RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I want to put in my two copper to say can we not nerf clerics? I want everyone to be this awesome. Raise the others up. Cleric does not need to be lowered. Everyone should shine this bright. They don't. Can we fix that?
This!
With increased hit points and nerfing wands, the need for healing in PF2 is greater than ever. We need lots of classes to be good at it in order to have PCs keep going for more than a couple of fights at a time.
I do want Clerics to be the best healers in the game, but right now they are almost the only ones who can keep a party on their feet. I think that's a problem, because it means parties can't have a diverse composition, since someone will be "stuck" playing the Cleric.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
But seriously, the sole reason a Cleric is broken compared to every other class is because of Channel Energy being so strong and having so much power to it. I'd consider having it be up to their Charisma modifier, flat, for starters (can't be any higher than 3). I'd also consider it costing Resonance for the Cleric to use as yet another balance point, but I'd like to see some playtesting with just the flat Charisma modifier first to see if it does enough, but then you have the whole Domain stuff too (which can bridge that gap even further with Healing domains and stuff), as well as shoring up other class options (like Bards and Sorcerers especially) so that they aren't as objectively bad. The other big thing is balancing encounters to where some of these common heal aspects between all of the classes exist.
Seriously, man, why does it seem that the first impulse of many people is always to go "Okay, this class is actually competent at something, nerf nerf nerf!!!"?
Bring the other classes up to the level of the Cleric in terms of healing. That way adventuring days can last more than ten minutes, maybe.
I for one would like to see the Cleric brought down to where the other supposed heal-capable classes are in terms of their ability to heal, solely because I want the brightest possible light to be shown on the issue of survivability, spell power levels, and lack of healing and avoidance capabilities (i.e. not enough spread around).
I do *not* want to nerf Cleric and call it a day. In fact, for those who are upset about folks saying "Nerf Cleric", consider that many folks don't want to stop there but instead want to even the (healing) power level out in order to then be able to properly bring that (healing) power level up across the board for all intended heal-capable classes.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I for one would like to see the Cleric brought down to where the other supposed heal-capable classes are in terms of their ability to heal, solely because I want the brightest possible light to be shown on the issue of survivability, spell power levels, and lack of healing and avoidance capabilities (i.e. not enough spread around).I do *not* want to nerf Cleric and call it a day. In fact, for those who are upset about folks saying "Nerf Cleric", consider that many folks don't want to stop there but instead want to even the (healing) power level out in order to then be able to properly bring that (healing) power level up across the board for all intended heal-capable classes.
If were talking in a vacuum, maybe that's the right approach. Unfortunately, we're talking about a game that essentially needs to be done and to the printers in about 6 months. "Breaking" the cleric by lower its healing and then building healing back up is very time inefficient. If the goal is to minimize the amount of 5 minute adventuring days, then damage mitigation has to be higher than it is at present. If the goal is to be a gritty, magic-light game I would recommend HackMaster. The current version nails that style of play.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you increase the power of healing options (curative magic, items, etc) then just get rid of channel and give clerics spontaneous conversion, you will still keep clerics as good healers but you simultaneously improve the healing ability of everyone else.
Tripling one class's highest level slots does not address the underlying issue that the heal spell is not up to the task at present.
Again, just jack up the healing value. Make is 2d6+spell mod (or 1d6 + spell mod in an area). Do similar stuff to LoH and other curative magic. Make some downtime mundane healing feats (see 5e). Remove resonance costs for curative items.
Then, bam, channel isn't needed. Non-clerics can heal. Clerics are still the best healers (especially with the healing domain power) thanks to spontaneous conversion.
You can keep saying this, but it doesn't make it true.
Or maybe the problem is available spell slots, the power of spells over and the availability of mitigation options? "Gut cleric" isn't a solution, its creating another problem. We're back to D&D's healbot cleric. Only its worse because instead of being able to disable enemies with spells, PF2 clerics can just hamper them.
Making the Heal spell more powerful doesn't fix mitigation. Maybe it makes druid and Div Sorc more capable, but it doesn't help Paladin or Alchemist. Even increasing the dice doesn't really help cleric, both because of how the three action version of heal works and because you'll be applying the static modifier less times per day.
