Healing Goalposts


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

51 to 89 of 89 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

necroon wrote:
Interesting.... I like the Healball idea. Do you think perhaps a rewrite of the current healing spells themselves might help?

Well, I could snidely suggest that it couldn't hurt. But, more helpfully, I think that simply bumping up the amount of damage healed would help substantially. Basically, a third level spell should heal as much as a third level spell would harm. Possibly a little less to allow for saving throws (since those will cut down on the amount of damage taken, but who resists a helping/healing hand?)

So I'd turn Shocking Grasp into Healing Grasp and make it heal 1d6 per level or thereabouts, capped at 5d6 unless you Intensify it. Voila, all of a sudden it's worth spending an action and a first level spell to keep the fighter on his feat.

ETA upon reflection, I think Soothing Grasp is a better name for the spell.


Orfamay Quest wrote:
necroon wrote:
Interesting.... I like the Healball idea. Do you think perhaps a rewrite of the current healing spells themselves might help?

Well, I could snidely suggest that it couldn't hurt. But, more helpfully, I think that simply bumping up the amount of damage healed would help substantially. Basically, a third level spell should heal as much as a third level spell would harm. Possibly a little less to allow for saving throws (since those will cut down on the amount of damage taken, but who resists a helping/healing hand?)

So I'd turn Shocking Grasp into Healing Grasp and make it heal 1d6 per level or thereabouts, capped at 5d6 unless you Intensify it. Voila, all of a sudden it's worth spending an action and a first level spell to keep the fighter on his feat.

ETA upon reflection, I think Soothing Grasp is a better name for the spell.

I certainly have noticed that even at a 2:1 ratio a character that is healed by a certain element of damage (fire, ice, ect.) is more easily healed by the party wizard who "accidentally" caught them in a fireball than they are by the cleric who wanted to heal them. I, Personally, would say that does indicate a numerical issue.

Your Soothing Grasp example is dead on and a quickened Healing Grasp would allow a Healer to action economy a bit better: possibly keeping up with a bad round for the party.


Orfamay Quest wrote:
necroon wrote:
Interesting.... I like the Healball idea. Do you think perhaps a rewrite of the current healing spells themselves might help?

Well, I could snidely suggest that it couldn't hurt. But, more helpfully, I think that simply bumping up the amount of damage healed would help substantially. Basically, a third level spell should heal as much as a third level spell would harm. Possibly a little less to allow for saving throws (since those will cut down on the amount of damage taken, but who resists a helping/healing hand?)

So I'd turn Shocking Grasp into Healing Grasp and make it heal 1d6 per level or thereabouts, capped at 5d6 unless you Intensify it. Voila, all of a sudden it's worth spending an action and a first level spell to keep the fighter on his feat.

ETA upon reflection, I think Soothing Grasp is a better name for the spell.

It would seem like taking away the bonus caps for healing spells would help. Don't forget that a specialized healer is going to be healing domain and at least after six level all the cure spells will be empowered. So for example, instead of having a 12th level cleric with the healing domain do ((1d8+5)*1.5)=~14 per CLW on average it would be 21 on average or so. And so on.


Arssanguinus wrote:

It would seem like taking away the bonus caps for healing spells would help. Don't forget that a specialized healer is going to be healing domain and at least after six level all the cure spells will be empowered. So for example, instead of having a 12th level cleric with the healing domain do ((1d8+5)*1.5)=~14 per CLW on average it would be 21 on average or so. And so on.

Not enough, IMHO. A cleric shouldn't have to burn a domain to be good at healing, any more than a wizard needs to be an evocation specialist to be good at Shocking Grasp. A shocking grasp specialist is scary. A healing-specialized cleric, even with this fix, is "meh."

One way of looking at it: A typical CR 7 monster does a low damage of 22 points. High damage is, of course, higher. So a specialized 12th level cleric can almost keep up with the hand-to-hand damage of a single monster five levels below him, by burning his limited spells per day?


Keep in mind that healing is automatic, attacks, damage spells both have to hit or beat saves usually. That has to go into the equation somewhere.

That average damage is "IF ALL ATTACKS ARE SUCCESSFUL"


Arssanguinus wrote:

Keep in mind that healing is automatic, attacks, damage spells both have to hit or beat saves usually. That has to go into the equation somewhere.

