PDA

View Full Version : The worst full caster?



HailDiscordia
2010-04-09, 11:54 AM
Generally, full casters are all very strong. Not all of them though. So what do you all think is the weakest of the bunch? I have to say that I think the Shugenga is pretty weak. We have one in our campaign now and her spell selection is just so crummy. She focused in Earth (mainly so she could still cast Fire and Water spells) on it just stinks. When she finally got 4th level spells she wound up with Dismissal and Death Ward, which I suppose are okay but really...Most combat she casts prayer and uses some wands.

Flickerdart
2010-04-09, 11:57 AM
The Warmage is probably the worst full caster, because blasting is a poor use of everyone's time. The Healer is also a pretty piss-poor full caster until they get gate. Beginning to see a trend here? If your spell list sucks, you'll suck. Your friend picked a crappy discipline and crappy spells, and surprise surprise, she's not as effective as otherwise possible.

Amphetryon
2010-04-09, 12:02 PM
Generally, full casters are all very strong. Not all of them though. So what do you all think is the weakest of the bunch? I have to say that I think the Shugenga is pretty weak. We have one in our campaign now and her spell selection is just so crummy. She focused in Earth (mainly so she could still cast Fire and Water spells) on it just stinks. When she finally got 4th level spells she wound up with Dismissal and Death Ward, which I suppose are okay but really...Most combat she casts prayer and uses some wands.

Earth domain isn't the crummy one for Shugenja. That honor goes to Water.

Handbook (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19870718/Shugenja_Handbook?pg=1)

Gorbash
2010-04-09, 12:05 PM
What Flicker said, if your spells suck - you suck. So, it's not only the matter whether your spell list sucks (but if it does then you can't do nothing about it really), it's how you choose those that you have. That's why there are many bad wizards in the world who think casting Fireball is awesome use of a spell slot and even with the widespread opinion on these boards how Batmen are awesome, still the bigger part of gaming population (who don't frequent charop boards) will do just that.

So, pick your spells carefully. :smallwink:

Yuki Akuma
2010-04-09, 12:07 PM
The Healer. They're worse at healing than Clerics, and all they get are healing spells...

Optimystik
2010-04-09, 12:09 PM
The Healer. They're worse at healing than Clerics, and all they get are healing spells...

This, and I'm surprised it took that long to state.
EDIT: Well, Flicker did mention it, but it's so poor compared to Warmage that I think it does win.

Though Truenamer is worse if you count pseudo-spells.

DragoonWraith
2010-04-09, 12:10 PM
Yeah, if we're talking Arcane/Divine, the Healer. Otherwise, the Truenamer. There's... not really a lot of competition in that regard.

Superglucose
2010-04-09, 12:12 PM
By that nature, I think Sorcerers are probably the worst full caster, in the sense that they can bottom out worse than any other class (at least, while still retaining their casting).

Optimystik
2010-04-09, 12:16 PM
To be fair, a Truenamer can at least grab a mace and swing (and in fact, most Truenamer horror stories I've heard, had the party telling their truenamers to do just that.) A healer gets 1/2 BAB, no way to boost it, and no offensive magic until Gate, not even other summoning spells.


By that nature, I think Sorcerers are probably the worst full caster, in the sense that they can bottom out worse than any other class (at least, while still retaining their casting).

Reserve Feats = never bottoming out.

Also wands, scrolls etc.

Yuki Akuma
2010-04-09, 12:17 PM
Is it bad that I totally want to try a Healer some day?

Optimystik
2010-04-09, 12:21 PM
Oh, forgot to mention - Healers are also MAD, just like Favored Souls. Bonus spells off Wis, DCs off Cha.


Is it bad that I totally want to try a Healer some day?

I do too, but I'll stick to an undead-heavy campaign :smalltongue: No AoO on healing spells means I can do a fair amount of damage.

...assuming I hit.

Gorbash
2010-04-09, 12:22 PM
By that nature, I think Sorcerers are probably the worst full caster, in the sense that they can bottom out worse than any other class (at least, while still retaining their casting).

Oh how true.

I'm playing in a group with one. Half-Elf Sorcerer lvl 15, no prestige class, no worthwile feats to mention, let alone spells (the only ones she casts are Chain Lightning, Cone of Cold and Fireball).

So, she's our high CL wand.

Thankfully, I play a Batman, so our arcane department is covered, and there's 6 of us and we can afford failures, but it's sad to see such a waste of space.

HailDiscordia
2010-04-09, 12:30 PM
Your friend picked a crappy discipline and crappy spells, and surprise surprise, she's not as effective as otherwise possible.

I agree and I don't. The problem with the Shugenga is that there is very little room to pick spells. They get an Order spell (many of which stink) and than they have to choose a spell from their discipline. At each level they wind up with one or two non-discipline spells, and they can't choose from their opposite discipline. I tried to help her make some good choices and there really isn't a ton. She choose Earth not because she liked it, but because she wanted to be able to dip into both Fire and Water.

Optimystik
2010-04-09, 12:33 PM
All the elements for Shugenja are excellent except Water (which basically makes you a subpar healbot.)

Earth is a very solid choice; check out the Shugenja Handbook (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=4367.0) for builds.

(I just saw the pun, I swear.)

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-09, 12:37 PM
I agree about the Healrer being the worst.

Probebly going IMO

Healer < truenamer < warmage


side note...
Which is better Shugenja or wujen?

Panigg
2010-04-09, 12:44 PM
The Shadowcaster from the book of magic.

He can be easily fixed with a couple of changes tho. Or rather, with the changes the creator made a few weeks after the book was released.

Yuki Akuma
2010-04-09, 12:51 PM
I agree about the Healrer being the worst.

Probebly going IMO

Healer < truenamer < warmage

What? How?

At least the Healer works. It's a Vancian spellcaster. Its mechanics are fine.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-09, 12:53 PM
What? How?

At least the Healer works. It's a Vancian spellcaster. Its mechanics are fine.

I've seen Truenames work great as gish/buffers.

I've never seen a healer do any thing other then heal. and to be honest in the games i did see it it was toping off the DS's vigor arua more then actualy healing.

Superglucose
2010-04-09, 12:56 PM
Reserve Feats = never bottoming out.

Using reserve feats = not the least common denominator of sorcerers.

Nuke
2010-04-09, 12:59 PM
Just curious, how are healers worse at healing the clerics?

Yuki Akuma
2010-04-09, 01:05 PM
They have to take a feat to be able to spontaneously convert spells into cure spells. Which means in order to do their job, they have to either pay a feat tax or waste spell slots on cure spells.

Kallisti
2010-04-09, 01:05 PM
Clerics--at least good clerics--get spontaneous conversion. So they're about par on healing, but the cleric is SAD and still gets plenty of spells useful for other stuff than healing without damaging his healing power.

At least, that's how my friend explained it to me. I've never really read the healer class.

mikej
2010-04-09, 01:09 PM
My vote is for the Warmage. I haven't seen much in the way of the Truenamer. All of the precious mentioned are pretty bad.

As for the Healer. It's still bad, I don't think many players would frown upon a class completely dedicated as the Healer ( although I'm sure many would point out the Cleric first ) to help them in battle. It's not something that anyone would be trapped in ( coughmonkcough ) for seeming good on paper. You're just a healer and if that's all you want to do than it does the job. You know what you're getting into.

The Warmage is slighty different. It seems like a good class for blasting. Except that normal ( without extreme Metamagic abuse ) blasting is fairly subpar compared to just buffing the party's beatstick. You're lackluster at best. Many times blasting into combat is not a great choice of actions anyways.

Optimystik
2010-04-09, 01:11 PM
Just curious, how are healers worse at healing the clerics?

In addition to what Yuki said, they don't even get the best healing spells (Vigor line) on their list, because they were made before PHB2. But unlike the other niche casters like Dread Necro, Beguiler and Warmage, they don't have a mechanic to branch outside their spell list. They also don't get UMD, so they can't even use wands/scrolls of vigor. And to cap it all, they are MAD, so are less likely to be able to use their heals offensively, or have as many of them as a cleric. (The poor BAB also hurts them here.)

They were just an awfully-designed class. The companion is nice though.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-09, 01:13 PM
My vote is for the Warmage. I haven't seen much in the way of the Truenamer. All of the precious mentioned are pretty bad.

As for the Healer. It's still bad, I don't think many players would frown upon a class completely dedicated as the Healer ( although I'm sure many would point out the Cleric first ) to help them in battle. It's not something that anyone would be trapped in ( coughmonkcough ) for seeming good on paper. You're just a healer and if that's all you want to do than it does the job. You know what you're getting into.

The Warmage is slighty different. It seems like a good class for blasting. Except that normal ( without extreme Metamagic abuse ) blasting is fairly subpar compared to just buffing the party's beatstick. You're lackluster at best. Many times blasting into combat is not a great choice of actions anyways.

Wouldn't then the healer be bad as well seeing as healing aka casting cures is considered subpar?

Nuke
2010-04-09, 01:14 PM
Right, they can't spontaneously cast so they're nowhere near as versatile as a cleric.. but I'm not seeing how that makes them worse healers than a cleric. Unless I'm missing something else, wouldn't a healer who memorizes all cure spells outperform the cleric who is uses his spell slots for cure spells?

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-09, 01:16 PM
Right, they can't spontaneously cast so they're nowhere near as versatile as a cleric.. but I'm not seeing how that makes them worse healers than a cleric. Unless I'm missing something else, wouldn't a healer who memorizes all cure spells outperform the cleric who is uses his spell slots for cure spells?

you shouldn't be healing in combat. out of combat healing should be done with vigor or some infinite healing combo.

mikej
2010-04-09, 01:17 PM
Wouldn't then the healer be bad as well seeing as healing aka casting cures is considered subpar?

Yeah, I forgot to add that. I do come from a group with the tradition of "you need an in combat medic." Also, I fully admit that both are pretty bad. I just wanted to speak my opinion of which one I thought was worse.

edit: I do try to promote out of combat healing.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-09, 01:21 PM
Yeah, I forgot to add that. I do come from a group with the tradition of "you need an in combat medic." Also, I fully admit that both are pretty bad. I just wanted to speak my opinion of which one I thought was worse.

edit: I do try to promote out of combat healing.


We were like that too then me and my friend switched gm/player rolls and i rolled up a "healer" that kicked more ass then the fighter and still had every one healed.

DragoonWraith
2010-04-09, 01:21 PM
Unfortunately, being an in-combat medic is hard. The only dedicated healing spell that is actually worth a Standard Action in combat is Heal. For the rest, they only become worthwhile if you're a War Weaver (which divine classes can't qualify for), and then only if your enemies are spreading the damage around a lot.

Nuke
2010-04-09, 01:24 PM
you shouldn't be healing in combat. out of combat healing should be done with vigor or some infinite healing combo.

I don't fall into that school of thought, but you could certainly use this argument as to why the healer is the weakest full caster, which I would probably agree with you on.

I just didn't see how people were saying that they don't even heal as well as a cleric does... I was wondering if I was actually missing something as far as clerics go. Obviously clerics are more powerful overall, but it seems like the healer is really good at their one thing they do.

Gnaeus
2010-04-09, 01:25 PM
Right, they can't spontaneously cast so they're nowhere near as versatile as a cleric.. but I'm not seeing how that makes them worse healers than a cleric. Unless I'm missing something else, wouldn't a healer who memorizes all cure spells outperform the cleric who is uses his spell slots for cure spells?

Well, the cleric could use all of his cure spots on healing spells that weren't for damage (like restoration or cure poison) and then convert them as needed.

And as noted, the healer can't use items like vigor wands.

The cleric gets several other great healing spells that healers don't get, aside from the vigor line. Like Revivify and Mass Restoration. They even appear to get Close Wounds one level before healers.

A healing cleric can get DMM persist and persist a mass lesser vigor, thereby assuring that everyone in his party walks into every encounter at full hit points for the rest of the day. Or DMM Quicken and cast 2 Heal spells in a round.

A cleric can use Inflicts to heal his undead allies.

A healing cleric has domains, so he can take prestige classes like Radiant Servant of Pelor, which Maximizes and Empowers all of his heals virtually for free.

A healing cleric can take Imbued Healing metamagic, giving free buffs to his allies with every heal. If the cleric has the healing domain, that means that his cure spells heal (normal spell healing+caster level+1) hit points + caster level in additional temporary hit points.

Edit: And if the healing cleric acts before any of his allies are hurt, he can proactively reduce their damage, with spells like Aid, Bears Endurance, or other defensive buffs. This is better than losing a round until your friends get hurt.

Amphetryon
2010-04-09, 01:40 PM
Unfortunately, being an in-combat medic is hard. The only dedicated healing spell that is actually worth a Standard Action in combat is Heal. For the rest, they only become worthwhile if you're a War Weaver (which divine classes can't qualify for), and then only if your enemies are spreading the damage around a lot.

The best way to be an in-combat medic that I've found, outside War Weaver shenanigans, is Marshal/Dragon Shaman. You can radiate low level Fast Healing while using your actual actions to do something more useful and intereresting.

Optimystik
2010-04-09, 01:43 PM
There are nice ways to heal in combat. My personal favorite is Eldritch Disciple, with Healing Blast and Eldritch Chain/Cone to zap multiple allies at once. With the right build, you can even get 9th-level divines, and Dark (Light?) Invocations.

Mushroom Ninja
2010-04-09, 01:47 PM
My vote for healer. Healer really sucks unless you pull rainbow servant shenanigans (I'm AFB, but I think you can do it).

MandibleBones
2010-04-09, 01:50 PM
I disagree about the Warmage being so bad, honestly. True, it's a blaster, which is not a place where arcane classes traditionally are at their best, but it's good a being a blaster.

A lot of the problems with being a blaster is versitility - it's hard to prepare the right blasting spell for the right combat, so in the end, buffing the fighter is usually more effective. As a warmage, though, you have such a wide range it's pretty easy to find the right ones. The eclectic learning alternate class feature lets you fill in a few of the utility spells not covered by the other caster in the party, and the bonus metamagic feats help you become a better blaster in that regard.

As for worst class, I tend to look at it in two ways: "What class is the worst at what it's supposed to do?" and "What class can I just not fix regardless of PrCs, feats or class options?"

Healer might be the first one; Truenamer is definitely the second.

warmachine
2010-04-09, 01:51 PM
I'm voting Healer as well. I'm a Tactician that likes to heal in combat, along with buffs, battlefield control and the occasional direct damage but Healer can do almost nothing but heal. I need a whole bag of tricks to make sure the party beats the **** out the enemy no matter what bizarre abilities the enemy has. Silence, Invisibility Purge, Freedom of Movement, Holy Smite, Magic Circle Against Evil, Divine Power, Flame Strike, Resist Energy etc. are all good tricks to have up my sleeve. And Healer has no equivalents. Can't even stand in for a melee fight.

Which of the Robin Law player types are they good for? Powergamer? NO! Butt Kicker? NO! Tactician? No. Specialist? Highly unlilkely as healing is passive and dull. Method Actor? Too boring compared to an Cleric or Druid. Storyteller? No story driving abilities. Casual Gamer? Spontaneous casters, such as Favoured Soul, requires less work.

What could possibly inspire anyone to develop or playtest this class?

Yuki Akuma
2010-04-09, 01:51 PM
My vote for healer. Healer really sucks unless you pull rainbow servant shenanigans (I'm AFB, but I think you can do it).

Sure, if you have a way of getting turn undead and the Sun domain.

JoshuaZ
2010-04-09, 01:52 PM
Warmage isn't nearly as bad as some people in this thread are making it out to be. The Advanced Learning feature allows you to pick up a fair number of evocation spells that fall into the utility end. And you get the orb line of spells automatically which are the best targeted damage spells.

MandibleBones
2010-04-09, 01:53 PM
What could possibly inspire anyone to develop or playtest this class?

If I recall correctly, it appears in the Miniatures Handbook - someone who needs a healing unit for a wargame, not a roleplaying game, likely came up with it.

Gnaeus
2010-04-09, 01:53 PM
What could possibly inspire anyone to develop or playtest this class?

The standard answer is that it was created for some DM's girlfriend. She didn't know the game, didn't want a bunch of confusing spells or options, she just wanted to heal people and ride around on a unicorn. It is purely speculation, but it may be the most likely answer to your question.

Mushroom Ninja
2010-04-09, 01:55 PM
Sure, if you have a way of getting turn undead and the Sun domain.

Rainbow Servant, not Radiant servant. Taste the rainbow, bitch!

However, I just remembered Rainbow Servant doesn't work either since it needs arcane.

Yuki Akuma
2010-04-09, 01:57 PM
Rainbow Servant, not Radiant servant. Taste the rainbow, bitch!

However, I just remembered Rainbow Servant doesn't work either since it needs arcane.

Oooh.

Well. Hm. You were still wrong. >.>

Radiant Servant of Pelor wouldn't be a bad PrC if Healers could qualify...

Are there any healing-based PrCs they qualify for?

Optimystik
2010-04-09, 01:59 PM
My vote for healer. Healer really sucks unless you pull rainbow servant shenanigans (I'm AFB, but I think you can do it).


Sure, if you have a way of getting turn undead and the Sun domain.

@ Yuki: You're thinking Radiant servant, I think.
@ Mushroom: Divine casters can't take Rainbow Servant. That includes the Healer.
@ Myself: Ninja'd.


Warmage isn't nearly as bad as some people in this thread are making it out to be. The Advanced Learning feature allows you to pick up a fair number of evocation spells that fall into the utility end. And you get the orb line of spells automatically which are the best targeted damage spells.

I agree with this. In fact, Warmage can even grab some utility spells with Advanced Learning. Not all evocations blast - you can go for Force Ladder or Blacklight or Cacophonic Shield instead and not be pigeonholed.

And of course, they do even better with Rainbow Servant than Sorcerers do, or any PrC that grants domains like Divine Oracle.

Umael
2010-04-09, 02:00 PM
The Healer. They're worse at healing than Clerics, and all they get are healing spells...

*nod*

If another class can do all that your class can do, better, and more, then your class sucks.

(For that reason, I really despise all the "Fireball is a sucky spell for a Wizard" commentary.)

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-09, 02:00 PM
Oooh.

Well. Hm. You were still wrong. >.>

Radiant Servant of Pelor wouldn't be a bad PrC if Healers could qualify...

Are there any healing-based PrCs they qualify for?

combat medic i belive

sonofzeal
2010-04-09, 02:00 PM
I've played a Healer, and yeah they suck. Your best bet is to go Diplomancer, as that'll give you something to do when not patching people together.

Of course, the ability to reverse pretty much everything is kind of awesome in and of itself. In the game I was in, I could basically counter out any single action an enemy made that wasn't environmental until I started running out of spells, which rarely happened. When you're healing more with a cantrip than most people can with Cure Light, healing starts becoming a little more viable.

Kobold-Bard
2010-04-09, 02:00 PM
...I've never seen a healer do any thing other then heal....

That's the point of them isn't it?

Gnaeus
2010-04-09, 02:00 PM
Sure, if you have a way of getting turn undead and the Sun domain.

Contemplative + Sacred Exorcist will get you there. You can't take the entire class pre-epic, but you can get contemplative 6 for sun and good domains, then sacred exorcist.

But Rainbow Servant doesn't require Sun and turn undead. Are you thinking of RSoPelor?

Ninjas. But at least I answered this one.

Radiant Servant of Pelor wouldn't be a bad PrC if Healers could qualify...



Can you get to rainbow servant with alternate source spell?

Optimystik
2010-04-09, 02:03 PM
Are there any healing-based PrCs they qualify for?

Apostle of Peace :smalltongue:
Not exactly "healing-based" but that's really all they can do, too. They get more utility spells and the CL stacks. Also Turn Undead, which is nice. Oh, and AoP are SAD.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-09, 02:06 PM
That's the point of them isn't it?

and thats what makes them worse

Thrawn183
2010-04-09, 02:23 PM
Heh, my group always rules that healers become spontaneous casters that know all the spells on their list (like warmages). So I'm used to Healers kicking some serious arse in my groups.

I would like to mention though, that healers get mass heal as an 8th level spell, which should be the only 8th level spell they ever prepare. So they really become pretty amazing at level 15 onwards rather than 17.

Seffbasilisk
2010-04-09, 02:31 PM
First to mention this here, and am slightly surprised at it, but for your perusal, I submit:

The Wu Jen.

I'll admit, I enjoy the CL boost, and the spell-secrets. But the spell list makes you think of the wizard's retarded cousin.

The taboos too.

I'll admit it could be very flavorful, but as it's written, it seems to be 'specialize, to get circumstance dictated bonuses, or you could lose all casting'.

All the negatives of wizards, and then some...

sonofzeal
2010-04-09, 02:32 PM
I've never seen a healer do any thing other then heal.
My healer did the following...



- Healing (of course; at level 8 I was healing 6 with a Cure Minor and 1d8+12 with a Cure Light)

- Buffing (Protection from Evil, Sanctuary, etc)

- Diplomancy (oh god the diplomancy!)

- Tanking (with Vow of Nonviolence and Vow of Peace, she virtually never took any damage, and the healbot is a logical first target anyway unlike a beatstick)

- Battlefield Control (Calm Emotions aura from Vow of Peace meant she could almost invariably stop most hostile sentients in their tracks; also attacks of opportunity with a sickle used for tripping)


.....now, many of those were done fairly poorly, or could have been done just as well by other classes with the same feats, but the result kind of worked.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-09, 02:42 PM
My healer did the following...



- Healing (of course; at level 8 I was healing 6 with a Cure Minor and 1d8+12 with a Cure Light)

- Buffing (Protection from Evil, Sanctuary, etc)

- Diplomancy (oh god the diplomancy!)

- Tanking (with Vow of Nonviolence and Vow of Peace, she virtually never took any damage, and the healbot is a logical first target anyway unlike a beatstick)

- Battlefield Control (Calm Emotions aura from Vow of Peace meant she could almost invariably stop most hostile sentients in their tracks; also attacks of opportunity with a sickle used for tripping)


.....now, many of those were done fairly poorly, or could have been done just as well by other classes with the same feats, but the result kind of worked.

so the first three are relevent however cleric beats them in almost every category and the last two are from feats.
The healer in our group did other stuff that was usefull but that was stricktly on the feats she had which in theory she could have done with Any class.

Starbuck_II
2010-04-09, 02:43 PM
First to mention this here, and am slightly surprised at it, but for your perusal, I submit:

The Wu Jen.

I'll admit, I enjoy the CL boost, and the spell-secrets. But the spell list makes you think of the wizard's retarded cousin.

The taboos too.

I'll admit it could be very flavorful, but as it's written, it seems to be 'specialize, to get circumstance dictated bonuses, or you could lose all casting'.

All the negatives of wizards, and then some...

Dude, Snake Darts. Nuff said. Read that spell one more time. Wu Jen only.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-09, 02:45 PM
Dude, Snake Darts. Nuff said.

Agreed. Wujen Kick some ass.. They have some decent debuffs IMO. Lots of con damage getting thrown around.. even an AOE con dmg spell at first level.

Optimystik
2010-04-09, 02:46 PM
I'll admit, I enjoy the CL boost, and the spell-secrets. But the spell list makes you think of the wizard's retarded cousin.

Nah, they have the essentials. Alter Self, Invisibility, Polymorph, Mind Blank, (Limited) Wish, etc. That alone puts them some distance ahead of Warmagi and even Dread Necros. And as prepared casters, they can pick up niche spells without hurting everyday effectiveness. Plus, they can qualify for some powerful PrCS like MotAO.

Shugenja is quite a bit weaker.

sonofzeal
2010-04-09, 03:01 PM
so the first three are relevent however cleric beats them in almost every category and the last two are from feats.
The healer in our group did other stuff that was usefull but that was stricktly on the feats she had which in theory she could have done with Any class.
That's the interesting thing though - even if the class sucks, a character with that class can actually do pretty well, even without gamebreaking munchkinness. All I did was give her a couple of eminently appropriate feats, slap on some basic gear, and... y'know, it worked.

JaronK
2010-04-09, 03:04 PM
The main problem with the Wu Jen is it looks so much like a Wizard that it has to be compared to the Wizard, and unless you're an Archivist that's always a bad comparison. Sorcerers have a similar problem due to being printed right in front of Wizards.

But the Wu Jen class itself is quite good.

JaronK

Godskook
2010-04-09, 03:04 PM
And as prepared casters, they can pick up niche spells without hurting everyday effectiveness. Plus, they can qualify for some powerful PrCS like MotAO.

But MotAO is full of Sorcerers and Warmages...

Arcane Preparation is fun that way.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-09, 03:04 PM
That's the interesting thing though - even if the class sucks, a character with that class can actually do pretty well, even without gamebreaking munchkinness. All I did was give her a couple of eminently appropriate feats, slap on some basic gear, and... y'know, it worked.

ya but those feats are questionable specific to your example plus we where not playing a highend game we play alot of E6 and low magic games.

sonofzeal
2010-04-09, 03:09 PM
ya but those feats are questionable specific to your example plus we where not playing a highend game we play alot of E6 and low magic games.
None of that undermines my point - that straight class comparisons ("omg healer is worse than cleric in every way") fail to capture the real picture, where sub-par classes are entirely manageable in actual gameplay and that a low end Healer (Tier 5) and a low end Cleric (Tier 1) can be in the same party without a massive discrepancy of power if they each find their niche.

Optimystik
2010-04-09, 03:11 PM
That's the interesting thing though - even if the class sucks, a character with that class can actually do pretty well, even without gamebreaking munchkinness. All I did was give her a couple of eminently appropriate feats, slap on some basic gear, and... y'know, it worked.

That indicates more the success of your group than your class. A Healer alone must rely on their companion to tank everything, a slow and dicey process even in the best of times. Fail one saving throw and you risk being knocked out of the game - your companion will succumb quickly, and you will follow suit. And because you must spend your actions healing instead of ending the encounter sooner, it drags on... and on... and on.

And yes, the above is an "actual gameplay" scenario. If a Healer is separated from the group (or worse, starts a solo adventure) they will be unimaginably crippled.


But MotAO is full of Sorcerers and Warmages...

Arcane Preparation is fun that way.

Wu Jen don't need to blow a feat though :smalltongue:

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-09, 03:13 PM
None of that undermines my point - that straight class comparisons ("omg healer is worse than cleric in every way") fail to capture the real picture, where sub-par classes are entirely manageable in actual gameplay and that a low end Healer (Tier 5) and a low end Cleric (Tier 1) can be in the same party without a massive discrepancy of power if they each find their niche.

I disagree.

Strait class comparison does take it into account. Healer is subpar in game play and thoretical. The only reason the "characters where decent" had nothing to do with the class it had to do with the feats.

Healer is subpar period. you example didn't prove that it wasn't.


Optimystik: though wouldn't you agree that it had less to do with the class and more to do with the feats?

Mauther
2010-04-09, 03:20 PM
So no anti-love yet for the Adept? I defy you to find a worse class.

DragoonWraith
2010-04-09, 03:28 PM
I disagree about the Warmage being so bad, honestly. True, it's a blaster, which is not a place where arcane classes traditionally are at their best, but it's good a being a blaster.
Not really. It doesn't even get the best direct damage spells on the Sor/Wiz list, Warmage Edge is a joke (and a bad one at that), and spontaneity doesn't really help when you're a blaster because you're only going to be blasting anyway. Both a Wizard and a Sorcerer can do blasting better, and blasting is the weakest thing either class can do - in fact, for the most part, they're balanced when they do blasting. The Warmage is still weaker than either.

Optimystik
2010-04-09, 03:29 PM
Optimystik: though wouldn't you agree that it had less to do with the class and more to do with the feats?

For Healer, or Wu Jen?

I was saying Wu Jen can enter MotAO and in fact gain better benefits than a Sorcerer (more spells, drawn from the sor/wiz list - meaning they now have access to two lists instead of one), without wasting a feat on Arcane Preparation since they already prepare spells.


So no anti-love yet for the Adept? I defy you to find a worse class.

Adept is more powerful than Healer for most levels.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-09, 03:29 PM
So no anti-love yet for the Adept? I defy you to find a worse class.

actualy the adept isn't that bad. They get familiars there spell list is ok.
And they get a d6 HD.


There not great but there not terrible either. I've actualy played them and there fun.


EDIT:

Optimystik:

I was talking about

That indicates more the success of your group than your class. A Healer alone must rely on their companion to tank everything, a slow and dicey process even in the best of times. Fail one saving throw and you risk being knocked out of the game - your companion will succumb quickly, and you will follow suit. And because you must spend your actions healing instead of ending the encounter sooner, it drags on... and on... and on.

And yes, the above is an "actual gameplay" scenario. If a Healer is separated from the group (or worse, starts a solo adventure) they will be unimaginably crippled.

Eldariel
2010-04-09, 03:32 PM
actualy the adept isn't that bad. They get familiars there spell list is ok.
And they get a d6 HD.

There not great but there not terrible either. I've actualy played them and there fun.

Indeed, it's fully possible to school most non-casters with Adept. Their spell list is shallow, but every level has few incredible ones which is enough to carry them over as long as anything isn't banned. Polymorph is the most crucial; it being banned is a huge drawback for the Adepts.

RagnaroksChosen
2010-04-09, 03:37 PM
Indeed, it's fully possible to school most non-casters with Adept. Their spell list is shallow, but every level has few incredible ones which is enough to carry them over as long as anything isn't banned. Polymorph is the most crucial; it being banned is a huge drawback for the Adepts.

its not that bad... seing as the time i played one polymorph was banned.

through around lots of scorching rays and buffs.

sonofzeal
2010-04-09, 03:45 PM
That indicates more the success of your group than your class. A Healer alone must rely on their companion to tank everything, a slow and dicey process even in the best of times. Fail one saving throw and you risk being knocked out of the game - your companion will succumb quickly, and you will follow suit. And because you must spend your actions healing instead of ending the encounter sooner, it drags on... and on... and on.

And yes, the above is an "actual gameplay" scenario. If a Healer is separated from the group (or worse, starts a solo adventure) they will be unimaginably crippled.
Granted that it was a "success of our group" rather than a success of the class. Our particular group never ran into any of the problems you mentioned; my Healer never got knocked out (I think she took maybe 6 damage the entire campaign and never got hit hard by saving throws), and her diplomancy was such that, separated from the group, she could have soloed a decent number of our adventures without hardly casting a spell. I'll completely admit that's got everything to do with Vow of Peace and diplomancy being a nasty combination, but there are other ways to be more effective with a Healer (such as Cloudy Conjuration, clever use of gear, or just good RP).

Point is... Healer's a terrible class, but a Healer is by no means a terrible character, and the gap between Tier 1 and Tier 5 in most games is actually entirely manageable.

JaronK
2010-04-09, 03:45 PM
So no anti-love yet for the Adept? I defy you to find a worse class.

I'd take Adept over Healer any day. They've actually got some solid and useful spells.

JaronK

JaronK
2010-04-09, 03:47 PM
Point is... Healer's a terrible class, but a Healer is by no means a terrible character, and the gap between Tier 1 and Tier 5 in most games is actually entirely manageable.

All classes can of course be played well (I've managed to make a Commoner work in a game). But the T1-T5 thing only works if the T1s behave themselves. Sounds like in your group they do, which is good. Let's face it, a Wizard could have replaced your healer entirely by getting the group to turn into Necropolitans and then using Animate Dead to get a few Necrosis Carnexes. Throw in Desecrate (which you can get via a ring) and an evil alter and you're set. None of that cost anything more than a touch of gold.

JaronK

Draz74
2010-04-09, 03:52 PM
And your party's living souls. :smalltongue:

Solarn
2010-04-09, 03:58 PM
Damn. I know this is D&D and so I really should give you a pass, but I just feel an overwhelming urge to say "LOL roleplaying is SRS BSNS".

I guess you can put it down to my different RPG upbringing. I haven't even tried D&D until I had over 6 years of playing other games, all of which had subcultures much more focused on fluff than crunch, even if the games themselves were of the hack and slash variety.

So whenever I see someone put a class down for being suboptimal, I just want to mock them into a whimpering ball of self-doubt because something in my mind keeps screaming "THAT IS NOT HOW YOU PLAY GAMES!" at me.

Nidogg
2010-04-09, 03:59 PM
By that nature, I think Sorcerers are probably the worst full caster, in the sense that they can bottom out worse than any other class (at least, while still retaining their casting).

Not actually. The extra SPD is awesome at lower levels and if you dont coppy spells into your spellbook your spell range compared to wizard are Pretty similar...
May I also direct you to the sorceror here...
I Dont need to prepare spell slots! (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0633.html)

JaronK
2010-04-09, 04:02 PM
And your party's living souls. :smalltongue:

Eh, that's a small price!

JaronK

Saph
2010-04-09, 04:04 PM
Let's face it, a Wizard could have replaced your healer entirely by getting the group to turn into Necropolitans and then using Animate Dead to get a few Necrosis Carnexes. Throw in Desecrate (which you can get via a ring) and an evil alter and you're set. None of that cost anything more than a touch of gold.

I always find this kind of CharOp reasoning hilarious. :P

"What do you mean you don't want to be turned into a desecrated undead? I just demonstrated that it would make you more powerful, didn't I?"

sonofzeal
2010-04-09, 04:04 PM
All classes can of course be played well (I've managed to make a Commoner work in a game). But the T1-T5 thing only works if the T1s behave themselves. Sounds like in your group they do, which is good. Let's face it, a Wizard could have replaced your healer entirely by getting the group to turn into Necropolitans and then using Animate Dead to get a few Necrosis Carnexes. Throw in Desecrate (which you can get via a ring) and an evil alter and you're set. None of that cost anything more than a touch of gold.

JaronK
Agreed he could, but I suspect in most groups he wouldn't, especially if there's already a dedicated healbot in the group who can heal over half anyone's max health in a single standard action and who doesn't require that the whole party become undead (and evil) and travel around with horrible twisted mockeries of nature all the time. Because, let's face it, the Necrosis Carnexes method is necessarily going to have some significant RP issues (not to mention the difficulty protecting them and that you'll need quite a lot to get reasonable in-combat healing).

Wizard is an objectively better class than Healer, hands-down, especially when it comes to flexibility. But... eh, I think people have a tendency to take that too far, to mean more than it does for actual group play. People confuse flexibility (which is what your Tier system measures, if I'm not mistaken) with power (which is a bit different). In group play, it works fine to have a specialty, and general weakness in other areas doesn't matter so much. This isn't an attack on your Tier system, which I think is highly useful for what it does, but I do believe the difference in power between a terrible class and an awesome class is much narrower than most people assume, around actual tables.

JaronK
2010-04-09, 04:06 PM
I always find this kind of CharOp reasoning hilarious. :P

"What do you mean you don't want to be turned into a desecrated undead? I just demonstrated that it would make you more powerful, didn't I?"

"What do you mean you don't want immortality and protection against most things hurting you? We're fighting to save the world from [World threatening thing X]! Now's not the time to get squeamish! Now get in there and get made undead so we can save your family and everyone you've ever loved, we can always reverse the procedure after the world is safe."

JaronK

Gorbash
2010-04-09, 04:12 PM
Damn. I know this is D&D and so I really should give you a pass, but I just feel an overwhelming urge to say "LOL roleplaying is SRS BSNS".

I guess you can put it down to my different RPG upbringing. I haven't even tried D&D until I had over 6 years of playing other games, all of which had subcultures much more focused on fluff than crunch, even if the games themselves were of the hack and slash variety.

So whenever I see someone put a class down for being suboptimal, I just want to mock them into a whimpering ball of self-doubt because something in my mind keeps screaming "THAT IS NOT HOW YOU PLAY GAMES!" at me.

We're not playing a game now, we're discussing the technical issues of a class. Why is that such a problem?

Kylarra
2010-04-09, 04:15 PM
"What do you mean you don't want immortality and protection against most things hurting you? We're fighting to save the world from [World threatening thing X]! Now's not the time to get squeamish! Now get in there and get made undead so we can save your family and everyone you've ever loved, we can always reverse the procedure after the world is safe."

JaronK"Really? 34 Int and the best solution you can come up with is a way to placate your undead fetish?"

Saph
2010-04-09, 04:15 PM
"What do you mean you don't want immortality and protection against most things hurting you? We're fighting to save the world from [World threatening thing X]! Now's not the time to get squeamish! Now get in there and get made undead so we can save your family and everyone you've ever loved, we can always reverse the procedure after the world is safe."

Funny thing about players, they have their own goals for their characters. A surprising amount of the time, those goals don't involve being turned into an unholy abomination through a ritual of horrible torture, even if it would make them more powerful. Bizarre, I know. :smalltongue:

Point being, it ain't the most practical advice you're giving.

Optimystik
2010-04-09, 04:18 PM
Optimystik:

I was talking about

I'm still not sure what you mean. sonofzeal was saying - "Healer isn't that bad, my group performed quite well while I was playing one" to which I replied "a good group can excel even if one class is bad" and showed how a Healer is absolutely awful away from said group as proof.


Point is... Healer's a terrible class, but a Healer is by no means a terrible character, and the gap between Tier 1 and Tier 5 in most games is actually entirely manageable.

"Character" depends very much on the player (both style and skill level) and as such I don't include it in power discussions.

A well-played Soulknife can decimate a badly-played Warblade (both 1v1, and facing equal level-appropriate challenges.) That says nothing about the two classes.

Oslecamo
2010-04-09, 04:18 PM
"What do you mean you don't want immortality and protection against most things hurting you? We're fighting to save the world from [World threatening thing X]! Now's not the time to get squeamish! Now get in there and get made undead so we can save your family and everyone you've ever loved, we can always reverse the procedure after the world is safe."


Says who? You can only reverse undeath with true ressurection, so it's only guaranteed for pretty high level parties.:smallamused:

Plus, the BBEG's evil cleric will be cackiling madly when he discovers he can just gain control of the "heros" with his rebuke atempts. What will that puny +2 turn resistance do to save you?:smallbiggrin:

Optimystik
2010-04-09, 04:20 PM
Says who? You can only reverse undeath with true ressurection, so it's only guaranteed for pretty high level parties.:smallamused:

Where'd you get that? Normal Resurrection works just fine.

JaronK
2010-04-09, 04:24 PM
Says who? You can only reverse undeath with true ressurection, so it's only guaranteed for pretty high level parties.:smallamused:

Plus, the BBEG's evil cleric will be cackiling madly when he discovers he can just gain control of the "heros" with his rebuke atempts. What will that puny +2 turn resistance do to save you?:smallbiggrin:

That's why step 1 after Necropolitan is to disguise yourself as living. Guess how many Clerics have a high enough spot check to notice the difference.

Besides, there are plenty of other ways to heal, I just happen to like undead.

JaronK

Mauther
2010-04-09, 04:27 PM
I'd take Adept over Healer any day. They've actually got some solid and useful spells.

JaronK

The difference is the healer's not bad at what it does. Okay, its not real good at anything else, but its a respectable medic. The adept isn't good at anything. Okay, it gets a familiar, whoopee. And it has all of the knowledge skills (WOW), otherwise the skills are the same the healer. What exactly does that do for you? At least the healer has some armor proficiency and can use a sticking sheild, plus good skills per level (5+INT according to the wiki, which just doesn't seem right). Sticking with pure magical punching power, the adept caps at 3 spells per level per day (plus any bonus spells), with 4 class levels between each new spell level. So at the totally awesome level 11, they've got three 1st level spells, three 2nd level spells, and two 3rd level spells (3/3/2) Yes you've got some combat spells (scorching ray at caster level 4 with a bonus spell, mighty lightning bolt at caster level 8 again with a bonus spell). At least the Healer has access to 9th level spells and the same caster progression as the druid. Healer still sucks compared to other divine casters, but come on, the adept sucks in every way possible.

Kobold-Bard
2010-04-09, 04:27 PM
That's why step 1 after Necropolitan is to disguise yourself as living. Guess how many Clerics have a high enough spot check to notice the difference.

Besides, there are plenty of other ways to heal, I just happen to like undead.

JaronK

Do you like Undead?

Or do you like Undead?

:smallamused: (I have nothing to contribute, sorry)

Glimbur
2010-04-09, 04:34 PM
Does Divine Crusader from Complete Divine count as a full caster? They do get a ninth level spell, and the anemic spell selection makes it not very appealing.

Solarn
2010-04-09, 04:37 PM
We're not playing a game now, we're discussing the technical issues of a class. Why is that such a problem?
Because your discussion of it reflects on how you play the game. The very idea of judging classes by their abstract "power" sounds wrong to me.

Basically, the larger D&D community, even the smart people, seem to be geared towards powergaming. Even people who understand the more cerebral aspects of roleplaying use optimization to judge how "good" a character is.

On the other hand, powergaming is anathema for the Hungarian RPG community (including those who play D&D), which I grew up in. Powergamers are mocked, shunned, they aren't even let into most groups or if they are, the DM goes out of their way to throw them in situations that can't be solved by rolling dice. We have derogatory nicknames for people who optimize their characters.

I know I'm being judgmental, but I just don't see the fun of trying so hard to win in a game where you can't even lose.

Tinydwarfman
2010-04-09, 04:40 PM
I know I'm being judgmental, but I just don't see the fun of trying so hard to win in a game where you can't even lose.

Changes from group to group. In my book, a TPK is losing.

peacenlove
2010-04-09, 04:41 PM
For player characters? Shadowcaster as written in ToM.
Few if any options, prestige classes, mysteries.
No way to reselect your mysteries (cmon even the sorcerer has a way :smallmad:)
Limited amount of mysteries both in quantity and in variety.
And lastly no comparability with existing material.
(although as NPC's they rock hard :smallamused:)

sonofzeal
2010-04-09, 04:41 PM
"Character" depends very much on the player (both style and skill level) and as such I don't include it in power discussions.

A well-played Soulknife can decimate a badly-played Warblade (both 1v1, and facing equal level-appropriate challenges.) That says nothing about the two classes.
Exactly.

I do think it says something though. I think what it says is that people get too hung up on the power imbalance. Certainly some classes are strictly better than others, but I don't think it makes as much actual difference as people generally assume on these boards. I think that's an important caveat when talking about the "worst" class in any category.

Amphetryon
2010-04-09, 04:43 PM
Basically, the larger D&D community that posts on an internet forum dedicated to the discussion of primarily mechanical aspects of the game, even the smart people, seem to be geared towards powergaming.Fixed that for you. :smallwink:

Optimystik
2010-04-09, 04:46 PM
Exactly.

I do think it says something though. I think what it says is that people get too hung up on the power imbalance. Certainly some classes are strictly better than others, but I don't think it makes as much actual difference as people generally assume on these boards. I think that's an important caveat when talking about the "worst" class in any category.

But we have to strip out subjective considerations like the player. Otherwise we have no basis for comparing anything.

It makes no actual difference only if you know what you're in for. Zeal, you are very experienced at D&D, and your higher-tiered party did not hog the limelight - thus you were able to remain effective even with a weak class.

But for newer players, the power disparities become very relevant, very quickly. Worse, the very name "Healer" is misleading; a newcomer to D&D who picked up the Miniatures Handbook would think "ah, this class must be the best at healing! It's Right There On the Tin!" Except the tin is a cake, and the cake is a lie.

Solarn
2010-04-09, 04:54 PM
Fixed that for you. :smallwink:
The forum isn't specifically dedicated to game mechanics though. It's dedicated to all roleplaying. You just never discuss anything else.

JaronK
2010-04-09, 05:05 PM
The difference is the healer's not bad at what it does. Okay, its not real good at anything else, but its a respectable medic.

Actually it's a lame medic. Out of combat healing is the most useful, and in combat healing is best when it does something else that's useful. The Healer sucks at both of these. Crusaders can do in combat and out of combat healing well. Dread Necromancers do both well if their target is undead or Tomb Tainted. Binders do out of combat healing well. Clerics can be amazing at both. Healers suck at this. The best out of combat healing spells are the Vigor line (preferably persisted if we're talking about the mass vigors) which Healers don't have. Other all day use healing abilities are found on a variety of classes... but not Healers.

Seriously, Healers are not good at healing.


The adept isn't good at anything. Okay, it gets a familiar, whoopee. And it has all of the knowledge skills (WOW), otherwise the skills are the same the healer. What exactly does that do for you?

Lets you rock Knowledge Devotion + Scorching Ray? And you can cast Polymorph? These things are useful, as opposed to in combat Cure spells. Mid combat healing doesn't get decent until Heal.

JaronK

Thrawn183
2010-04-09, 05:15 PM
I'd like to mention that the Healer gets the mass cure spells a full spell level earlier than anyone else (mass cure light starting as a 4th level spell instead of a 5th level spell) and mass heal as an 8th level spell.

You really shouldn't go running around saying that other classes can heal better than a healer can.

Yuki Akuma
2010-04-09, 05:16 PM
The forum isn't specifically dedicated to game mechanics though. It's dedicated to all roleplaying. You just never discuss anything else.

Well, you know, apart from all those threads about roleplaying and gaming etiquette.

Tinydwarfman
2010-04-09, 05:17 PM
The forum isn't specifically dedicated to game mechanics though. It's dedicated to all roleplaying. You just never discuss anything else.

Wow, you really need to have a closer look there. My current view of the front page, arrows to threads not about mechanics.
http://img691.imageshack.us/img691/3189/frontpage.gif


EDIT: fixed pic.

Solarn
2010-04-09, 05:17 PM
Well, you know, apart from all those threads about roleplaying and gaming etiquette.

Wow, you really need to have a closer look there. My current view of the front page, arrows to threads not about mechanics.

file:///D:/Users/Connor/Desktop/front%20page.jpg

It was hyperbole and you're quite right. In fact, you make a better point against Amphetryon's claim than I did.

JaronK
2010-04-09, 05:24 PM
I'd like to mention that the Healer gets the mass cure spells a full spell level earlier than anyone else (mass cure light starting as a 4th level spell instead of a 5th level spell) and mass heal as an 8th level spell.

Clerics have Lesser Mass Vigor at 3rd level, which is a better spell than Mass Cure Light by quite a bit. Vigorous Circle at 5 or 6. And they can persist either of those. Meanwhile, all the other classes I mentioned can heal the entire party without any cost during downtime (no lost spell slots).

Yeah, they're all better at it.

JaronK

Shpadoinkle
2010-04-09, 05:28 PM
If you gave Healers the ability to cast thier touch spells at a range of 5 feet per level (but ONLY the spells they get from the Healer class) and expanded their spell list a bit to include some of the wizard's abjurations they'd actually be decent. As it is, they're just clerics, but worse in literally every possible way (except maybe for the unicorn companion.)

JaronK
2010-04-09, 05:31 PM
They definitely need an expanded spell list with the best healing spells as well as solid defensive buffs and maybe some counterspelling capability. Also, some all day free healing ability would be pretty important, like a fast healing aura.

JaronK

Vizzerdrix
2010-04-09, 05:33 PM
Because your discussion of it reflects on how you play the game. The very idea of judging classes by their abstract "power" sounds wrong to me.

Basically, the larger D&D community, even the smart people, seem to be geared towards powergaming. Even people who understand the more cerebral aspects of roleplaying use optimization to judge how "good" a character is.

On the other hand, powergaming is anathema for the Hungarian RPG community (including those who play D&D), which I grew up in. Powergamers are mocked, shunned, they aren't even let into most groups or if they are, the DM goes out of their way to throw them in situations that can't be solved by rolling dice. We have derogatory nicknames for people who optimize their characters.

I know I'm being judgmental, but I just don't see the fun of trying so hard to win in a game where you can't even lose.

Wow. Honestly? It's common to bully people for playing the game the way they want to? What a bunch of hate mongers and bullies. Ever think that maybe it isn't about winning or loosing? Some people prefer the action aspect of the game. Some people prefer solving puzzles. Picking on people for liking these parts of the game is despicable and low. People that take the game to that level of elitism need to walk away from the hobby until they can grasp the concept that games are ment to be fun for all involved.

Tehnar
2010-04-09, 05:36 PM
I disagree that in combat healing is worthless. I feel it is a pretty valid option, but dependent on the power level though.

In a game with nightstick DMM persist, Incantantrix, et al, yeah its a waste of a standard action. In other kinds of games I feel it is a pretty good way to use your actions.

That being said, I don't think Healers are poor healers. They even get some pretty nifty abilities in addition to their spells. The problem is they don't have a few utility spells all casters should have, like dispel.

Solarn
2010-04-09, 05:43 PM
Wow. Honestly? It's common to bully people for playing the game the way they want to? What a bunch of hate mongers and bullies. Ever think that maybe it isn't about winning or loosing? Some people prefer the action aspect of the game. Some people prefer solving puzzles. Picking on people for liking these parts of the game is despicable and low. People that take the game to that level of elitism need to walk away from the hobby until they can grasp the concept that games are ment to be fun for all involved.
Heh. Funny that you say that when powergaming is fun only for the players doing it and pretty much ruins the fun for everyone else. One powergamer could ruin a session for an entire group. And how is snubbing that certain kind of player more elitist than grading character classes (including ones others may like) based on how optimal their abilities are?

Tavar
2010-04-09, 05:51 PM
I disagree that in combat healing is worthless. I feel it is a pretty valid option, but dependent on the power level though.

In a game with nightstick DMM persist, Incantantrix, et al, yeah its a waste of a standard action. In other kinds of games I feel it is a pretty good way to use your actions.
I've never seen a case where IC healing has been worth it, unless you're optimizing it to that level. Otherwise, you're pretty much spending an action plus limited resources to undo something that only costs actions. How is that a good trade? Never mind the fact that you have to potentially put yourself at risk in order to heal, so you're giving the enemy another chance to attack.

Solarn
2010-04-09, 05:54 PM
I've never seen a case where IC healing has been worth it, unless you're optimizing it to that level. Otherwise, you're pretty much spending an action plus limited resources to undo something that only costs actions. How is that a good trade? Never mind the fact that you have to potentially put yourself at risk in order to heal, so you're giving the enemy another chance to attack.
It's a good trade in that it makes the character being healed not die.

Optimystik
2010-04-09, 05:54 PM
Well, you know, apart from all those threads about roleplaying and gaming etiquette.

And fluff, flavor, backstories...


I'd like to mention that the Healer gets the mass cure spells a full spell level earlier than anyone else (mass cure light starting as a 4th level spell instead of a 5th level spell) and mass heal as an 8th level spell.

You really shouldn't go running around saying that other classes can heal better than a healer can.

Mass Lesser Vigor is 3rd level, much more useful than MCL, and Healers will never see it.


They definitely need an expanded spell list with the best healing spells as well as solid defensive buffs and maybe some counterspelling capability. Also, some all day free healing ability would be pretty important, like a fast healing aura.

JaronK

And they need to spontaneously cast their entire list, which is tiny anyway.
Also, an advanced learning for either Conjuration (Healing), or Abjurations.


It's a good trade in that it makes the character being healed not die.

So does, y'know, killing the enemy.

Kobold-Bard
2010-04-09, 05:56 PM
I've never seen a case where IC healing has been worth it, unless you're optimizing it to that level. Otherwise, you're pretty much spending an action plus limited resources to undo something that only costs actions. How is that a good trade? Never mind the fact that you have to potentially put yourself at risk in order to heal, so you're giving the enemy another chance to attack.

It keeps people alive sometimes (especially in games I've played in), it's not great but it does a job quite well.

Solarn
2010-04-09, 05:59 PM
So does, y'know, killing the enemy.
Except if you can't kill the enemy fast enough for that. Then you suddenly wish someone was healing you while you fought.

Optimystik
2010-04-09, 06:01 PM
Except if you can't kill the enemy fast enough for that. Then you suddenly wish someone was healing you while you fought.

There are still many other options available before healing HP damage, such as creating summons to draw fire, illusions to confound, walls and other barriers to control the battlefield, or otherwise disabling the enemy without killing them.

Healing is not efficient - while it keeps the party alive, it does nothing to end the battle. Stopping the enemy does both.

Tavar
2010-04-09, 06:03 PM
It keeps people alive sometimes (especially in games I've played in), it's not great but it does a job quite well.

So, after spending a slot for some healing, they're now only on the ground. So the spend an action picking up their weapon, then getting up, the latter of which provokes an AOO. And now they're back down, on the ground, unconscious. The only thing that's changed is that the enemy has had another action, and you're one spell slot down.

Keep in mind, this isn't counting stuff like Heal(which can be effective), nor is it saying that healing isn't needed, just in combat healing generally takes away more than it gives.

Tinydwarfman
2010-04-09, 06:08 PM
The thing is for in-combat healing, you have to weigh the benefits of healing, let's say, 3d6+5, vs other things you could do in your turn. There are situation where it is definitely more advantageous to heal, but healing does not take a character out of danger. Benign Transposition is actually a far better "healing" spell, as it takes a character out of danger.

Akal Saris
2010-04-09, 06:15 PM
I've actually written a handbook (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=6849.0)for the Healer class, since I was interested in whether the class was really hopeless. I can sum up the handbook as: the Healer is bad, but not that bad with expanded books. If you allow the spells from BoED, the healer is about on par with the shugenja and wu jen, and if you also allow the spells suggested from the Spell Compendium, then it's probably middle of the road/tier 3.

Unlike JaronK, I'd rather have a Healer in my party than an adept (I'd put healers at around tier 4, they are slightly better at their role than the NPC class) - but seriously, there's no mechanical reason to take the class, except for players who intentionally want to start at lower on the tier range/class totem pole or play as a heal-bot from levels 1-5 before the healing boost sucks. I'm also not convinced that there's a compelling RP reason to take the class if the cloistered cleric variant is also allowed.

Worst full caster? Possibly, if not tied with the warmage for that role. But being the worst full caster is like being worst olympic skater - you're still better than an entire mob of pathetic classes like truenamer, monk, and samurai.

My intro to the handbook:
Let's get one thing off the table: Healers are inferior to clerics and druids.

That's right. Inferior. If you're playing one, it's more like being a favored soul or bard - you have less flexibility with your spells, and you're more of a support player than anything else. That doesn't mean you can't contribute to your party in a meaningful way - it just means that you aren't going to be in the spotlight as often.

Anytime you rate various classes, such as with JaronK's Tier system, the Healer is going to come out looking worse than it actually is, because it's competing against two of the best classes in the game. Players can get away with playing monks and other awful melee classes, because there's no Tier 1 pure melee class - at worse you're going to compare a monk with a swordsage. Anyone playing a Healer has to justify why she isn't playing a cleric or druid.

So. Healing. Healing gets a pretty bad rep around most CharOp forums because it is near-impossible to optimize healing well enough to counter an opponent reliably, whereas damage and battlefield control spells are both easier to optimize and more effective at finishing an encounter. And the simple truth is that a dedicated healer is NOT necessary to a party, which most new players don't really grasp. They see that every party has a cleric or druid, and then think that every party needs a healer to step up and heal the fighter every round in combat.

Well, this isn't WoW, and you don't need a dedicated healer. You need somebody who can patch up the party after a fight with the wand of cure light wounds. If everyone kills the opponent with 400 damage in two rounds, or if the opponent spends the whole time being grappled by the druid (instead of the druid standing back and waiting for the monk to take damage), then you've won without wasting any time on healing.

With that said, even though a dedicated healer is not a necessary role, it still can be a useful one. In a low-level game, healing in combat with the Healer is a pretty slick move - if your rogue just took 7 damage to the face and hit the floor, healing him for 1d8+7 is going to keep him in the fight, which means more actions for your side of the table and a very happy rogue.

In the same vein, if you're there on hand to cleanse fear, poison, level and ability drain, or any other effect, you're keeping the team going where otherwise everyone would be running around like a headless chicken. Think of it this way: if battlefield control is the key to winning at D&D, then you are playing a counter-battlefield control class.

The point is that even if a party doesn't need a dedicated "make the hurting stop" guy, having one in the group can still be a huge help. It's like how nobody ever says "Jane! You're playing the party bard this time, we desperately need a character with bardic knowledge and gather info!" But if somebody happens to be playing a character with those skills, it can frequently prove useful to the party.

In some games, healing will remain effective the whole campaign. Sometimes the party and DM are both terrible optimizers, after all. However, most of the time healing stops scaling with in-combat damage around the mid-levels (5th-6th), and doesn't really recover until 11th level with Heal and later Mass Heal. That's a pretty significant chunk of gameplay right there.

For that reason, in the mid-levels a well-played Healer should focus on utility spells and keeping the party free of battlefield control. In the high levels, it again depends on each campaign. Sometimes a game is so lethal that the Healer might spend all of her time casting Heal and Revivify, and in other games she should be helping with countering status effects and providing battlefield control and party buffing. Get a good feel for the combat dynamics of your group and your DM, and your effectiveness as a team player will improve dramatically.

MandibleBones
2010-04-09, 06:29 PM
Guess how many Clerics have a high enough spot check to notice the difference.

A better question might be, "How many clerics have a high enough spellcraft to recognize that your 'humans' are being healed by harm and mass inflict critical wounds spells?"

Edit: And if you want to heal as a wizard, why not take Arcane Devotion: Healing Domain? Sure, to use it to its best ability you'll need to boost wisdom, but a Periapt of Wisdom is cheap and gets you 6th-level spells from which to craft magic items.

Kobold-Bard
2010-04-09, 06:32 PM
A better question might be, "How many clerics have a high enough spellcraft to recognize that your 'humans' are being healed by harm and mass inflict critical wounds spells?"

Edit: And if you want to heal as a wizard, why not take Arcane Devotion: Healing Domain? Sure, to use it to its best ability you'll need to boost wisdom, but a Periapt of Wisdom is cheap and gets you 6th-level spells from which to craft magic items.

Or be an Artificer.

Thrawn183
2010-04-09, 06:38 PM
I don't consider out of combat healing to be much of a consideration when a single feat (touch of healing) can get your entire party to half health without the expenditure of any resources at all.

Runestar
2010-04-09, 06:41 PM
It's a good trade in that it makes the character being healed not die.

I could argue that you could achieve a similar outcome by using that standard action to do something which damages the foe and makes him fall that much faster. It also seems like the most inefficient manner of going about it, because you are doing nothing to reduce the offensive capability of the attacking monster either.

Unless you can heal more damage than the monster is dealing...

Eg: summoning an appropriate creature to grapple/bullrush/trip the offending monster, hitting him with an offensive spell to kill him that much faster, benign transposition to replace the wounded PC with another target. All this not only allow me to save a dying PC, but also has another benefit, so I gain in terms of action economy.

DragoonWraith
2010-04-09, 06:43 PM
Except if you can't kill the enemy fast enough for that. Then you suddenly wish someone was healing you while you fought.
Except the average Cure spell heals one person for less than the average enemy of the same level deals in a single round. So using Cure spells in combat means you will be wasting your turn to mitigate (but not eliminate) the damage to one person. That is just not efficient, no matter what. You might want in combat healing, but Cure is not going to give it to you.

Gorbash
2010-04-09, 06:52 PM
Because your discussion of it reflects on how you play the game. The very idea of judging classes by their abstract "power" sounds wrong to me.

Basically, the larger D&D community, even the smart people, seem to be geared towards powergaming. Even people who understand the more cerebral aspects of roleplaying use optimization to judge how "good" a character is.

On the other hand, powergaming is anathema for the Hungarian RPG community (including those who play D&D), which I grew up in. Powergamers are mocked, shunned, they aren't even let into most groups or if they are, the DM goes out of their way to throw them in situations that can't be solved by rolling dice. We have derogatory nicknames for people who optimize their characters.

