Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
On Healing and Broccoli
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="(Psi)SeveredHead" data-source="post: 6043430" data-attributes="member: 1165"><p>Kind of. I'm actually not a fan of the weapons, and turn undead isn't needed, but yes, I expect them to have healing magic. Otherwise they're not a member of the cleric game class, they're a member of the priest social role.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is why I distinguished the two. (I also don't think the term "cleric" applies to holy men, shamans, etc from many other cultures. I don't see cleric = priest.)</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I disagree. I think the choice is which class you're playing. Playing a non-healing cleric is as weird as playing a ranger with no wilderness skills.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That's actually one of the issues I have with Next. I don't think it's a good idea to (for instance) make the Swashbuckler archetype a fighter build, even though they fight. In 3.x, WotC tried numerous times to build a swashbuckler PrC that built on the fighter, and it didn't work very well. The way magic items work in 3.x played a role in it, but trying to turn a class that's optimally wearing heavy armor hurt.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That's a lot of unneeded options there. I think the cleric had a role too "broad" before (eg undefined), so you were basically buffing, debuffing, blasting, whacking, tanking and healing. Many of those roles can be taken by other classes, but healing is something only clerics have been able to do well since 1e. That's why I focus on the healing part. Naturally any cleric could then "build" toward taking other roles, but I expect healing to be part of all clerics. If you're a divine spellcaster who doesn't heal, then you're playing some other class.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'd rather give them their own class. I don't think even the rogue is a good fit for a swashbuckler, even if it's a bit closer than a fighter.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Was he a magical healer? Or was he doing the kind of surgery you do in real life (or d20 Modern), where you spend a considerable amount of time patching up holes and then, being unable to repair all the damage, leave the patient to rest, possibly "low" on opium? That's quite a bit different from clerical healing.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think roles are a much more convincing argument.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>That DoA II stuff sounds a bit like healing surges (except unlimited surges), the challenge being to survive a fight (and then heal up) rather than try to keep hp up all day.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>They might all be balanced, but <strong>they're playing different roles</strong>. I don't think a cleric of death and a cleric of life are playing the same role in the party, and it doesn't make much sense to give them all the same weapon proficiencies/armor proficiencies/hit points/Hit Die values either. They're both <em>priests</em>, and play a similar societal role, but I don't think they should be part of the same class.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>My experience in AD&D was not having a cleric was ... boring. We had a campaign that only went from 1st to 2nd level where our only healer was a paladin. That was 2 hp per day. (Maybe 4 at 2nd-level?) The DM took to letting us find <strong>lots</strong> of healing potions, but gave up because it was breaking suspension of disbelief. (Every edition prior to 4e had really slow non-magical healing, so needless to say we felt that hard.) Sure, it was possible. That didn't mean it was good or fun.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>See above. It <em>was</em> a game balance "upset".</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And I disagree. And this is one reason why I think we're arguing semantics. The name of the class is much less important to game design than what it does.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Naturally, since WotC is dumping 4e design, this is the case, but I think it's kind of ... bad. You can even get stuck with some of the issues of the 3e ranger (or frankly any of them) or monk where you get abilities you don't want or need. (A fighter with low Strength, high Dex and the Archery specialty is still getting the ability to gain bonus damage to <strong>melee</strong> attacks, for instance.)</p><p></p><p>Of course, WotC isn't going to listen to me <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite3" alt=":(" title="Frown :(" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":(" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="(Psi)SeveredHead, post: 6043430, member: 1165"] Kind of. I'm actually not a fan of the weapons, and turn undead isn't needed, but yes, I expect them to have healing magic. Otherwise they're not a member of the cleric game class, they're a member of the priest social role. This is why I distinguished the two. (I also don't think the term "cleric" applies to holy men, shamans, etc from many other cultures. I don't see cleric = priest.) I disagree. I think the choice is which class you're playing. Playing a non-healing cleric is as weird as playing a ranger with no wilderness skills. That's actually one of the issues I have with Next. I don't think it's a good idea to (for instance) make the Swashbuckler archetype a fighter build, even though they fight. In 3.x, WotC tried numerous times to build a swashbuckler PrC that built on the fighter, and it didn't work very well. The way magic items work in 3.x played a role in it, but trying to turn a class that's optimally wearing heavy armor hurt. That's a lot of unneeded options there. I think the cleric had a role too "broad" before (eg undefined), so you were basically buffing, debuffing, blasting, whacking, tanking and healing. Many of those roles can be taken by other classes, but healing is something only clerics have been able to do well since 1e. That's why I focus on the healing part. Naturally any cleric could then "build" toward taking other roles, but I expect healing to be part of all clerics. If you're a divine spellcaster who doesn't heal, then you're playing some other class. I'd rather give them their own class. I don't think even the rogue is a good fit for a swashbuckler, even if it's a bit closer than a fighter. Was he a magical healer? Or was he doing the kind of surgery you do in real life (or d20 Modern), where you spend a considerable amount of time patching up holes and then, being unable to repair all the damage, leave the patient to rest, possibly "low" on opium? That's quite a bit different from clerical healing. I think roles are a much more convincing argument. That DoA II stuff sounds a bit like healing surges (except unlimited surges), the challenge being to survive a fight (and then heal up) rather than try to keep hp up all day. They might all be balanced, but [b]they're playing different roles[/b]. I don't think a cleric of death and a cleric of life are playing the same role in the party, and it doesn't make much sense to give them all the same weapon proficiencies/armor proficiencies/hit points/Hit Die values either. They're both [i]priests[/i], and play a similar societal role, but I don't think they should be part of the same class. My experience in AD&D was not having a cleric was ... boring. We had a campaign that only went from 1st to 2nd level where our only healer was a paladin. That was 2 hp per day. (Maybe 4 at 2nd-level?) The DM took to letting us find [b]lots[/b] of healing potions, but gave up because it was breaking suspension of disbelief. (Every edition prior to 4e had really slow non-magical healing, so needless to say we felt that hard.) Sure, it was possible. That didn't mean it was good or fun. See above. It [i]was[/i] a game balance "upset". And I disagree. And this is one reason why I think we're arguing semantics. The name of the class is much less important to game design than what it does. Naturally, since WotC is dumping 4e design, this is the case, but I think it's kind of ... bad. You can even get stuck with some of the issues of the 3e ranger (or frankly any of them) or monk where you get abilities you don't want or need. (A fighter with low Strength, high Dex and the Archery specialty is still getting the ability to gain bonus damage to [b]melee[/b] attacks, for instance.) Of course, WotC isn't going to listen to me :( [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
On Healing and Broccoli
Top