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

[Particle_Man]

They could use something to do besides heal. That could get boring after a while. The cleric is playable because he can do so much. The healer is kind of blah.
Note about boringness: I like the warlock, but sometimes, you get sick of blast blast blast.

You just gave me an idea. Give the same character two sets of abilities: Healer by day, Warlock by night!

 

[FireLance]

So if you decided to make it like that, would it become too powerful, or no considering that it is a healer instead of anything else?

By itself, I doubt that spontaneous casting would make a healer too powerful, except in an undead-heavy campaign. It would significantly bump up the effectiveness of the party, but that to me is a happy problem (naturally, YMMV). It would also make it more viable compared to the cleric.

 

[Remathilis]

Meh. Shoulda been a PrC.

That said, I DID see a PC healer/combat medic heal 9 hp with a 0 level spell! I guess if thats your boat...

 

[Fishbone]

There is no reason for it not to be a prestige class, past level 10 it doesn't really gain anything.Limited spell list and not being able to cast spontaneously are the two biggest sticking points.
Edit:Oh, and why isn't charisma the sole casting stat?

 

[Wik]

I *really* liked the art for the healer... I think it's the best class art I've seen yet, hands down.

As for the class itself...

I think the "girlfriend" analogy is a pretty good one, and the class does seem to be marketed that way (unicorn being the obvious example). I would have liked to see the class have something else instead - there are far too many classes that grant some sort of special animal/mount that it's getting old.

I also would have loved to have seen a class that heals without casting spells. I think a healing class with no spells would have been a lot more interesting than something that really has the cleric's spell list with a lot dropped out. As an example, the dragon shaman is almost a cleric replacement, and he gets no spells whatsoever... doing something similar with the healer would have been great.

I also think the healer's ability to regenerate limbs for characters is neat, but outside of the scope of the D&D rules. I don't know about you, but we didn't have too many characters losing limbs, and, to the best of my knowledge, there isn't a whole lot in the rules that could cause a character to lose a limb (except for vorpal weapons, but a head isn't really a "limb", y'know?). So, it seems silly to allow a character to fix a problem that isn't ever really a problem addressed in the rules.

As in, if you play the game by the rules, it's highly unlikely your character will lose a limb in combat. Because of this, it's highly unlikely that a healer will ever use the restore limb ability. But, whatever.

If you were to try and play a healer in my campaign, I'd probably refer you to a cleric with the healing domain... but that's because I play in smaller groups where the highly-specialized nature of the healer would be detrimental to the group as a whole. If I were running a larger party (say, six or seven players with henchmen), then I'd be all for a player running a healer. Even then, I'd allow the healer a speed boost (to better move about the battlefield), a choice of animal companions, and maybe an expanded spell list.

 

[Glyfair]

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

It can work fine, but I'm not sure D&D is usually the place for it.

In Runequest, you can join the Cult of Chanala Arroy, the healing goddess. Anyone that goes anywhere in the cult not only won't be violant, but they can't (with some very specific exceptions for certain chaos creatures). If they use their "sleep spell" on an opponent, then they are under their protection. If a party member attacks that creature, no Chanala Arroy priestess will heal them ever (given that was the only major source of resurrection or regeneration magic, you didn't want to go there).

Of course, the game was a bit more deadly overall than D&D. One of the early conventions was to offer a ransom if you were sure to be beaten. You lost some money, but were still alive after it was over. Try surrending in D&D and see how often it works against most intelligent monsters.

While playing a Chanala Arroy priestess still wasn't common, it certainly was done. It was very challenging.

 

[Felon]

So if you decided to make it like that, would it become too powerful, or no considering that it is a healer instead of anything else?

If the class could heal spontaneously, I personally would want it to have limited spells known, simply because I don't want Restoration, Remove Disease, Remove Curse, Remove Blindness, Remove Paralysis, Remove Fear, and any othe curative spell being released on tap. Then the DM would wind up in a situation where virtually no debilitating special attack can really make the PC's sweat.

If you want a dedicated healer class, then the first thing to offer is ranged healing. It doesn't have to be much range at all, but take it beyond touch range.

 

[ForceUser]

Note about boringness: I like the warlock, but sometimes, you get sick of blast blast blast.

Side note: This criticism of the warlock holds no water with me.

"I like the ___________, but sometimes, you get sick of _____, _____, _____."

I like the rogue, but sometimes you get sick of sneak sneak sneak.

I like the fighter, but sometimes you get sick of hack hack slash.

Etc. etc.

Whatever.

As for the healer, it seems superfluous when the cleric can do the same job and do other stuff too.

 

[Drowbane]

As others have mentioned, the Healer is a great Cohort-class... but I'd rather have a Cleric-cohort.

 

[Buttercup]

I'm playing a fighter/sorcerer that has a healer cohort. She has saved the party's bacon time and again. In a party of 8 with no clerics, she is our sole source of healing.

Would I want to play a healer? Absolutely not. The person upthread who suggested playing a cleric who has a healer cohort, now that's a nifty idea.

I think that in games I run, I may plop them in good temples in lieu of clerics though. I've always been bothered by how many roles the cleric can fill.