Can we just agree that Mabven is wrong and that she/he/it needs to learn2logic before posting again?
lol , your hash and come off as rude much man, but your amusing and make good points at times.
I do think the op is wrong, but who knows Jason might not.
Skylancer:
Your arguments are so full of holes and demonstrate such a misunderstanding of the core rules that I don't even need to point them out for them to be obvious to anyone who actually plays.
Psychic_Robot:
You are a Troll. Lucky for me, I am a cleric with Fire domain.
That's no argument. Come back when you actually have a point to make in your own thread.
The druid is not a dedicated healer. He has the spells, but making him focus on them is like putting a paralysed midget on a NBA team; That's just retarted.
Please do not encourage boosting the druid even further, thank you.
I just figured out the title, it's a reference to the druid's Wild Shape ability.
The elephant in the room IS the druid.
Seriously though, what optimization for critiquing did you gain in exchange for the -20 on your diplomacy rolls? And was it worth the reputation you've built as an abrasive loud mouth? (something some of us try to ignore when you make valid points)
Translation: "BAWWWWW."
It is the Internet. It does not matter. Few things matter on the Internet. Emotional outrage at things that do not matter is pointless.
We are talking about a game. This is one of those things that does not matter.
Chill. Have a glass of water. Enjoy Pathfinder.
Chill. Have a glass of water. Enjoy Pathfinder.
can we have rum?...where did the rum go?
No, not at all. I'm just seeing the funny side.
Teaching a dog to lick someone is hardly difficult.
Heck, they do it without asking.
You know I forgot to say this earlier, I read your post right before passing out this morning and was asking myself if you were actually trying to be comical. I thought you were but wasn't sure lol.
Anyways I thank you for bringing in a bit joviality. The thread needed it which was part of the reason of the whole disclaimer when I posted.
@ Dennis da Ogre:
I have no problem with the trick "lick", the main problem I have (and again TOTALLY off topic) with adding to or creating more tricks is that the vast majority of players or DM's don't enforce the limitations of an animal intelligence. The animal companion is often treated like low intelligence follower who can't communicate without magic. I also think this is where a lot of the "power" comes from this class feature. If the animal companion were role played more appropriately, the limitations enforced I don't think it would be as powerful. Now with that objection explained giving it more options when the limitations aren't enforced is something I am against. So while you are right "lick" is appropriate, so is "open the fridge and grab me a brew." Now if something that is a little more complicated is allowed, how complicated is too complicated? Once we start opening that door it is very hard to close, so my suggestion is to leave tricks core and not play with them any. In regards to the tricks I'm going to borrow one of my cousins favorite phrases. KISS - keep it simple stupid.
And please note I'm not calling you stupid ;)
@ Diego Bastet:
Zero Charisma, I'll agree with you on two things:One: There is no need to play the big testosterone-full guy. There are many on every forum that would REALLY help more other people if they were just more polite. There is the perceived problem of "I must be stronger, and I must seem smarter and over that other male" thing, but since I'am a real Psychologist, and many people are not (for wich I'm glad), I'll not enter on this subject. Now, we all people here are working towards the same goal. Your name won't be on the playstester credits as "he is above this other because he is more masculine"...geez... The better thing you'll be able to get is being on the top of the list if your name is Abel. Better yet, if your name is Abbel. I can't think of any other name that would be on the top of the list.
Two: Leaving the falus thing behind (oh, that was horrible), I agree with the part that druids should have the option of being good at healing. They are already very strong and all, so they should have the OPTION of being good at it. OPTION, not base ability. OPTION.
I'm guessing I'm the testosterone-full guy huh? I would like to point out that the OP and his friend whipped out their E-peen, or more appropriately RP-peen when they started going on about the 150+ hours of play testing and "Play a cleric until 9 and tell me etc." as well as when ZeroCharisma said the following about the OPs posts and behavior prior to my inflammatory remarks:
That being said, I thought your argument was intelligent and well thought out and completely germane. Thanks for taking the time to post.
I have not responded in the like nor am I likely to.
Now seeing as the nice approach hadn't worked I got down to the posters level in an effort to communicate with them. I would like to correct you if you are under the impression I am trying to show that I am bigger, stronger or smarter than the rest if for no other reason than I minored in psychology as well. I am well aware that my name won't be in the credits (as I even stated in my disclaimer). I could care less if any of the posters are male, female, both, young or old. I do expect a certain amount of maturity though when on a public board and when that fails I don't mind being crass to get my point across if it will help. I also hope my explanations of the rules aren't what make you think I am trying to be "smarter" than the others. I have a very strong aversion to ignorance and I can't help but try to correct someone when they are wrong. Ignorance runs rampant these days and it is not good for the world. If someone has a less than perfect grasp of the rules it is a simple matter of explaining the correct workings as far as I am concerned. It is nothing but time and effort and hopefully the person is better off for it, and I personally think it is the right thing to do. I also find the greatest thrill to making a character is having a concept that is great but that is actually viable within the rules. I don't want bent rules, questionable interpretations, or anything of the sort. That isn't to say there aren't house rules but those are generally reserved for something so far out the rules structure that they are required and a great deal of work and discussion is involved (like weeks at times - there was this 2nd ED character we were converting... But I digress). I would rather find an existing mechanic and try to work the concept into it then work the rules to fit my concept and that is why the druid build the OP posted set me off. But that was mostly before Pathfinder was around SO... If I was the target of that comment I'd ask you to reconsider after re-reading this thread again with my point of view in mind. If I wasn't, well then damn, I wasted all this typing :(
As for your 2nd point, I'd have to say that druids are already really good healers. Not only can they heal but they can summon creatures, have a body guard(at worst), and have access to at least a handful of unique spells. Some of the creatures they can summon can even heal... Do they really need more? Even the fact that you are calling the druid very strong is a good indicator that they need nothing more. A class that is very strong doesn't need more options lol. The classes that aren't very strong need them!
@ZeroCharisma:
I have looked to see where I might have insulted you, the closest I came was this:
If the OP or his friend had as much game play experience and knowledge of the rules as they've touted I don't believe this thread would have gone on the way it did.
