Helper Classes

At Wizards one year, I gave a short lecture to the RPG R&D crew about why clerics are impossible to balance. Since most of their power (healing) helps other characters, it’s power that doesn’t feel cool. To help the cleric feel cool, it needs a double-helping of power, and that’s what we gave it. In theory, one way to balance the cleric is to re-write every class so that a good deal of its...

At Wizards one year, I gave a short lecture to the RPG R&D crew about why clerics are impossible to balance. Since most of their power (healing) helps other characters, it’s power that doesn’t feel cool. To help the cleric feel cool, it needs a double-helping of power, and that’s what we gave it. In theory, one way to balance the cleric is to re-write every class so that a good deal of its power comes from helping other characters in the party. Druids and bards have “helper” abilities, and we discussed giving such abilities to all classes. For example, some folks talked about taking away the 5-foot step as a general rule and re-writing the fighter so that one of the class’s abilities was to allow party members to take 5-foot steps. That was too big change for the system and for fighters, and what actually came out of these conversations was a number of new “helper classes.” The D&D Miniatures Handbook included the healer and the marshal, the 13th Age system included the occultist, and 13th Age Glorantha included the trickster.

old page 90(1) copy.jpg

The healer in the Miniatures Handbook was sort of like a cleric but even more focused on healing. Over previous decades, I had seen players occasionally create pacifist characters, and a healer class of one sort of another has appeared here and there. It’s a natural enough concept. Unfortunately, it’s a hard concept to get right. The healers from the fantasy world Glorantha, for example, are duty bound to try to protect even enemies from being killed. If a self-righteous paladin in a party can be at odds with the other characters, try a pacifist who tries to keep party members from killing their foes. When Rob Heinsoo and I later wrote 13th Age Glorantha, we balked at writing up a playable healer because the canonical healers in the setting don’t “play nice” with others—ironically because they play too nice with the enemy. As for the healer class in the Miniatures Handbook, it never got a lot of play and didn’t prove popular enough to recur in later iterations of the game.

The marshal was a non-supernatural class that had bard-like abilities to improve other characters’ performances in combat. Mostly, they provided specific buffs to party members, which represented the practical guidance they provided in the heat of battle. There was a lose fit between what the marshal was doing in the game world (barking out orders) and the magic-like bonuses in the game system. In design terms, it represented sort of a Magic: The Gathering approach, in which simple, useful mechanics evoke what’s happening in the game world rather than strictly simulating it. Years later, 4E would double down on the evocative and game-oriented approach instead of 3E’s simulations esthetic. Unlike the healer, the marshal was popular, and similar classes would appear later in the development of D&D classes.

For 13th Age, Rob Heinsoo did most of the classes, but I wrote up the occultist, one of the game’s first all-new classes. The occultist was my attempt to create the equivalent of a cleric, and in particular one that would feel more powerful in play without actually being more powerful. In combat, the occultist mostly observes the attacks made by the other characters and the attacks made against them. The occultist’s spells are instant actions that let another character reroll a missed attack, prevent damage from incoming attacks, or increase damage that their allies deal. In effect, preventing damage is “healing in advance,” but it feels gratifying to interrupt a monster’s attack to reduce damage to a friend. It’s proactive and even aggressive, while healing is more reactive. Likewise, helping a friend land a mighty blow is also a feel-good moment. The other player gets to feel more effective because it’s their character that’s dealing out more damage. The player running the occultist, meanwhile, also feels effective because the effect on play is more dramatic than after-the-fact healing. The occultist is ideal for the sort of player who loves to keep an eye on combat, to watch every turn, and to judge when to apply the right effort for the best effect. For the occultist, friends’ turns and enemies’ turns sort of feel like part of their own turn because the player is monitoring events and deciding when to intervene. Other players’ turns and monsters’ turns are more interesting when you have the option to instantly step in and alter the outcome. For an added touch of cool factor, the class description specifies that there is only one occultist. There are no occultist guilds or even higher-level occultists to make the occultist character feel unexceptional.

