My apologies: I'm sure this has been asked before, but the search function on this site gives me every thread where drain, healing, or health has been mentioned.

What is the Drain Value of the Heal spell? Is it:

1) The damage the target has (-2)
2) The damage the spell heals (-2)
3) Something else entirely?

E.g.: Bob has suffered 6P damage. Susy (Magic 5) casts the Heal spell on him, at Force 4, garnering 2 hits.

Must Susy resist 4S drain, or 1S drain?

It is Option 1: 4s... it is total (Damage Sustained - 2)DV

That is how I read it, but one of my players was arguing for the 2nd.

Thanks!

we had this discussion also very often .In Forums as well as in our Rounds.
We consider #2 as the right one.
The Drain depends upon how much the Spell heals ,not how deep the Wound is

With Mambo # 5
Medicineman

Huh. Well, that muddies things nicely.

We, too, play using option 2. We prefer the drain based on amount healed, not on total wound. Otherwise you could *really* hurt yourself trying to heal a gravely wounded troll when all you're trying to do is just heal them enough for them to make it to a medical facility.

Don't forget to use First Aid first. Either way, after magical healing only the medicine skill and rest will help the injured.

Well, more data is always good, yes?

I am doing the choice 1-thingie.

Why? First: It is simple, and doesn't allow for trickery-abuse (when people begin argueing about what a "Set of wounds" is, and if they could just heal low values in a chain and such.
Also it states the drain is (Damage value)-2, not (Damage healed)-2 or (Force)-2.

And for fluff: Magic tends to ALWAYS target the whole. While the effect itself CAN be about a single aspect of a target, the target is always a complete thing or person. I would allow for specific healing when you have specialized healing spells (which would be bad for bookkeeping, and overly complex). I mean for example a "Heal Bullet Wounds" or "Heal Legs" spell. They might have a even lower drain, and will only target specific wounds and woundlevels. But that is a stupid idea though. Just take your 13 drain to get your wounded troll-friend back from the DAMN DEAD and be happy about it *g*.

I've ruled Version 1 for my games. Just as it's more difficult to patch up a person that has multiple or massive injuries, it's the same with dealing with trauma using magic.

The Drain Value of Heal is equal to the Damage Value the target sustains (before healing) minus two (IMHO).

Bye
Thanee

That is a fair view. I don't agree with it, but I understand where you're coming from.

For us, it's less about trickery. We rule "set of wounds" to be all wounds between heal spells. So Undamaged->First heal->More damage->Heal (only that new damage)->etc. Keeps us honest.

Using your idea above though, I'd max the drain out at the maximum amount of damage that the spell can hope to heal, based on force cast. After all, if your friend has 15 boxes of damage, unless you're overcasting as an initiate, you're never going to be able to heal that much damage with the spell. IMO you shouldn't risk death when your spell can't heal even a 3rd of the damage in question.

Oh, and of course First Aid first. Always do that. Just didn't see it being relevant to the discussion at hand.

For a long time we were using it the #2 way, but about a year ago we re-read it and realized it probably should be #1.

That being said, we are still playing it the #2 way as a style-of-play choice. A little easier healing allows for some braver PCs.

Using your own life energy to stabalize and heal someone with 15 boxes of damae is risky, and likely to cause the death of the mage trying it. Seems fair to me...

I play by option #2.

It just doesn't seem right to me that in every other spell the caster can control it's power level on the fly by choosing the Force. But not heal? Why is that one the only one to break from that standard mechanic, the only spell that the mage has no control whatsoever on the spell's power?

So when I look at it and can easily read it as either interpretation, I pick #2. The Force of the heal spell still matters in option #2 because it will limit the hits and therefore drain. That seems more in line with the rest of spellcasting then option #1.

You DO control the power level, you choose the Force you cat it at. Unfortunately for the Caster, Drain is not based upon the Force of the Heal Spell, but upon how jacked up the recipient of the Spell is.

