Okay, so, I'm a first time DM and a mildly inexperienced player of RPGs. A week ago I started a campaign with me and 5 other guys on the Crypt of the Everflame module. We have a monk, a barbarian, a wizard, a rogue, and a ranger. Beyond the ranger, no one can really cast healing magic. I have two other people who want to join, but I can only take one. One of them wants to be cleric but I'm not sure if he'll be enthusiastic enough for the game. I've tried to get him to roll up his cleric but as far I know he hasn't actually done anything with it yet. The other is enthusiastic, but is insisting on playing paladin. That's fine and all, but I don't think he realizes that he would end up as the primary healer for the party. So far, I've just used a pregen cleric to heal the party in the period of time in which we don't have any healing magic of any kind, but as soon as the adventure is done, she's gone. So, my question to you is this: who should I pick to join the game? The cleric or the pally?
Pally.
He and the ranger can use wands, and ad hoc in more potions for the party to find.
Kinda like the ole guantlet game, "blue warrior needs healing badly"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
who should I pick to join the game? The cleric or the pally?
Take the one who will 'fit' into the party better, both as a player and as a character.
From what you wrote, the Pally player is more enthusiastic. This would be quite a bonus in my book. Now, how would the players fit into the group?
The problem is, I don't know which of the two will fit in better. I've played with the cleric before, and he's fun to play with. As for the other, I don't know. He's never played a tabletop RPG, so I don't know at all what type of player he is.
|
Having a healer in the party is kinda like having life insurance. You won't appreciate it until you need it.
That said, and having a played a pure healer Cleric before, a dedicated healer is... VERY BORING in the long run.
The player who plays a healer, should be able to do other things OTHER then heal.
A Paladin is good, as between him and the ranger, they should be able to do most of the hp healing needed. Provide them with a means of healing ability score damage and remove curses, poisons and diseases and you are set!
*Remember! Curses, poisons and diseases DON'T always require magic to cure! Medical herbs, rare minerals and other remedies can also be used.
Your the GM! Make use of creative solutions.
As for your Cleric, ask him what kind of Cleric is he making. Don't let him make a "healer" cleric just because you asked him to. Ask him to make the Cleric, he WANTS to play. Otherwise if he lose interest and leaves or remake his character, you will be stuck back at square one...
|
You have to remember the creation process. If the cleric player hasn't made one before, the amount of things to decide is hefty. A cleric has to pick a god which leads to picking domains, domain spells. And after that still has to pick their daily spells which isn't limited by how many he can know, but by how many you have access to in books. 62 spells to pick from level 1 spells. Plus the choice of god colours your whole character. It might just be he doesn't know where to start and needs help.
The paladin just has to put in stats and pick feats and gear. Kinda easier to build. So if your basising it on having a character made up already that might be a bit premature. Go off the players not the players characters.
|
Normally for newer players, I don't recommend class archetypes. However, there is always the Hospitaler option for the Paladin.
Paladin "Hospitaler" Archetype
There are only three changes, all of which are pretty straight forward, and in a party with no healer I like to believe that aura of healing is a fair trade off for aura of justice (even if aura of justice is rather nice).
So really, you could go with whichever player you feel more comfortable with. Of course though, as others stated before: Wand of Cure Light Wounds, Cure Potions, etc...
Personally, I would pick whichever player you feel would mesh well with the group. Especially in a group of that size, it gets a little more difficult to keep things straight forward (especially if one player ends up being a disturbance for the others).
Why only take one? the difference between 6 and 7 players isn't that big of a deal. Since your gonna have to modify the module for 6 players anyways, I don't see the extra person being that big of a deal.
Part of the issue is playing space. My table only has enough room for 6-7 people total. Anymore than that would require a new space to play in. Mostly though, it's just because I only feel comfortable managing 5-6 players.
As for the other queries, I've decided to go with the guy who wants to be a pally. If a player falls through, I'll let the other guy in. As for any of the other suggestions, I'll take them into account. I'll probably encourage the pally to play a hospitalier, but I won't force the issue. If we end up still getting trashed in fights, I'll just modify some encounter and throw more potions their way. Thanks for the help, though.
Another quick thought: It looks to me like potentially you'll have a lot of melee-focused PCs (barbarian, monk, rogue and potentially the ranger and paladin as well).
It may be worth mentioning to the paladin that planning for ranged combat could work out quite well for him (even if the ranger is an archer too). This also allows him to cast Shield Other on either the monk or more likely the rogue and keep another PC in the fight while he fires arrows unmolested from the back (which keeps him in the right place to hit everyone with a channel while minimizing the number of bad guys that get it too).
The problem is, I don't know which of the two will fit in better. I've played with the cleric before, and he's fun to play with. As for the other, I don't know. He's never played a tabletop RPG, so I don't know at all what type of player he is.
