|
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
So spare me the little, "I don't wanna heal, I want to play a battle cleric," attitude. It will take you three successful turns to do the damage any of the damage classes do in one turn. So sack up and do your JOB.
As a GM, that is not an attitude I would tolerate at my table.
|
Eric,
Are you saying there is only one way to play a Wizard, Cleric, Rogue, ect?
I merely pointed out that MY healer has options beyond healing and does a lot. Other folks have said that their characters were built for other things than the cookie cutter forms you seem, through your post, to indicate you expect everyone to do.
One of my pet peeves is the lack of trap-finding among the rogue archetypes, but each does play a particular niche. So, a rogue two weapon wielder who likes to feint is as valid as a 'hobbit burglar' with trap finding. Not everyone has the same expectations in a fight.
As for a 'battle cleric' not being a valid type. I think, like many things in life, results may vary. One person's playstyle isn't the same as another.
I know some of the posts have been of the bent you are going on about BUT the attitude of the OP was that he was TOLD to do something.
Do you like being TOLD how your character SHOULD be played, do, or what to buy/get?
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hey you're a cleric who doesn't heal and Bob's a rogue who doesn't find traps.
Since you don't heal Mr. Cleric, you'll be taking point to find traps today. And when the fight begins, we expect you to be in the front lines battling it out against the BBEG, with your 20 AC.
Since Frank the Tank with his 25 AC fighter ain't interested in taking all the damage, if Mr. Cleric can't be bothered to heal him in battle, so your AC 20 Mr. Cleric will have to share some of the damage, up front.
And my archer, he won't be firing 3 arrows per round with his multi-shot since he doesn't want to become a target, if Mr. Cleric won't heal him, when all the baddies want to kill him for doing 40-80 dmg each turn.
The only time I expect to use my CLW wand as a fighter, is if there is no healer in the party, otherwise, I EXPECT the healer class to heal. You'll never out damage my archer, so why bother with your piddly channel negative energy and your crappy Cause Serious Wounds?
And before you whiners start talking to me about not knowing how clerics work, MY primary character is a lvl. 7 Cleric. Oh and I HEAL, I do other things, but I HEAL. Because I'll never out dmg the alchemist or the archer or the rogue but I might keep them on their feet just a few rounds longer to kill the BBEG with the superior dmg, rather than waste spells that might be resisted or might get saved against for 1/2 damage.
So spare me the little, "I don't wanna heal, I want to play a battle cleric," attitude. It will take you three successful turns to do the damage any of the damage classes do in one turn. So sack up and do your JOB.
And this isn't directed at anyone here in particular, its just a pet peeve of mine, when Clerics don't heal. Because they think they are so cool doing 1d8+4 with their enhancement spell, while my archer is doing 1d8+12 x 3 each turn.
Wow.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32
|
So spare me the little, "I don't wanna heal, I want to play a battle cleric," attitude. It will take you three successful turns to do the damage any of the damage classes do in one turn. So sack up and do your JOB.
I play an inquisitor 1 (infiltrator) / Cleric X (evangelist).
I can't spontaneously heal, I don't channel for healing, and I don't deal damage.
However, I can spontaneously disable and command enemies, boost the stealth and disguise of the entire party, maintain large numbers of extended buffs and debuffs, throw many prepared battlefield control spells, and have a bluff bonus in the mid twenties at level 3. What's more. I keep extra wands and scrolls prepared for healing after a battle, even though it is not expected of me where I play. In short, I do my job very well, I've just chosen my own job instead of letting arbitrary classes choose my job for me.
If you would rather a character built in this fashion heal instead of do any of the other things that it is capable of, you will end up being rather disappointed with the output of my cure light wounds wand and infernal healing wand. Never you mind that being met with this attitude would cause me to walk away from your table every day of the week.
So spare me the little, "I don't wanna heal, I want to play a battle cleric," attitude. It will take you three successful turns to do the damage any of the damage classes do in one turn. So sack up and do your JOB.
Can we not make the thread about telling people what to do and how their class works? A cleric can frontline relatively well, especially if he has time to buff up. CoDzilla was a thing in the past.
Anyways, was the point about a cleric who didn't want to heal, or about how someone though they didn't have to bring their own healing? If you bring your own wand I don't have a problem using it, but if I have to use my own because you refuse to bring one specifically because its my job to use my resources on you I might not be so happy about it. I usually share my charges of infernal healing, and whatever other spells I happen to have(I usually carry a bundle).
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Now, now, now, colleagues: Eric has a right to his position.
Eric, my service to Charon, lord of the Styx, limits the flexibility I might have, ministering to living creatures such as yourself.
You insist that I heal your wounds, and by the powers granted me I shall be all too happy to oblige. But I would require in turn a little, shall we say, adjustment on your part. After all, it's not PvP if the victim insists upon it.
|
|
Also, since you seem to have an interest in system mastery, did you know that it is more efficient to have everyone attack (or buff attacks to, or debuff attacks from) the BBEG than it is to have one person waste each round topping people's HP off?
Dead BBEGs do significantly less damage.
Ah, maybe I didn't explain myself quite well.
I don't heal anyone in the first round, unless the BBEG gets initiative and does a butt load of damage. I'll cast non-healing spells like bless or even a Cause Serious Wounds and make sure that the BBEG feels he's been "inappropriately touched by a member of the clergy." But at the end of the day, if I see my people taking a beat down from an AoE, I'm going to counter it with an AoE with a positive channel of my own and I don't grumble about it.