Which means there are only two meaningful Forces to cast it at:
Force = Magic score
Force = Magic score x 2 if you don't mind (or want to due to nearly full stun track) taking physical drain


Anyhow, I've read it over and over again and both interpretations appear equally correct to me by RAW. "Damage Value" alone doesn't specifically say whether it's damage sustained by target or damage healed by caster. I just prefer #2 since it gives the player more options and control, though neither interpretation do I really like.

The first seems a bit more valid but I would only count "physical" damage not stun.

But this choise influences the building of a character big time.
So I would never build a healer without the Biomed-group on 4.
Simply to have an option to heal bigger wounds without killing myself. (If you are counting Stun too, it is close to a nobrainer)

I use (F÷2)+0

To avoid this eighteen valid interpretations bullshit, and to make it consistent with all other spells, I advise changing the Drain of all curative Health spells from (DV) to (F÷2), and adding +2.

It is kind of a funny Drain value, when you look at it that way. If you pick #1, there's no penalty for casting at huge Force except overcasting. At #2, you only "pay" for the hits you put into damage; if you get more spellcasting hits than you're comfortable with, you could invest them into speeding up the healing instead (and not take Drain for them). Both these things seem ugly.

So I'd pick #3: the Drain Value is simply Force -2. Consistent with other spells.

Like a great many things in SR, it seems there are two (or more) valid interpretations. Choose what works best at each table, as always. (Like LOS capable heal spells in our game... stupid time for healing is still restrictive, but at least you don't have to physically touch the person... Yes, that's a house rule)

Heal is a mana spell (+0), range of touch (–2), and permanent (+0, since it restores the body to its natural state). Since it is curative, the DV is based on the damage being healed. DV:(Damage Value) – 2

Seems obvious that damage being healed is not the DV of the wound.

Not So Obvious, otherwise this discussion would not be taking place...

You can interpret it that way, when you look only at the "Heal" spell. But when you look at other healing spells like "Resist Pain", "Cure Disease" or "Detox" too, you will get problems with that sort of argumentation.
Resist pain doesn't heal any damage, but it has still the drain value: (Damage Value) – 4.

Streetmagic page 160:

I thought my argumentation above was convincing for answer #1, but this seems more like answer #2
Now I am confused.

*Edit: But no matter what is RAW, I think that #2 would be the better Rule. Otherwise the drain would be too high for a healing spell imho.

My Street Magic PDF says 162 for that quote, but yeah. It's "...damage they are healing..." A force 6 spell can't heal more than 6 boxes, so max 6 drain then? After all, you aren't trying to heal 12 boxes with your force 6 spell (not including overcasting here for this example).

"damage they are healing" however is not the same as damage boxes the spell succeeds to remove. The Spell is healing a patient with a certain amount of damage. So it is the value before any effect that counts.
IIRC the number of boxes that are healed are never referred to as Damage Value.

Quoted for Truth...

Again, "damage they are healing" can easily be interpreted as "damage value they are trying to heal" or "damage value they are able to heal" ie: the effect of the heal. Again, both interpretations appear 100% accurate.



Hit the nail on the head as far as I'm concerned. I don't like how either interpretation actually plays out.

As I said above the Resist Pain spell has the drain value "(Damage Value) – 4"
Here it becomes obvious that the drain value of healing spells "(Damage Value) -X" means the damage the patient has before the spell is cast. Because in the case of Resist Pain it can mean nothing else. The spell doesn't heal any damage.

#1 is RAW. Bad, but RAW.
I wounder why they didn't keep spell rating/2 +X. Would be much more straight.

Did you even bother to read Resist Pain? It is functionally identical to Heal with two exceptions; first, you "ignore" damage instead of healing it, and second, it has lower Drain .

Any and every valid interpretation of "(DV)" for Heal applies to every curative health spell.


Edit:
Third difference: Resist Pain can affect Stun damage.

I decided to just go with Force - 2 as the Drain Value. Figured it was in the middle between # hits, and damage taken by the person. And it actually factors the force of the spell into the drain.