Example @ lvl 2:
If a Cleric can cast DataLore Heal 3/day at 2d6+Wis (call it +4), that's an average of 11 points per cast and an average of 33 points healed per day. That represents all their non-cantrip spells for the day.
The same cleric using Playtest Channel can cast, lets call it an average of 6/day (assuming a 16 Cha). You'll heal 1d8+4 per spell, for an average of 8 per heal, but with a daily average of 48 points healed per day. Plus, you'll still have three spells left to do things other than heal with.
Your 1st level heal spell, to effectively replace channel's healing throughput would need to start at 2d8. And all the cleric would do is heal. That's bad game design. The class is called "cleric" not "healer". Healing is part of what it does, but it should not narratively or mechanically be the only thing it does.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you increase the power of healing options (curative magic, items, etc) then just get rid of channel and give clerics spontaneous conversion, you will still keep clerics as good healers but you simultaneously improve the healing ability of everyone else.
No, because now Clerics are using those slots solely for healing and will basically never cast another spell thanks to how much healing is needed (and how generally lame a lot of the other spells are now).
Tripling one class's highest level slots does not address the underlying issue that the heal spell is not up to the task at present.
Again, just jack up the healing value. Make is 2d6+spell mod (or 1d6 + spell mod in an area). Do similar stuff to LoH and other curative magic.
The problem isn't that Heal doesn't do enough healing. It does lots of healing, especially if you boost it with feats and domains and such. If you can get someone from dying to nearly full HP in one spell, the throughput isn't the problem.
The problem is that the monsters turn around and land 2-3 attacks (which they can do fairly regularly) and suddenly the person is nearly dead again, necessitating more healing. The spell options to negate that offense are comparatively weak and not very effective.
Making Heal heal for more than someone's max HP does nothing to solve the real problem, unless that overhealing becomes temporary HP and thus damage mitigation.
Make some downtime mundane healing feats (see 5e). Remove resonance costs for curative items.
Something on this front desperately needs doing. Downtime healing is awful right now. They should add that onto the Medicine skill so it's useful for more than accidentally killing dying people.
Then, bam, channel isn't needed. Non-clerics can heal. Clerics are still the best healers (especially with the healing domain power) thanks to spontaneous conversion.
Channel will not be needed only when damage mitigation and avoidance comes up high enough that people can get through an encounter without dying if they aren't healed. With so few spell slots, having to burn them for healing exacerbates the Healbot problem because now any time you actually do something else, you're removing healing from the group.
Channel is one of the things that is actually working well in the game right now, and I really don't understand this desire to whip out the nerfbat and make Clerics as lousy as the other casters feel.
In the other hand, inspire courage is huge. In some of my simulations against strong monsters, it was +30% damages for other party members - in other words, the bard was doing his share of damages without actually attacking, just by spending an action on inspire courage.
How about a bard performance that negates criticals while it is in effect?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I do want Clerics to be the best healers in the game, . . . .
I agree generally with your sentiments but I'd like to challenge you a bit on this one point. Why -- other than tradition -- should clerics be the healer? I agree that they should be among the best. But I think the game would benefit if other classes were equally good.
And it might also encourage more variety in cleric builds since you wouldnt feel that you were letting the party down everytime you chose an option that didn't optimize healing.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Channel to me, is not really working. It smells like a bandaid fix. It functions nothing like any other class ability. Every other class that wants to do special stuff keys that off their Spell Points or Spell Slots. Clerics get this extra third thing that triples their highest level slots for healing basically. All I hear from folks that think this is good is that "It works! We live with it!" Well, ya, but it doesnt work at making parties varied or gameplay better.
Unless they are going to start hacking in a bunch of random bandaids like this onto the Druid, Bard, and Divine Sorc, then we are stuck with the DM likely running a DMPC Cleric just to keep a party alive and that is just not good design. If they do put in a bunch of such hacks, survivability may go up but the design would likely be clunky (like channel) and be harder to balance.