And you know what, I've gone to games where 3 tables were open and people at each table know my cleric. And I'm sure, some of them are thinking, 'Eric's cleric is not a glory hog who needs to be the center of attention and he's never had anyone die in his party either.' And then I get invited to all three tables.
So my big bad cleric will channel negative energy to hit 5 undead in one shot but everyone knows that when push comes to shove, they don't have to worry about having a CLW wand to keep them alive, while they are tanking a 160 hp. golem, that has 6 attacks, either.
|
|
There seems to be a lot of debate on the various roles of characters, and of fighters, and every other class going on, as well as who the healer is.
Most of the arguments I feel the need to make have already been made, and the people who need to listen aren't listening, making the probably one of the most inflammatory and pointless threads on the boards right now (although if people would listen, it would be extremely valuable).
You can never depend on what another party member might play. I'm not saying class, I'm saying role. You have NO RIGHT to tell other people who know their character and built their character, who want their character to be their character, how to play their "class."
In a team game like this, everybody should contribute to the combat in some way (sorry face rogues, I know it's a cool concept but PFS is designed with too much combat to not need combat effectiveness). It is almost never optimal to heal in combat, because most monsters will hit harder than most characters can heal.
One person kept talking about his massive damage barbarian. Good for you, I have one too! Mine has bought over his career all of 2 wands of CLW and 1 wand of infernal healing. Just over 2000 of his total 135k gold. Most of it was actually bought with prestige, which he's spent on nothing else. It is a pittance, and especially when you play a barbarian, you have to be the team player. Barbarians are designed to be hit and be able to take hits with their vast health pool. By making a barbarian you have to understand you will be a resource vacuum. You need to be responsible especially in this situation, for your own charcter. If you intentionally make a character that is going to be a massive drain on resources, don't demand other people to waste theirs on you because you are selfish.
The wand of CLW is not meant of in-combat healing. It is the single most efficient out-of-combat healing in the game (sans Wand of Infernal Healing from those who suckle from devils). Especially at low level, clerics don't get many spells, and they wil simply not be able to heal all the damage you take. Don't expect them to try, especially at the cost of not being able to play their own character.
For the record, my cleric is a buffing evangelist cleric. No spontaneous conversion, and reduced channeling. Don't tell me I have to heal you because you're using reckless tactics. Battle clerics are some of the best damage dealers in the game, and can easily do damage on par with most melees or archers.
There's so much more I could say, and want to say, but it's a waste of time sadly.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Could you explain that please?What's abundantly clear to me by the hosts of ad hominems, personal insults, irrelevant anecdotes, and conflating of issues is that many posters, including you, have an agenda. It's apparent to me that to the extent such a discussion about healing even suggests that clerics should be "expected" to heal sets you and others at Def Con 1. You're afraid that if one were to even acknowledge on an academic level that the primary function of a cleric is to heal, it means you'll have to concede that this is all a cleric should be doing or that clerics that don't focus on healing are doing it wrong.
No, people don't want to agree with you about a cleric's primary role being healing because you're wrong.
The primary role of any character is defined by the person who created and plays that character, not by their class.
That's why so many people have given you examples of clerics who mostly focus on other things, and treat healing as a secondary role, if that much. Each character defines their own role. Why would you keep insisting that any class has a primary role in a game with so much flexibility?
Well, my alchemist could have spend a discovery on infusions, so he'd be able to make potions of cure light wounds for the party for free. Instead he took Explosive Bomb, which means he'll damage more.
At the next level, he could have selfishly taken Spontaneous Healing, so he'd be able to bring himself back if he got taken out, but I decided he's got enough trust in the society that he'll take Precise Bombs, which helps the party more.
You want to be as self-sufficient as possible, without being overly selfish about it. It's a balancing act.
|
|
Could you explain that please?What's abundantly clear to me by the hosts of ad hominems, personal insults, irrelevant anecdotes, and conflating of issues is that many posters, including you, have an agenda. It's apparent to me that to the extent such a discussion about healing even suggests that clerics should be "expected" to heal sets you and others at Def Con 1. You're afraid that if one were to even acknowledge on an academic level that the primary function of a cleric is to heal, it means you'll have to concede that this is all a cleric should be doing or that clerics that don't focus on healing are doing it wrong.No, people don't want to agree with you about a cleric's primary role being healing because you're wrong.
The primary role of any character is defined by the person who created and plays that character, not by their class.
That's why so many people have given you examples of clerics who mostly focus on other things, and treat healing as a secondary role, if that much. Each character defines their own role. Why would you keep insisting that any class has a primary role in a game with so much flexibility?
Show me a cleric build that can out damage my archer or my fellow player's alchemist or a wizard or a rogue.
If you want to do dmg, don't play a cleric, since then you're wasting everyone's time and taking up a valuable seat at the table, that could go to someone who's actually designed to bring the pain.
I'm guessing here but your best cleric build ever, has never even come close to doing 1/2 the dmg that the rogue or the archer does or alchemist, has he?
I'm further going to go out on a limb here and say, 'for all the damage you've done, my heal cleric at the same level has done 3 times, more than you have.'
Wha, wha, what??? Not possible you say.
Yup, you see when I healed the barbarian mid battle for 40hp and he's not bleeding out on the ground and is instead doing another 30 dmg. per round, that's NOT his damage, that's MY dmg, he's doing, he's dead in that scenario and at that point he's MY Summoned Monster.
