GMs and pulling punches


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

Grand Lodge

I was curious to hear from GMs about how they handle parties with absolutely no means of renewable-resource healing. I got a 2nd-level party with a magus, monk, evil cleric, rogue, and wizard and they burn through potions like it's popcorn. They JUST now have enough money to pick up a wand of cure light wounds as of our last game. They obliterate pretty much everything in their path, but we know that won't last long once the big monsters start to make an appearance.

How do other GMs handle this stuff? Do you pull your punches slightly when you have parties like this, or do you lay it on even thicker to punish them for it?


I'm confused. There's a Cleric in the party. He may be evil, but Cure Light Wounds isn't an aligned spell. He can prepare it and cast it just like any other cleric. If he somehow thinks it's against his alignment to heal things, just remind him that healing himself and his friends helps him stay alive to do more evil later.

In a general sense though, I don't pull punches when the group doesn't have someone who can bandage them up. They need to figure out something. If that means someone learns how to be effective with UMD, and they pool money for a wand, then so be it.


I don't see how this should be a problem. Someone who can heal the rest of the party is, while handy, absolutely not required to play this game. For years I've DMed for players without cheap healing and it never was an unsolvable problem.

However, as a GM, you're probably already 'pulling punches' in some way. It might be minor, but most GMs tie the adventure at least somewhat to the interests of the players. So f.e. if the party happens to encounter a magical shrine, which doubles the amount of healing when resting there, it's not that strange..

In any case, you shouldn't go out of your way to punish the players for not playing optimally!

Dark Archive

I have three parties with no dedicated healer. They do well, but getting hit suddenly means a lot more.
They do find a lot more cure potions in loot though; I tend to make sure they get enough potions to allow half the party to drink one during combat, should the need arise. From there on, they'll simply have to be clever.
I'm not holding back simply because they don't have a healer.


I guess the problem is that you have a non-channeling cleric and 3 semi squishy melee combatants? Well, first off remember you can always give out partially used wands as treasure to provide some additional healing. Or I often use the 3.5 magic item compendium healing belt as a popular item. I think the issue is less about healing and more about the fact that they probably dont have a dedicated front liner and 3 secondary frontliners who can do a bunch of damage.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32

Never inclined to pull punches, even less inclined when there's evil elements to the party.

Grand Lodge

yes he can prepare them. That doesn't mean he does.


I ran a campaign for two characters, each of which was two levels higher than a member of a four-man adventuring party would be during the campaign. They didn't have any healing for several levels (rogue and sorceror), although now they both have picked it up.

It was working out okay. They were a stealth-based duo that hit pretty hard. They depended on potions and the occasional magic item, but thankfully the AP handed them out like candy. I would say my group's chief problem was that almost every creature was immune to sneak attack, or heavily resistant to / immune to fire.

Did I pull punches? I'd say yes. I allowed the sorceror to add negate aroma to his spell list since it fit his concept.

After a particularly bad string of encounters that had negated the fire specialist's spells, I switched out some lemures for earth elementals.

I allowed the group to talk a devil into joining the group for a session -- an enemy that isn't necessarily hostile to PCs, but I didn't have him screw them over either. I'm pretty sure the chapter boss, also immune to fire, would have pulverized the poor PCs otherwise.

My last session went perfectly with minimal interference. Probably the best combat we've had so far -- it didn't feel like a 'sure win' for either side. There was real push and pull there. The sorceror is going to really dice things up if he keeps taking rogue levels with his high CL scorching ray.

We're coming up to a notorious TPK spot. I'm interested in seeing what'll happen.


Strife2002 wrote:
yes he can prepare them. That doesn't mean he does.

If he's not interested in healing, the party needs to come up with an alternative solution... and it will probably (hopefully) be an expensive one. The cleric should feel free to foot the bill, too.

Liberty's Edge

Are you running published scenarios? The reason I ask is that I normally write scenarios to fit the party

No rogues or other trap finders? Then I will only put the occasional trap in.

No one with Diplomacy? I won't be more than an occassional scene that would benefit from Diplomacy.

