Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="nightwyrm" data-source="post: 5892330" data-attributes="member: 75542">The healing may be smaller in comparison, but it's still there in a pinch.  You always have your 2 or 3 "word" ability healing real hps when things go south. Also, a big part of why taclords (even under the proposal that they only heal with temps) may be viable in 4e is that 4e allows PCs to top off their own hp, in and between combats. A taclord doesn't need to focus on healing the party because if he can get the party thru the combat fast enough thru his bonuses, the party can heal itself back to full. Are we gonna make the warlord only heal temps due to versimilitude but allow PCs to heal their own real hps in 5e?  I agree there's a place for proactive and reactive abilities and in some situations one is more useful than the other. But unless you know someone is gonna get hit (a defender etc.) or the ability activates as an interrupt, "temp-hp buffering" is most likely not gonna be as versatile as real healing. If the unbuffered wizard got hit by a hidden lurker, the cleric is going to be more useful than the warlord. Of course, this depends on a lot of factors, such as the relative amounts of hps granted but at the end of the day, the warlord is still trading limited (daily ability, healing surges, whatever) resources for non-permanent resources while the cleric is trading limited resources for permanent resources.</blockquote>