Pacifist Healer Feat Question

80 posts / 0 new
Last post
Dose the Pacifist Healer feat only work with abilities that make the target spend a healing surge ? Dose it work with spells such as cure light wounds that say they may spend a healing surge 'as if they had spent' a healing surge ?
only for powers that allow them to spend a healing surge. so no cure light wounds wouldn't work off it. 
only for powers that allow them to spend a healing surge. so no cure light wounds wouldn't work off it. 



I disagree.  "As if they had spent a healing surge" means that anything that would trigger based on the use of a healing surge should trigger because it's "as if the character had spent healing surge."  The only difference is they don't have to spend the surge.  But it should be treated as if they did.
My god that interpretation would make pacificst healer totally OP.  My belief is that you have two diffrent effects that are in conflict, Pacifist Healer saying you only get it only when you actualy spend the healing surge, and cure light wounds saying you get it as if you had spent a healing surge.  It kind of comes up to the DM which one overrides the other (I would say Pacifist Healer would override but I could see another DM going the other way).
To be fair I should say that the above post is how we play it.  I remember there being a few other posts that debated whether cure light wounds counted as spending a healing surge and that debate went on for several pages.  I apologize, I didn't mean to speak as if I had the ultimate answer.

But what I can say is that we play it where it counts as spending a healing surge and it hasn't been as overpowered as others may lead you to believe.  You can use cure light wounds once per day on one target that you have to walk up to and touch.  It's hardly overpowered.
only for powers that allow them to spend a healing surge. so no cure light wounds wouldn't work off it. 



I disagree.  "As if they had spent a healing surge" means that anything that would trigger based on the use of a healing surge should trigger because it's "as if the character had spent healing surge."  The only difference is they don't have to spend the surge.  But it should be treated as if they did.



Cure Light Wounds doesn't allow them to spend a surge, so Pacifist Healer shouldn't trigger.  The "as if they had spent" language is there to calculate how the power is going to heal them.  
Effect: The target regains hit points as if it had spent a healing surge.
For the purpose of determining how much they have been healed, they have spent a surge; for the purpose of triggering other conditions, they have not.

I have no comment about whether or not it would be overpowered.
My god that interpretation would make pacificst healer totally OP.  My belief is that you have two diffrent effects that are in conflict, Pacifist Healer saying you only get it only when you actualy spend the healing surge, and cure light wounds saying you get it as if you had spent a healing surge.  It kind of comes up to the DM which one overrides the other (I would say Pacifist Healer would override but I could see another DM going the other way).



1. Yes. "Your Belief". As in "Your Opinion." Just as effective as the posters belief that you responded to.

2. Except the feat does not use that wording. It only mentions using a power that allows the terget to spend a healing surge. CLW and some other powers act as if the target has used a healing surge.

3. I am DM in my group and I rule that PH works with CLW (and those other feats that work in same way). I have a player that thinks it is not supposed to work that way...I override him. More healing is good....but YMMV.

To be fair I should say that the above post is how we play it.  I remember there being a few other posts that debated whether cure light wounds counted as spending a healing surge and that debate went on for several pages.  I apologize, I didn't mean to speak as if I had the ultimate answer.

But what I can say is that we play it where it counts as spending a healing surge and it hasn't been as overpowered as others may lead you to believe.  You can use cure light wounds once per day on one target that you have to walk up to and touch.  It's hardly overpowered.

I remember there being a thread about this topic also...if Mvincent is around he could point us to it (he's a master at that). I do not remember the final concensus but I do not think it is OP. PH only works with Divine Powers...and stunning is pretty strong (even under specific conditions/triggers). I do not think that allowing it to work w/ "as if" powers is too much.

only for powers that allow them to spend a healing surge. so no cure light wounds wouldn't work off it. 



I disagree.  "As if they had spent a healing surge" means that anything that would trigger based on the use of a healing surge should trigger because it's "as if the character had spent healing surge."  The only difference is they don't have to spend the surge.  But it should be treated as if they did.