When I channeled positive and everyone went from 10-15hp. due to a breath weapon to 35-40hp. the next time the 'dragon' jumped at someone, he didn't have to shred his character sheet and everyone else, didn't have to run and 'FAIL' the scenario, instead they killed the 'dragon' with another 60 dmg. again, that wasn't their dmg. that was MY dmg.
Sorry but my heals out dmg any of you combat clerics by a ration of 3:1.
Now, I'm not targeting you specifically but all the folks, who think their 'battle' clerics are such a hot idea. Because quite frankly, when I sit down at a table, I want people to bring the pain or bring the buffs or bring the heals.
Give me 100% of your potential at the table and I'll welcome you with open arms. Give me 30% of your potential and most people will want someone else at the table, instead of your 'battle' cleric.
|
|
Could you explain that please?What's abundantly clear to me by the hosts of ad hominems, personal insults, irrelevant anecdotes, and conflating of issues is that many posters, including you, have an agenda. It's apparent to me that to the extent such a discussion about healing even suggests that clerics should be "expected" to heal sets you and others at Def Con 1. You're afraid that if one were to even acknowledge on an academic level that the primary function of a cleric is to heal, it means you'll have to concede that this is all a cleric should be doing or that clerics that don't focus on healing are doing it wrong.No, people don't want to agree with you about a cleric's primary role being healing because you're wrong.
The primary role of any character is defined by the person who created and plays that character, not by their class.
That's why so many people have given you examples of clerics who mostly focus on other things, and treat healing as a secondary role, if that much. Each character defines their own role. Why would you keep insisting that any class has a primary role in a game with so much flexibility?
Well put Fromper!
I tend not to tell people what class my battle oracle is. I just say front liner.
If they ask I say battle oracle. Then they do silly things like try to protect me with their usually inferior AC and damage output. Because obviously the hulking tiefling with black spiked plate mail, a pole arm, and a symbol of Gorum on his chest need protecting.....;)
|
Wow.Hey you're a cleric who doesn't heal and Bob's a rogue who doesn't find traps.
Since you don't heal Mr. Cleric, you'll be taking point to find traps today. And when the fight begins, we expect you to be in the front lines battling it out against the BBEG, with your 20 AC.
Since Frank the Tank with his 25 AC fighter ain't interested in taking all the damage, if Mr. Cleric can't be bothered to heal him in battle, so your AC 20 Mr. Cleric will have to share some of the damage, up front.
And my archer, he won't be firing 3 arrows per round with his multi-shot since he doesn't want to become a target, if Mr. Cleric won't heal him, when all the baddies want to kill him for doing 40-80 dmg each turn.
The only time I expect to use my CLW wand as a fighter, is if there is no healer in the party, otherwise, I EXPECT the healer class to heal. You'll never out damage my archer, so why bother with your piddly channel negative energy and your crappy Cause Serious Wounds?
And before you whiners start talking to me about not knowing how clerics work, MY primary character is a lvl. 7 Cleric. Oh and I HEAL, I do other things, but I HEAL. Because I'll never out dmg the alchemist or the archer or the rogue but I might keep them on their feet just a few rounds longer to kill the BBEG with the superior dmg, rather than waste spells that might be resisted or might get saved against for 1/2 damage.
So spare me the little, "I don't wanna heal, I want to play a battle cleric," attitude. It will take you three successful turns to do the damage any of the damage classes do in one turn. So sack up and do your JOB.
And this isn't directed at anyone here in particular, its just a pet peeve of mine, when Clerics don't heal. Because they think they are so cool doing 1d8+4 with their enhancement spell, while my archer is doing 1d8+12 x 3 each turn.
Wow heard, and seconded sir.
|
I know that locally, ie.. in the Jax area, we're not to bad on this. A LOT of players are pretty charitable with their wands of clw. Typically giving them to the cleric with a 'take care of the group' attitude. We have a few players that prefer to get their charges on them.. but that is more to spare the healer his spells than 'my stuff for me'.
That has been my experience as well, in the Twin Cities metro area (Minneapolis/St Paul). I can even remember a case, when going through the Temple of Empyreal Enlightenment that the two sorcerers in the group, each of whom had a wand of Infernal Healing used their charges to heal the group, even though my gunslinger and my buddy's inquisitor had wands of cure lights. In general, I have found people to be very generous with their healing.
This has prompted me to do things like have my Gunslinger/Inquisitor buy a wand of Endure Elements with 2PP, because we learned where we were going was potentially going to have extreme conditions. Of course, playing a gunslinger, I have realized that expendables are just part of the game (rare is the scenario that Munny doesn't burn through 60-100gp of bullets and cartridges). When asked if there is anything that a caster could prepare, I will suggest an Abundant Ammunition (or two), so that if I have to resort to the expensive stuff (cold iron or adamantine paper cartridges), they will be replenished. I've even thought of buying a wand (or even some oils), but it hasn't seemed worth it in the long run. If I need to burn through 5 adamantine paper cartridges at a cost of 180gp, I will... far better than letting the combat extend for another half dozen turns, causing a higher expenditure of healing, etc.
The only time I have complained with my rogue about a lack of flanking was when a player moved his ranger out of flanking, allowing the imps we were fighting to A) Gang up on me (with their DEX damaging poison), and B) stop being flanked, so that I couldn't really damage them. This was a situation where tactically he should have stayed (since he gave up his flank as well). But, more commonly, I will rely on Silbeg's skill in acrobatics to tumble around to where he needs to be. If I get hit with an AoO, so be it, but that is also why he's got a decent armor class.
|
A Witch can heal, does it mean that the Witch should be there to heal?
A Druid can heal, does it mean that the Druid should be there to heal?
A Ranger can heal, does it mean that the Ranger should be there to heal?
A Bard can heal, does it mean that the Bard should be there to heal?
An Alchemist can heal, does it mean that the Alchemist should be there to heal?
An Inquisitor can heal, does it mean that the Inquisitor should be there to heal?
An Oracle can heal, does it mean that the Oracle should be there to heal?
A Paladin can heal, does it mean that the Paladin should be there to heal?
If you say that there are more options to these classes, then the Cleric has every right to choose what they want, Archetype, Domain, or otherwise. If you say that a Cleric is there to heal because they have cures and channels, an Oracle can cure and could channel. A Paladin can cure and channel, and even have lay on hands.
Do not expect the class to be there to fit your whim. Remember that this is a team game and everyone has their character to play, not a game where you want to be the star player and everyone else follows your whim.
As for supplying one's own items, make note that what people have is what people have. The risk of people not supplying their own stuff is what people has to see beforehand and evaluate if they can survive the mission with the items there. If this results in a TPK, everyone is in part responsible to their situation. The Inquisitor cannot blame the Oracle for not supplying a cure wand if the Inquisitor is clueless enough to believe that they can walk in and come out unscathed.
An actual example was when I was inside Bonekeep. We had a Fighter, Barbarian, Ranger, Paladin, Paladin, and Bard. Both Paladins could not use lay on hands or channel energy. The Ranger was a Two-Handed Ranger. The Bard was a Geisha Bard that focused on Enchantment Spells in her slots. How did we survive 6 rooms? We each supplied enough healing potions/scrolls ourselves to push through with sheer muscle. If we did not, we would have been killed in room 2.
Remember again that this game is a team game, and everyone need to supply stuff to let the team live, or expect to have a lower that suggested survival rate on characters you might have spent weeks/months playing with and scenarios that are now unable to replay because your dead character played through them.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Eric, people have the right to play their character however they wish. It is their character, not yours and you have no right to tell them how they should play it. If they are asking for tips, that is another story. This is NOT world of Warcraft. There is no minimum damage required to fulfill the role you choose. Nobody should feel bullied to change roles simply because another character is outperforming them. Every class can dish out damage depending on the build, whether it is more or less effective than another character does not matter. All that matters is that you have fun playing your character in a way that YOU want to play it.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Eric,
Might I suggest you play Dragon Age: Origins? You get to adventure in a party of 4, you get companions that heal you, and you get to micromanage their gear and actions.
Else, this is a co-operative game. If the cleric doesn't want to use his actions to heal you, if the wizard wants to evoke rather than haste you, if the bard wants to focus on himself (I refer to Devish Dancers as 'greedy bards' because everyone is shocked when their buffs only work on themselves), they can, and will. They're not your characters.
My personal experience, especially with new players, is a sigh of sadness when the cleric has to cross off that spell he wanted, to cast cure X wounds.
|
|
You guys are right, no one should have to play anything they don't want to and shouldn't be bullied or coerced or any of that other stuff.
-----
But me and my fellow gamers still have the right to get up from the table and not to play with the battle cleric, if he's doing 1/3rd of the dmg that the other PCs are doing, right? We also have a right not to be coerced or bullied to play with a useless PC?
I just want to clarify if I have the same rights as everyone else?
|
|
You guys are right, no one should have to play anything they don't want to and shouldn't be bullied or coerced or any of that other stuff.
-----
But me and my fellow gamers still have the right to get up from the table and not to play with the battle cleric, if he's doing 1/3rd of the dmg that the other PCs are doing, right? We also have a right not to be coerced or bullied to play with a useless PC?
I just want to clarify if I have the same rights as everyone else?
No one should have to build a character or play in a manner they do not wish too, nor should they be patronized for such.
No one must sit at a table with any player they do not wish too, for any reason, nor should they be patronized for such.
That said, all individuals measure their views and experiences differently. We should all try to be courteous. Sitting away from another player because of their build is something I find to be jerkish. I would welcome any character build at a table I play at.
That said, I would sit away from a player if they chose to play in a manner that is disruptive, purposefully uncooperative, or rudely confrontational with every NPC encountered. Some might consider that to be jerkish.
It's all about perspective. I try to treat everyone fairly. Sometimes this requires more effort than others.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Being asked to bring your own happy stick isn't rude. Not bringing one and then expecting other players to cover down on your cheap a-- is rude.
Not bringing a CLW wand is like showing up at a BYOB party and asking,
"who brought the booze?"
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Move action: quick channel 8d6 negative energy (select out up to five party members, DC 21 Will save for half)
Swift action: Activate Channel smite
Standard action: Vital Strike for +15 / 4d6+20+8d6 negative energy (DC 21 Will save for half)
---
90 damage on average, max 140, min 40 if they fail both saves, single target
28 average damage to everyone else in 30 ft
32/62/92 single target if both saves are made
14 average damage to everyone else in 30 ft
Or I can just channel twice for 16d6.
Now add in the Whimsy domain (this is a separatist Cleric, after all)
Roll 1d6.
1: 1d6 less dice
2 - 4: normal dice
5 or 6: +1d6 dice to channel
---
That's a stupid, but legal build I threw together in 5 minutes. There are much better ones out there.
I know you're going to move the goalposts and tell me that's not good enough, or equivalent, or whatever to the magical unicorn archer and alchemist builds you have hidden behind your screen. But that's why comparing damage builds across classes is silly.
Point is, I'd hardly call that useless. But yes, you'd have every right to walk away from the table, and I'd encourage you to exercise it.
|
|
Bleed Condition:
A creature that is taking bleed damage takes the listed amount of damage at the beginning of its turn. Bleeding can be stopped by a DC 15 Heal check or through the application of any spell that cures hit point damage (even if the bleed is ability damage). Some bleed effects cause ability damage or even ability drain. Bleed effects do not stack with each other unless they deal different kinds of damage. When two or more bleed effects deal the same kind of damage, take the worse effect. In this case, ability drain is worse than ability damage.
Infernal Healing:
1) Is it a Spell? Yes.
2) Does it heal hit point damage? Yes.Therefore it stops bleed effects.
If you have Fast Healing via nature, I agree, does not end bleed. As it, seems straight forward to me.
No it does not heal hit point damage.
Infernal healing gives you the "fast healing 1" ability for 10 rounds.
The spell itself does not heal the damage.
|
RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
But me and my fellow gamers still have the right to get up from the table and not to play with the battle cleric, if he's doing 1/3rd of the dmg that the other PCs are doing, right? We also have a right not to be coerced or bullied to play with a useless PC?
To quote Captain Hindsight: If you sit at a table assuming each PC to be played a certain way, you're going to have a bad time.
There are many unquantifiable ways that PCs contribute to combat, the very least of which (in my mind) is damage. As has been stated before here: this is a system built on variables. There are 10 different ways to accomplish the same thing, be that damage or support. And pigeon-holing clerics into one category brings nothing constructive to the table.
Indeed, you have the right to play with whomever you see fit, and to stand up from a table if you think it best. I would only say that this though.
Rather than try and fit a non-support PC into a support role, why not, with your mastery of the system, educate that player on how they might improve that character, or suggest other options they might enjoy more? Usually, people starting out in RPGs gravitate toward a playstyle, and try to play that way regardless of class. Since you have an understanding of the Pathfinder rules, I'd encourage you to help less informed players with their characters, rather than slighting them, or simply getting up and leaving.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Could you explain that please?What's abundantly clear to me by the hosts of ad hominems, personal insults, irrelevant anecdotes, and conflating of issues is that many posters, including you, have an agenda. It's apparent to me that to the extent such a discussion about healing even suggests that clerics should be "expected" to heal sets you and others at Def Con 1. You're afraid that if one were to even acknowledge on an academic level that the primary function of a cleric is to heal, it means you'll have to concede that this is all a cleric should be doing or that clerics that don't focus on healing are doing it wrong.No, people don't want to agree with you about a cleric's primary role being healing because you're wrong.
The primary role of any character is defined by the person who created and plays that character, not by their class.
That's why so many people have given you examples of clerics who mostly focus on other things, and treat healing as a secondary role, if that much. Each character defines their own role. Why would you keep insisting that any class has a primary role in a game with so much flexibility?
Show me a cleric build that can out damage my archer or my fellow player's alchemist or a wizard or a rogue.
If you want to do dmg, don't play a cleric, since then you're wasting everyone's time and taking up a valuable seat at the table, that could go to someone who's actually designed to bring the pain.
I'm guessing here but your best cleric build ever, has never even come close to doing 1/2 the dmg that the rogue or the archer does or alchemist, has he?
I'm further going to go out on a limb here and say, 'for all the damage you've done, my heal cleric at the same level has done 3 times, more than you have.'
So from what I'm reading here, your position is:
1. If you're not uber-optimized, don't bother showing up.
2. Damage and healing are the only two roles in any party.
I really hope I never meet you at a gaming table.
As for my own clerics, I had one that did over 50 points of damage in a single round at level 1. Bit of Luck domain power on the gunslinger standing next to me. He shot his gun and rolled two d20s because of my power. One of them would have missed, and the other was a natural 20. He got to roll twice on the confirmation, too. That's my cleric whose primary role is to be a buffer. He heals some, too, but it's not his primary role. That's why I gave him higher wisdom than charisma - uses per day of those buffing domain powers was more important than uses per day of channel energy.
I have another cleric whose main role is debuffer. He's got the Touch of Chaos domain power, so enemies will have to roll twice and use the worse roll, and a racial favored class bonus to get more uses per day out of it. Since I was dumping charisma on this guy anyway, I decided to channel negative energy, since his whole schtick is to touch people on the front line, so he can spontaneously cast inflict spells. It's not the highest damage in the game, but it'll get past any DR. Since he usually prepares debuff spells exclusively, his only method of healing is from a wand.
But I guess my buff specialist and debuff specialist clerics aren't good enough characters to play at the tables with Eric Saxon or N N 959, since I defined their primary role as something other than healer.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But me and my fellow gamers still have the right to get up from the table and not to play with the battle cleric, if he's doing 1/3rd of the dmg that the other PCs are doing, right? We also have a right not to be coerced or bullied to play with a useless PC?
I just want to clarify if I have the same rights as everyone else?
Yes you do. By all means, please exercise them.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Rather than try and fit a non-support PC into a support role, why not, with your mastery of the system, educate that player on how they might improve that character, or suggest other options they might enjoy more? Usually, people starting out in RPGs gravitate toward a playstyle, and try to play that way regardless of class. Since you have an understanding of the Pathfinder rules, I'd encourage you to help less informed players with their characters, rather than slighting them, or simply getting up and leaving.
