Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 6144453" data-attributes="member: 92511">Magical HealingThe Cleric, obviously.Alternately:Druid, has access to healing spells. Not as fluent as Clerics, but they're there.Bard, has access to healing spells. Minor, perhaps, in relation to Clerics or Druids. But they're there.Paladin, laying on hands.Rangers: optionally/possibly if you use spell-casting Rangers.Mundane/Martial/whatever term for &quot;Non-magical&quot; isn't going to get panties in a bunch Healing1: Healing/Medic/First Aid SkillAny class can take this. Their effectiveness is strictly dependent on how &quot;good&quot; at the skill they are. A Wizard or Thief could provide superior non-magical first aid to a warlord or a bard or a non-healing oriented cleric, for that matter...if they have a superior skill bonus/use/rank/however they're gaging skills beyond &quot;have it v. don't have it&quot;.2: Mundane Inspirational/Determination/Self-Control/etc... &quot;Healing.&quot; Which is, in reality, &quot;healing&quot; by Damage Reduction or &quot;Temp HP&quot;, removal of conditions and/or something like that. Not &quot;closing wounds&quot;, but keeping you getting &quot;wounded fer reelz&quot; in the first place and/or then allowing [or forcing] you to &quot;push through it and keeping going.&quot;Warlord: if it warrants it's own class or sub-class (I think a theme/specialty would completely suffice).Bard can do it, along with everything else they can do...&quot;Barbarian&quot;/Berserker: some ability related to their raging.&nbsp; Monk: they must have some kind of &quot;ignore damage/overcome/fix yourself&quot; ability, don't they?Any and every class has access to some form of healing. MOST classes have two. Making sure there's a &quot;Warlord&quot; cuz we need some other way for people to heal besides Clerics makes no sense. You haven't needed a cleric to heal since the introduction of the Druid, Paladin, and Ranger in 1e...and Bard, for that matter, if you used them in 1e...and/or Psionics had powers that could heal. Non-magical healing skill came in 2e...How &quot;we need a warlord tied to D&amp;D for non-clerical healing&quot; is an actual position, I simply don't see.How we need them for &quot;non-magical healing&quot;...it's marginally more understandable, I guess. Fewer options than with magic (as it should be). But this, still, does not say/warrant them, to me, as needing to be &quot;tied to D&amp;D worlds&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="steeldragons, post: 6144453, member: 92511"] Magical Healing The Cleric, obviously. Alternately: Druid, has access to healing spells. Not as fluent as Clerics, but they're there. Bard, has access to healing spells. Minor, perhaps, in relation to Clerics or Druids. But they're there. Paladin, laying on hands. Rangers: optionally/possibly if you use spell-casting Rangers. Mundane/Martial/whatever term for "Non-magical" isn't going to get panties in a bunch Healing 1: Healing/Medic/First Aid Skill Any class can take this. Their effectiveness is strictly dependent on how "good" at the skill they are. A Wizard or Thief could provide superior non-magical first aid to a warlord or a bard or a non-healing oriented cleric, for that matter...if they have a superior skill bonus/use/rank/however they're gaging skills beyond "have it v. don't have it". 2: Mundane Inspirational/Determination/Self-Control/etc... "Healing." Which is, in reality, "healing" by Damage Reduction or "Temp HP", removal of conditions and/or something like that. Not "closing wounds", but keeping you getting "wounded fer reelz" in the first place and/or then allowing [or forcing] you to "push through it and keeping going." Warlord: if it warrants it's own class or sub-class (I think a theme/specialty would completely suffice). Bard can do it, along with everything else they can do... "Barbarian"/Berserker: some ability related to their raging. Monk: they must have some kind of "ignore damage/overcome/fix yourself" ability, don't they? Any and every class has access to some form of healing. MOST classes have two. Making sure there's a "Warlord" cuz we need some other way for people to heal besides Clerics makes no sense. You haven't needed a cleric to heal since the introduction of the Druid, Paladin, and Ranger in 1e...[I]and[/I] Bard, for that matter, if you used them in 1e...and/or[I] Psionics [/I]had powers that could heal. Non-magical healing skill came in 2e...How "we need a warlord tied to D&D for non-clerical healing" is an actual position, I simply don't see. How we need them for "non-magical healing"...it's marginally more understandable, I guess. Fewer options than with magic (as it should be). But this, still, does not say/warrant them, to me, as needing to be "tied to D&D worlds". [/QUOTE]

Verification