2
$\begingroup$

One in 200 soldiers has the capability of fast healing themselves and others by touch.

The soldiers can regrow fully an amputated arm (theirs or others) in a matter of seconds but the process it's not passive. The healer needs to be concentrating on the process, granted it can keep doing other things (walking, talking, reading, etc) if practiced enough.

The amount of mass that can be produced by such healers, without rest is equivalent to three times their own body mass. The smaller is the wound the less mas is needed and the faster it will be healed.

1 - From a tactical point of view how would this special soldiers be used in a medieval setting? (would they be on a unit of their own?, would they be distributed amongst the other units?, would they be kept back or use in front?)

2 - How would the advancement of technology change their positioning? How would the positioning be different in an Victorian setting, what about a modern one?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Can instantly lethal wounds like head or spine injuries still be healed? $\endgroup$ – Dragongeek Mar 22 at 20:56
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Is "amount of mass" the only limitation on healing powers? Can one healer fix thousand stab wounds within one hour? $\endgroup$ – Alexander Mar 22 at 22:25
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Also, in medieval setting, would the army be organized in a feudal manner? That way, every knight and lord would bring in one or a few healers, and would be very reluctant to part with them. $\endgroup$ – Alexander Mar 22 at 22:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Alexander Yes, mass/the amount of organic tissue the healers can produce is the only limitation. Yes, provided that the healer is well rested, concious and the stabs aren't instantly lethal (example, they could heal a hearth wound before they die or a broken spine but not decapitated head or a stab in the temple for that matter). The setting is not yet decided. $\endgroup$ – Mike Mar 23 at 14:45
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Dragongeek Any injurie that doens't prevent thought would be easy to heal if the wounded healer is concious and well rested. Wounds that would instantly kill someone or prevent clear thought might mean death for the healer. Now if its to someone else, imagine a stabed brain, and a healer is nearby to quickly remove the weapon and heal the brain the person would survive. But with who knows what kind of memory loss or mind problems. $\endgroup$ – Mike Mar 23 at 14:53
5
$\begingroup$

The lionshare of people in medieval war died after the battle from their wounds and more importantly infections. Keeping these healing guys back as medical staff and focussing on closing the worst of the wounds to prevent infections from taking hold you can maximise the amount of people that can be healed while minimising the risk to these people. So dont heal the wound completely, just make sure its smaller and clean which I assume your healing would accomplish.

Also, upgrade their food privileges. If they are fat they can heal more people.

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ "Also, upgrade their food privileges. If they are fat they can heal more people." Ok, that is an interesting idea, I never would have come up with that. $\endgroup$ – Mike Mar 22 at 20:42
1
$\begingroup$

I concur with others' opinions that healers should be kept at back. I'm going to back that opinion with math.

1 in 200 talent means that for an army of 10,000 there will be only about 50 healers. I also presume that because of high demand, most healers will be conscripted to the army, and in general population this talent will be even more rare.

50 healers can be either split thin - one healer per company, or grouped together in one or few healing camps at the back. The second approach has numerous advantages and fewer drawbacks.

Healing camps advantages:

  1. Healers can work as a team, balancing their workload;

  2. There's no chance that a single healer would be overwhelmed by high number of casualties, or, if a healer becomes a casualty himself, a company is left with no healing options;

  3. Healers would be protected from the action on frontlines;

Company healers advantages:

  1. Any injury can be healed quickly, eliminating the need to carry the wounded to a back camp;

Company healer's only advantage gets quickly negated when action intensifies and casualties mount up. Given that central command has the freedom to organize healers as they see fit, grouping them at the back seems like the most logical choice. Having said that, I presume that top commanders still keep "personal healers", who can quickly heal them, or anyone withing the commander's troop - at the commander's discretion.

However, if healing talent is more common, say, 1 in 20 soldiers, then we would have a strong case for having company healers, while still keeping the healing camps.

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

Kept at the back

The fact that they need to concentrate means they're vulnerable. If they appeared on the battlefield, soldiers would know to go for head shots. They're far too valuable to risk. They would be spread out behind the lines with their own unit of helper / bodyguards and fallen soldiers would be dragged back to them to heal.

Also by being spread out, a surgical strike couldn't wipe them all out, mind you, with their value, they'd be captured if at all possible and used by the victorious army.

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$

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.