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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 6523841" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Yeah...I have yet to see actually effective, balanced (or "at parity," if balanced is a four-letter-word to you) options that manage to make damage resistance, THP, or buffs equivalent to actual healing. The balance-point appears to be so narrow that almost every attempt overshoots or undershoots, and it's almost always the latter. People tend to call the former "cheesy," to boot. The only place I've seen even moderately effective "mitigation-based" death prevention is League of Legends, and even there it's substantially less effective than just outright healing (and higher HP pools).Ah, okay, so...I didn't at all get what you were trying to say there. I understand now. And all I can say is, I see "Has Cure Wounds, Regenerate, etc. on its spell list" as being dramatically more important for the Cleric's identity than "Has a hard-coded ability that gives HP." If the hard-coded-ness is the issue, would you be placated by making it an option? For example, a choice between getting that ~or~ getting an extra use of Improved Action Surge or the like? Since the 4e Warlord was, after all, more about the force-multiplication than the healing per se.No, but I do equate actually-competent captains, sergeants, and other there-on-the-battlefield people with having the ability to push their comrades (whether subordinates or not!) to tap resources they didn't know existed, which is precisely how Warlord healing was fluffed--you're injured, but you draw on some of your inner reserves (Healing Surge) to keep going despite the pain. You can't do it forever (the Surges will run out), but you can do it now, and possibly again in the future.I don't deny that those things are more interesting. The point is that groups that don't have Clerics suffer for it majorly, and I've never seen anyone successfully achieve a Cleric replacement that can't do even a little bit of actual, real, legitimate, non-temporary healing. I also truly believe that the Warlord should be at least able to have a little bit of actual healing, without having to give up (much) of the other stuff that, I completely agree, makes it an interesting class to play.In which case, I think I need to repeat what I said before: We should agree to disagree. I think healing is essential to what the Warlord represented, even if it is actively uninteresting (I don't think it is, but just for argument), because it finally, well and truly cut the shackles of "Who's gonna play the Cleric?" A 5e party is at a severe disadvantage if they don't have a caster that can heal, and I don't believe your Warlord can do enough to make the difference often enough. Surely it will help--no question. I just don't think it is enough, and (as I noted before) would have liked to see more. Your subclass is a huge improvement over the Battlemaster, no question--I just feel it doesn't (quite) go far enough.</blockquote>

Verification