Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="keterys" data-source="post: 6593293" data-attributes="member: 43019">Yep, it's totally worth respecting action economy. That said, a healer's kit or goodberry is equally effective at getting someone back up and _almost_ as effective at keeping them up (sadly). The bonus action healing word is also tremendously worthwhile in that instance.Cure wounds itself, though? Meh. Good for out of combat and little else.The really clever thing is when you realize that your bard _could_ cure wounds someone to keep them in the fight or cast sleep _to end the fight_. We actually were keeping track at one point (different group of characters), in the theory that it might be valuable test data, and we found that offense was _at least_ twice as effective as heals. That is to say, not using a spell for offense meant we used twice as many spells for heals in the long run.Hence, our current Cure Wounds-less party. It's worked just fine through Phandelver and Hoard of the Dragon Queen. We've only just started the sequel (some other noun of Tiamat), and it's still working just fine.It also helps that I've got an imp familiar whose job is to immediately get back up anyone who drops, I'll grant, but I've only had him since 3rd level.You should never count their ability to heal against them, regardless. It's pure addition. It just potentially means you should have even more of them in the party. Which is hardly the right message to send to D&D Encounters, but I wouldn't expect it to take too long before someone notices how ridiculous a druid is for encounters and decides they should try that out next season.Too late.</blockquote>

Verification