I’ve been reviewing the cure spells output. Many players and GM’s on the boards have discussed the general ineffectiveness of direct healing (and later on, the mass heal spells). What really bothers me is the complete disconnect between the highest since cure spell (Cure Critical Wounds / 4th level averaging about 30-35hps or so) and the 6th level heal doing 110-120. (10 hps/lv, max 150 at 15th). This issue repeats with Mass Curing spells vs. Mass Heal.
The reality is, that at early levels, healers can (with a good roll) heal ~75% hps on a single character. Then, in mid levels around 6-10, they can only do about 25-50% on a good roll (it’s worse the closer you get to level 10). Then, at level 11 (or 12 for oracles) through 16, healers can heal a single target for 75-100% (no roll needed with heal). At the same time, they have pathetic group heals that do about 10-25% (Seriously). Then, suddenly, at level 17-18 (Depending on the class), they can heal an entire group for nearly full HPs.
Now, I’m fully aware of how the game is balanced around the concept that healing should not outbalance damage (lest the battles never end and/or a healer become an absolute necessity to each party). I still feel that the game would benefit from better ramping on healing capabilities. (Mind you, this would also apply to inflict spells which are rarely used because of their ineffectiveness before level 11/harm) I’ve crunched a lot of numbers in an effort to bridge some of the gap I see, and maintain the spirit of what the game tries to do, I have come up with a possible solution/middle ground.
First, cure serious wounds would be based on a d6, similar to fireball. It heals d6/lv max 10d6.
Cure critical wounds would be based on a d8 per level, max 12d8.
A new 5th level spell, Cure Massive Wounds, would heal a blanket 6 hps/level, maximum 90 hps.
All mass spells (which start at level 5) would be bumped up one level. Instead of Mass Cure Light wounds at level 5, healers would have Mass cure moderate wounds. The level 8 Cure Critical wounds would be replaced with Mass Cure massive wounds (I know, that sounds weird).
I got some number crunching below for comparisons... The first total number is at level 11, the last is at level 20. Now, what are your thoughts? Thanks!
Normal Rules
Direct Cure Spells
1 Cure Light - 1d8+lv - 9.5, 9.5
2 Cure Moderate - 2d8+lv - 19, 19
3 Cure Serious - 3d8+lv - 24.5, 28.5
4 Cure Critical - 4d8+lv - 28, 37
6 Heal 10hp/lv, 15 max - 150
Mass Cure Spells
5 Cure Light - 1d8+lv - 24.5
6 Cure Moderate - 2d8+lv - 29
7 Cure Serious - 3d8+lv - 33.5
8 Cure Crtical - 4d8+lv - 37
9 Heal - 10hp/lv - 200
Proposed
Direct Cure Spells
1 Cure Light - 1d8+LV - 9.5, 9.5
2 Cure Moderate - 2d10+LV - 21, 21
3 Cure Serious - D6/lv, Max 10d6 - 35, 35
4 Cure Critical - d8/lv, Max 12d8 - 45, 54
5 Cure Massive - 6hp/lv,Max 90hps - 66, 90
6 Heal - 10hp/lv,150 max - 150
Mass Cure Spells
5 Cure Moderate - 2d10+20 - 31
6 Cure Serious - D6/lv, Max 15d6 - 52.5
7 Cure Critical - d8/lv, Max 20d8 - 90
8 Cure Massive - 6hp/lv,120hps/max - 120
9 Heal - 10hp/lv (250 max) - 200
Is the max for cure light will still be level 5 under this and moderate will be level 10 right The problem is when you get to cure serious wounds is one feat that works wierd with this called fey founding in the inner sea world guid with cure serious wounds would end up healing d6+2 for each level. So that maybe should be banned with the following chaniges as it heals maybe too much although it does take one more point of damage from cold iron weapons. But healing an average of 55 points of damage from a third level spell but you have to take it at level 1.
Yes...normal maximums (level 5 for cure light wounds) still apply. Hmm...I'll have to keep an eye for that. Another thing I considered is the healing domain which adds 50% to cure spells with variables. That would buff the lower level cures to almost be better than the higher level ones. (Cure Critcal at 11th level would be 67 compared to Cure massive's 66, since it isn't buffed by that feature given that it is not a variable). I'm still pondering that little asterick as well.
Consider calling it Cure Deadly Wounds, or Cure Fatal Wounds.
Consider calling it Cure Deadly Wounds, or Cure Fatal Wounds.
Good idea. I like the deadly wounds one. Any other thoughts on my thoughts and proposal?
|
I think you are trying to cure things that are not broken.
The commonly available hit dice are d6, d8, & d10. The average for each HD is 3.5, 4.5, and 5.5. Assuming at least +2 per level due to CON and things like toughness or taking the extra hit point we get the following hit points on average
(need some space)
Level-d6--d8--d10--Avg Healing (dropping .5)
1---- 8---10--12----5
3----19---23--27---12
5----30---36--43---18
7----41---49--58---27
9----52---62--73---31 (breath of life-gotta memorize that one)
If you compare the d8 column to the avg healing you see that the healing consistently around 50% of the d8 column. Also the cleric still has a bunch of lesser heals available if required and channelling if things get tough.
A cleric should be able to keep the average party alive with RAW. Your adjustments are not required.
Why is breath of life not listed as cure spell?
I think you are trying to cure things that are not broken.
The commonly available hit dice are d6, d8, & d10. The average for each HD is 3.5, 4.5, and 5.5. Assuming at least +2 per level due to CON and things like toughness or taking the extra hit point we get the following hit points on average
(need some space)
Level d6 d8 d10 Avg Healing (dropping .5)
1 8 10 12 5
3 19 23 27 12
5 30 36 43 18
7 41 49 58 27
9 52 62 73 31 (breath of life-gotta memorize that one)If you compare the d8 column to the avg healing you see that the healing consistently around 50% of the d8 column. Also the cleric still has a bunch of lesser heals available if required and channelling if things get tough.
A cleric should be able to keep the average party alive with RAW. Your adjustments are not required.
I'm not so worried about the "Cleric keepin the party alive." After all, the cleric's role isn't to keep the party live. It's a support class that has an array of support spells, including buffs, debuffs (such as dispel magic), healing, etc. The cleric not only heals, but helps party members shine. But, clerics, as well as oracles, druids, paladins, inquisitors, witches and more, have healing as a main or secondary ability. If we want those classes to feel like they can heal, those abilities do need to be somewhat attractive as an option. So let's take a look at your numbers.
I have a mid level group now. At 10th level, our wizard has about 58 (Toughness, Favored) hps. The Cleric as 80ish. The fighter has over 100. Remember, 10th level characters have enough wealth to buy +stat items, and the fighter usually has got a +str/con item by then. Using toughness and favored bonus, he gets 10.5 hps/level on the avearge with a 14 con and a +2 CON item.
My problem is this. The level 10 cleric can heal, on average, (edited) 37 hps with a breath of life or hurt an undead for 18-37 based on save. That's 35-63% based on whether its the fighter or mage she's healing . Then, she gains one level. BAM. She's now curing 10/level and doing 55-110 damage to that vampire. That's a 300% increase in this main ability, and insures she can heal ANYONE. It's a huge jump. No other class really has that jump in progression in their primary party role.
Then there's the mass cure spells. Getting mass cure light and moderate wounds at level 10-12 for an oracle (who wishes they had channeling) is a joke. At level 16, that cleric is getting 28 hps with a channel (8d6), or 34 with a mass cure critical (oracle does that too).
I don't know of too many players that will burn a level 8 cast to heal everyone with a mass spell for 34 hps in that level range. But, that cleric/oracle gains one level and BAM! Mass Heal does 170 hps to all allies in close range. Wow. Now, suddently, mass heal for the oracles is a viable, tactical option. Heck, its a really GREAT option if she's got the 9th level spell to burn. 8th level curing spell? Waste of time.
I understand that level 3,6 and 9 spells are supposed to be big steps...and that a lot of classes get big steps at 11 such as the witches major hexes, or the fighter's third attack. But, c'mon...a jump of 300% in what the cleric/oracle does best? Really?
