I think everyone complaining that the options don't cover every possible spectrum of choice would probably claw their eyes out in frustration taking one of those "Are you suitable to work here?" surveys attached to many job applications.
Since the vast majority of posters here are simply asking for/falling into a category "2.5" no one is asking for "every possible spectrum of choice ". We want one more choice.
|
If he's been dropped and the enemy is still alive, he's dead. It'll just take an extra round to assure that.
It's just semantics, really.
Depend on initiative.
- If you heal him to positive hp before the enemy action he is mobile and the enemy can't perform a CDG, he has a better AC that an unconscious target. And there are very good chances that you will have a chance to cure a comrade before the enemy turn come again, as probably he has dropped him at his initiative count.- If you heal him to positive HP before your comrade turn he can act. Maybe he has some emergency equipment that can remove him from the danger area, maybe he can cast mirror image, maybe he can simply attack from a prone position ad do enough damage to change the situation.
And all the above is pertinent only if the character has been dropped while in melee with the enemy. The enemy archer has dropped the mage? You are in rough terrain? If he is conscious he can scamper to a protected position. Or even stand up (he will not provoke if he isn't in the area threatened by a enemy) and move 30' away to a protected position.
You are simply assuming a lot of things that depend heavily on the situation.
I would say between 2-4. Never is a strong word, and never healing can and does lead to tpk. It gets more interesting when you have to decide between healing to maybe prevent a tpk or attacking to maybe prevent a tpk. That being said, I have had a dedicated healer that annoyed the DM to no end. The party was able to be a tad more reckless, so they were able to finish the battles quicker, but that is a niche case.
all in all, it kind of depends on the situation. (and if you consider temp hp/fast heal to be healing or buffing)
I voted last resort. With exception to certain non-core healing options healing is just too inefficient to make it worthwhile in combat before getting heal at 11th+ level. The best forms of healing I've seen for low-levels are the very rare HoTs (infernal healing and extended infernal healing are two decent low-level healing spells spring to mind) and pre-combat healing through the use of temporary HP (unfortunately there are few noncaster temporary Hp abilities in core).
It's my experience that for the majority of the game, in-combat healing results in a greater loss of life for your team overall. Mostly because you are losing Hp faster than you can heal it and by "wasting" your action to heal. This is evident even at low levels. If an orc deals 9 average damage per swing (minimum 6, maximum 12 with a falchion) and a healer heals 5 average damage per cure light wounds (1d8+1, min 2, max 9) then the healer is burning a party resource (1st level spell) to not even match the damage done by a single enemy (so the enemy is still winning) which cost the enemy nothing to do.
Then you consider that a group of 3 orcs is a CR 1 encounter. Which means if all orcs are only hitting 50% of the time the whole group would be expected to deal around 13.5 average damage to your party each round the orcs are able to attack and deal damage.
That's before figuring in the fact most healing spells are touch-range, which means they can easily provoke attacks for casting (which can be a big problem if the warrior-type is surrounded by enemies who just harmed him or her.
In the case of class-specific healing like channel energy for clerics, those tend to come with their own woes. Now channel energy is pretty cool at low levels from a resource-to-healing perspective, but looses a lot of its luster if you're not healing everyone more or less equally (it loses a lot of its oomph healing a single target, so it actually contributes to the idea of trying to spread damage around and then heal between combats). It also has the issue of very swingy-healing (there are no flat modifiers so it's 1-6 * cleric level-1/2 rounded up) which means a 5th level cleric may heal for only 3 hp (pointless) to 18 hp (almost as good as cure serious wounds average healing).
Unfortunately it scales pretty horribly (10d6 healing is just useless at level 19+ for anything other than out of combat healing and it has been a steady decline about 5th level or so). It also has the troubles of healing your enemies as well which is particularly problematic in mixed combat (especially true when you have different combatants trying to flank one another and mixing up the ranks) which means you're also aiding the enemy. Now there's a feat for that but it only allows you to ignore X+1 targets from your channel (1 being yourself but who would deny themselves free-healing?), but it's based on an ability score (forcing you to be more MAD for very little gain) and you are more likely to encounter NPC foes in greater force than you are to have many PC party members (which means that the feat favors negative channelers who can ignore their party when damaging, but the opposite is often more difficult).
