Healer (from MHB): Is this a good class?

[Beckett]

I have heard it referred to as the "girlfriend class", meaning a casual gamer (such as, for example, the girlfriend of a gamer that is not a hardcore gamer herself) that doesn't like being aggressive in combat so much but likes having something to do that people appreciate.

Not only that, but the healer eventually gets a unicorn.


The healer is a support class. It'd make a great cohort, or an NPC for a party that's a little shorthanded. But as a PC, it just seems lacking. I mean, the healer can heal. And, well, heal. Oh, she can also remove paralysis, that can be handy (no, really, saved a character from a CDG in my last session).

In my AoW gestalt game, one player is using a Healer/Favored Soul. Since I started the game standard, I'd say she's one who has benefited the most from the switch to gestalt. Before, she could heal, and maybe take a half-hearted stab with her long spear. Now, she has a better BAB, and spells that can support the party beyond being a glorified cure light wounds wand.

 

[frankthedm]

I have heard it referred to as the "girlfriend class", meaning a casual gamer (such as, for example, the girlfriend of a gamer that is not a hardcore gamer herself) that doesn't like being aggressive in combat so much but likes having something to do that people appreciate.

From what I understand somebody from Wotc DID call it that. I think the analogy is on the money, though I really dislike when a player brings anyone to game who is not a gamer.

Last I checked, this is not a pacifist’s game. A classso uncombative as the healer really won't make a grand PC.

In D&D before 3E, healing was rare and precious. But when Wotc made healing much more available, they set the bar very high for anyone to compete with the cleric for healing without endangering game balance. All one has to do to make healer viable is drop the effectiveness of swapping spells for the cleric or remove the ability. If cleric lose a spell level of effectiveness on converted cures and inflicts, The healer class will have a much better niche.

 

[Jedi_Solo]

The healer is a support class. It'd make a great cohort, or an NPC for a party that's a little shorthanded. But as a PC, it just seems lacking.

Fully agree. The Healing Hands ability (which adds the Healer's CHA bonus to the amount healed) ensures that a cohort Healer won't fall behind a full PC cleric in the amount they are able to heal and since they gain the Mass spells earlier than a cleric they won't fall behind in that department either. They also get some nice abilties for their casting such as Effertless Healing which allow them to cast without provoking the AoO in the first place.

Weapon wise they aren't as limited as the class might first appear. While they are limited to non-metal armor a Healer can still use swords, spears and bows (proficency issues aside) without violating their oaths.

I do wish that there were other options than the Unicorn companion and they need to not have as limited a spell list. Heck, the printed spell list is pushing the issue as it is (what is Gate doing there?) but the spell list issue iseasily house rules and the PHB II can give ideas about replacing the unicorn.

They are a one trick pony but it is a heck of a trick. I wish they had more variety in the spell list (maybe Dimension Door for the "get the wounded out of the line of fire" aspect or maybe more protection style spells) and the unicorn is... well... a unicorn. It seems a little stale to me as a full PC, but if no one wants to play a Cleric, a Healer Cohort is the way to go. Your party will thank you.

 

[Greg K]

I actually have a healing goddess in my campaign so I appreciate the narrow focus . However, I agree with those that think it should be a spontaneous caster. As for the Unicorn companion, I consider it just another example of WOTC's designers ruining a new base class with class abilities that are both unnecessary for the concept and too specific for many campaigns.

Edit: As for being a better healer than the cleric, I don't find it a problem. Then again, I think cleric spell lists should be more specialized to reflect their deity as should class abilities (e.g., not all clerics should turn/rebuke undead)

 

[Satori]

The Healer is perfect for my group as an NPC or Henchman.

So far my group consists of 3 Dual Wielding Melee'rs, an Archer, a Spring Attack Swashbuckler...and me as the lone Cleric.

I love clerics when they aren't relegated to walking band-aids, as they have a unique set of abilities that work offensively and defensively. They also compliment other class combinations as well, particularly Monks/Sacred Fists.

However...I'm a walking band-aid.

I'm currently in the process of trying to suicide the character and remaking something a little more entertaining...with the caveat of hiring a lower level Healer henchman.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Why not get a healer henchman AND keep your cleric?

 

[frankthedm]

I love clerics when they aren't relegated to walking band-aids, as they have a unique set of abilities that work offensively and defensively.

However...I'm a walking band-aid.

Clerics are overpowered when they are not band aids. Wotc gave them extra power to compensate for having most of their spells being sucked away by having to heal the party. There is a reason the tanks are still being hit when they have good AC and take so much damage from those blows. The fighter that eats a full attack is going to be needing your best healing spells very soon. If you hope to wait till after the battle so you can use a few lower level spells, you'll be raising him not healing him. I almost feel bad for you since your party sounds like the others are not full plate wearers and lose HP in a fight real fast.

I'm currently in the process of trying to suicide the character and remaking something a little more entertaining...with the caveat of hiring a lower level Healer henchman.

Why not just ask the DM to retire the character?

 

[Odhanan]

The Healer is a specialized class. As such, it needs to be a bit stronger mathematically than other classes to compensate for its specialization. Moreover, the Healer is specialized in a passive - some would call it supportive - role. It will fit some players who will love it while some other players will hate it.

The Healer IMO is a great class. Not for everyone though.

 

[Fishbone]

I used one, a Magic-Blooded Aasimar. I got a +X Heavy Skillful Greatspear. 3d6+X damage, free proficiency, decent reach. Focused on Charisma and then Strength and took the feat Spellcasting Prodigy for extra spells. Took two flaws for Augmented Healing. At 12th level I was a total walking band-aid and did decent damage in combat when I hit, 3d6+10, which was about 60 percent of the time, though it was not expected of me. Decent skill list and charisma focus along with healer perceptions and the healer code made the class a natural face. It is on the weaker side and requires more planning but it pretty solid when you focus on Charisma and Strength. I reccomend giving the Leadership feat solely with regards to a cohort at level -1 instead of the unicorn and allowing spontaneous healing. Giving a 3/4 BAB wouldn't break the class, either.
Really frontloaded too, past level 10 there is no real reason to continue in this class instead of prestige class.

 

[Jubilee]

I like the concept of the class alot, but I also think it would be better as a spontaneous caster and if it had some way to add new spells to the spell list. I would absolutely play one if I could convince the GM to let me alter spells to the list (such as add the vigor spells and healthful rest) as well as cast spontaneously. I'm currently in a campaign where I decided to play a totally non-combat support character, mostly a healer. It came down to a healer or an archivist, and I went with archivist because there were so many more spells available to me, and since we have a warmage instead of a wizard, I'm able to fill alot of holes.

Great concept, imo, but somewhat poor execution.

/ali