Awkward Party

[carrdrivesyou]

So I just started in a new Pathfinder Campaign, and I must say, our party is a bit unorthodox. The group just found the fifth player and so we should be ok.

The party consists of:
Halfling Rogue
Human Fighter (Will alternate wiz and ftr and eventually go eldritch knight)
Monk of the Four Winds (Not sure about race, likely human)
A rogue/wiz, will go arcane trickster (again not sure about race)
and finally, my Human paladin (going pure pally, THF style)

That having been said, we may obviously run into some issues in the healing department. I can use wands without an issue, and I am pretty sure both the rogues will be able to UMD wands without much problem. That having been said, should I optimize my LoH or damage output more? Should I focus on being more of a tank, or more of a healer?

[exelsisxax]

You're overrating the value of healing. Get some CLW wands and heal out of combat like everyone without a vitalist or life oracle does.

Kill the bad guys and they can't deal damage. If you use actions on healing, they stay alive and render your healing pointless. LoH is good only for swift healing yourself and dumping at the end of the day.

So get power attack, help the rogues flank, smash everything.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by carrdrivesyou
Should I focus on being more of a tank, or more of a healer?

This is something that will depend on the other players at your table. In my own experience, most players want healing in-combat, despite internet theorizing to the contrary.

This is not to say that the theorizing is unfounded—only that in most of the games I’ve been in, the other players don’t spend a lot of time on forums like this, and they want their healing sooner rather than later.

What level are you starting at? If you’re starting at first or thereabouts, that will give you some time to learn the other players’ preferences.

[Geddy2112]

You're overrating the value of healing. Get some CLW wands and heal out of combat like everyone without a vitalist or life oracle does.

Kill the bad guys and they can't deal damage. If you use actions on healing, they stay alive and render your healing pointless. LoH is good only for swift healing yourself and dumping at the end of the day.

So get power attack, help the rogues flank, smash everything.

Second this. Prevention is the best medicine. Healing in combat is really only key when 1. it is faster than a standard action 2. it brings action economy back to the side of the players(reviving downed allies, removing debuffs etc). 3. You have no other useful or pressing actions and it will do more good than an at will ability. As a paladin, you will almost always be better off attacking than healing unless situation 1 or 2.
A character alive with 1 HP is as dangerous as one with full health, and while they are more likely to die from the next hit vs go down, they are still acting.

That said, 1 character per 4-5 with in class healing is normally sufficient to keep an entire party topped off. Considering you have 2 more characters that can use wands on top of you topping people off with said wand, I think you will be fine. At higher levels the wizards can summon monsters to heal people. Most games I have played have done fine with 1 class with in class healing, and then 1-2 more spot healers to use a wand, etc. At higher levels, death itself becomes more of an inconvenience and just a temporary condition. I will say that at very low levels healing is a big deal, particularly 1st where you won't have LoH or a wand of CLW. By 3rd or 4th this should no longer be a problem.

[Elder_Basilisk]

It's a problem that will solve itself. When characters die for lack of healing, a player can roll up a cleric or Oracle. Odds are good that the character to die will not be your paladin...


As to the internet so-called wisdom that healing in combat is not necessary... Well it's true that you are likely to make it through any given combat without healing. And it is true that a character who only brings healing to the table is generally inefficient. However most good cleric, Oracle, or other "healer" builds bring more than just healing to the table. They usually bring buffing, some form of offense or both as well. Moreover they also bring status removal and utility which are what let's most parties win some fights that would otherwise be very challenging. (Freedom of movement, remove fear, remove paralysis, heroes feast, etc are game changers).

And without a source of in combat healing, parties tend to be brittle. Win initiative kill all the monsters works well until everyone rolls under 10 on in it and the monsters all roll above 15, then proceed to roll two crits and more hits than misses. At that point the party is behind the 8 ball and without some healing magic to slow the bleeding, the encounter can snowball out of control and result in character deaths even if the party is ultimately victorious. This party full of rogues, monks, and multiclassed wizards seems likely to be especially vulnerable to a bad matchup and a series of bad rolls leading to death.

On the other hand, what can you do about it? You could switch your character concept to Oradin and that might help but even then fragility is built into the party composition and reducing damage output to gain healing doesn't necessarily solve it.

[Florian]

Should I focus on being more of a tank, or more of a healer?

Smite them all, heal up later. Works best in PF, as we tried to tell you in your Pally build thread.

[ATHATH]

Human Fighter (Will alternate wiz and ftr and eventually go eldritch knight)
*hurk*

Have you recommended playing, say, a Magus or a Warpriest to the player that wants to play a Wizard/Fighter?

[Crake]

2. it brings action economy back to the side of the players(reviving downed allies, removing debuffs etc)

I disagree with this sentiment. It's far better to spend an action earlier to prevent your allies being downed. Once they're downed, they need to spend an action to pick up their weapon again, and spend another action to stand up, which will likely provoke an attack of opportunity, meaning they're just as likely to drop back down immediately. Better to stop them from dropping in the first place, you trade your standard action in exchange for a) not wasting an ally's entire action, and b) preventing an opponent from getting a free attack.

[Boggartbae]

I disagree with this sentiment. It's far better to spend an action earlier to prevent your allies being downed. Once they're downed, they need to spend an action to pick up their weapon again, and spend another action to stand up, which will likely provoke an attack of opportunity, meaning they're just as likely to drop back down immediately. Better to stop them from dropping in the first place, you trade your standard action in exchange for a) not wasting an ally's entire action, and b) preventing an opponent from getting a free attack.

This is very true. The only time you should heal in combat is if you don't think you can kill the monster before it gets an action, and if it will also use that action to drop a teammate.

If you want your healing to be more effective, then get some bracers of the merciful knight (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/a-b/bracers-of-the-merciful-knight/). They hardly cost anything, and give you 2d6 extra HP per heal. In combat healing needs to be in really large amounts, otherwise the enemy will negate it with their next action.

The bracer's are about as far as I would go, with maybe an ornament of healing light (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/m-p/ornament-of-healing-light/) so you don't have to move. Just focus on dealing damage and use your swift action heals to keep yourself tanky and alive.

Of course, being optimal isn't always the most fun thing to do, so if you really want to play a healer paladin, then I would peruse the pfsrd (https://cse.google.com/cse?q=lay+on+hands&cx=006680642033474972217%3A6zo0hx_wle8#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=lay%20on%20hands&gsc.ref=more%3Afeats&gsc.sort=) for things that affect lay on hands. Your character will still be effective I promise.

[Eldariel]

I disagree with this sentiment. It's far better to spend an action earlier to prevent your allies being downed. Once they're downed, they need to spend an action to pick up their weapon again, and spend another action to stand up, which will likely provoke an attack of opportunity, meaning they're just as likely to drop back down immediately. Better to stop them from dropping in the first place, you trade your standard action in exchange for a) not wasting an ally's entire action, and b) preventing an opponent from getting a free attack.

This is a matter of perfect vs imperfect information though. It's generally pretty hard to know in advance, which enemy will crit which party member on any given turn; thus damage can be wildly unpredictable and your action may or may not be used on the wrong target if you heal early. It's generally all about actions and which action is the most likely to minimize the amount of resources a given fight takes.

[Peat]

I figure by the time you have to make lots of feat choices about this, you'll have a far better idea of what's wanted at the table and what isn't.

[carrdrivesyou]

Smite them all, heal up later. Works best in PF, as we tried to tell you in your Pally build thread.

Caught me lol!

Really I was just curious if the party makeup would have changed this at all. It's been a long time since ive played pathfinder. Longer still since ive played a melee. SO I'm a bit out of my element.

[Florian]

Caught me lol!

Really I was just curious if the party makeup would have changed this at all. It's been a long time since ive played pathfinder. Longer still since ive played a melee. SO I'm a bit out of my element.

No worries, even on this board, there´re still some people that enjoy playing a solid melee.

Broadly speaking, unless certain "glass cannon" or "suicide tank" builds come into play, healing is not that much of an issue if people don´t act dumb and share their WBL and resources.

You have two arcane casters, they should be able to use preventive stuff like False Life, Protection from Energy, summon meat shie... erm monster, the Arcane Trickster should have UMD and be able to use scrolls and wands. Yes, that means survival and patching up is communal duty....

[Geddy2112]

I disagree with this sentiment. It's far better to spend an action earlier to prevent your allies being downed. Once they're downed, they need to spend an action to pick up their weapon again, and spend another action to stand up, which will likely provoke an attack of opportunity, meaning they're just as likely to drop back down immediately. Better to stop them from dropping in the first place, you trade your standard action in exchange for a) not wasting an ally's entire action, and b) preventing an opponent from getting a free attack.

This is very true. The only time you should heal in combat is if you don't think you can kill the monster before it gets an action, and if it will also use that action to drop a teammate.
I totally agree with this. If my cleric has deathwatch up and I can tell the barbarian is on 3hp or less from a single hit against a big nasty enemy, I am very likely going to cast the strongest healing spell I know on the barb. But also this:

This is a matter of perfect vs imperfect information though. It's generally pretty hard to know in advance, which enemy will crit which party member on any given turn; thus damage can be wildly unpredictable and your action may or may not be used on the wrong target if you heal early. It's generally all about actions and which action is the most likely to minimize the amount of resources a given fight takes.
You don't always know how bad off your party is, or what the damage range of a monster is, or if the DM just rolled really high and got lucky. Your ally might be out of deathwatch range(if you have it up), or you have no heal ranks, so you only have a general guess as to remaining HP. Likewise, instead of healing if I know my action could end the combat, I am liable to cast a combat ending spell/do something combat ending, rather than healing and giving the enemy any more turns. Say the party is up against a banshee, and it crit's with its touch attack-if the character is still up, they are bad off. As a cleric, I could cast heal on the party member, but I could also hit the banshee with heal, which could bring it one hit away from death, even if it saves. I could also cast anti-incorporeal shell, and once everyone is bubbled in I can heal them up, or if I have ranged party members they can shoot arrows/spells/stuff at the thing.

Healing in combat has a place, but there are usually better choices.

This does remind me of a good spell, paladin's sacrifice, that helps keep healing action economy on par. You can buffet a hit from the squishy guy immediate action and then take the damage, where you can swift action LoH yourself.

[weckar]

The mentality that actions used to eliminate are better than actions used to heal tend to ignore one basic fact: usually you don't know how many enemies there actually are.
Not knowing what actions will end a battle, therefore, force one to err towards caution.
Caution means staying alive at all costs.
Thus - in-combat healing.

[CharonsHelper]

*hurk*

Have you recommended playing, say, a Magus or a Warpriest to the player that wants to play a Wizard/Fighter?

Actually - starting at 10 Eldrich Knight is perfectly viable - so long as they only dip 1 level into a class for martial weapon proficiency and take the other 5 into Wizard before going Eldrich Knight. (Though an Inspired Blade Swashbuckler is probably a better dip than Fighter - as it's a stupidly good 1 level dip, especially since their INT will be high already.)

Casting as an 8th level wizard (and still have 10th level caster level with a Trait) is better than casting as a 10th level Magus, though the Magus has bonus stuff like Spell Combat & Spellstrike. As they level further the Eldrich Knight's spellcasting will get better faster than a magus's.

Now - starting at a lower level I would 100% agree with you that Magus is the better option, but level 9-10 is right about when Eldrich Knight becomes a solid choice. (though trickier to build - and from the OP is DOES seem like the player in question doesn't know how)

[weckar]

Alternating Fighter/Wizard rather than just a dip for proficiencies still falls on the NOT side of the Fence of Recommendation, though.

[CharonsHelper]

Alternating Fighter/Wizard rather than just a dip for proficiencies still falls on the NOT side of the Fence of Recommendation, though.

Definitely. And a magus is easier to build semi-competently. I just meant to point out that at level 10 an Eldritch Knight build can be very solid.

[carrdrivesyou]

Definitely. And a magus is easier to build semi-competently. I just meant to point out that at level 10 an Eldritch Knight build can be very solid.

I agree here. The player in question knows about the Magus, but specifically said that the EK is what they want to play. I discussed it with the DM, and he said since none of us are really Tier 1 or 2 builds, we should be playing to roughly the same level of power.

Personally, I rather like low tier games. They are a bit more challenging, and keep you on your feet a bit more.

[Florian]

I agree here. The player in question knows about the Magus, but specifically said that the EK is what they want to play. I discussed it with the DM, and he said since none of us are really Tier 1 or 2 builds, we should be playing to roughly the same level of power.

Personally, I rather like low tier games. They are a bit more challenging, and keep you on your feet a bit more.

Odd. Tiers measure raw power and the ability to break the game, not effficiency. Classes like the Magus or Warpriest are frighteningly efficient, but dont really break the game balance where it really counts.

[exelsisxax]

I agree here. The player in question knows about the Magus, but specifically said that the EK is what they want to play. I discussed it with the DM, and he said since none of us are really Tier 1 or 2 builds, we should be playing to roughly the same level of power.

Personally, I rather like low tier games. They are a bit more challenging, and keep you on your feet a bit more.

This is going to be a serious problem with something like a fighter3/wizard3 EK entry. You're talking about it as if the party is sitting comfortably in "system capable T3", when this guy is about to cripple himself with the extremely low floor of half-speed prepared spellcasting combined with the very low ceiling of throwing half his levels in the garbage(fighter). You're going to overshadow him, and quite frankly the rest of the party, by properly using power attack.

I don't forsee any colour sprays, glitterdusts,or hastes being prepared. I'm predicting magic missiles, true strike, and burning hands.

The help the party needs is for upgrades to Unchained rogues and monks. And if EK guy really wants to have levels of that particular PRC and won't settle for anything else 1 fighter level is enough rope to hang yourself with, he doesn't need any more. Healing is the least of your troubles if you want to actually worry about party viability.

[carrdrivesyou]

This is going to be a serious problem with something like a fighter3/wizard3 EK entry. You're talking about it as if the party is sitting comfortably in "system capable T3", when this guy is about to cripple himself with the extremely low floor of half-speed prepared spellcasting combined with the very low ceiling of throwing half his levels in the garbage(fighter). You're going to overshadow him, and quite frankly the rest of the party, by properly using power attack.

I don't forsee any colour sprays, glitterdusts,or hastes being prepared. I'm predicting magic missiles, true strike, and burning hands.

The help the party needs is for upgrades to Unchained rogues and monks. And if EK guy really wants to have levels of that particular PRC and won't settle for anything else 1 fighter level is enough rope to hang yourself with, he doesn't need any more. Healing is the least of your troubles if you want to actually worry about party viability.

Please expose any major or minor flaws you see. I am looking for creative ways to really help the party and make things fun for the newbies as much as myself.

I like to optimize but not necessarily min max. This is one of those exceptions because newbies tend to make mistakes, and I don't want them to get discouraged. So if there are any bits of gear or feats that would help fill in holes, send em at me. If you can see any problems that may arise from an RP point of view, throw em at me. I'd like to be prepared.

[exelsisxax]

Please expose any major or minor flaws you see. I am looking for creative ways to really help the party and make things fun for the newbies as much as myself.

I like to optimize but not necessarily min max. This is one of those exceptions because newbies tend to make mistakes, and I don't want them to get discouraged. So if there are any bits of gear or feats that would help fill in holes, send em at me. If you can see any problems that may arise from an RP point of view, throw em at me. I'd like to be prepared.

Alright, so I really wasn't clear.

There is nothing you could do as a paladin to save this party. If the DM plays even a relatively easy AP by the book you are likely to get TPK'd. Despite having 5 players, this party is composed mainly of classes with dramatic, inescapable drawbacks, extremely poorly executed build goals, or being hard to play without moderate system mastery.

In 3.5, druids had 3 class features that were each more powerful than the entire monk class. It's not as bad in PF, but there's a reason unchained monk exists: vanilla monk is garbage and you should not let any new player use one. Vanilla rogues are almost as worthless, and you should under no circumstances allow new players to play them.

If you're worried about eating a TPK, worry about your party members. You can't heal when you're dead, and ultimate mercy has really high prerequisites so healing dead people probably isn't happening either. If an anti-optimized party can handle what the DM throws at you, you won't need healing. Or anything, really.

You see a party-wide problem, address it as a party-wide problem. Inform the EK guy that his planned build sucks, and newbies should probably play sorcs anyway. sorcadin, previously recommended magus, if he's that into EK, but pretty much anything else is better than EK anyway.
Why are there 2 rogues? Parties can absolutely work well with copies of classes, but make sure they are aware of this. They will absolutely be stepping on eachother's toes, and that of EK fighter guy(god help him). If the trickster guy wants a magic rogue there's more newb-friendly methods, like a straight up wizard rogue archetype and various magus archetypes.
Monk guy absolutely must play an UCmonk. Ask your DM to make the elemental fist exchange, the rest of the features don't really matter. I'll bet you never hit 12th level, just like almost nobody does.

I can't give you fluff reasons, because you haven't said anything about RP goals or setting and fluff is fluffable anyway.

[Boggartbae]

This does remind me of a good spell, paladin's sacrifice, that helps keep healing action economy on par. You can buffet a hit from the squishy guy immediate action and then take the damage, where you can swift action LoH yourself.

I love that spell so much. I once used it to save a child from a burning building by casting it while jumping so I took his falling damage.