Cure Light Wounds doesn't allow them to spend a surge, so Pacifist Healer shouldn't trigger.  The "as if they had spent" language is there to calculate how the power is going to heal them.  
Effect: The target regains hit points as if it had spent a healing surge.
For the purpose of determining how much they have been healed, they have spent a surge; for the purpose of triggering other conditions, they have not.

I have no comment about whether or not it would be overpowered.

Can you show the rules that states this please. If there is one I would like to have is accessed to me. Cause as far as I know "as if" works completely "as if" and PH can trigger.

My interpretation is certainly not the only one, and it very well could be wrong...but then again, until someone points out how it is most certainly NOT right, it is as right as any other reading.

But then, YMMV.

It doesn't work because it doesn't allow them to spend a healing surge. Pacifist healer explicitly states any power that lets them spend a healing surge. Healing as if you had spent one simply means you regain your surge value without using a surge. No surge there = pacifist healer doesn't work. It's quite simple.
Actually just to be anal...It says when you use a DIVINE power that lets the target spend a healing surge...not ANY power, any DIVINE power...ok anal time over...

Samrin, is there a definitive ruling that "as if" does not equal? Just curious, I have not heard of one, but I am not on top of eratta would not be hard to get that by me.

The healing you get is just like you had spent one, you have not but for all intents and purposes you have for that healing...PH works...That is my view, your is different, and I understand it. There is nothing that I know of that tells me my ruling is wrong and your is right.
Dose the Pacifist Healer feat only work with abilities that make the target spend a healing surge ? Dose it work with spells such as cure light wounds that say they may spend a healing surge 'as if they had spent' a healing surge ?



Pacifist Healer


Heroic Tier
Prerequisite: Cleric
Benefit: When you use a divine power that allows a target to spend a healing surge, the target regains additional hit points equal to 1d6 + your Charisma modifier. The additional hit points increase to 2d6 + your Charisma modifier at 11th level, and to 3d6 + your Charisma modifier at 21st level.
Also, whenever you deal damage to a bloodied enemy, you are stunned until the end of your next turn.


The simplest answer is usually the correct one in this system. Nothing in this power implies that it works with "as if you spent a healing surge" it's "Allow". Meaning you the power must give the option/force the target to spend a healing surge.

The whole "as if" in healing is to tell you the amount the person healed, it doesn't count for him/her using one. As I was reminded by a CS, this isn't "Magic the Gathering". The rules aren't ment to be complicated.




"DMs are not always right, but whatever the DM says, goes. And if he says enough stupid stuff, his players go too." - Salla
RAW it looks like cure light wounds doesn't get the bonus.
I thought it did at first, mostly due to not reading the feat well enough or ever actually playing a cleric.
Hijacking the thread, when's a good time to train out pacifist? Non-damaging cleric abilities are thus far pretty poor pickings past level 25 or so.
Dose the Pacifist Healer feat only work with abilities that make the target spend a healing surge ? Dose it work with spells such as cure light wounds that say they may spend a healing surge 'as if they had spent' a healing surge ?



Pacifist Healer


Heroic Tier
Prerequisite: Cleric
Benefit: When you use a divine power that allows a target to spend a healing surge, the target regains additional hit points equal to 1d6 + your Charisma modifier. The additional hit points increase to 2d6 + your Charisma modifier at 11th level, and to 3d6 + your Charisma modifier at 21st level.
Also, whenever you deal damage to a bloodied enemy, you are stunned until the end of your next turn.


The simplest answer is usually the correct one in this system. Nothing in this power implies that it works with "as if you spent a healing surge" it's "Allow". Meaning you the power must give the option/force the target to spend a healing surge.

The whole "as if" in healing is to tell you the amount the person healed, it doesn't count for him/her using one. As I was reminded by a CS, this isn't "Magic the Gathering". The rules aren't ment to be complicated.





Is my interpretation complicated? Sorry to hear you hurt your brain on it bro', I thought the KI discussion was tougher. You are right it is simple, really, your are treated as if you spent one. Unless I missed something actual official I don't think my interpretation is off, neither is yours for that matter. But hey YMMV.