For the record, in reference to the issue of adding more options to the poll, I don't see the need for a 2.5 as a middle ground option. I only see the need for a "depends on the character" option.
For your typical cleric or whatever, healing is inneficient and generally hurts the group overall. But you actually can make a character that heals well.
It's no different than blasting. A typical sorcerer that blasts is going to be sub-par. He's practically wasting resources more often than not. But you can build a blaster that's very powerful indeed, if you know what you're doing.
It's my experience that for the majority of the game, in-combat healing results in a greater loss of life for your team overall. Mostly because you are losing Hp faster than you can heal it and by "wasting" your action to heal. This is evident even at low levels.
I actually think it's most evident at low levels and fades over time. Damage starts high in Pathfinder, but increases slowly until additional attacks spike it again.
While I agree it's impossible in core, I have played characters that outhealed incoming damage such that I could easily keep the whole party up while still attacking (Paladin) or casting control spells (Oracle) most turns. It is definitely possible, it just takes specific builds/tactics.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The most efficient forms of healing I've seen are actually damage mitigation or paladin healing (sometimes the two combine exceptionally well). Damage mitigation usually comes from things like miss %, armor, damage reduction, and energy resistances, but can also include damage passing through the use of abilities like shield other or the psionic share pain which allow multiple players to share their damage between one-another (so if one player suffers 10 damage he and another instead suffer 5 damage each). This spreads damage across multiple party members which in turn makes it harder to remove a single member from the fight and makes out of combat healing more efficient (nobody is lost during the battle and every can be healed between fights).
Paladin healing is potent and doesn't cost them anything real in terms of action economy (thus a paladin warrior-type is ideal because she can heal herself while doing her thing). Paladins also get shield other as a spell. A group with two paladins is extremely difficult to break up as they can cast shield other on each other and split their damage and heal it. Which means that if the enemy team attempts to burst one Paladin down they heal it twice as quickly (the damage is split and healed twice as a swift action).
If you include the psionics rules (and I would because they're damn good and an amazing update to the 3.5 psionics rules which were better balanced than core magic) then you have some other excellent options for damage mitigation and healing. Powers such as natural healing or vigor are both good methods of self-healing or damage mitigation in their own right (temporary HP effectively being pre-healing).
The Vitalist is actually the best designed healer I've seen in a very long time. It is a class that specializes in healing and damage mitigation. It has a very cool option to channel healing to other targets (a vitalist + cleric are very cool together because the cleric can channel energy and the vitalist can move all the wasted healing from X targets to Y target who really needs the healing).
They are also decent at actually delivering the healing without murdering themselves with AoOs. As long as his collective allies are within medium range (100 ft. + 10 ft. / level) he can heal himself and redirect the healing to someone else. Thus a vitalist will usually use natural healing to heal up to 3 HP / caster level to a target from a sizeable distance (at first this healing is mild in strength but it can get to be pretty potent as levels rise). Healing opportunities can get especially nice if you acquire the share pain power so as to split damage further.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I voted for 2.047361 because I don't like using the nearest approximation. What now?
I think everyone complaining that the options don't cover every possible spectrum of choice would probably claw their eyes out in frustration taking one of those "Are you suitable to work here?" surveys attached to many job applications.
Well stated.
I also wonder... what's the point of complaining about the options? What does one hope to accomplish?
If you hope that the poll will be changed to include a "2.5" or a "2.14" option, then would it not be easier to simply make that poll yourself?
Personally, I want to vote for Sqrt(5), and I object to any poll that doesn't specifically include this option!