Whoops...knew I forgot something...doesn't change the premise of my arguement toooo much...but here ya go. I added in breath of life.
Normal Rules
Direct Cure Spells
1 Cure Light - 1d8+lv - 9.5, 9.5
2 Cure Moderate - 2d8+lv - 19, 19
3 Cure Serious - 3d8+lv - 24.5, 28.5
4 Cure Critical - 4d8+lv - 28, 37
5 Breath of Life - 5d8+lv - 33.5, 42.5
6 Heal 10hp/lv, 15 max - 150
Mass Cure Spells
5 Cure Light - 1d8+lv - 24.5
6 Cure Moderate - 2d8+lv - 29
7 Cure Serious - 3d8+lv - 33.5
8 Cure Crtical - 4d8+lv - 37
9 Heal - 10hp/lv - 200
Proposed
Direct Cure Spells
1 Cure Light - 1d8+LV - 9.5, 9.5
2 Cure Moderate - 2d10+LV - 21, 21
3 Cure Serious - D6/lv, Max 10d6 - 35, 35
4 Cure Critical - d8/lv, Max 12d8 - 45, 54
5 Cure Massive - 6hp/lv,Max 90hps - 66, 90
6 Heal - 10hp/lv,150 max - 150
Mass Cure Spells
5 Cure Moderate - 2d10+20 - 31
6 Cure Serious - D6/lv, Max 15d6 - 52.5
7 Cure Critical - d8/lv, Max 20d8 - 90
8 Cure Massive - 6hp/lv,120hps/max - 120
9 Heal - 10hp/lv (250 max) - 200
I’ve been reviewing the cure spells output. Many players and GM’s on the boards have discussed the general ineffectiveness of direct healing (and later on, the mass heal spells). What really bothers me is the complete disconnect between the highest since cure spell (Cure Critical Wounds / 4th level averaging about 30-35hps or so) and the 6th level heal doing 110-120. (10 hps/lv, max 150 at 15th). This issue repeats with Mass Curing spells vs. Mass Heal.
I dont see why this is a problem. The difference between 4th and 6th levels spells is huge to begin with. The only sequence of spells in the game that follows a relatively linear progression is summon monster/natures ally, and even those have peak levels. The up and down nature of spells at various levels is part of being a spell caster.
The reality is, that at early levels, healers can (with a good roll) heal ~75% hps on a single character. Then, in mid levels around 6-10, they can only do about 25-50% on a good roll (it’s worse the closer you get to level 10). Then, at level 11 (or 12 for oracles) through 16, healers can heal a single target for 75-100% (no roll needed with heal). At the same time, they have pathetic group heals that do about 10-25% (Seriously). Then, suddenly, at level 17-18 (Depending on the class), they can heal an entire group for nearly full HPs.
I wouldnt dispute your numbers, just dont see the arguement for this being a problem. Heal is better then cure spells, and is 2 spell levels higher...where is the problem with that?
Now, I’m fully aware of how the game is balanced around the concept that healing should not outbalance damage (lest the battles never end and/or a healer become an absolute necessity to each party). I still feel that the game would benefit from better ramping on healing capabilities. (Mind you, this would also apply to inflict spells which are rarely used because of their ineffectiveness before level 11/harm) I’ve crunched a lot of numbers in an effort to bridge some of the gap I see, and maintain the spirit of what the game tries to do, I have come up with a possible solution/middle ground.
What exactly is the 'spirit of what the game tries to do'? You dont explain that and just assume that an even progression of healing at each and every level is what it is trying to do. I disagree. I think that for lower levels healing is meant to be a limited (either per day or per item) resource that the party uses as the day progresses, and is one of the primary resources a dm will try to drain over the course of the day to apply pressure to the party.
Heal is a spell that comes along when the game shifts (or has shifted) from being about hit points to being about debilitating effects and spells. Hit point management stops being important, so heal basically glosses over it.
Your prescribed changes alter the way the game would be played, and in my mind go against the 'spirit' of healing, by making it more of an action economy choice as opposed to a reasource to be depleated.
|
|
See above
I'm not so worried about the "Cleric keepin the party alive." After all, the cleric's role isn't to keep the party live. It's a support class that has an array of support spells, including buffs, debuffs (such as dispel magic), healing, etc. The cleric not only heals, but helps party members shine. But, clerics, as well as oracles, druids, paladins, inquisitors, witches and more, have healing as a main or secondary ability. If we want those classes to feel like they can heal, those abilities do need to be somewhat attractive as an option. So let's take a look at your numbers.
I have a mid level group now. At 10th level, our wizard has about 58 (Toughness, Favored) hps. The Cleric as 80ish. The fighter has over 100. Remember, 10th level characters have enough wealth to buy +stat items, and the fighter usually has got a +str/con item by then. Using toughness and favored bonus, he gets 10.5 hps/level on the avearge with a 14 con and a +2 CON item.
My problem is this. The level 10 cleric can heal, on average, (edited) 37 hps with a breath of...
There are a few things you are overlooking. The lower level cure spells can be spontaneously cast negating the need to memorize them. The cleric is free to memorize other spells and cast cure when it is needed.
Breath of life and heal require preparation of the spell to use them during the day. This limits the cleric's options regarding spells and healing. As a return on the investment of memorizing the more powerful spells he gets more healing.
Heal is somewhat of an artifact from 1st edition (which had no spontaneous casting). However around 10th level every class stopped rolling for hit points and gained a set amount (1 or 2 per level plus con) but monsters kept doing more and more damage. So the need for a full return of hit points was needed. In 3.5/Pathfinder high level monsters do even more damage per round and so the need for heal is still there.
Still I don't think you are fixing anything. If you don't like the jump in healing ability then adjust the power of Heal. The 3.x/pathfinder set up for healing works well.
I dont see why this is a problem. The difference between 4th and 6th levels spells is huge to begin with. The only sequence of spells in the game that follows a relatively linear progression is summon monster/natures ally, and even those have peak levels. The up and down nature of spells at various levels is part of being a spell caster.
I made a mistake in that premise...to clear it up a little.... the difference is 5th level casting (Breath of life 5d8+lv, around 32.5 at level 10) and 6th level Heal (110 hps at level 11 for cleric).
Most spells to follow somewhat of a progression. Damage spells are tied to d6/level or d8/2 levels. Granted, at level 6, the wizard gets ray of disentigrate (2d6/level), which ironically enough, does less damage than a sucessful harm spell, lol. I don't disagree that there are definately some big jump ups in the game. As I Said, level 3,6 and 9 spells are where you get thinks like fireball (The first solid AoE that scales with level well) and wish. But no where is the jump quite as large as this. It's a 300% jump...which brings up the next point...
Your prescribed changes alter the way the game would be played, and in my mind go against the 'spirit' of healing, by making it more of an action economy choice as opposed to a reasource to be depleated.
Now, this could be debated a bit...but lets say that the premise is that until 6th level casting, it's just supposed to be a resource. Well, that would concern me a bit. I don't know of too many players that want to be simply a walking HP battery for the rest of the group (Perhaps that's why its so hard to get people to play clerics). They do nothing cool in battle, because they 'shine' at the end of battle rolling a ton of d8's ticking off lower level spells on their sheet as they do so. I've seen it before, of course. It's boring and no one really wants to do it.
However, if healing in battle is a viable course of action... one amoung many, for the oracles/cleric, etc...then every decision they make in battle is exciting. Do they heal the fighter that's down 50 hps knowing that will actually be able to keep him in the BBEG's face a couple of rounds longer, or do they go for a party wide buff, or do they prepare to counter spell the mage? Healing becomes one of a number of viable combat choices for the healer...and last time I checked, more choices = fun. Less choices = not fun.
Regardless, at level 11/12 (level 6 spells), you get heal with is clearly full combat option (If it was a full round cast or more, I might believe otherwise). So, why should curing be more of an "out of combat resource" at level 10 and below, and a totally combat option afterwards? We're not just talking about an extra class feature like the figther's ability to use a full move in heavy armor. We're talking a cornerstone ability that defines the divine classes. Why make them wait 10 levels (which many players don't get to) to have choice and fun in their class?
