PCs using their abilities - a favor to the party?

[roguerouge]

or it could possibly detract from their games. I've played with enough different attitudes to know which it does for me.

It's true that different playstyles are different.

Ah yes, the "if you enjoy my playstyle you are mature and good roleplayers and if you don't you are immature..." I think we're done here.

Hey, man, no need to be insulting. I was not quoting you. I was responding to the guy who said he hadn't seen that since junior high school. It was directly on point, not an ad hominem argument. I was arguing that for some players, some styles work where others don't: "It's true that different playstyles are different." Why are you angry about my taking your viewpoint?

Sheesh. It's almost as if we're talking about religion in this thread... oh, wait.....

 

[Elf Witch]

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.

I have played with people like this and it drives me crazy. I have gotten to the point that I won't tolerate it in a game. You are playing adventures suck it up if you are so afraid of death then your character should have stayed home on the farm. As a DM I give a little help with this everyone starts my game with a fate point it is a chance to get out of death free. If you cash it in you immediately stabilize and you don't lose a level.

I have played in games where characters may not have liked each other and snarked and argued but I have never played in a game where you would just let a fellow party member die because of it. In combat all those issues are put aside. A group will not last long if you can't trust your fellow party members to watch your back in combat.

Inter party conflicts can be fun if no one takes them personal and they don't derail the game.

I have also never played in a game where clerics where expected to heal every ouch in combat. Healing was done after the combat and if we had the resources we invested in potions and wands to help. The only time healing was done during combat was when a PC was dying or the main fighter was about to go down.

I will say this I understand that not everyone wants to play a cleric who heals and that's cool and the party needs to do something about healing it should not be just the cleric's responsibilty, but sometimes you need to sacrifice for your party for example if your healing wand is out of charges and you are out in the wildneress then at that time the cleric is going to need to take on more healing. And this is not just a cleric issue if a druid or a bard were in the party in this situation they would need to do what it takes to keep the party alive to be able to get back to town to get a new wand.

I played a sorcerer in a game and the party had been captured we escaped but without our weapons and armor. The fighters made do with quaterstaffs and I used a lot of my slots to cast mage armor on the party to help keep us alive.

 

[Driddle]

(deleted)

 

[Jubilee]

When I play a cleric, I generally proceed from the viewpoint that my cleric is a kind of missionary for her faith. She'll heal the other PCs whether or not they actually venerate her deity, because that demonstrates the strength, mercy and kindness of her god.

I usually play Good clerics of Good deities, though. I might take a different view if playing a Neutral cleric.

But I would still probably heal the other PCs whether or not they respect my deity, because I in turn would hope they will help me out when I need it.

I've seen you play two clerics so far, both of which were 'battle clerics' and didn't offer healing spells to the party during or after combat! I want to see one of the goodie-goodie healy healy types next..

/ali

ps. I have played both combat clerics and healy types (well, it was an archivist), and I think both are valid styles of play. Sometimes you wanna charge into battle, sometimes you wanna heal all the owies - it seems to be the acceptable form of play in our group, too.. it does get sticky with the GM who doesn't think temples would sell wands or potions of healing to people of other faiths, especially when you travel to a place where all the deities are different!

 

[roguerouge]

Looking back at this thread, I can see that I should add a disclaimer before my posts that advocate a viewpoint. I think that this goes without saying, but I guess that it must be made explicit:

"All role playing advice is given without knowledge of you and your group. Only you and your group knows what is fun for you. What you are doing is not badwrongfun. My advice is offered based on what I think might be fun for you to try.

Run this idea by your DM before trying it out. If you don't have the opportunity before trying out this idea, read the body language and facial expressions of your fellow players to see how they're liking it. If you have a history of player melodrama at your games, you likely are not good at reading nonverbal cues to emotion. This is okay. Simply pass the DM a note describing what you are going to try before you do it."

This has been added to my sig.

 

[Driddle]

... read the body language and facial expressions of your fellow players to see how they're liking it. If you have a history of player melodrama at your games, you likely are not good at reading nonverbal cues to emotion. OR YOUR FRIENDS MIGHT SIMPLY BE DENSE. This is okay. Simply pass the DM a note describing what you are going to try before you do it.

Suggested add, above.

 

[roguerouge]

Now I have no problem with someone saying beforehand that their cleric is going to be more of a battlepriest, and healing won't be his top priority, as long as this is done before character creation. Nor do I have a problem with the scenario of a party member who violated some trust of the cleric or group at large with some sort of poor judgement call. That is, however, an understandable exception to the rule.

QFT. And thank you for your support.

 

[roguerouge]

Suggested add, above.

Sorry, ran up against the character limit. It's like they don't want essays in my sig or something....

 

[Greylock]

Speaking of party expectations and players expectations, and expanding my list beyond the ones I've listed:

A few characters ago, I played a Bard, but he wasn't your typical lute strumming Bard. He was very much an AD&D type Skald, who was intentionally designed to be a very effective front line fighter. His Bardic talent was in story telling and rote memorization of sagas. His reason for adventuring was that it was his keenest desire to become an integral part of his people's tales, instead of simply a teller of tales. His Bardic abilities came into play in the taverns and inns, and in his diplomatic skills with NPCs. In battle, he meant to be on the front line.

And, once again, I had a passel of players who came to second guess my every move. They thought I was intentionally sabotaging the party by not using my character's buffing abilities like a machine whenever they expected it. Before that group fell apart, and it did fall apart, they got into this annoying habit of openly rolling their eyes, and "reminding" me, "gently", whenever they thought my guy should be standing back and buffing. Never mind the fact that my character was the best pure melee combat oriented guy in a party with a Monk, a Wizard, and two range weapons focused types.

So, there you have my amended list of un-fun characters. That Bard was designed to be a blast to play, and he was at first. Conceived after Herger the Joyous from the 13th Warrior, he certainly was a great character until the other players decided I was "playing him wrong". It will be a cold day in heck before I play a Bard again, but I likely will play a Cleric again in the future. And he WILL abide by my character conception, and not player expectations.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Pre-Heal, it's quite hard to make a combat healer cleric in 3e. You need feats and magic items from splatbooks such as Augment Healing or Ring of Mystic Healing and you're still not that good at it. The core cleric is probably best as a self-buffing melee damage dealer, especially if you use unerrated Righteous Might and Divine Favor. His healing and condition cures, such as Restoration, are best used outside of combat. And he has some good situational buffs such as Protection From Evil and Freedom of Movement, also best cast outwith combat.

So I understand the 3e cleric not healing in combat. It's usually not the best tactic.

But that doesn't have anything to do with refusing to heal other PCs unless they make nicey to your god.