Cleric Won't Heal?

[Warpiglet-7]

I see a lot of people talking about the idea of roles and if a cleric should hear or a fighter should fight. I know that 5e has less dependence on class role, but I always looked at classes as having roles and players mostly needing to play those roles. If I have 4 friends and one wants to play a fighter that is an archer. That just means that someone else needs to front-line fight. A cleric that refuses to heal would be just as bad in the group. Saving the in combat heal is ok to a point, but at some point the front-line fighter may feel like he needs to pull back and shoot since he is low on HP, leaving the others in the party to now be in the front line.

I am not saying you are wrong—this is all opinion afterall. However, in decades of play I don’t think I have ever discussed “roles.” It has always been about pulling your weight in some way.

it could be healing but it could be doing anything in your skill set that helps others survive. To that end, I have (well my group) not ever expected anyone to take a cleric.

I am a fan of taking what Appeals to the player. The dm can adjust. If we recognize we are short on healing and think we need it, gold has new value. We will be forking it out for healing potions!

I wonder too if this is maybe more of an issue from 1e than 5e. The healing now is so easy in comparison

 

[cbwjm]

This is why I like playing an order cleric. Heal my ally and they get to make an attack. If its with healing word then I'm also able to make an attack. Works really well with the party rogue.

 

[aco175]

I am a fan of taking what Appeals to the player. The dm can adjust. If we recognize we are short on healing and think we need it, gold has new value. We will be forking it out for healing potions!

I also like to let players pick what they like, but the game is set up to have 1 of each class- less so in 5e I agree. Playing modules is more noticeable if the DM needs to adjust to make up for things. In a homebrew I have had parties of all thieves or mages, but I found that eventually the need for another role forces someone to multi-class or take feats and such to make up for this.

 

[Warpiglet-7]

I also like to let players pick what they like, but the game is set up to have 1 of each class- less so in 5e I agree. Playing modules is more noticeable if the DM needs to adjust to make up for things. In a homebrew I have had parties of all thieves or mages, but I found that eventually the need for another role forces someone to multi-class or take feats and such to make up for this.

Yeah, actually I was just thinking about home brew vs modules before reading this.

agreed that there can be more assumed by other authors.

i can see discussing and filling a need somehow as a party. But if I play cleric (about to do so soon!) I just can’t stand the passive role.

I have a high strength arcana cleric in heavy armor planned. Looking to grapple and shove and mace (gfb) my way to not heal as much.! Looking to hold folks in spirit guardians!

but of course if someone is diseased or barely hanging on, of course I would toss them a heal before the next room.

but I plan an active role in the fighting as a primary concern. Going with a cleric of wee Jas and plan to get some skeletons to help the party as we go.

that was actually a discussion I had to have. No use in having LG paladins go apesh*t on me! I made sure the PCs involved could tolerate that especially if we destroyed them after use.

but that is back to alignment and personality more than class discussion....which has needed discussion in my group more than roles per se.

 

[Eltab]

Nothing but the cleric has a grand total of two spells.

Cure wound 1d8+4, Guiding Bolt 4d6.

Basically she can't heal everyone anyway even if she wanted to.

That sounds like an under-cantrip'ed cleric.

But now you know: shell out GP for Potions of Healing and be ready to spend your own turn coming to the aid of somebody else. This Cleric cannot cover that task solo.
You will need a tactical eye, too, so you can arrange to fight where you cannot be swarmed or surrounded. And/or learn to sneak past the sentries a lot.

 

[Lanefan]

I once - and only once! - tried playing a hard-line zealot Cleric who would only cure members of her own faith; to the point of "Convert or die" if someone was down and bleeding out. This happened often, as we were raw 1st-level at the time; and even though she was the only healer we had, as no-one else in the party was of her faith* she didn't have to (or get to) do much curing. She also made no friends whatsoever.

Then my Cleric went down, having got a bit separated from the party during a rolling combat. Had someone got to her and patched her up her odds of survival were good. Three party members raced toward her from different locations - and I-as-player know full well what's coming next: each of the players had independently passed a note to the DM saying variants on "If I get to her first, finish her off!".

None of them got the kill, however, as the monsters finished her off first.

* - if memory serves, both she and her deity were LN thus her deity wasn't anything offensive or evil.

 

[J-H]

Healing is vastly underrated in whitespace Theoretical Optimization discussions. I say this having run a party from 3-12 with a Life Cleric in it, in a combat-heavy campaign. I tried to kill them and rarely succeeded. Lots of encounters, not a ton of rests.

That said, the cleric doesn't have to heal any more than a druid has to. There are other things the class can do.

 

[prabe]

@Lanefan I'd be inclined to say your cleric (and you-as-player) had earned that outcome. "Convert or I won't cure you" seems easier to pull off with an NPC than with a PC, at least in any version of D&D I've played.

 

[Charlaquin]

This is why I like playing an order cleric. Heal my ally and they get to make an attack. If its with healing word then I'm also able to make an attack. Works really well with the party rogue.

Order domain is dope, I’m so glad they’re reprinting it in Tasha’s.

 

[Lanefan]

@Lanefan I'd be inclined to say your cleric (and you-as-player) had earned that outcome.

Oh, I don't dispute this for a second!

It was an experiment on my part - a topic of discussion around that time had been Clerics not adhering to their faith, and so I thought I'd try the other extreme. Being early days in the campaign I knew there'd likely be lots of character turnover anyway, so if my Cleric died quick it'd just be one more log on the fire.

"Convert or I won't cure you" seems easier to pull off with an NPC than with a PC, at least in any version of D&D I've played.

Indeed, but sometimes it's fun to try these things as a PC just to see what happens.