D&D 5E Refusing To Heal Party Members?

[Zardnaar]

What's wrong with all members of the group buying potions of healing... also does your paladin have any spell based healing?

We are kinda broke (or at least my Paldin is). I can't even afford half plate at level 3 (200gp). I'm also not sure if it has occurred to them to try and buy them.

The Rogue player has noticed he is having trouble being effective and I told him it was diue to party composition and he is hanging back with a bow so we tend to have 2 front liners and 4 ranged PCs.

 

[Zardnaar]

Okay, sounds like you don't have much healing. Viable choice in 5e, though works better if supported by being high stealth or something else to help avoid needless encounters.



Great, you have an opinion. Of course, that doesn't mean any other player needs to agree with your opinion. So it's rather irrelevant.



Okay, you're not the healer and you don't spend lots of your healing in combat unless someone drops. Wouldn't be particularly noticeable if you weren't posting about it. At my table we'd really hope you have a character personality and picked a paladin's oath that goes along with it. A tough driven pragmatic oath of vengence we'd all go "oh yeah, that's perfect, clean up your own messes" while a virtuous or holy oath of devotion we'd think you're meta-gaming.

As a side note, if we mentioned that as front-line melee folks, you and him are protecting the squishier members of your party, but the little healing the party has goes twice as far because if they get hit they take full damage, while he only takes half due to resistances? So he's doubling the effectiveness of the healing available.

He is an Oath of Vengeance sword and board. Personality naive, flaws thinks he is superior to others, craves the respect of the common folk (rescued NPCs from slavers), donates loot to the church (since stolen). Tends to believe what he is told with a decent persuasion/deception roll. Wants to set up a cadet branch of his noble family (second son), and claims to have had a passopnate love affair with his second cousin (his idea of passion being love letters).

I was not being to serious with the Barbarian asking for permission from others to play one but in our groups there is an etiquette around playing them in regards to the healer being OK to spend extra resources to heal. I know they take half damage but in a recent fight I took 0 damage due to AC and the Barbarian soaked around 100 (47hp at level 1). I roill my dice in fornt of the DM, the Barbarian does it between sessions to level up. Claims he rolled a 12,12,11 for hit points and has 15,18 and 19 for dex/con/str.

 

[Tony Vargas]

5e classes aren't designed to slip neatly into efficiently-synergizing roles anymore. Even when the Paladin was designed to fill a specific position in the party roster, it wasn't the position of sole healer. Things like this are going to happen unless the group gets together and designs a party rather than just designing characters independently.

There are several worthy support classes that could have been played instead of the existing characters, a couple even while sticking to similar concepts. You could have played a War Cleric rather than a Paladin, giving you more daily spell power and more flexibility in how you heal (healing word for in-combat healing as a bonus action). And Lore Bard is not /that/ different in basic concept from a Wizard - different, yes, but not as different as playing a traditional Cleric instead of a wizard. Even, the Barbarian probably doesn't deserve all the blame: while they may get hit a lot, they do mitigate the damage they actually take, and have big fat d12 HD. If he'd been a Battlemaster fighter, for instance, the little bit of damage mitigation he'd've gotten at 3rd from Rally (assuming he chose rally) would hardly make as much net difference as taking half damage as a barbarian.

Aside from your group as a whole trying to create a more coherent/efficient party, your DM could also be trying to keep the campaign playable by giving you opportunities to short rest, placing more external healing resources, and the like. Of course, in a more status-quo style 'sandbox' campaign that may not be the most attractive idea.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

I was not being to serious with the Barbarian asking for permission from others to play one but in our groups there is an etiquette around playing them in regards to the healer being OK to spend extra resources to heal. I know they take half damage but in a recent fight I took 0 damage due to AC and the Barbarian soaked around 100 (47hp at level 1).