No magical healing? I will scale encounters so that on average you won't need more than natural healing.


How do you handle, as a GM, the acquisition of magic items, gold, consumables, etc?


I typically ask myself the question, "Would it serve the story at this point for a PC to die?"

Most often, the answer is no. Once in a while...yes.

Rise of the Runelords:
One of my PC's, when they finally confronted Mokmurian, had a backstory as a member of the Black Arrow group. He was already at about 3/4 hp (which was still at around 70-ish) and he chose to do what his character would...he dropped his bow, drew out his +1 frost longsword and charged. Mokmurian used a Quickened Disintegrate on him. He failed his save, but it was just too good for the story that he was the one to take down Mokmurian so I conveniently forgot to roll half the damage dice (which was still an impressive amount of damage to the PC)

I probably wouldn't have low level mooks killing your PC's, unless they are being really stupid against the enemy, but if they choose to confront a BBEG that hits hard without some healing...the story should play out to make the BEST story.

Horizon Hunters

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

I'm about to start running the Reign of Winter AP in a few weeks and the party consists of the following: Barbarian, Sorcerer, Inquisitor, and Wizard(Spellslinger). The Inquisitor will assuredly be on the front line next to the Barbarian. The Healing potential for him at low levels is basically nil with the exception of wands, scrolls, or the like. What will I do to help the party out? About as much as they do to help themselves. If someone decides to invest in UMD then I will be sure to drop a wand into the loot once in a while(this is what I expect to do being as the Inquisitor can use them anyway). If not, well, they will get an occasional potion and just have to stop more often to rest and heal up. I'm not going to screw them over, but I'm also not going to ignore the fact that they decided to create a party that doesn't include a dedicated healer (especially after I've played that part in the last two campaigns!). My group knows what to expect going in...

Also, there is always Leadership and the oft-dreaded Cohort. I don't have a problem with someone "burning" a Feat to acquire more traditional healing as long as there is some legitimate "in-game" reason/rationale for it. I also would make this a Side Trek instead of just plopping the walking band aid into the game.

Shadow Lodge

I run a group with two players, neither of whom are inclined to play divine spellcasters. Really, it hasn't been an issue. I make healing potions relatively cheap and available, sneak healing wands into the treasure, and frequently include NPC clerics as henchmen. Even so, it's more about keeping things moving than making the fights easier, since 90% of the healing takes place after a fight. I refuse to design encounters around the tank/healer/damager "holy trinity," so they rarely if ever need someone in the back ranks flinging healing spells.


Parties who set out without healing are being just as stupid as parties who set out without food and water. The consequences should be clear, obvious, and painful.


Never forget that Sorcerers, Wizards, Magi, and Summoners all have access to Infernal Healing wands without UMD for patching up between fights.

Dark Archive

Personally, I don't run scenarios or even linear campaigns. I almost exclusively run sandbox games, and I certainly don't pull punches. If a character gets killed by goblins in the first fight, then so be it. I also give out hero points, and allow for a PC to spend 1 hero point (instead of 2) to save their characters life. I have one player who almost never spends his hero points that way, and instead spends them on other things. If character gets killed, then he simply makes a new one.


It is fairly straight forward. They have someone who can use a wand and no one willing to do any healing... Looks like they will have to set aside a portion of their wealth to buy cure wands.

Liberty's Edge

Calybos1 wrote:

Parties who set out without healing are being just as stupid as parties who set out without food and water. The consequences should be clear, obvious, and painful.

Or maybe the players are telling you something about the type of game they want to play. If you are running a published scenario then, yeah they maybe should make sure they cover all the typical roles such a scenario assumes, then again maybe they hope you will adjust the scenario appropriately. If you're running an original scenario of your own devising, then yeah if players make a party without magic users maybe they want to play in a campaign where magic is rarer.

The key is communication.

Liberty's Edge RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

IMO, it's on the players to figure out what capabilities they need and have them. I always recommend to my players to talk about group roles beforehand. If they don't have a healer, that's their problem, not mine.