Anything else was directed at the OP. Now if you have to take offense at that there is nothing I can do about it and I'm not going to try. However I am going to keep posting counterpoints to things that I don't agree on and if you and your friend are just going to ignore them it will be pretty foolish and immature. I may have been intentionally inflammatory at times but that still doesn't mean I don't have valid points and my solutions are some how incorrect. Just like you have been defending the OP saying that they have been "germane" with immature behavior and intelligent well thought out posts, the same reasoning applies. I have been no worse than the OP, just more verbose. I type what I think, just like I say what I think.
As for the druid build, I understand that a DM cannot know all the rules at all times. If you were allowing the build to be used in your game because the PC had a good concept I get it. Maybe you didn't read the rules totally you have a lot going on, maybe you decided to bend the rules for the character, I don't know what is going on. But the build is bad, it is not core and that makes the game it is played in not core. Can we agree on that?@Mab:
Did the link to the PrC I posted not solve your problem? It is core, it does what you wanted and was everything you asked for. While I don't expect a thank you I'm fairly sure we can call this thread closed now. It was a pleasure to help you.
Vodka and tonic water... Hell, Heather is bartending, why the hell am I still here posting?
Don't know, I'm having water...with my whiskey. Can't see how people can drink that stuff straight (the water that is).
can we have rum?...where did the rum go?
how dare you waste good whiskey by mixing it....gods above!
I like bourbon myself
eh I drink it all straight more or less
ummm single malt scotch
Skylancer, I should know better, but... if you reread the post you will see that I was a player in the game where Mab played the druid. I did not "allow" anything in that game. I never presuppose to backseat dm.
When I play I relish the opportunity to be a leaf in the wind, rather than the driving storm. Furthermore that experience was waaaaaaaaaaay before Pathfinder was even a glimmer in the Paizonian eye. I believe that I clearly stated that it was under 3.5. I could be wrong there's a lot of data to sift through here.
I may "not know all the rules" but I love love love the game and I'm always trying to learn it better. It is one of the only places I find "magic" in the modern world. I can't find where I said my play test experience was "better" than yours. I just can't. If it came off that way I didn't mean it to. How could it be?
I imagine that under different circumstances you and I would have gotten along famously. I hope indeed that someday we meet at a gaming table and have a rocking game. I wonder however, if your passion is for the game or if it is for being right. Please show me that it is the former and put this behind us. Heck, come to Croton Falls, NY & Ill even buy you a vodka tonic and pat you on the back for your prodigious effort at posting here.(I'm a bartender too) If I didn't take the time to support the points which I agreed with you on, I'm sorry, I hope I have the opportunity in the future.
For the record: the only post I lauded by Mab was his original which was clever and well thought out, as well as nicely written. I have only defended him on a personal level since as we have different opinions about the topic at hand, and obviously about message board etiquette.
Dennis, I'm sorry you didn't like my phrasing but I just don't see how giving the druid one additional domain choice (not even an additional domain) would be harmful to anybody's good time. It's a wash, no?
You no like, you no take. Cakey Pie. I know its easy to say "house rule it", but I am not one for house rules, regardless of rumours floating around here.. ::grin:: I truly hope that didn't come off as too glib, I intended it with humor.
I suppose you are getting me back for the Umm comment, or the "no" comment (which I object to only at the beginning of a sentence for the record) and I hope we can call it even. I am not your enemy by one stretch of the imagination. I can recall threads here where we've had differences and expressed them civilly. I can't stress that enough. Again, I could very much imagine enjoying sharing some game time with you. Hope I get the chance.
To all other posters, constructive or not, thanks for participating and making for a lively debate. Like democracy, I feel like participation here is a responsibility as much as a privilege.
I am sorry that this thread went this way, because I still believe in my heart that at least some option for the druid healer should exist. I feel it with passion, but I also recognize that every table holds a different game.
I was speaking recently with a fellow online who told me that his DM had them (7th level characters) trapped in a dungeon with frost giants and some CR 15 monsters. When I said "That's crazy, come play withus" he basically said , "No, we have fun"... Okay well, whatever floats yer boat, right. People play the game to experience different things. I will never intentionally say (and I hope I haven't implied it in any way) that my way of playing is the only way.
Without all the acrimony, it may have been easier for Paizo peoples to find useful info here, and I apologize for furthering it or participating in it any way.
Yes, I may house-rule Druid healing in after final PF, and I'll live with any consequences in my game if I do. I probably won't. But sometimes when I look into my player's puppy dog eyes I find it impossible to say no. (again humor)
I truly hope you all understand I am not that guy. I am here to help. I am here to contribute. I have said my piece in this thread and I will do my level best to move on and leave this post alone. I fear my participation is now far more deleterious to the flow of info than I ever expected and certainly I never intended that.
I have always enjoyed reading these forums and as far as I'm concerned PF is the way of the future as far as the spirit of the game is concerned. I think you folks, for the most part are bright and motivated and I admire and respect you. I recognize that love of this game brings us here and don't want to make anyone associate negativity with it.
Thanks again to everybody for their input and hope to see you under better circumstances in other threads here.
Edit: For the record, I used to be a single malt man myself. I have had to stop drinking for medical reasons but I used to love a couple of finger of Balvenie Doublewood neat more than my left pinky. Cheers!
If you still think that Channel Energy is not unbalancing, and you actually play the game, put together a party of 10th level characters of any class but cleric, and ask your DM to put you in an encounter with one 10th level neutral cleric who channels positive energy, has a high charisma and has the selective channeling feat. Team that cleric up with say 3 barbarians of 8th level, and see if you can possibly put out enough damage to bypass the healing the cleric is doing every round. I'd wager quite a bit that TPK will be the result. And after you are all dead, go to your DM, give him a hug and say 'I didn't realize, dude, I feel for ya.'