Furthering the "healing through damage prevention" mindset is through spells like resist energy (which can also be used offensively). Most casting classes get spells like resist energy. They are a unique form of "healing" in that the amount they "heal" is based on how much of a specific form of damage you're taking and in what quantities.
Resist energy begins at 10 points of resistance and rises to 20 at CL 7, and then 30 at CL 11. If you are encountering a lot of energy damage from either foe or friend, this simple spell can turn damage that would be harrowing into something not worth a second thought. It can trivialize encounters that are energy-damage heavy (things like blasters, hell-hounds, elementals, and effectively neutralize many breath weapons).
It can be used offensively. The average damage from a 10d6 fireball is 35 on a failed saving throw. If your party is buffed with resist energy (such as by a communal resist energy) then you can probably toss fireballs around willy-nilly with no real worry of harming your team (they'll take no damage on a successful save and nearly no damage on a failed save) which can be handy (used offensively you can carpet bomb enemies and allies alike without fear of killing the wrong people).
Spells like stoneskin are incredibly efficient means of damage prevention against most monsters. While less impressive against some humanoids, very rarely should you see enemies with adamantine weapons, and it's pretty much guaranteed to work against natural weapons. While it only prevents 10 damage per hit, most monsters rely on landing multiple moderate-damage attacks via 3+ natural weapons. In such a case the amount of damage prevented (and thus "healed") skyrockets. If something jumps your wizard and deals 90 damage on a pounce over a span of 5 attacks (let's say a dire tiger or something) your wizard will ignore about 50 points of that damage. Now your wizard isn't dead anymore! Not bad for the cost of a single potion of cure light wounds.
Usually i would be in the 2 category, but it really does depend on the party. We once made a 3 man group for a module and decided that we would all take the fey foundling feat. The quick channeling cleric was the healing champion of Golarion.
Usually i would be in the 2 category, but it really does depend on the party. We once made a 3 man group for a module and decided that we would all take the fey foundling feat. The quick channeling cleric was the healing champion of Golarion.
There are certain exceptions to every rule. Something I've seen a few players do is using trained pets or familiars to administer healing to players through the use of consumables (for example, a pet monkey who is trained to deliver potions and/or oils, or an imp of fairy-thing that uses a healing wand). Such tactics are often fairly decent since those things might not have much else to do anyway (most familiers don't want to be in the midst of combat but imps can turn invisible so they make good field medics).
In your case the entire party was specced to be very pro-healing and it worked nicely for them. That's a good strategy. :D
A similar case was a party of 4 negative energy channeling clerics who also healed via negative energy. This party still didn't heal often in fights but they were pretty tough and very capable of healing themselves in a pinch. Rarely did they need to though since they often had a small army of meat-shields you had to beat through if they withdrew into the ranks of their undead.
Usually i would be in the 2 category, but it really does depend on the party. We once made a 3 man group for a module and decided that we would all take the fey foundling feat. The quick channeling cleric was the healing champion of Golarion.There are certain exceptions to every rule. Something I've seen a few players do is using trained pets or familiars to administer healing to players through the use of consumables (for example, a pet monkey who is trained to deliver potions and/or oils, or an imp of fairy-thing that uses a healing wand). Such tactics are often fairly decent since those things might not have much else to do anyway (most familiers don't want to be in the midst of combat but imps can turn invisible so they make good field medics).
In your case the entire party was specced to be very pro-healing and it worked nicely for them. That's a good strategy. :D
Yeah a Paladin with fey foundling and a channeling Cleric as backup is very hard to take down.
Btw that 4 cleric thing sounds funny as hell. I should mention that to my group. We kinda have a thing for theme parties.
Usually i would be in the 2 category, but it really does depend on the party. We once made a 3 man group for a module and decided that we would all take the fey foundling feat. The quick channeling cleric was the healing champion of Golarion.There are certain exceptions to every rule. Something I've seen a few players do is using trained pets or familiars to administer healing to players through the use of consumables (for example, a pet monkey who is trained to deliver potions and/or oils, or an imp of fairy-thing that uses a healing wand). Such tactics are often fairly decent since those things might not have much else to do anyway (most familiers don't want to be in the midst of combat but imps can turn invisible so they make good field medics).