PF2 would be a far better game if there were no channel and parties could survive with a variety of healing options. Suggestions that fail to address that fail to fix a large problem (the only major one I have with this edition) and just kick the can down the road.
Your post is asking for two mutually exclusive things.
If they do put in a bunch of such hacks, survivability may go up but the design would likely be clunky (like channel) and be harder to balance.
and
PF2 would be a far better game if there were no channel and parties could survive with a variety of healing options.
You can't "have more options" while calling more diverse options "hacks" or "bandaids". To have more options is to have more options. Removing Channel isn't adding options. Buffing the Heal spell isn't adding options. You are specifically narrowing options.
Lets go back to the origin of Channel Energy in PF1, where it was Paizo's fix to healing in 3.5 D&D. It gave Clerics three resources: Spells, Domain Powers, and Channel. This is mirrored in the PF2 version, which has Spells, Spell Points and Channel. Except that now you get less domain powers and less spells. Channel continues to scale, but at a slightly more reliable rate thanks to the higher die and wisdom bonus.
What you're calling "bandaids" are really options and they should include them. There should be a healing focused build of the alchemist. It's thematic, its mechanically interesting, and it allows more non-divine healing into the game. You're right that as is, a cleric is essentially mandatory. However, your wrong in your solution. The problem ins't cleric, heal or channel energy. The problem is in how spells have been powered down and the action economy has made enemies more dangerous.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I played a Druid and a negative Channeler on lvl 5, with as good as only Heal spells prepped. In both cases we had a positive cleric as well, and it was necessary. I bearly had enough healing for myself (fair enough, I played offensive and was tanking by sole healing, instead of using shield). In both scenarios I used up all my Heal spells (lvl 1,2,3) in one single combat. I had Battle Medic + Natural Medicine and a Wand of Heal lvl 1.
In one of these scenarios I even overspent Resonance for Healing.
So even if you cast only Heal spells as Druid, it is not enough Healing for your entire group - in my experience.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think that in a polytheist setting like Golarion, fixed healing class features like channeling don't make a lot of sense.
I have to agree very strongly about this. Cleric = healer is an artifact from way back. The 1E cleric spell list is very biblical, meaning it conforms to a Christian idea of clerics as healers. This is nonsensical in a polytheistic world.
But this is NOT likely to change. Clerics as healers is very likely to stay precisely because it is such an old trope in the game. :(
The best we can hope for is to get som non-cleric way to restore hit points.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I don't see an issue of having every healer brought up to the power level of Clerics.
But know that fights WILL get tedius and long if that happens, because monsters, npc, and opponents, would have the same access to the same boosted healing that will make fights be all about attrition.
And that, imo, would bog down the game.
I agree with this, but not with the solution of buffing every caster/healer class. As the rate of taking damage looks now, I am afraid that what PF2 needs is some kind of short rest mechanic that resores hit points.
Take a 10 minute break to recover (con bonus, minimum 1) * level hit points.
You can do this a set number of times, say 3 (as many as spellcasters get spells of their highest level). Having Con in the number of uses would make Con too good here, as it already has a huge impact on the number of Hp restored.
I know this is controversial, but its the best way I see of fixing the 10 minute adventuring day, and it would not make fights tedious as you can't use this in combat. Magical healing becomes a combat resource.
the cleric isn't s stronger than before. the spell list is weaker. what has changed is monsters are way more dangerous, and no more wand spam nonsense.
Clerics could always heal this much, the problem was in p1, they didnt need, and alot of clerics i played with in P1 didnt even bother.
it's great. they changed the game so that you acutally need a cleric to heal now. they are doing the same thing for traps. i cant remember a single time was afraid of a trap going off in pathfinder.
all that is happening is that the designers are attempting to blend pathfinder with the aesthics of AD&D 2nd edition (the best version of D&D) in my opinion.
class destinctions again, healing needed again, if they can bring back demi-human style multiclassing back, all will be right in the world.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Channel to me, is not really working. It smells like a bandaid fix. It functions nothing like any other class ability. Every other class that wants to do special stuff keys that off their Spell Points or Spell Slots. Clerics get this extra third thing that triples their highest level slots for healing basically. All I hear from folks that think this is good is that "It works! We live with it!" Well, ya, but it doesnt work at making parties varied or gameplay better.
