|
Is the consequence that some deadbeat runs out of hit points and is therefore no longer able to continue demanding that I subsidize his character?I'd say it's no more reasonable for other players to REQUIRE you to buy ANYTHING than it is to expect other players to expend their resources on you.Part of not expending resources for others is accepting the consequences.
Since no demand was made to subsidize the character, no.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My characters heal their comrades.
It doesn't matter whose wand they use. It doesn't matter if the victim has never bought a consumable in their career.
My characters don't quibble about insignificant garbage like that. If their ally hands them a wand and tells them to use it, they will use it. If not, they'll use their own. And if they don't buy their own, they don't demand others heal them. They thank them when they receive it, asked or not.
|
|
I find this popular attitude to be amusing.
1. It's predicated on the assertion that healing is being "demanded." Yet, I've never been in a game where I've seen another player "demand" healing. I'm sure it has happened, I've just never seen it in my small sample size of about 20-30 games (80-170 players) usually with complete strangers.
2. Even if said player did "demand" healing (oh the injustice of it all), the response itself is severely myopic. So we'll just leave one character who has presumably taken damage while doing his job in helping the party, to lie here in the gutter. So now we are down a player and all the associated skills or abilities. Let's hope your faction mission doesn't need said players Sleight of Hand skill. That would be irony wouldn't it?
Well guess what? Now that said player is left behind, or is forced to leave the scenario for no credit, who's next in line? Probably you with the wand who won't heal anyone else with it. So you're going to spend that 15 gp a shot healing yourself. Only now, with one less player, you're more likely to get hit and one has to ask oneself how much money was really saved? You're also exposing yourself to all the possible side effects of melee combat, including permanent effects that may cost you a lot more than a few wand charges to get removed. God forbid you go negative and no one else can use the wand.
Grant it, when I read these types of comments, I envision some cleric or wizard copping attitude toward a barbarian or fighter who just took not one for the team, but a whole lot of them. Honestly, if a front line fighter or even a rogue got hit with a something nasty. I'd be more than willing to chip in to help them get it removed. I want that fighter to focus on better armor and better weapons. I also don't begrudge them saving their PP for a resurrection as they are most likely to need it as compared with my back row archer.
1. I almost exclusively play front-liners. Every one of them has a wand of either CLW or Infernal Healing. It has in no way impacted my ability to prepare myself for front-line combat.
2a. If you're a barbarian "your hit points are your AC." BUYING A WAND IS INVESTING IN YOUR ARMOR.
2b. By your own reasoning, I'd prefer that a party cleric spend their resources being a better cleric. Do you know what does not help achieve that goal? Spending all your resources on consumables because you're buying for 4 (or 6).
"Why is your channeling so low?"
"I couldn't afford a phylactery because I spent all my money on wands."
"(sad trombone)"
3. I have never refused anyone healing. However I do reserve the right to, especially if Mr. "My HP are my AC" Barbarian deliberately runs through attacks of opportunity because "he has the HP*." Guess what? He didn't "have the HP" anymore.
*This happened at the game SammyT described earlier.
4. Your attitude is all well and good until you get a party of 4 people with no healing and no wands:
"I'm a frontliner! It's not my job to heal!"
"I'm a wizard! I don't cast healing spells!"
"I'm a rogue! I'm just here to pick locks!"
"I'm an archer. I stopped playing my cleric because everyone treated me like a hit point vending machine."
If that party had wands, the wizard and/or ranger could heal everyone up out of combat.
5. What do you people do when there isn't a cleric in your group? Call off the game?
"No healbot. Everyone go home!"
Because a party comprised of people who provide for themselves can handle just about any encounter and heal themselves out of combat. Even if it means making a bunch of UMD checks or drinking a bunch of potions.
|
What do you people do when there isn't a cleric in your group?
You make the mission happen.
I ran Severing Ties for a 4th level Gunslinger, 1st level Ninja, 1st level Monk, and 1st level Zen Archer. They completed the mission, with the only fatality coming in the last battle when the ninja was taken from full to negative Con.
|
|
What do you people do when there isn't a cleric in your group?You make the mission happen.
I ran Severing Ties for a 4th level Gunslinger, 1st level Ninja, 1st level Monk, and 1st level Zen Archer. They completed the mission, with the only fatality coming in the last battle when the ninja was taken from full to negative Con.
That was my point.
|
the OP was making the point that there was a Cleric (Healer) in the party and thus his healing was someone elses responsability.
I was not!
I brought up the cleric because I felt that if he had healed at all, ever during the game then the burden of healing wouldn’t have been as great on the rest of the party. He didn’t heal in or out of combat. And no one told him, who had a wand, spells, and channel, to heal but I, who solved puzzles, dealt damage and took some serious hits due to other character shenanigans, was told I needed to get a wand.
I deleted the reference to the cleric because I felt it distracted from the main point of the post which was that I do not like the unofficial rule that everyone has to have a cure wand. If it’s that important why not just forgo Prestige until a wand is obtained?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Frankly, your character is your responsibility. With new players, I'll heal them, because they don't know any better. With players above level 3, I'll actively avoid them. I want my clerics, oracles, and paladins to progress in certain ways, and I'm not going to be pigeonholed by someone else.
Good luck in your endeavors, but I fear we won't meet at the gaming table.
|
|
Perhaps the disconnect here is that I haven't played anything above level 7. Maybe higher level games burn through CLW wands like rice paper and it becomes more pronounced.
They do. My level 11 Barbarian has 171HP when raging. That's 31 charges on average if I'm knocked down to 0.
At level 9, I had to go toe to toe with a Dragon. I got knocked down to 4 of her then 141 total HP. The only reason I stayed alive was because our cleric was able to keep healing me back up. Good thing she hadn't wasted all her healing spells earlier after the previous encounter. In that encounter, btw, the cleric was bleeding out. I healed her with my CLW wand.
I'm going to step back for sec and make an observation. Like so many disagreements we have two people who are talking about two different things. While I agree with Mike Brock that characters in PFS need to have more self-reliance than in a normal PRG, I also agree with the OP in rejecting the requirement and the social pressure that you're jerk if you don't have a WCLW.
I don't think you're a jerk if you don't have a WCLW.
That having been said, I can empathize with frustration at players who refuse to exercise discretion and become indignant when someone doesn't keep them healed up.
I do think you're a jerk if you become indignant when someone "doesn't keep you healed up" at their own expense. Because now you're not only telling them what to do ("heal meh!"), you're expecting them to pay for it themselves.
Something I'd like to point out, though. There's a difference between "keeping you healed up" and "keeping you alive." If the cleric (or bard, or witch, or whatever) is spending every round topping off your hit points, they're wasting actions, inviting you, Tanky McDPR, to take more damage because it's now taking longer to subdue the baddies.
There are absolutely times when the best thing someone can do is heal in combat ("keeping you alive" may be one of them). Some people think those times is all of the times. They are wrong.
|
|
If I refused to buy a 2PP CLW/infernal healing wand, I would also:
- expect the healers in the group to only go so far as to spend their daily spells on me if I needed it, not their own consumables that I refused to buy - even if I were to die because of it.
- understand that it was possibly at the detriment of the group if I'm burning the healer's spells instead of a consumable.
- be asking for their trust in that I believed we could still make it alive and successful.
|
|
I think that this discussion is less two issues, than the same issue from two different perspectives.
No one wants to play with jerks who needlessly cost the rest of the party resources. Seems to me all the people in the thread are the decent right sort, (although I question how anyone could honestly recommend a spell as evil as Infernal Healing :P) which makes sense since the most important rule is Don't be a jerk. (Only ahead of "Don't talk about Pathfinder" because it's the fracking forum.)
I have myself honestly recommended wands of CLW to folks at a table when I was the only one who had one. Sometimes because I hate to see it halfway discharged after a fight, and sometimes because I hate to see some guy at his next table die because of lack of healing. (And I can be as bitter as the next guy if a rogue or alchemist with low AC insists on being in dangerous positions with no tactical advantage, and I have to pay for their mistakes.)
On the other hand, I hate to make someone feel like they can't play because they don't have one. I only brought it up because on some future adventure I don't want to see you have to hide in the back (or even die) because no one is on heal duty.