And DZ, don't give me a CS answer, we both know how much we like what they have to say huh.



You are right it is simple, really, your are treated as if you spent one. 


The target is not treated as if they spent a surge, they just regain hit points as if they spent a surge.

Nothing that triggers from spending a surge (the effects of Stonemeal Biscuit, Armor of Durability, Collar of Recovery, Symbol of Shared Healing, etc.) occurs.  The target doesn't spend a surge, so effects that occur when the target spends a surge do not occur.

There's really not much more to say.   I recognize that if the previous comments haven't swayed you, this is unlikely to, but I'm not really sure what you're expecting.  
RAW you must spend a surge to get the bonus. Cure Light Wounds does not spend a surge. You just regain your surge value in hitpoints. There is a difference. You have to actually spend a surge to gain the benefit of pacifist healer. All the "as if" does is tell you how many hit points to regain.
There's really not much more to say.   I recognize that if the previous comments haven't swayed you, this is unlikely to, but I'm not really sure what you're expecting.  

I expect someone to show me something official. Until then it is only one player to another giving an interpretation.

If something official was shown to me I would be happy to change my stance. It would not change my game ruling, but I would then put it in the house-rule section.

RAW you must spend a surge to get the bonus. Cure Light Wounds does not spend a surge. You just regain your surge value in hitpoints. There is a difference. You have to actually spend a surge to gain the benefit of pacifist healer. All the "as if" does is tell you how many hit points to regain.

But where? I am not trying to be dense (in your opinion...not said, just being clear that I am not opposing your interpretation just to argue) but there is nothing official/ RaW. One of the goals for 4e is "unless it says you cannot, you can". On that I read it as you qualify.

It says When you use a divine power that allows a target to spend a healing surge. the target regains additional hit points equal to 1d6 + your charisma modifier.

That is RAW. Cure Light Wounds does not let them spend a healing surge. It only lets them heal their surge value. You're looking for a loophole that doesn't exist.
RAW it looks like cure light wounds doesn't get the bonus.
I thought it did at first, mostly due to not reading the feat well enough or ever actually playing a cleric.
Hijacking the thread, when's a good time to train out pacifist? Non-damaging cleric abilities are thus far pretty poor pickings past level 25 or so.



Why train it out?  It's still quite useful, and you can still use the damaging abilities on anything that isn't bloodied without penalty.  It's only a problem if the DM doesn't tell you when things are bloodied (and he's supposed to tell you things like that), and if he doesn't, use them as early as possible.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
Is my interpretation complicated?

It got complicated at the point where you read Cure Light Wounds' text "The target regains hit points as if it had spent a healing surge." and read "The target regains hit points and triggers other powers and effects as if it had spent a healing surge."

"The world does not work the way you have been taught it does. We are not real as such; we exist within The Story. Unfortunately for you, you have inherited a condition from your mother known as Primary Protagonist Syndrome, which means The Story is interested in you. It will find you, and if you are not ready for the narrative strands it will throw at you..." - from Footloose
Is my interpretation complicated?

It got complicated at the point where you read Cure Light Wounds' text "The target regains hit points as if it had spent a healing surge." and read "The target regains hit points and triggers other powers and effects as if it had spent a healing surge."


Good point (except for the complicated part, I do not think that having my reading makes it complicated), but why would it need to say that. Saying it is just as if you had spent one is enough isn't it? Is to me, but I guess that does not surprise anyone. 8)
RAW it looks like cure light wounds doesn't get the bonus.
I thought it did at first, mostly due to not reading the feat well enough or ever actually playing a cleric.
Hijacking the thread, when's a good time to train out pacifist? Non-damaging cleric abilities are thus far pretty poor pickings past level 25 or so.



Why train it out?  It's still quite useful, and you can still use the damaging abilities on anything that isn't bloodied without penalty.  It's only a problem if the DM doesn't tell you when things are bloodied (and he's supposed to tell you things like that), and if he doesn't, use them as early as possible.

He should but if he is like me sometimes he misses telling, what with all the other things he is trying to keep track of. Don't be shy of asking for information from the DM, especially if the target has taken damage.

Spending a healing surge and healing as though you spent a healing surge is not the same thing. One of them is expending a resource the character possesses. The other is healing an amount that is equal to a set value of a healing surge.

I'm not being snarky when I ask this next point, but how do you have them confused?

You can spend healing surges in many ways that don't involve healing. The two are not one in the same.
Spending a healing surge and healing as though you spent a healing surge is not the same thing. One of them is expending a resource the character possesses. The other is healing an amount that is equal to a set value of a healing surge.

I'm not being snarky when I ask this next point, but how do you have them confused?

You can spend healing surges in many ways that don't involve healing. The two are not one in the same.

Get them confused? I am happy you mentioned that you are not being snarky cause it would come off as such. One is the expenditure of the surge (generally due to an encounter power being used) the other is the more powerful daily power and gives you the added benefit of getting the same basic healing back, while not actually spending the surge, but being treated as if you had.

You can? Never thought of them, which Divine Powers allow you to spend a healing surge and not gain healing? I am far from all-knowing when dealing with powers. Talk to me, you might have something that leads me to your thinking.

Most potions require you to spend a healing surge, regardless of whether the potion provides healing. For example, the Gravespawn potion reads: "Power (Consumable): Minor Action. Drink this potion and spend a healing surge. You do not regain hit points as normal. Instead, gain resist 5 necrotic and resist 5 poison until the end of the encounter. You also gain a +5 power bonus to your next Endurance check against any disease of level 5 or lower."

Some magic items have "healing surge" powers, which can be recharged by spending a healing surge (rules in the PHB). For example, Bloodcut armor: "Power (Healing Surge): Minor Action. While you are bloodied, use this armor to gain resist 10 to all damage until the end of your next turn."

Also, various powers exist that have you spend a healing surge without gaining hit points, such as the Paladin L5 daily Martyr's Retribution:  "Attack: Strength vs. AC, and you must spend a healing surge without regaining any hit points"

t~ 
Yes, potions (duh how did I not even think of them, I should be ashamed of myself) but how many are DIVINE powers. Just that one paladin power. There must be more then that. Out of three books and hundreds of divine powers that is the only one that talks about using a healing surge and NOT gaining healing? That actually makes more more inclinded to think I am not wrong (notice I have not used "right"...yet ;)  ) Only divine ones, and it has to have healing surges involved. It is a smaller list than some might think. Reasons I do not think it is a wrong call to allow this ruling.
Please enlighten us as to the special rules for Divine powers.  

Pacifist Healer feat states
When you use a divine power that allows a target to spend a healing surge, the target regains additional hit points equal to 1d6 + your Charisma modifier.

Pacifist Healing has two requirements:
  You use a divine power
  Target is allowed to spend a healing surge by that power
If both are met then you roll extra healing dice

Some advocate that Cure Light Wounds qualifies for Pacifist Healer bonus dice because of it states that "the target regains hit points as if it had spent a healing surge."

CLW meets the first requirement of Pacifist Healer because it is a divine power.
CLW does not meet the second requirement because the power does not allow a target to spend a healing surge.  CLW does not allow a player to reduce his or her total healing surges available by one so CLW does not qualify for Pacifist Healer.

The second requirement is not met by spending a healing surge or a healing surge facsimile.  It is met by the power allowing the character to spend the surge.

The RAW are plain.  I anticipate that some will be unsatisfied with any interpretation unless it either:
      Comes from an official rule source other than customer service
OR  Matches their interpretation, despite the RAW

For home games, play as you like.  For public games like LFR, you should anticipate surgeless healing to be denied the Pacifist Healer bonus dice.

Seems like a waste of posting space to keep the whole "show me where it says you can't" vs "prove it says you can".

My opinion is, RAW, CLW does NOT get the PH bonus. It clearly states you get the bonus healing when the target SPENDS a surge, not when conditions mimic the spending of a surge.