Lol, what? What kind of terrible characters are you assuming are getting used here? Because that Cleric? He's doing a whooping 5d6 healing. Yes, that was heavy sarcasm. In other words, it's inferior to a Cure Moderate Wounds cast by the same cleric which is in and of itself a weak spell. Even CLW would only be 3 points behind if it weren't for that pesky CL cap. 'But it affects more than one!' you might be saying. Well good luck getting it off, and good luck getting the party to be stupid and not focus fire. Even if they don't know about the healing yet, only the last HP matters so just hurting all the barbs a bit is useless, but killing them one by one is not. Unless the party is totally incompetent, the cleric is wasting action after action so it comes down to what the Barbarians are doing. And this assumes you're only level 10, and fighting what is on paper a CR 13 encounter. I say on paper because incredibly suboptimal choices (using any healing not named Heal in combat) reduce the threat creatures pose thereby resulting in an ad hoc CR reduction. Even if the party is only level 10, they can handle a few piddly little barbarians. After all, they aren't casters. And their caster is doing nothing useful.
Channel Energy is a half decent means of out of combat healing. In combat, it is a waste of an action because it does not and cannot keep up. Focusing on Healing (again, barring Heal) is always a bad approach as you cannot even negate a single round of enemy actions, therefore you are fighting a losing battle of attrition. Compare to say... buffs to prevent the damage in the first place. Heal is good enough to be worth a combat action. Good thing you get it too, as the Fighter will become lunchmeat in two rounds so constant Heals are the only way to keep him alive and being ignored.
Edit: Now I'm getting trolled by Tarren. His attempts however make me laugh, which is more than I can say for all the others. So keep it up Tarren. < no sarcasm.
As I have said before, I care not if you curse me, bless me or ignore me entirely. Continue to insult me if it fills some psychological need within you, but quite honestly, you are screaming into the wind. I don't care.
I do care, however, about the game, and there are maybe 4 or 5 posters in this thread who have come to it with the intention of having an actual constructive discussion of the issue, some of which have completely disagreed with me, some have engaged me in discussions of actual options for balancing healing in the game, and to them I am grateful. I sincerely hope that the folks at paizo will have the patience to wade through the acrimonious morass that has become this thread, and can take away from it some actual information they can use to help them in the unenviable task of balancing encounters against the power of channel energy.
As it stands now, and as the cleric in my party, I may just have to start ignoring the existence of channel energy, as I have seen just how difficult it has been for ZeroCharisma to balance encounters against it, and I care quite a lot about him, appreciate the work he puts into dm'ing our campaign, and it pains me to see his hard work made trivial by the change of one paragraph in the game's rules and the addition of one feat.
To those who have reacted with such passionate opposition to the possibility of the removal of channel energy from the game, ask yourselves: would such a possibility make you so angry if said character feature didn't change the balance of the game in favor of the players as much as I suggest it does.
To those who say that channel energy does not affect combat significantly: in my experience in play-testing the cleric I have not once used channel energy out of combat, have not once finished an adventuring day without using every use of my channel energy ability, and with a charisma of 14, the Selective Channeling feat, and some quite basic tactical positioning, I have had no trouble at all in using the ability even with 4 or more living opponents on the battle field.
In addition, I can only recall 2 or 3 occasions in 150+ hours of play-testing when the use of healing potions, wands or scrolls was even considered by players in the party.
And finally, to those of you who have found it necessary to personally attack ZeroCharisma in response to his defense of me: I pity you, because if you ever encounter such a caring and generous person in real life, you are sure to drive them away and deprive yourselves of the pleasure of their company and their generous, giving ways.
You can't rebutt our statements. You just keep spouting the same crap over and over again.
Welcome to fail.
You personally have made no statements worth rebutting. Fail is a verb, not a noun. Welcome to the English language.
You can't rebutt our statements. You just keep spouting the same crap over and over again.
Welcome to fail.
I want to know what sort of pathetic enemies Zero is fielding if 1d6 per odd level is actually remotely relevant against them.
Suppose you're right about him being generous, because he's practically handing you the game.
You can't rebutt our statements. You just keep spouting the same crap over and over again.
Welcome to fail.
I want to know what sort of pathetic enemies Zero is fielding if 1d6 per odd level is actually remotely relevant against them.
Suppose you're right about him being generous, because he's practically handing you the game.
Try 6th level cleric, 6th level fighter, 6th level conjuration specialist wizard and 6th level rogue vs. 13th level bard, 2 8th level barbarians, 5 6th level fighters, and 15 2nd level fighters. CR 14 or 15 - so far above us that in 3.5 should not even award experience because any way we could overcome such an encounter should just be a fluke. Defeated handily, although with use of almost 100% of party resources and the bard escaped without a scratch, but still, should have been a literally impossible encounter.
You can't rebutt our statements. You just keep spouting the same crap over and over again.
Welcome to fail.
I want to know what sort of pathetic enemies Zero is fielding if 1d6 per odd level is actually remotely relevant against them.
Suppose you're right about him being generous, because he's practically handing you the game.
Also, are you suggesting that an ogre with a +8 attack bonus is likely to hit even a single character in a lvl 9 party more that 10-15 % of the time? Forget channel energy, send 8 of them at us, I won't heal the party at all and they will all die in a matter of seconds. In fact not only will I not heal, I will do my best impression of the bard and just make up a little ditty about how god-like the fighter, rogue and wizard are while doing a little jig.
Try 6th level cleric, 6th level fighter, 6th level conjuration specialist wizard and 6th level rogue vs. 13th level bard, 2 8th level barbarians, 5 6th level fighters, and 15 2nd level fighters. CR 14 or 15 - so far above us that in 3.5 should not even award experience because any way we could overcome such an encounter should just be a fluke. Defeated handily, although with use of almost 100% of party resources and the bard escaped without a scratch, but still, should have been a literally impossible encounter.You can't rebutt our statements. You just keep spouting the same crap over and over again.
Welcome to fail.
I want to know what sort of pathetic enemies Zero is fielding if 1d6 per odd level is actually remotely relevant against them.
Suppose you're right about him being generous, because he's practically handing you the game.