You are telling me, that you are reading the single description of Resist Pain spell, and come to the conclusion that "(Damage Value) - 4" means the nethits you got - 4?
Wow. I really though it was definite. Everytime the word "damage" is used in the description of the spell, it refers to the damage the patient has. And it's clearly said: "It does not remove the damage itself, only eliminates the modifiers."

Ok then try the Healing Spell "Stabilize". Here the drain code is "(Overflow damage) – 2". Again the drain code refers to the damage the patient has before the spell is cast. And again net hits have nothing to do with the drain code.

I think, as far as "author's intent" or RAW or whatever, the spell Stabilize really shows that the DV of spells like Heal should be Damage Taken (#1), not damage healed. This spell Stabilize is pretty worthless, in every way inferior to the actual Heal spell, except for the lower DV. If the damage healed ruling (#2) is used, then there is never a reason to have Stabilize, as then the DV will be exactly the same as Heal, and it won't actually heal any damage at all.

Having said that, I think that the Force / 2 ruling is the way I would go.

I see other valid points in this thread, but this is the way my old GM interpreted it, and it's the way I've always played. It always seems to be fair and balanced, as well.

I prefer some version of (Force/X)+Y as well. It's consistent with the (non-healing) spells: you have to guess how much maximum effect you want before casting, but you know the maximum drain too. And it rewards being as least as good at Spellcasting (+mods) as you are at reaching Force.

Everyone is different I guess. I prefer the uncertainty of whether your life will be snuffed out by trying to save another. Thematically appropriate in my opinion, as well as being the typical way the spell is read.

And just as a point, you never "Guessd" at the maximum effect with the normal system you seem to prefer. You CHOOSE the maximum possible effect, and then move from there. No guesswork involved at all.

One life for another is very unlikely, unless the mage is injured as well. In this case attempting magical healing isn't a great idea anyway. To really trouble the caster (with BOD 3), i.e. bring him into overflow, the patient would have to have sustained more than 13P damage without the caster getting a single hit on his drain resistance roll.

I find it interesting that the curative healing spells are the only spells in the game whose drain scales as Force rather than Force/2. Strictly speaking, it's not entirely true because it's not based directly on Force, but it is typically the case because the healing effect is capped by net hits which in turn are capped by Force.

It tells me something of the intent of the setting, that it's supposed to be harder to heal someone. That points me toward Option 1 ("Damage Value" = current damage status of subject).

It's also harder to heal most augmented subjects ("Healing Characters with Implants", SR4A, p. 207), which would be most teammates (aside from some magic and TM types)...and that makes the First Aid adept quite valuable.

And yet I have seen a mage go unconscious by trying to heal a Troll with 13 boxes of Damage. It does happen, which is why I always prefer the Technological route. Drain is a Bitch, and always catches up to the mage at the most inconvenient of times.
Of course, I generally prefer to leave the healing until the mission is over, if at all possible, as it is SO inconveninet to have to do so during an active penetration of a facility.

Doing it during the run will of course give you the ability to do so for every "set of wounds" incurred. Also, doing it in steps will decrease odds of incurring lasting Drain, since First Aid can be used to counter smaller ammounts of drain more effectively than one large heap as well.
Both have their drawbacks and benefits.

Healing mid-run is almost not an option, what with it taking twice the drain value in rounds to make permanent. So for that 13-boxes down troll, you're looking at 26 rounds to heal him, even if it's just 4 boxes you actually help. 26 rounds at is longer than most runs would deal with. And for those 26 rounds, you're sure not feeling any better until the very end, so Mr. Deth better be stable, or you're not healing him in time before he dies.

You do runs in under 26*3=78 seconds generally? Now I've heard of the "hours of planning and a minute of combat" approach, but this seems stretching it, no?
Also note that by no means does the 26 turns to become permanent mean the victim won't be healed before that. Just the healing will be magical in origin until that time expires, which means the magician needs to sustain the spell during it, and someone else might dispell it.
Although he'd probably be better off shooting the troll in the face again, or the mage twice for that matter.