(Of course, it needs to be balanced...but in playing a level 9-10 group, at least up to this point, I do not feel the level 11 numbers in my proposed list would be OP'd. I'll talk about more on another post.)
I like it. Especially considering that many people (my group including) work with higher point-buys and the percentages for what HP healed you gave are even lower.
Yeah...I've had campaigns run with 25+ point buys. It's even harder for direct damage and healing to keep up there. Most direct damage spells like Magic Missle and fireball scale with level. Unfortunately, cure spells scale very slowly, making them obsolute quickly unless, as someone said earlier, you're just looking at them as some kind of our of combat resource (Which, btw...I've seen clerics get dried out VERY quickly in that 7-10 range where their spells just don't keep up)
Any other changes you would make? Perhaps to channel energy? (either the amount healed or # of times you can do it?)
There are a few feats and an item or two that helps channeling. One thing I have thought of though...magical items that add an extra ability to channeling as described in the variant channeling rules. Normally, variant channeling allows you to add an extra ability to your channel, such as giving all allies +1 hit/5 levels who are basked in your channel. The trade off is that you heal for 1/2 as much. I think having a feat or magic item that allows a cleric to do that with normal healing will help channeling stay viable as a combat option into the higher levels (at level 10, average channeling is 18, which helps, but is usually a subpar choice...at higher levels, it just gets used as an out of combat resource)
These changes will greatly extend the time of the average 'adventuring day
Not necessarily in my campaigns. My players usually tap the cleric's channeling (Since it's not super effective in combat) andthen use wands of cure light wounds healing as backup...it's a cheap way to provide the party healing in between battles so they don't dry out the cleric. So, usually when the party rests, it's because everyone is out of spells. (It sucks when you rely on the cleric for healing, and you tap him out, and you have to rest for a full day...remember, clerics get spells once/day.)
Which brings up another point of having higher curing spells at mid levels. If healing is only an out of combat resource, the cleric/oracle's main ability is simpy a boring resource that saves the party money. yawn. And they end up being the ones begging to rest every time. Double yawn.
When it's actually effective in combat, it gives them a reason to be excited to be a healer. They save people's lives who are about to die. (That's hard to do at level 10 when your best cure only does 35-40). Having lower level spells that scale a little better does give them more longevity for those times when they are the "HP battery," no doubt. It might be nice to have to rest because the wizard ran out of spells or the Barbarian ran out of rage first, though :)
There are a few things you are overlooking. The lower level cure spells can be spontaneously cast negating the need to memorize them. The cleric is free to memorize other spells and cast cure when it is needed.
No, actually, I'm fully aware of it. I'm also aware that classes with curing spells outside of cleric and oracle, such as the Witch, Bard or Paladin, don't have that option...they still sacrifice a potentially useful spell (sometimes MULTIPLE spells if they want multiple copies) to have that emergency cure handy should someone get into big trouble. Or they take them because no one wanted to play a full healer (go figure) and now they have to use a LOT of spell slots to be that healing battery. Regardless, a person who sacrifices a 4th level spell (or three) have the ability to cure in battle, should be able to do more than 30 pts of healing...especially at a level where every round the party is usually absorbing 60-90 hps of damage (as a whole).
The thing is most people use wands of cure light wounds for healing so they can cast better spells.
|
|
But why does healing need fixing?
You are trying to make the healing powers scale more linearly but I do not see why we need to do that. Healing has worked fine in every game I have played in 3.x/pathfinder. Usually a group had more than one caster who could heal or expendable magic items (potions, wands).
The only time I have seen characters die in games is when a monster crits for so much damage it erases all a character's HP or when people with low hit points do stupid stuff. Neither of those can be fixed by better healing.
An easier way to scale the spells is to have the xd8+ level be xd8 + x times level, up to a cap.
CLW becomes d8+5 Max.
CMW becomes 2d8+20 max.
CSW becomes 3d8+30 Max.
CCW becomes 4d8+60 Max.
A level 5 would be 5d8+75 damage, which would be about the same as a minimum Heal spell, and give smooth assurance.
If you apply the per level mods to the Mass spells, they become much more useful. Mass Cure Light wounds of d8 + 4 x CL to 15th is a nice burst heal...probably TOO strong for a burst heal, actually. The burst heals aren't really meant to be hugely effective, anyways...
==Aelryinth
The thing is most people use wands of cure light wounds for healing so they can cast better spells.
And that's fine if they want to use consumables to save spell casting. I have no problem with that. How party members handle out of combat healing is rarely the issue at lower levels provide the party has either a wand or a channeling cleric. At higher levels, especially given the sad nature of the "Mass" spells, it becomes an exercise to have the healer tick off a half dozen or more lower level spells in an effort to heal or top everyone off (when they run out of channeling, or, heaven forbid, don't have channeling available). Usually they go through the lowest levels first in between battles, of course, to conserve the more powerful higher level ones.
In battle, of course, it's the opposite. The economy of actions says that you need to get the most bang for your turn if a friend is in trouble. So, naturally, clerics will use the best heal they have more times than not.
Non clerics that have heal spells, however, will rarely take them. They just don't see the point of taking a Cure Serious Wounds over other fourth levels spells. Having the ability to heal someone for 35 or 40 hps in a pince instead of taking a powerful damage or CC spell hardly seems worth it, especially given the amount of pain bad guys dish out. 1 or 2 attacks quickly put your healed person back in trouble! You would have been better off taking your chances holding him with a 2nd level hold person or pit trap!
Having healing spells that can actually make a difference in combat (as well as out) makes more sense. You give those classes who have the ability to memorize curing spells a viable, in combat option along with their various other options. And, more options are good. Of course, we want to have this balanced. No one is happy if the fifth level cleric can fully heal everyone in the party with a single spell/channel, you know?
But why does healing need fixing?
You are trying to make the healing powers scale more linearly but I do not see why we need to do that. Healing has worked fine in every game I have played in 3.x/pathfinder. Usually a group had more than one caster who could heal or expendable magic items (potions, wands).
The only time I have seen characters die in games is when a monster crits for so much damage it erases all a character's HP or when people with low hit points do stupid stuff. Neither of those can be fixed by better healing.
Well, that's your experience. My experience has been different. Sure, MOST battles could be gotten through without a healer. It's just a matter of the party outdamaging or outsmarting the mobs.
But there are those times when the party gets caught flat footed and get hit with a nasty alpha strike. Or someone makes a mistake. Or the party needs a few rounds to figure out what the weaknesses are of the enemy are. Or the fighter was critically hit, and is forced to fight defensively or go total defense...taking away a good portion of the party's damage capabilities if he's not healed...I could go on and on.
The fact is, there are plenty of table top games that do NOT have healer class at all.
Pathfinder is not one of those games.
Pathfinder doesn't just have a healing class, it has several. It also has several more classes that have the ability to cast healing spells such as paladin, bard and witch.
Now, it can be argued that, perhaps, healing as just not meant to be effective in combat. OK...but why do we have heal then? So, at 11th+ level we get a standard (which means easy to use in battle) cast Heal spell. And, to those who make that argument, I have to ask, why have classes, then, like the cleric, who have so much healing capability. They channel. They spont into cure spells, etc, etc. The answer I get? So they can be a healing or HP battery.
And, again, we wonder why no one wants to play a healer.
To tell any character they have to wait until 11th+ level before they get to really feel like a full fledged healer or have full access to class defining abilities just feels cheap. (Yes, we know that cleric is the best healing class available, but you can't really heal anyone in combat effectively until 11th level). Furthermore, if you imply that curing spells are really supposed to be for just out of combat, then the cleric on your team feels pretty useless since his/her primary ability is easily replaced by a cheap wand of CLW.
As a person who enjoys playing cleric type classes in every RPG I play, I find such line of thinking to be an insult. No wonder clerics have such a bad rap!
The reality is, HPs and melee damage have been raised with PF. Squishies get more HPs. Characters now get 1 hp/level from class focus, and another easy one from Toughness (Don't leave home without it). Melee characters are doing more damage than ever before with improved feats like cleave, easier flanking, more feats over all and teamwork feats. The healer's cure spells, however, have not moved up one iota. Channeling for clerics is a nice way to alleviate some of the need to suck up otherwise useful battle spells to heal up between battles...but their cure spells have fallen behind. Cure Critical Wounds and Breath of life (if it was in 3.5) made more of a difference when people and monsters had 20 hps less at level 10. They were still well short of heal, but when your teams HP range is 35-70, it worked well enough
PF has taken was used to be useful in combat (direct cures between level 5-10) and put it in the backburner status for most players. So, aside from the disconnect that happens from Breath of Life to Heal (At level 10 I can heal in combat for 40, at level 11: 110!!), my main beef is, yeah, you are taking what used to work most of the time in combat, and told healers: "Guys, you have one less strategic option in combat."
|
|
Non clerics that have heal spells, however, will rarely take them. They just don't see the point of taking a Cure Serious Wounds over other fourth levels spells. Having the ability to heal someone for 35 or 40 hps in a pince instead of taking a powerful damage or CC spell hardly seems worth it, especially given the amount of pain bad guys dish out. 1 or 2 attacks quickly put your healed person back in trouble! You would have been better off taking your chances holding him with a 2nd level hold person or pit trap!
You are talking about spontaneous casters I assume. Having limited spells known necessarily limits what you can pick. Even when it comes to non-cure spells choices have to be made due to the limits of that type of class. It is not a valid argument for changing cure spells.
Druids and witches would have to choose whether to prepare the cure or other spells at every level. In games I have played they usually prepare their strongest heals.
I frequent these boards quite a bit, and until now I've never seen one player or GM disparage the cure or heal spells as being generally ineffective, much less "many." More importantly, in 31 years of playing, I've never heard a single instance in which a gamer blamed a TPK or even the death of a single character on the notion that the cure spells let him down.
I think that what you really need, is to build your own cleric with a selection of feats (preferably from 3.5, since our party's healbot extraordinaire can crank out ridiculous healing using feats from Complete Divine), and not try to change the game as a whole. Understand, the game assumes disposable magic items include healing items. That is normal for the rest of us. I personally don't think it's a problem. Preferring to use those slots for other items is a personal preference, not a sign of a broken ruleset.
Just sayin'.
Druids and witches would have to choose whether to prepare the cure or other spells at every level. In games I have played they usually prepare their strongest heals.
Hmm? Well, I'm talking bard, witch, paladin, alchemist, druid, etc...not just Spont classes.
But why do that (Memorize the highest level cures) when, as those who would argue me state, "Healing isn't meant to effective in combat?" And who can argue with them? Have you played 7-10th level? The more physical bad guys can easily crank out 30hps/damage/each against a medium armored character. Using a Cure Critical / Breath of life to heal that 10 hp Ranger to 45 didn't even buy the poor bloke a turn if he's got more than one flailing on him! It might help your heavily armored fighter who's fighting defensively to last another round though! LOL
I frequent these boards quite a bit, and until now I've never seen one player or GM disparage the cure or heal spells as being generally ineffective, much less "many." More importantly, in 31 years of playing, I've never heard a single instance in which a gamer blamed a TPK or even the death of a single character on the notion that the cure spells let him down.
I think that what you really need, is to build your own cleric with a selection of feats (preferably from 3.5, since our party's healbot extraordinaire can crank out ridiculous healing using feats from Complete Divine), and not try to change the game as a whole. Understand, the game assumes disposable magic items include healing items. That is normal for the rest of us. I personally don't think it's a problem. Preferring to use those slots for other items is a personal preference, not a sign of a broken ruleset.
Just sayin'.
Now you've heard one. Just sayin' :D And I've been playing for thirty TWO years, so I have you beat. Ok. I don't really. But if it makes you feel any better, I've been playing since AD&D, and I almost always play a cleric or healer of some sort. It's what I do.
My friend, you will be happy to know that I'm not only a GM (having done 2 campaigns to these higher levels), I'm a player. My cleric is ninth level now. I have first hand experience through some very trying encounters. I'm also an accountant, so I know a thing or two about crunching numbers. The fact is, PF does tweak a lot from 3.5, including raising everyone's HPs and the effectiveness of martial combat... two things that put a great demand on in healing, both in and out, for those who choose to take a healer with them. Healing effectiveness, as a ratio to those level 3-5 curing spells capability versus damage/hps has gone down significantly. It has lead to a day and age where, as you can see right here on this tread, people are regulating healing to out of combat. I'm happy you are happy with the system now. By all means, continue to use it. I, for one, am exploring some alternative ideas to address what I, in my limited view as both a player and GM, perceive to be... maybe not a problem...but at least an opportunity for improvement.
I figure this is in house rule territory, but our DM allows CdG with Cure spells. After all, they can be used as touch attacks (against the undead), so he believes it stands to reason that if a Cure can crit an undead for more damage, why can't it crit an ally?
Crit'd heals does sound interesting :)
I'll be fair... I mean, back in the AD&D days, I know that until I could cast sixth level spells, curing in battle usually wasn't a great idea. If we could spare it, we had people take duel class cleric so we'd have some extra healing on hand when necessary, and we relied on potions pretty often. So if someone really got hurt, a concentrated effort could get him back up. When, as a cleric, you got to 11 or 12 and got heal...man...what a rush. Suddenly, and finally, you could really cure people in battle in one turn. It was like the mage getting fireball, but you had to wait a lot longer. Until then, being a cleric meant being an HP battery (and not a great one at that). And you know what? It wasn't that much fun. But, it was generally necessary that SOMEONE play one.
I remember those days... but not THAT fondly!
While I'm not as familiar with 3.5, I did heals in a run there too. It was nothing to write home about, but clearly with spont healing 3/3.5 was a move in the right direction. They buffed up spells from what I remember in 1-2nd edition, so healing seemed a bit more viable in combat. It was better. Still not super fun, but moving in the right direction
PF brings channeling, allowing clerics to rely less on their spells for keeping the party going between battles and thereby de-emphesising the need to be thought of as an HP battery. Again, great. That was the first thing to get me excited, and I quickly rolled a cleric. But, the more sessions I played after level 5ish, the more I saw a concern. The problem is that the HP and melee attack increases significantly deflated the gains made on single target and AoE heals outside of "Heal" and "Mass Heal"
Is it game breaking? Will it result in tons of party wipes? No. But this direction in PF certainly makes playing a healer a small step back. So, I believe that tweaking it in this direction that I propose can make healers (and the idea of memorizing healing spells for combat before the almighty Heal spell) more viable to play and take for players without overbalancing their utility in combat. And more viable combat options means more meaningful choices for all classes who have access to cure spells. That can mean more strategy and more fun if it is balanced with other options.
For those who have concerns that somehow buffing up heals might break the spirit of curing or the game, I'd like to point out (as some of you already know), clerics (and those who can take domains and get the benefit of them) can take, assuming their deity allows it, the healing domain. At level 6, all cure spells are automatically empowered, doing 35-50% more than normal (Depending on how you interpret Empower). So, Healing domain clerics and the such are already curing close to the curve I list in the 5-10 range. I just feel that limiting those gains to that one domain, and not having a bit of a larger step at 5th level spells, misses something.
Clearly what I have listed for mass spells is higher than even empowered. I feel those needed the most help. Does anyone serious use any of the mass cure spells as written? Do players really use them? Burning a 6th level slot for 29 pts to all (When average hp max around 120ish) is or an 8th level slot for 37 seems (When it's closer to 160ish) seems pretty poor. I just can't see my cleric using them in any circumstance. Even if my whole party was down to 1hp, bringing them up to 30ish at a level when the average fireball is 42 and melee attack is in the 60s seems somewhat...risky use of a turn.
