D&D 5E Life without a healer

[Tony Vargas]

It's different but it's not that different. What I find is that healing during combat isn't that common. Even in older editions we tried to save the healing for after the fight, but we did have to use spells or else camp out in the wilderness for quite some time.

It varies with style and the level of challenge presented by combats. It also varies with the action economy impact of the kind of healing available. Spending an action to stabilize an ally, for instance, is, in that one round, assuming the ally is in no danger of dying /right then/, a bad deal, while spending a minor/bonus/swift action or immediate/reactions to get an ally back into a fight between the initiative count he was dropped and his next turn is well worth it. In-combat healing in an fight with little risk of allies dropping is nearly pointless - if the fight carries a high risk of allies dropping, being killed, or the whole thing spiraling into a TPK, then it can be a necessity.

4e and 5e both moved away from magical healing in a big way.

Probably the wrong way to look at it. 4e moved the resource burden of restoring hps almost entirely to the character suffering hp loss in the form of 'surges.' Most surge-triggers still be magical (the Cleric's were the best), and magical non-surge healing was relatively rare, and very valuable. 4e also removed the bookkeeping of multi-day or between-adventure healing. 5e partially reversed that by returning some of the healing burden to traditional support-role casters, but mainly the in-combat portion of that burden. It also essentially advised lightening that burden by providing encounter guidelines weighted towards many, relatively easy combats that wouldn't call for in-combat healing, making hp attrition a whole-day consideration instead of dropping/dying in combat being a tactical consideration.

I find that the tougher vs more fragile component remains because the tougher characters already get better mileage out of the hit points in having more hit points, generally better defensive options, and more healing in the hit dice on those short rests.

As far as that goes, yes, since HD are proportional (being, afterall, how your hps are determined, as well as how they can be restored on a short rest). OTOH, proportionally, magical healing resources are less effective on them.

 

[Ashrym]

snip

5e definitely backtracked a bit when it came to in combat healing options but a person needs to keep in mind that most of those in combat healing spells are inefficient and do not heal large amounts of hit points. It's only spells like heal, mass heal, and power word: heal that really put in a high number, and those are very high level options with limited slots and considerable opportunity costs. Scaling cure wounds can give a few more hit points but it's a waste compared to group healing spells. The most efficient healing spells are things like aura of vitality and prayer of healing, and take the spell options right back to out of combat healing to use them. Additionally, even challenging encounters don't kill characters by hit point loss. The hit points get high enough that dropping may occur but that is why I carry healing spells and the paladin has loh and we have the healer feat. What usually causes a problem is status effects and that's why we like options for helping saving throws.

I agree that spending hit dice on a short rest is different from spending an action surge in combat but the similarity is in spending a healing resource die based on class where every character brings his or her own healing. Hit dice spent during short rests is easily the largest resource for healing we have, and it's further supported with the feat and basic healing potion equipment; song of rest is normally worth 10 dice in healing on top of hit dice. Also second wind in the fighter's case.

As I mentioned earlier, we use stealth. We also use social skills and trickery. We have solid DEX in general for initiative benefits. Most of the group has high mobility options (which is on of the reasons the paladin likes haste). The fighter uses range instead of mobility but the point of the range and mobility is tactical striking key targets after threat assessment. Mobility and damage on select targets is a big part of damage mitigation. Most of that damage comes from the fighter, paladin, and rogue but the monk also uses stunning attacks.

I think the whole point of the discussion is on how groups choose to heal with discussion on what to do instead of healing. We don't use a lot.of in combat healing spells because of the way we play and because spells are not prioritized as a healing resource before other options. Since all characters bring some healing of their own the onus is on them to use it. What's missing is removing status effects as a common option and that's what a group really needs to watch.

Either way, I don't think I am looking at it the wrong way. ;-) 5e definitely gives more healing to everyone than pre 4e. I do agree there was a clear move to support classes but that isn't really different than leader classes, other than which classes might fit into the role.

 

[Tony Vargas]

5e definitely backtracked a bit when it came to in combat healing options but a person needs to keep in mind that most of those in combat healing spells are inefficient and do not heal large amounts of hit points.

Much like they were back in the day, yes. Thus 'backtracked.'

Additionally, even challenging encounters don't kill characters by hit point loss.

Maybe not technically, if you consider failing that 3rd death save unrelated to hp loss.

(They do drop characters, though, necessitating in-combat healing to get them back up into the fight.)

the similarity is in spending a healing resource die based on class where every character brings his or her own healing.

Yep, thus the partial backtracking. HD represent less of a resource than surges did, as little as 1/3rd the resource for tougher characters.

I do agree there was a clear move to support classes but that isn't really different than leader classes, other than which classes might fit into the role.

The three full-caster support classes in 5e were all leader classes in 4e and/or Essentials. The Paladin was a 'secondary' leader. The big difference between a support-capable full caster in 5e and a 4e leader is that the 4e leader, though able to contribute in other ways, could not just change his stripes overnight and become a controller or striker, while any 5e caster can largely reconfigure itself just based on spells prepared (or even spells cast spontaneously during the day, assuming a fair variety prepared).

I think the whole point of the discussion is on how groups choose to heal with discussion on what to do instead of healing.

It's fairly straightforward, really. The D&D adventuring 'day' is ultimately limited by hp attrition. Fewer hp resources, including using slots for support magic to mitigate hp damage or restore hps, ultimately means shorter days. Whether that's arbitrarily via 'DM force' or as a coping mechanism through 'skilled play.'

Either way, I don't think I am looking at it the wrong way. ;-) 5e definitely gives more healing to everyone than pre 4e.

Which is the wrong way to look at the progression of the trend. 5e definitely gives less healing to everyone (more 'healing burden' placed on support casters) than 4e, which gave more than 3e, which, via Wands had also taken healing burden off of casters relative to prior editions. Though the means and details varied, D&D was on a path to equalize healing burden without doing away with the traditional Cleric (support) iconic roll entirely, simply making it more appealing and better-balanced. 5e has reversed that trend.

All part of evoking that classic feel.

 

[Dasem]

Two campaigns. Same group.

First was an Ancients Paladin, a Champion Fighter, and a Bear Barbarian. Paladin had to utilize his Lay on Hands every day, but it was enough to get us through our adventuring days together. Only once of twice across 7 levels did the Paladin have to actually cast a healing spell.


Second campaign is a Dex-based melee Ranger, an Open Hand Monk, and a Bard. The Bard knows Healing Word, but has never actually cast it. Instead, he focuses his spells on being a controller and debuffer, mitigating any healing required. Enemies under Hypnotic Pattern don't inflict damage, right? In eight sessions, nobody has cast a healing spell, although a favorite trick of the Bards is to use Polymorph on a wounded ally (typically the Monk) when the ally gets to low HP. This enables the Monk to continue fighting the battle without being at serious risk for death.

 

[MechaPilot]

I voted paladin, but that's honestly because the cleric in my group is played by someone who specifically does not want to play a healer. He warned everyone that he's "not that kind of cleric" when the game started, so a lot of the magical healing duties have fallen on the shoulders of the paladin.