Basically your high AC is encouraging monsters to attack your team-mates. The too tough tank can be as big a problem as the too squishy one. It's not worth the effort to try and hit you. That's inefficient, as it leaves you with Hit Dice you cant spend. With no healer, you want to spread the damage out and have everyone able to heal on short rests.

Assuming most of that was physical damage, if the barbarian wasn't there, that would have been nearly *200* damage applied to your teammates. The barb is still saving you HP and resources.

 

[Imaro]

We are kinda broke (or at least my Paldin is). I can't even afford half plate at level 3 (200gp). I'm also not sure if it has occurred to them to try and buy them.

The Rogue player has noticed he is having trouble being effective and I told him it was diue to party composition and he is hanging back with a bow so we tend to have 2 front liners and 4 ranged PCs.

The rogue at 3rd level should be getting sneak attack damage if he's continuously hitting opponents that are engaged with you or the Barbarian even at range... which should either free up your spells from smites (since the rogue is doing more damage now) to more healing or... The rogue should focus on whatever is attacking the Barbarian so they can bring it down quicker and mitigate some of the damage the barbarian is taking... especially if you are getting hit less because of a higher AC.

 

[Celebrim]

No one is CE but I think two or 3 of them are CN.

In my experience as a DM, 80% of players that play CN are playing it as 'Diet CE'. They want all the 'benefits' of being evil, without having to put it on their character sheet. I suspect what you really have going is 2-3 of them are CE (labeled CN) and 1-2 of the ones labeled CG are probably CN. And I wouldn't be too sure of the ones labeled 'Neutral' either.

Real CN has something like, "Harm no one, do as you please" as a philosophy. A real marker here of whether you are dealing with real CN's is whether they are morally repulsed by betrayal, by failing to pay your debts (or even incurring debt), or by trespassing on someone else's deserved property and rights. If they are consistently when faced with a choice to enrich themselves at the expense of others, choosing to enrich themselves and they don't even attempt to rationalize it much, you have a clear CE. Also look out for indicators like, not only is the character unmerciful, but he delights in wrecking an unlimited vengeance on anyone that insults them - ei, insults are paid with punches, and punches with dagger thrusts, and sometimes insults with dagger thrust.

In any event, your Paladin is scarcely less in conflict with a CN than they would be with a CE character. It's ok to bring that up in play, provided you are willing to take outs to prevent party dissolution and play off of the other players cues. Of course, that assumes everyone is going to be mature about it. Instead of making it a table issue, make it an issue in character. If the Barbarian is like, "I'm all bloody again, bro. Heal me.", it's alright to go, "Our Glorious Lady Showna is not running your personal blood bank. If I expend the power she has delegated to me, to heal you of your recklessly earned wounds, then I'm risking the death of someone else who has greater needs. My purpose in this life is not to validate your wrathfulness and disregard of personal safety." And if the Barbarian's player is any good, he'll respond with something like, "Oh. How do you know that?" And so forth.

 

[Lanefan]

This is definitely an example of why I no longer as a DM work on the principle that everyone should show up with their own character and expect it to work.

There are multiple problems with this party composition that is just begging for IC conflict to break out, which at most tables invariably spills over to OOC real world conflict.

Depends on the table. For my part the more I read about this party the more I see it as having loads of entertainment potential!

But I also agree with the general consensus of the thread that the party composition is weird. Five of your six players have at least a very strong chaotic bent, and there is at least the suggestion of a trend toward CE. And, you are playing a paladin. This sounds like a recipe for disaster.

Almost inevitably the rest of the party will at some point hang the Pally out to dry...unless they still don't have any other healing options and think they have to keep him going for that aspect alone.

My advice; tell the DM that your character leaves in disgust at the parties self-centered chaotic ways and goes to seek his own fortune. Switch your character out for a CE cleric, and then make the rest of the party grovel (literally and figuratively) whenever they need healing. Charge the other party members in favors and coin whenever they want a spell from you. Make them get down on their knees and beg your deity for his blessings. If they can't pay, and they are down to 1 hit point, tell them that you'll overlook it this time provided they put on a slave collar and abase themselves before you. That at least would resolve all the contradictions in the party, instead of having a self-centered party that wants the advantage of a self-sacrificing healer validating their self-centered approach to the game, they'd get what they want good and hard.