It's just my opinion...everyone has one, even if its wrong :)
|
A few things I don't feel have been raised in the thread:
1) Breath of life does more then just give HP back, breath of life is the only spell that brings you back from death. It is worth having one memorized at all times once it is on your spell list, as it can save you a lot of diamonds in resurrection/restoration costs.
2) Channeling Energy, available at all levels and gives a scaling AOE healing. There are also feats to improve its efficacy like selective channeling, and quick channel, Channel Revival, and Contingent Channeling. There is also a magic item that boosts your channeling by 2d6.
3) Dedicated healer classes: The cleric and oracle are not healers, but utility casters with a breadth of capabilities, but they can become focused with the oracle of life, or Merciful Healer (Archetype).
Putting this together, with my 9th oracle of life in a single round I've pumped out 14d6 in a 30 ft radius and a quickened cure critical wounds, which was 49 HP to the area on average and 27 to the recipient of the cure. Which is far from ineffective, especially as we have a very large party, 5 PCs, three bonded animals and 3 cohorts.
Now, this could be debated a bit...but lets say that the premise is that until 6th level casting, it's just supposed to be a resource. Well, that would concern me a bit. I don't know of too many players that want to be simply a walking HP battery for the rest of the group (Perhaps that's why its so hard to get people to play clerics). They do nothing cool in battle, because they 'shine' at the end of battle rolling a ton of d8's ticking off lower level spells on their sheet as they do so. I've seen it before, of course. It's boring and no one really wants to do it.
However, if healing in battle is a viable course of action... one amoung many, for the oracles/cleric, etc...then every decision they make in battle is exciting. Do they heal the fighter that's down 50 hps knowing that will actually be able to keep him in the BBEG's face a couple of rounds longer, or do they go for a party wide buff, or do they prepare to counter spell the mage? Healing becomes one of a number of viable combat choices for the healer...and last time I checked, more choices = fun. Less choices = not fun.
Unless it simply isnt a combat option, like I said its not what the cleric does in combat, or any divine caster. Maybe in an emergency, someone is about to die, sure, but the cleric has real spells and abilities to be using in combat. My point is if healing is inefficient time wise and just a resource to be used AFTER combat, then it isnt the clerics combat role. Making it more effective in terms of action economy makes it more of a choice for the cleric or any divine caster and thus limiting them to being walking bandades.
I think channel energy is indication that the spirit of healing is an out of combat action. It is woefully inefficient for recovering hits as they come, but if you bring the party together after combat and burn a few channels its a good resource. And it saves the clerics spells. Spells they can use to shine in combat. Making healing spells more of a combat option pushes divine casters MORE towards the walking bandaid role, not away from it.
Regardless, at level 11/12 (level 6 spells), you get heal with is clearly full combat option (If it was a full round cast or more, I might believe otherwise). So, why should curing be more of an "out of combat resource" at level 10 and below, and a totally combat option afterwards? We're not just talking about an extra class feature like the figther's ability to use a full move in heavy armor. We're talking a cornerstone ability that defines the divine classes. Why make them wait 10 levels (which many players don't get to) to have choice and fun in their class?
The game after level 10 is not the same game as it is in earlier levels. At low levels damage and hit points matter. You are more grounded in reality. At higher levels spells become available that let you gloss over previously challenging things. Teleport is a prime example. Just getting to the dungeon is a challenge at low levels. At higher magic trivializes it so you can move on to bigger things. Divine magic does that too. Heal is a prime example. Heal being way better then everything else that came before is intentional, the same why teleport is better then expeditious retreat in terms of transport. You shouldnt worry about silly things like hit points or ability damage at higher levels, you are an emerging demigod, so watch out for that finger of death instead.
What alot of people dont realize is that the game is actually several games in one. Levels 1-6 are a gritty kind of fantasy still grounded in reality. 7-10ish is high fantasy, you are a hero of legend. 11 to 15 or so and you are in the wuxia or lower order super hero realm where a handful of people can take on whole armies, and when you get higher you are playing dc comic heroes. And I do not believe healing is a cornerstone of divine classes or at least it shouldnt be. It should be a secondary or even tertiary thing. Are you honestly saying the only way to have fun as a cleric or other divine caster is by healing?
(Of course, it needs to be balanced...but in playing a level 9-10 group, at least up to this point, I do not feel the level 11 numbers in my proposed list would be OP'd. I'll talk about more on another post.)
Balance really isnt the issue here, it is the nature of the game that changes. Would it be overpowered as a spell? No. But it would be shifting the role of people who can cast them, and in my opinion not in a positive direction.
Unless it simply isnt a combat option, like I said its not what the cleric does in combat, or any divine caster. Maybe in an emergency, someone is about to die, sure, but the cleric has real spells and abilities to be using in combat. My point is if healing is inefficient time wise and just a resource to be used AFTER combat, then it isnt the clerics combat role. Making it more effective in terms of action economy makes it more of a choice for the cleric or any divine caster and thus limiting them to being walking bandades.
See...that's my issue. That line of thinking. You're basically telling healers that they have to wait until 11th level to be able to effectively use a major class feature in combat...that until then, cure spells are simply a resource to be consumed in between battles, regulating them to "healing batteries" waiting to be drained. This feature is easily handled by the cheap CLW wand. Is it any wonder its so hard to find a healer?
If you want to say that clerics have so many other things to do in combat and healing should be their primary focus...fine...but healing should be right near the top of the list. Telling them they have to wait until 11 to heal decently in combate is like telling a fighter he can't used ranged attacks (which is a good secondary focus for most fighters to deal with things that cannot be melee'd) until 11th.
Giving players more strategic choices in battle is good. Clerics right now, as you describe them, from level 1-10 can attack, buff or debuff (If you count spells like hold person as a debuff of sorts). Clerics from 11-16 can attack, buff, debuff or single person heal. Clerics from 17+ can attack, buff, debuff, single person heal or massive heal (The mass heals before 9th lv spells are pathetic for in combat application).
Why not have in battle curing be a viable choice at earlier levels? They are a cleric/oracle/etc for crying out loud! And, as I state earlier, in 3.5 in battle healing was more viable because HPs and melee damage weren't as high as they are in PF. Both of those have been buffed up significantly. Curing spells have not.
An easier way to scale the spells is to have the xd8+ level be xd8 + x times level, up to a cap.
CLW becomes d8+5 Max.
CMW becomes 2d8+20 max.
CSW becomes 3d8+30 Max.
CCW becomes 4d8+60 Max.
A level 5 would be 5d8+75 damage, which would be about the same as a minimum Heal spell, and give smooth assurance.If you apply the per level mods to the Mass spells, they become much more useful. Mass Cure Light wounds of d8 + 4 x CL to 15th is a nice burst heal...probably TOO strong for a burst heal, actually. The burst heals aren't really meant to be hugely effective, anyways...
==Aelryinth
I've been thinking about this idea all night, Aelryinth...and the more I think about it, the more I like it. It's much simpler than my idea. I think I'll crunch some numbers!
A few things I don't feel have been raised in the thread:
1) Breath of life does more then just give HP back, breath of life is the only spell that brings you back from death. It is worth having one memorized at all times once it is on your spell list, as it can save you a lot of diamonds in resurrection/restoration costs.
I'm fully aware of that, but I don't see how that changes the premises I set forth.
2) Channeling Energy, available at all levels and gives a scaling AOE healing. There are also feats to improve its efficacy like selective channeling, and quick channel, Channel Revival, and Contingent Channeling. There is also a magic item that boosts your channeling by 2d6.
I've actually mentioned this before.
My cleric that I play does all of these things. Channeling starts out pretty efficient for in battle healing, but by the 6-12 range, it starts to feel very weak without these feats/items. If you invest in the item you describe and invest heavily in feats, then, sure, they remain effective thoughout the 6-10 rangs... but after that, it falls behind again. It's not a great thing to invest too many precious feats into because, at the end of the day, it's effectivness nosedives at higher levels.
3) Dedicated healer classes: The cleric and oracle are not healers, but utility casters with a breadth of capabilities, but they can become focused with the oracle of life, or Merciful Healer (Archetype).
