Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Voadam" data-source="post: 8609529" data-attributes="member: 2209">I preferred 4e's style of healing. One of the four core class roles is healing and buffing so there is the divine magic cleric, the arcane magic bard, and the martial warlord. In combat healing based off of both the healer's healing power resources and the healed's healing resources. Having healing be both heal the target and do x as a combo action was great for my playstyle preferences. Having a choice of combat contribution being buffing and healing, defense, concentrated damage, or area damage/control was a great menu of options that could work in different combinations for different in combat feel.In 4e being a big defender with a leader/healer at your back you can really mechanically hold the line against big monsters as an effective tactic to free up your vulnerable buddies to bring their glass cannons into play for major damage.Having an in combat healer in 4e was a fun option for the combat flow and dynamics, but generally not a necessary one. Most groups can get through a lot of combat by hammering with the other non healing roles then healing up on their own outside of combat with surges.In 5e the healer's roles in combat are a little different. It is either spend a big action and resource economy for little comparative return (that can still be worthwhile), or even littler healing while still having a cantrip or physical attack, or popup healing as needed while trying to focus on other stuff.I preferred 4e where big in combat healing was an option that worked in ways I enjoyed within the math, but not necessary.5e is decent, but I prefer 4e's flow options.Also 4e's Warlords were a fantastic class.</blockquote>

Verification