| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Splitting this idea off from another thread, because I think it's big enough to stand alone.
"No one wants to play the cleric" is a well known meme. Clerics have always been pressured into the role of healbots, because every party needs a healbot, but very few people want to play the healbot.
And then you have to ask - why are clerics healers? Legacy reasons, I would argue almost entirely. Thematically it's a little weird. Why is the priest of every non-evil god primarily a healer?
My feeling is, 2e is an opportunity to kill the healbot meme. Clerics should be able to heal - healing is definitely a divine spell - but the existence of Channel Energy class feature pushes the vast majority of good (read PC) clerics into the healbot role. Plus, people who want to be able to do healing HAVE to play clerics, because no other form of healing competes.
Let's make cleric exciting again. Let's make people ~want~ to play cleric, want to play a kick-butt champion of what their god embodies.
So, that all said, this basically comes down to two major ideas: 1) Balance encounters and healing sources such that a dedicated healer isn't needed; 2) Instead of making Channel Energy the core cleric class feature, make Domain the core cleric class feature.
Instead of being a class feature, Channel Energy should be the Domain power of the Healing domain. Then, every domain should have a power that is as useful and build-defining as Channel Energy.
That way, clerics of a particular god feel like clerics OF that god, granted the divine powers that god seems like they would grant. Instead of healers who happen to have a differently-shaped holy symbol than other healers.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would add at the same time give druids bards paladins sorcerers the ability to heal as good as healer clerics because we shouldn't need to have every party have a cleric to heal well enough. Good at healing isn't a good class nitch imo.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Healbotting has never been the optimal way to play the cleric. And channel energy is no longer tied to alignment. Locking channel energy behind healing domain would mean that only clerics of only one or two core deities would have healers...
|
...Then, every domain should have a power that is as useful and build-defining as Channel Energy.
That way, clerics of a particular god feel like clerics OF that god, granted the divine powers that god seems like they would grant. Instead of healers who happen to have a differently-shaped holy symbol than other healers.
I agree that most clerics do feel very similar to each other and that a stronger domain focus might help to separate clerics from one another.
Are you just envisioning the domain powers being buffed a little bit so they qualify more as a signature power?
Or a group of changes like 5th ed where clerics would also usually get heavy armor, martial weapons, or a better cantrip based on their domain's type?
My main worry is how binary having a cleric in the party will be. Because my issue isn't whether clerics should have healing capabilities, if they also have neat things to do on their own, but if the only way to have effective healing is having that sweet sweet channel energy, then the choice is either someone has to play a cleric, or the party is a lot more prone to becoming a group of ex-adenturers, in the vein of the ex-parrot.
If there were a greater ability for non-cleric healing, then I'd be fine with clerics retaining a channel energy ability, and as much as I disliked the aesthetics of wands of CLW, their practical impacts were beneficial (more or less; would have liked some form of daily restriction, that I don't think works with them and resonance; not that I dislike resonance, but mixing resonance and non-emergency healing doesn't work for me).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here's an idea: make the alchemist the alpha healer. In lore they're the ones that make all the healing potions anyway. I agree though, any class with healing as part of what they do should get an equal shot in helping out. I wouldn't even so much seeing rangers step up with some healing power--like herbalism.
"Do you have any Athelas? Kingsfoil? It should slow the poison."
My main worry is how binary having a cleric in the party will be. Because my issue isn't whether clerics should have healing capabilities, if they also have neat things to do on their own, but if the only way to have effective healing is having that sweet sweet channel energy, then the choice is either someone has to play a cleric, or the party is a lot more prone to becoming a group of ex-adenturers, in the vein of the ex-parrot.
If there were a greater ability for non-cleric healing, then I'd be fine with clerics retaining a channel energy ability, and as much as I disliked the aesthetics of wands of CLW, their practical impacts were beneficial (more or less; would have liked some form of daily restriction, that I don't think works with them and resonance; not that I dislike resonance, but mixing resonance and non-emergency healing doesn't work for me).
Exactly this. Currently the discrepancy in party survivability between "has a cleric" and "doesn't have a cleric" is MASSIVE, which is what results be people being pressured into being healbots.
It doesn't even matter if things are balanced so that you don't technically need a cleric; clerics are so good at healing that it's optimal to have one whether you need it or not.
That's my main drive behind saying they should move away from healing as a primary class feature. I'd like to see Channel Energy not just made a domain power but also nerfed, alongside other, non-cleric heal options being buffed. Sorcs, Bards, Alchemists, and Druids should all have ~viable~ healing abilities, not just token ones. The idea that Cleric should be the be-all end-all healer that no one else can compete with needs to die.
And powering up domain powers so that clerics vary heavily based on their deity makes the class a lot more fun and interesting to play.
But mostly, parties needing a Cleric so much that people get pressured into playing one needs to be a relic of the past.
Occult casters have Soothe to heal.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here's an idea: make the alchemist the alpha healer. In lore they're the ones that make all the healing potions anyway. I agree though, any class with healing as part of what they do should get an equal shot in helping out. I wouldn't even so much seeing rangers step up with some healing power--like herbalism.
"Do you have any Athelas? Kingsfoil? It should slow the poison."
I've actually got my alchemist set up , at least partially, to hand out "needs"
I love quick alchemy for those kind of uses.. random antidote, antiplague, silversheen etc.
Though sadly the class is built.. WAYYY too much into "use quick alchemy for bombs dangit!" to get a whole lot of milage out of them
that said..I don't think any class should be "the alpha healer" I think most or any class should be able to be an alpha healer. but nothing heads and shoulders above the rest.
Shame that anything but those Antidotes, Antiplagues, bombs, and a few other niche items costs two Resonance (one from the Alchemist and one from the consumer) to use. Elixirs of Life being just a weaker Healing Potion for the exact same cost (both gold and Resonance) most of the time really stings.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Agreed with Zwordsman. Classes that have access to healing should be able to do it effectively, but in a way that is unique to them. If you're going to tie healing to spell lists, you could make it so that Divine is best Single-Target, Occult heals AoE the best, Primal does Heal over Time (think Persistent healing rather than persistent damage), and Arcane does Temporary HP stacking. Boom. Now a support abjuration wizard, a cleric, and a bard all feel different when supporting the group with heals.
I realize those are broad strokes but c'mon. Paizo devs are game designers. Surely they can come up with something more fleshed out. :P
Lots of good ideas in this thread. :)
I love the idea of making healing a shared party burden. Every party needs healing, why shouldn't most classes be able to supply a little healing? A few spell tweaks + make Medicine able to do meaningful out of combat healing by default + make Battlefield Medicine a bit more reliable is probably all that's needed.
Glad to see that there seems to be general agreement that Clerics being pidgeonholed into healbots isn't great. :)
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, I don't like the idea of every class just having "Healing Power" but damage mitigation is something that works. Having healing as a function of spellcasting classes works well, but martial classes get goodies, too. Paladins get the ever efficient Lay on Hands for HP and conditions, Barbarians get flat damage reduction, rogues could get a reactionary damage 1/2, Fighters get sky-high defenses/parry abilities, monks could channel ki through their strikes, healing themselves as they attack, rangers could be herbalists/field medics that use their surroundings for tinctures and tonics.
There are SO many ways to make classes have unique abilities that fit their flavor to sustain themselves (and some of them already do). We just need them to be prominent options for people to take. There is some concern of a tanky playstyle slowing down play, but anything that moves groups away from "must have a healer" is a good thing, imo.
I agree, Davor, although I do think that through Medicine skill feats any character should be able to be a passable healer even if their class isn't.