorvinStarmast Dec 9 '19 at 13:52
  • \$\begingroup\$ @KorvinStarmast Well, I guess people liked your edit because it was at -4 before. I don't really like quoting the entire rule in question back at people since I like to assume people at least read what they are asking about :/ \$\endgroup\$ – jgn Dec 9 '19 at 14:00
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ If they had cited the rule in the question, I don't think it would have been useful in the answer, But since they did not, I felt that since you made a point about what it does or does not say, showing what it says would support what you said (and which I wholeheartedly agree with) and show to all readers the point you made. \$\endgroup\$ – KorvinStarmast Dec 9 '19 at 14:05
  • \$\begingroup\$ If you start thinking about the "realism" And now you know why there is a 200 post long thread on the PF2 forums about a similar feat and whether or not it requires free hands and/or a healer's kit... (because "a stern glance" doesn't make sense from a realism perspective) \$\endgroup\$ – Draco18s no longer trusts SE Dec 9 '19 at 21:33

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.