Grand Lodge

Lamontius wrote:

How do you handle, as a GM, the acquisition of magic items, gold, consumables, etc?

Right now I'm running them through Rise of the Runelords, so all their healing potions came from a couple of downed goblin commandos, Tsuto, stuff they bought, and potions the magus started with on account of taking the Rich Parents trait.

When running a homebrew campaign, I'm a firm believer in random chance. I roll ALL treasure randomly using the treasure generation tables in UE. If an odd lucky roll ends up producing a treasure that's 3 times higher than they should receive at that point, I'll reroll (but save that for a later level) until I hit a total within a range of my desire.

Shadow Lodge

Charlie Bell wrote:
IMO, it's on the players to figure out what capabilities they need and have them. I always recommend to my players to talk about group roles beforehand. If they don't have a healer, that's their problem, not mine.

It's a two-way street. A GM has the responsibility to tailor the game to the players' preferences. If you have three rogues and a wizard, you build encounters that will be challenging but winnable for three rogues and a wizard. Being subjected to constant TPKs isn't fun -- and neither is being forced to play a class or role you don't enjoy. And if the players aren't having fun, it most certainly is the GM's problem.

Grand Lodge

Oh also traps were mentioned earlier. Their trap detection sucks too since the rogue took the sniper archetype.

Liberty's Edge RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kazred wrote:
Charlie Bell wrote:
IMO, it's on the players to figure out what capabilities they need and have them. I always recommend to my players to talk about group roles beforehand. If they don't have a healer, that's their problem, not mine.
It's a two-way street. A GM has the responsibility to tailor the game to the players' preferences. If you have three rogues and a wizard, you build encounters that will be challenging but winnable for three rogues and a wizard. Being subjected to constant TPKs isn't fun -- and neither is being forced to play a class or role you don't enjoy. And if the players aren't having fun, it most certainly is the GM's problem.

I generally don't build encounters at all because I run APs or PFS. Players are responsible for their own choices. If they want to play 3 rogues and a wizard, then they can put on their big boy pants and figure out how to deal with encounters given the ample capabilities they have. Players are smart and figure out ways to make things work.


GM_Solspiral wrote:
Never inclined to pull punches

Okay.

GM_Solspiral wrote:
even less inclined when there's evil elements to the party.

Why?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

In general I build adventures based on what would make sense for the area and the creatures inhabiting it. I don't make any considerations for who the party is beyond making sure no one is completely shut down for sessions at a time. For example, I'm not going to have a party of martially oriented characters continually encountering swarms and incorporeal creatures, while I'm also not going to have a party of casters fight nothing but golems.

If the PCs don't have the right tools for the job it's their imperative to find the right tools for the job. Prepare different spells, buy new equipment, hire someone to help them, purchase a spell cast. I'm not going to change what exists in the world based on who they are. After all, they're just more people in the world, and it doesn't revolve around them. Important people, but just people all the same.


It's up to the players to prepare the party. If they've neglected healing that's up to them. If they make poor choices and their characters die as a result then next time they might make better choices.

Shadow Lodge

Charlie Bell wrote:
I generally don't build encounters at all because I run APs or PFS. Players are responsible for their own choices. If they want to play 3 rogues and a wizard, then they can put on their big boy pants and figure out how to deal with encounters given the ample capabilities they have. Players are smart and figure out ways to make things work.

Fair enough. I think we have very different styles of GMing though -- my private games are very sandboxy. Even when I run APs, I tend to use them as a rough framework.

But really, that's beside the point -- if the APL lines up with the CR, classes shouldn't matter. Tactics matter, of course, but healing can come from any number of sources.

Liberty's Edge RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

And to be fair to your earlier point, when I did run a homebrew game, it also was very sandboxy and highly tailored to the PCs. Probably a player expectation calibration kind of thing.

PFS does not really cut you any slack if the party lacks a key capability--although RAW PF is generally constructed with a degree of capability overlap across classes so that you don't, for instance, necessarily need a rogue to find traps or a cleric for healing.