In that situation, I would personally go with the cleric. The player you know and trust is the safer pick, and the group would probably appreciate clerical healing more than they would appreciate another (likely) primarily-melee character with only slight amounts of healing.
|
|
Why only take one? the difference between 6 and 7 players isn't that big of a deal. Since your gonna have to modify the module for 6 players anyways, I don't see the extra person being that big of a deal.Part of the issue is playing space. My table only has enough room for 6-7 people total. Anymore than that would require a new space to play in. Mostly though, it's just because I only feel comfortable managing 5-6 players.
As for the other queries, I've decided to go with the guy who wants to be a pally. If a player falls through, I'll let the other guy in. As for any of the other suggestions, I'll take them into account. I'll probably encourage the pally to play a hospitalier, but I won't force the issue. If we end up still getting trashed in fights, I'll just modify some encounter and throw more potions their way. Thanks for the help, though.
Bah...space isn't an issue...it's a feature. When I had to run large games in small spaces, we had the "corner" for whoever showed up last :P . Made sure people showed up on time hehe.
They don't need a dedicated healer. Wands of CLW, some means of removing status effects (scrolls and mercies will work fine), and some limited ability to put out big amounts of quick healing in an emergency (lay on hands is decent enough) to prevent someone from dying is all you need.
It will work fine as long as you realize that a party with more offense and less healing SHOULD be ending encounters faster. They went heavy on the offense, and so wipe out the foes earlier than a party with a healer than can't fight too well would have. As long as you don't start thinking they have it too easy and ramp up the difficulty to make them need a healer.
I think a lot of DMs do that. Just recently had a big group of 18 PCs come together for the final dungeon only to split up into 4 groups to handle different sections of the dungeon that had to be done simultaneously, and one group ended up with 2 sneak attackers, a summoner, and a psychic warrior. I made sure to remind the DM, "now...this group is stealthy as hell (ie, surprise rounds galore) and can do a ton of damage, but in return they have no staying power. Please keep that in mind and don't overreact when they're nuking encounters by the start of round 2."
I second the Infernal Healing suggestion. Fairly worthless in battle, but out of battle, it's a level 1 spell that heals a straight 10 points of damage. Might be tricky convincing a Pally to use it on him, however...
the paladin wouldn't be casting it, just having it cast on him from a wand by the wizard. my paladin thinks it's great, he is out collecting devil's blood all the time, nice to get a use out of it.
|
|
Might just be me but a Paladin using Infernal Healing which carries the 'Evil' descriptor might be setting themselves up for issues (using ... errrm ... devil's blood or unholy water as components etc.).Kayerloth
Though I believe this should be a separate thread, (does anyone have a link to one?) I completely agree with Kayerloth. A Paladin taking on Infernal healing creates class issues. This would be especially so if using Greater Infernal Healing, as then the Paladin detects as an "Evil Cleric". I believe something like this would fall under the "etc." in the Paladins Code.
Though, for more dictation on this matter, I would suggest making a thread in the Rules Questions forum. If such a post does not exist, that is. That way, this thread could stick to advice.
Might just be me but a Paladin using Infernal Healing which carries the 'Evil' descriptor might be setting themselves up for issues (using ... errrm ... devil's blood or unholy water as components etc.).KayerlothThough I believe this should be a separate thread, (does anyone have a link to one?) I completely agree with Kayerloth. A Paladin taking on Infernal healing creates class issues. This would be especially so if using Greater Infernal Healing, as then the Paladin detects as an "Evil Cleric". I believe something like this would fall under the "etc." in the Paladins Code.
Though, for more dictation on this matter, I would suggest making a thread in the Rules Questions forum. If such a post does not exist, that is. That way, this thread could stick to advice.
In PFS it does not matter, casting infernal healing no more makes you evil than casting protection from evil makes you good.
The cleric or the pally?
I'd take both, it's a 7 player table for 1 module, it isn't a big deal. In addition, Everflame is very difficult and everyone should be level 2 by the time of the final encounter, or you could be looking at a TPK.
For healing, just use wands of cure light wounds for divine casters and wands of infernal healing for arcane casters. IH is actually more efficient and better healing for out of combat (OOC). My home group is now level 5 in PFS using infernal healing OOC only.
Even though infernal healing doesn't make you evil, Paladins and good Clerics still wouldn't be casting it or using it from wands, and they'd also refuse it cast on them if they have a choice. Other good PCs, it will depend on how the player portrays them.
While I agree that a wand of cure light wounds is almost an essential part of a party it does not replace a healer. Healing HP is the most common thing a healer does but is not the only thing. They also have to be able to deal with ability damage and drains, poison, disease, curses, and other long lasting conditions.
