Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 6090349" data-attributes="member: 6668292">On a related note, this was one of my observations with combat roles being baked into classes in 4e. Some classes could blend from their main role into others, from what I understand (the 4e Fighter can be a good Striker, for example), but some seemed much less able to blend. And so you have people saying what they think is the optimal party composition (1 Leader, 1 Controller, 1 Defender, and a couple Strikers, or something similar). So, while you get some options when going for your party composition, you still get kinda stifled. That's not to say you can't go a different route (pemerton's group has no Leader, but I think three PCs that can heal), but I still see a lot of people say "no, you shouldn't have 2 Leaders, 2 Defenders, and 1 Striker. The fights will drag on too much." And I think we can probably agree that a group without Leaders to PCs that can dip healing (like pemerton's group) might be in for a lot of a hurt.However, the game is playable like that. And that's about how I feel with cleric healing. I have played without any source of magical healing a few times, and I've run even more games where my party didn't have any magical healing. We actually quite like this kind of thing; if you're wounded, you might need to wait somewhere while you treat your wounds. However, the world evolves a lot during this time. Suddenly, we had games where years passed potentially between levels, instead of days or weeks. It's also why we like missing magical transportation.Yeah, it's just a preference thing. However, my point is that you can get along without magical healing in the same way you can use a party composition in 4e that others would find grindy (or worse, such as a party with no Leaders). Essentially, either one should be able to work, but there's consequences for choosing that party composition (periods of rest, or grindy fights). And, personally, I'm totally okay with that. As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I'd disagree with this. If I don't have internet access, that'll make an impact on my life. By no means do I consider internet access necessary, however. The same is true for instant healing (magical or otherwise) in my campaign; if you don't have it, it'll make an impact, but you can (and I have) played games without it, and have fun games if that's something you're okay with (and I get that not everyone is). But "makes an impact" is not how I'd describe "necessary", personally. As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I want to feel included!Depends on the adventure. If they can take their time, why not? If they can't, then they might need to press on, and they might suffer casualties or not even make it back. I'm okay with this dynamic.Core, or Basic? If you mean Basic, then I doubt we'll even have Warlords, Bards, and the like. Since I basically don't care about Basic (and don't think that the large majority of people will be playing it to any degree, including new players), I'll take this as "Core" as in Basic+Standard. If that's the case, sure, let other classes heal.Again, are you talking about "Core" or "Basic"? If Basic (which I still don't really care about), then yeah, to a small degree (Fighter's Parry, for example). If anything beyond Basic? Definitely. But again, I don't see the Cleric as necessary even if it is the only way to heal. As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification