PCs using their abilities - a favor to the party?

[Greylock]

Oddly enough, speaking of fulfilling "party roles", I have played in games, some as recently as a year or so ago, where the party Barbarian with great-ax would refuse to go toe to toe with the bad guys, out of a Meta fear on the part of the player because he "only" had 14 HPs [at first level], leaving it up to the more roguish members of the party. Where the party Fighter [Paladin-type] would refuse to help my above mentioned Cleric when a manticore was dragging him off because he didn't agree with his un-Knightly take on life. When the Wizard wouldn't blast the approaching hoards with her best AoE spell because she was running low for the day. Where the party Rogue wouldn't touch traps because he was gunshy.

So why, for the love of all that is unholy, does every one feel compelled to pick on Clerics?

This, as I mentioned above in my previous post, is the SINGLE most un-fun aspect of playing a Cleric.

 

[Hussar]

How about role-playing cleric spells not as a power, but as a privilege? If, from the get-go, your cleric spells only work when they advance the religion's agenda and the deity's ethos, then you could legitimately roleplay it. It's not you practicing extortion, it's your God's disapproval of your party member's actions.

"I'm sorry, but that spell just won't work when I target you with it. See, I'm holding the charge! My God was really quite offended by your choice to kill the hostage to get to the bad guy. I'm afraid he will only grant me cure light wounds when it's for you.... I'll see what I can do to persuade my divine advisor, but it would help if...."

*snip*

Two problems with that. First off, trying to pass it off onto your god doesn't really work, because, well, the player is still deciding to withhold healing. I suppose it could be the DM, but then, it's just passing the buck really.

Secondly, advancing the agenda of a given faith is a pretty broad thing to work from. If the cleric is good, and the fighter has just killed a bunch of evil guys, even if they aren't enemies of the cleric's faith, has he advanced the agenda?

Naw, I've never once seen a cleric player who has actually withheld healing since junior high. That's a social contract issue that just never comes up in my games anymore.

 

[cougent]

As a DM I would point him towards my basic rules of characters (rule 1 : you will play your character. Rule 2 : you will come up with a character you can play without ruining other players' fun or forcing them not to play their characters) and suggest a change of attitude or a new PC.

The lesson - know what your DM likes before you play extremes.

Not really enough info here to say decisively, but it almost seems like you are breaking your own Rule #2 by pre-deciding what role the cleric should play, maybe you should add an asterisk to it that says *except for clerics who will heal all whether they like it or not.

As a player I have almost always played a cleric, that is a warrior priest. Depending on my stats I am in the first or second echelon hammering away to further the ideals of my deity, at sword point if needed. Not cowering in the back waiting for someone to yell "medic". Healing is a tertiary ability that I will dole out to as many as possible when the battle is over. After I have battled and turned and if I have spells left to use, or *maybe* drop and convert. If I spent time figuring out a set of spells to accomplish a task and now have to drop one or more of those to use as a heal spell then both my PC's life and my player fun are both seriously undermined.

As a DM, I routinely run a cleric NPC to handle the "medic" role so that any player clerics can truly play their characters as they see fit. My players also learn to play "Bruce Willis / Die Hard" style, that is you fight you get hurt, there is more fight ahead, you fight hurt and go on. They don't enter each and every battle rested, refreshed, and restocked on HP. We play some pretty gritty scenarios and they have come out carrying a comatose body or two with just a handful of HP left amongst the whole group on more than a few occasions.

What I see more often, but not too bad is that the cleric refuses to use healing in combat unless absolutely necessary more so because he wants to cast the other cool spells clerics have access to.

Perhaps a better expression of what i was trying to say above.
It seems there is a fairly common idea that clerics should prepare nothing but healing spells and do nothing but heal, that is what I find irritating. I would always heal party members *as I could* with prepared or easily droppable spells. However, would I drop a high level offensive spell for cure serious wounds while still in the middle of a hostile environment? Maybe / maybe not, but is there a presumption that I *should* do that? From non cleric players, definitely.

 

[Agamon]

Oddly enough, speaking of fulfilling "party roles", I have played in games, some as recently as a year or so ago, where the party Barbarian with great-ax would refuse to go toe to toe with the bad guys, out of a Meta fear on the part of the player because he "only" had 14 HPs [at first level], leaving it up to the more roguish members of the party. Where the party Fighter [Paladin-type] would refuse to help my above mentioned Cleric when a manticore was dragging him off because he didn't agree with his un-Knightly take on life. When the Wizard wouldn't blast the approaching hoards with her best AoE spell because she was running low for the day. Where the party Rogue wouldn't touch traps because he was gunshy.

So why, for the love of all that is unholy, does every one feel compelled to pick on Clerics?

This, as I mentioned above in my previous post, is the SINGLE most un-fun aspect of playing a Cleric.

Bingo. People here are saying this is a Cleric Only problem. And maybe that's their experience, but it's not mine. Plenty of times I've seen PCs refuse to help each other because of in-game disagreements. Because of the hack'n'heal nature of D&D, the cleric's refusal to heal is maybe more obvious.

I've noticed that with the exact same players, they'll run a group of strangers and not work together much at all, but when they make a group of PCs from the same organization, disagreements are down and everyone's following the same game plan. I often insist that they make the latter type of group. While in-party disgruntlement has a place, it's a lot more fun when they get along.

 

[IceFractal]

A lot of times, this situation actually comes from the other players treating the Cleric like a band-aid, with "you don't even worship Pelor" just being a way to make them stop taking the Cleric for granted. Here, watch this PSA:


How to Not Treat the Cleric Like a Band-Aid (and be More Effective Too)

1) Do not expect the Cleric to do between-combat healing from their daily spells past low level - that's what the party buys healing wands for. Not only does the Cleric have other things to do with those spells, but you are reducing the emergency resources that could save you in combat, for the sake of saving some minor cash.

2) Don't call for healing every time you get a scratch. In-combat healing should be reserved for the seriously injured people - people in danger of dying in the next round or two. It's not an effective use of actions or spells to try to keep everyone at full health while they're being beat on ... unless you are a RSoP super-healer or something.

3) If your character is fragile, take some basic precautions. Defensive spells, not rushing in unprepared, staying within a move-action of the Cleric, and knowing when to retreat are vital skills that will save the Cleric having to run past all the monsters and get AoO'd to death trying to save your sorry ass.

4) Clerics have other spells besides healing, and those spells are useful. Often a well chosen buff spell, holy smite, or even summoning spell can contribute more to the battle than healing. The key is the right mix, and again, not using spell slots for between-battle healing.

5) Don't complain if the Cleric decides to go into melee. Clerics like to kick ass too (and can be very good at it), and if you are still alive, you are being healed plenty. Obviously, the effectiveness of this tactic depends on how many tanks you already have.


A helpful PSA, I always find, especially if you imagine it being narrated by a surly dwarf.
Oh, and don't actually diss the Cleric's god and then expect healing, that's just asking for trouble.

 

[LonePaladin]

I just recently played a half-orc cleric/barbarian in an Eberron game, and didn't have any of these problems. I did use healing spells when someone was at risk of dropping, but generally saved the higher-level spells for use in combat — about the only time I'd convert one of those into a healing spell was when the other fighter in the party was desperately in need of a LOT of healing RIGHT NOW, or when we were between adventures.

If anyone started begging for healing when they were still within 2/3rds of their max hit points, I'd just snort and say, "Pansy. Tough it out. I'll fix you when you really need it."

The faith of the other PCs never came into question (but then, religion in Eberron is a little more fluid). And when the party healer can fly into a rage, and has a pile of action points to spend on re-using that ability, you don't argue much with him.

 

[Gothic_Demon]

A lot of times, this situation actually comes from the other players treating the Cleric like a band-aid, with "you don't even worship Pelor" just being a way to make them stop taking the Cleric for granted.

QFT

My players are exactly the same with this issue, and the cleric refused to heal them with its (warforged) own spell selection, but promised to use any cure wand the party bought whenever they needed it. Soon the party stopped expecting healing and started to consider the cost. (And, of course, a fully tanked warforged cleric with a full compliment of spells really lowers the amount of damage the party takes!)

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Bingo. People here are saying this is a Cleric Only problem.

No, actually, at least two people on this thread have commented on players who do this with clerics are problem players who find a way to be annoying with any character, and my opening post specificly asked IF it was a cleric thing or if people belonged to groups that were universally uncooperative.

AFAICT, the only people saying it's cleric only are the ones defending it as "not a problem".

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

I think that I've not made myself clear, and I apologise for that. I seem to have touched a nerve.

What I'm talking about is that if I played in a group as a Cleric where all the party demanded of me was "Heal, Heal, Heal!" I'd be just as aggravated as if I was playing in a group as a Fighter and the Cleric refused to Heal me when I got injured.

I'd respect a player that made it clear that his Cleric thought about his religion all the time and considered, out of battle, whether to heal or not. In battle, I'd be telling the Cleric whatever he wanted to hear if it meant I didn't get killed.

My point was:

Playing a Cleric and taking a bit more time over your healing, when time is available, makes the game more fun and more indepth for everyone, rather than going down the lazy route of 'Yeah, yeah, I break out the d8s and heal everyone up before we rest overnight...'

However, I would always consider what kind of group I was in. If I brought out that attitude the first time and got frosty looks and unhappy gaming buddies, I'd drop it immediately. And I'd hope that the players and DM would make it clear that it wasn't welcome right at the start so that I could apologise and move on - making the character a bit lighter in tone.

Hope that clears things up a bit.

 

[roguerouge]

Two problems with that. First off, trying to pass it off onto your god doesn't really work, because, well, the player is still deciding to withhold healing. I suppose it could be the DM, but then, it's just passing the buck really.

Secondly, advancing the agenda of a given faith is a pretty broad thing to work from. If the cleric is good, and the fighter has just killed a bunch of evil guys, even if they aren't enemies of the cleric's faith, has he advanced the agenda?

Naw, I've never once seen a cleric player who has actually withheld healing since junior high. That's a social contract issue that just never comes up in my games anymore.

There are problems with that? Good. There's problems with every approach to a character. That's where narrative comes from.

And that's a good thing.

I guess what interests me about this thread is that some people are getting all upset about something that could possibly add to their game's role playing: conflict. If you have mature role players who understand that it's an OPPORTUNITY when their characters have different viewpoints, well, these kind of shenanigans do lead to inter-party conflict, which leads to role playing, which leads to tighter parties and players who have invested more in their characters.

If you're playing with immature players, then by all means, don't try the high risk, high reward approach of playing your cleric in this manner. Otherwise, have the CHARACTERS, not the PLAYERS, fight it out.