A Hospitaler Paladin is able to cover these almost as well and in some cases better than a cleric. Have the Paladin take the oath of charity and he will be even better at healing. Between his spells and his lay on hands he will be able to handle the role of a healer as well as a cleric.
This party should by all accounts be able to dish out tremendous damage, if played right. Best defense is to annihilate the enemy before healing becomes an issue.
The rest can be done away with through cheap wands.
What if wands arent commonly available and nobody has the crafting feat?
In our games, when we come into a new populated area, we use the online treasure generator based on population that somebody wrote, in order to see whats available. Once a week an area will reset or get new stuff, if we are around long enough.
Now for our group its not a problem. The GM simply adds the occasional cure light wand or something similar to enemy resources, and while they may use a charge or two in a fight, we will end up with it. All well and good.
But I could see how in games where you cant buy whatever you want, but instead have to deal with what happens to be on the market, it could be rough.
Honestly, I would vote for wands/potions. and maybe give them a wand or 2 for free.
What if wands arent commonly available and nobody has the crafting feat?
In our games, when we come into a new populated area, we use the online treasure generator based on population that somebody wrote, in order to see whats available. Once a week an area will reset or get new stuff, if we are around long enough.
Now for our group its not a problem. The GM simply adds the occasional cure light wand or something similar to enemy resources, and while they may use a charge or two in a fight, we will end up with it. All well and good.
But I could see how in games where you cant buy whatever you want, but instead have to deal with what happens to be on the market, it could be rough.
The random treasure generator is one of my major peeves. It breaks any illusion of immersion for me, because it is a giant middle finger to anything resembling socio-economics.
Compare it to walking into a typical town IRL and hit up an electronics store looking for an item that is commonly on high demand, like an iPhone. But no, this town does not HAVE iPhones, or ANY cellphones. It has penis pumps, wind-up cymbal monkeys, russian spy sattelites and The Complete Pingu DVD set.
Healing wands are best used outside of combat. Well, in my opinion virtually all healing should be done outside of combat, but that's probably another thread...
As long as you have a "healer" with the ability to do the following things in your party, you should be fine:
1. Pull off an emergency heal in the middle of battle. Clerics are best for this, but there are plenty of other classes who can fill the bill including paladins and druids.
2. Heal disease or cure poison. Again, best done outside of combat, but when you need this, you will appreciate it.
3. Restore characters temporary attribute or level loss. Again, best done outside of combat, but ....
4. Contribute meaningfully to the party when not healing. This is really the big one. If you have a healer who can also contribute significantly in combat, you're ahead of the game in multiple ways.
Our group has a player who loves to play battle clerics. He is now playing a paladin. In either case his characters are solid battle contributors who can handle the party's healing needs, both in combat and out.
@Kamelguru: So you have been to Edelburg, MO? They only have crap like that.
@Kamelguru: So you have been to Edelburg, MO? They only have crap like that.
Cannot say I have, but when the GM pulls stuff like that on me, I like to imagine that I am in some manner of town inspired by a Sacha Baron Cohen movie. "No, we not has healing wand. But we has scroll of hypnotic pattern. You like? Is nice!"
@Kamelguru: So you have been to Edelburg, MO? They only have crap like that.Cannot say I have, but when the GM pulls stuff like that on me, I like to imagine that I am in some manner of town inspired by a Sacha Baron Cohen movie. "No, we not has healing wand. But we has scroll of hypnotic pattern. You like? Is nice!"
I do something like this too!
I love detail a World I build so I always produce my list of Items based on need within a specific place. Though I am a History/Culture nut and that comes easy for me.
EDIT: Be glad you haven't. Edelburg is a freaky place. Their sign says "The most Kinkiest place in the Ozarks!". Now that I think about it... It is like a Sacha Baron Cohen movie...
|
|
Might just be me but a Paladin using Infernal Healing which carries the 'Evil' descriptor might be setting themselves up for issues (using ... errrm ... devil's blood or unholy water as components etc.).KayerlothThough I believe this should be a separate thread, (does anyone have a link to one?) I completely agree with Kayerloth. A Paladin taking on Infernal healing creates class issues. This would be especially so if using Greater Infernal Healing, as then the Paladin detects as an "Evil Cleric". I believe something like this would fall under the "etc." in the Paladins Code.
Though, for more dictation on this matter, I would suggest making a thread in the Rules Questions forum. If such a post does not exist, that is. That way, this thread could stick to advice.
In PFS it does not matter, casting infernal healing no more makes you evil than casting protection from evil makes you good.
That is a very interesting thread indeed. That will take a bit of getting used to if I ever try to get in on running a PFS game.
I admit, I would probably rule otherwise in a personal game, being that Pathfinder factions play in quite a bit less, generally. Very good to have the solid source though.
Thanks for the link!