As for the DM not letting the party know the enemy is bloodied, I'd say the correct DM response is that if the DM forgets to say it or mark it as bloodied, the stun should be waived or the pacifists round should be restarted.

Although, I do have a couple questions:

1. How many cleric divine powers allow healing without surge spending?
2. Are there any cleric heals that are not considered divine other than a second wind?


My opinion is, RAW, CLW does NOT get the PH bonus. It clearly states you get the bonus healing when the target SPENDS a surge, not when conditions mimic the spending of a surge.



As a minor point, PH does not say the target gets bonus healing when the target spends a healing surge, it says that PH applies bonus healing when using a power that allows the target to spend a healing surge. 

While minor, the point is basis for correct interpretation:  Can CLW in any case allow the target to use a healing surge?  No.  Therefore, PH does not apply.

Please enlighten us as to the special rules for Divine powers.  


Read the feat, ixnay reprinted it...it triggers off of DIVINE powers...arcane healing, primal healing, untyped healing do not even get a sniff at PH because they are not from the DIVINE power source....you feel enlightened now?
Pacifist Healer feat states
When you use a divine power that allows a target to spend a healing surge, the target regains additional hit points equal to 1d6 + your Charisma modifier.

Pacifist Healing has two requirements:
  You use a divine power
  Target is allowed to spend a healing surge by that power
If both are met then you roll extra healing dice

Some advocate that Cure Light Wounds qualifies for Pacifist Healer bonus dice because of it states that "the target regains hit points as if it had spent a healing surge."

CLW meets the first requirement of Pacifist Healer because it is a divine power.
CLW does not meet the second requirement because the power does not allow a target to spend a healing surge.  CLW does not allow a player to reduce his or her total healing surges available by one so CLW does not qualify for Pacifist Healer.

The second requirement is not met by spending a healing surge or a healing surge facsimile.  It is met by the power allowing the character to spend the surge.

The RAW are plain.  I anticipate that some will be unsatisfied with any interpretation unless it either:
      Comes from an official rule source other than customer service
OR  Matches their interpretation, despite the RAW

For home games, play as you like.  For public games like LFR, you should anticipate surgeless healing to be denied the Pacifist Healer bonus dice.


That is ok ixnay, you can mention my name in your opinionated observations. I am actually very satisfied with how you laid it out. You did a good job. Pat your back.

You are right, though, I do not hold your version of the rules any higher than mine or anyone elses unless they are a direct developer, or it is handed down from WotC in eratta. No offense meant there. You are just a player as am I, and you read it differently from  me.

Now look at your explaination. You go on about "allow". So if the power does not specifically say the target is allowed to spend a healing surge then the power cannot benefit from PH? Becasue then forced healing would not be acceptable as then there is no choice by the target. He is not "allowed" to spend one, he "has" to spend one. Allowing permits the use, giving choice to use the resource.

See I am of the opinion that the phrasing, using "allow", is there to say that if a divine healing power uses a healing surge to heal the target then it triggers the feat, and divine healing powers that give their healing "as if" the target spent one are as good as the ones that require the expenditure of the surge. The target got the healing like a surge was allowed to be spent.

It is also my stance that if they were only showing that the power gave a fixed number based off of the surge value then they would have written it as:

"Target gains hit point equal to their healing surge value." (Or "twice" or "three times" etc)

And they would not have mentioned how the target does not spend the surge(s) at all.
I DM a game with a cleric in it that uses this feat and I will chime in with my own opinion.  That is that the PH feat does not work with powers that do not make you expend a healing surge.

Pacifist Healer feat states
When you use a divine power that allows a target to spend a healing surge, the target regains additional hit points equal to 1d6 + your Charisma modifier.

If a cleric is healing an ally with CLW, he lets them regain their surge value in hit points, without spending a healing surge - no resources were spent, the feats prerequisite was never met so therefore I feel it should not trigger. 

Now the above argument that states that even though you aren't spending a heling surge per say, you are still benefitting from essentially doing just that seems weak - then again so could my view of the dilema. 

