As combined spells also have their effects combined, wouldn't you heal d6 + 2x(Primary)?

When it was discussed on the old boards the concensus was no. I think the concern was it becoming too good by dealing damage and healing better than dedicated spells could.

I would content that that is the whole point of a combined spell - to be better than the original. One is already taking a substantial risk in attempting to cast combined spells (much higher than average CTN, having to bypass all indicated defenses, etc), thus the benefits should match the risks.

yeah... no.
sure a person can read the advanced spell rules that way, and most of the time it doesn't matter.
However it only matters when you get a benefit from total damage done from the spell, and that combined damage is usually over powering ( particularly with AOE damage). I as a player am not trying to push that envelope. and I as a judge will push back at any player that does try to push that envelope.

furthermore, turning pound of fleshbolt into an AOE pushes it certainly into the realm of whoa now this does too much (never mind the really high CTN, and casting numbers) and I agree. now if you separate the pound of flesh damage from the elemental damage as an AOE, well that's sustainable and not so huge to be an entire game changer.

in a very narrow reading of the rules, you are correct, however when looking at the larger context, that small amount of correctness does not fit in with other similar power level effects.

That's the thing, though. You *can't* overlook the high difficulty of casting the spell just because you want to do so. Having a large CTN, having only one primary die be explodable, requiring both spells be of the same source and duration, and other explicit restrictions placed on advanced spell is the 'cost' of trying to be a magical bad ass. Creating and actually casting an advanced spell is already very restrictive. It's been mathematically shown that casting an advanced spell (already made up of adapted spells so they fit together), then adapting it to be "epic" is no easy task.

Mind you, none of my characters have any casting ability -- my characters speak pretty or kill with arrows -- so I have no reason to argue for some one else being more awesome than I other than I think nerfing advanced spells to the point of 'why bother' is just a waste. Between the discussions from the old boards and what I've seen here - overruling what's in the book, I see no real benefit to creating advanced spells.

I honestly don't see why it's an issue that *some* combinations of spells are awesome. There are plenty of combos that are just 'meh'. So a powerful mage with said combos are pretty awe inspiring, so what? How is it different than a behemoth melee fighter that combines two weapon fighting with runes on each exceptional weapon, die bumps to might, and martial techniques? Even without exploding dice, the target likely just took 30+ damage. When it comes right down to it, not all builds are created equal. I think it's a mistake to try to nerf things because they seem to be too powerful (to some). Sure, that mage and fighter probably own the combat...oh well...put more critical skill checks in the mods to make the "less effective combatants" shine. One of my characters is *awful* in combat, but he can talk the rain out of falling on him. I don't feel slighted when that character almost a full tier below him makes my guy look like he's fighting with a feather duster - cause combat ain't what he does. On the other hand, my Ss'ressen is so skilled with a bow and in stealth that he could almost sneak up on the Gods and shoot'em in the face - but he couldn't talk his way out of a paper bag without starting a jihad scale war...

you are making me play the devils advocate here. I find that problematic because your just pushing your point of view and not understanding mine, let me say it again:

You have to look at relative power levels, compare advanced spells not made with "vampiric" effects (A pound of flesh, vampiric touch etc) to ones made with those effects. ( or even to non advanced spells of similar casting numbers) you will see there is a relative power jump, particularly in the realm of healing.

No, I see your point, I just disagree with it and was explaining why. You contend there is a power imbalance that occurs when one combines spells that can do AOE damage and heal at the same time and, without thorough investigation, I disagree and add "even if there is, so what". I say it's a smart use of two spells, if one is willing to risk the spell fizzling.

I would also contend that if a combined spell is made up of one spell that bypasses AR and one that does not, the final damage all bypasses AR. It's black letter in the book: "the effects of both spells are combined". That said, I dislike that per the book the base spells can independently succeed/fail based on which defense is targeted by each. Based on the above logic (bypass AR and healing), the combined spell should have to meet/exceed both targeted defenses on a single attack roll or totally fail -- making combined spells just a little harder to use.

As an aside: If the Divine healer type is supposed to be - in concept - better at healing than should be possible with an advanced arcane spell, maybe that's an argument for said Divine healer type to be boosted, rather than the mage getting nerfed. Right now the go-to divine healing spell is 'Diminish Fatigue'. I've always thought that, for being the core healing spell with no ability to incorporate it into an advanced spell, it's pretty underpowered.

I'm fine with splitting out the damage between the types, so that the healing only applies to the part of the spell that came from "pound of flesh," but.... what about the adaptations? If you add a die, does it add to pound or to elemental? After all, the area of effect adaptation applied to both, so doesn't the additional die of damage (in effect). Or do you need to track what adapatations come from which spell, which is very confusing?

I mean, it seems to me that you could use the first adaptation (at +4 CTN) to add a d4 damage, and then up that die using the last adaptation (at only +3 CTN each time).

"Vampiric" advanced spells were discussed at great length on the old forums. With mith's reading of the advanced spell rules, they become way too good. Some people suggested the best fix was changing them to be advanced spells in themselves while others preferred the more limiting reading of advanced spells (healing only based on the vampiric spell damage - aoe vampiric+damage spells healing just gets obscene otherwise).

This may soon be a moot point as I'm pretty sure Pedro said he's including advanced spell errata/clarification in the FAQ/errata that will be coming out soon.

but the point isn't moot, because hes putting out the errata for discussion, so lets discuss.

the idea is to come up with simple and elegant solutions to the vampiric AOE problems