Those are weak examples, actually. (Though life oracle has some nice perks in their revalations) Your best bet is something like a cleric with the healing domain, which gets +50% on all cure spells after hitting 6th level. That's a much more useful ability as far as healing goes than what those present.
Putting this together, with my 9th oracle of life in a single round I've pumped out 14d6 in a 30 ft radius and a quickened cure critical wounds, which was 49 HP to the area on average and 27 to the recipient of the cure. Which is far from ineffective, especially as we have a very large party, 5 PCs, three bonded animals and 3 cohorts.
Sure, you can do that with channel... again, you feat heavily into it, and spend money on the item or have it count against your character's value for that level. And you've just used up around half your channels (3) for the day depending on your feats and CHA... for 49 points. Which gets the average 9th level party back about 55% of their life. By the time you're 15th level, that same combo that you feated so heavily into does 70 pts when the party is averaging 150 pts for 45%. When you get mass heal, it's obsolete.
Now, I will agree, what you have here IS effective (even if you can only do it about twice / day). But it's a lot, IMHO, to ask players to not only be forced into an archtype of oracle AND take those feats AND buy specific items just to be relatively effective. Why should heaven oracles not have effective means of healing? They have no channeling at all, and not a whole lot of way to improve cure critical wounds at 9th level which heals one target for 30ish.
A quickened cure crit at 9th level? Dang. Maybe with a meta rod of some sort (which is quite expensive... out of reach for most 9th level characters).
|
|
A quickened cure crit at 9th level? Dang. Maybe with a meta rod of some sort (which is quite expensive... out of reach for most 9th level characters).
Nope, it is part of the oracle of life:
Combat Healer (Su): Whenever you cast a cure spell (a spell with “cure” in its name), you can cast it as a swift action, as if using the Quicken Spell feat, by expending two spell slots. This does not increase the level of the spell. You can use this ability once per day at 7th level and one additional time per day for every four levels beyond 7th. You must be at least 7th level to select this revelation.
As for the character investment in a character to make it effective, I'm not sure that isn't a fallacious argument, Clerics and Oracles are utility casters, their is lots of stuff you can do, if you choose to specialize in healing there are options, yes by specializing in those options you become less effective in other areas. Likewise a Sword and Board fighter isn't optimal at range, or an illusionist wizard might not be the best blaster.
As for the channeling, burst healing of the group for a large amount of HP is a great counter to burst damage to the group. Also, it is an AOE heal, so as it compares to the single target healing it is fantastic, never mind up against mass CLW.
As for other oracle revelations, there are some great ones include: life link, spirit boost, safe curing.
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
The thing that strikes me funny about this thread is that the OP is actually PROMOTING a Cleric as a Healbot, when so many others, including many game designers, have worked so hard to make the class so much more than that. The Cleric is one of the most flexible, most powerful classes in Pathfinder and, by the way, they can heal too!
So you've not only got to invest heavily, as you did (By choosing the archtype, proper feats, buy an item), but you also have to exhuast your resources much faster (three channels for the day and two spell slots at highest level) and you still only heal the party for about 55% and a main person for another 25%ish. Don't get me wrong. From an action econmy standpoint, of course, it's a homerun. Great build. But, I would expect for THAT much investment and consumation of resources that you top everyone to the brim, lol. Granted, though, such a sentiment is extremely subjective.
My problem is, again, I don't think that any healer class should have to invest THAT heavily to cure a single target for 50% at level 7-10. In 3.5, Cure Critical was 4d8+lv, so about 25. When your average 7th level character there had 45 hps and 10th level character had 65 (4.5 hps+1 con+1 item buff for 7/10 levels) that was groovy.
Now, in PF, characters have higher HP overall from favored bonuses, buffed up toughness and higher HD for some classes. Now, the average hps for 7th level is closer to 60 (4.5+1Con+1Favored+1Tough+1 Con Items) and 10th level to 85.
Of course, the real problem is damage. Everything's hiting harder as well. Everyone gets more feats, and those feats (like cleave, power attack, etc) are improved for more damage. The healer just doesn't keep up in that range of levels.
And don't get me started on the laughable mass cure spells.
I'm OK with character investment to be better at something. If a rogue wants to be really good at stabbity flank, he has to invest heavily in feats that support that. Unfortunately, there's not a lot of feats that support healing casters in a smiliar fashion. But, I think forcing particular archtype+feats+items+double consumption of abilities to do something well is overkill.
The thing that strikes me funny about this thread is that the OP is actually PROMOTING a Cleric as a Healbot, when so many others, including many game designers, have worked so hard to make the class so much more than that. The Cleric is one of the most flexible, most powerful classes in Pathfinder and, by the way, they can heal too!
The cleric should be someone who is good at "many other things" as you suggest...I agree with that... but you know what? Maybe, just maybe, they should be good at healing! I mean, it's just a thought, but perhaps the ability to heal in combat should be something that should be strategically viable. I dunno. Could just be me!
Taking away healing capability (by inflating the rest of the game) doesn't lessen the need or call for a constant source of healing. Increasing the cleric's ability to do decent heals doesn't make them more or less of a healbot.
By having healing in combat as a viable alternative for its costs (a standard action) gives the cleric one more choice in their arsenal of things they can do in combat. And more choices is good, especially when that choice is a core component of what the class is known to do well.
See...that's my issue. That line of thinking. You're basically telling healers that they have to wait until 11th level to be able to effectively use a major class feature in combat...that until then, cure spells are simply a resource to be consumed in between battles, regulating them to "healing batteries" waiting to be drained. This feature is easily handled by the cheap CLW wand. Is it any wonder its so hard to find a healer?
The problem is calling them a healer in the first place. They arent a healer they are a cleric. I am not telling them to wait until 11th level to use a class feature. I am telling them it is not their responsibility to be a walking bandaid untill magic makes it trivial.
The wizard is not required to carry the entire party every where they go on floating disks, the party finds other ways to travel, and sometimes floating disks is used in a specific way. Then one day the wizard learns teleport. Now overland travel is trivialized and its ok for the wizard to spend time and resources on it.
The same goes for the cleric and healing. He is a divine caster not a healer. In combat cure spells are not a class feature. They are a drain on the fun of being a divine caster. They should be using their actions in combat for something more fun.
If you want to say that clerics have so many other things to do in combat and healing should be their primary focus...fine...but healing should be right near the top of the list. Telling them they have to wait until 11 to heal decently in combate is like telling a fighter he can't used ranged attacks (which is a good secondary focus for most fighters to deal with things that cannot be melee'd) until 11th.
If someone WANTS to focus on healing or even have a secondary focus, there are things like feats and domain powers that can alter that. In fact the healing domain does that very thing in the form of healers blessing. The fighter diverts some of his feats to ranged fighting to apply a secondary focus as a choice made by the player, so does the cleric devote one of his domains or maybe a feat as a choice made by the player to add focus to healing.
Giving players more strategic choices in battle is good. Clerics right now, as you describe them, from level 1-10 can attack, buff or debuff (If you count spells like hold person as a debuff of sorts). Clerics from 11-16 can attack, buff, debuff or single person heal. Clerics from 17+ can attack, buff, debuff, single person heal or massive heal (The mass heals before 9th lv spells are pathetic for in combat application).
This is special kinds of false. More options are not always better. If i give you a choice between a juicey steak dinner, a pulled pork sandwhich, OR stale bread but if you eat it your friends eat for free. That is not better then just the steak or the pulled pork sandwich being offered. Is it the worst thing in the world if you eat the bread? No. Will your friends be happy? Probably. And ofcourse you can always eat a real meal next time right?
That is what its like asking a divine caster to heal in combat. You are asking them to give up what is ostensibly fun about their character to make everyone else's lives happier while they go about their business doing what they wanted in the first place.
Channel energy was an attempt to explicately get away from a cleric having to use his spells for healing. Divine spontaneous casting was another attempt to keep the clerics spells from all getting hemmed in as cure spells. I dont think the cleric should be a healing batter but exactly the opposite. I think non-spell resources should be the primary source of healing, and the cleric should only be called on to heal in combat in very specific circumstances. By taking it out of combat, it allows the cleric to spend his most precious resource (Actions in combat) on other things, and takes the social pressure off the play to be the walking bandaid. He is a badass holy avatar of his god instead.
