Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Thundering_Dragon" data-source="post: 2405632" data-attributes="member: 33723">I would really like to hear the other side of the story here, mostly because of this quote:&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;It sounds like the group actually has a problem with the way the character is being played in a mechanical, rules based sense.&nbsp; &quot;&quot;Bob&quot; is a Cleric, so why isn't he healing us?&quot;&nbsp; Seems to be the attitude that's presented here.&nbsp;&nbsp;Who says a Cleric cannot be a &quot;self buffing fighter&quot;?&nbsp; It's really aggravating that certain classes in D&amp;D are automatically assumed to HAVE to fit into a certain role.&nbsp; Clerics are not required to heal any more than Rogues are required to pick pockets.&nbsp; If &quot;Bob&quot; was playing a Psychic Warrior or another class with self buffing abilities no one would say a word, but since the Cleric also has heal spells he's automatically consigned to the role of walking band aid?&nbsp;I have also run Clerics similar to this one, and it's really irritating how the other players simply assume you are there to heal them.&nbsp; Now, whenever I run a Cleric like this, I make certain to inform the rest of the players and the DM beforehand the type of character he is going to be.&nbsp; &nbsp;Finally, there are plenty of Gods who would encourage &quot;Bobs&quot; behavior, rather than disapprove.&nbsp; Clerics of Tyr, Tempus, Clangeddin, Corellon, and many more have goals that focus on fighting the wicked, rather than protecting the weak or healing the sick.&nbsp; It seems to me the only real problem here is everyone expects &quot;Bob&quot; to fill a presupposed role that does not fit what he actually wants the character to do.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;With two more Clerics in the party, this is the perfect opportunity to allow &quot;Bob&quot; to play a battle oriented Cleric without the party missing out on the healing he could provide, since it is already covered.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Thundering_Dragon, post: 2405632, member: 33723"] I would really like to hear the other side of the story here, mostly because of this quote: [b][/b] It sounds like the group actually has a problem with the way the character is being played in a mechanical, rules based sense. ""Bob" is a Cleric, so why isn't he healing us?" Seems to be the attitude that's presented here. Who says a Cleric cannot be a "self buffing fighter"? It's really aggravating that certain classes in D&D are automatically assumed to [b]HAVE[/b] to fit into a certain role. Clerics are not required to heal any more than Rogues are required to pick pockets. If "Bob" was playing a Psychic Warrior or another class with self buffing abilities no one would say a word, but since the Cleric also has heal spells he's automatically consigned to the role of walking band aid? I have also run Clerics similar to this one, and it's really irritating how the other players simply assume you are there to heal them. Now, whenever I run a Cleric like this, I make certain to inform the rest of the players and the DM beforehand the type of character he is going to be. Finally, there are plenty of Gods who would encourage "Bobs" behavior, rather than disapprove. Clerics of Tyr, Tempus, Clangeddin, Corellon, and many more have goals that focus on fighting the wicked, rather than protecting the weak or healing the sick. It seems to me the only real problem here is everyone expects "Bob" to fill a presupposed role that does not fit what he actually wants the character to do. With two more Clerics in the party, this is the perfect opportunity to allow "Bob" to play a battle oriented Cleric without the party missing out on the healing he could provide, since it is already covered. [/QUOTE]

Verification