Ok, so your DM doesn't understand what CR means. Yet you won because of what? Little 3d6 Channel Energies? Did this super force of enemies just lie down and let you kill them? Because that might negate half a hit from one of the two barbs if they roll a 1 on their damage die. It might negate half a hit from one of the five mid level fighters if they roll average. It might negate an entire hit from one of the many peon fighters if they roll average. And yet you expect me and us to believe that even though you basically wasted every single action on in combat healing that wasn't the Heal spell and you were one of the two casters and therefore one of the two characters capable of significantly influencing the outcome if you did something meaningful with your actions you beat these guys. I call utter bull****.
Edit: So the entire party has AC 26-27 at level 6. Or 9, depending on if you're still referring to the example or referring to your party. I call utter bull**** again, or alternately the entire party has heavily gimped their offense so that the only thing they actually accomplished is making combat far slower. That still doesn't address the fact this so called uber Channel Energy is barely able to keep up with something a third your level, and anything remotely CR appropriate renders it an unquestionably wasted action.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
1) the elimination of the 15 minute adventuring day.
2) druid needs to be allowed a means by which he can also heal at range.
1) The 15 minute adventure day is a result of inexperienced players and doesn't deserve any effort to eliminate.
2) A Druid doesn't need any additional non-Druid like abilities. Give them Alter Self at will or Plane Shift at will like 1st edition Druid before you give them things that don't feel or smell like a Druid.
3) The Paladin should be the second best healer, druid should be the third or fourth.
I agree completely, the fact that Druids used to be the 2nd best healer was a flaw in 3.5 game mechanics. Druids should be worse than Paladins and as far as I'm concerned Druids should be similar in healing power to a Ranger.
I get the distinct impression the only view you want to hear is "I agree and here is how to give a huge boost to the Druid to make it an uber healer." But I just don't believe that is the proper thing to do nor do I think it makes it more Druidlike.
Keep in mind, I don't see the Druid in 3.5 as that much more powerful than the other classes (I'd never play one.) I do see how others believe it is the top class, I just don't agree with them. So I'm not coming at this from a point of view of "they are too powerful, don't give them more power". I'd like to see more power in the Druid, just make it Druidlike.
It's amazing how people hear only what they want to hear, and fixate on that which they are on a crusade about. This is not about the druid, forget the druid has any healing capability at all. What this is about is game balance. Assume that every party has a very powerful cleric, and no one lacks for healing and everyone is happy. Well, then, what about the under-dogs - those poor little evil baddies we must face and kill. They are evil, so by definition, they can not channel positive energy. They should be left with entirely gimped healing capability, why? Because the pc's are the heroes and should always win?
In 3.5 an evil cleric who knows he is going to face a group of pc's, and has some nice hard-hitting cohorts to protect his hide may have prepared almost exclusively healing spells, and thus would have been able to match the pc's cleric heal-for-heal.
In PathfinderRPG, said evil cleric simply can not keep up, thus does not present as much of a challenge to the pc's. Sure, he can channel negative energy, and thus negate some of the good cleric's healing, but those uses of channel energy afford the pc's a will save for half damage, a save which in most parties, at least half of the pc's are likely to make. The effectiveness of his channel energy uses is half to 3/4 the effectiveness of the pc's channel energy. And yes, I know, if the evil cleric surrounds himself with undead protectors, then his channel energy is as effective as the pc's channel energy, but are we to expect that all evil clerics surround themselves with undead and scorn the company of the living altogether?
I play role-playing games to face mortal danger that I choose not to, and can not face in real life, and to feel the thrill of escaping from that mortal danger by dint of my abilities and out-witting the evil I must face. How good is a horror movie in which the protagonist is inherently capable of destroying all the horrors he meets, and we are certain of his success?
Ok, so your DM doesn't understand what CR means. Yet you won because of what? Little 3d6 Channel Energies? Did this super force of enemies just lie down and let you kill them? Because that might negate half a hit from one of the two barbs if they roll a 1 on their damage die. It might negate half a hit from one of the five mid level fighters if they roll average. It might negate an entire hit from one of the many peon fighters if they roll average. And yet you expect me and us to believe that even though you basically wasted every single action on in combat healing that wasn't the Heal spell and you were one of the two casters and therefore one of the two characters capable of significantly influencing the outcome if you did something meaningful with your actions you beat these guys. I call...Try 6th level cleric, 6th level fighter, 6th level conjuration specialist wizard and 6th level rogue vs. 13th level bard, 2 8th level barbarians, 5 6th level fighters, and 15 2nd level fighters. CR 14 or 15 - so far above us that in 3.5 should not even award experience because any way we could overcome such an encounter should just be a fluke. Defeated handily, although with use of almost 100% of party resources and the bard escaped without a scratch, but still, should have been a literally impossible encounter.You can't rebutt our statements. You just keep spouting the same crap over and over again.
Welcome to fail.
I want to know what sort of pathetic enemies Zero is fielding if 1d6 per odd level is actually remotely relevant against them.
Suppose you're right about him being generous, because he's practically handing you the game.
I don't understand how you can profess that the only curative ability that is of any use at all is Heal. I would like to wager that even those who have most adamantly opposed me in this thread disagree with you on that point. I simply don't see a cleric casting cure spells and channeling energy in combat as a 'wasted action'. The cleric is a healer. He can be many other things - an evocation specialist capable of dishing out devastating damage; an adept summoner which can call forth beings of light and good to defend the weak; a svengali-like master of the mind who can bend the will of his foes to his own purposes; but above all, the good cleric is a healer, always was a healer and always will be a healer. To say that the least effective thing a healer can do in combat is to heal his comrades is simply confusing to me. The cleric's main focus is healing, long before he has access to the spell 'Heal', and to say that spending my time in combat focusing on the aspect of my character that is most powerful is like saying that the evocation specialist wizard, since he has access to the polymorph school of spells is wasting his time by blasting the enemies with fireballs and cone of cold, and if he knew what he was doing, he would buff himself, polymorph into some massive monster and wade into melee.
