Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FarBeyondC" data-source="post: 6858379" data-attributes="member: 6803170">Hmm...I personally have never been stuck in a support role when I've chosen the feat (mainly because I only really use it when people are dying or when the situation is stable enough to allow for it). Also, I often find it difficult to not choose the feat or even to not choose it as my first feat (at first level even thanks to variant human). But then, I tend to play the guy you want to have the things you want others to have.  ...I probably shouldn't touch this, so I won't- at least, not the way I want to.Instead, I'll note that I've always felt like it could be argued that the healer feat essentially allows the mundane materials and methods of a healer's kit draw from the energy of the multiverse to achieve its magic-like effects. Like a boss of bosses.(Incidentally, one of my top two moments in tabletop roleplay involved a cleric of mine patching up a fully raging barbarian despite his (ultimately futile) attempts to kill her.)I've always felt like the Healer feat should require proficiency in Medicine, personally. That being said:1. Granting a feat for gaining a skill (especially one as good as the healer feat) seems like it would make the skill in question far more potent/useful than virtually any other.2. What if people want the Medicine skill but not the Healer feat?Honestly, the first benefit is the more problematic of the two, if either benefit qualifies as problematic (neither does in my view). While 5-10 + Level/CR hit points a use is good, the ability to continually be able to get someone back into the fight is what I would have targeted.For what you and yours are trying to do, it seems like a good change, though.</blockquote>

Verification