So the idea here - there's an open weekly table run at your friendly local gaming store for anyone who wants to show up and play. They've just started up a low-level adventure, and you've built whatever character you'd want to build for it. You look around the table at the collection of 2-4 strangers who are now your fellow party members. (Assume Covid is no longer an issue.) Given the character that you've brought, which character class/build/whatever would you *hope* to see?
If you routinely bring multiple prebuilt characters for better party optimization in these sorts of cases, feel free to hold forth on that. If it's more complicated than that, by all means explain further. Mostly, I'm looking for some insight on what kind of characters to think about putting together if I want to be particularly party-friendly in that sort of environment. (More broadly, I'm hoping to get answers for other people too. I mean, I personally won't be playing any casters regardless, but that doesn't mean you should ignore them when making your suggestions.)
|
Honestly, a "traditional" Rogue who doesn't go overboard on Archetypes for things like Spellcasting, you know, the good old stab-shoot-steal-skill monkey type character. Somebody with a not-trivial amount of HP, are able to reliably hit, flank around, and also "debuff" in a variety of ways while not being just a dead standard 2 handed weapon Barb/Ftr trying to get big damage numbers.
I just haven't seen many of these in PF2 games I've played or ran, not exactly sure why but yeah, just my experience.
What I'm playing: most likely a smart and charismatic support character
What I hope to see: literally anyone with cool abilities and/or personality thats fun to watch go off, and will work in a team. My main abilities are strongest when I'm in a party that is willing to team up. If there's no healer, I'll pick medicine as one of my main skills, otherwise, my spells are mostly based around winning the fight before it really begins
there's an open weekly table run at your friendly local gaming store for anyone who wants to show up and play. They've just started up a low-level adventure
"Adventure" specifically means a Pathfinder Adventure, or generically some kind of adventure?
If it's a 30+ hour commitment to the same group of people, what Gary Bush said - a dedicated healer. Or, rather, a player willing to sit there and mash the "heal" button for 30 hours, which is a super important as well as super boring task. The premade Adventures are pretty tough, and people need to get together and make sure skills are covered, etc., and in-combat healing is something that needs to be discussed, so if someone's going to step up and free us of that constraint ... all the better.
If it's a 1-4 hour commitment for the evening, what Alchemic_Genius said - an interesting character and a cooperative player. Especially with PFS scenarios, the combats are way less deadly, and people playing strange builds and/or using unoptimized strategies are unlikely to change our survival rate. No melee fighter? No dedicated healer? Meh ... we'll probably be okay.
If I were going to be walked in blindfolded and have zero idea of what was going on or how I got there or who was playing or how long we were going to be playing, I'd probably hope that someone had brought - and would bring myself - a redeemer or paladin.
If we're level 4, a Druid with an animal companion. That character has AOE, healing, and flanking on tap.
"Adventure" specifically means a Pathfinder Adventure, or generically some kind of adventure?
I hadn't really thought to specify.
The focus on healing is kind of interesting. From readings elsewhere, I'd been under the impression that you could mostly afford to handle healing post-battle, and that it was mostly covered by the Medicine skill and a few General feats to back it up. Sure, in-battle healing might be handy from time to time, but it wasn't really seen as a priority. This seems to suggest a much stronger need for it than I'd been aware of.
The focus on healing is kind of interesting. From readings elsewhere, I'd been under the impression that you could mostly afford to handle healing post-battle, and that it was mostly covered by the Medicine skill and a few General feats to back it up. Sure, in-battle healing might be handy from time to time, but it wasn't really seen as a priority. This seems to suggest a much stronger need for it than I'd been aware of.
While the general opinion is that in-battle healing does not seem to be necessary it surely has a lot of advantages, especially in a PUG.
The most important one being that it is possibly the easiest and most convenient way to mitigate the effects of RNG (aka good or bad luck on both sides of the GM screen), suboptimal tactics / plain mistakes as well as the very possible lack of general party optimisation, both in tactical gameplay as well as in class and skill composition.
In-battle healing can be a powerful "undo" button and especially inexperienced or careless players will most possibly benefit if such a character is part of their PUG.
I'd been under the impression that you could mostly afford to handle healing post-battle, and that it was mostly covered by the Medicine skill and a few General feats to back it up. Sure, in-battle healing might be handy from time to time, but it wasn't really seen as a priority.
You have to be really careful of wording.
While I'm sure there are those who believe healing can be relegated to post battle, most people wouldn't agree.
More people would agree that a dedicated healer isn't necessary. But a dedicated healer makes everything easier; and also some sort of in-combat healing is necessary.
Certainly, gone are the days where people make their little brothers play the cleric because that's the only way to heal, nobody wants to do it, and I'M TELLING MOM YOU'RE NOT LETTING ME PLAY / FINE YOU CAN BE THE HEALER.
Clerics aren't just healbots anymore. They can be and they're still quite welcome, but they can be other things (the divine spell list has some great offensive options). Also other classes can be healbots.
And if nobody wants to be a healbot there are more options - but multiple characters are going to have to chip in. Everyone having Battle Medicine is probably overkill, but 1/3-2/3 of the party with Battle Medicine is the standard way of surviving without a dedicated healer. You can also get non-arcane spellcasters to agree to prepare a few healing spells. You can also agree to spend a disproportionate amount of gold on healing potions, or make sure a chunk of martials/arcane casters have Trick Magic Item and some scrolls. All viable IMO.