And as far as my DM's ability to understand CR, he understands it just fine, but unfortunately for him, when he says 'Uh, guys, maybe this is too much for you, perhaps you should check out the infestation of undead across town instead', we just rub our hands together and start gathering intelligence on our foe and try to figure out how to sway this apparently impossible battle to our favor with spell choices, tactical positioning, timing and bluster. Fake it 'till you make it. CR is not a double-yellow line you must not cross, but a guideline to help DM's create balanced encounters. If you have never knowingly walked into an encounter 4, 5, or 6 CR above your party level, with full understanding that you may be doomed, and walked away victorious, you have never lived.
I admit, that particular encounter was 8 or even 9 CR above us, and should have ended in the death of us all, but various factors including planning, tactics, quick thinking, a whole lot of luck (yes, remember, luck is a factor in this game), and to no small degree, vast amounts of healing power led to what was, if not a full victory, at least a terminal blow to the evil organization of our foe. Now remember, the boss, the 13th level bard was not killed, nor even suffered a single point of damage (perhaps one or 2 self-inflicted when his rod of wonder went awry), thus no experience was awarded, nor should it have been even if we had skewered him because of the vast gap in CR he represented. Now that I think about it, I guess the whole thing was a CR 13 encounter, since all the other enemies were his cohorts and followers, as-per the leadership feat and thus represented a portion of his CR, yet still, 7 CR above party level is still too high to award experience.
And now all the way at the end, I realize that I have adopted a sloppy habit just because others in the discussion had that same sloppy habit. Monsters have CR, encounters have EL. The bard's CR was 13, if the other enemies had not been his cohorts and followers, the EL of the encounter would have been 14 or 15, but since they were his cohorts and followers, the EL of the encounter equaled the bard's CR, thus EL 13. I hope to never fall into that sloppy habit again.
TL;DR.
You're still wrong.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
1) fixate on that which they are on a crusade about.
2) What this is about is game balance.
3) Assume that every party has a very powerful cleric,
4) In PathfinderRPG, said evil cleric simply can not keep up
1) Which is what you seem to be doing.
2) Game balance would dictate that Clerics should not have healing on par with a Cleric and game balance should help enhance the healing of a Paladin. At least in my opinion.
3) I don't assume that, particularly when the 4 weekly groups I'm involved in dont' all have Clerics and often run with no healer (Cleric, Druid or Paladin.)
4) Evil Clerics do just fine, but healing isn't their forte and they shouldn't be excellent at healing. It is particularly outside the norm for an Evil player to care about healing. Evil Clerics should care about inflicting harm, not healing it. At least if you care about roleplaying.
I can't resist pointing out that the "broken" encounter that people could not resist criticizing was a climactic encounter in a recent Paizo adventure path. It didn't sound familiar to you? For the sake of spoilers I won't go into details but those familiar with the products could probably place it.
It was their EL and their encounter verbatim, Mab having the details slightly awry. I can't blame him. It was a chaotic encounter and yes, luck played a huge part. The party fighter should have died. The whole party should have gone to the
It's amazing how people hear only what they want to hear, and fixate on that which they are on a crusade about. This is not about the druid, forget the druid has any healing capability at all. What this is about is game balance. Assume that every party has a very powerful cleric, and no one lacks for healing and everyone is happy. Well, then, what about the under-dogs - those poor little evil baddies we must face and kill. They are evil, so by definition, they can not channel positive energy. They should be left with entirely gimped healing capability, why? Because the pc's are the heroes and should always win?
In 3.5 an evil cleric who knows he is going to face a group of pc's, and has some nice hard-hitting cohorts to protect his hide may have prepared almost exclusively healing spells, and thus would have been able to match the pc's cleric heal-for-heal.
In PathfinderRPG, said evil cleric simply can not keep up, thus does not present as much of a challenge to the pc's. Sure, he can channel negative energy, and thus negate some of the good cleric's healing, but those uses of channel energy afford the pc's a will save for half damage, a save which in most parties, at least half of the pc's are likely to make. The effectiveness of his channel energy uses is half to 3/4 the effectiveness of the pc's channel energy. And yes, I know, if the evil cleric surrounds himself with undead protectors, then his channel energy is as effective as the pc's channel energy, but are we to expect that all evil clerics surround themselves with undead and scorn the company of the living altogether?
I play role-playing games to face mortal danger that I choose not to, and can not face in real life, and to feel the thrill of escaping from that mortal danger by dint of my abilities and out-witting the evil I must face. How good is a horror movie in which the protagonist is inherently capable of destroying all the horrors he meets, and we are certain of his success?
Evil clerics are naturally gimped in the healing department as they have to actually waste spell slots on that, and spontaneously cast some very weak direct damage (before Harm, which is half decent direct damage).
If the evil cleric is healing round after round, he's doing the PCs a favor by wasting his resources fighting a battle he cannot win, thereby prematurely taking himself out of the combat. If he's casting his other spells he might do something meaningful. Even if he has undead with him so he can heal his allies and hurt the PCs at the same time the damage is still too low to matter barring something like Harm, Mass.
If your claims are true, stop trying to get the enemy to negate themselves with horrid tactics.
I don't understand how you can profess that the only curative ability that is of any use at all is Heal. I would like to wager that even those who have most adamantly opposed me in this thread disagree with you on that point. I simply don't see a cleric casting cure spells and channeling energy in combat as a 'wasted action'. The cleric is a healer. He can be many other things - an evocation specialist capable of dishing out devastating damage; an adept summoner which can call forth beings of light and good to defend the weak; a svengali-like master of the mind who can bend the will of his foes to his own purposes; but above all, the good cleric is a healer, always was a healer and always will be a healer. To say that the least effective thing a healer can do in combat is to heal his comrades is simply confusing to me. The cleric's main focus is healing, long before he has access to the spell 'Heal', and to say that spending my time in combat focusing on the aspect of my character that is most powerful is like saying that the evocation specialist wizard, since he has access to the polymorph school of spells is wasting his time by blasting the enemies with fireballs and cone of cold, and if he knew what he was doing, he would buff himself, polymorph into some massive monster and wade into melee.