Why not have in battle curing be a viable choice at earlier levels? They are a cleric/oracle/etc for crying out loud! And, as I state earlier, in 3.5 in battle healing was more viable because HPs and melee damage weren't as high as they are in PF. Both of those have been buffed up significantly. Curing spells have not.
GWAH? The high end of the hit point scale is unchanged. The people who take the most hits (guys with d10 hit dice) have exactly the same HP as in 3.5. And actual optimized combat damage also has not changed trememdously. The optimization has become easier for most classes, but the actual potential output is close to the same. As far as I can tell. If you have evidence to the contrary i'd like to see it, but I havent seen anything outpace the damage of 3.5 pouncing barbarians or tricked out Codzillas.
|
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
The thing that strikes me funny about this thread is that the OP is actually PROMOTING a Cleric as a Healbot, when so many others, including many game designers, have worked so hard to make the class so much more than that. The Cleric is one of the most flexible, most powerful classes in Pathfinder and, by the way, they can heal too!The cleric should be someone who is good at "many other things" as you suggest...I agree with that... but you know what? Maybe, just maybe, they should be good at healing! I mean, it's just a thought, but perhaps the ability to heal in combat should be something that should be strategically viable. I dunno. Could just be me!
Taking away healing capability (by inflating the rest of the game) doesn't lessen the need or call for a constant source of healing. Increasing the cleric's ability to do decent heals doesn't make them more or less of a healbot.
By having healing in combat as a viable alternative for its costs (a standard action) gives the cleric one more choice in their arsenal of things they can do in combat. And more choices is good, especially when that choice is a core component of what the class is known to do well.
But I disagree with your assumption that Clerics are not good healers in combat. I've run plenty of Clerics and have used Cure spells to good effect in combat to keep other party members up and fighting. It's not my sole role in a combat situation, but it is a viable option.
Your argument loses steam for me with your assumptions that:
1) The Cleric's primary role is to heal.
I disagree with this. He is indeed one of the best healers in the game, but I don't agree that it's his primary role. It's a viable option, but not the only one available.
2) Cure spells don't scale well over high levels.
My experience is that they work well as is. I am not convinced by your arguments that there is a problem here that needs solving. The Pathfinder game does not always follow a linear progression from a leveling up perspective and often makes large leaps from one level to another for a variety of classes - compare an arcane caster's 2nd level spell list to their 3rd level spell list if you need an example. This is by design.
To me, it seems like you're trying to fix something that doesn't need fixing by using arguments that don't apply to the way the game is designed.
We may have to agree to disagree here.
I don't agree that it's his primary role.
Well, the cleric is the really a support class. He's not the best front line attacker, arcane caster, bomber, kiters, tanker, etc. He definately has the best party buffs in the game next, to possibly, the bard. Of course, you can build a cleric/oracle/etc any number of ways (as you can most classes) to focus on whatever you want. But a generic cleric is a support class with buffing and healing as the primary focus of his spells. I never indicated, however, that clerics only role was to heal. I keep saying over and over, that healing should be a viable, strategic choice for the cleric in battle... one amoung others...instead of being regulated (in terms of efficient use of action economy) to out of combat.
2) Cure spells don't scale well over high levels. The Pathfinder game does not always follow a linear progression from a leveling up perspective and often makes large leaps from one level to another for a variety of classes - compare an arcane caster's 2nd level spell list to their 3rd level spell list if you need an example. This is by design.
Read my massive earlier posts. I've addressed this. I'm totally cool with the jumps we normally see, especially at level 3 and 6 spell levels.
However, the jump for healing blows the mind. 5th level breath of life heals 5d8+lv: about 32 hps. Cure/Harm (for those into harming) Critical is about 28. Heal/Harm jump that up to 110. That's a 300%+ jump in efficiency.
I'm OK with a jump. Sure. But this is a rocket ship jump.
But, yeah, I'm aware it's by design. I just think it's a poor design.
Like you said, we can agree to disagree.
|
It seems to me that there is a potential quick and dirty solution to the "problem". With the advent of Pathfinder a lot of classes had their hit die increased to the next larger die. However, the die used to determine how many hit points were restored with a cure spell remained the same. IMHO all one arguably needs to do is to alter the cure spells such that instead of using d8's to determine how many hit points they are curing they use d10's. That can be done with a simple house rule. I don't personally see the need to redesign the healing mechanics of the entire system because some people aren't happy with it. Some people will always be unhappy about darn near everything and it is axiomatic that you can't please everybody.
It seems to me that there is a potential quick and dirty solution to the "problem". With the advent of Pathfinder a lot of classes had their hit die increased to the next larger die. However, the die used to determine how many hit points were restored with a cure spell remained the same. IMHO all one arguably needs to do is to alter the cure spells such that instead of using d8's to determine how many hit points they are curing they use d10's. That can be done with a simple house rule. I don't personally see the need to redesign the healing mechanics of the entire system because some people aren't happy with it. Some people will always be unhappy about darn near everything and it is axiomatic that you can't please everybody.
Good point. But, remember, that Pathfinder also made it easier to get more hps/level with toughness now giving HP/level, and favored class bonus (though a few do pick skill points here). Since it seems that, originally in 3.5, healing seemed to be (1/2 level * d8 + lv) which came close to a 50% hp heal for the average class in those days, I would suggest that having the current heals do (1/2 level * d10 + 2 / level) would bring it REALLY close to the same line of thought.
|
|
Good point. But, remember, that Pathfinder also made it easier to get more hps/level with toughness now giving HP/level, and favored class bonus (though a few do pick skill points here). Since it seems that, originally in 3.5, healing seemed to be (1/2 level * d8 + lv) which came close to a 50% hp heal for the average class in those days, I would suggest that having the current heals do (1/2 level * d10 + 2 / level) would bring it REALLY close to the same line of thought.
I must be atypical because I almost always go for the extra skill points. :-) At any rate, another way to go that might not make people's heads explode with math would be to just increase the dice rolled for cures to D12's. That ought to keep even the barbarians happy and do wonders for the supporting cast characters limping along using d6's and d8's for hit die.
|
|
I don't agree that it's his primary role.Well, the cleric is the really a support class. He's not the best front line attacker, arcane caster, bomber, kiters, tanker, etc. He definately has the best party buffs in the game next, to possibly, the bard. Of course, you can build a cleric/oracle/etc any number of ways (as you can most classes) to focus on whatever you want. But a generic cleric is a support class with buffing and healing as the primary focus of his spells. I never indicated, however, that clerics only role was to heal. I keep saying over and over, that healing should be a viable, strategic choice for the cleric in battle... one amoung others...instead of being regulated (in terms of efficient use of action economy) to out of combat.
2) Cure spells don't scale well over high levels. The Pathfinder game does not always follow a linear progression from a leveling up perspective and often makes large leaps from one level to another for a variety of classes - compare an arcane caster's 2nd level spell list to their 3rd level spell list if you need an example. This is by design.
Read my massive earlier posts. I've addressed this. I'm totally cool with the jumps we normally see, especially at level 3 and 6 spell levels.
However, the jump for healing blows the mind. 5th level breath of life heals 5d8+lv: about 32 hps. Cure/Harm (for those into harming) Critical is about 28. Heal/Harm jump that up to 110. That's a 300%+ jump in efficiency.
I'm OK with a jump. Sure. But this is a rocket ship jump.
But, yeah, I'm aware it's by design. I just think it's a poor design.
Like you said, we can agree to disagree.
But it is more then just 32 avg damage, it is back from beyond the brink of death for no material cost. That is an amazing resource saver for the party
I must be atypical because I almost always go for the extra skill points. :-) At any rate, another way to go that might not make people's heads explode with math would be to just increase the dice rolled for cures to D12's. That ought to keep even the barbarians happy and do wonders for the supporting cast characters limping along using d6's and d8's for hit die.
