Cleric Won't Heal?

[DnD Warlord]

I have a strong preference for designs where at least some classes can fill multiple roles depending on how you design your character. The more flexible classes is one of the things I really appreciate about 5e and PF2.

I don’t play pathfinder but my favorite classes in 4e worked that way too... my fighter could focus more on damage and be a striker ect... I miss having mechanical options that aren’t labeled soellsy

 

[Lanefan]

This is only a tangentially-related topic, but one of my pet peeves in D&D is the concept of "decision by committee." It often hides behind the label of "teamwork," but it's effectively six different players playing six different characters at the same time, with perhaps one of them acting as a Table Captain for everyone else.

"Okay, it's Huxley the Warrior's turn on initiative. Jim, what do you think he should do? Mmhm. Bob, what do you think about Jim's idea? Excellent point, Kevin, it would be easier to flank if we put Huxley over there. Okay, Walter...you've been quiet this evening, do you have an opinion on Huxley's action? Fair enough. So we've decided Huxley will go over here and do The Thing."

"Next turn! What does everyone think Willori the cleric should do?"

And round and round they go.

The only way to stop this is for the DM to proactively bring out the smackdown hammer and say the only voice she wants to hear on Huxley's turn is that of Huxley's player unless Huxley is communicating in-character with another PC (and remember, only so much can be said in six seconds). If need be, enforce this with some harsh in-game punishments e.g. loss of turn for those who won't shut up, and it'll come around pretty quick.

Another option is to enforce to the letter "if you say it, your character says it"; which means they can discuss tactics all they like but the enemies can hear every word...

I've done this in the past, largely because it's a very small step from 'playing by committee' to having some players outright start telling other players what to do and-or playing their characters for them - even when the PCs were separated in the fiction and could not communicate - and this never ends well. What I ended up doing was ruling that any suggestion from another player whose character couldn't have made it immediately became a banned action.

 

[Lanefan]

To me, a cleric who blatantly refuses to heal should have been another class.

Well, unless it's a Death Cleric whose focus is putting foes down and then starting them on their safe pleasant journey to the afterlife....

 

[Lanefan]

My AD&D clerics packed 1 or 2 healing spells per day, period. We'd adventure, then retreat, rest for a day, heal, then rest for another day and return to our adventuring (or at least that was the plan).

Exactly. But 4e-5e design doesn't seem to like or encourage this style of play, preferring instead that the party be able to do most adventures in one extended run.

 

[Lanefan]

This strikes me as odd. Why is the cleric pigeon holed into one role when no other class is? Would it make you feel better if a player ran a "divine warrior" instead of a "cleric?" Same class but played as a striker?

"Divine warrior" is just fancy words for "Paladin", right?

And all the basic classes have their basic things they do best, be it in or out of combat. Fighters give out (and take) damage. Clerics support and heal. Rogues sneak and scout. Wizards stand in the back and watch (according to the front-liners!).

A Fighter who won't fight or a Rogue that won't scout is about on a par with a Cleric who won't heal*: much less useful than it could be.

* - out of combat particularly.

 

[Zardnaar]

"Divine warrior" is just fancy words for "Paladin", right?

And all the basic classes have their basic things they do best, be it in or out of combat. Fighters give out (and take) damage. Clerics support and heal. Rogues sneak and scout. Wizards stand in the back and watch (according to the front-liners!).

A Fighter who won't fight or a Rogue that won't scout is about on a par with a Cleric who won't heal*: much less useful than it could be.

* - out of combat particularly.

I like playing a cleric because the 5E one is a fun spellcaster.

If I was expected to heal on demand I wouldn't play the class.

If they tried to force me to play the class I leave game and they still have no cleric.

I'll heal if I've got the spellslits but the larger a group gets you probably want more than one potential healer.

Some people are directly expecting the cleric to heal in demand and then double down on it with the healer feat instead if taking that feat themselves.

Strategically and tactically that's poor. What happens if the cleric is KO'ed?

 

[Oofta]

"Divine warrior" is just fancy words for "Paladin", right?
...

I thought "font of awesome" was a fancy word for "Paladin".

Or is that only for gnomish paladins?

 

[Oofta]

I've played clerics that only used healing as a last resort myself, at least until higher levels when you get ways to heal multiple at once. It worked just fine for us, I was just up front with the group on what to expect.

One of the few things I miss about 4E was how effective a fighting cleric could be at both fighting and healing but overall I don't think it's that big of a deal. Nobody should be forced to play a healbot, and I don't think you need to.

 

[Ashrym]

Well, unless it's a Death Cleric whose focus is putting foes down and then starting them on their safe pleasant journey to the afterlife....

Most clerics are better off doing that in combat most of the time. I would still expect a death cleric to heal outside of combat and in combat when it makes sense. A cleric who never heals isn't making use of all the class features.

IMO, a cleric who never heals is playing suboptimally. A cleric who is always healing is also playing suboptimally. Good play comes from using all the class features when it makes sense to do so.

I accept that it's not my place to play someone else's character for him or her. That doesn't mean he or she should not respect my opinion, and it doesn't mean he or she is playing the cleric more effectively.

 

[Zardnaar]

Most clerics are better off doing that in combat most of the time. I would still expect a death cleric to heal outside of combat and in combat when it makes sense. A cleric who never heals isn't making use of all the class features.

IMO, a cleric who never heals is playing suboptimally. A cleric who is always healing is also playing suboptimally. Good play comes from using all the class features when it makes sense to do so.

I accept that it's not my place to play someone else's character for him or her. That doesn't mean he or she should not respect my opinion, and it doesn't mean he or she is playing the cleric more effectively.

She's more likely to use prayer of healing than the cure spell. She's never really gonna have that many spare spellslots.