That average damage is "IF ALL ATTACKS ARE SUCCESSFUL"

Actually no. Healing is not automatic. Healing requires that you can cast the spell and reach your target. Often this means getting into melee range of said monster. And then you have to roll for it assuming your target is willing.

And yes it does require that all attacks be successful for that damage to settle in.

Also it's not entirely accurate just a good benchmark for us to look at. For example our friend at that CR, the dire bear, will do well over 31 points on average if all hsi attacks hit. The Cryohydra will be hitting for around 42 damage if all 6 bites hit one target.

On the opposite end of that spectrum the medusa will only hit you for about 8 points of damage if her bow hits. But the danger in her is not the HP damage but the flesh to stone ability.

The closest to that number of the examples I picked is the Totenmaske with 23 average damage with the average of charisma drain.

So yeah, the text says average damage if all attacks are successful. The reality varies.


However, an "optimized" healer would have this up on this most likely to take damage ...

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/advanced/spells/sacredBond.html#_sacred- bond


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Arssanguinus wrote:

However, an "optimized" healer would have this up on this most likely to take damage ...

http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/advanced/spells/sacredBond.html#_sacred- bond

And we're back to a cleric shouldn't need to specialize in healing to be merely effective at it.

A generic wizard is effective at blasting. A specialist evocation build is terrifying.
A generic wizard is effective at crowd control. A specialist conjurer is God (just ask Treantmonk).
A specialist healing build cleric is marginally effective at healing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

What is the general definition of 'Optimized' anyway?


Well, the technical definition is "designed to produce the greatest possible specific effect." The DPR Olympics is a huge exercise in damage-per-round optimization to see just how much damage things can put out. More loosely, an optimized character is a character designed to be very effective at a chosen role, typically at the expense of things outside of that role -- e.g., an optimized wizard is very good at casting arcane spells. An optimized blaster wizard is very good at direct-damage (blast) spells, probably at the expense of save-or-suck spells, utility spells, or hand-to-hand combat ability.

The iconic cleric, Kyra, is somewhat healing-optimized; she's not very good at turning undead, but she could also be substantially better at healing (neither of her traits are healing-focused, for example).


Craig Frankum wrote:
What is the general definition of 'Optimized' anyway?

Depends on what you're doing and everyone gives a different answer. Some will say this means broken, others will say this means the ebst.

I say it means he's works the best at what you want him to do which can be practically anything. In this case its possible to overoptimize in a bad direction (such as healing) and not accomplish as much if you optimized him to say, buff, or debuff.


So, I'm confused. What about life oracles? Are they any good at healing? When I played mine in Thornkeep I was getting a lot of use out of life link, channeling, and energy body... then again the things there hit hard.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
FanaticRat wrote:
So, I'm confused. What about life oracles? Are they any good at healing? When I played mine in Thornkeep I was getting a lot of use out of life link, channeling, and energy body... then again the things there hit hard.

Life Oracles are probably the best healers in the game. But they're also extremely limited; when you play a life oracle, you're essentially a wandering first-aid kit and little else. Many people find them not especially fun to play for that reason.


Yes, you can do a lot more with a cleric than be a heal-bot.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I find life oracles to be fun because they're usually also effective party faces.


Yeah, something beyond bash or blast.

The Exchange

The problem with healing is that it doesn't buff the party.

A buffed party ends fights, a healed party drags out resources.

Maybe a +1 metamagic feat to heal (spell level) hit points a turn for caster level rounds or until the spell ends.

Edit: anything the pcs have monsters can get....

Scarab Sages

Well, here's the thing about healing, and specifically Cleric healing:

It's situational. Let's just do a round 1 analysis. Round 1, what does your party do? Ideally, nobody is missing health (you DID buy that wand of cure light wounds, right?), or at least the health missing is minimal. What does a healing specialized cleric do? This first round can be critical in determining the outcome of a fight, and a healing specialized cleric, or a cleric who only heals, brings NOTHING to the first round, or possibly even second, of a fight, unless he purposefully drops himself to the bottom of the initiative table, which is just absolutely crazy.

Already, this is the problem with healing. You can see it in just about any game, tabletop or video, that has a healing mechanic. Unless healing doesn't interfere with normal actions (ala 4th edition/D&D next) or far outpaces damage dealt over X amount of time (healer classes in most video game RPGs), it simply isn't effective outside of very specific situations, such as a last ditch effort to keep a party member from going down.

A damage-oriented cleric can deal respectable damage AND heal the party just as well as a healing cleric. Sure, he can't do it as many times per day, but the difference is so minimal as to be laughable. A spell-oriented cleric can prevent damage before it occurs, making allies harder to hit, and almost impossible to crit barring extra abilities (I'm looking at you, greataxe-wielding cyclops). All of these are better options in the early rounds of combat.

Or, to look at it another way, let's analyze the typical fight: It's usually either against a solo creature, or against a group of creatures. IF the party is fighting a solo creature, action economy will likely prevail in the long run, and the party needs to get a leg up on the competition before it has time to build up steam. Healing gets 0 benefit in the early game, even if it can be a game changer in the end game of a fight. In group fights, the best way to reduce party damage is to either prevent the party from being hit, OR to reduce enemy numbers by focusing fire. Remember, 5 almost dead goblins do just as much damage as 5 healthy goblins.

Basically, if healing is to be useful, you need to be able to react to situations more quickly than normal, either by having readied actions (which are just BEGGING to be wasted), or being able to heal precisely when needed, and for large chunks of health. Something like making all healing spells swift actions would go a long way to making them more popular, and possibly making them heal d8's per level, as opposed to d8...+1.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Nearly any cleric or oracle will have spells besides healing available. Bless, for instance, is a perfectly good first round spell for a low-level healer. Shield of faith on the melee dude, or Summon monster to get a meatshield. The various 2nd-level stat buffs. Prayer or blessing of fervor at the appropriate levels. These are all things that can help out on any round of combat in which no healing is necessary.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Davor wrote:

Well, here's the thing about healing, and specifically Cleric healing:

It's situational. Let's just do a round 1 analysis. Round 1, what does your party do? Ideally, nobody is missing health (you DID buy that wand of cure light wounds, right?), or at least the health missing is minimal. What does a healing specialized cleric do? This first round can be critical in determining the outcome of a fight, and a healing specialized cleric, or a cleric who only heals, brings NOTHING to the first round, or possibly even second, of a fight, unless he purposefully drops himself to the bottom of the initiative table, which is just absolutely crazy.

Already, this is the problem with healing. You can see it in just about any game, tabletop or video, that has a healing mechanic. Unless healing doesn't interfere with normal actions (ala 4th edition/D&D next) or far outpaces damage dealt over X amount of time (healer classes in most video game RPGs), it simply isn't effective outside of very specific situations, such as a last ditch effort to keep a party member from going down.

A damage-oriented cleric can deal respectable damage AND heal the party just as well as a healing cleric. Sure, he can't do it as many times per day, but the difference is so minimal as to be laughable. A spell-oriented cleric can prevent damage before it occurs, making allies harder to hit, and almost impossible to crit barring extra abilities (I'm looking at you, greataxe-wielding cyclops). All of these are better options in the early rounds of combat.

Or, to look at it another way, let's analyze the typical fight: It's usually either against a solo creature, or against a group of creatures. IF the party is fighting a solo creature, action economy will likely prevail in the long run, and the party needs to get a leg up on the competition before it has time to build up steam. Healing gets 0 benefit in the early game, even if it can be a game changer in the end game of a fight. In group fights, the best way to reduce party damage is to...

Wow. I was unaware that specializing in healing required a cleric to remove all non healing spells from their spell list, dress in lacy gauze, and carry a plus one feather duster in their hand.


Put all your spells into healing, put all your feats into murdering things and hp, multi-class to taste, laugh.

Barberic is a good combo (barb/cleric). Throw some feats into getting more rage points.

That cleric, he is such a sissy with his feather duster greataxe and large pool of rage and healing, lol.


Davor wrote:


A damage-oriented cleric can deal respectable damage AND heal the party just as well as a healing cleric.