Well, I really like your idea of the d10... and adding one more HP/level to compensate for toughness and extra favored class. I'll post my final house rule version below.
I would say about 7 out of 10 players in may campaigns take the extra HP, and almost all my NPC bad guys do :P The human sorcerers do take the extra spell known though!
But it is more then just 32 avg damage, it is back from beyond the brink of death for no material cost. That is an amazing resource saver for the party
Oh, hey, I don't disagree. It's an awesome spell. It's nice, really. It just doesn't solve any of the concerns I have regarding the fact that cure spells, overall, have lost ground in 3.5 to PF, or the really old skoool jump of 300% effectiveness between level 4 or 5 Cure spells (or level 7/8 mass cure spells) and their Heal variants.
I've suggested the following before:
Cure Light Wounds: 1d8+1d8/5 levels (5d8 max)
Cure Moderate Wounds: 2d8+1d8/4 levels 7d8 max)
Cure Serious Wounds: 3d8+1d8/3 levels (9d8 max)
Cure Critical Wounds: 4d8+1d8/2 levels (14d8 max)
That way higher level casters can get more out of the cure line of spells but without rendering later curing useless or giving a significant ability to outpace damage.
It wouldn't hurt my feelings to leave the current +1 per caster level (max 5, 10, 15, 20) on there too if people wanted it.
It was a pretty liked idea back during beta testing but didn't make it through.
First, I want to thank everyone who took the time to write here, especially those who added to the line of thought I was working on. So, I’ve listened to a lot of you, took those things that really made sense, and came up with this house rule variant.
First, most cure spells only receive a small increase to reflect the overall power increase in PF. The D8 increases to d10 to reflect the higher HD for classes in PF, and an additional +1/level is added (For a total of +2/level) to reflect the higher HPs characters get from toughness, class bonuses, etc. Maximum per level bonus is doubled, as well (So max CLW is 1d10+10 at level 5).
Second, we have add “Cure Fatal Wounds” at level five that is a strong cure spell capable of doing about half of what heal does at sixth. Appropriate, IMHO, for a fifth level. It does not have the resurrect capability of Breath of life, however. It does 5d8+3/level (+50 max), which is 2hps more per level than Breath of life. Average at level 11 is 60.5 compared to heal's 110.
Third, I have moved the Mass Cure spells to one higher dice than normal to make them somewhat useful (1d8+lv just seems laughable for 5th level, even if it is AoE) while keeping the +2 per level for most.
These three changes, I believe, allow healing to have more of a role in combat, without being dominating at all. It should make healing more of a possible combat option rather than something to be done strictly out of battle (more choices are good!). The extra 1.5 hps/healing per level for direct cure spells will hardly slow down the slaughter of any party who is way over their heads or poorly prepared. You guys have seen just how much damage pathfinder foes can do.
But wait, there’s more! Fourth, we are introducing an array of feats. Now, in the past, if one wanted to be a particularly powerful healer, they would have to choose the healing domain (+50% on all cure spells, wow!) or something like the Life oracle. While those should still be the defining archtypes that represent the most powerful battlefield healers, we want to allow other classes that have healing (Such as the witch, fire oracle or bard) to be able to heal well as the prominent battlefield healer if they wish… but doing so should come at a cost. Hence, the feat cost.
Some have pointed out the the clerics "main purpose" isn't really healing. As a support class, that can be argued. However, most of us will agree that "Buffing" ranks high on their list of things to do as well. So, we wanted to have a way to breath life into Channeling at the higher levels, while at the same time, emphasizing their buffing capabilities. Channeling variants are the perfect answer, as they provide "Channeling" type bonuses (Which means they stack with others).. .usually at the cost of half of the healing channeling provides. We have come up with feats to let high level clerics and channel types to have the have the best of both for a cost. The details are below.
Enhanced Cure
Req: Access to Cure Spells
Benefit: Whenever you cast a cure spell, the maximum number of hit points healed is based on your caster level, not the limit based on the spell. For example, an 11th-level caster with this feat may cast cure light wounds to heal 1d10+22 hit points instead of the normal 1d10+10 maximum.
Enhanced Cure II
Req: Access to Cure Critical Wounds or better, Enhanced Cure I
Benefit: Mass Cure spells heal an additional 1d10. Direct curing spells heal an additiona 2d10. An "Enhanced" cure spell takes a full round to cast (Full round cast action, not 1 round cast).
Fast Healer
Req: Access to Cure Moderate Wounds or better
Benefit: Whenever you cast a cure spell (a spell with "cure" in its name), you can cast it as a move action, by expending a higher level spell. This does not increase the level of the spell for purposes of calculating healing. You can use this ability once per day at 3rd level and one additional time per day for every four levels beyond 3rd.
Quick Healer
Req: Access to Cure Critical Wounds or better, Fast Healer
Benefit: Whenever you cast a cure spell (a spell with “cure” in its name), you can cast it as a swift action, as if using the Quicken Spell feat, by expending a spell two slots higher. This does not increase the level of the spell. You can use this ability once per day at 7th level and one additional time per day for every four levels beyond 7th.
Enhanced Channeling I
Req: Permanent ability to Channel 5d6 or more (Exclusive of items)
Benefit: Choose a variant channeling benefit. Your channels now have that benefit without the normally assoicated 50% penalty to the healing.
Enhanced Channeling II
Req: Permanent ability to Channel 9d6 or more (Exclusive of items), Enhanced Channeling I
Benefit: Choose a second variant channeling benefit. Your channels now have that benefit without the normally assoicated 50% penalty to the healing.
Here are the numbers crunched at level 15 for various spells (Both by normal rules and proposed house rules w/o special feats and archtypes)
Normal
Direct Cure Spells
1 Cure Light -1d8+5 -9.5
2 Cure Moderate -2d8+10 -19
3 Cure Serious -3d8+15 -28.5
4 Cure Critical -4d8+20 -32
5 Breath of Life -5d8+20 -36.5
6 Heal 10hp/lv, 15 max -150
Mass Cure Spells
5 Cure Light -1d8+20 -19.5
6 Cure Moderate -2d8+20 -24
7 Cure Serious -3d8+20 -28.5
8 Cure Crtical -4d8+20 -32
9 Heal 10hp/lv
Proposed 4
Direct Cure Spells
1 Cure Light -1d10+2lv (10) -15.5
2 Cure Moderate -2d10+2lv (20) -31
3 Cure Serious -3d10+2LV (30) -46.5
4 Cure Critical -4d10+2LV (40) -52
5 Cure Deadly Wounds -5d10+3LV (50) -72.5
6 Heal -10hp/lv (150) -150
Mass Cure Spells Total
5 Cure Moderate -2d10+2lv (20) -31
6 Cure Serious -3d10+2lv (30) -46.5
7 Cure Critical -4d10+2lv (40) -52
8 Cure Deadly Wounds -5d10+3lv (50) -72.5
9 Heal 10hp/lv (250 max) -150
houserules:
1)
cure light 1d6 +1 per lvl max +5
cure moderate 2d8 +1 per lvl max +10
cure serious 3d10 +1 per lvl max +15
cure critical 4d12 +1 per lvl max +20
2)
cure spells can revive people from death if healed to sufficient hp within 1 round of dying, this only works for cure spells or laying on hands not channeling.
3) clerics get laying on hands uses per day of cha mod (if positive) + 1/2 cleric lvl with a minimum of one use per day, the cleric can choose to spend two uses to channel or use it on himself as a swift action.
* these houserules make healing at low level a bit weaker at low level, but doesn't require clerics to invest in charisma to be decent channelers later on. If you want clerics to be more powerful healers consider using wisdom to determine the number of uses of laying on hands instead, at lower level in particular they will save a number of uses by using laying on hands instead of channeling and at higher level they will gain more uses. Caster clerics will be able to focus more on spells other than healing gaining a good ammount of healing by increasing wisdom and leveling up, combat clerics will only need a decent wisdom and still get a fair ammount of in combat healing to use on themselves.