They do now the Oracle is the new "healbot" right?
Unless the oracle picked inflict spells for some reason.
I don't think one can get away from the idea that clerics are there to cast healing spells, since it is one of their main class features.
I do think it is possible to play with your role a little bit to try and get away with not always having to be the one that does it.
Eldritch Heritage or a one level dip into Wizard/Sorcerer grants access to a familiar which can deliver touch spells for you, and Familiar Spell can allow you to play with action economy by putting useful buffs and/or heals like remove curse, or remove blindness/deafness on your Familiar, then converting those spells into heals as needed, though it does require some higher level spell slots to use and there is not really efficient way to dodge metamagic costs in Pathfinder like there was in 3.5.
Combine that stuff with Divine Metamagic and the game may implode in on itself.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There are lots of ways a Cleric can take part in the game and kill stuff while not also standing by idly while his allies are killed. Any one of these might help a bit, and combining a few might make sense too.
Summoning - Clerics get the same access to Summon Monster spells that Wizards do plus a unique feat or two to improve their summoning ability. Summon some lantern archons to kill stuff while you heal. Summon some bralani azata to kill stuff while you heal or heal while you kill stuff. This is a key Cleric power just like healing. Some folks don't like summoning because it makes the player's turn longer. If people raise this criticism tell them that you'll gladly omit the part of your turn where you heal them.
Selective Channel - Being able to avoid healing enemies makes healing allies with channel a better option. Be sure to pick up the phylactery of positive channeling so that your channel heals +2d6 more damage.
Quickened Channel - If you channel faster you’ll still have time to cast a spell or maybe make an attack. With the right spell selection you could keep people alive and have fun at the same time.
Wands - Taking the Craft Wands feat can help preserve your spell slots for more interesting stuff than Cure spells. It can also ensure that you always have access to situationally critical spells like Delay Poison. I’ve got a lot of mileage out of wands in many campaigns. They’re a solid option.
Improved Familiar - If somebody in the party (not necessarily you even) has an improved familiar it can use wands of Cure Moderate Wounds and other helpful spells. I’ve used this tactic a lot. Sometimes the familiar gets squashed, but the improved action economy is generally worth the risk. If the familiar is yours it can also deliver touch spells like Cures.
You might want to take a good look at the Cleric spell list too and note spells which are likely to have a serious impact on combats. Something like Greater Command can make a bunch of enemies lose a turn or two and walk around triggering AoOs. If none of this appeals to you I'd agree that maybe playing a "half-healer" like an Inquisitor or Paladin would work best for you. A party made up mostly of such PCs can be quite effective.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think one can get away from the idea that clerics are there to cast healing spells, since it is one of their main class features.
I don't think one can get away from the idea that clerics are there to smite and cast holy vengeance spells, since it is one of their main class features.
:)
I don't think one can get away from the idea that clerics are there to cast healing spells, since it is one of their main class features.I don't think one can get away from the idea that clerics are there to smite and cast holy vengeance spells, since it is one of their main class features.
:)
Both of these statements are true.
Cleric + Holy Vindicator = spell casting paladin of awesomeness. Do this, and bleed awesome damage all over your foes!
Also, never prepare cure spells, that's what spontaneous casting is for- unless of course you cast inflict spells.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly OP? Sounds like you typecast yourself in the "healbot" role. Play a cleric for what they are: the eyes, hands, and voice of the divine. Gods don't f$#$ around. Neither do their servants when it comes to getting things done. You speak with absolute authority, act with absolute certainty, and judge absolutely all within the ethos of your god as reflected through your character's societal experience. Do that and you will be playing a cleric.
You speak with absolute authority, act with absolute certainty, and judge absolutely all within the ethos of your god
... and then you'll be playing a judgmental jerkass zealot whom nobody likes and would probably be abandoned by the party at the first opportunity.
You speak with absolute authority, act with absolute certainty, and judge absolutely all within the ethos of your god... and then you'll be playing a judgmental jerkass zealot whom nobody likes and would probably be abandoned by the party at the first opportunity.