Unfortunately, this isn't true. As a simple example, clerics with the Healing domain get a free Empower -- actually, better than Empower -- on their healing spells. This would ordinarily cost a feat and a spell level to a "normal" cleric if they could do it at all. Unsurprising, a specialist in healing is better at healing than a non-specialist or a specialist in something else.

But that's not the problem, that's simply restating the definition of the word "specialist." The problem is that the healing rules themselves are so ineffective that you need to specialize to be marginally useful in combat healing.


3.5 Loyalist wrote:

Put all your spells into healing, put all your feats into murdering things and hp, multi-class to taste, laugh.

Barberic is a good combo (barb/cleric). Throw some feats into getting more rage points.

That cleric, he is such a sissy with his feather duster greataxe and large pool of rage and healing, lol.

So you are suggesting;

`Multiclassing to ruin your spell casting progression
`Going into a class that precludes the notion of spellcasting while in fighting form

Yes, yes I do laugh. I laugh heartily.

Actually you know what has been one of my favorite feats for clerics in recent memory? Glorious Heat. Free healing everytime you murder the crap out of someone.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
TarkXT wrote:

So you are suggesting;

`Multiclassing to ruin your spell casting progression
`Going into a class that precludes the notion of spellcasting while in fighting form

Yes, yes I do laugh. I laugh heartily.

Actually you know what has been one of my favorite feats for clerics in recent memory? Glorious Heat. Free healing everytime you murder the crap out of someone.

Eh cleric spells with the fire descriptor with very minor healing? No thanks.

I'd prefer to go with feats for fighting as a cleric and just sub in healing when it becomes necessary. Heavy Armor Prof. + PA + Furious Focus +2 handed weapon = delicious secondary fighter ability.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

^^ What one of my player's Life Oracle Half-Orc did basically. He did quite well, heal spells for free, buff or damage spells, and hit things with his Falchion.


TarkXT wrote:
3.5 Loyalist wrote:

Put all your spells into healing, put all your feats into murdering things and hp, multi-class to taste, laugh.

Barberic is a good combo (barb/cleric). Throw some feats into getting more rage points.

That cleric, he is such a sissy with his feather duster greataxe and large pool of rage and healing, lol.

So you are suggesting;

`Multiclassing to ruin your spell casting progression
`Going into a class that precludes the notion of spellcasting while in fighting form

Yes, yes I do laugh. I laugh heartily.

Actually you know what has been one of my favorite feats for clerics in recent memory? Glorious Heat. Free healing everytime you murder the crap out of someone.

Just a dab of multiclassing. This isn't an argument, so chill mate.

1 level of barb, 2 if you think you can afford it. It doesn't ruin your progression, you still can get more levels later, if you live to reach them. If you think it doesn't work, try it--the mighty Barberic.


Jack Rift wrote:
^^ What one of my player's Life Oracle Half-Orc did basically. He did quite well, heal spells for free, buff or damage spells, and hit things with his Falchion.

Excellent.


Pathfinder Adventure, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Davor wrote:

Well, here's the thing about healing, and specifically Cleric healing:

It's situational. Let's just do a round 1 analysis. Round 1, what does your party do? Ideally, nobody is missing health (you DID buy that wand of cure light wounds, right?), or at least the health missing is minimal. What does a healing specialized cleric do? This first round can be critical in determining the outcome of a fight, and a healing specialized cleric, or a cleric who only heals, brings NOTHING to the first round, or possibly even second, of a fight, unless he purposefully drops himself to the bottom of the initiative table, which is just absolutely crazy.

Already, this is the problem with healing. You can see it in just about any game, tabletop or video, that has a healing mechanic. Unless healing doesn't interfere with normal actions (ala 4th edition/D&D next) or far outpaces damage dealt over X amount of time (healer classes in most video game RPGs), it simply isn't effective outside of very specific situations, such as a last ditch effort to keep a party member from going down

A cleric shouldn't be healing in the first round of combat anyway.

What kind of fighter needs healing in the first round of combat?

An unlucky group perhaps? who got caught by surprise by an AOE effect? but if that's the case a Channel might be needed - as it benefits the whole party. The fighter who has just been blinded and critically hit with with poisoned greataxe could probably use a heal. (Cure Light Wounds is not a substitute and won't get him/her back in combat the next round - which is were they need to be).

