JRRNeiklot
First Post
I have never seen anyone choose a cleric because they get to be a healbot. Not ever in my 32 years of playing D&D. I'm sure there are some who enjoy that, but 5 out of 6?
Time to Heal
- Thread starter Mark CMG
- Start date
It's more like, "We need a healbot, I played one last time, it's Jim's turn to be the cleric."
People don't choose a cleric because they want to be a healbot. The party needs a healbot, hence someone choose a cleric.
And it's not just about hp healing. Removing poison, curses etc. are all part of why the party wants a healbot.
Last edited:
FireLance
Legend
I think there is a more fundamental question that needs to be addressed, namely: what is the role of healing in D&D?
It is entirely possible to run a D&D campaign with just natural healing. The PCs would just need to be more cautious (perhaps retreating when any character is reduced to less than 25% of hit points to lower the chance of character death) and spend more time resting between adventures.
So what does healing actually add? In my view:
1. Generic safety net. This allows characters to take more risks because they are now better able to stave off death.
2. Targeted resilience. Healing can mitigate the effects of bad luck (at least, in the form of higher than expected hit point loss) on any single character, so that the party as a whole is able to adventure for longer.
3. Reduced downtime. Here the concerns are more narrative-based than mechanical, although it might have a material impact on challenges that are reactive or have a deadline. Otherwise, it is simply a matter of resting a day or resting a week or more.
4. Short-term tension. This point is probably somewhat controversial, since it is most obvious in 4e. The "hit point yo-yo", in which characters have their hit points reduced close to 0 (or even dropping below that) during an encounter and then being restored close to full after each fight, creates more tension in each fight than the numerically equivalent approach of (say) quadrupling each character's number of hit points and having them fight four fights without any healing in between. In the latter case, tension would naturally be lower (or at least, different) in the first few fights since the PCs are likely to have substantial hit point buffers.
So IMO, healing isn't strictly speaking necessary in any edition of D&D. However, if you choose to go without healing, you would have to go without the elements listed above in your games.
It is entirely possible to run a D&D campaign with just natural healing. The PCs would just need to be more cautious (perhaps retreating when any character is reduced to less than 25% of hit points to lower the chance of character death) and spend more time resting between adventures.
So what does healing actually add? In my view:
1. Generic safety net. This allows characters to take more risks because they are now better able to stave off death.
2. Targeted resilience. Healing can mitigate the effects of bad luck (at least, in the form of higher than expected hit point loss) on any single character, so that the party as a whole is able to adventure for longer.
3. Reduced downtime. Here the concerns are more narrative-based than mechanical, although it might have a material impact on challenges that are reactive or have a deadline. Otherwise, it is simply a matter of resting a day or resting a week or more.
4. Short-term tension. This point is probably somewhat controversial, since it is most obvious in 4e. The "hit point yo-yo", in which characters have their hit points reduced close to 0 (or even dropping below that) during an encounter and then being restored close to full after each fight, creates more tension in each fight than the numerically equivalent approach of (say) quadrupling each character's number of hit points and having them fight four fights without any healing in between. In the latter case, tension would naturally be lower (or at least, different) in the first few fights since the PCs are likely to have substantial hit point buffers.
So IMO, healing isn't strictly speaking necessary in any edition of D&D. However, if you choose to go without healing, you would have to go without the elements listed above in your games.
Mustrum_Ridcully
Legend
And yet, the primary reason for a party to absolutely want a Cleric was always that it would heal. [-]Nothing[-]Little else.
It has nothing to do with what a "real world" Cleric may have done or do, or what the "story" of the class is. But that's is the primary function everyone wants to have one for in a D&D party. Believing anything else would to me imply a very unique gaming experience that is not representative of the norm.
Not everyone plays the Cleric because he wants to play the healer of the party, but the party will typically appreciate him most for his healing abilities, and will dislike it if they don't receive healing from the Cleric.
Last edited:
avin
First Post
Also in my experience nobody wants to be the Cleric, as a Healbot.
There's a pretty simple option here, IMO, make one of the Cleric/Priest options something along the lines of 4E Hit&Heal Cleric... make a few damageenemies+healparty spells for other healing classes too... I wouldn't mind.
There's a pretty simple option here, IMO, make one of the Cleric/Priest options something along the lines of 4E Hit&Heal Cleric... make a few damageenemies+healparty spells for other healing classes too... I wouldn't mind.
Mattachine
Adventurer
In my 30 years of playing D&D, the cleric has been primarily the healer--even with only very limited healing until 7th level. Don't forget that they got other spells associated with healing, such as slow poison, remove fear, and remove paralysis. When folks say "healing" they mean the associated status removal spells, too.
In addition to being another DM who saw clerics as primarily healers for decades, I also had gaming groups where the cleric was the chore players took turns at, or the party suffered through without one. There was a time when the players would sometimes have a secondary character--that would usually be a cleric.
This isn't because of MMORPGs. I started playing D&D in 1981. Many players don't like the idea of being the support character. In fact, I would argue, MMORPGs made playing a support character interesting and fun (my favorite type of PC in GuildWars is the Monk).
Yes, some players create a divine warrior out of the cleric, and evil cleric villains were a common staple of my games, but they were always at the bottom of the character barrel.
In addition to being another DM who saw clerics as primarily healers for decades, I also had gaming groups where the cleric was the chore players took turns at, or the party suffered through without one. There was a time when the players would sometimes have a secondary character--that would usually be a cleric.
This isn't because of MMORPGs. I started playing D&D in 1981. Many players don't like the idea of being the support character. In fact, I would argue, MMORPGs made playing a support character interesting and fun (my favorite type of PC in GuildWars is the Monk).
Yes, some players create a divine warrior out of the cleric, and evil cleric villains were a common staple of my games, but they were always at the bottom of the character barrel.
FreeTheSlaves
Adventurer
Where does the heal skill come into this?
I means it is fairly obvious that this skill is pretty much the answer to every character having access to healing. The Cleric should just be better with it.
Make the heal skill actually heal and we're good to go with or without a Cleric in the party.
I means it is fairly obvious that this skill is pretty much the answer to every character having access to healing. The Cleric should just be better with it.
Make the heal skill actually heal and we're good to go with or without a Cleric in the party.
Not counting the fact that heal didn't became a skill until 3x, you run into people who likes that healing only be magical. There are still people who are annoyed at warlords healing.
FreeTheSlaves
Adventurer
Nope, the healing non-weapon proficiency was in 2E. I think it cost a couple of slots.
I'm 100% Ok with Cleric healing, but there should be a place for dressing wounds and recuperative care.
If the non-bloodied half of a characters HPs represent stamina, luck etc... There is plenty of scope for the heal skill to restore HPs as the dressed character gets their wind back, recovers consciousness etc.
I'm 100% Ok with Cleric healing, but there should be a place for dressing wounds and recuperative care.
If the non-bloodied half of a characters HPs represent stamina, luck etc... There is plenty of scope for the heal skill to restore HPs as the dressed character gets their wind back, recovers consciousness etc.
Similar Threads