Because Heal is the only one capable of remotely keeping up with a single enemy dealing its damage for a single round or in many cases a single enemy hitting you with one of their several attacks within that single round. Anything else you're wasting spells because you cannot keep up and the guy will die anyways, even if no one else is being attacked which means you're running every which way and still failing horribly.
Using blasting spells is also a waste of an action, roughly tied with healing in terms of suck and fail. Summoning spells are better. His crowd control isn't as good as a Wizard but still constitutes a worthwhile use of spell slots. See, if you make the enemy waste rounds dealing with your magic, they aren't attacking. You prevent the damage which means you are a more effective 'healer' than if you were casting cure ______ wounds.
The evoker wizard is wasting his time, regardless of whether he has Polymorph or not. Were he focusing on something, anything else he would not be composed of suck and fail.
In summary, stop heavily under utilizing the class by pigeonholing and relegating them into the weakest possible role they can fill.
And as far as my DM's ability to understand CR, he understands it just fine, but unfortunately for him, when he says 'Uh, guys, maybe this is too much for you, perhaps you should check out the infestation of undead across town instead', we just rub our hands together and start gathering intelligence on our foe and try to figure out how to sway this apparently impossible battle to our favor with spell choices, tactical positioning, timing and bluster. Fake it 'till you make it. CR is not a double-yellow line you must not cross, but a guideline to help DM's create balanced encounters. If you have never knowingly walked into an encounter 4, 5, or 6 CR above your party level, with full understanding that you may be doomed, and walked away victorious, you have never lived.
And then he just hands you the win because clearly you did not pick spells well. Yet you think you did which naturally leads to me and anyone else who knows what they are talking about questioning your judgment regarding what constitutes good tactical positioning and timing.
Oh and if the DM knew his stuff he could easily TPK you with something only 1 or 2 points higher than your CR, therefore he was giving you free experience points. How do I know this? Because I actually use my encounters to the best of their abilities, and therefore have killed party members left, right, and center using only encounters in the routine to CR + 2 range. The routine deaths were player incompetence. The higher stuff did not reflect poorly on the PCs. It was just mean.
I also 2 rounded a level 15 with a CR 6.
So see, if I threw such an encounter at my party, it would be a death sentence. If someone else threw one at me, it still would be unless they went easy on me.
I admit, that particular encounter was 8 or even 9 CR above us, and should have ended in the death of us all, but various factors including planning, tactics, quick thinking, a whole lot of luck (yes, remember, luck is a factor in this game), and to no small degree, vast amounts of healing power led to what was, if not a full victory, at least a terminal blow to the evil organization of our foe. Now remember, the boss, the 13th level bard was not killed, nor even suffered a single point of damage (perhaps one or 2 self-inflicted when his rod of wonder went awry), thus no experience was awarded, nor should it have been even if we had skewered him because of the vast gap in CR he represented. Now that I think about it, I guess the whole thing was a CR 13 encounter, since all the other enemies were his cohorts and followers, as-per the leadership feat and thus represented a portion of his CR, yet still, 7 CR above party level is still too high to award experience.
I still question your judgment regarding what constitutes good planning and tactics. It definitely wasn't healing unless these guys were poking you with toothpicks. Your healing is simply far too weak to keep up.
The bard was wasting rounds screwing around with a rod of wonder? See, handing you the win. Had he actually done anything remotely approaching reliable, you'd have been slaughtered. All he has to do is haste and sing, and everyone gets bonuses to hit and damage. Then stand back and smoke a blunt, watch the beatsticks work. With that many of them they can easily kill half the party a round. Even without the buffs.
Here's some more facts to dispel your illogic.
CLW heals 1d8+1, average 5.5. That's less than a single hit from just about any CR 1 creature. It's less than some of the fractional CR creatures, and it's less than all of them if they all attack.
CMW heals 2d8+3, average 12. That is again less than a single hit from CR 3 stuff, or a pair of lower CR things.
CSW heals 3d8+5, average 18.5. Yup, CR 5 stuff hits harder. Multiple lower CR things hit harder.
CCW heals 4d8+7, average 25. Uh huh. CR 7 still hits harder in all combos.
At any level other than 1, 3, 5, or 7 healing magic is even more lackluster until level 11 where you get Heal and it's 10/level max 150. That manages to keep up fairly well.
Now this Channel Energy is even weaker than cure ______ wounds. You get 1d6 average 3.5 per odd level instead of 1d8 average 4.5 per odd level and then +1 per level on top of that.
1d8+1 (5.5) > 1d6 (3.5).
2d8+3 (12) > 2d6 (7).
3d8+5 (18.5) > 3d6 (10.5).
4d8+7 (25) > 4d6 (14).
Hell, even if you compare the level 9 channel to the level 7 heal you get 17.5 which is still quite inferior. At 11 you get Heal where it becomes a no contest.
Now. Since cure spells are clearly inadequate to keep up in combat and are therefore only useful for out of combat healing, and channel energy is weaker than cure spells we can easily and logically conclude channel energy is also only useful for out of combat healing. Why? Because there the action cost doesn't matter. A > B. B > C. Therefore A > C.
Your character is functionally retarded. You will be assimilated. Report to CharOps for immediate optimization. You will be known as Sweetcheeks_of_logic. Resistance is futile.I like your style.
Both of you guy are so FULL OF IT!
"it" in this case being "win".
Your character is functionally retarded. You will be assimilated. Report to CharOps for immediate optimization. You will be known as Sweetcheeks_of_logic. Resistance is futile.I like your style.Both of you guy are so FULL OF IT!
"it" in this case being "win".
Only problem is my impersonator quickly lost the funny and went back to whiny emotard mode. Had he kept it I would not have minded since he would have amused me.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
Only problem is my impersonator quickly lost the funny and went back to whiny emotard mode. Had he kept it I would not have minded since he would have amused me.Your character is functionally retarded. You will be assimilated. Report to CharOps for immediate optimization. You will be known as Sweetcheeks_of_logic. Resistance is futile.I like your style.Both of you guy are so FULL OF IT!
