Cleric Won't Heal?

[Zardnaar]

Can you buy potions, though? I was under the impression that 5e by RAW didn't have any sort of magic-item economy, thus if you can buy potions that must be a house rule.

You can buy common items. Mostly that means 2d4+2 healing potions.

 

[Lanefan]

She's better off letting you drop taking 9hp of damage vs cure having you drop anyway.

Except doesn't dropping wipe out the Fighter's action for the round? If yes, how is this any more 'efficient' in terms of winning the battle?

 

[Zardnaar]

Except doesn't dropping wipe out the Fighter's action for the round? If yes, how is this any more 'efficient' in terms of winning the battle?

Sometimes yes but it depends on initiative.

Sometimes fighter dropping is the most efficient thing to do and then heal later.

No point healing the fighter if they drop anyway or you heal them and they get hit again before their initiative.

So it depends on the situation.

Still feeds into the "why didn't someone else devote something to healing".

I played a Paladin once in a 7 person party no one else had any healing so I just healed myself. I'll help out if I can but if I have a choice between healing you and healing myself guess what one I'm picking?

 

[Lanefan]

Let's clarify. Am I not allowed to play a class that has other ways to be effective, but also has healing, if I do not intend to do a lot of healing? That I should pick another class. No druids of any stripe. No divine sorcerers. No clerics. Or is your problem just with clerics? And if so, why?

As long as you make it clear up front - as in, before we head out into the field - that you're not going to do much if any healing (or, fair enough, if you're only going to use your healing on yourself as a trade-off for not draining party healing resources) then all is cool: if we need more healing in the party we still have time to go recruit some.

It's if you say one thing (sure, I'll heal ya) up front and then do another (refuse to heal) when the chips are down that legitimate issues arise.

 

[Zardnaar]

As long as you make it clear up front - as in, before we head out into the field - that you're not going to do much if any healing (or, fair enough, if you're only going to use your healing on yourself as a trade-off for not draining party healing resources) then all is cool: if we need more healing in the party we still have time to go recruit some.

It's if you say one thing (sure, I'll heal ya) up front and then do another (refuse to heal) when the chips are down that legitimate issues arise.

Some people are also just useless. They play cowardly types who are often to fair away to help.

Rogues fall into this category alot.

 

[Lanefan]

Why haven't you spent resources on healing? Did you take inspiring leader or healer yourself?

If I'm a Fighter everything I've got is going into making myself better able to bend my opponent's nose into its face. That's my job.

 

[Blue]

Not even close

If you CAN help and CHOOSE not to...

I can cancel my plans to be out of town, but because I choose not to I'm a bad friend?

Again, the cleric isn't doing nothing. The cleric is effectively contributing. There is an opportunity cost for the cleric to not do that and heal instead. One that at times is not the right choice. Casting Spirit Guardians to damage a bunch of foes and slow them so they can't reach the sorcerer in the back. Other crowd control or action denial spells. Getting off a Bless so we can drop the hard to hit foes quicker instead of topping off one fighter. Or maybe even just getting off an attack or cantrip on a foe about to drop before they get their action again.

You are espousing a very selfish viewpoint that clerics - and friends - must prioritize your needs first, and find them at fault when they choose not to do so and take care of what they want to do.

 

[Zardnaar]

If I'm a Fighter everything I've got is going into making myself better able to bend my opponent's nose into its face. That's my job.

Healer feat does that. I regard it as more powerful than say great weapon master.

The cleric player could just go screw it I'll play a paladin instead, heal myself only and party still doesn't have a dedicated healer.

5E monsters a bit in easy side.

 

[Lanefan]

Sometimes yes but it depends on initiative.

Sometimes fighter dropping is the most efficient thing to do and then heal later.

No point healing the fighter if they drop anyway or you heal them and they get hit again before their initiative.

So it depends on the situation.

It's meta-game considerations like this that make me despise cyclic initiative! That, and were it me someone who dropped would always lose at least one round worth of actions even if cured quickly.

I played a Paladin once in a 7 person party no one else had any healing so I just healed myself. I'll help out if I can but if I have a choice between healing you and healing myself guess what one I'm picking?

That sounds rather...un-Paladinic.

 

[Zardnaar]

It's meta-game considerations like this that make me despise cyclic initiative! That, and were it me someone who dropped would always lose at least one round worth of actions even if cured quickly.

That sounds rather...un-Paladinic.

Well we don't have to be good aligned anymore.

I was but I couldn't heal 6 people by myself anyway so didn't matter. What I thought.

I did keep a few heals in the tank to prevent people dying. Here have 1 hp.

Grand total of 20/hp a long rest doesn't go far.