An exciting healer?

[Gwic]

So, I'm handing the DC reins of my group to one of the PCs, who had been playing a dwarf cleric. The other groupmembers are dragonborn paladin, halfling rogue, dwarf fighter, and human wizard. The fighter and rogue are probably going to stick with their characters, and the paladin and wizard are might re-roll defender & striker (not sure what yet).

This leaves a big hole in the Leader category (controller, too, but not as critical when there are multiple defenders). I was hoping to play a striker, but I'm content to change roles. I'm mostly wanted to have an exciting character. Here are my thoughts on the leader classes:
- Cleric - Nothing specifically bad, with a few good smites, but a dead horse RP-wise.
- Paladin - Don't want to step on current pally's toes, and is it even effective as the sole healer w/ limited heals per day?
- Bard - This one is a little interesting with its controller aspects, but I know it's historically an RP/support class that has been less than thrilling to play.
- Shaman - I can see making this interesting, but I feel like the spirit companion adds way too many rules questions and slows down table play. Is this your experience? Has (stealth x companion) been tough?
- Ardent - I've generally steered clear of Psionic-source PC's because, frankly, it seems like an extra game mechanic that is more frustrating than useful. Anyway, can Ardents be effective solo healers and still fun to play? I've never played as or with one before.
- Runepriest - This looks like the most interesting class fluff-wise to me, except for that one big problem that the feat support sucks, what with the "rune feats" flop.

So, I guess overall I'm leaning towards Shaman or Runepriest, but I'm open to any of them. The big questions is: what healers have you played, and did you find them fun? What would you recommend?

[WickerNipple]

How did you miss Warlord? Rawr. Get yer enable on.

[hamishspence]

Or Artificer?

[MLH]

Bards rule, one of my players plays a bard and not a session goes by where I don't think "man I wish I could make a bard and play"

[MeeposFire]

Bards are very fun and very good.

I agree that you missed the most exciting option in terms of being dynamic in the warlord. That is the best at making things happen.

Rune Priests are fine but they are confusing due to rune states and the like and you would likely need to remind the other players about the specific bonuses often.

Ardents are fine leaders though not my thing.

Paladins make great secondary leader but as a primary it is lacking.

My suggestion is warlord or bard. Bard has more skills and has some interesting abilities (lots of movement and control and good at everything else a leader is good at doing). A warlord has the best enabling (getting players to attack off their turn), powerful off turn actions, and is great at moving allies. The edge probably goes to the warlord but the bad is very good (though I must say that one of my players did not like the bard because it did not act like earlier bards since it buffs less and does more moving powers and enabling and she wanted to buff).

[Gwic]

How did you miss Warlord? Rawr. Get yer enable on.
A *chuckle* clerical error, I assure you. I can't say that I find "let someone else attack" to be a terribly exciting tactic (I realize this is a very "boo hoo I don't like healers" thread, but I'm hoping people on here can point me to some exciting builds).


Or Artificer?
What source is that in? I should have specified that I've got PHB 1-3, MM 1-3, DMG 1-2, PP, AV 1-2, and MV.

[hamishspence]

That's in Eberron Player's Guide.

Swordmage is in Forgotten Realms Player's Guide (arcane defender) and other classes appear in other sources- Dragon Magazine, the Essentials books, Heroes of Shadow).

[MeeposFire]

A *chuckle* clerical error, I assure you. I can't say that I find "let someone else attack" to be a terribly exciting tactic (I realize this is a very "boo hoo I don't like healers" thread, but I'm hoping people on here can point me to some exciting builds).


What source is that in? I should have specified that I've got PHB 1-3, MM 1-3, DMG 1-2, PP, AV 1-2, and MV.

Artificer is in the Eberron campaign setting. They are masters at buffing and shuffling healing surges around.

Warlords can do much more than make others attack and further often times their best power are I attack and you attack.

Take the encounter power "vengeance is Mine". This power is an off turn power that triggers when you are hit. After you are hit you attack the enemy and then you command an ally to attack the same an enemy. It is a two attacks for one. Also check out powers like "hail of steel" which has you make an attack and if you hit all your allies get to attack the target as well. That power destroys encounters. Even simple powers like "reorient the axis" change encounters by allowing you to spend a minor action to allow all your allies to shift int mod squares around the battlefield. In other words you just changed the whole battle. There is no more dynamic leader in the game.

Warlords also have quality powers that don't involve enabling allies it is just that the best powers in the game often involve enabling allies (for leaders). Action economy is the basic currency of D&D.

[Gwic]

Looks like I should give Bard and Warlord a good read tonight... Thanks for the tips everyone!

By the way, we'll be starting at level 4 and going to 6 or 7 before things get mixed up again, if that influences your opinions at all.

[Kurald Galain]

I was hoping to play a striker, but I'm content to change roles.
Well, the most strikerish leader is the Warlord. It is also one of the most strategic classes in the game, and goes way beyond merely "let your ally attack". This is probably the best leader class in the game.


Paladin - Don't want to step on current pally's toes, and is it even effective as the sole healer w/ limited heals per day?
I generally recommend against using the same class twice in any party. At any rate, a paladin is not really a leader.



- Bard - This one is a little interesting with its controller aspects, but I know it's historically an RP/support class that has been less than thrilling to play.
Your assumption is incorrect. The bard is great at moving everybody around the battlefield and/or messing up your enemies.



- Shaman - I can see making this interesting, but I feel like the spirit companion adds way too many rules questions and slows down table play. Is this your experience? Has (stealth x companion) been tough?
It doesn't slow down gameplay. This is one of the harder leaders to play effectively, though.


Anyway, can Ardents be effective solo healers and still fun to play? I've never played as or with one before.
No personal experience, but I hear they play mostly like warlords, only psionic.


- Runepriest - This looks like the most interesting class fluff-wise to me, except for that one big problem that the feat support sucks, what with the "rune feats" flop.
Yeah, this is one of the undersupported classes in the game, and as a result, one of the least effective leaders. Not just because of feat support, either; he needs some more good powers out there.

[kyoryu]

Looks like I should give Bard and Warlord a good read tonight... Thanks for the tips everyone!

By the way, we'll be starting at level 4 and going to 6 or 7 before things get mixed up again, if that influences your opinions at all.

Also look at Crossbow Artificers. They can pretty much get to the point where every single thing they do is a result of an attack with their crossbow, except for their healing abilities. Kinda fun as a non-passive-healer option.

[Warlawk]

I guess I don't see how a cleric is a dead-horse RP wise. There's plenty of great stuff you can RP as a cleric. Mechanically I think melee battle clerics are one of the most fun leaders around. If you have a melee heavy group though a tactical warlord can turn your party into a blending machine. For taclords I think eladrin are a fantastic choice, good secondary stats, eladrin weapon training lets you pick up a reach spear with bonus damage. Also this lets you grab a ton of great mobility options with eladrin racial feat support which can be extremely important especially for a melee leader.

[Epinephrine]

The big questions is: what healers have you played, and did you find them fun? What would you recommend?

I'll chime in: I almost always end up being the leader. I'm the only one who really enjoys the role, so it tend to fall to me. I've played two shaman, a bard MC/warlord, and a runepriest. I've mucked around statting out many others, but these are the only ones that I've had a bunch of playtime on.

The most fun (for me) was the bard/warlord with paragon multiclassing, and he was very much an enabling build. It was all about letting the other players shine, allowing them to nova, setting them up and so on. I really enjoyed it, but I could see how a lot of people would find it hard to not roll as many dice. He virtually never made a weapon attack (I think he threw a knife once or twice), but with a selection of the best warlord and bard powers it was great fun.

The runepriest was neat, and when it worked it was solid. When you miss though you don't get the kicker, you don't get the runestate.

The two shaman were interesting, and very tactical. One was a world speaker, the other a guardian (bear). They played quite differently; the bear wants people adjacent to his spirit and grants THPs and bigger heals. It's a little dull in some ways, though the spirit is awesome to use, blocking corridors and catching fleeing enemies, etc. The world speaker plays more defender-like, using the spirit to control the enemy rather than to support your side, and is a bit more tactical with the shifting and such.

I'd recommend the warlord or bard, or even a combination of the two.

[Zaq]

I'll throw in another good voice for the Runepriest. It's a very fun class (it's complex enough to actually keep my attention, and I find most 4e classes to be waaaay too simplistic out of the box) and quite effective as well. Its weaknesses are pretty obvious (lowish mobility, virtually zero ranged options, and very few good AoEs), but that doesn't mean it's not fun and powerful. I recommend getting a whiteboard to keep track of all the little bonuses you're slinging around.

Ignore the Rune feats. They're a waste of space. That doesn't mean you can't be perfectly effective. It just means you have to look up your own feat combos instead of having them ready-made.

[Fox Box Socks]

If things absolutely, positively have to die, Genasi Tactical Warlord is the way to go. Accept no substitutes.