My interpretation is that the wording exists to declare how many HP the ally gets and could very well be worded the way it was referenced above.  CLW and such say 'you gain hit points as if you had spent a healing surge', not 'you gain hit pionts, and all other effects dependant on spending a healing surge, as if you spent a healing surge.'     

To each his own though. 




To each his own though. 


Smurf-zactly.

So if the power does not specifically say the target is allowed to spend a healing surge then the power cannot benefit from PH?


Correct.  If a power does not say a target can spend a healing surge then PH gives not benefit.
Review the effect text of Healing Word, for example.
"The target can spend a healing surge and regain an additional 1d6 hit points."
Note the healing is not forced.  The target can spend a surge and get the effect.  Alternately, the target can choose not to spend a surge and not get the effect.  From a RAW perspective, PH is triggered whether the target spends the surge or not.  If the target does not spend the surge then PH still has no effect because it only adds additional dice and the target receives no dice unless the target spends the surge.

Contrast that with the effect text from CLW
"The target regains hit points as if it had spent a healing surge."


Becasue then forced healing would not be acceptable as then there is no choice by the target. He is not "allowed" to spend one, he "has" to spend one. Allowing permits the use, giving choice to use the resource.


Please give an example of forced healing.  All the surge-based healing powers I know about use can not must.


See I am of the opinion that the phrasing, using "allow", is there to say that if a divine healing power uses a healing surge to heal the target then it triggers the feat, and divine healing powers that give their healing "as if" the target spent one are as good as the ones that require the expenditure of the surge. The target got the healing like a surge was allowed to be spent.


I understand this opinion.  I don't agree with it.  I think you are reading more into the text of Pacifist Healer than is there.  Pacifist Healer says nothing about spending a healing surge, only about using a power that allows a target to spend a healing surge.


It is also my stance that if they were only showing that the power gave a fixed number based off of the surge value then they would have written it as:

"Target gains hit point equal to their healing surge value." (Or "twice" or "three times" etc)

And they would not have mentioned how the target does not spend the surge(s) at all.


I think your proposed phrasing and the existing phrasing say the same thing, with regards to PH.
Also, please note that CLW says nothing about a target not spending a healing surge, either in the power or it's fluff.

PH, or anything else, can be played as the group agrees in a home game.
The mainstream opinion in LFR, supported by RAW, is surgeless heals do not benefit from PH.  Some DMs may rule differently but I advise players with characters that use PH to expect not to benefit from PH on surgeless heals in an LFR game.

Correct.  If a power does not say a target can spend a healing surge then PH gives not benefit.
Review the effect text of Healing Word, for example.
"The target can spend a healing surge and regain an additional 1d6 hit points."
Note the healing is not forced.  The target can spend a surge and get the effect.  Alternately, the target can choose not to spend a surge and not get the effect.  From a RAW perspective, PH is triggered whether the target spends the surge or not.  If the target does not spend the surge then PH still has no effect because it only adds additional dice and the target receives no dice unless the target spends the surge.

Contrast that with the effect text from CLW
"The target regains hit points as if it had spent a healing surge."

Good point on the examples, though I would think the target who chooses to NOT use the surge for Healing Word would still get "additional effect". You have used a divine healing power that allows them to use a surge, it is not dependant on using the surge, it just has to allow the use of it. But that is a different topic.


Please give an example of forced healing.  All the surge-based healing powers I know about use can not must.

It is less of using "must" and more of saying the target just spends the surge. An example, I don't know of one. I do not know the powers well enough to pull one out, but I thought there were some that use that type of wording. Am I mistaken?


I understand this opinion.  I don't agree with it.  I think you are reading more into the text of Pacifist Healer than is there.  Pacifist Healer says nothing about spending a healing surge, only about using a power that allows a target to spend a healing surge.

Here is what I mention up above about it being a power that allows, so healing whether you spend the surge or not. Maybe I am inferring a bit more in this regard, but I do think the reasoning is not void.