Unless they are going to start hacking in a bunch of random bandaids like this onto the Druid, Bard, and Divine Sorc, then we are stuck with the DM likely running a DMPC Cleric just to keep a party alive and that is just not good design. If they do put in a bunch of such hacks, survivability may go up but the design would likely be clunky (like channel) and be harder to balance.
PF2 would be a far better game if there were no channel and parties could survive with a variety of healing options. Suggestions that fail to address that fail to fix a large problem (the only major one I have with this edition) and just kick the can down the road.
Druids get spell points, spell slots, and a wild shape pool.
Channel is Cleric's main way of healing. Most domain powers don't allow you to heal (pretty sure it's only the healing domain that does). If you were to remove channel, then even with the healing domain they'd be lesser healers than the current leaf order druids (and offer less since druids can still pick up an animal companion). Without the healing domain, it would be impossible to play as even an off healer without completely devoting all of your spell resources to healing (not really being an off healer at that point).
It's not a bandaid. It's a class feature that lets Clerics be either primary healers or decent off healers.
Druid Wild Shape is hardly an equivalent comparison, for a few reasons.
1) Only one of the four orders gets Wild Shape by default.
2) On orders that don't get it by default, if they spend the feat they get a pool, yes. A pool of one use. They get a second if they spend, like, something like half their feats on it.
3) Even on the one order that does get it for free, they get a number of uses per day equal to the modifier in a secondary stat (Strength). 1+Strength if they (like the other orders) spend something like half their feats on it. Compared to Cleric's 3+Secondary Stat (Charisma) pool of Channels from level 1.
4) Even Wild Druids are going to have to spend at least one feat anyways to actually make it something worth using because the base form... really isn't. Pest Form is a joke, and I'm not entirely convinced it doesn't exist purely so they could make claims that Wildshape is usable from level 1 while what we know as Wildshape actually turns on at level 4 like it always did (though of course the duration is gutted, the stats are pitiful, and I could go on but this has been discussed in many threads as is...)
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I do want Clerics to be the best healers in the game, . . . .
I agree generally with your sentiments but I'd like to challenge you a bit on this one point. Why -- other than tradition -- should clerics be the healer? I agree that they should be among the best. But I think the game would benefit if other classes were equally good.
And it might also encourage more variety in cleric builds since you wouldnt feel that you were letting the party down everytime you chose an option that didn't optimize healing.
Good question. I think tradition is really the main reason. And I absolutely *do* think that other classes should be able to be great healers.
In my opinion, it should be possible to build a bard, or druid, or sorcerer or whatever who is a better healer than a "standard" cleric. But if someone takes a cleric and really optimizes them for healing more than anything else, I want that to be the best healing in the game.
But again, there's no particular reason clerics should be the ones who are the best, aside from tradition. As long as a cleric doesn't feel required in order to have a prayer of surviving the dungeon (pun intended), I'll be happy.
I just posted this in another thread but it seems appropriate here too:
I'd also like to see more options for a main healer, but in ways that are particularly flavorful to the class like how paladins healing with holy light that protects with a +1 to AC.Leaf Druids I could see having a potent regenerative healing, which because that can often be less powerful than burst healing like the cleric gets against burst damage would keep people alive and waking up when they hit zero hit points for a few rounds, or fill them with life energy whenever they are over healed giving them a +1 to hit or a burst of speed.
Abjurer wizards could front load healing by casting powerful shielding spells that grant temporary hit points at a similar level to a cleric.
Alchemists healing brews should approach the level and quantity of a clerics heal but could also add the effects of a mutagen for a few rounds at higher level, letting them buff and heal at the same time.
A monk of the healing hand might be able to restore some small amount of spell points (if there's a way to make that a non recursive cycle) with a heal as they unblock the ki in their patient.
I'm not sure about bards because but I'm sure someone who connects better with that class than I do could come up with something.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Good question. I think tradition is really the main reason. And I absolutely *do* think that other classes should be able to be great healers.In my opinion, it should be possible to build a bard, or druid, or sorcerer or whatever who is a better healer than a "standard" cleric. But if someone takes a cleric and really optimizes them for healing more than anything else, I want that to be the best healing in the game.