A wand of Cure Light Wounds works great in out-of-combat healing, it's not a question what is optimal. There are moments when there is no substitution for Heal or a Breath of Life.

I think the third post of the thread said it all and nothing since has been said to challenge this.

Lincoln Hills wrote:
I've seen posts about its 'uselessness', but I haven't been persuaded. It doesn't hasten victory, that's true, but there are other classes (the warriors, wizards... yes, even the rogues) whose job it is to hasten victory: it's the healer's job to delay defeat long enough for that victory to arrive. Sometimes that means giving up a glamorous 20-hp-damage attack so you can keep the barbarian long enough to deliver a 40-hp-damage attack. It's not as glamorous as dealing that 40-hp stroke yourself, but it's a lot better than delivering your 20-hp blow and leaving the enemy with 15 hp and the leisure time to kill off your buddies.

It's simple, if you are a Cleric; I expect you to be able to heal if required and take the lead when fighting undead (either with knowledge or channels etc..) If you are pushing the barbarian and fighter out of the way to fight on the front line whilst the wizard in the back is bleeding out unconscious - you are kinda being a jerk.

If you go around telling people you are a doctor long enough, they are going to expect you to behave like one. Anyone else is a holy fighter or in some cases a glory-hound...

The Exchange

the party needs to have healing covered. it does not have to be from the cleric. Druids (especially if positive energy elementals are allowed), bards, inquisitors, charismatic halfling paladins with healing feats, witches, alchemists, even wizards have healing options (summons, infernal healing, planar allies, and the true name arcane discovery.

HPs are easy to heal. affliction removal is more important.


Pathfinder Adventure, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Sure, affliction removal...

The Heal spell and Breath of Life are combat changers; they can't be replicated by items, they need someone willing to step up and cast them in combat or you prepare for going without.


lastblacknight wrote:

Sure, affliction removal...

The Heal spell and Breath of Life are combat changers; they can't be replicated by items, they need someone willing to step up and cast them in combat or you prepare for going without.

or you cast some other 5/6th level spells and prevent the damage instead. A Plane Shift that send the enemy to the negative energy plane ussually means you don't need breath of life.

In the game I'm gming now, we have a summoner, a wizard, inquisitor archer who deals 350+ dmg per round, a knife throwing ninja that kill inmolation devils in one round,a antipaladin and a dervish Magus that crit for 200 hp. They don't have dedicated healer, and they don't miss it. THey have UMD and breath of life/heal scrolls just in case, and a wand of restoration. They are doing fairly well.


lastblacknight wrote:

Sure, affliction removal...

The Heal spell and Breath of Life are combat changers; they can't be replicated by items, they need someone willing to step up and cast them in combat or you prepare for going without.

A paladin can use Breath of Life with a feat.

And for the matter "going without" has worked fantastically for most of the groups I've played in. Mainly because we rarely find ourselves in a position of even having 5th and 6th level cleric spells. Funny how most people manage PFS or the first half of most AP's without them.

Allow me to paint for you a portrait of healing.

These classes can cast Cure Spells:

Alchemist
Bard
Cleric
Druid
Inquisitor
Oracle
Paladin
Witch

These classes can heal hp damage in ways other than cure spells

Alchemist (fast healing grand discovery)
Bard (infernal healing)
Cleric (channeling)
Druid: (good berry
Inquisitor (judgment)
Magus (infernal healing)
Monk (wholeness of body)
Oracle (can channel)
Paladin (lay on hands)
Rogue (major magic for infernal healing)
Sorc/Wizard (infernal healing and certain schools/bloodlines)
Summoner (sacrifice evolution, fast healing evolution, infernal healing, various spells usable only on eidolon)
Witch (healing hex)

These classes can heal ability damage

Alchemist
Cleric
Druid
Inquisitor
Monk (qiggong restoration)
Oracle
Paladin

These classes can cure or prevent status effects:

Alchemist
Bard
Cleric
Druid
Inquisitor
Monk (qiggong restoration, neutralize poison)
Oracle
Paladin
Sorcerer/Wizard
Witch

These classes can raise the dead:

Alchemist
Cleric
Druid
Oracle
Paladin
Witch

And you know I'm probably missing a bunch off those lists. Wow, it's weird how paizo just spread the healing through so many classes, it's almost as if they were trying to give us the message that cleric's can do other things.

