A lore bard 6 picks up the Aura of Vitality spell from the Paladin list. He then multiclasseses into a Life Domain Cleric and gets the Disciple of life feature.
Does disciple of life help the healing with Aura of Vitality any at all? Help???
Aura of Vitality -
Healing energy radiates from you in an aura with a 30-foot radius. Until the spell ends, the aura moves with you, centered on you. You can use a bonus action to cause one creature in the aura (including you) to regain 2d6 hit points.
Disciple of Life -
Also starting at 1st level, your healing spells are more effective. Whenever you use a spell o f 1st level or higher to restore hit points to a creature, the creature regains additional hit points equal to 2 + the spell’s level.
Why would disciple of life not add to the hit points restored by aura of vitality?
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
Aura of Vitality should work with disciple of life. If the bard gets good berry as a spell as well you probably have the best healer in the game.
FrogReaver wrote:
Aura of Life is a spell that heals i.e. it is a healing spell. Disciple of Life says "your healing spells are more effective". Why is this an issue? How Aura of Life actually heals is irrelevant to the spell and feature descriptions.
Zardnaar wrote:
El_Condoro wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
El_Condoro wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
I agree that it seems like it might be a "too good to be true" interaction. It is a very reasonable question to ask.
@ FrogReaver. I can't believe you're getting such unreasonable and unhelpful replies. In general the community here is helpful and does not try to stifle conversation as happened early in this thread. Aura of Vitality and Disciple of Life do work together.
Check his first two replies - they make no attempt to answer the question, he's just being purposefully dense and toying with Frogreaver. The guy posts 3 times in this thread before he answers the question.
It definitely works. The spell is an aura, and the aura/spell heals.
Let's apply the logic above to Fireball: Fireball the spell doesn't deal damage, it only creates a fireball. The fireball deals the damage. So then you'd have to wonder if the fireball is a magical or mundane fireball..
This reasoning is obviously not correct. Fireball IS the spell, just as Aura of Vitality IS the spell.
I suppose you could argue that DoL doesn't work with goodberry since the berries do the healing, not the spell itself since the spell only creates berries, but it's the same trap. The berries are the spell. And the devs have said DoL works with goodberry.
Bloodscythe wrote:
slumgum wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
AaronOfBarbaria wrote:
I, personally, don't allow Disciple of Life to work with every berry from Goodberry. I rule it creates three additional one HP berries. You get the same extra HP as if you had cast any other level 1 healing spell with a level 1 spell slot.
Goodberry is already a fantastic spell as you can dump your spell slots the night before and create dozens of berries for the next day.
guachi wrote:
Note that the effective argument against Goodberry working with Disciple of Life for 4 points/berry is based on game balance, rather than the rules themselves. As it requires either a level dip, or a feat to function for healing that's only effective out of combat, I'd be inclined to allow it, though a DM is free to rule otherwise as a house rule.
It would be different if DoL specified the additional healing is predicated on when you cast a spell, however, as worded it is when you use the spell. If you're not using the berries, or the aura, you're not exactly getting much use out of that spell, are you? 
Or to phrase it another way - the effect of a spell is part of the spell. Therefore, using its effect is generally akin to using the spell itself.
Keep in mind that 5e has never been about exact wordings, however - if you want that, play 4e, which has word-for-word specificity as a design priority. 5e is more... guidelines with subjective DM fiat then objectively quantifiable in interpretation. There are pros and cons to each.
Kostoglot wrote:
And IIRC the argument was that Good Berry does not heal. It conjures berries which allow someone who eats them to regain HP which is why it doesn't work. You're not using the spell when you eat the berries, you're using the berries. The spell only allows you to summon the berries. But really this entire discussion has already been done. There's multiple threads about this. The questions asked by Aaron are correct as he (from what I can tell) just wanted you to reach the answer by yourself, especially with your history of making threads to troll the forum.
Noctaem wrote:
lawrencehoy wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
mellored wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
OoftaMeg wrote:
Noctaem wrote:
Jeremy Crawford did not confirm that the rules allow for it. Unless you're reading his tweet in a different way than I am. He said "I would allow it". You're free to interpret that any way you wish, just to me it doesn't answer the question plaguescarred asked on twitter.
slumgum wrote: