Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Crimson Binome" data-source="post: 7796128" data-attributes="member: 6775031">The implication is that the healer could be replaced by a robot, since there's very little decision-making involved. The underlying math of a system may assume a character who just stands there and hands out healing every round, which isn't very interesting to play, but is nevertheless a requirement in order for the game to function as-intended. (I'm not saying that any particular game is guilty of this, but the implication is always there.)There is some amount of truth to the perception, and I say this as someone who plays a healer whenever possible: Healers interact primarily with willing targets, who cooperate with their plans, while strikers and tanks primarily interact with enemies who have their own ideas about what they should do. The healer is much less adversarial of a role, in combat. I don't want to say that it's easy mode, because we do have our own challenges (mostly in regards to managing resources), but it's a different sort of thing; and it's not the sort of challenge that everyone really understands or appreciates.Some games are worse about this than others, and there have been a number of attempts to address this. Most familiar to the majority of this forum, 4E attempted to hide healing away as a swift action, so you could still do something "interesting" with your major action even though you felt "obligated" to provide in-combat healing. World of Warcraft "solved" the problem of just spamming the heal spell by providing a number of random and trigger-able buffs and cost-reductions to each of your various spells, such that you had to pay constant attention and use the best healing spell for the situation at hand.</blockquote>

Verification