What isn't viable is the all-offense approach, hoping to kill everything quickly. You can't bump AC to unhittable levels or attacks to undefendable levels. So sooner or later someone gets crit or fail a few persistent damage rolls in a row, and someone's going to have to do in-combat healing, even if it's pouring a minor healing potion down someone's throat.
Clerics are definitely healbots in 2e, they literally have a class feature that's just extra casts of heal, 2e has the most healbot pidgeonholed clerics I've seen.
I'd probably say a bard, they're always useful, with their great focus cantrips and probably the best spells around.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Clerics are definitely healbots in 2e, they literally have a class feature that's just extra casts of heal, 2e has the most healbot pidgeonholed clerics I've seen.
A healbot is someone who does nothing but heal. PF2 Clerics can have so much extra healing they don't need to prepare heal spells in their slots (as is the case with my Cleric, that I am currently playing).
They will usually have as many other spell slots of relevant levels as they have free heals, so they are a healing class for sure, but if all you do is prepare heals, that's a decision that was made.
Most of their feats relate to altering heal, which is fair. But I cannot stress how much the game expects you to use archetypes to do different things, and class feats are mostly about the core class features.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
More people would agree that a dedicated healer isn't necessary. But a dedicated healer makes everything easier; and also some sort of in-combat healing is necessary.
I think a dedicated healer is a liability. What you ideally need is 2 non dedicated healers.
Dedicated healers cause a few issues:- If the healer goes down, who can heal them?
- If there's no need of healing, they have nothing to do.
- They are boring to play (personal opinion, but I'm pretty sure I'm not the one to think that).
Also, in PF2, there's not so much optimization you can apply to your healing. Between a Cleric with all the healing feats and a Druid who cast a 2-action Heal, the difference in efficiency is not stellar.
But I agree that healing is extremely important to save character's lives. When you have to run away from a monster, if you don't have healing, you often leave bodies behind. With healing, you can save them at the last moment (even if it's not always easy).
And when I walk into a PUG, I don't want to see another character with the same main attribute. But there's no character I'm happy to see always, it'll depend on what I play.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think a dedicated healer is a liability. What you ideally need is 2 non dedicated healers.
I'm not sure I'd go as far as to say a liability, but even a cleric is better off preparing support and such in their slots instead than healing. My group's cleric started discovering the rest of her actual spell list and combats go way smoother now that shes taking out the big bad's mook squad with calm emotions of fireball (Sarenrae cleric), tossing out heroisms, etc, instead of just casting heal on the ally with the lowest health
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Clerics are definitely healbots in 2e, they literally have a class feature that's just extra casts of heal, 2e has the most healbot pidgeonholed clerics I've seen.
(Everyone knows Clerics with harm fonts don't exist. :v )
I'd be happy to see a Champion with good tenets, honestly, just because the extra defense makes things easier for everyone. But I also agree with most of the above answers. In general, a character with supportive or defensive capabilities and willingness to use them with care seems like a nice balm for the general aura of "rather difficult" that PF2 has picked up.
I'm not sure I'd go as far as to say a liability, but even a cleric is better off preparing support and such in their slots instead than healing. My group's cleric started discovering the rest of her actual spell list and combats go way smoother now that shes taking out the big bad's mook squad with calm emotions of fireball (Sarenrae cleric), tossing out heroisms, etc, instead of just casting heal on the ally with the lowest healthI think a dedicated healer is a liability. What you ideally need is 2 non dedicated healers.
Yes, it's a bit of a hyperbole.
In fact, in PF2, you can easily have most characters able to heal. Half of the classes are able to heal through class features or spells. And there's Battle Medicine for those with available hands. So it's easy to have 2/3 of the characters with healing abilities.
Yes, it's a bit of a hyperbole.
In fact, in PF2, you can easily have most characters able to heal. Half of the classes are able to heal through class features or spells. And there's Battle Medicine for those with available hands. So it's easy to have 2/3 of the characters with healing abilities.
As far as I can see (https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=760 ) Battle Medicine doesn't even require the free hand. (Don't ask me how that works.)
It's also interesting that Battle Medicine has the same DCs as Treat Wounds, and heals the same amount of HP, but carefully evades actually invoking Treat Wounds in any other way (and thus is not affected by any boosts to Treat Wounds other than the HP gain).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, it's a bit of a hyperbole.
In fact, in PF2, you can easily have most characters able to heal. Half of the classes are able to heal through class features or spells. And there's Battle Medicine for those with available hands. So it's easy to have 2/3 of the characters with healing abilities.As far as I can see (https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=760 ) Battle Medicine doesn't even require the free hand. (Don't ask me how that works.)
It's also interesting that Battle Medicine has the same DCs as Treat Wounds, and heals the same amount of HP, but carefully evades actually invoking Treat Wounds in any other way (and thus is not affected by any boosts to Treat Wounds other than the HP gain).
Battle Medicine requires a free hand, and Paizo clarified this.
It also needs the healer's kit which can be the one kit available hands-free or can be pulled out and held in the second hand.As for abilities not working together, that's standard in PF2. There's a "no stacking" mindset that tries to keep force multipliers to a minimum. Hence the general rule for multiplying is 2x original & 2x original = 3x original rather than 4x. Or Elf Step specifying it's a separate action so it doesn't interact with other abilities that alter your Step (like Tiger Stance).
ETA: If abilities did stack, that'd lend to breaking the power curve. Players would be obliged to stock up on the additive abilities since they amplified each other so much. IMO it's better to have them all strong in their own right, and no stronger than intended by their interplay with other abilities.