As to this other silly remark:

Quote:
It's simple, if you are a Cleric; I expect you to be able to heal if required and take the lead when fighting undead (either with knowledge or channels etc..) If you are pushing the barbarian and fighter out of the way to fight on the front line whilst the wizard in the back is bleeding out unconscious - you are kinda being a jerk.

Ye gods the grognardia is strong here. Are you suggesting I lead the way in a fight against the undead with an ability that registers less damage on them than a fireball of an equivalent level? HEll, don't get me started on those show offs. This isn't 2nd or 3rd ed my friend if they fail their saves they get mildly ticked, they don't start running off to become easy meat for your fighters.

O but what about knowledge you say? Funny you say that, because I figured between the bard, and wizard in the group I could throw my measly 1-2 points per level into Heal since that's sort of something I can do. If they put points in it they'll tend to be better. And gods don't get me started on the summoners "pet" who has a starting Know Religion score of +10 at level 1 because he can.

As to being a doctor?

I've played plenty of clerics. None have claimed to be doctors. Some have claimed to have a touch of skill in the healing arts. But, my warlord, my scholar, herald of death, my raving doomsayer, and my flame of justice, and my defender of peace and love would not call themselves doctors any more than my chelaxian noble would call himself a savage (he's a barbarian). :)

These expectations you have are a meta concept that died when Monte Cook got his hands on the game. CoDzilla exists as a concept because clerics stomped over to your table, breathed radioactive fire on your expectations, and took a toxic poop on your prejudice's. There's a person on here who ran a game of all clerics and they simply annihilated the red hand of doom.

And you know what my group expects of me and my ulfen evangelist of gorum? To buff, hit things with my greatsword and be as metal as the days when Dio was young and Ozzy was still ridin that crazy train. When I heal it's because I've hacked apart all the other dudes and want to find more dudes to hack apart. Because the Lord in Iron demands I walk a path paved in skulls and mortared by the blood of my enemies.

So, to conclude my late night rant. I'm not going to bother telling you that these hypothetical scenarios are crap (wizard is bleeding and unconscious? Get off the wizard class before you hurt yourself). You should know by now that such scenarios presented in such a way are incomplete nonsense. No one has successfully presented to me in any of these threads a plausible scenario where healing immediately was the best option available. I've seen a few that are reasonable, heck I've seen one or two rare scenarios where a very strong heal actually changed the course of a battle. I won't deny that it's handy in a pinch. No one can. But to tell me that those scenarios alone are reason to force an outdated expectation on a cleric and no one else after all the reading, scrounging, and hard studying I've done for this game? Well, prepare to be as shocked as a 1950's preacher's wife at an S&M club.


In other news I'm so tired I jsut spent an hour typing a reply to a person I'm never going to convince ever over a subject I literally crap all over every time I pick up the class. Help me TOZ.! ;-;


Don't forget about Adepts, they can heal as well :)

Personally I'm a huge fan of playing NPC classes. I've even playing an epic level commoner (21st in a 3.5 game). Being seen as a simple man with no form of nobility/standing/fame/etc can be very useful.


I would like to point out though. There are many a time where a well placed healing spell is extremely useful. For instance, my last game, we were in a giant room with 2 enemies ahead of us and an assassin somewhere in the room. The fighter charges in and accidentally triggered a trap (rogue didn't have time to sweep the room. Kinda hard to explain in RP why the rogue is all over the floors and the walls when the Oracle is talking to the assassin to get information.) Well, as luck would have it, the fighter survives the trap but the wizard, the rogue, the oracle of metal, and the inquisitor all get hit with a fireball trap (cliche yes?). I managed to avoid it (oracle of life [kinda knew ahead of time the game would have alot of undead]) with stupid luck. Well at that point a good deal of our party was hurt pretty bad (the GM likes throwing high powered traps at us) so healing actually helped out alot.

Additionally, many people seem to assume everyone in the party is a super optimized power house machine, but guess what? For MOST parties, that is not the case. Heck, my game alone has 2 new players. Most of the games I have been in (and I have been in many different groups having grown up an Army brat and am now a Navy sailor) have been made up of a few experianced players and alot of new players or people just looking to have fun. In nearly all those scenerioes a person who can throw powerful heals is actually rather needed.


