Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 7421624" data-attributes="member: 996">Not that healer archetypes are really a thing - every character than can heal in D&amp;D can do more than just heal - but 'more' relative to what?&nbsp; In 5e, the Cleric, Druid, Bard, Paladin, &amp; Ranger can all heal, in about that descending order of effectiveness.&nbsp; In 3.5, the Cleric, Druid, Paladin, Bard, &amp; Ranger could all heal, in about that order.&nbsp; The Bard's a significantly better healer in 5e, that's about it.&nbsp; In 5e you get enough HD to approximately recharge your hps, if you rest an hour.&nbsp; In 3e, you could get a trivially cheap WoCLW and recharge 275 hps in 5 minutes.&nbsp; That's about the same, really (HD aren't up to the crazy of Wands, but wands were arguably unintended, and not everyone could use then, though everyone could benefit as long as one willing ally could).&nbsp; In 4e, the Cleric, Paladin, Warlord, Bard, Shaman, Artificer, Ardent, Rune Priest, &amp; Druid (Sentinel) could all heal, and you got enough surges to heal yourself completely a minimum of 1.5 times, quite possibly 3+ for a tough defender type, with a 5 min rest, or you could spend a surge to 'Second Wind' for 1/4 your hps in combat.Heck, even in 1e, the Cleric, Paladin, Druid, Bard &amp; Ranger could all heal - that's the same classes, the Bard &amp; Ranger just didn't get any healing until quite high level, and the Druid, critically, didn't have CLW at 1st level.&nbsp; You couldn't use your 1e HD to heal, though, I suppose you might find a ring of regeneration some day....&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />&nbsp;All the more reason to keep the record straight on the game's direction.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7421624, member: 996"] Not that healer archetypes are really a thing - every character than can heal in D&D can do more than just heal - but 'more' relative to what? In 5e, the Cleric, Druid, Bard, Paladin, & Ranger can all heal, in about that descending order of effectiveness. In 3.5, the Cleric, Druid, Paladin, Bard, & Ranger could all heal, in about that order. The Bard's a significantly better healer in 5e, that's about it. In 5e you get enough HD to approximately recharge your hps, if you rest an hour. In 3e, you could get a trivially cheap WoCLW and recharge 275 hps in 5 minutes. That's about the same, really (HD aren't up to the crazy of Wands, but wands were arguably unintended, and not everyone could use then, though everyone could benefit as long as one willing ally could). In 4e, the Cleric, Paladin, Warlord, Bard, Shaman, Artificer, Ardent, Rune Priest, & Druid (Sentinel) could all heal, and you got enough surges to heal yourself completely a minimum of 1.5 times, quite possibly 3+ for a tough defender type, with a 5 min rest, or you could spend a surge to 'Second Wind' for 1/4 your hps in combat. Heck, even in 1e, the Cleric, Paladin, Druid, Bard & Ranger could all heal - that's the same classes, the Bard & Ranger just didn't get any healing until quite high level, and the Druid, critically, didn't have CLW at 1st level. You couldn't use your 1e HD to heal, though, I suppose you might find a ring of regeneration some day.... ;) All the more reason to keep the record straight on the game's direction. [/QUOTE]

Verification