"it" in this case being "win".
You seem to think CyborgRodent_of_Logic is all about you? You're not the only poster on this board who reduces the game to a bunch of mechanics for damage dealing, disregards the rest, and then complains we aren't playing it right. Two posts were directed at you. One you applauded, the other you cried about. If you haven't got a thick enough skin to take it, don't dish it out.
|
TL;DR.
Heh, I had to look that up online;
"TL;DR
One of the great, definitive abbreviations for the social web is TL;DR. It stands for too long; didn't read, and epitomizes the short-attention-span crowd, the willfully idiotic segment of the online population that 1. we all sometimes belong to and that 2. makes for the s&&#tiest experiences on the web."
The search also linked to an article about bestiality, but I have no idea what the relationship between TL;DR and man-on-dog lovin' is...
Crusader:
Wow. Just wow.
If this is really how you feel about the core classes of the game, why do you play? Or at the very least, why have you not created threads entitled 'Clerics and all cure spells are useless. Please remove them from the game' and 'Evocation magic is a waste of time, please give us more things to summon.'? Seriously, if these are your actual opinions, why do you waste your time with a gaming system that in your opinion is so full of useless crap that most of it is unusable. In addition, why do you waste your precious time posting in a thread about a subject that holds absolutely no interest to you at all - healing?
|
|
Because Heal is the only one capable of remotely keeping up with a single enemy dealing its damage for a single round or in many cases a single enemy hitting you with one of their several attacks within that single round. Anything else you're wasting spells because you cannot keep up and the guy will die anyways, even if no one else is being attacked which means you're running every which way and still failing horribly.
Using blasting spells is also a waste of an action, roughly tied with healing in terms of suck and fail. Summoning spells are better. His crowd control isn't as good as a Wizard but still constitutes a worthwhile use of spell slots. See, if you make the enemy...
Your playing style is all wrong CoL. Honestly, the mechanics you use to play and the style of gaming you obiously follow is so full of fail as to be ridiculus.
A cleric is great support in any combat. They are a support mechanic, able to fill many roles due to self buffs, but truly they shine as the man/woman to keep the party running when the big hitters roll in.
The entire idea of channel energy was introduce healing that could occur adequately enough to enable your cleric to also use other offensive magic. In other words, he could still play the healer adn get some altenrative functionality. If your not playing your cleric as the support guy, you're palying it wrong!
Now be fore you go and get yourself all upset and start crying troll, I just wnated to point out
If you look at the individuals that are actually capable of intelligent thought and at least marginal emotional maturity you will find there is not nearly as much interpersonal conflict due to such simple, but critical things as not taking 'your approach sucks' as a personal insult
You seem to think CyborgRodent_of_Logic is all about you? You're not the only poster on this board who reduces the game to a bunch of mechanics for damage dealing, disregards the rest, and then complains we aren't playing it right. Two posts were directed at you. One you applauded, the other you cried about. If you haven't got a thick enough skin to take it, don't dish it out.Only problem is my impersonator quickly lost the funny and went back to whiny emotard mode. Had he kept it I would not have minded since he would have amused me.Your character is functionally retarded. You will be assimilated. Report to CharOps for immediate optimization. You will be known as Sweetcheeks_of_logic. Resistance is futile.I like your style.Both of you guy are so FULL OF IT!
"it" in this case being "win".
Maybe it was the obvious ripoff of my chosen username here. Just maybe. If you meant it as a general thing you should have just used a Borg name or something. Now, it was funny at first which is why I didn't mind it. It quickly became unfunny from there. It amuses me greatly you think pointing out you aren't being funny to try to get you to go back to cracking funny jokes is 'crying about it' especially since nearly every single post you direct at me translates directly into 'WAH Crusader of Logic is a meanieface WAH!'
Crusader:
Wow. Just wow.
If this is really how you feel about the core classes of the game, why do you play? Or at the very least, why have you not created threads entitled 'Clerics and all cure spells are useless. Please remove them from the game' and 'Evocation magic is a waste of time, please give us more things to summon.'? Seriously, if these are your actual opinions, why do you waste your time with a gaming system that in your opinion is so full of useless crap that most of it is unusable. In addition, why do you waste your precious time posting in a thread about a subject that holds absolutely no interest to you at all - healing?
Strawman. Useless for in combat healing =/= useless. Especially when I specify they do still work out of combat where the action cost doesn't matter.
Summoners aren't great without certain tricks that do not currently exist in Pathfinder. Namely, making summoning a Standard action so you aren't interrupt bait. They are however good enough to be used, which is more than can be said for blasting.
Blasting spells, and 4 cure spells =/= most of the gaming system. It's only a small portion in fact. Just about any spell not from the Evocation school is going to be better.
I entered this thread because you started with an invalid premise stemming from a failure to do your research despite the large amount of time you allegedly spent testing, and therefore did not notice that your original point (ranged healing) is not new to Core and is anything but overpowered. It only got worse from there as you quickly proved you did not want constructive feedback, you just wanted people to agree and buff the Druid who is about the last class that needs a buff. This is evidenced by your interactions with those who were not in the least inflammatory towards you yet were shot down by you again and again simply because they did not agree.
Now. Channel Energy does save a few CLW wand charges for out of combat healing so it does serve some purpose. However, it is a waste of a combat action as you cannot hope to outheal the enemy, especially with such a weak healing effect.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
You seem to think CyborgRodent_of_Logic is all about you?Maybe it was the obvious ripoff of my chosen username here.
Let me rephrase. You seem to think that 'CyborgRodent_of_Logic' is ONLY about you. It is also about PsychicRobot and Squirreloid. (PR had a laugh about it). Guess I should have gone with 'PsionicRodent_of_Reason' but I didn't think of it at the time. I'm not making fun of you and you alone, I'm making fun of anyone who post after post refuses to see that other people enjoy different aspects of the game and acts like there is only one way to play this game.
I actually figured you could take it in the spirit it was meant. Apparently not. I'll stop now.