In your case the entire party was specced to be very pro-healing and it worked nicely for them. That's a good strategy. :D
Yeah a Paladin with fey foundling and a channeling Cleric as backup is very hard to take down.
Btw that 4 cleric thing sounds funny as hell. I should mention that to my group. We kinda have a thing for theme parties.
I love themed parties. That party was a group of clerics all of the same order who were running the red hand of doom. They were clerics of Wee Jass (Lawful Neutral goddess of death and magic) who were trying to prevent the wholesale destruction of countless people by the hobgoblin armies led by Azar Kull. And boy did they prevent. :O
That party romped and stomped through that campaign like Gojiira through tokyo. Every member of the group was specced similar to the others with some lightly off-speccing as desired. Each was a heavy-armor wearing, undead-mongering, fighting machine. That 3/4 BAB and d8 HD isn't so bad when you've got some nice buffs. Meanwhile, they looked at every enemy felled like treasure. They ripped a hydra apart and then animated him as a fast zombie. Did much the same with a manticore. Later they felled a green dragon and added it to their ranks. By the time they actually met the hobgoblin hordes they met them in force and began a terrible slaughter and wholesale dismantling of the hobgoblin warmachine. :D
By the time they reached the point to go fight the end-game boss they had plenty of undead, lots of treasure, summoned celestial beings at their aid, and were righteous forces of the witch queen. Tiamat best step off, the goddess of magic and her followers are not to be trifled with. :P
Since infernal healing was published it has become the new go-to method for healing in a lot of the games I've been in. In terms of cost it's superior to traditional healing spells for out of combat healing. A single potion of infernal healing costs 50 gp and provides double the healing of cure light wounds (it actually heals +1hp over CLW's max roll). So a wand of the stuff is awesome (heals 500 hp worth of hit points in 50 10 hp increments which is a lot).
If there was a communal infernal healing it would also be an awesome method for restoring Hp out of combat (similar to the Healing Wards from Warcraft III). I'd definitely consider packing such a thing should it be available.
still touch, and a full round cast makes infernal healing on the list of risky spells.
Regarding damage mitigation, some people have recommended shield other. It's good on paper but I've had problems keeping recipients within the spell's range. Any tips or tricks to making it work?
|
Option 2: Healing in combat is a very bad use of resources and should be a last resort.
This option means that you will normally perform other actions in combat but will save a comrade from dying if it comes to that.
I go with option 2. It's really just simple math. Your healing output will rarely be able to keep up with the damage output of your opponents. Heals in combat are best reserved to keep someone from dying (stabilize), and rarely to bring someone up from unconsciousness (if there are circumstances that make it likely said person will be able to stay up and not just get knocked down again).
Why are you farther then 30 feet away from the party? As the cleric you should have decent armor so being closer should not be an issue. AFAIK there is no way to increase a spell's range.
The enlarge spell feats doubles a spell's range. I would get in as a rod though, instead of burning a feat on it.
What does summoning outsiders to heal count as?
|
As for the voting I would go with option 3 or 4.
I mostly play clerics. I play other classes too, but because so few people want to play clerics, or more specifically healers, I often just roll up my sleeves and play a cleric. They are quite a versatile class.
I have several Devine Casters in PFS. I have 2 Clerics, one of Sarenrae, another of Asmodeus.
I have a Mystic Theurge of Pharasma, and a Life Oracle of Pharasma. All of these characters fluff wise role play quite differently and in terms of game mechanics play quite differently.
Much to peoples surprise, not all clerics are healers...my PFS LN cleric of Asmodeus isn't a healer...he doesn't have a single skill rank in the heal skill, but he has lots of skill ranks in Profession Barrister.