It doesn't make it an invalid character, just an annoying PC character for the other players to deal with.
You speak with absolute authority, act with absolute certainty, and judge absolutely all within the ethos of your god... and then you'll be playing a judgmental jerkass zealot whom nobody likes and would probably be abandoned by the party at the first opportunity.
Aye, 100s of ways to play a character, but guy who tells me what to do is rarely best, and if your real life person is perceived to speak through that character... man... That's just bad mojo right there.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You speak with absolute authority, act with absolute certainty, and judge absolutely all within the ethos of your god... and then you'll be playing a judgmental jerkass zealot whom nobody likes and would probably be abandoned by the party at the first opportunity.
I dunno. I kind of want that in a Cleric of Calistria.
At least this time I don't have to pay extra.
But when someone gets reduced to 7 health out of 71 and gets pissed at me because I'm not healing them, my question back to them is always, "what did you do wrong to get into this situation?"
What's their answer to this? If you can get your party taking less hits, there's less call for you healing constantly. Win win.
You can totally play an agent of your deity, speak/act with the authority of your patron, yet not be a jackass. Although you have divine backing, you are still a representative of your god and have all associated responsibility.
Not to mention your being part of and responsible to your guild, the Pathfinders, your party, etc.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Play an evil cleric. Memorize Death Knell. When a character goes unconscious, cast Death Knell on them. Good times.
Play an evil cleric. Memorize Death Knell. When a character goes unconscious, cast Death Knell on them. Good times.
My friend played a Cleric of a death god in a game full of annoying people at a FLGS just to do that...
*pretend to roll a Heal check*
"Well, looks like it's his time to go... DEATH KNELL!"
Eldritch Heritage or a one level dip into Wizard/Sorcerer grants access to a familiar which can deliver touch spells for you, and Familiar Spell can allow you to play with action economy by putting useful buffs and/or heals like remove curse, or remove blindness/deafness on your Familiar, then converting those spells into heals as needed, though it does require some higher level spell slots to use and there is not really efficient way to dodge metamagic costs in Pathfinder like there was in 3.5.
Combine that stuff with Divine Metamagic and the game may implode in on itself.
Even with DMM (and various methods to gain extra turn attempts to spend), I'm unimpressed.
First, your familiar can only hold a number of spell levels equal to your caster level. Unless he's loading him up with a bunch of first level spells, that's not going to go very far, even if we assume the metamagic reduction counts toward this limit (the wording of the feat is ambiguous and we don't know the intent).
Second, your familiar is, well, fragile. If you want it to go around casting touch spells, it's a liability that the DM will surely target.
Third, while it might be cheaper to do this, it honestly doesn't perform all that much better than just handing your familiar a wand or two. I could see some specialized builds that could take advantage of this but for what you're suggesting it burns extra feats for not much benefit. And either way you'd probably get much better results by just using DMM: Persist mass buffs on the party.
|
It is kind of weird that your fellow gamers are so stuck on these old cliche' roles for classes.
Playing Pathfinder, for at least a little while, they should know now, those don't apply anymore.
Rogues are not the sneakiest, or the best equipped to deal with traps.
Wizards don't make the best Fighters through polymorph spells.
Prestige Classes are not the only path to strong PCs.
Things have changed.
Sounds like your group is like ours.
The house rule we currently use is allowing a player to play a second character specifically geared to heal. So few players enjoy the role of healer in a group that it is not often anyone plays a healer as a main character.
The biggest problem clerics have is spell slots. They can be very effective in combat, but they have to fill their slots with spells to heal all the various types of damage players take. Restoration, remove disease, remove paralysis, resist energy, and the like. If they don't, the party might end up dead.
Be nice if Paizo would take this into account by grouping all the condition removing/healing spells into a group and allowing the character to spontaneously cast the spells. Then they can fill slots with spells that allow them to engage in offense, while still doing the job only they can do.
Few other classes have the spell selection clerics have for helping another character recover. You can't expect other characters to cover everything with wands, potions, and scrolls. Quite a few of them can't use the scrolls and wands on their own. If you're the only class capable of casting the spells the party needs to recover, they're going to expect you to do it.
You shouldn't let yourself get stuck playing the healer. It's not fun all the time. You should tell the players you game with you're not going to do it all the time. One of them needs to step up when you want to play a more offense-oriented character.
It is kind of weird that your fellow gamers are so stuck on these old cliche' roles for classes.
Playing Pathfinder, for at least a little while, they should know now, those don't apply anymore.
Rogues are not the sneakiest, or the best equipped to deal with traps.
Wizards don't make the best Fighters through polymorph spells.
Prestige Classes are not the only path to strong PCs.
Things have changed.
Sadly healing has not. Only life oracles are better than Clerics at healing.
|
|
Sadly healing has not. Only life oracles are better than Clerics at healing.It is kind of weird that your fellow gamers are so stuck on these old cliche' roles for classes.
Playing Pathfinder, for at least a little while, they should know now, those don't apply anymore.
Rogues are not the sneakiest, or the best equipped to deal with traps.
Wizards don't make the best Fighters through polymorph spells.
Prestige Classes are not the only path to strong PCs.
Things have changed.
Now, I feel the need to create a number of healing builds.
I have to strongly disagree I am a level 1 paladin that just leveled to 2 if I didn't get healed I would have died in the second encounter mobs hit for almost 1/2 my HP at level 1 I had 19 HP and 18 acIt's always funny when the person unwilling to play the helpful class accuses the person who *is* willing that they're not being generous enough.
Healing is a secondary concern at best. The game plays just fine without a "healer".
10 for class, 1 for favored class, 5 for con, 3 for toughness and how did you get the last hp?
Edit: wraithstrike already informed me that i suck at math. I blame my baby:)
Being a cleric and a healbot are two different things. If you play tactically you wont have to heal that much, but if you are always healing then you are a healbot, and I would let the party know you have not intention of healing every round because it is not fun.
@Tutens sometimes things happen, but in most games you wont be in that type of trouble for every fight.
Sadly healing has not. Only life oracles are better than Clerics at healing.It is kind of weird that your fellow gamers are so stuck on these old cliche' roles for classes.
Playing Pathfinder, for at least a little while, they should know now, those don't apply anymore.
Rogues are not the sneakiest, or the best equipped to deal with traps.
Wizards don't make the best Fighters through polymorph spells.
Prestige Classes are not the only path to strong PCs.
Things have changed.
What havent changed about if Life oracle, that wasent a class back when the other things were true, is the better healer?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have to strongly disagree I am a level 1 paladin that just leveled to 2 if I didn't get healed I would have died in the second encounter mobs hit for almost 1/2 my HP at level 1 I had 19 HP and 18 acIt's always funny when the person unwilling to play the helpful class accuses the person who *is* willing that they're not being generous enough.
Healing is a secondary concern at best. The game plays just fine without a "healer".
10 for class, 1 for favored class, 5 for con, 3 for toughness and how did you get the last hp?
That is 19
10+1+5=16
16+3=19
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have to strongly disagree I am a level 1 paladin that just leveled to 2 if I didn't get healed I would have died in the second encounter mobs hit for almost 1/2 my HP at level 1 I had 19 HP and 18 acIt's always funny when the person unwilling to play the helpful class accuses the person who *is* willing that they're not being generous enough.
Healing is a secondary concern at best. The game plays just fine without a "healer".
10 for class, 1 for favored class, 5 for con, 3 for toughness and how did you get the last hp?
That is 19
10+1+5=16
16+3=19
Really? Hmm yes it seems you are rigth:) now i just need to ask why a paladin would put 20 in con:)
And thanks for the math lesson, i will use a calculator next time.
|
No offense OP, but I feel like you're telling your fellow players "I wouldn't piss on you, if you were on fire."
It sounded to me, more like
"This is the fifth time I've had to call the Fire Brigade this week. I'd really appreciate it if you stopped dousing yourselves in gasoline and playing with matches."
It isn't just the 'asking for healing' that grates, it the lack of any kind of tactical thinking, that the OP mentioned, which would get to me.
"I'll never need to fight defensively. Cleric can fix me up."
"I don't need to position myself better, so I'm not flanked. Cleric can fix me up."
"I don't care if I incur attacks of opportunity. Cleric can fix me up."
etc.
That would be like living with a group of fratboys, who have nightly gasoline fights, play with matches, and have vandalised the fire alarms.
Talking purely in-world here. While perhaps its appropriate to show some 'tough love' and refuse healing to teach people a lesson, it's the kind of thing that destroys friendships or gets you sacked from your mercenary company (depending on what type of party your group has).
Unless you're very diplomatic about how you go about it, you're likely to never adventure with that group again.
How do I prove to my group that a battle cleric is more useful than a bandaid?
Step 1: Buy a wand of cure light wounds.
Step 2: Tell the rest of the players that you will will heal their characters after combat is over, but they will have to reimburse you for the cost of the wand charges used (or pitch in for the purchase and for any replacements). Note that many groups pool funds for "party use" items such as buffing/healing wands.
Step 3: Explain that you are not there to babysit their characters and save them from the consequences of their decisions; you are an equal partner, not a subordinate. If they want immediate assistance in combat on a frequent basis, then they should plan their own character accordingly (potions, single use magic items, Use Magic Device, Leadership) or play a character with healing spells on their spell list (alchemist, bard, druid, inquisitor, oracle, paladin, ranger, witch).
Step 4: Play your character.
Step 5: Stop playing clerics and play a secondary healer (alchemist, bard, druid, inquisitor, oracle, paladin, ranger, witch) using the same principles in steps 1-4. If the rest of the players desire a "heal-bot" cleric that much, let one of them take on the responsibility. Either they'll figure out that a dedicated in-combat healer is not necessary most of the time or they'll come up with a way to rotate who plays the cleric.
A lot of times players with the mindset of needing a "heal-bot" don't see the costs in action economy and/or gp for the "free" healing that a "heal-bot" provides. Or that in-combat healing is usually a very inefficient option for a character to take.
OP. Every time you play a cleric, you are enabling your party's behavior. If you want them to change, you are going to have to get proactive about it.
Stop playing the "healbot"/babysitter class until they learn.
|
|
I have to strongly disagree I am a level 1 paladin that just leveled to 2 if I didn't get healed I would have died in the second encounter mobs hit for almost 1/2 my HP at level 1 I had 19 HP and 18 ac
At first level you're lucky to survive the first encounter even with healing. Healing is not the main concern until the source of damage is eliminated.
Sounds like the party should chip in for a hireling, Merek the generic cleric.
On the forums people like to blanket healing as being useless and you should just kill the enemy instead. But there are so many other things to consider, you're just handwaving all the major strategy behind healing the party and pretending like their is none. Here are some things you should look out for:
1. Is a [wounded party member] likely still going to survive on the next round if I don't heal them?
2. Can I make an efficient use of channel energy; ie; are multiple party members damaged and in range? Assuming 4-person party, you quadruple the effectiveness of a channel if everyone is in range and needs healing. Maybe after an AoE spell or breath weapon.
3. Will I provoke an AoO to heal?
4. Is there a more effective use of my action?
4a. Can I defeat the enemy with one spell/ability/attack cycle? People like to say you should just kill rather than heal, but it's better to keep the primary damage dealer alive than to make an attack roll and miss or hit for low damage.
4b. Am I buffed ? How effective of a combatant can I realistically be?
4c. Do I have time and ability to set up for a stronger action next round (eg; casting a buff spell)?
4d. Can I provide enough healing to maintain [wounded character] as a meaningful part of the battle. eg; do I have a Heal spell available, or am I down to Cure Light Wounds only?
If the answer to many/most of these is "no" then you should probably heal. If the answer to a good chunk of them is "yes" then probably you can use your turn more effectively.
You speak with absolute authority, act with absolute certainty, and judge absolutely all within the ethos of your god... and then you'll be playing a judgmental jerkass zealot whom nobody likes and would probably be abandoned by the party at the first opportunity.
Bah. You misunderstand. Roleplay. You don't dictate how others play. You don't hesitate to let your faith show, though. If your god has a strong opinion on something from source material let it out there. If they don't, keep quiet or play your character. Roleplay should never be bad. Clerics are zealots though. Gods don't give everyone power who asks for it. They're the proven faithful. That takes a good bit of drinking the kool-aid. If you want divine power without the devotion play an oracle. That's their niche.
Bah. You misunderstand. Roleplay. You don't dictate how others play. You don't hesitate to let your faith show, though. If your god has a strong opinion on something from source material let it out there. If they don't, keep quiet or play your character. Roleplay should never be bad. Clerics are zealots though. Gods don't give everyone power who asks for it. They're the proven faithful. That takes a good bit of drinking the kool-aid. If you want divine power without the devotion play an oracle. That's their niche.You speak with absolute authority, act with absolute certainty, and judge absolutely all within the ethos of your god... and then you'll be playing a judgmental jerkass zealot whom nobody likes and would probably be abandoned by the party at the first opportunity.
Depends on your game. Some expect you to be a complete Phycho Zealot, others are fine with you being a bro, and others judge you from deity to deity. Personally I'm fine with clerics being bros rather than prudes.
|
|
On the forums people like to blanket healing as being useless and you should just kill the enemy instead. But there are so many other things to consider, you're just handwaving all the major strategy behind healing the party and pretending like their is none. Here are some things you should look out for:
while partially true, I think it's more accurate to say the reverse, and are blanketing the Cleric (but not other healy classes automatically) as a bandaid first, and maybe a party member after that.
1. Is a [wounded party member] likely still going to survive on the next round if I don't heal them?
2. Can I make an efficient use of channel energy; ie; are multiple party members damaged and in range? Assuming 4-person party, you quadruple the effectiveness of a channel if everyone is in range and needs healing. Maybe after an AoE spell or breath weapon.
3. Will I provoke an AoO to heal?
4. Is there a more effective use of my action?
4a. Can I defeat the enemy with one spell/ability/attack cycle? People like to say you should just kill rather than heal, but it's better to keep the primary damage dealer alive than to make an attack roll and miss or hit for low damage.
4b. Am I buffed ? How effective of a combatant can I realistically be?
4c. Do I have time and ability to set up for a stronger action next round (eg; casting a buff spell)?
4d. Can I provide enough healing to maintain [wounded character] as a meaningful part of the battle. eg; do I have a Heal spell available, or am I down to Cure Light Wounds only?
If the answer to many/most of these is "no" then you should probably heal. If the answer to a good chunk of them is "yes" then probably you can use your turn more effectively.
I think the better question is, barring the obvious a character's about to die from a random bad roll on someone's part (and less them consistently making poor choices), is it worth reactively healing when you could probably be otherwise contributing in a meaningful way?
And that could even be free options like Aid Another to boost AC or Attack rolls, Flanking, or just regular attacking. Healing will generally not keep up with the damage taken, especially if you are counting on Channel Energy past approx. level 3.
Depends on your game. Some expect you to be a complete Phycho Zealot, others are fine with you being a bro, and others judge you from deity to deity. Personally I'm fine with clerics being bros rather than prudes.
Clerics of Calistria are FAR from prudes. Cleric in general does not mean prude. It's not about being a complete zealot. Read my post. Do what you do within the ethos of your god AND through the lense of your societal experience. It all matters, dude!
Personally, I don't play any of my characters as bros. Then again, I've never played in a group who came to the table roleplaying they previously knew each other.
Depends on your game. Some expect you to be a complete Phycho Zealot, others are fine with you being a bro, and others judge you from deity to deity. Personally I'm fine with clerics being bros rather than prudes.Clerics of Calistria are FAR from prudes. Cleric in general does not mean prude. It's not about being a complete zealot. Read my post. Do what you do within the ethos of your god AND through the lense of your societal experience. It all matters, dude!
Personally, I don't play any of my characters as bros. Then again, I've never played in a group who came to the table roleplaying they previously knew each other.
Yeah, like I said, varies from table to table and sometimes deity to deity.