Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8035748" data-attributes="member: 18">Seriously? I am arguably doing the first as a matter of fact (it's not like, my goal in life or something), but I think the second is pretty silly as an accusation.Not "in other words". In your words.When I say win, I mean win. That doesn't necessarily entail any killing. So you're arguing with yourself here. Actual healers want the party to live and succeed. That, since 3E, arguably since 2E, actually relatively rarely means casting healing spells.For you, apparently, but for most people, I don't think that's true.It doesn't sound like an oversimplification from what you're saying there so that's a bit confusing. Also it's not true that you have to do all that much damage. We had a largely non-damaging healer in my 4E group (though she did have some utterly deadly stuff because, well, she was there to help the party, not perform some pointless activity for her own satisfaction), and she did tremendously despite contributing relatively little to damage.I can certainly see that a Lazylord might have pleased you better. One of the players in my group was a Shaman which was sort of Lazylord-adjacent.Christ.</blockquote>