But again, there's no particular reason clerics should be the ones who are the best, aside from tradition. As long as a cleric doesn't feel required in order to have a prayer of surviving the dungeon (pun intended), I'll be happy.
Ok. I think we are on the same page. In my ideal world several classes would have a "healing spec" that was roughly equivalent in power but maybe went about healing in a slightly different way.
I think someone on here had the idea that Leaf Druids could heal with regeneration that was slower but healed more over time. While Wizards might "heal" with force fields and other forms of damage mitigation. Bards might give out temporary hit points to simulate "inspiration" and so on. I like these ideas. They seem flavorful.
Ideally, dreaming up and playing healing builds would be as much fun as coming up with damage builds.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
So my thoughts on the state of healing in Pathfinder 2:
1) Consumables Suck
Consumables have been nerfed brutally hard. While comparing WBL between the editions is apples to oranges, we can make rough comparisons by estimating the value of items at each level. Based on these numbers PF2 healing elixirs are 3-4 times mroe expensive than PF1 potions of CLW, and PF2 wands of heal (1st) are 7-8 times more expensive than PF1 wand of CLW on a per-charge basis. And that's before we even consider resonance pushing you to use the more expensive items.
Bottom line, without the GM going full Monte Haul, consumables are simply too expensive to use on a regular basis.
2) Clerics get more daily resources than other classes
No other spellcaster has anywhere near as many daily resources as the cleric. Channel means 3-6 additional spells at your highest spell level (or more at higher levels), an amount of casting power that is simply not obtainable by any other source. To an extent it doesn't even matter that it's healing, the cleric just has way more daily resources than other classes and this lets them keep pressing forward long after everyone else is depleted.
I feel pretty much every class other than cleric needs significant buffing to get the same level of staying power as the cleric. And yes, I do feel it's a case of "everyone else needs buffing" and not "cleric needs nerfing". The daily resources of the other classes is clearly insufficient.
3) Preventing Damage is Harder
Most forms of debuffs, save-or-suck, and battlefield control have been drastically nerfed. Whatever your feelings on this, these spells were the most effective means of preventing damage in the first place by disrupting enemy tactics and suppressing their offensive presence. With these abilities weaker, the party as a whole is taking more damage on average.
While it might be that new tactics will emerge in time, right now tactical options are much weaker in general. This makes the brute force solution of just throwing more daily resources at the problem - the cleric - overwhelming the most effective approach.
-----
So in total, healing is more necessary than ever, alternatives are less effective than ever, and clerics have way more daily resources to spare than anyone else while also being the best at filling this role.
The divine sorcerer does require more forethought than the cleric but she holds up pretty well in my opinion and my party was glad to have her. Just take some crafting feats. With an 18 charisma my 8th level sorcerer had 8 resonance left after investing in items. Its plenty to keep up with the healing as long as the DM is fair about downtime activities
Amazing with some actual playtest experience. Kudos!
Just wanted to add that neither of my groups had a cleric so far, adventures on lvl 1 and 4 have been fairly easy.
For Healing we had an alchemist and a paladin on level 1, a wildshape druid and a divine sorcerer on 4 the sorcerer was competent enough on his own to heal the group, natural healing helped in between fights to take on a couple of encounters every day.
On my own encounter testing optimized clerics made most fights/adventures almost trivial in the damage department, they had some healing spells prepared which seemed almost unnecessary especially with a second healer (paladin or druid) on board.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Perhaps the alchemist could be granted an option for channel like healing from elixirs?
In PF1 healing bomb basically did that. I wouldn't mind seeing it back again. But you are right, in it's current state, only clerics are any good at real healing. They really need to fix that.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just wanted to add that neither of my groups had a cleric so far, adventures on lvl 1 and 4 have been fairly easy.
For Healing we had an alchemist and a paladin on level 1, a wildshape druid and a divine sorcerer on 4 the sorcerer was competent enough on his own to heal the group, natural healing helped in between fights to take on a couple of encounters every day.
On my own encounter testing optimized clerics made most fights/adventures almost trivial in the damage department, they had some healing spells prepared which seemed almost unnecessary especially with a second healer (paladin or druid) on board.
Curious about this - in our level 1 group we were all (3 fighters and a bard) at about half hp after the first doomsday dawn fight, and one character used a hero point to not die in fight two. Then we rested overnight, got back to half hp (adding about 3 each, as I recall) and promptly went to fight three, where another fighter had to use hero point and we went and rested. We put out lots of damage, but the monsters did this as well, and the non-cleric healing we had was totally insufficient (sooth doing d6+4, as I recall, and the level * con overnight).
My current position is that every party needs a cleric, perhaps an alternative healer as well (for when the cleric is beaten up) and I sense a problem in society play, where the table composition is "random."
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just wanted to add that neither of my groups had a cleric so far, adventures on lvl 1 and 4 have been fairly easy.
For Healing we had an alchemist and a paladin on level 1, a wildshape druid and a divine sorcerer on 4 the sorcerer was competent enough on his own to heal the group, natural healing helped in between fights to take on a couple of encounters every day.
On my own encounter testing optimized clerics made most fights/adventures almost trivial in the damage department, they had some healing spells prepared which seemed almost unnecessary especially with a second healer (paladin or druid) on board.
Curious about this - in our level 1 group we were all (3 fighters and a bard) at about half hp after the first doomsday dawn fight, and one character used a hero point to not die in fight two. Then we rested overnight, got back to half hp (adding about 3 each, as I recall) and promptly went to fight three, where another fighter had to use hero point and we went and rested. We put out lots of damage, but the monsters did this as well, and the non-cleric healing we had was totally insufficient (sooth doing d6+4, as I recall, and the level * con overnight).
My current position is that every party needs a cleric, perhaps an alternative healer as well (for when the cleric is beaten up) and I sense a problem in society play, where the table composition is "random."
This mirrors my experience as well. At level 1, we had a bard who was totally unable to keep up with the healing demands by himself. This was exacerbated by the fact that "go back to town and heal up at the temple" is almost as expensive as chugging healing potions!
At level 4, they have been doing better, with a druid as the primary healer. But it still feels like they are running on fumes healing-wise after one or two fights. We are playing the our third session of Pale Mountain tonight, and I'm seriously worried that there will be a TPK because the group's healing resources have been completely exhausted and they are about to hit the adventure's climax.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
PFS would be all but unplayable in a system like this... Random party composition combined with only 1/12th of classes being functional healers is a bad position. Other classes need additional resources comperable to the cleric in this regard, because I agree that it isn't that the cleric is overpowered, other classes are simply bereft of the glut of initial resources clerics possess.
For example, To compete:
Alchemist's should gain 3 bonus Resonance Points from Studied Resonance, only to use Advanced Alchemy (so only for crafting infused elixirs and such during your daily prep). Further, Infused items should never cost Resonance (regardless of the user); because it is impossible for Alchemists to really support a party if they cannot even spend their resources on the party's behalf like a cleric can. As is they don't even make effective outfitters.
Bard's should be able to grant Temporary HP through Inspire Courage (equal to your level, or some other reasonably small but scaling value). I know it is already an amazing cantrip, but such a change would significantly reduce the amount of healing a party with a Bard needs in the long run, without trivializing combat threats or obviating the need for actual Healing.
Divine Sorcerer's Channel Energy should be more similar to Cleric and Druid pools, and grant a number of uses of Channel Energy equal to 1 + their Wisdom Modifier.
Other classes should get comperable boosts to their initial resources as well, but I haven't come to any conclusions regarding what those should be...
Just wanted to add that neither of my groups had a cleric so far, adventures on lvl 1 and 4 have been fairly easy.
For Healing we had an alchemist and a paladin on level 1, a wildshape druid and a divine sorcerer on 4 the sorcerer was competent enough on his own to heal the group, natural healing helped in between fights to take on a couple of encounters every day.
On my own encounter testing optimized clerics made most fights/adventures almost trivial in the damage department, they had some healing spells prepared which seemed almost unnecessary especially with a second healer (paladin or druid) on board.