Quote:
Additionally, many people seem to assume everyone in the party is a super optimized power house machine, but guess what? For MOST parties, that is not the case. Heck, my game alone has 2 new players. Most of the games I have been in (and I have been in many different groups having grown up an Army brat and am now a Navy sailor) have been made up of a few experianced players and alot of new players or people just looking to have fun. In nearly all those scenerioes a person who can throw powerful heals is actually rather needed.

No, no one assumes that everyone is optimized. If you have a cleric, ONLY YOU need to be remotely optimized--and not super optimized, just very very low optimization. In fact, I can summarize what you apparently consider "super optimization" in one sentence. Beware, because after reading the following three words, you will immediately transform into an expert cleric player:

Prepare buff spells.

There, done. It doesn't matter in the slightest whether the party is optimized or not, just have the cleric use powerful buff spells and you will be sufficiently powerful that you will never need in-combat healing.


Noireve wrote:


Additionally, many people seem to assume everyone in the party is a super optimized power house machine, but guess what? For MOST parties, that is not the case.

of course not everybody is optimized. Some even cast cure spells :P

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Davor wrote:
A damage-oriented cleric can deal respectable damage AND heal the party just as well as a healing cleric. Sure, he can't do it as many times per day, but the difference is so minimal as to be laughable. A spell-oriented cleric can prevent damage before it occurs, making allies harder to hit, and almost impossible to crit barring extra abilities (I'm looking at you, greataxe-wielding cyclops). All of these are better options in the early rounds of combat.

Depends on how he's built for damage. If he's a negative channeler, than the only healing he has are wands, scrolls, potions, and specifically prepared healing spells.


Pathfinder Adventure, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
TarkXT wrote:

As to this other silly remark:

my original Quote:
It's simple, if you are a Cleric; I expect you to be able to heal if required and take the lead when fighting undead (either with knowledge or channels etc..) If you are pushing the barbarian and fighter out of the way to fight on the front line whilst the wizard in the back is bleeding out unconscious - you are kinda being a jerk.

Quote:

Ye gods the grognardia is strong here. Are you suggesting I lead the way in a fight against the undead with an ability that registers less damage on them than a fireball of an equivalent level? HEll, don't get me started on those show offs. This isn't 2nd or 3rd ed my friend if they fail their saves they get mildly ticked, they don't start running off to become easy meat for your fighters....

[and part 2]
....So, to conclude my late night rant. I'm not going to bother telling you that these hypothetical scenarios are crap (wizard is bleeding and unconscious? Get off the wizard class before you hurt yourself). You should know by now that such scenarios presented in such a way are incomplete nonsense. No one has successfully presented to me in any of these threads a plausible scenario where healing immediately was the best option available. I've seen a few that are reasonable, heck I've seen one or two rare scenarios where a very strong heal actually changed the course of a battle.

Whilst I respect your opinions (and you obviously have a lot of them).

You are wrong however, the Wizard above the 'hypothetical example was in fact my Summoner, who collapsed whilst the Paladin and Cleric of the party decided to to go 'nova' leaving their comrade to bleed out. (during Eyes of the Ten).

As for the rest of your 'rant' you kinda missed the point. The point wasn't that other classes could/can heal. It was talking about effective healing in combat; and what sort of healing might be required. It's not about whether clerics can be effective front-line fighters (In my years I have seen/played/gm most of the builds). My post comments on peoples play-styles and managing expectations at the table.

The fact is if you are taking a support class; i.e. a Class whose character fills a support role, then you should be willing to provide that support as needed. As for your comment referencing undead; there is nothing like a cleric when the party is wraith or shadow especially at first level.

as for the ad hominem on Grognard.. yep guilty. I have played since first edition and am coming up on 4th star in PFS, but the Don't be a Jerk rule is timeless..

It's reasonable to expect a Cleric to heal if required and take the lead when fighting undead (either with knowledge/tactics or channels etc..) Most of their powers come from the Divine and they are fighting the antitheses of life after all.

51 to 89 of 89 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Healing Goalposts All Messageboards

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