So I feel for you. I hope in the future you don't have to play with jerks, and to the extent that you do, they will at least leave you alone about this now.
PS It is hard not to talk about how great a wand is at the moment you're using it.
PPS The build I am currently working on is a Paladin with Greater Mercy by level 7. Can't quite figure a way to get it by level 5 without a ton of cash. But afterwards, free raises for everyone. Except me...
|
|
PPS The build I am currently working on is a Paladin with Greater Mercy by level 7. Can't quite figure a way to get it by level 5 without a ton of cash. But afterwards, free raises for everyone. Except me...
I pulled it off at level 6. Take greater mercy at 3, ultimate mercy at ten. 22 charisma gets you 6 uses of lay on hands (19 starting, +1 stat bump at level 4, +2 hat), 3 from level, and then I snagged it by going Warrior of Holy Light (trades spells for being a mini-bard, and more Lay on Hands!).
You don't actually have to have 10 uses of lay on hands to take the feat, its just useless until you do. My table of Bonekeep was *very* thankful for the free raises...
|
|
PPS The build I am currently working on is a Paladin with Greater Mercy by level 7. Can't quite figure a way to get it by level 5 without a ton of cash. But afterwards, free raises for everyone. Except me...I pulled it off at level 6. Take greater mercy at 3, ultimate mercy at ten. 22 charisma gets you 6 uses of lay on hands (19 starting, +1 stat bump at level 4, +2 hat), 3 from level, and then I snagged it by going Warrior of Holy Light (trades spells for being a mini-bard, and more Lay on Hands!).
You don't actually have to have 10 uses of lay on hands to take the feat, its just useless until you do. My table of Bonekeep was *very* thankful for the free raises...
I only started with 16 Charisma, because I was originally going to do a different build. But I have the Way of the Kirin boon on this character. So it's just a matter of getting another few lay on hands. The plan now is just to take the feat to get extra...
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
Perhaps the disconnect here is that I haven't played anything above level 7. Maybe higher level games burn through CLW wands like rice paper and it becomes more pronounced.
Well, let me throw this out there. When my first character was a level 1, and I was playing my first scenario as him (My third scenario altogether - the first two were with pregens), I was the only one in a certain party with a viable Wand of CLW. (One other person had one, but refused to use it because it was "low on charges"). I burned through twenty-something charges on that scenario because I was healing the entire group. For a level 1 character, that's no small amount of gold, and had I not done it, it would have been a TPK. It was nearly a TPK anyway.
You say that it is wrong to use societal pressure to force people to buy Wands of CLW. What about the societal pressure to make those who do spend money on Wands of CLW to pay for everybody else's healing? Is that any better? Should I have put my foot down and let the party TPK?
|
|
Well, let me throw this out there. When my first character was a level 1, and I was playing my first scenario as him (My third scenario altogether - the first two were with pregens), I was the only one in a certain party with a viable Wand of CLW. (One other person had one, but refused to use it because it was "low on charges"). I burned through twenty-something charges on that scenario because I was healing the entire group. For a level 1 character, that's no small amount of gold, and had I not done it, it would have been a TPK. It was nearly a TPK anyway.You say that it is wrong to use societal pressure to force people to buy Wands of CLW. What about the societal pressure to make those who do spend money on Wands of CLW to pay for everybody else's healing? Is that any better? Should I have put my foot down and let the party TPK?
you do the same thing you would do if you're out with friends for lunch and the bill comes and one of them doesn't have the cash. You cover for them. If it happens more than once? You don't do lunch (game) with them again. Simple.
1st time? On me....
More times? well, that depends doesn't it.
That about sums it up.
Like I mentioned earlier, I have a cleric that I've only played 3 times, started with a CLW wand acquired with GM credit prestige points, and the wand is already down to 20 charges. At level 3, replacing it over and over will be expensive. This is specifically a non-healing cleric, so the wand is my only way to heal anyone, other than a couple of potions I carry as a backup in case I go down and someone needs to heal me by pouring one down my cleric's throat.
