Cleric Won't Heal?

[Blue]

My take is you want one full-time healer and one or two backups (who mostly focus on other things), with the backups' only curative job being to keep the main healer upright.

Yeah, this is an efficient setup. Had a campaign that ended that the DM ran a 2-session special for us a year later to tie up a plot thread. We ended up at one point with seven 10th level characters vs. nine young blue dragons and a blue dragon wyrmling in a wide open place with no cover. We did have a life cleric who wanted to be a primary healer, and my bard. The dragons got initiative on us, dropping one barb and the fighter from full and really hurting the rest of us. In terms of initiative, I went after the dragons, and then our healer, and then everyone else. Almost every turn in that combat was: I healing word the cleric to bring her back up, and do something with my action that isn't a levelled spell (since I bonus action cast). Our cleric uses some sort of mass healing to bring back everyone who fell and give some buffer to others. They pound on dragons. New round - dragons drop at least two people, but never both the cleric and the bard the same round. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Having a backup healer (including the cleric who isn't much focused on healing but will in a clutch) gives a lot of robustness to a party.

 

[Redwizard007]

I covered that earlier. Don't ask for magical healing until you have used your hit dice.

Missed it. Did you cover Healing Surges as well? They make a party freaking terrifying.

 

[Ashrym]

The game is designed so that clerics can heal. Not that they must. Clerics also make great blasters, buffers and front line combatants. With all the out of combat healing, not to mention the healing abilities of the paladin, ranger, bard, sorcerer, artificer, and druid, there is no reason that one class, or one character should become Mr. Band-aid.

Rogues can search for traps, but nothing in their class makes them particularly good at it unless they chose to use expertise for theives tools.

Nothing bothers me more than when one player tries to dictate to another what role their character should fill. I actually prefer to call characters by their background rather than their class. That way we avoid this type of shenanigans.

A divine warrior is any warrior inspired by faith. Paladins are an example, but so are templars, knights on pilgrimage, crusader archers, even berserkers inspired by Woden. Class is just the package of mechanics you chose as a base. It isn't a character concept.

I've played, regularly, with a rogue who doesn't scout. She's a beast with DPS and a great party face. I've also seen fighters played as amazing bowmen. Almost never in the front lines. On the flip side, I've played with an evoker that got addicted to Magic Missle, and a heal bot cleric. The former two were much better teammates than the latter.

BZZZZT.

The game designed cleric so they could heal, among many different things they can do. So can druids, arguably better. Bards can heal fairly well, and are better at preventing damage via crowd control than either of them. Divine Sorcerers can heal very well, also potentially better than clerics between metamagic and using SP to make the right spell slot.

Cleric no more are designed TO heal then a fighter is designed TO be a front liner. They both can do it, but that's not the only way to play them.

Classes are designed do they can heal because there are times when they should heal.

You should probably read the rest of my posts, though. I've never considered clerics heal-bots or band-aids. My stance the players should use all features appropriately including healing. Refusing to heal is choosing to ignore a strength of the class.

 

[Zardnaar]

Classes are designed do they can heal because there are times when they should heal.

You should probably read the rest of my posts, though. I've never considered clerics heal-bots or band-aids. My stance the players should use all features appropriately including healing. Refusing to heal is choosing to ignore a strength of the class.

They're not refusing to point blank heal, main point is she can't heal everyone.

No one else has invested in it.

 

[Blue]

Classes are designed do they can heal because there are times when they should heal.

You should probably read the rest of my posts, though. I've never considered clerics heal-bots or band-aids. My stance the players should use all features appropriately including healing. Refusing to heal is choosing to ignore a strength of the class.

At no point was anyone discussing refusing to heal, just healing when they wanted as a clutch healer after informing the other players so they know what to expect. This isn't about never healing, it's about having to heal as a primary priority.

My bard can heal, but instead of blocking myself off from casting a spell since I dropped a bonus action healing word it's often better to get out a big crowd control spell. Same for the cleric being discussed - they will heal when it's clutch, but assuming heal should be their first priority carries a heavy opportunity cost when often something else the cleric can do is a more efficient or even more in-character choice.

 

[Zardnaar]

At no point was anyone discussing refusing to heal, just healing when they wanted as a clutch healer after informing the other players so they know what to expect. This isn't about never healing, it's about having to heal as a primary priority.

My bard can heal, but instead of blocking myself off from casting a spell since I dropped a bonus action healing word it's often better to get out a big crowd control spell. Same for the cleric being discussed - they will heal when it's clutch, but assuming heal should be their first priority carries a heavy opportunity cost when often something else the cleric can do is a more efficient or even more in-character choice.

If there's not enough healing to go around one could always you know take a cleric level and heal yourself.

People won't because they want someone else to do it.

 

[Ashrym]

The cleric yesterday said something like.

"I'm not healing you unless you fall over".

Translation I'll save your life with healing word.

^This looks like an inappropriate level of resistance / refusal to heal to me. There are times when healing is important in combat.

They're not refusing to point blank heal, main point is she can't heal everyone.

No one else has invested in it.

Everyone has healing with hit dice. Healing potions are on the basic equipment list.

5e deliberately took pressure off the cleric as a class. That doesn't mean clerics don't heal. The class was given access to all those healing spells by design intent otherwise there would have been no reason to guarantee that access.

Clerics get the efficient out of combat healing. Any complaint you might have about the availability of cleric healing as a resource applies to any other class.

Clerics are the best fit. Druids are the alternative. Bards can be built as an alternative. Sorcerers can be built as a decent enough alternative. The difference is preparing any spell on the list versus not necessarily learning healing spells at all.

Paladins and artificers have some decent healing.

Those are the main options.

At no point was anyone discussing refusing to heal, just healing when they wanted as a clutch healer after informing the other players so they know what to expect. This isn't about never healing, it's about having to heal as a primary priority.

My bard can heal, but instead of blocking myself off from casting a spell since I dropped a bonus action healing word it's often better to get out a big crowd control spell. Same for the cleric being discussed - they will heal when it's clutch, but assuming heal should be their first priority carries a heavy opportunity cost when often something else the cleric can do is a more efficient or even more in-character choice.

At no point was anyone saying clerics should only heal or heal on demand.

What I said was the class is designed to heal as a basic part of the chassis and clerics should heal appropriately. I said multiple times there's usually a better option in combat.

That's why I said you should probably read my other posts. ;-)

 

[Campbell]

I do think there is an interesting question when it comes to more flexible classes (spell casters mostly). Should player be responsible for utilizing everything in their kit even if conceptually they want a more specialized character? This is less of a problem for like fighters or warlocks because to specialize in part of their kit they have to make permanent choices. A Cleric, Wizard, or Paladin can change up their kit from day to day. Should they be expected to utilize everything?

This is a fairly contentious issue in PF2 design. Martial characters have more specialized kits so they have more potency than a caster even when utilizing strictly at will abilities. Casters are obviously designed with the idea that will be trying to utilize everything you have available and pick the right tool for the right situation. It lacks the sort of options that casters in 5e have to be as effective in say melee combat or skills as martial characters. There's nothing like the Valor Bard, Lore Bard, Bladesinger, et al that can keep pace with martial characters in their chosen specialty.

I think the way 5e presents itself players are expected to be more free to make those sorts of playstyle choices. For one the default tuning is not meant to be all that high pressure. You totally can play an evoker with the expectation that you get to just blast all day. The College of Swords presents itself as a warrior who happens to have some spells. I do not really see anything in the way an Oath of Vengeance Paladin is presented that indicates players should be expected to utilize the not destroying your enemies part of the kit. I mean you can totally distinguish yourself by doing so.

I personally prefer games with tighter tuning that require you to really utilize every advantage you have, but I do not think that's the default 5e presents.

 

[Campbell]

So I have this 5e character I have been playing for a while (about a year). On paper he's an Eladrin Swashbuckler Rogue / Draconic Bloodline Sorcerer.

In combat he's an extremely mobile skirmisher who is able to deliver damage exactly where's its needed through sneak attack paired with Green Flame Blade / Booming Blade. He also his spell slots for long lasting Buffs and Debuffs (mostly Haste and Slow ) Personal Defenses (mostly Shield and Absorb Elements), Mobility (Fey Step and Thunder Step) and to fuel Sorcery Points to Quicken his Green Flame Blade. No Fireballs to be seen here.

Outside of combat the character is very focused in social skills. He is an envoy from the Court of the Erlking and like knows magic stuff. He could not perform scouting duties or search for traps very well if his life depended on it.

The character has a unique niche that I fashioned for him and contributes plenty both in and outside of combat. There are tools in my toolkit that I almost never use, including Fireball and more utility style magic. I should probably look into that. How ever I am not sure given how lax the tuning is in most 5e adventures (based on what is published, the written guidelines and personal experience) that I should be expected to.

 

[cbwjm]

Maybe they shouldn't have cut the spell slots so much.
Even with life clerics their channel divinity should be something like 2d10+level healing.

The life cleric channel is kind of annoying because it only takes you up to a maximum of half health.