Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Staffan" data-source="post: 8795860" data-attributes="member: 907">The only one of those that's actually inherent to a class is lay on hands. The others all require very specific choices made in character building, some of which are more costly than others. For example, Hymn of Healing requires that you either spend your 2nd level feat on it instead of your muse's feats, or that you're a human with the Natural Ambition ancestral feat.But they certainly help when they are available. In the three Pathfinder campaigns I've been involved in I've seen:<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">One group that had both a paladin and a cleric, and the cleric also focused on Medicine. The other characters were a primal sorcerer with heal for the occasional combat heal, and an alchemist who could whip up an occasional elixir of life even if her focus was on bombs. This campaign also had the advantage that levels 5-7 or so were spent hex-crawling, which reduced the pressure (since you usually didn't have an enemy in the next room to worry about). This campaign has been on hold a bit since we've been trying out other games, but up to level 12 it's been working fine.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Another was a larger group where a rogue was persuaded to pick up Medicine and the associated feats (because he was the one with skill increases and feats for it), and there was also a redeemer who helped. This group did not have a particularly healing-focused cleric (they did have a cleric but with harm instead). I was GMing this group, and it was much rougher even if it kind of worked out (but the strongly dungeon-focused AP we were playing really didn't help).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">The last was a victim of circumstances, and a frickin' disaster. When we started out, we planned to have a fighter, a cleric, a ranger, a wizard, two rogues, and an investigator. However, the cleric dropped out before we started because he needed to focus on studies, and the fighter's player has only rarely been able to make it. I've been trying to make that work first by having Medicine on the ranger, and when it was clear we'd need a tank I first made a monk with the Medic archetype, and when he died I tried a fighter with the Blessed One archetype. All of these were disasters.</li> </ol>Now, one might say that of course the last one was a disaster and the second one was rough, without a dedicated healer. However, I think the game should work well without one. I want either a game where people can make the PCs they want to play without having to be overly concerned with fulfilling party roles, or where the game strongly indicates that you need to make sure you have X, Y, and Z in your party (and preferably where there are multiple different ways of doing X, Y, and Z), like in 4e. Pathfinder 2 gives a whole lot of options for each individual character, but requires that the party fulfills certain requirements, making many of the options trap options for the party – at least in a high-pressure environment.</blockquote>

Verification