Michael Cule
>You do? Clever lad! Mind explaining it to me? We've puzzled over it for
>hours...
>Have you seen the errata note that makes it a normal sorcery spell and not
>have the special duration? This means it is useless without Duration.
T'ain't.
Even without providing any regain of lost hit points, a successful use of Treat Wounds with sufficient intensity stops bleeding, and diminishes the dangers of infection. For a really good healing, the average Rokari knight or sergeant would want a Neutralize Damage anyway...
Bleeding rules are a book-keeping terror, if your players don't accept on-the-fly rulings, but they might be worth the effort.
>> If
>> this was really the case 'Heal' would be always better the Treat wounds
>> even with intensity 10 or more. Please help me out here !!!
>Heal is always better than Treat Wounds.
Yes. That's why I liked the Healsharp variant of Treat Wounds (suggested some time during the RQ4 discussions) a lot, where each intensity of Treat Wounds gave +5% to the success of the First Aid roll, and +1 to the damage healed.
Treat Wounds is useless during combat - as should be all but the most powerful healing spells... Otherwise the effective hit point total becomes close to the stored magic point total. A spirit magic Heal (usually affordable up to 4 points, everything beyond requires a Healer's vow, a shamanic quest, or near-heroic bribes and efforts IMG) still is too effective, but that's the inheritance of RQ2. It should at least take more time and concentration.
End of The Glorantha Digest V5 #162
Powered by hypermail