Because Heal is the only one capable of remotely keeping up with a single enemy dealing its damage for a single round or in many cases a single enemy hitting you with one of their several attacks within that single round. Anything else you're wasting spells because you cannot keep up and the guy will die anyways, even if no one else is being attacked which means you're running every which way and still failing horribly.
Using blasting spells is also a waste of an action, roughly tied with healing in terms of suck and fail. Summoning spells are better. His crowd control isn't as good as a Wizard but still constitutes a worthwhile use of spell slots. See, if you make the enemy...
Your playing style is all wrong CoL. Honestly, the mechanics you use to play and the style of gaming you obiously follow is so full of fail as to be ridiculus.
A cleric is great support in any combat. They are a support mechanic, able to fill many roles due to self buffs, but truly they shine as the man/woman to keep the party running when the big hitters roll in.
The entire idea of channel energy was introduce healing that could occur adequately enough to enable your cleric to also use other offensive magic. In other words, he could still play the healer adn get some altenrative functionality. If your not playing your cleric as the support guy, you're palying it wrong!
Now be fore you go and get yourself all upset and start crying troll, I just wnated to point out
If you look at the individuals that are actually capable of intelligent thought and at least marginal emotional maturity you will find there is not nearly as much interpersonal conflict due to such simple, but critical things as not taking 'your approach sucks' as a personal insult
Support, support, support. I did mention buffs didn't I? Yeah, I did. You know, those things that mitigate or prevent damage in the first place thereby more effectively 'healing' than using healing magic while still perfectly qualifying as 'support'? What's more, since these things last a while he can do other stuff in the meantime instead of running around like Benny ****ing Hill playing whack a mole with the healing.
See, to use wrong and fail in context I have to actually be wrong, and actually be screwing up on some significant level. Since you are agreeing with me, and further trying to pick a fight about things that have already been clarified this is not the case. Therefore, at best you are saying you are even more wrong and made of fail as you are agreeing with me despite knowing this. Since I have pointed out how you be a better 'healer' already at least once, and yet you are bringing it up as if it were something new you fail at reading comprehension. And are wrong of course.
|
A druid is having trouble healling?
Let me help: Summon Nature's Ally IV +
Summon: Unicorn.
You get: 3 first level spells, 2 second level spells (all as Spell like abilities) AND a magic circle of Protection evil (can be a decent buff).
3 Cure light wounds
1 Cure Moderate
1 Neutralize poison
COP: EvilAND
a fourth level Ranger (4d10 HD +11 Horn d8+8, FA +11 horn (d8+8)/ +3 Hooves (d4+2) Darkvision, Loads of immunities, Wild Empathy, Scent 18 AC)Heck use Summon Nature's Ally V get d3 of them to heal several allies then have them stampede. I can see it now:
Gateman of Heck: How did you die?
BBEG: Unicorn stampede.
Gateman of Heck: WHAT?
BBEG: Unicorns stampeded me to death.
Gateman of Heck: *uproarious Laughter*
lol I do believe I will toss this in somehow... not exactly sure how... It means I HAVE to kill off a PC somehow with a stampede of Unicorns, but this would be worth it!
Oh sheesh I laughed so hard I cried.
And while we are all laughing let's tone down the hostility... makes us all look bad
You seem to think CyborgRodent_of_Logic is all about you?Maybe it was the obvious ripoff of my chosen username here.Let me rephrase. You seem to think that 'CyborgRodent_of_Logic' is ONLY about you. It is also about PsychicRobot and Squirreloid. (PR had a laugh about it). Guess I should have gone with 'PsionicRodent_of_Reason' but I didn't think of it at the time. I'm not making fun of you and you alone, I'm making fun of anyone who post after post refuses to see that other people enjoy different aspects of the game and acts like there is only one way to play this game.
I actually figured you could take it in the spirit it was meant. Apparently not. I'll stop now.
As stated, it was fine when it was funny. If you can make it funny again, it will be fine again. More likely though it will just encourage those with no comedic talents to hop on the bandwagon yet again so it won't help any. Let's go with that stop option.
Crusader:
I am very glad you enjoy your style of play, and hope that it continues to work for you. I, however, play in a group where it is a general consensus that we enjoy combats that last more than 3 or 4 rounds, and perhaps we fail at perception, but the enemy does occasionally get the drop on us, so sometimes damage happens before a single buff can be cast. In our campaign healing is absolutely not a waste of time, your mileage may vary. Fortunately for you, the cleric is good at virtually everything, so even though you are not getting much use out of his healing abilities, I'm sure there are many other aspects of the cleric you can enjoy.
Which means you are facing nothing but very weak enemies, both because they cannot kill you in 3-4 rounds and because healing sans Heal is actually capable of negating their damage.
See also: Long term buffs. Or even casting them in combat. Still better damage mitigation than healing.
|
No, not at all. I'm just seeing the funny side.
Teaching a dog to lick someone is hardly difficult.
Heck, they do it without asking.
You know I forgot to say this earlier, I read your post right before passing out this morning and was asking myself if you were actually trying to be comical. I thought you were but wasn't sure lol.
Anyways I thank you for bringing in a bit joviality. The thread needed it which was part of the reason of the whole disclaimer when I posted.
No problem, just sitting back, watching the trainwreck, cracking jokes and wondering how long before this thread gets locked, like every other one in which someone compares casters and non-casters.
Director of Games
|
If this thread cannot get back on track it will get locked down. The tone and comments by some of the posters here is unacceptable. You know who you are. Clean it up.
As an aside, I do not feel, at this time, there there needs to be a drastic increase in the amount of healing in the game. Channeling has certainly added a lot. I will consider the druid a bit further.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
|
How about Aaron A. Aardvark?
LOL! This one is really good. I'll use it against my player who smacked me with Abbel!
I'm afraid I can't take the credit for that one; he's a character from a Judge Dredd episode 30 years ago.
The first citizen to be culled by the insane Chief Judge Caligula, who started at the front of the phone book.The irony is, until he changed it the week before, his name had been Zzachary Z. Zzizz...