This is just nonsense.

How is it nonsense? If you get interrupted before the end of the spell, no effect is had. It's not like you get a partial heal because you spent 10 of the 26 rounds on the spell. So if the patient dies from overflow before the spell completes, then whoops, no heal for him. If combat resumes before end of the spell and you can't maintain it for some reason, no heal.

Unless I missed some rule somewhere that says otherwise? Feel free to let me know if I'm doing this wrong. As it is, healing on a run is *not* an option. First aid, sure. Slap patches, of course. Actual time to heal? Nah.

Which is silly, as it should take longer to first aid. Instead, first aid takes a number of combat turns equal to the amount of damage you're trying to heal. So if you're just aiming for 4 boxes to take down 2 modifiers for the person, sweet, 4 combat turns. Significantly less likely to have that interrupted than a 20+ combat round task.

Actually First Aid does take longer than Magical Healing. First Aid takes 1 Complex Action/DV, magical healing restores boxes immediately, BUT the caster has to continue to concentrate for the whole time (DV*2 Turns) for this effect to become permanent. The Medic can start helping the next patient as soon as he has finished with the first.

So the magical healer needs to do some triage, and start out healing the most hurt character, moving on to the next.This divideshealing efficiency as needed, and will make them all "done" healing around the same time.
Of course, taking a minute's worth of breather might be a good call just as well.

Wait a second... So the healing takes effect immediately, but doesn't become permanent unless you finish the number of rounds needed?

So what, if you get interrupted/knocked out, all the damage comes back?

Yes. It's actually pretty stupid. I have seriously considered changing the duration of curative spells to Instantaneous, but am somewhat concerned about the power increase & haven't tested it yet.

Edit:
Although admittedly, the curative spells are usually functionally "Instantaneous" anyways, so it probably isn't really changing much.

The patient is off at least as bad as before. It is not clear whether another attempt can be made to heal him.

It would probably be better to say that the patient heals 1 box of damage per 2 combat turns.
Or at a similar appropriate rate of Damage Boxes / combat turn. Then you knew how much damage would be already healed if the spell was aborted. At least that would be better than than the wounds healing instantly and ripping open again.

Actually in my games, simply because no one had read and ask to apply the rule strictly, we play by instant heal/no sustaining. I can tell you it makes magicians /VERY/ good at healing. Now that I read this thread, next time I run another Shadow game, I'll go for the grittier rule, and enforce the whole sustaining time (Grittier meaning drain is based on current damage, not the healed or the hits accomplished).

I like long healing times, I like runner's to know that a bullet hurts. A lot. A helluva lot. Even in minor wounds. I like drained magicians, sweating to save their troll friends and explaining why cyber is good to make you a badder guy on the streets but also harder to heal magically. I also like that mages who use heal learn some medicine (because its important and gives flavour).

Npc's shot hurt too, and since they aren't psychos (as most runner's tend to be, fighting to the death all the time, looking for bigger damage codes than ever and stating that overcasting to Force 14 powerbolts is a sign of accomplishment) they usually drop to teh floor and surrender and yell for help and surrender after they get shot the first time. Heck I even have some pro's do that, and deffinitely sure security guards.

I guess I like my games more dramatic, and when the characters decide to go for summary executions of the guys with a family who just wanted to do an honest-paid job, I hit the players in the moral problem of the situation.

P.D: Last post is an opinion, and take it as such. I will not argue the validity or truth of the point. There is none. I am simply trying to give a perspective from my game, hoping that it improves yours.

So you're saying that the heal spell heals everything at cast point, but if something happens before it can become permanent, then all of a sudden, the wounds rip back open, and drop all that damage back on a character, potentially killing them if they've taken more damage since the heal "started."

Well. Good reason to target the PC mage even more now. Fantastic.