Shadow Lodge

I've only played a few PFS sessions, but I've already noticed that most people pack a bag of utility magic items for things like healing and traps. That's probably the best solution to the OP's question actually.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32

Rynjin wrote:
GM_Solspiral wrote:
even less inclined when there's evil elements to the party.
Why?

Well I just plain won't run an all evil party campaign, you want to run around robbing and killing people play GTA. But I will allow if a party member becomes evil or starts evil and wants to change ect.

I've had this result in players killing player on at least 3 occasions, once it ended extremely well, once it ended that campaign on a somewhat sour note, and once it ended with very hurt feelings and then end of a gaming group.

I've learned to be careful with evil characters, I won't absolutely prohibit them but I won't pull punches for them that's for sure. If anything they run a larger risk because they could well run afoul of the party.

I also try to avoid alignment changing items in my game becasue they are BS.


I'm almost never in favor of GMs pulling punches, though there are some things to consider.

If you create your own story or run a sand-box game, you are probably going to do some tailoring to whatever is in the party. As someone said above, all martial vs swarm = no fun. Your goal is still to make the game challenging, but you will need to dial down if there is no healer present.

I do feel that APs assume you have the "holy trinity" available in your group in some form. It doesn't have to be fighter/cleric/wizard, but something covering at least 70% of each of those classes will probably be needed.

How many characters are in the party. Most published adventures assume 4-6 players. If you have less, it's hard to cover the bases. This is one of the times I'm most likely to be in favor of pulled punches... To a degree.

In short, don't punish the PCs for not having a healer, but being overly soft on them can be equally as un-fun.


GM_Solspiral wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
GM_Solspiral wrote:
even less inclined when there's evil elements to the party.
Why?
Well I just plain won't run an all evil party campaign, you want to run around robbing and killing people play GTA.

Or D&D, pretty much the same thing, just swap Technology out for Magic, and have a team of of people who kill things and take their stuff, rather than just one.


Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Strife2002 wrote:
yes he can prepare them. That doesn't mean he does.

No need to hold back. Might want to have a mook with a cure light or moderate potion on them occasionally. If they manage to use it before the party can take them out good for them, if not? Tough.

If the cleric isn't willing to prepare a few heal spells each day, he doesn't have to; that's between the player and the rest of the party. Beyond moderating any discussions or arguments about that to keep things civil and fun for everyone, let them hash it out themselves.
Not sure what your campaign world is like, but for Golarion and most settings I've been in there's no reason the party can't pick up a wand or two and some cure potions to keep topped up between fights. Most groups I've been in pool money for that.


Whenever party composition is seriously lacking, I usually address it at the beginning of the game. "Alright, here's the thing, you don't have a healer in the group. You know that doesn't mean you'll never take damage, right?"

It comes up more often that no one wants to play the rogue. And then I have to be like "You know there are still going to be traps, right?"

My sympathy for your party is also seriously lessened because they HAVE a healer. They have a cleric, which is literally the "I heal people" class. If he doesn't want to heal people, that's not your fault. It would be like me playing a bard who didn't want to sing and expecting you to lower the CR of encounters because I wouldn't use my abilities.


Small correction. Cleric isn't the "I heal people" class. That's the Life Oracle. Cleric is the "I'm a Cleric, therefore I do what I'm built for and do it well. Be that kicking ass, casting the spells that make the peoples fall down (quite literally, several cleric spells specifically put people on their face :P) or something else entirely."

There are a lot of Cleric Builds that don't heal any more than a Ranger does, ie through use of Cure Light Wands. (Including the cleric in our current party)


kyrt-ryder wrote:

Small correction. Cleric isn't the "I heal people" class. That's the Life Oracle. Cleric is the "I'm a Cleric, therefore I do what I'm built for and do it well. Be that kicking ass, casting the spells that make the peoples fall down (quite literally, several cleric spells specifically put people on their face :P) or something else entirely."

There are a lot of Cleric Builds that don't heal any more than a Ranger does, ie through use of Cure Light Wands. (Including the cleric in our current party)

That's fair. I was thinking more in terms of iconic or classic roles. Remember, Life Oracle is a Pathfinder thing. If most other editions, if you wanted reliable and solid healing, you brought a cleric to the mix.