Curious about this - in our level 1 group we were all (3 fighters and a bard) at about half hp after the first doomsday dawn fight, and one character used a hero point to not die in fight two. Then we rested overnight, got back to half hp (adding about 3 each, as I recall) and promptly went to fight three, where another fighter had to use hero point and we went and rested. We put out lots of damage, but the monsters did this as well, and the non-cleric healing we had was totally insufficient (sooth doing d6+4, as I recall, and the level * con overnight).
My current position is that every party needs a cleric, perhaps an alternative healer as well (for when the cleric is beaten up) and I sense a problem in society play, where the table composition is "random."
Well we had two PCs capable of healing in the level 1 adventure, the alchemist mostly healed in between encounters or to heal up when resting which the group did once. The healing of the paladin wasn't very strong but allowed them to get to a reasonable health total at times to press on. They did not spend a single hero point and killed drakus in a single turn.
But let me talk a little bit about the encounters, the ooze did some area damage and then he got bursted down due to his low ac. The Goblins have not been very hard the dwarfen ranger saw them easily the party was well equipped with light sources and followed him and his companion, for the chars without shields take cover was very useful. But some goblins have even been killed on range. The goblins landed a couple of hits, no crits involved. But every player hit was essentially lethal.No fight against the centipedes, the quasits where flanked and overwhelmed quickly.
And Drakus was killed by ranger + badger in a single round.
I would agree with your sentiment of 2 players being able to somewhat heal. The more healing capabilities spread among the party the more spells can be prepared to do something else and they can save one another.
In the level 4 adventure, the druid was used to heal in between fights while the sorcerer used high burst heals with a minor staff of healing. Having the flexibility of the sorcerer helped a great deal. The druid was also quite competent with natural healing and dished out 6 successful healings in roughly 3 days. Except in the fight against the water elemental (they did not rest beforehand) we never came close to use up all the healing. Both players used other spells too and never felt useless in the fights. The sorceror being an elf and having magical striker still felled valuable in combat even though she healed a lot. The druid was also one of the main damage dealers and tanks with wildshape and the claws.
I have no experience with the PF2 bard yet however I would not recommend one as the solo group healer as I would not even recommend a cleric as a solo group healer. A bard with any other combination of heal should be fine though IF the bard is fine with being the healer. 2 Healers make sure that you can always do something else as well.
In general I would say depending on the build and the party level, paladin, cleric, druid, sorcerer and alchemist can be decent healers.
And I would also agree that PFS with random groups should have a focus on self-sustaining choices, being able to heal (at least yourself) is great, but proactive damage protection like stoneskin and false life + shield are great too.
I didn't have a Cleric in either of the sessions that I ran but I did have a Bard and a Sorcerer casting from the divine spell list. Healing seemed more versatile but less useful than in Pathfinder First Edition. In almost every combat scenario where a healing spell was used casting an offense or buffing action would have been more useful.
Not sure what could be done to make this better... If healing is too useful, it's all that character ends up doing. I definitely don't want 4E style "attack to heal others" abilities.
What would help is better access to healing out of combat. I think a Druid could pull it off down the road with that leyline ability (can't look it up at the moment).
What would help is better access to healing out of combat. I think a Druid could pull it off down the road with that leyline ability (can't look it up at the moment).
A 20th level feat isn't a practical solution.
I played a Leaf Druid in "In the Pale Mountain's shadow" with NO cleric and had no trouble keeping up with healing for the whole party. We rested when we had traveled and adventured for 8 hours or the party's other resources were low. The wizard was the the one with the greatest resource limitation.
With Natural Healing, 8 Goodberries (I could have had 12), a minor staff of healing, a wand of healing and heal spells, I had plenty. None of our party was even knocked.
I would say the druid felt slightly less potent than a cleric would have, but there was abundant healing.
You spent all your magic item economy on healing, so you should have plenty. Perhaps other casters will not? I think in an travel adventure, having one big encounter also lessens the healing requirements (until you get to the dungeon).
Overall, I like the idea of a few more classes having some healing builds.