Anyways, I have yet to sit at a PFS table with a divine caster, a cleric, (well with the exception of my cleric of Asmodeus), and not have people eager to have an actual cleric who heals and buffs at their table. If a clerics ability to buff, and heal in combat as well as in between combats , were a waste of resources, I have yet to see it. I have yet to be told, no don't use a healing spell, wait till afterwards. Channel Energy has given a cleric yet another tool with which they can both heal their party members, and harm the undead. It makes it so that a cleric doesn't have to choose between saving a bless spell in case he might need it for a clw spell, and casting that bless spell.
The only reason infernal healing is a go to spell, is because it is the sole healing spell an arcane caster such as a magus/sorcerer/wizard has access to.
There is a series of spells, not part of the Open Gaming materiel, which is in the 3.5 Spell compendium.
The Vigor Spells
Cleric/ Druid Spells
On Page 229, there is
Level 1: Lesser Vigor D: 10 RDS +1 rd/ LVL max 15, Living creature touched Fast healing 1
Level 3: Vigor D: 10 RDS +1rd/lvl max 25, Living Creature touched Fast healing 2
Level 3: Vigor Mass Lesser D : 10 RDS +1rd/lvl max 25, 1 creature/2 levels Fast healing 1
Level 5 Greater Vigor: D: 10 RDS + 1 rd/lvl max 35 rds, LivingCreature touched Fast healing 4
Level 6: Vigerous Circle D: 10 RDS +1rd/lvl max 40, 1 creature/2 levels Fast healing 3
I use them in my home games. WIth these spells there isn't any need for infernal healing spells.
Anyways I think people will figure out healing according to how they want to run things in their games. Access to the cure light wounds spell has been spread around from being solely a cleric spell
Now the Alchemist, Bard, Cleric, Druid, Inquisitor, Oracle, Paladin, Ranger, and Witch class, have access to the Cure Light Wounds spell...the job of healing can be passed around a bit.
But back to the voting I would go with option 3 or 4
WHY AM I THE ONLY ONE TO FAVORITE #4??
because you could be buffing, debuffing, or fighting instead of just standing around doing nothing.
Why are you farther then 30 feet away from the party? As the cleric you should have decent armor so being closer should not be an issue. AFAIK there is no way to increase a spell's range.
The enlarge spell feats doubles a spell's range. I would get in as a rod though, instead of burning a feat on it.
It's more the others moving around the battlefield (to get flanking, charge a particular bad guy, etc). We've run into situations like this:
Our group starts in a comfortable fireball formation.DM: You spot the spellcaster in a clearing 60 feet away. Roll initiative.
Inquisitor: 31!
Cleric: 12!
DM: Inquisitor, you won initiative. Take your action.
Inquisitor: I charge the caster!
*Shield other pops*
or
Inquistor: I wait until the cleric's initiative so we can charge together.
DM: Okay, you hold your action. In the meantime, the spellcaster beat the cleric's initative and casts a spell. Everyone save.
Which I guess is the point of the spell: let's share the pain. It just feels a bit. . .unwieldy sometimes. Sometimes keeping characters on a tether isn't feasible.
Good idea about the rod though. Casting it after Blessing of Fervor might be an option.
TLDR: I hate having others operate on a tether.
The only reason infernal healing is a go to spell, is because it is the sole healing spell an arcane caster such as a magus/sorcerer/wizard has access to.
There is a series of spells, not part of the Open Gaming materiel, which is in the 3.5 Spell compendium.
The Vigor Spells
** spoiler omitted **
Well that and because it has better average healing than CLW even at CL 5 (CL 5 CLW heals 9.5 average versus 10 guaranteed). Plus every time you cast it (unless you're a sorcerer) you have the satisfaction of knowing that you're using devil blood to heal people. That's damn satisfying.
Things you can do instead of getting hit by a fireball: drop a blindness/deafness spell on the spellcaster. Now he cannot target.
By level 5 my cleric's save DC vs the Blindness/Deafness spell is going to be along the lines of: 10+5(wisdom)+3(spell)+2(feat) = 20. Most arcane spellcasters will fail that save a significant part of the time.
Alternately, drop a silence spell on the spellcaster. I always carry a couple scrolls of silence by level 5.
Do either as a readied action and the spellcaster just wasted an action.
Frankly, I don't understand healing builds. Damage prevention is usually so much more effective.
As for going before or after the wizard, if you really want to go first that is possible. Have a decent dex and take the trait Reactionary. If you really want, take Improved Initiative. You could also go for the tactics sub-domain in order to get that 2d20 take the best initiative roll.
Finally, a cleric should be one of the most perceptive people in the group. Always max ranks in perception even if it is not a class skill.
- Gauss
Things you can do instead of getting hit by a fireball: drop a blindness/deafness spell on the spellcaster. Now he cannot target.
By level 5 my cleric's save DC vs the Blindness/Deafness spell is going to be along the lines of: 10+5(wisdom)+3(spell)+2(feat) = 20. Most arcane spellcasters will fail that save a significant part of the time.
Alternately, drop a silence spell on the spellcaster. I always carry a couple scrolls of silence by level 5.
Do either as a readied action and the spellcaster just wasted an action.
Frankly, I don't understand healing builds. Damage prevention is usually so much more effective.
As for going before or after the wizard, if you really want to go first that is possible. Have a decent dex and take the trait Reactionary. If you really want, take Improved Initiative. You could also go for the tactics sub-domain in order to get that 2d20 take the best initiative roll.
Finally, a cleric should be one of the most perceptive people in the group. Always max ranks in perception even if it is not a class skill.
- Gauss
Agreed on pretty much all accounts. Though I think outright disrupting a caster's spell is probably a safer bet than trying to silence them with a scroll (silence has a will save to ignore it and scrolls tend to have poor DCs). Whatever works though. :)
When I silence targets I almost never silence the target directly. I silence the area or an unattended object in the target's vicinity. No save. :)
I can keep a spellcaster shut down forever like this if I have enough silence spells. He would have to move out of my line of sight.
Still, I should only have to shut him down a round or two until the melee guys cut him down.
- Gauss
Looking at these options again, I can see why I wanted a 2.5 It's a difference between the option given and the subtext that follows.. If we just take the Options:
Option 2: Healing in combat is a very bad use of resources and should be a last resort.
And...
Option 3: Healing in combat is a perfectly effective way to reduce risk to your party.
I would always choose Option 3. However, with the following subtext:
Option 2:This option means that you will normally perform other actions in combat but will save a comrade from dying if it comes to that.And..
Option 3:This option means that you will heal primarily but not exclusively.
The subtext leans my answer back to Option 2.
I don't heal primarily and will normally choose other options, but healing is indeed a perfectly effective way to reduce risk to your party, and will consider it an option if my other options would not be as effective.
As a result I favorited both options.
|
|
Well that and because it has better average healing than CLW even at CL 5 (CL 5 CLW heals 9.5 average versus 10 guaranteed). Plus every time you cast it (unless you're a sorcerer) you have the satisfaction of knowing that you're using devil blood to heal people. That's damn satisfying.The only reason infernal healing is a go to spell, is because it is the sole healing spell an arcane caster such as a magus/sorcerer/wizard has access to.
There is a series of spells, not part of the Open Gaming materiel, which is in the 3.5 Spell compendium.
The Vigor Spells
** spoiler omitted **
Of course Infernal healing is statistically better then CLW.
Infernal Healing is categorically an evil spell with as you have pointed out requires a drop of devil blood as a materiel component. But for some players that makes them uncomfortable.
Also for some players' characters, Infernal Healing makes the character uncomfortable as well. These characters would prefer not to have the taint of Asmodeus on them.
I prefer to have the Vigor spells in my home games, to offer another healing option not tied to Asmodeus especially if the spell bothers someone.