You sir, are a gentleman and a scholar. I would consider myself lucky were I to be able to play at your table.
|
|
You can play your character how you want.
If someone wants you to have a wand in an adventure I would tell them, "buy me one then.".
If you do not want to spend your resources there, that is fine. But you should not have to spend your resources on other players when they can buy a wand for you to use on them.
Sure you can.
But don’t expect someone to use their consumable on you.
And don’t assume that a “healing” classes spell slots and/or abilities are at your disposal either.
Just as much as you want to play your character the way you want to play them, others have the same luxury.
That being said, it is socially accepted that you provide for your own healing and don’t overly burden the “healing” classes with it. They should not have to spend all their spell slots and x/day abilities on you, because you refuse to account for your own healing.
It is your choice. Just know the consequences of your choice.
|
|
So from what I'm reading here, your position is:
1. If you're not uber-optimized, don't bother showing up.
Have you played a S4 scenario lately?
I'm not for requiring, uber-optimized PCs but Paizo is making them mandatory these days, from what I've seen. Or you're going to watch your PCs eat it, if most of your group isn't, optimized to a major degree.
And half if not most of the people here, who say 'people have the right to play what they want,' are also among the group who keep pushing for harder and harder scenarios and Paizo listens to them.
So, if I'm facing down BBEGs who are 2 times stronger than they were S0-3, then I adjust my play style and who I group with. It didn't used to be like this. But you adapt or your PCs die. And when your PCs keep dying at lvl. 6, you'll eventually quit.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll never understand why there exists such resistence to the idea of purchasing wands of CLW. They are enormously cheap and remarkably useful. You only delay your ability to get raised by 1 scenario, but you make the necessity of such a raising a more distant possibility.
I may be new, and in fact I only started playing Pathfinder two weeks ago. However, I have played lots of tabletop RPGs before as well as other D&D style games (Baldurs Gate etc) but that is irrelevant to where I am going with this.
What I do find relevant is besides a meager 2PP that gets taken away your ability to get raised by one scenario, it seems there are a ton of 2-4PP items you can buy that help mitigate the chances of EVER needing it in the first place. Personally I am happy having spent 2PP for this item. If it saves my PC or another one from death even once, then it has served this purpose.
I play this game to have FUN; and as we all know, dying and losing your character is never fun!
|
|
<<I am deleting the first part of this post where I talk about a cleric. It got a lot of attention and I felt it was distracting from the point of the post; a point that I expressed much better and with less general frustration on the second page of this thread. >>
I am pretty darn sick of being told I need to get a cure wand. As if my contributions to the party don’t count because I don’t come with wand included. I can’t count the number of times I was the only one at the table able to identify a monster. In Slave Pits of Absalom my familiar saved the party from a TPK. In Frozen Fingers of Midnight I disarmed the big bad in the first round of combat. In Rise of the Goblin Guild I caught the goblin after jumping out a window. In the Veteran’s Vault my wizard sprinted across the battle field and used one of his own potions to stabilize a party member while the heavy hitters ran away. I #$%! contribute.
Not having a cure wand does not make me a drain on party resources. I cast my spells to benefit other party members ALL THE TIME. I never once told someone they needed a wand of Resist Energy, Enlarge person, Bull Strength, Invisibility, or Fly.
And I would like to point out that when some crazy ninja/monk/assassin woman lays the smack down on my wizard he is taking damage that would have been directed at one of the other party members. Giving me a hard time for needing healing is really a jerk move. Particularly when my Magic Missiles were about the only things that could hit her.
Because I get told every time I game that I NEED a cure wand I am buying one. I have never been so bitter about such a small thing. I am just sick of hearing about it.
Here's my simple take on it.
Character Classes are made to be distinctive, and to work together. Traditionally, healing is part of being a cleric, and if you happen to be a cleric who is spec'd where healing is difficult you need to make this clear up front.That said, by chosing to make such a cleric, you have diverged from what most people think of as a cleric. As such, don't feel bad if when you join a party as your cleric, the party reasonably asks "Do we need a second cleric?"
So, great, buy yourself a clw wand. But if we all think that is the necessity, then the party shouldn't feel upset when instead of pulling out the magic missle wand (the one I didn't spend the 2pp on) to tip the bad guy over death's doorstep, I pull out my clw wand and heal myself instead.
---
We recently played a game where a druid had replaced virtually all the druid low level feats with alternate ones. The party was really happy to have a druid because they were stuck in a briar maze fighting a nuisance enemy that could navigate the maze. But then they discovered the druid had traded in the ability to move through the briars in favor of a different (and ultimately useless) ability - ocean-going themed druid in an all dry land campaign. Yup. He was still a druid. No, no one was happy about having a druid any more.
The wizard with cures, the cleric without, the fighter who can only fight well ranged, the rogue who can't pick locks, the bard with no perform skill. Yup, you can make all of those things in PFS. But you may just end up as that guy with a trendy character.
My thought: Be what you are, be good at it, throw in as much flavor as you want without undermining your character's role in the world.
If I want a mage that can heal himself, kill, and tank... I'll go play my Warlock in WOW.
;)
If I played a cleric, and my party continually felt like their only recourse to healing was to use wands, I'd probably feel bad that they didn't trust me to take care of them when they needed it.
I tend to play dwarven battle clerics when I play a cleric, but somehow I manage to find time to cover the heals. Yeah, sometimes I burn a spell I MIGHT have liked to use elsewhere. But the wizard probably didn't want to use the last charge in his wand to keep the bad guy from doing a coup de grace on my unconscious self either. :)
|
|
So from what I'm reading here, your position is:
1. If you're not uber-optimized, don't bother showing up.
Have you played a S4 scenario lately?
I'm not for requiring, uber-optimized PCs but Paizo is making them mandatory these days, from what I've seen. Or you're going to watch your PC eat it, if most of your group isn't.
And half if not most of the people here, who say 'people have the right to play what they want,' are also among the group who keep pushing for harder and harder scenarios and Paizo listens to them.
So, if I'm facing down BBEGs who are 2 times stronger than they were S0-3, then I adjust my play style and who I group with. It didn't used to be like this. But you adapt or your PCs die. And when your PCs keep dying at lvl. 6, you'll eventually quit.
Yes I have. I've played a 3-7 with new players user iconics and my PC was the only non-iconic there. I have even played the Exclusive (Day of the Demon) with 4 other non-caster types, one of them a build that seemed very squishy.
Both times we had close calls, particularly in DotD since we had to watch out for challenges that a healer could have fixed on the fly. Despite two times in both have at least one PC down to negatives, we came out all alive.
I've also GM'd season 4 games where the 'director' type player, über optimized like you indicated was needed, nearly got the players killed. I've sat a table with 5 GMs and seen an optimized monster PC nearly kill the rest of the group. My PC had to put him down to save the rest of the party.
A table that gets along, works together and works at their goals works better for me than a table full of optimized Pcs that argue with each other over tactics and plans. The original poster complained about being bossed at, and I sympathize.
You, Eric, seem to indicate in your posts that if we don't do things the right way (ie Clerics hea, ect) that we're doing it wrong. Others have offered expanded options on how to build team play.
My suggestion, which I am going to follow right after I hit enter, is this: get up, walk away and think about what has been said. Relax. This is about a game folks, we are all trying to have fun. Nothing more or less. Talk about how to improve game play, not argue that other folks method are wrong or whatever.
We're here to build a better experience, not batter at each other. Take a walk, see a movie, cool down before the language gets too intemperate. Me? I'm going to go out and watch planes take off at the local NAS while having a late lunch with a friend and swap lies about his kid and my niece.
Well to respond to the original point, which was. 'Why should I buy/use a CLW wand when there is a cleric in the party?' The biggest reason for a CLW wand is to heal everyone to full after each battle and generally one should avoid using it during combat. When playing a non cleric/oracle I would far prefer using charges off my own CLW wand to heal up and making sure that the cleric/oracle keeps their spell slots for when they are needed, in combat. The cost of a few charges from a CLW wand is minor compared to the potential benefit of a key Protection from Evil, Comprehend Languages, or timely Command spell. I would generally prefer our cleric to save their channel energy for combat as well, it is far more useful after the entire party gets hit by a surprise fireball from an invisible BBEG than to save me the 2PP every 3-4 levels I spend on a CLW wand. Yes sometimes the cleric has unspent resources at the end of the adventure and I wasted a few charges on my wand but that is a sacrifice I am willing to make every single game for the comfort of knowing my cleric/oracle still has the majority of their arsenal ready when we confront a tough fight later in the adventure.
The second claim I heard was that a cleric's job is to heal since there is no way they can ever be as good at damage/whatever as any other class. First off this is incorrect, a good optimizer can make a cleric who can excel at damage, battlefield control, buffs/debuffs, and generally filling all sorts of roles. Secondly the most important thing for the player sitting across from me to do is to help create an atmosphere of enjoyment for everyone (players and DM). I don't require the people I play with to always make the most optimal choices with their completely optimized characters, I ask of them to try hard, take the game seriously while remembering it is a game and we are all here to have fun. Finally I assume the person next to me knows their character better than I do, so while I could have yelled at this 4th level cleric I played with to heal me for 2d8+3 instead I let him play his character and he cast burning hands on the four thugs who were attacking me for 25 points of damage each. Pretty sure that was more effective than any 4th level fighter/rogue/archer in terms of damage done. Of course damage done isn't a measuring stick I use when determining the value of a PC. Did you help us complete the mission, and did you add enjoyment to the game are the only measuring sticks I use.
|
|
Here's my simple take on it.
Character Classes are made to be distinctive, and to work together. Traditionally, healing is part of being a cleric, and if you happen to be a cleric who is spec'd where healing is difficult you need to make this clear up front.
That said, by chosing to make such a cleric, you have diverged from what most people think of as a cleric. As such, don't feel bad if when you join a party as your cleric, the party reasonably asks "Do we need a second cleric?"So, great, buy yourself a clw wand. But if we all think that is the necessity, then the party shouldn't feel upset when instead of pulling out the magic missle wand (the one I didn't spend the 2pp on) to tip the bad guy over death's doorstep, I pull out my clw wand and heal myself instead.
---
We recently played a game where a druid had replaced virtually all the druid low level feats with alternate ones. The party was really happy to have a druid because they were stuck in a briar maze fighting a nuisance enemy that could navigate the maze. But then they discovered the druid had traded in the ability to move through the briars in favor of a different (and ultimately useless) ability - ocean-going themed druid in an all dry land campaign. Yup. He was still a druid. No, no one was happy about having a druid any more.The wizard with cures, the cleric without, the fighter who can only fight well ranged, the rogue who can't pick locks, the bard with no perform skill. Yup, you can make all of those things in PFS. But you may just end up as that guy with a trendy character.
My thought: Be what you are, be good at it, throw in as much flavor as you want without undermining your character's role in the world.
If I want a mage that can heal himself, kill, and tank... I'll go play my Warlock in WOW.
;)If I played a cleric, and my party continually felt like their only recourse to healing was to use wands, I'd probably feel bad that they didn't trust me to take care of them when they needed it.
I tend to play dwarven battle clerics when I play a cleric, but somehow I manage to find time to cover the heals. Yeah, sometimes I burn a spell I MIGHT have liked to use elsewhere. But the wizard probably didn't want to use the last charge in his wand to keep the bad guy from doing a coup de grace on my unconscious self either. :)
Most of what you are talking about is during combat, where a Wand of CLW won't save you anyway. There's a difference between a cleric refusing to use resources that he paid for on you after the combat is over, and him weighing his options to make the best decision at a given time during combat.
|
|
Character Classes are made to be distinctive, and to work together. Traditionally, healing is part of being a cleric, and if you happen to be a cleric who is spec'd where healing is difficult you need to make this clear up front.
That said, by chosing to make such a cleric, you have diverged from what most people think of as a cleric. As such, don't feel bad if when you join a party as your cleric, the party reasonably asks "Do we need a second cleric?"
Well that tradition has been gone for at least 10 years now, to the point that some players haven't been gaming as long as its been gone. Clerics can spell up, wade into combat and knock heads off of things before they do damage in a blood bath of head bashing skull crunching artery tearing pro active healing.
PFS is deliberately set up so that you don't NEED a cleric. You should be able to power through the encounters and use the readily available wands of CLW to heal up in between.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow and wow. This is why I stopped playing a cleric after just two scenarios.
First, it is my opinion they are one of the most versatile classes out there. This makes things hard - you have to pick what you want them to do well. Optimizing a cleric can be hard, and take a few levels. I finally settled on what I want and have yet to get my new PFS cleric into a game.
In the olden days, clerics cast spells and cracked heads. Guess what, if you're built around 4-man party, that's not a bad thing. At all.
What if you have a table full of squishy casters? Suddenly that "battle cleric" with 16 STR in full plate who can still buff like mad doesn't sound so bad. Every blow that falls due even to my +1 bless at level one is MY blow, by other reasoning I've seen here.
But that's not the point. I have played a number of scenarios. Many builds have been optimized. Some have been gloriously not. Like the elf barbarian with 14 STR who wanted to stay out of the way of little fey creatures becuase she was "scared" of them.
Did I walk away? No. Did I demand that we find an optimized barbarian? No. In good fun I ribbed her barabarian's wimpy tactics, and we had fun with our group.
Isn't that what the game's about?
|
|
The wizard with cures, the cleric without, the fighter who can only fight well ranged, the rogue who can't pick locks, the bard with no perform skill. Yup, you can make all of those things in PFS. But you may just end up as that guy with a trendy character.My thought: Be what you are, be good at it, throw in as much flavor as you want without undermining your character's role in the world.
What if I show up to the table and introduce my character as a swordsman, and inform everyone that my role is fighting on the front lines? What class is he? Hint: He's in the first paragraph I quoted above as a character type you apparently have a problem with. Does his class matter, as long as everyone in the party knows he's primarily a front line fighter and he contributes to the party?
You have a problem with a wizard that cures people? What do you think of my sorcerer whose UMD is so high he can use wands of CLW without having to roll a die? His primary role is a battlefield controller, but he's also a backup healer. Is there some reason you would have a problem with that?
I have no problem with making characters that are useful. But their role is decided by me, not the name of their class.
Despite Chris's warning, the tone of this thread is continuing to veer toward heated/personal/insulting.
Please keep it civil.
|
|
So from what I'm reading here, your position is:
1. If you're not uber-optimized, don't bother showing up.
Have you played a S4 scenario lately?
I'm not for requiring, uber-optimized PCs but Paizo is making them mandatory these days, from what I've seen. Or you're going to watch your PCs eat it, if most of your group isn't, optimized to a major degree.
And half if not most of the people here, who say 'people have the right to play what they want,' are also among the group who keep pushing for harder and harder scenarios and Paizo listens to them.
So, if I'm facing down BBEGs who are 2 times stronger than they were S0-3, then I adjust my play style and who I group with. It didn't used to be like this. But you adapt or your PCs die. And when your PCs keep dying at lvl. 6, you'll eventually quit.
I've played roughly half of the season 4 scenarios. None of my PCs have died in them, though I have seen a few deaths. The worst was actually a table with 3 positive channeling clerics that decided to play up when between tiers, despite my voting against it, because most of them figured that much healing could keep any group alive. My PC was the only one (out of 6) who didn't die.
Every character should be able to contribute, but having a pissing match to see who does the most damage doesn't help anything. No, my front line battle oracle probably can't keep up with the raw damage of some of the PCs you mentioned, mostly because I decided to prioritize AC over DPR by giving him a longsword and buckler instead of a greatsword. But who cares? With 20+ strength at level 4, Power Attack, and buff spells, he still easily does enough to be useful, and he has secondary roles besides damage dealer that make him useful to any group. Last time I played him, he successfully completed 3 faction missions, because 2 of the other players needed help, and I had the proper skills trained. And yes, he's a backup healer, but he rarely bothers healing anyone in combat.