I think your proposed phrasing and the existing phrasing say the same thing, with regards to PH.
Also, please note that CLW says nothing about a target not spending a healing surge, either in the power or it's fluff.

PH, or anything else, can be played as the group agrees in a home game.
The mainstream opinion in LFR, supported by RAW, is surgeless heals do not benefit from PH.  Some DMs may rule differently but I advise players with characters that use PH to expect not to benefit from PH on surgeless heals in an LFR game.

I do not do LFR, and never mentioned it. But as you said, mainstream opinion. Mainstream is not necesarily correct and opinion is just that. The supported by RaW part, in my own opinion, is not 100%. You do not convince me with that logic.

The mainstream community where I live are of the opinion the Canucks are the best team in hockey. Me? My opinion is not the same.

None of the powers actually say anything about not using a healing surge, so I am not sure what you mean.

My phrasing removes surges completely from the idea they are a part of the power and deals only with the fixed asset you are gained.
The original phrasing allows ambiguity and thus threads like this are born.

But like has been said....many times and many ways...Merry Christ....wait. NO, I mean YMMV...8)



It is also my stance that if they were only showing that the power gave a fixed number based off of the surge value then they would have written it as:

"Target gains hit point equal to their healing surge value." (Or "twice" or "three times" etc)

And they would not have mentioned how the target does not spend the surge(s) at all.


I agree with this; if the target was only supposed to regain its healing surge value, the power would just say that.  CLW should trigger anything that changes the amount someone heals when they spend a surge; any of the items that say "regain X more hit points when you spend a healing surge," for instance, would trigger on CLW, because you regain every hit point you would have if you had spent a healing surge.  Non healing effects would not be triggered- the Shield of the World Tree property, "When you spend a healing surge, each ally adjacent to you gains a +2 shield bonus to AC until the start of your next turn," for instance, is not triggered, because you're only regaining hit points as if you spent a surge, not triggering effects that don't heal hit points.

There's still an argument to be had about whether triggering on allowing someone to spend a surge is functionally different than triggering on spending a surge, and I don't really have a position on that point, but I think it should at least be clear that "heal as thought you spent a surge" isn't limited to your healing surge value.

I agree with this; if the target was only supposed to regain its healing surge value, the power would just say that.  CLW should trigger anything that changes the amount someone heals when they spend a surge; any of the items that say "regain X more hit points when you spend a healing surge," for instance, would trigger on CLW, because you regain every hit point you would have if you had spent a healing surge.



I agree with this as long as it is using the power or feat as written.  For example, Healer's Lore states:
When you grant healing with one of your cleric powers that has the healing keyword, add your Wisdom modifier to the hit points the recipient regains.

This clearly applies to CLW, Astral Seal, and a number of other surgeless healing powers.

That said, I don't know of any feature, feat, or power that is phrased "regain X more hit points when you spend a healing surge".  I'm not saying there isn't one; my rule knowledge is not encyclopedic.  I also agree that if something said "regain X more hit points when you spend a healing surge" it would apply to CLW.

Back on topic, Pacifist Healer is not phrased that way.


That said, I don't know of any feature, feat, or power that is phrased "regain X more hit points when you spend a healing surge".  I'm not saying there isn't one; my rule knowledge is not encyclopedic.  I also agree that if something said "regain X more hit points when you spend a healing surge" it would apply to CLW.



Just as an example, Armor of Durability: "When you spend a healing surge to regain hit points, you regain additional hit points equal to the armor’s enhancement bonus."  Collar of Recovery is similar: "Gain extra hit points equal to this item’s enhancement bonus when you spend a healing surge to regain hit points."  There are a few other items like that.
The second requirement is not met by spending a healing surge or a healing surge facsimile.  It is met by the power allowing the character to spend the surge.



In that case, what happens in this situation:

- Fighter has no surges left
- Cleric with Pacifist Healer feat uses Healing Word on fighter

Does the fighter regain hit points equal to 1d6 plus the cleric's charisma modifier? The cleric used a power that allowed the fighter to spend a healing surge, even though he did not actually spend one.
The world is a mess, I just need to... rule it.