That said, there are no bad leaders. Artificer, Bard and Warlord are considered the strongest, while Ardent and Cleric are considered the weakest (Runepriests are somewhere in the middle), but they're all more than effective at getting the job done.

Also you glossed over the Essentials classes. Warpriest is a fun choice (Sun, Storm and Earth are all strong choices, Death is lackluster), while Sentinel is neat for heroic tier, after which their pet starts dying faster than lemmings in a knife factory.

[INDYSTAR188]

To add my two cents here.... I am currently playing an 11th Level Dwarf Cleric/Radiant Servant and there is a whole lot of really cool RP stuff mixed in here. Not to mention the ability to DESTROY undead. Searing Light is a really cool power and - in addition to all that you can support melee, heal, do the talking in RP scenarios. I kinda wish I had picked a Bard just because they sound cool and seem more flashy but really cleric is a solid class.

[TurtleKing]

I wonder why most people only give the Shaman a passing mention. It can be very effective versatile. There are five builds in all, but looks like you only have two to choose from. Based on your group composition and resources available I would recommend the Panther Shaman build. Does the PP stand for Primal Power? If so then the other two builds open up, but are not as effective for your melee focused group unless they focus on ranged.

Panther Shamans can buff their allies increasing their attack and damage. As well as helping to manuaver your allies about. Panther Shamans have some good damage output as well. So if you want Leader with a side of Striker that is challenging a Panther Shaman may be for you.

One fun tactic that I have used with my Shaman is to teleport my sc about the battlefield. However doing so before getting Sudden Call feat from Primal Power I had to give up my move action to be successful.

With Primal Power you become even deadlier. THe spirit companion is great since they are not affected by so many different things.

[tcrudisi]

My favorite healers are the Runepriest and the Bard. It's not even close. With a Bard, I'm free to do some crazy shenanigans and make my character weird yet likable. With the Runepriest, there's just so much flavor in the class. It may not be the strongest leader, but it's good enough and it's the most fun to me.

The Rune states are pretty pimp and the powers are diverse enough that it's never boring. Yeah, the Rune feats are terrible, but who cares? Yeah, the support for Runepriests is non-existent. It doesn't matter. It's got a great chassis. Also, you'll actually have some spare feats to throw in for fun feats. (Yeah, that's due to the fact that they don't have many good class feats.) Still - try the Runepriest. If it isn't quite as powerful as other leaders, don't sweat it. You'll have at least as much fun as if you played another leader.

Or, play a Bard and have fun rocking skill challenges and sliding your allies around like they are a 3 year old walking on ice.

[evirus]

One fun tactic that I have used with my Shaman is to teleport my sc about the battlefield. However doing so before getting Sudden Call feat from Primal Power I had to give up my move action to be successful.

With Primal Power you become even deadlier. THe spirit companion is great since they are not affected by so many different things.

I second the use of a Shaman (I'm guilty of playing a longstanding one in a campaign). It is however not for the faint of heart; positioning is a HUGE deal for all shamans. The placing of your spirit companion is always the biggest and most important part of your turn. If you don't like (or are able) to deal with heavy tactical placement, Shaman may not be for you.

My second choice would be Bard, they are just the Pimps of 4e.

[Sol]

I play an ardent in a paragon campaign (level 13 now), and I have to say, I can't imagine any other leader pulling off some of the stunts I do.

The sad psionic truth is that it's rarely (if ever) worthwhile to pick up non-heroic tier at-will powers, because as a leader, controller, or defender (and there's no augmentation-using psionic striker), the riders are far more important than the damage being dealt. And the heroic-tier riders are just as awesome, and can be used more-or-less at-will by mid-paragon, without fear of ever running out of power points. At level 11, aug 2s can be used 4 times per encounter.

My choices, then, at-will:
Energizing Strike can give an ally 11 temps, or, for 2 power points, can grant a surge.
Focusing Strike can grant an ally a save, or, for 2 power points, grant all allies within 5 saves.
Ire Strike is nearly identical to commanders strike...but if i augment 2 it, it becomes, "shift an ally within 5 squares of me to any square i choose adjacent to the target, then grant him/her a MBA against the target with 1d8 extra damage, and if it hits, the target gains 6 vulnerable all."

It's a little more complicated to keep track of power points than it is when they're not on the table, but when people need healing...i have a near-infinite supply of it until they're out of surges. My best healing nova turn ever, one of my strikers was dying and the defender had 2 HP. Most of us were bloodied. I used a minor action utility power to grant the dying ally 2d10+his surge value in surgeless healing. Then I used a minor to ardent surge the tank (surge+4d6+6). Standard action I used my second wind. My second wind lets an ally within 5 spend his second wind as a free action, heals every bloodied ally within 5 for 6, which triggers mark of healing to let them make a saving throw, and gives one ally either a save or 6 temps. Then I used an action point and used Argent Strike (from the argent soul PP) aug 2 to let every ally within 3 of me spend a surge or gain 10 temps.

All in all, the total healing was 6 surges+2d10+4d6+24, three saving throws, and 25 temps. In one turn.

The only real downside to ardents is that it's hard to remember all of that. And that if the healing from argent strike or energizing strike or the save from focusing strike is really, really needed, you better hope you don't miss, because none of an ardent's riders are on an effect line.

[Gwic]

It doesn't slow down gameplay. This is one of the harder leaders to play effectively, though.
I've been trying to figure out... how does stealth work for the companion? Do I roll stealth separately for it? If I use a spirit attack power, do I lose my own hiding? Would it work for a shaman to sit in the bushes, hidden, while his companion mucks about the battlefield?


I guess I don't see how a cleric is a dead-horse RP wise. There's plenty of great stuff you can RP as a cleric. I just meant that I've never been in a 4e group without one, and they've been played so much that playing another one is "beating a dead horse," especially since the PC I'm replacing was playing one and I want to be a distinct character from his. On the other hand, radiant-nuking undead is appealing, especially given this PC's penchant for zombies...



I'd recommend the warlord or bard, or even a combination of the two.
You and several other people recommend this. But at the heroic level, the only thing the warlord multiclass feat grants is his healing ability. Is this just not a viable mix until paragon? I'll probably stat out a warlord at some point in this process.


Also you glossed over the Essentials classes. None of us own or want to invest in Essentials.


To add my two cents here.... I am currently playing an 11th Level Dwarf Cleric/Radiant Servant and there is a whole lot of really cool RP stuff mixed in here. Not to mention the ability to DESTROY undead. Searing Light is a really cool power and - in addition to all that you can support melee, heal, do the talking in RP scenarios. I kinda wish I had picked a Bard just because they sound cool and seem more flashy but really cleric is a solid class. Yeah, nuking the undead (given, as mentioned above, the new DM's penchant for zombies) is a very tempting ability. With I had the Divine Power book for the cleric's extended options. It would probably expand the class enough for me to make a cleric with "new car smell."


...There are five (shaman) builds in all, but looks like you only have two to choose from. Based on your group composition and resources available I would recommend the Panther Shaman build. Does the PP stand for Primal Power? If so then the other two builds open up, but are not as effective for your melee focused group unless they focus on ranged...
One fun tactic that I have used with my Shaman is to teleport my sc about the battlefield. However doing so before getting Sudden Call feat from Primal Power I had to give up my move action to be successful... I have lots of questions for you. First, I'd probably pick Protector (PHB2) or Watcher (PP = Primal Power). Either way, I'd pick up Protector's Strike and Claws of the Eagle for at-wills, and Sudden Call and Strngthening Spirit feats. Question about sudden call: does it still take a Minor action to dismiss the companion? Makes sense (to keep me from resummoning him all over creation every turn) but want to check.

The argument (in my mind) for Watcher over {rotector is that I don't know if I need all the healing, and the rogue in the party would love to make free RBA's w/ CA (aka, throwing his new +2 dagger w/ sneak attack damage) while the wizard (if she stays that) would love to magic missile people to oblivion.

(The DM would probably be fine with me retraining Spirits later if I need to.)


My favorite healers are the Runepriest and the Bard. It's not even close. With a Bard, I'm free to do some crazy shenanigans and make my character weird yet likable. With the Runepriest, there's just so much flavor in the class. It may not be the strongest leader, but it's good enough and it's the most fun to me.... Try the Runepriest. If it isn't quite as powerful as other leaders, don't sweat it. You'll have at least as much fun as if you played another leader.
Yeah, I would probably really enjoy Runepriest... the optimization part of my mind just has trouble accepting that. Thanks for the opinion though.

AGAIN, thanks to everyone on here for all the help! You all are an invaluable resource.

[Kurald Galain]

I've been trying to figure out... how does stealth work for the companion?
Officially, it doesn't. The companion is a conjuration, not a creature. And yes, by RAW you do lose your own stealth if your spirit attacks. It is not unreasonable to ask your DM for a different ruling, though.


You and several other people recommend this. But at the heroic level, the only thing the warlord multiclass feat grants is his healing ability.
There's a bunch of other warlord multiclass feats (in MP / MP2) that give other things, like the warlord's action point ability.

[Epinephrine]

I've been trying to figure out... how does stealth work for the companion? Do I roll stealth separately for it? If I use a spirit attack power, do I lose my own hiding? Would it work for a shaman to sit in the bushes, hidden, while his companion mucks about the battlefield?

Technically you can't stealth and use your spirit to attack while remaining hidden. The spirit is interesting though, in that it can essentially fly, and at Paragon the feat Back Against the Wall (or whatever it is called) starts looking good - so long as you are next to a wall you (and hence your spirit) gain a +1 to hit and a +1 to AC. Since you can be against a wall the whole time and send your spirit roaming, it's not a bad way to get a decent bonus.


You and several other people recommend [Bard/Warlord]. But at the heroic level, the only thing the warlord multiclass feat grants is his healing ability. Is this just not a viable mix until paragon? I'll probably stat out a warlord at some point in this process.

I didn't take the multiclass feat that gives a healing power, I took one with bonuses on Action Points, which is a nice bonus to hand out. I did the paragon multiclassing thing, so I actually had 3 feats swapping powers for warlord powers, and picked up the warlord initiative bonus (and then the Combat Commander feat, to add my Cha to everyone's initiative...we pretty much always had initiative). For me the fun was that I could pick powers I wanted from the two classes, and I went into a warlord epic destiny later.

[Gwic]

Officially, it doesn't. The companion is a conjuration, not a creature. And yes, by RAW you do lose your own stealth if your spirit attacks. It is not unreasonable to ask your DM for a different ruling, though.

There's a bunch of other warlord multiclass feats (in MP / MP2) that give other things, like the warlord's action point ability. Thanks for the info. Are conjurations (and their mechanics) described in detail in any central place? As for the martial power feats, it's just not in my library and I'm not sure I can justify buying it right now :smallconfused:


Technically you can't stealth and use your spirit to attack while remaining hidden. The spirit is interesting though, in that it can essentially fly, and at Paragon the feat Back Against the Wall (or whatever it is called) starts looking good - so long as you are next to a wall you (and hence your spirit) gain a +1 to hit and a +1 to AC. Since you can be against a wall the whole time and send your spirit roaming, it's not a bad way to get a decent bonus.

I didn't take the multiclass feat that gives a healing power, I took one with bonuses on Action Points, which is a nice bonus to hand out. I did the paragon multiclassing thing, so I actually had 3 feats swapping powers for warlord powers, and picked up the warlord initiative bonus (and then the Combat Commander feat, to add my Cha to everyone's initiative...we pretty much always had initiative). For me the fun was that I could pick powers I wanted from the two classes, and I went into a warlord epic destiny later.
Interesting points... I should try a paragron-tier campaign sometime soon, so I can try all these things out.

[evirus]

I have lots of questions for you. First, I'd probably pick Protector (PHB2) or Watcher (PP = Primal Power). Either way, I'd pick up Protector's Strike and Claws of the Eagle for at-wills, and Sudden Call and Strngthening Spirit feats. Question about sudden call: does it still take a Minor action to dismiss the companion? Makes sense (to keep me from resummoning him all over creation every turn) but want to check.

The argument (in my mind) for Watcher over {rotector is that I don't know if I need all the healing, and the rogue in the party would love to make free RBA's w/ CA (aka, throwing his new +2 dagger w/ sneak attack damage) while the wizard (if she stays that) would love to magic missile people to oblivion.

(The DM would probably be fine with me retraining Spirits later if I need to.)


- You only pick 1 at will, the other is determined by your Spirit Choice.
- Yes, it's a minor action to dismiss your SC.
- Even if you pick protector, you can pick Claws of the Eagle as your 2nd at will for the RBA.
- If you don't require the extra healing you could still go stalker or World spirit and still take Claws of the Eagle.


I've been trying to figure out... how does stealth work for the companion? Do I roll stealth separately for it? If I use a spirit attack power, do I lose my own hiding? Would it work for a shaman to sit in the bushes, hidden, while his companion mucks about the battlefield?


Spirit Companion is a misnomer, it is neither a spirit nor a companion. In fact it isn't a creature at all, it'a conjuration. Having said that, the spirit never attacks, you are the one making the attack with the origin listed as your spirit. In this case, yes you would loose your stealth as you are the one attacking a target.

In the same case, your spirit melee attacks originating from your spirit would take -2 hit if you were prone even if your SC is not prone.


The spirit is interesting though, in that it can essentially fly...

There is a huge debate about this in every forum concerning SC's. WotC has ruled both that it can and can't fly. Ask you GM accordingly.
What is very interesting however is that because it is not a creature it can't generate attacks of opportunity by moving. Also, it is imune to blast/burst damage and ignores difficult terrain and any status effects.

Conjuration rules are summarized in PHB2 in the glossary at the back and SC rules in the PHB2 Shaman section add exceptions to the general conjuration rules.

[Epinephrine]

There is a huge debate about this in every forum concerning SC's. WotC has ruled both that it can and can't fly. Ask you GM accordingly.

Hmm, wasn't really aware that many people feel it can't. It doesn't need to be supported (from the description of a conjuration), so I just assumed it can move about in the air. If not, you could always conjure it where it was needed to attack a flier.


What is very interesting however is that because it is not a creature it can't generate attacks of opportunity by moving. Also, it is imune to blast/burst damage and ignores difficult terrain and any status effects.
Yes, not provoking is handy, though effects and the spirit get a little tricky.

If you are slowed the spirit is also slowed (it has your speed), but if you are immobilised the spirit is still moving full speed. If you run the spirit doesn't benefit from the extra speed (you move your speed +2, your speed doesn't increase by 2), but when you charge the spirit doesn't move at all. Items that let you move faster do however increase the spirit's speed, just like wearing armour slows it down. You can attack creatures you can't see with no penalty if the spirit can "see" them (say, around a corner from you, but not from your spirit), but if they blind you you suddenly take a penalty to hit, even though you couldn't see them before. I guess the spirit must imitate you to some extent, since if you are knocked prone the spirit is suddenly harder to hit with missile attacks.

Spirits are weird.

[evirus]

If you are slowed the spirit is also slowed (it has your speed), but if you are immobilised the spirit is still moving full speed. If you run the spirit doesn't benefit from the extra speed (you move your speed +2, your speed doesn't increase by 2), but when you charge the spirit doesn't move at all. Items that let you move faster do however increase the spirit's speed, just like wearing armour slows it down. You can attack creatures you can't see with no penalty if the spirit can "see" them (say, around a corner from you, but not from your spirit), but if they blind you you suddenly take a penalty to hit, even though you couldn't see them before. I guess the spirit must imitate you to some extent, since if you are knocked prone the spirit is suddenly harder to hit with missile attacks.

Huh, I thought it said whe you take a move action, you can move your SC 6 squares (I could be very wrong and don't have my books handy).

The important thing to note is that the SC doesn't "do" anything, it's like a figment of the Shaman's imagination. Only effects and statuses that the shaman is under affect his attacks since fundamentally he is the one making them.

It is also important to note that the SC = damage resistance. Any hit that doesn't kill your SC is ignored. Any hit that does enough damage to kill your SC deals damage to you but is LESS than it would have been if it HAD hit you.


Spirits are weird.

Which makes the class interesting to play.

[Epinephrine]

Huh, I thought it said whe you take a move action, you can move your SC 6 squares (I could be very wrong and don't have my books handy).

Close, it reads "When you take a move action, you can also move the spirit a number of squares equal to your speed."


Which makes the class interesting to play.

Agreed, I'm on my second Shaman (I do enjoy them), but they're still weird :)

[TurtleKing]

As for the question earlier from you yes it still takes a minor action to dismiss your spirit companion. With Sudden Call the summoning is now a free action. So you can you can summon then use a power next dismiss it move then summon again. This is sgnificant over some other feats since your mobility has increased. Without the feat you can still "teleport" your sc about but you can't either use your move action or standard action.

Status effects, ongoing damage, blast/bursts, auras?, and others don't affect your sc. If going for a heavy Defender party then yes Protector or World Speaker works for this. In my experience when the defender player isn't there I step up with my sc. Resilient Spirit helps this further by adding +2 to all of the sc's defenses for just one feat. The other means is to get all the way to chainmail proficiency, but that requires 2 feats and only applies to AC. However in your party with 2 defenders do you need another if even its secondary role? The Stalker aka Panther Shaman would be better in this regard unless the party is ranged. The Panther Shaman adds attack and damage so you can help them fight better has you fight. Also understand that any of the Shaman builds can heal. If healing/mitigating damage is the goal then Protector aka Bear Shaman is the overall best. Plus the spirit companion does not have to be a bear, panther, or eagle. It could look like any kind of creature even elemental for the appearance is purely aesthetical.

[1of3]

My favorite is Artificer. It's probably not the most powerful one, but I like the style, especially weapon enchantments.

It's most useful with a good defender. Usually, you don't want your defender to be perfect. If the defender is low on surges, but the rest of the party is mostly full, the defender did too much. With an Artificer, that's not no problem, as you can heal allies with other allies's surges.

[Epinephrine]

My favorite is Artificer. It's probably not the most powerful one, but I like the style, especially weapon enchantments.

It's most useful with a good defender. Usually, you don't want your defender to be perfect. If the defender is low on surges, but the rest of the party is mostly full, the defender did too much. With an Artificer, that's not no problem, as you can heal allies with other allies's surges.

I found that the shaman (especially the bear shaman) has a bit of this flavour, too - because they grant the bonus d6s of healing to a second target (complete with bonus for being healed next to the spirit) they actually hand out a fair bit of non-surge healing, allowing some efficiency of surge usage. We often patch up our assassin by healing the paladin or slayer, throwing her the 1d6+5 HP bonus heal (up to 2d6+5 next level, which will help).

[tcrudisi]

I found that the shaman (especially the bear shaman) has a bit of this flavour, too - because they grant the bonus d6s of healing to a second target (complete with bonus for being healed next to the spirit) they actually hand out a fair bit of non-surge healing, allowing some efficiency of surge usage. We often patch up our assassin by healing the paladin or slayer, throwing her the 1d6+5 HP bonus heal (up to 2d6+5 next level, which will help).

Annnndddd... that's exactly why I can't stand the Shaman. The flavor? Like it. The powers? Pretty good. The Spirit Companion? Annoying, but only because even LFR DM's don't know how to handle it 90% of the time.

But the heal? OMG - that heal? It is the worst thing since Natalie Portman became engaged. Let's go with a pro/con list. Pro: Let's you heal two people at one time and get minor boost increases to both heals. Con: It's better to do 100 damage to one target than 60 to two targets. Likewise, it's better to heal one person well than two people badly the majority of the time.

It's sad, but the Shaman heal killed the class for me. Completely, totally thrashed it. Words cannot properly express how much I dislike the Shaman as a class and it is 95% because of their heal. My characters die a little bit inside when I sit down at a table and see that I have a Shaman healer. (They also die a lot on the outside since the Shaman can't heal.)

Okay, I've ranted. My apologies. I actually erased a similar message yesterday then thought, "Nah, I don't want to bog the thread down with my opinion" and yet I saw the thread again and I could not resist. :smallannoyed:

Oh, back to on topic though: the Shaman is nothing like the Artificer when it comes to healing. The Artificer spreads surges around efficiently. The Shaman asks the tank to sacrifice 5 healing surges to give the striker, who is out of healing surges, 5d6+25. Yeah, no, that's not efficient. The Shaman only pretends to let others spend healing surges.

Oh crud, I'm about to rant again. Submitting and leaving the thread now. /sigh

[Epinephrine]

Oh, back to on topic though: the Shaman is nothing like the Artificer when it comes to healing. The Artificer spreads surges around efficiently. The Shaman asks the tank to sacrifice 5 healing surges to give the striker, who is out of healing surges, 5d6+25. Yeah, no, that's not efficient. The Shaman only pretends to let others spend healing surges.

Oh crud, I'm about to rant again. Submitting and leaving the thread now. /sigh

If you use it that way, yes, it sucks. If you have someone down 13 with a surge value of 11, and someone else down 10 with a surge value of 8 (or many variations on this theme), the shaman heal looks pretty good, since you have a decent chance of only spending 1 surge to get two people fully healed. So you look at your injuries and optimise who spends surges. In other situations the artificer heal is much better, it's like having communal surges. The shaman heal is a different type of efficiency, good at patching up damage when you don't quite want to spend a surge, worse when people are really badly injured, but better when your party spreads the damage around a bit.

Heck, I've "mercifully" knocked out an enemy (deal non-lethal damage to him) and then awoken him for questioning by healing him back up (monsters have surges, too) and handed the bonus HP to my ally. That's free healing, if a little abusive. I try not to do it too often (did it once when we rescued some hostages - patched up their wounds since they had surges left, and happened to throw the extra heals to my allies to save on surges), but when there's an excuse, I'll use it.

[gullven]

Im playing a 7th lvl archer warlord and im having a blast. i ended up taking a multclass feat for runepriest so i could add another heal ( we have too many glass cannons in my group)

[evirus]

But the heal? OMG - that heal? It is the worst thing since Natalie Portman became engaged. Let's go with a pro/con list. Pro: Let's you heal two people at one time and get minor boost increases to both heals. Con: It's better to do 100 damage to one target than 60 to two targets. Likewise, it's better to heal one person well than two people badly the majority of the time.


This is absolutely why I like playing a Shaman. Most healers use their healings reactivly and step in when PCs are in trouble. Since your single target heal is less impressive as a Shaman you need to be proactive and heal before the need becomes critical.

It requires a lot of foresight and you need to always be thinking a few steps ahead so your spirit companion is in the right place to heal the right people (and not loose the d6s). In addition you need to have your SC in the right square to be able to attack the enemies (a totemic spear helps a lot) AND in the proper tactical position so your allies can get adjacent to it to benefit from most riders.

The most important part of your turn is where to place your SC. Too close to the hard hitters and they migth pop it and you loose your end of turn riders for adjecent allies. Too far and you loose your Opportunity Attack benefits. Out of position and you loose some heals. In a tacticaly awkward place and suddenly your allies can't get to him to benefit from it's effects.

The most important part of your turn is always figuring out what your allies can do, where they can move to and what the enemies will do. Then you can move your SC to the best spot.

Like I said, not for the faint of heart.

[valadil]

A *chuckle* clerical error, I assure you. I can't say that I find "let someone else attack" to be a terribly exciting tactic.

It's more interesting than you'd expect. Choosing who gets to attack is almost always interesting. Ideally you'll support your striker, but what if the defender has a shot at the wounded elite?

The other factor that's fun with warlords is giving out bonuses. They're situational and usually only last a turn or so, so nobody else remembers them. When an ally misses an attack, it's your job to ask if they remembered that the enemy grants CA for the turn and that the ally is getting +4 to hit because of his action point. Then your ally will get excited about the attack and you'll sit back smugly knowing that you were what made the attack successful. And you get to do all that when it's not even your turn!

[tcrudisi]

I can't say that I find "let someone else attack" to be a terribly exciting tactic

I have an easy solution for that. You are absolutely correct: it is boring to most people to play a class which just gives away a bunch of attacks while rarely making them himself. So instead, if I'm playing that type of class, I collect the basic attacks of everyone at the table. Then, I roll the attack myself and let the ally roll the damage. Or I'll let them roll the attack and I roll the damage. Something akin to that. It keeps me in the game and feeling as though I'm contributing. I have sat with people who refused to do it this way, at which point I promptly put away the Warlord and brought out a non-leader. It's extraordinarily rare, but it does happen.

The time I played a warlord in a home game, everyone just told me to roll the attacks I gave them plus the damage. I let them roll if it was something like the heroic power where I attack and the ally attacks. After all, I'm already attacking.

[Surrealistik]

But the heal? OMG - that heal? It is the worst thing since Natalie Portman became engaged. Let's go with a pro/con list. Pro: Let's you heal two people at one time and get minor boost increases to both heals. Con: It's better to do 100 damage to one target than 60 to two targets. Likewise, it's better to heal one person well than two people badly the majority of the time.

Natalie Portman is overrated.

[Epinephrine]

I have an easy solution for that. You are absolutely correct: it is boring to most people to play a class which just gives away a bunch of attacks while rarely making them himself.

Never understood this, myself.

The barbarian swings an axe. I swing a barbarian! With a bonus!

[evirus]

I have an easy solution for that. You are absolutely correct: it is boring to most people to play a class which just gives away a bunch of attacks while rarely making them himself. So instead, if I'm playing that type of class, I collect the basic attacks of everyone at the table. Then, I roll the attack myself and let the ally roll the damage. Or I'll let them roll the attack and I roll the damage. Something akin to that. It keeps me in the game and feeling as though I'm contributing. I have sat with people who refused to do it this way, at which point I promptly put away the Warlord and brought out a non-leader. It's extraordinarily rare, but it does happen.

I do this too, mostly because my barbarian can only roll 12s. That's great for damage rolls, not so much for hit rolls.

[darkdragoon]

But the heal? OMG - that heal? It is the worst thing since Natalie Portman became engaged. Let's go with a pro/con list. Pro: Let's you heal two people at one time and get minor boost increases to both heals. Con: It's better to do 100 damage to one target than 60 to two targets. Likewise, it's better to heal one person well than two people badly the majority of the time.

Just like with damage, static bonuses to healing do most of the work.

6d6 is 18 HP, nothing to get worried about when a Shaman can easily add con, wis, item bonuses etc. to 2-3 targets.

[Kurald Galain]

The barbarian swings an axe. I swing a barbarian! With a bonus!

Lazylord FTW!