I know I'm being judgmental, but I just don't see the fun of trying so hard to win in a game where you can't even lose.

Ah, so you're my northern neighbour. :smallamused:

That's a bad attitude your community has. Optimization is nothing but playing smart, and I don't see why should it be frowned upon, let alone banned.

D&D is a combat oriented system, meaning there's a moderate to high amount of it in every campaign (especially pre-generated ones). So, if your character often gets killed in combat or doesn't contribute much or is outclassed by the rest of the party, there's a good chance you'll get bored.

Sure, your character might have a vast personality and rich background, but you don't really use that in combat situations. The idea of optimization is to make your character good in his role. You do that in every day life, why should D&D be any different?

Jack_Simth
2010-04-09, 06:57 PM
I don't consider out of combat healing to be much of a consideration when a single feat (touch of healing) can get your entire party to half health without the expenditure of any resources at all.Eh, goes better with a Vampiric dagger (magic item compendium) and the Summon Elemental reserve feat. Full out-of-combat healing for the entire party. If you don't mind being Evil, that is.

Solarn
2010-04-09, 07:03 PM
Ah, so you're my northern neighbour. :smallamused:

That's a bad attitude your community has. Optimization is nothing but playing smart, and I don't see why should it be frowned upon, let alone banned.

D&D is a combat oriented system, meaning there's a moderate to high amount of it in every campaign (especially pre-generated ones). So, if your character often gets killed in combat or doesn't contribute much or is outclassed by the rest of the party, there's a good chance you'll get bored.

Sure, your character might have a vast personality and rich background, but you don't really use that in combat situations. The idea of optimization is to make your character good in his role. You do that in every day life, why should D&D be any different?
Yeah, that's why I wrote first thing that I really shouldn't say anything because it's D&D.

Still. If you want to play D&D for the combat aspect, then why do you want to optimize your character to get through combat as fast and unharmed as possible? What comes then? Another combat, which you also get through as fast as possible, until you get to the end of the dungeon, where you will be rewarded with XP, treasure and maybe items which you will then spend to optimize your character even further to get through battles even faster so you can get the treasure at the end of the next dungeon as well which you will spend the same way...

At what point are you actually playing? This is not a game, it's just OCD.

Of course, I'm being a bit facetious here, but this does seem to be the ideal of many players.

deuxhero
2010-04-09, 07:05 PM
Yes you've got some combat spells (scorching ray at caster level 4 with a bonus spell, mighty lightning bolt at caster level 8 again with a bonus spell).

Uh, I think you should look beyond direct damage for offense.

Adepts get sleep (save or lose for 5 HD of creates at a point when foes have under 5 hd) Bestow Curse (50% of being unable to do anything is always painful) Polymorph (always broken) plus a good deal of utility spells. Healers can... heal?

qcontinuum
2010-04-09, 07:16 PM
At what point are you actually playing? This is not a game, it's just OCD.


You're playing when you're figuring out what the best feat choices are to optimize your damage output, or the best equipment to be prepared for whatever baddies show up or traps/puzzles the DM throws at you, or what the tactically optimal move is in the midst of combat. For a person who mostly enjoys the tactical wargaming aspects of D&D (and RPG's in general), that's what makes them happy.

Also, just because you want to play a mechanically optimized character doesn't mean that you don't want to roleplay. Perhaps you're a story-driven, roleplaying-saavy individual who just doesn't want your party member to die because you decided not to spend time on the mechanical aspects of your character and thus weren't able to support the party in killing off the bad guy quickly enough.

Its not a continuum with munchkin at one end and drama queen at the other, its a multi-axis system

Yuki Akuma
2010-04-09, 07:32 PM
I am somewhat insulted by the insinuation that players who enjoy playing effective characters are bad roleplayers, in all honesty. That's pretty rude, and I'm glad I don't live in Hungary.

Gorbash
2010-04-09, 07:33 PM
Still. If you want to play D&D for the combat aspect, then why do you want to optimize your character to get through combat as fast and unharmed as possible?

Because the DM (good one, at least) will then make strategies with his monsters/NPCs that will require me to strategize with what I've got, so it will be challenging.

And I love challenging fights, to think up a way to beat the opponent against whom the usual approach doesn't work.

Not really fun to participate in fights when mechanins of your class won't let you. And that's why you optimize.

Temotei
2010-04-09, 07:34 PM
I am somewhat insulted by the insinuation that players who enjoy playing effective characters are bad roleplayers, in all honesty. That's pretty rude, and I'm glad I don't live in Hungary.

Isn't that a fallacy? Something like the Stormwind fallacy or something?...

Solarn
2010-04-09, 07:38 PM
You're playing when you're figuring out what the best feat choices are to optimize your damage output, or the best equipment to be prepared for whatever baddies show up or traps/puzzles the DM throws at you, or what the tactically optimal move is in the midst of combat. For a person who mostly enjoys the tactical wargaming aspects of D&D (and RPG's in general), that's what makes them happy.

Also, just because you want to play a mechanically optimized character doesn't mean that you don't want to roleplay. Perhaps you're a story-driven, roleplaying-saavy individual who just doesn't want your party member to die because you decided not to spend time on the mechanical aspects of your character and thus weren't able to support the party in killing off the bad guy quickly enough.

Its not a continuum with munchkin at one end and drama queen at the other, its a multi-axis system
Huh. It makes sense. I'm not a wargamer myself, so I never thought of it that way.

Some optimization can be argued for, but at some point, it becomes unsupportable in character (usually where the cheese starts coming in). Beyond that, it's just bad roleplaying and it's no coincidence that the people who would do that are the ones who usually ruin any attempts at serious roleplaying.

In M.A.G.U.S. (the Hungarian fantasy RPG and the most popular RPG in Hungary for an incredibly long time before D&D and Vampire: the Masquerade started taking over) it's within the rules to make a 1st level character with a maxed out weapon skill for throwing knives and then acquire (with some finagling) some masterwork throwing knives laced with the deadliest poison available, by forgoing most other skills necessary for a well-rounded character and selling off their entire starting inventory, thanks to the "choose starting inventory" step of character creation being completely independent of where the character starts or where he is from geographically.
Will this character be able to kill monsters and NPCs he shouldn't be? Yes.
Will he be anything but Death-aligned (M.A.G.U.S. has a Life-Death alignment system instead of Good-Evil)? Not unless the DM is a retard who goes only by what's written clearly in the sourcebooks.
Will he be targeted as soon as he comes into existence by all major crime syndicates and possibly some rather nasty rulers for being a threat to their power? Of course.
Will the player complain about this endlessly because his character was technically within the rules? You betcha.

Yuki Akuma
2010-04-09, 07:42 PM
So, Hungarian roleplayers are mostly made up of elitist bullies? Good to know.

Solarn
2010-04-09, 07:44 PM
{Scrubbed}

pinwiz
2010-04-09, 07:49 PM
First of all i'd like to remind people that everyone has their own likes and dislikes.

I think there's a massive difference between power gamers and munchkins. It can be completely within character and good roleplaying to have your power hungry wizard searching out the best ways to destroy the world.

Basically I'm trying to say that a power gamer is just trying to broaden his effectiveness and prevent his character from dying. A munchkin tries to beat the DM, and the other players.

Just my two copper, for whatever it's worth.

Solarn
2010-04-09, 07:52 PM
First of all i'd like to remind peole that everyone has their own likes and dislikes.

I think there's a massive difference between power gamers and munchkins. It can be completely within character and good roleplaying to have your power hungry wizard searching out the best ways to destroy the world.

Basically I'm trying to say that a power gamer is just trying to broaden his effectiveness and prevent his character from dying. A munchkin tries to beat the DM, and the other players.

Just my two copper, for whatever it's worth.
There's only a very thin line, in my experience. Munchkindom is a natural progression for a player who does nothing else but powergame.

I think the reason for that is that there's nothing in the game mechanics controlling level progression. Spellcasters automatically gain knowledge of new spells with spell levels, feats and skills are gained automatically and even the most obscure classes are available to anyone anywhere if they meet a few requirements. There's no arduous training process to master Great Cleave for example, or to get a level in a powerful prestige class. They just happen and so a dedicated powergamer need never do anything other than fight monsters and distribute skill points.

Gorbash
2010-04-09, 07:57 PM
Munchkindom is a natural progression for a player who does nothing else but powergame.

And why do you assume that a player who power games does only that? :smallconfused:

Amphetryon
2010-04-09, 07:58 PM
a) We're far off-topic at this point.

b) There's a point at which we hit a slippery slope on the power gamer/munchkin debate. Did you put your highest stat in INT, when making a Wizard? That's clearly intending to gain a mechanical advantage. Ultimately the 'roleplay not rollplay' camp, in its most extreme, should either have no knowledge of character sheet or, barring that, assign stats, race, class, and equipment randomly to avoid concerns that they're just trying to get MOAR POWAH.

arguskos
2010-04-09, 07:59 PM
And why do you assume that a player who power games does only that? :smallconfused:
I too wonder this. Does the fact that I make flavorful, interesting, story-driven characters pale before the fact that I ALSO mechanically make them useful? Does the latter vastly outweigh the former, magically? Cause, that's the vibe I'm getting here, and I am unclear as to why that is the case.

Solarn
2010-04-09, 08:03 PM
I too wonder this. Does the fact that I make flavorful, interesting, story-driven characters pale before the fact that I ALSO mechanically make them useful? Does the latter vastly outweigh the former, magically? Cause, that's the vibe I'm getting here, and I am unclear as to why that is the case.
It doesn't. But as I said, after a certain point there's no IC justification for cheese.

DragoonWraith
2010-04-09, 08:04 PM
Solarn, point of interest:

Major Infractions
These are offenses that will garner you an Infraction from a Mod and most likely a modification of the offending post. Major Infractions have a 24 month expiration time and are worth 100 points.

Flaming
Any poster that openly attacks, insults, belittles, or abuses another poster will have their offending post modified and an Infraction issued to them. You can be critical of another poster's viewpoint in a debate, even going as far as to explain why you believe them to be mistaken and backing your points up with rules quotes as appropriate, but the moment your criticism extends to the person who posted that viewpoint, it has crossed the line.

Specific things you cannot do on this message board that might be allowed elsewhere: [...]
Belittling people who care more about mechanics than roleplaying.

arguskos
2010-04-09, 08:10 PM
It doesn't. But as I said, after a certain point there's no IC justification for cheese.
Define "certain point". Is it when I go Wizard 5/Incantrix 10/Wizard +5? Cause, uh, that's GAME DESTROYINGLY powerful if I want it to be, and yet, is simple as can be. Or, is it when someone makes the Mailman build? Or is it Pun-Pun? The point here?

Wording like "certain point" is so ambiguous and vague that it ceases to have relevance in these debates. You could claim (not saying you are, but one could) that Fighter is overpowered, and anyone who allows it is a moron. This may be true to them, but it's not to the rest of us, and claiming it as a universal truth and insulting other folks because of it is gonna end poorly. One must argue in a rational fashion, not in a method that boils down to "I think X, and so should you".

This is the central issue folks here are taking to you, I'm certain of it. Your posts sound a lot like "I think X, and so should you" (even if you don't intend as such, I assume the best always). For the sake of this discussion and it's participants, let's move away from such things, and on to an actual discussion of the mechanical issues with the game's full casters, ok?

EDIT: It's worth noting, DragoonWraith, that the very next line is the same thing, with mechanics and roleplaying reversed. Good to keep that in mind as well, everyone. :smallwink:

Gorbash
2010-04-09, 08:14 PM
It doesn't. But as I said, after a certain point there's no IC justification for cheese.

Optimization != Cheese.

At certain point it MAY become, but on its own, it's not. You're using Yoda logic. Optimization leads to cheese, therefore optimization is cheese.



EDIT: It's worth noting, DragoonWraith, that the very next line is the same thing, with mechanics and roleplaying reversed. Good to keep that in mind as well, everyone.

Yes, but nobody here mentioend role-playing in that context. Because RP can't be measured in the same way structured system such as D&D (and classes it spawned) can be, so that's usually not the issue.

arguskos
2010-04-09, 08:17 PM
Yes, but nobody here mentioend role-playing in that context. Because RP can't be measured in the same way structured system such as D&D (and classes it spawned) can be, so that's usually not the issue.
Oh, I know no one did. I just like reminding folks the blade cuts both ways, and that we all should remain civil. :smallredface: I meant no offense.

Tinydwarfman
2010-04-09, 08:34 PM
You probably have had some very bad experiences with power-gamers, and that may be clouding your views. Optimization in itself is a fun game to me, and while I am a serious power-gamer in PVP stuff (I mean, the point of the game is to win, what do you expect), I very rarely bring super-powerful builds to the table. It's just not fun. (The most powerful thing I've done was probably an enchanting focused sorcerer) I always play decently powerful stuff though, around tier 3. Yet because I like to talk about theoretical things on internet forums and with my friends you would shun and bully me? :smallannoyed:
Bad players are the real problem. If someone is hurting your game, talk to them, an if they are a good friend or player, they should co-operate with you to get everyone having fun again. If you thought I was being too good with my unarmed swordsage, and was making the game less fun for others, I would swap him out for something else.

tl;dr, Bad players are the problem, not their degree of optimization.

The Shadowmind
2010-04-09, 08:36 PM
While going straight the Warmages are quite bad, they do get a few SoDs, and the know-it-all spell list system they share with the Beguiler & Dread Necro. can make them decent to powerful with the right PrCs, so they can't be the worst.

The biggest problem with healing, is it doesn't scale as effectively as damage dealt does. Cure Critical Wounds from a 7th level cleric heals 4d8+7 to one target with the level 4 spell while at level 7 a wizard can hit for 7d6 to a group. So for a spell one level lower, the wizard is doing .5 less damage on a failed save than the cleric is healing, and the cleric will run out of spells first since the cure spell only effects one target, and the target is also doing nothing during their turn to stop the next attack.

sonofzeal
2010-04-09, 09:38 PM
But for newer players, the power disparities become very relevant, very quickly. Worse, the very name "Healer" is misleading; a newcomer to D&D who picked up the Miniatures Handbook would think "ah, this class must be the best at healing! It's Right There On the Tin!" Except the tin is a cake, and the cake is a lie.
In defence of the Healer, "Healing Hands" combined with the various Mass healing spells earlier means they actually do quite well for in-combat healing. My Healer, who wasn't even really optimized, could generally heal people for over half their max health with a standard action, and by level 7 could heal the whole party for over a third. This is not insignificant! Unless someone was nearly killed in a single round, I could get them back up to full right away. If the whole party got hit by a fireball and every single one failed their save, I could cancel out all of that damage about as easily as it was dealt. In-combat healing isn't fun, but for larger groups where lethality is high and party damage output is also high, it's pretty darn effective. A dedicated Healer makes a good 5th (or 6th or 7th) man in a group, especially since most people seem to prefer Clerics of Headbonking these days.

(And your all-day free healing is called "Touch of Healing" from Complete Champion. Clerics are just as good at this too, but it's worth noting.)

sofawall
2010-04-09, 10:25 PM
(And your all-day free healing is called "Touch of Healing" from Complete Champion. Clerics are just as good at this too, but it's worth noting.)

Your all-day half-price healing, you mean. Unless you habitually send in the tanks at half HP.

Runestar
2010-04-09, 10:46 PM
Binder gets at-will healing at lv7 (and possibly as early as 5th lv with improved binding). 1 lv of dragon shaman simulates touch of healing as well. Shadow sun ninja (prc from tome of battle) heals marvelously as he fights. Make him undead (via necropolitan) and you have free healing.

Wands of vigor at dirt cheap at 750gp for 550hp of out-of-combat healing. A ghaele (using the monster class progression) gets CLW at-will at 8th lv (in addition to full cleric progression for the 1st 14 lvs).

Just curious - is there a way to transfer your own hp to heal other PCs. Would combo well with touch of healing. :smallbiggrin:

I wouldn't say that in-combat healing is necessarily had per-se, but it seems that if you want to go about healing in the most cost-efficient manner, you would do well to finish combat as soon as possible, then heal outside of combat. This is because the faster you take down the foes, the less time they have to damage (and less damage taken means less resources spent on healing). Plus, the cheap sources of healing all take place gradually over time, which makes them feasible only during downtime, when you are not fighting.

Summons can also be indirect healing as well, since damage they soak up is damage not taken by your party (unless it is AoE). This is in addition to providing misc benefits such as combat maneuvers, flanking/aid-another and maybe even a dash of battlefield control.

That cleric could just as readily have been contributing to the party's damage output by first firing off buff/offensive spells, then undoing all the party's damage after the fight.

Here is an excerpt of a party who managed to work their way around not having a dedicated healbot in the party.

Based in Eberron, Eclipse Inquisitives is a small private investigation and bounty hunting firm based out of Sharn. We've run around various parts of Eberron in four proper adventure arcs (two of which were the published modules Shadows of the Last War and Whispers of the Vampire's Blade, the rest were homemade) to date and have just started our fifth. Encounters tend towards information gathering, social interaction, and spectacularly violent combat. Here are the party members, with class and prestige class breakdown.

Members
Elerosse Tasardur: Elf ranger (using the sublime way variant in my signature) and Revenant Blade

At first glance, 'Rosse appears to fit the tank role. He is brutally effective in combat with his double scimitar (specializing in critical hit delivery, as often and as painfully as possible) and has become the party's primary damage dealer in the last few levels. However, he has neither the highest AC nor the largest hit point pool in the party. Secondly, he's also our primary scout with very high Spot and Listen checks. He's actually far more skilled than the tank role expects, capable of handling many infiltration and mobility challenges. He does not try to hold the line either; he deals damage rather than attempt deterrence.

Lehatharath: Kalashtar ardent, recently multiclassed into crusader.

Lehatharath seems to straddle the tank and healer roles; he has the highest AC and hit point pool in the party, can become even harder to kill thanks to his Defensive Precognition buff, and carries easy healing with his Touch of Life power. However, he lacks offensive strength in melee compared to Elerosse, Torrin, or Angela's constructs. His healing is also limited and not used in combat except in case of emergencies (in fact, he can only heal his own ability damage at the moment, and not that of others). Most of his offense lies in his mind-affecting powers (two debuffs and the damaging Mind Thrust) making him effectively a heavily armored enchanter in combat. Moreover, he is more skilled than the tank or healer roles suggest. Many ranks in Gather Information and the Urban Tracking feat, combined with a number of information gathering psionic powers and items give him the point position in places where detective work is needed (although he appreciates 'Rosse's significant tracking abilities).

Torrin Ghaladra: Elf monk, ninja, swordsage, and Shadow Sun Ninja

Like Elerosse, Torrin appears to fall into one of the four roles, namely the sneak position. He's got sudden strike, heavy Hide and Move Silently ranks, and trapfinding. The catch? He throws himself into combat with less abandon than the more resilient Lehatharath or Elerosse. He does this for two reasons. First is that he has excellent defenses. His AC is good, though not as good as Lehatharath's often is; more importantly, he can call upon invisibility from both his maneuvers and ninja ki abilities. Invisibility can often be a better defense than high AC or HP; it's kept him alive with less HP than the rest of the party. Having incredible saves - the best in the party by far for almost all three - doesn't hurt either. The second reason is that he can flank from any angle (with the Island of Blades stance) and perform combat battlefield control that a fighter type is normally expected to provide (with his Setting Sun maneuvers). On top, his Touch of the Shadow Sun ability allows him to heal allies after damaging enemies. It's not uncommon for Torrin to heal more hit points in a battle than Lehatharath.

Angela Loren d'Ghallanda: Halfling shaper and Astral Zealot

Don't let the levels in a caster-role class like the shaper fool you; indirectly, Angela is the party tank. Offensively, she can summon astral constructs, and it's always preferred for the disposable and powerful constructs to take the lead in melee combat than any of the others. Defensively, she is far more resilient than the mage role suggests. Her Fortitude save is as high as her Will save, she often enjoys an better AC than Elerosse, has more HP than Torrin, and she almost always has some damage reduction available from class features and powers. Her toughness means the party can worry less about keeping her safe and more about taking the fight to the foe. She also has excellent social skills and the benefits of Favored in House to solidify her position as party face.

Yuki Akuma
2010-04-09, 10:48 PM
Just curious - is there a way to transfer your own hp to heal other PCs. Would combo well with touch of healing. :smallbiggrin:

Get them to hit you with a vampiric touch effect.

DragoonWraith
2010-04-09, 11:06 PM
The Lifebond Vestments Soulmeld allows you to do exactly that, heal someone and then take damage equal to half the damage healed. You can get it as a non-meldshaper by taking Shape Soulmeld (Lifebond Vestments), but it's limited to a max heal of 1 per Meldshaper Level + 5 per invested Essentia, so without a Meldshaper Level, you're going to need Essentia, and a fair amount of it, too. It's also a Touch and it is limited to once per hour per creature.

Binding it your Arms Chakra (Open Lesser Chakra, min ECL 12th) lets you do it at a range of 30 ft. rather than as a Touch. Binding it to your Heart Chakra lets you do it at-will (no one per hour per target restriction), but that requires Open Greater Chakra (min ECL 18th)

magic9mushroom
2010-04-09, 11:23 PM
The main problem with the Wu Jen is it looks so much like a Wizard that it has to be compared to the Wizard, and unless you're an Archivist that's always a bad comparison.

Or Spell to Power Erudite. :wink:


Yeah, that's why I wrote first thing that I really shouldn't say anything because it's D&D.

Still. If you want to play D&D for the combat aspect, then why do you want to optimize your character to get through combat as fast and unharmed as possible? What comes then? Another combat, which you also get through as fast as possible, until you get to the end of the dungeon, where you will be rewarded with XP, treasure and maybe items which you will then spend to optimize your character even further to get through battles even faster so you can get the treasure at the end of the next dungeon as well which you will spend the same way...

At what point are you actually playing? This is not a game, it's just OCD.

Of course, I'm being a bit facetious here, but this does seem to be the ideal of many players.

Protip: Games generally have no point. That's why they're games. Humans have this tendency to derive pleasure from things that are otherwise meaningless.

Your argument boils down to "if you don't like the same things I like, you're DOIN IT RONG and won't have any fun". Which is so absurd I'm giggling uncontrollably while posting this.

sonofzeal
2010-04-10, 12:01 AM
I wouldn't say that in-combat healing is necessarily had per-se, but it seems that if you want to go about healing in the most cost-efficient manner, you would do well to finish combat as soon as possible, then heal outside of combat. This is because the faster you take down the foes, the less time they have to damage (and less damage taken means less resources spent on healing). Plus, the cheap sources of healing all take place gradually over time, which makes them feasible only during downtime, when you are not fighting.
Oh, out-of-combat healing is certainly far more efficient, and any good party can have that covered (Healing Belts are good too). In-combat healing is strictly unnecessary as well, I've been in many parties without it and we've got along fine. And usually the in-combat healing I've seen has been from Clerics who haven't devoted any special effort into healing besides taking their class, so that contribution is usually hardly worth it and only really helps if there's one particular party member who's effective against the enemies and it's imperative to keep him alive.

A good dedicated healbot is slightly different. Think of it this way - I could take almost any offensive action the enemies just did, and reverse it. With Healing Hands and Augment Healing (hardly massive optimization), I found I actually kept pace with enemy damage output. I could also remove just about any status affliction they could throw at us (including, in some cases, death attacks), even at low-mid levels. This ability to effectively reverse enemy actions, then, is akin to the ability to deny them actions in the first place. No attack roll, no save, no SR since I'm targeting allies. That's a nice thing, at any level, when you can do it... which is not always, but much more often and more consistently than you might think.

Clerics can do that too, but they have to try a bit harder, and usually have to really dedicate themselves to the roll. Delayed "Mass" spells are significant, because they're the first real source of ranged healing. Lack of Healing Hands means they have to work a lot harder to find bonuses to keep their healing competitive. Heavy armor is nice, but it reduces your move speed, which is significant since so many of the relevant spells are "touch". Also, the (Su) abilities the Healer gets are pure mental actions, meaning they can cure their own paralysis and similar effects without preparing a Stilled Silent version of a niche-use spell, making them a bit harder to take out of the fight prematurely. If your Cleric is focusing on the healbot role, I'd suggest that there are few reasons not to take Healer (disclaimer: my group gave them the Cleric's "Spontaneous Casting" ability, which does make a difference, and I recommend yours do the same).

It falls apart in rocket-tag games, of course, and there's a few thing I couldn't cope with. Multi-target debuffs were a problem, as were high-damage-with-bad-rider-effects, and I couldn't reverse it if someone 'ported an ally away. It's also not really the most efficient way to fight, I could keep up with the damage output of a bruiser for a bit but after that I either had to count on the rest of the party taking him down or we could start being in trouble. I certainly wouldn't call it an essential party roll, and I certainly would recommend a Cleric in more dangerous games or with a smaller party, for the extra combat potential and flexibility. But I wouldn't worry about a player showing up with a Healer the way I would if they showed up with a Monk or Soulknife. My main concern would be that they might not find it fun, if it's not an RP-heavy group, but that's different.




.....all that said, they're still probably the worst full-caster in the game by most metrics. Warmages are "just blasters", but in a party where there's other people doing hp damage (like, y'know, 90% of the parties out there) it can add up pretty quickly. And they're more fun. That's always a big factor.

marjan
2010-04-10, 12:09 AM
Just curious - is there a way to transfer your own hp to heal other PCs. Would combo well with touch of healing. :smallbiggrin:

There is spell in BoED, Blood of the Martyr or something like that.

TheOOB
2010-04-10, 12:20 AM
If we are sticking to normal spellscasters, my vote is for healer. The warmage at least does what they do fairly well. Direct damage is useful, and they are good at it. Even if it is inefficient, it does work to end an encounter. Besides, they can learn some pretty useful evocation spells(force cage comes to mind).

Healer on the other hand isn't even very good at what they do(cleric is equal if not better), and what they do is not useful. Healing spells are reactive, which means they only work after you have allready failed to protect the team, and they do nothing to stop further damage, they just prolong the fight. In any case, before heal most healing spells heal little damage compared to normal attacks at that level.

Solarn
2010-04-10, 05:07 AM
Solarn, point of interest:
Okay. I honestly didn't see that when reading the forum rules.

Glimbur
2010-04-10, 10:08 AM
Just curious - is there a way to transfer your own hp to heal other PCs. Would combo well with touch of healing. :smallbiggrin:

Lifebond Vestments, a soulmeld from Magic of Incarnum, lets you heal people by up to (meldshaper level + 5* invested essentia) as a standard action, and you take half the healing as damage. You can get it with a single feat... but you can only heal a given person 1/hour. It's unclear to me if binding it to your Heart chakra (which doesn't happen until high levels) gets rid of the time restriction or not.

edit: wow, super-ninja'd.

sreservoir
2010-04-10, 12:43 PM
Or Spell to Power Erudite. :wink:

StP Erudites don't usually get compared to wizards due to the significantly different but mostly similar magic system.

Optimystik
2010-04-10, 06:06 PM
I've actually written a handbook (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=6849.0)for the Healer class, since I was interested in whether the class was really hopeless. I can sum up the handbook as: the Healer is bad, but not that bad with expanded books. If you allow the spells from BoED, the healer is about on par with the shugenja and wu jen, and if you also allow the spells suggested from the Spell Compendium, then it's probably middle of the road/tier 3.

Hmmm, I actually hadn't noticed that line in SpC until you mentioned this. So SpC recommends adding the Vigor line and a number of buffs/abjurations to the Healer spell list as we've been saying.


Healer (Miniatures Handbook): Add spells concerned with healing, removing affliction, providing protections, and providing for needs. In particular, add higher-level versions of spells the healer can already cast, such as mass restoration.

Depending on your DM's definition of "protections" and "needs," this might boost it to a reasonably playable level indeed.

BoED isn't as helpful, I'm afraid - while it would be reasonable to give them access to a number of spells from within, the book itself does not mention them. But a Healer could go into Apostle of Peace (not a terrible choice of PrC for them in any event) and pick up any of the BoED divine spells that way.

AslanCross
2010-11-09, 06:11 AM
I once told one of my players I was willing to let him play an Ordained Champion of the Silver Flame (favored weapon: Longbow) and allow his channel spell ability to work with it.

Heal or buff your friends by shooting them with arrows!

grarrrg
2010-11-09, 07:12 AM
BAD Necro, BAD!
No cookieinternets for you!

Souhiro
2010-11-09, 07:36 AM
I would say Sorcerer. Because all the prestige classes are about "Losing something and gaining something". But since sorcerers get the minimum ranks, the minimum HD, and only one good Saving, every full caster PrC is good for them than being stuck into sorcery.

Lhurgyof
2010-11-09, 08:51 AM
The Healer. They're worse at healing than Clerics, and all they get are healing spells...

Worse at healing that the cleric? Certainly not out of the box?

I'm sure a Healer can be optimized into a better healer than a cleric, right? Or is it the lack of Turn Undead that screws them over?

Edit: Didn't notice the necromancy.

Thurbane
2010-11-09, 07:37 PM
An out of the box Cleric has the option of converting ANY non-domain spell into a healing spell. The Healer must memorize any healing spell they want to use.

If a Healer uses every spell slot he has on a Healing spell of some kind, then he probably has the edge on a Cleric from his class features that boost healing. The Cleric can pump out as many Cures as the Healer, but has the luxury of loading up on other utility/non-cure spells, and converting them to Cures on the spot.

Also, the Cleric can memorize other resotrative spells like Restoration, Remove Disease, Neutralize Poison etc. and convert them to Cures if not required. With the Healer, it's either/or - either he memoizes one of these spells, or a Cure. If he doesn't need the Neutralize Poison, he does not have the option to swap it for a Cure later in the day.

...if you twink both classes out to be as Cure/healing focused as possible (using feats, PrCs etc.), then the Cleric is still going to win (or at least be very close), and have all sorts of other utility on top.

Having said all of that, I do prefer a Healer as a cohort or NPC, as he isn't as likely to outshine (non-Cleric) PCs.

Marnath
2010-11-09, 07:40 PM
* Turn Un-thread!*

Thurbane
2010-11-09, 07:42 PM
You know, it can be confusing to us non-Americans. Last post "04-11-2010 11:06 AM" looks like 4th of November to many of us! :smalltongue:

Marnath
2010-11-09, 07:43 PM
You know, it can be confusing to us non-Americans. Last post "04-11-2010 11:06 AM" looks like 4th of November to many of us! :smalltongue:

Yeah, except for a thread to be that old in this subforum, it had to be on like page 20 or something.

Thurbane
2010-11-09, 07:48 PM
Yeah, except for a thread to be that old in this subforum, it had to be on like page 20 or something.
True - but for subsequent posters, who may not notice...

Akal Saris
2010-11-09, 09:16 PM
I'll echo many others that warmage and healer are the only two casters that are mediocre. Which prompted me to write my poor, ignored guide for the Healer class :smalltongue:

That said, both classes have the potential to become "tier 1 or 2" with optimization. Warmage can either do Rainbow Servant or Mage of the Arcane Order to expand his spell list, while Healers with access to BoED can practically double their known spells with all the sanctified spells, and getting another 2 domains from the contemplative PrC can do wonders for a divine spell list.

Morithias
2010-11-09, 09:21 PM
Just to throw my word in on this. I do believe the healer IS quite weak yes, but I find in a holy party, a vow of peace healer can be a brutal force. Especially if you max/min diplomacy to abuse the redemption rules in BOED for extra XP.

Also, seriously 1/week true res for free? I know it's not the most powerful level 9 spell, but DAMN gotta love it.

Also makes a nice combo with a berserker. Send the guy in a kamikaze army attack, have him win and die at like -9000 hp or something like that and bring him back with no lasting damage.

Also any full caster can be made very brutal if they use the necrotic cyst fest, yes it's evil in nature but the healer doesn't have a code of honor last I recall. It wouldn't combo with vow of peace, but hey level 7 for perm mind control, and level 9 for existence erase. Nice *sunglasses*.

But yeah, healer would probably have to be my choice too, with the exception of a class like cleric or druid that broke some vow removing their powers (although that is unlikely I admit).

Edit: And wow I need to pay attention to people's sigs more. Thanks a lot for the book! I'll be sure to use this!

Thurbane
2010-11-09, 09:29 PM
Also any full caster can be made very brutal if they use the necrotic cyst fest, yes it's evil in nature but the healer doesn't have a code of honor last I recall.
The Healer class has a req of being Good aligned. There is a note about ex-healers losing all spells and class abilities.

Morithias
2010-11-09, 09:33 PM
The Healer class has a req of being Good aligned. There is a note about ex-healers losing all spells and class abilities.

Let me rephrase that it is "evil in nature" but doesn't actually require you to be evil to take the feat. Yes, you can be good aligned, a healer, and know how to cast a spell that can delete someone's soul.

Eldariel
2010-11-09, 09:36 PM
An out of the box Cleric has the option of converting ANY non-domain spell into a healing spell. The Healer must memorize any healing spell they want to use.

If a Healer uses every spell slot he has on a Healing spell of some kind, then he probably has the edge on a Cleric from his class features that boost healing. The Cleric can pump out as many Cures as the Healer, but has the luxury of loading up on other utility/non-cure spells, and converting them to Cures on the spot.

Also, the Cleric can memorize other resotrative spells like Restoration, Remove Disease, Neutralize Poison etc. and convert them to Cures if not required. With the Healer, it's either/or - either he memoizes one of these spells, or a Cure. If he doesn't need the Neutralize Poison, he does not have the option to swap it for a Cure later in the day.

...if you twink both classes out to be as Cure/healing focused as possible (using feats, PrCs etc.), then the Cleric is still going to win (or at least be very close), and have all sorts of other utility on top.

Having said all of that, I do prefer a Healer as a cohort or NPC, as he isn't as likely to outshine (non-Cleric) PCs.

Also, Cleric gets Domains which qualifies him for Radiant Servant of Pelor (Prestige Class which improves healing quite notably), can grant Caster Level Bonuses to healing and with Spontaneous Domain Casting, enable you to spontaneously cast Heal, Mass Heal and Regenerate among others.

And Cleric does indeed get Turn Undead which can fuel Divine Metamagic, Divine Spell Power or similars which can improve healing spells tremendously or grant other, awesome longterm benefits.


Basically, anything Healer does, Cleric does better. Except exists as an invisible NPC helper, as stated.

Thurbane
2010-11-09, 09:52 PM
Let me rephrase that it is "evil in nature" but doesn't actually require you to be evil to take the feat. Yes, you can be good aligned, a healer, and know how to cast a spell that can delete someone's soul.
Interesting...I just assumed Necrotic Cyst had an Evil req.

Basically, anything Healer does, Cleric does better. Except exists as an invisible NPC helper, as stated.
It's a shame, really. The classes introduced in the Miniatures Handbook (Healer, Marshal, Favored Soul and Warmage) are some of my favorites, but most are very much on the low end of the power/utility scale. FS isn't too bad, as a full caster with access to the Cleric spell lsit, but still fairly weak compared to a Cleric.

I guess it helps most classes not to use Cleric as a yardstick! :smallbiggrin:

Coidzor
2010-11-09, 10:21 PM
Wow. No spontaneous healing for the class that says it on the tin. Well, that was a bad design decision.

Thrawn183
2010-11-09, 10:21 PM
In my campaigns I've house ruled the healer to be a spontaneous caster with all of it's spells automatically known (like a warmage). It's turned out to be surprisingly good. Fighting a whole bunch of enemies that do ability damage? You can heal a LOT of ability damage. Just like you can heal a LOT of HP. Just like you can end a LOT of status effects.

With a modified healer in the party, I know I can throw pretty much anything that's even remotely level appropriate at the party and they'll just keep on truckin'.

averagejoe
2010-11-09, 11:25 PM
The Mod They Call Me: Thread necromancy.