I'm not terribly familiar with editions prior to 3.X, but based on what I've been told I'd be prone to agree with you Detective.

In 3E though, Clerics were far better off kicking butt than healing in combat (until sufficient splats came out to really crank that healing per spell, otherwise it was just a waste of a combat action, which was tragic because there ARE people out there who like the idea of being a dedicated healer, they're just not very vocal and possibly not very numerous.)


If the cleric doesn't prepare heal spells because it's a crimp in his/her style, well ... the consequence of such inaction is the death of compatriots, or even self. Evidently it just ain't kewl, eh?

Well, dying is even less cool.

Since they have the potential to take care of themselves and are simply refusing to do so, perhaps you should take the kid gloves off.


Oh, Clerics have always been great at kicking butt. But of the PHB classes, they were also the only class capable of being built as a dedicated healer without some tricky play.


For the story and group continuity, I have to rescue the loons from time to time. The time I had a pair of Ogres double hit AND double crit the Mage on round one, clear to negatives. Both the highest and most together of the lot, yet down in one round.


Pendin Fust wrote:

I typically ask myself the question, "Would it serve the story at this point for a PC to die?"

Most often, the answer is no. Once in a while...yes.

** spoiler omitted **

I probably wouldn't have low level mooks killing your PC's, unless they are being really stupid against the enemy, but if they choose to confront a BBEG that hits hard without some healing...the story should play out to make the BEST story.

I think we can safely say you're not pulling punches, since your BBEG, who's likely to toss out a TPK as designed, is either casting 10th level spells or he's got a magic item that's by itself worth twice his expected wealth by level.


Pendin Fust wrote:

I typically ask myself the question, "Would it serve the story at this point for a PC to die?"

Most often, the answer is no. Once in a while...yes.

** spoiler omitted **

I probably wouldn't have low level mooks killing your PC's, unless they are being really stupid against the enemy, but if they choose to confront a BBEG that hits hard without some healing...the story should play out to make the BEST story.

How did he use his spell before the pc finished his charge? doesn't sound legal.


It is ALWAYS important to design encounters around the PCs, taking into account both abilities, restoratives, and the capacity to obtain more. Particularly when planning encounters of higher CR than the APL. A curse or blindness/deafness spell, for example, can destroy a character if the party is unequipped to deal with it.

You don't need to make things easy on the PCs, nor only ever pit them against foes they're capable of handling. But it's important to make sure that a player doesn't sit in the corner bored and useless for hours on end after a character death or debilitating debuff.


I've played in parties without a party healer and it was fun in a gritty, high risk way. If the party members are open to varying up their tactic and playing it smart, you don't need a party healer. Potions and scrolls can be found. If you think it can help, wands of healing could be thrown in but I've never really been crazy about those. Seems a bit too convenient. On the other hand, if the party is expecting to be able to power through everything, then you have the choice of either providing more healing, reeling in the power level of the opponents a little, or having them risk a tpk. Nobody likes tpks but a group of fools normally don't last very long anyway.


Lack of healing means some typical roles in party are overrepresent, so they can slice through many specific encounters. If they have very easy way in part of adventure, why they shouldn't have hard time, f.e , with swarms ?

Lack of regular healing also encourage to play smart- ambushing, elaborate tactics, using of cover etc.


Doggan wrote:
I'm confused. There's a Cleric in the party. He may be evil, but Cure Light Wounds isn't an aligned spell. He can prepare it and cast it just like any other cleric.

He probably doesn't want to be a healbot. If you have to prepare healing spells, it contributes to being a healbot. (So does healing in combat. Ideally a good-aligned cleric never preps healing spells, and can convert them out of combat. Of course, during an emergency, you might need healing right now!)

Character roles, both RP and meta, should be decided before game start. I went through a wretched 2nd Edition campaign like that, and my first d20 Modern campaign went like that too, before I got the hint to make sure there's always a healer in the group.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / GMs and pulling punches All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion