Healer class 3.5

[sambouchah]

I was searching the my copy of the miniatures handbook and found the Healer class. I thought it was a neat class with a pretty cool companion. I'd like to play one at some point but I'm not sure it would be the best choice.

I'm wanting it to be a pacifist(sacred vow, nonviolence, and peace maybe) with huge healing prowess to keep the players who are all "Must DESTROY, need deal more damage!" feeling I'm useful. Any ways to add more Hp gain to the already (hopefully)impressive Healing Hands bonus?

Thanks in advance, Sam

[Urpriest]

Akal Saris has a pretty good handbook for this. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=6849)

Off the top of my head I'm not sure Vow of Nonviolence is that great for you, you don't get a lot of spells that offer saves.

[sambouchah]

Akal Saris has a pretty good handbook for this. (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=6849)

Off the top of my head I'm not sure Vow of Nonviolence is that great for you, you don't get a lot of spells that offer saves.

I would have to take it for vow of peace. I'll check out the handbook, thanks

[Jeff the Green]

Before you go with VoP, you absolutely must make sure it's okay with your fellow players. It seriously constrains them as well as you.

[dascarletm]

Before you go with VoP, you absolutely must make sure it's okay with your fellow players. It seriously constrains them as well as you.

It doesn't require them to give away their money. :smallconfused:

[Jeff the Green]

It doesn't require them to give away their money. :smallconfused:

Sorry, VoPe (Vow of Peace). Vow of Poverty I'd recommend against for other reasons.

[dascarletm]

Sorry, VoPe (Vow of Peace). Vow of Poverty I'd recommend against for other reasons.

Ah yes, that one is a bugger on the other players.

[Flickerdart]

Having a VoP character in a party is great - he doesn't care which loot he gets because he tithes it all, so just give him all the Apparatuses of Kwalish that you find.

[Urpriest]

Having a VoP character in a party is great - he doesn't care which loot he gets because he tithes it all, so just give him all the Apparatuses of Kwalish that you find.

:smalleek:

Poor Apparatus of Kwalish...

[dascarletm]

:smalleek:

Poor Apparatus of Kwalish...

I had two players use one of those to go deep beneath the ocean to retrieve a piece of an artifact once. Both being high level (only a monk and a fighter) decided to use that, and had a hell of a fight using it against an octopus.:smallbiggrin:

[sambouchah]

Before you go with VoP, you absolutely must make sure it's okay with your fellow players. It seriously constrains them as well as you.

How does VoPe inhibit the other players? Or is the prerequisite feat that makes it not as worth it?

[Urpriest]

How does VoPe inhibit the other players? Or is the prerequisite feat that makes it not as worth it?

With Vow of Peace, you aren't allowed to let your allies commit acts of violence, basically.

[Flickerdart]

I had two players use one of those to go deep beneath the ocean to retrieve a piece of an artifact once. Both being high level (only a monk and a fighter) decided to use that, and had a hell of a fight using it against an octopus.:smallbiggrin:
You mean the CR1 animal that isn't even very good for its level?

[sambouchah]

With Vow of Peace, you aren't allowed to let your allies commit acts of violence, basically.

So turning a blind eye even if it's a casualty for the cause is a no-no? I guess I could see that:smallfrown:

[dascarletm]

You mean the CR1 animal that isn't even very good for its level?

I meant the CR8 one. Octopus, Giant. Though it was so long ago, I don't remember if it was that or just a large octopus-like creature...

EDIT:

So turning a blind eye even if it's a casualty for the cause is a no-no? I guess I could see that:smallfrown:

If the others are on board though it is nice. When I play good I find little need to actually kill enemies.

[Jeff the Green]

So turning a blind eye even if it's a casualty for the cause is a no-no? I guess I could see that:smallfrown:
Vow of Nonviolence:

To fulfill your vow, you must not cause harm or suffering to humanoid or monstrous humanoid foes. You may not deal real damage or ability damage to such foes through spells or weapons, though you may deal nonlethal damage. You may not target them with death effects, disintegrate, pain effects, or other spells that have the immediate potential to cause death, suffering, or great harm. Your purity is so great that any ally of yours who slays a helpless or defenseless foe within 120 feet of you feels great remorse. Your ally takes a -1 morale penalty on his attack rolls for 1 hour per your character level. For each helpless foe slain, the attack penalty increases by 1, to a maximum equal to your character level. The duration of the increased penalty starts from the latest slaying. You may ask your allies to give you an oath that a helpless foe will not be slain. If the oath is sworn, an ally who later breaks the oath takes the penalty for doing so as if you were present. If you leave a helpless foe to be killed by your allies, you have broken your vow. You may ask a defeated creature to give you an oath of surrender or noninterference in exchange for its life. If the creature breaks this oath to you, you can allow your allies to deal with the creature as they see fit without breaking their oaths or your vow of nonviolence. If you intentionally break your vow, you immediately and irrevocably lose the benefit of this feat. You may not take another feat to replace it. If you break your vow as a result of magical compulsion, you lose the benefit of this feat until you perform a suitable penance and receive an atonement spell.

Vow of Peace:

To fulfill your vow, you must not cause harm to any living creature (constructs and undead are not included in this prohibition). You may not deal real damage or ability damage to such creatures through spells or weapons, though you may deal nonlethal damage. You may not target them with death effects, disintegrate, or other spells that have the immediate potential to cause death or great harm. You also may not use nondamaging spells to incapacitate or weaken living foes so that your allies can kill them--if you incapacitate a foe, you must take him prisoner. If you intentionally break your vow, you immediately and irrevocably lose the benefit of this feat. You may not take another feat to replace it. If you break your vow as a result of magical compulsion or otherwise unwittingly, you lose the benefit of this feat until you perform a suitable penance and receive an atonement spell. (Characters who have taken a Vow of Peace are known to drink water through a strainer in order to avoid accidentally swallowing, and thereby causing harm to, a small insect.)

[dascarletm]

The vow of peace could almost be argued from RAW that you must become a prison-master. It says nowhere that you can let them go free...:smalltongue:

[The Ravensong]

With Vow of Peace, you aren't allowed to let your allies commit acts of violence, basically.
Sure you are! You just lose your feat as soon as you do :smallbiggrin:

[Kesnit]

With Vow of Peace, you aren't allowed to let your allies commit acts of violence, basically.

No, your allies can attack anything that isn't helpless or defenseless. Could cause problems if there is a Rogue that likes to sneak in before a battle, but if an enemy can fight back, they aren't helpless.

[Larkas]

In case you're open to homebrew, you might want to check T.G. Oskar's retooled Healer (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=133118). It basically makes the Healer a lot more competent at its shtick, and buff the class elsewhere too. It's worth a read, if nothing more. The only drawback I see to it is that by turning it into a spontaneous spellcaster, you deny this Healer access to sanctified spells. And, well, you can't bypass it with a single feat because you don't qualify for Arcane Preparation. :smallfrown:

[stack]

Vow of non-violence does kick-in for calm emotions and sanctuary. Not much else. I would ask your DM to make the healer a single-stat caster instead of two-stat, which just feels like poor design (either give ALL casters two casting stats or none!).

[Miranius]

Think about the saint-template. Althoguh it has LA, it gives you huge increases in your DC`s for the vows plus DR, fast healing, ability increases, spells,......

If LA-buyoff is allowed it is more than worth it for a healer.

[prufock]

The Healing Touch reserve feat will save you many spells outside combat. Unlimited healing up to half max hp, but it's slow. And +1 CL to healing spells.

Spontaneous Healer means you spontaneously cast cure spells, just like a cleric! Except limited times per day, boo.

Of course, you'd be better off playing a cleric and getting a unicorn through Leadership or other means.

[Devils_Advocate]

"...Sigh. Lousy white mage's oath."
--- 8-Bit Theater

So, hey, I wrote up my own long-winded analysis of and list of suggested changes to the Healer class (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4251616#post4251616)! Read them, maybe!

Or don't, but just heed this word of advice: Healers should be able to spontaneously cast all of the spells on their spell list. That's how the Warmage, Beguiler, and Dread Necromancer work, and it's obviously how themed spellcasters like that should work, but the Healer was designed before they figured out the trick to balancing classes like that, and suffers for it. It may be that it was never updated because no one cares about it, and that no one cares about it because it's inferior to Cleric at the one thing it's supposed to be good at. (You had one job, Healer class!) Which is sad, because with this one change, it ceases to be inferior at that one thing! So this is a really obvious house rule.

I wrote the above based on memory without any fact-checking, so someone correct me if I got some details wrong.

[Urpriest]

No, your allies can attack anything that isn't helpless or defenseless. Could cause problems if there is a Rogue that likes to sneak in before a battle, but if an enemy can fight back, they aren't helpless.

Ah ok, looks like I had misremembered. That's substantially more viable, though you still probably can't do much in the way of BFC (since you still can't incapacitate or even weaken foes unless you're sure your allies can manage to capture them).

[sonofzeal]

Ah ok, looks like I had misremembered. That's substantially more viable, though you still probably can't do much in the way of BFC (since you still can't incapacitate or even weaken foes unless you're sure your allies can manage to capture them).
Even that's not true. You can't incapacitate/weaken for the purpose of your allies killing them. That's not quite what you said.

Let's look at a range here, from 1 to 10, where 1 is "I'm 100% certain my allies will CDG everyone here until they're dead", and 10 is "I'm 100% certain my allies will spare any lives they can".

You said you can only BFC right at the top of that spectrum (where "you're sure" they'll capture). But the actual wording of the Vow only requires that you don't do it at the bottom of the spectrum (where "you're sure" they'll kill). If there's any ambiguity, then you're not BFC/debuffing for the purpose of killing them, even if that might eventually be the result. And, remember, if someone breaks their word against you, they become fair game and can be slaughtered on sight no matter how they plead.

[Larkas]

[COLOR=#B35858]Or don't, but just heed this word of advice: Healers should be able to spontaneously cast all of the spells on their spell list. That's how the Warmage, Beguiler, and Dread Necromancer work, and it's obviously how themed spellcasters like that should work, but the Healer was designed before they figured out the trick to balancing classes like that, and suffers for it. It may be that it was never updated because no one cares about it, and that no one cares about it because it's inferior to Cleric at the one thing it's supposed to be good at. (You had one job, Healer class!) Which is sad, because with this one change, it ceases to be inferior at that one thing! So this is a really obvious house rule.


The only drawback I see to it is that by turning it into a spontaneous spellcaster, you deny this Healer access to sanctified spells. And, well, you can't bypass it with a single feat because you don't qualify for Arcane Preparation. :smallfrown:

Like I said before, that is the drawback of turning the Healer into a spontaneous spellcaster. A drawback that can't be circumvented the way a Warmage or Beguiler can, because, AFAIK, there isn't a feat for that. It's not a huge drawback, but one that you must have in mind. Sanctified spells are a great way of keeping the RAW Healer viable and relevant in regular play.

[sonofzeal]

Like I said before, that is the drawback of turning the Healer into a spontaneous spellcaster. A drawback that can't be circumvented the way a Warmage or Beguiler can, because, AFAIK, there isn't a feat for that. It's not a huge drawback, but one that you must have in mind. Sanctified spells are a great way of keeping the RAW Healer viable and relevant in regular play.
Well, as long as we're houseruling... have Healer count as Cleric for the purpose of Sanctified spells. It's pretty darn RAI (Healers make perfect sense to have the same access that Clerics enjoy), and the wording allows Clerics to cast Sanctified spells even if the Cleric is a spontaneous caster.

Speaking of, that's actually the other way to approach this. I'm like a broken record on the subject, but there's a Cleric variant called the Evangelist that has delayed spell access (Sorc progression) that casts spontaneously and adds domains to Spells Known - and gains extra Domains as it goes. The end result is a divine emissary who's massively versatile within the specific focus of their patron. A Cleric of Kord or Nerull or Pelor or Boccob might end up being basically the same, but Evangelists of those four gods will be massively different.

The upshot is, an Evangelist of a god with Healer-friendly domains gets to spontaneously cast all sorts of restoratives and status-removers, as well as whatever else that god offers - which might end up being a whole lot more useful than the exceedingly narrow Healer list. Even with a few "open" spells known you're still pretty focused, but you can usually count on at least a little flexibility. Even Pelor offers the Sun domain for Flame Strike.

[Chronos]

The main thing with Vow of Peace, is talk to your DM about it before you start. sonofzeal's interpretation of the vow is a reasonable one, but ultimately, it's not his interpretation that's going to matter at your gaming table. If your DM takes the same interpretation, then go ahead and take the vow, as long as you don't have a Belkar in the party. But if your DM takes the interpretation "no incapacitating anyone ever, because someone might decide to CdG them", then you obviously want to stay away from the vow.

[Waker]

I'd second looking at T G Oskar's Healer remake. It has some very nice mechanics to make healing a more worthwhile role. Alternatively you might like my Chorister class, which lets you play a healer/buffer type.

[ngilop]

I am going to put a shameless plug in for my own re-tooled healer (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=14851428#post14851428)

but I alwasy thoguht Vow of Peace only affected your teamates if the killed helpless/defensless beings not like crazy frothing at the mouth charging at you demons and such

also since undead and such aren't living isn't ther ea caveat that they are exempt form the vow of peave nonkilling ness drawbacks?

[sonofzeal]

The main thing with Vow of Peace, is talk to your DM about it before you start. sonofzeal's interpretation of the vow is a reasonable one, but ultimately, it's not his interpretation that's going to matter at your gaming table. If your DM takes the same interpretation, then go ahead and take the vow, as long as you don't have a Belkar in the party. But if your DM takes the interpretation "no incapacitating anyone ever, because someone might decide to CdG them", then you obviously want to stay away from the vow.
....yeah, pretty much. Especially with Exalted stuff, there seems to be a mandatory "DM PLEASE SCREW ME" sign that comes with it, even if the actual wording of the rules doesn't require it. I'll never understand why so many DMs feel the need to go for overly-strict interpretations, but they're out there and you should always check with yours to see how they handle things.

Still, the wording of the rules only REQUIRES that you fall right at the bottom of the spectrum I mentioned (1/10 or maybe 2/10). You obviously pass at the top of it (9/10 or 10/10). I see no reason whatsoever why your DM should be a jerk and punish you for stuff in the middle, knowing full well that it's going to destroy your character in particular and the party dynamic in general. RAW doesn't require them to do so, and all I can do here on the forum is advice you on what RAW says.