For 13th Age Glorantha, I wrote up another helper class: the trickster. As with the Gloranthan healer, the Gloranthan trickster has an iffy pedigree. The wild and unpredictable trickster character from the setting was an uneasy fit with the no-nonsense and gritty RuneQuest system that powered Gloranthan roleplaying. Andrew Finch tells a story of how the clever use of a trickster’s powers managed to defeat an entire temple of Chaotic cultists by tricking them into destroying themselves. The players at the table were geared up for a massive, running battle with the toughest enemies they’d ever fought, and on the enemies’ home territory. The trickster made all that planning and anticipation moot. No one else got to so much as make an attack roll. Thankfully, the trickster makes a better ally than the pacifist healer, and Rob and I were able to make a memorable, playable character that feels like no other class.

If the occultist is ideal for a player who likes to pay close attention, the trickster is good for a player who likes to mix things up and maybe get the snot beat out of them in the bargain. (Can you guess? I enjoy playing both classes.) As with a typical class, the trickster’s abilities work on the character’s turn, but as with the occultist these powers typically help the other characters. With powers such as the Dance of Blood and Slapstick, the trickster helps allies make extra attacks on enemies while provoking attacks from those same enemies on themselves. No one knows what’s going to happen when the trickster takes their turn. For me, the less I know about how my turn is going to end up, the more interesting the dice rolls are. Sometimes the trickster ends up just taking damage for nothing—hey, that’s a trickster for you! To balance the possibility of costly failure, these powers have big upsides when everything works out right.

The trickster’s standard, at-will melee attack deals no damage at all. In the game world, the trickster might be using a chicken carcass as a weapon, and how much damage would you expect that to deal? Instead of dealing damage, “feckless strike” curses the target with bad mojo, so the next time an ally strikes that foe, the ally deals a lot more damage than normal. In a sense, the trickster’s damage is delayed, waiting for an ally to hit that foe and apply the “damage” done earlier by the trickster. Again, the player with the trickster feels effective, and the other player is happy to deal more than normal damage.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Jonathan Tweet

Jonathan Tweet

D&D 3E, Over the Edge, Everway, Ars Magica, Omega World, Grandmother Fish

Hurin70

Adventurer
Healing is fun, however healing in 5e is dull and unrewarding. This is because of the choices made in 5e, and these same choices that make 5e feel less dangerous are precisely the choices that make healing dull. If dying is likely and combat is dangerous, healing is more rewarding and involved.
I actually agree totally with that.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

cbwjm

Seb-wejem
this is true. But I wonder:

Is a healer necessary in 5e?

I am starting to think not. And in fact, if someone wants a tougher go of a dungeon or quest, not having some spam cures fits the bill.

withdraw when you get banged up and low on hit die recovered. It’s more strategic and a little more old school since all the new toys seem to replace the healing of old.

tons of healing beyond rests and class feature seems like overkill in some games now. Certainly the case if you kills things efficiently with all the burst and nova damage options
Healers in 5e aren't necessary. Healing is, even emergency healing might be needed, but having a healer is not a requirement for the edition, it's just a bonus to have one for those encounters where all the rolls have gone wrong. Short rest healing, long rest healing, easily accessible potions make dedicated healers unnecessary. Throw in the healer feat which anyone can take and a dedicated healer class really isn't needed.
 

Healers in 5e aren't necessary. Healing is, even emergency healing might be needed, but having a healer is not a requirement for the edition, it's just a bonus to have one for those encounters where all the rolls have gone wrong. Short rest healing, long rest healing, easily accessible potions make dedicated healers unnecessary. Throw in the healer feat which anyone can take and a dedicated healer class really isn't needed.
Healing isn't necessarily but you do need ways of addressing the nastiest of the conditions and dealing with the effects of not having healing for those who can't take a nap and recover 100s of HPs.
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
Healing is fun, however healing in 5e is dull and unrewarding. This is because of the choices made in 5e, and these same choices that make 5e feel less dangerous are precisely the choices that make healing dull. If dying is likely and combat is dangerous, healing is more rewarding and involved. IMO, if healing is a side gig to calling storms and smiting infidels, then you aren't really a healer.

That's kinda the whole point though.

If you create a game system where fighting, healing, tanking, lockpicking, trap disarming, damage dealing, book reading, sewing etc are needed, then you as a game designer have to go out your way to make it fun for everyone who plays because your game forces one of the players to do it.

If you create a game system where certain features are not needed, there is noonus to make that action extra fun nor rewarding for anyone except for who you feel like doing so for.

Old School D&D required priests or potions to create the game style it desired. So it had to attempt to make clerics fun or pollute areas with healing potions
 

cbwjm

Seb-wejem
Healing isn't necessarily but you do need ways of addressing the nastiest of the conditions and dealing with the effects of not having healing for those who can't take a nap and recover 100s of HPs.
True, but sometimes the way you handle that is via your allies kicking the ever living snot out of your opponents. Everything else, normally there is at least one NPC that can cast lesser restoration... maybe.
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
Healing is fun, however healing in 5e is dull and unrewarding. This is because of the choices made in 5e, and these same choices that make 5e feel less dangerous are precisely the choices that make healing dull. If dying is likely and combat is dangerous, healing is more rewarding and involved. IMO, if healing is a side gig to calling storms and smiting infidels, then you aren't really a healer.
I'm not sure how much of an old-school player/DM you are, but this is a wonderfully old-school way of looking at it.

That said, I'm still all about in-combat healing being the exception rather than the norm; with healing being something mostly done outside of combat and the healer finding other ways to contribute during the actual fighting.
 

5E seems to me to be built so as to not require a party to have any particular classes in them. So we get healing without clerics, and open locks/disarm traps without rogues.
 

Mannahnin

Scion of Murgen (He/Him)
Well, as someone who loves healing, I find the proposition that other things are inherently more fun demeaning and condescending. I know some people feel obligated to heal when a healer "is needed". But the attitude that it is inherently bad and undesirable is divisive and makes people feel unwelcome. I know it isn't for everybody, but it doesn't mean healing is less fun. It is ok if it isn't for you, but you don't need to dismiss it, (because in turn you are dismissing the people who like it)
I don't think he was dismissing it so much as relaying a common opinion (which you obviously don't share) that designers like Tweet and the folks at WotC have been struggling with for decades. There seems to be a small subset of players who genuinely enjoy playing a healer and spending their resources and actions in combat on healing at least some percentage of the time vs. casting an offensive spell, attacking or something.

But this percentage of players is small enough that a lot of groups wind up with NO ONE wanting to play the cleric/healer, because so many folks want a more "active"/aggressive role. Even in 3.x where Clerics reached the apex of their power and were commonly talked about as broken, many groups still experienced this. I wound up playing a Cleric in two different long-running 3.x campaigns in part because no one else was interested! Tweet speaks to the design challenge of trying to incentivize people to play Clerics without making them overpowered, which the 3.x teams really struggled with.

You can see the ongoing efforts to overcome this challenge in 4E and 5E.

In 4E the baseline combat healing (Healing Word for Clerics, Inspiring Word for Warlords, etc.) was a Minor action, so you'd only have to give up your attack or "real" action to heal if it was a badass or backup healing spell. And they allowed everyone to spend Healing Surges on a Short Rest, and once per fight as a Second Wind (albeit at the cost of an Action, so you rarely saw anyone do that except Dwarves, because they could do it as a Minor action).

In 5E they've continued the heal-yourself-on-a-short-rest concept with Hit Dice, and made Healing Word a Bonus action spell for Clerics, again following much the same philosophy as 4E; make it less necessary for anyone to NEED to play a Cleric, and make it so that Clerics don't HAVE to spend whole Actions on healing if they don't want to.
 
Last edited:

Voadam

Legend
I am in the camp as both a player and a DM of not having liked the big disparity on the flow of the game of having a healer in the party or not. As a PC in AD&D I remember spending weeks in a cave healing up after our two fighter duo fought some gargoyles and being down about 20 hp. Big narrative break in the action that did not really feel like the Gray Mouser and Fafhrd or Conan and a buddy. In contrast the same characters were pushing through adventures with tough fights regularly once we hooked up with a fighter/cleric. I prefer having the Gray Mouser and Fafhrd being viable on their own so I like the trend of 3.5 UA alt rules reserve points, 4e core healing surges, and 5e long rest healing.
 

Voadam

Legend
I also like the idea of cool support classes, bards to buff, clerics with buff spells, etc. The 3e marshall had cool aura powers but were weak themselves and most of their aura powers meant they were kind of passive in helping others which made them a great class to gestalt or have as a cohort but not that attractive to play straight. The 4e warlord was pretty fantastic, being able to do a lot of active actions to help others, particularly giving others attacks or shouting at others to walk it off as hp healing. 5e bards handing out bonus dice is fun, but I think 4e pulled off the concepts best. I am interested in checking out the 13th Age occultist now.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top