And you think the current party is a recipe for disaster? This would be ten times worse; adding headaches and solving nothing.

I tried something like this once, in fact: I brought in a fanatic zealot of a Cleric who was at the time pretty much the only healing the party had; problem was, she wouldn't heal you (or cast any other spell for you) unless you were sworn to her faith...which led to at least one "convert or die" moment when a dying character asked for a cure.

She lasted two sessions. Her career ended when she was knocked unconscious by some foe or other, whereupon a storm of notes flew towards the DM from the other players; it later turned out there was a three-way race among other party members to get to her and finish her off!

Lan-"alas for the party, the enemy had already killed her by the time anyone else got there"-efan

 

[Zardnaar]

The rogue at 3rd level should be getting sneak attack damage if he's continuously hitting opponents that are engaged with you or the Barbarian even at range... which should either free up your spells from smites (since the rogue is doing more damage now) to more healing or... The rogue should focus on whatever is attacking the Barbarian so they can bring it down quicker and mitigate some of the damage the barbarian is taking... especially if you are getting hit less because of a higher AC.

He seems to like sneaking off solo alot and hanging back with a bow. He likes using stealth but inly tends to get sneak attack on the 1st round. Eanged rogues also tend to be less efficient due to +2 AC firing through allies, disadvatage to hit if they get in melee and they are not dual wielding to double the chances of a sneak attack.

 

[Celebrim]

Depends on the table.

Well, of course it depends on the table. If you are dealing with really skilled players, even Belkar Bitterleaf and Roy Greenhilt can be in the same party and the players can make it work.

And you think the current party is a recipe for disaster? This would be ten times worse; adding headaches and solving nothing.

Depends on the table.

While I wasn't being fully serious with all my suggestions, a well played CN or CE cleric in a party that appears to trend CN/CE anyway makes a lot more sense than a paladin and doesn't result in the party automatically being in moral conflict.

I tried something like this once, in fact: I brought in a fanatic zealot of a Cleric who...lasted two sessions. Her career ended when she was knocked unconscious by some foe or other, whereupon a storm of notes flew towards the DM from the other players; it later turned out there was a three-way race among other party members to get to her and finish her off!

Then she wasn't a very good evangelist was she? First of all, why would a polytheist insist on a conversion? Doesn't all she really care about is if her deity receives due respect? More to the point though, was she representing principles that the party affirmed in play and in beliefs? Was she embodying and expressing a heroic ideal that the rest of the party already wanted to aspire too? Sometimes you have to match the cleric to the party. Like for example the time I played a cleric for whom drinking was a sacred act or worship, and who spent his time calling his flock to take opportunities for pious revelry?

"Thou hast fought valiantly and looted well, Sir John. Come, sit with me and quaff a sacred beer and be healed of your weariness and pains!...Of course, it would not be amiss for you to buy this round, in expression of your gratitude."

"No, of course technically the beer isn't necessary for your healing, Sir John... but why would you want to do it without one?"

If you don't convert even your own party, you are doing it wrong.

 

[GameOgre]

Since when does Paladin= Healer?

That's CRAZY!r
You mean they want you to use SMACK JUICE to heal instead of lay down some smack?

Cray-Cray!

sent from my phone on a buss with one hand because I care bout Cray Cray Paladins.


Tell that pally do get off yo $%$% and play a REAL class. or you know..act like a barbarian.

I play a barb and I would be too ashamed to show my face around the next barb sweat lodge meeting ifI needed some weak arsed girlyman in plate to hold my hand and touch my wounds in order to make it through the day.


Yeah ask Mary the barbarian if she can handle it on her own.