The first two tables I played with this PC were almost all newbies with level 1 characters (some pregens), so I didn't mind helping them out by providing most of the healing. The third time playing my cleric was the table SammyT was complaining about, where a level 5 barbarian didn't bring any healing for himself, and intentionally made himself a target to prevent anyone else from getting hit. Again, I don't mind hitting someone like that a couple of times with my wand, since he's helping the rest of the party by taking those hits for us, but if I had to spend 10+ charges on him, I would have been rather annoyed. Luckily, I think our group did have 3 or 4 people with wands, so the expense got spread around. But again, everyone should be responsible for their own healing.
|
|
I'm somewhat confused by the SammyT incident. Given that the barbarian did not have his own healing, you would have preferred he let everyone suffer their own hits? So only people with healing wands should be tanking? Or put another way, don't tank if you don't have a healing wand?
I'm curious, did the barbarian do this against the will of the party? Was there not some other character more suited for tanking?
The barbarian didn't have his own healing. He rushed in, took some hits, then assumed someone else would heal him.
In this case, there were others in the group (including Sammy and I) who had brought wands and could use them. But that was the only healing available - I don't think anyone had any class abilities or prepared spells to use on healing, not even my cleric (negative channeler). Given the large amounts of damage the whole group ended up taking in this adventure, we went through a lot of wand charges. What if we'd run out, because not everyone had brought enough wand charges and/or potions to cover themselves? We didn't, but if there had been fewer wands at the table, we might have come close.
Again, this is why everyone should be self sufficient. I don't mind throwing a couple of wand charges to other team members once in a while, but I shouldn't have to spend 10+ charges on other people in a single session. I need my money and prestige for other things, some for my own PC, like the mithral breastplate I'm saving up for, and some for the group, like the wand of Protection from Evil I didn't mind using on several of my teammates during this adventure.
|
|
Okay, so I noticed a dearth of tanks in my area and decided to create a monk to fill the void. By 4th level I have an AC of 23 and 39 HP. Not stellar but not crappy either. But because I frequently am the only tank at the table I still take a lot of damage and because there is also a dearth of healers in the area, most of my healing comes from my own Happy Stick a.k.a. Wand of Cure Light Wounds. As a result, at 4th level I am already on my 2nd wand and i can only imagine that is going to excellerate exponentially. I have 9th and 12th level characters that are still on their first wand.
So essentially I am sucking up damage so that the squishies don't have to and burning charges on my own wand while the squishies don't have to because I am taking the hits for them. Never mind that if I wasn't taking the hits, the squishies would be burning twice as many charges on their own wands because of all the hits they would taking, it's my sole responsibility to provide healing for myself because i decided the local area could use a tank and chose to fill that void. Does anyone else see a problem here?
|
|
AC 23 isn't much above what my non-tanking caster had at 4th level. Mage armor, shield, your dex and your wisdom...AC 23 really isn't very high for a 4th level monk.
Further, I've got a tanky cleric and a tanky paladin. Neither has gone through even half the charges of their first wand (4th and 6th level, respectively).
|
|
Sigh... I knew I shouldn't have mentioned stats any. It always seems to change the discussion from the one intended (in this case a discussion of fairness) to one of implicate blame on the OP for not having a Über optimized, cracked out, munchkin-fest and unfounded assumptions of inferior play practices.
The problem is an issUe of fairness, not builds.
|
|
Like I said, I have no problem helping you with your healing, but if you wanted the rest of the party to foot the bill for all of your healing, that wouldn't exactly be fair to the rest of the party. I mean, they're responsible for any healing they need, so why shouldn't you be responsible for at least some of the healing you need? (Using a general "you", not YOU you.)If you want to argue that it isn't fair to expect the tank to pay for all of his healing, then healing costs should be shared by the ENTIRE party, including the tank.
If you bring a wand, I see that as you taking responsibility, and I'll help you with the healing, including using some of my own resources to do so. If you DON'T bring a wand (when you COULD have), then I see that as freeloading.
And that is a fair response to the question of fairness.
My point being that some on this thread seem to think it would be my entire responsibility because I chose to fill the role of party tank, or worse, it was my fault for not living up to their standards of brokenness.
