Designers : Please tone down Healer Kit feat & the cleric class to be taken seriously

From the other thread:

58409598 wrote:
90830509 wrote:
Healing kits are a general resource to supplement wands and potions, or other healing resources. It should not be a replacement for class ability. Class ability supports the widest range of campaign settings, and it also isolates the character from DM intervention, when a resource is not availabe due to the setting, money, etc. 

However, martial healing can be different in comparison to divine or other types of healing. It is fair to make one weaker than the other, and provide variety in the healing methods classes can use. They may specialize to create a niche. So where a cleric is not to be touched with healing output, or even utility (cure disease, etc.), the warlord can specialize in damage mitigation, second wind, with a sprinkling of martial healing that is weaker, but offer the same effects as a cure light wounds. I don't mind the natural design emphasis, or incorporating a certain feel to justify the mechanics. But if you just rule out martial healing because all hit points are meat, then you lost me.  

 

In this case healing kits heal more than potions, and healing kits can be more readily available than wands or potions depending on the campaign style.

Look at it again. 1 feat + kits compares well to a 5th level cleric for in combat healing.  1 third level spell, 2 second level spells, 3 first level spells for the cleric using all slots on cure wounds cures 6 times for 29, 40, 33 because using the higher level slots makes for bigger number for a total of 102 hit points.  A healer feat and kits heals 100 hit points throughout the day on a party of 4 5th level characters using 8 actions.

In what way is that healer feat and kit not keeping up?  That cleric is forced to use all of his spell slots just to compete with a feat, cast spells for nothing else, and only has an advantage in bigger bursts or hitting the same target multiple times as necessary and relying on cantrips and cleric combat for everything else.  A fighter with that feat would compare well to cleric healing, even without warlord-like powers.

That feat using kits is a strong feat.  It kicks tail over a first level cleric.

 

Wotc, please pass this serious bug on to Mearls et al.

I find it reprehensible that I can build a fighter and with one of his/her many feats, have equivalent (or even superior) daily healing to that of a cleric. I wanted to play a Next cleric and now I feel completely deflated by this feat. It's such a sad thing to see so little respect for the cleric's role in D&D, one of the core 4 classes. 

I believe it's completely overpowered to encompass the cleric class' main purpose, to heal her party mates, via a single feat, and unfuriating that many think it's a good idea so they don't have to have a cleric in their party. That's fine, but the healing this feat provides is WAY too good.

Please, tone down the healing value, and make it non-usable in combat. It will still be very powerful, even at 1/2 the cleric's output. A cleric, don't forget, will rarely use 100% of her spells for healing, which means this feat is EASILY providing more than the cleric can in a single day.

That would be like making an Arcane Initiate feat provide "Magic Missile, Invisility, Fly, and Fireball" spells to anyone who wants it. Completely broken and overpowered to replace an entire class for the cost of one feat. It's insulting to clerics, and to the power of the gods, if any schlep can put a couple bandages on and brew some tea and somehow that's equivalent mechanically, and in HP healed per day, as someone who devoted their entire lives to their gods to do just that.

My Cleric of Life, is now a Fighter + Healer Kit. At level 5 I'll be a much better melee combatant than I would be as a cleric, with the equivalent in healing ability == completely overpowered.

Cleric is a Core 4 class. No single feat should provide 100% of the healing that single-classed clerics can provide if they focus all their spells on just healing.
Mmm.

Disagree.

I mean, I completely see where you're coming from. But it seems like one of those things where you just change the definition of short/long rest. Or change the rate of healing.

Basically, you can tone it down at your table.

I'd turn it up, because I like that style. But it's really one of those things that appears to work best on the "dial."
So you're okay if a cleric can pick up a feat and be just as good at fighting as a fighter, then?

Just so we're clear.

A feat is supposed to be roughly equivalent in power to a +2 ability bump, not FIVE LEVELS OF CLERIC

It's so insulting to realize the designers think a cleric's healing contribution is worth only a single feat. 

Is this to be the way forward, then? Completely obviating the main schtick of an entire class via a single feat?

If my choice to play a cleric means so little that it's main purpose is easily swappable to any other party member, that just makes me so mad. Might as well just play a fighter and take the feat then.

So disappointed right now. 
It is pretty powerfull, but is the problem that the feat is to powerfull or the cleric to weak when it comes to healing.

Personaly find that the healing duties of the cleric cut to much into his spell slots.
So one of the remarks i made in the latest survey is that Channel Divinity: Restore Health should be avilible to all clerics not just the ones with the life domain.


 
I posted in the other thread where this rant is playing out, but really the feat does not make a person into a healer.


That little analysis you quoted completely ignored the Cleric of Life's Channel Divinity.

So your level 4 Cleric of Life could heal 20 hp per fight without casting Cure even once.  You'd trade that for the ability to heal someone 1d6+4+level once and then nothing else on that guy until after the fight? 
If it costs the Cleric a feat to be able to fight as well as the fighter, that will be a nice change over certain editions where the Cleric was better all the time (feats or no).

That said - I don't see the sole function of a cleric as a healer. I like to think that feat exists for parties w/o clerics or for clerics who'd rather have more fun with their spells (specifically for players who don't find spending all spells on healing as fun).
It is pretty powerfull, but is the problem that the feat is to powerfull or the cleric to weak when it comes to healing.

Personaly find that the healing duties of the cleric cut to much into his spell slots.
So one of the remarks i made in the latest survey is that Channel Divinity: Restore Health should be avilible to all clerics not just the ones with the life domain.

 



I was planning on playing a Life Domain cleric, in fact I made another thread about it. 

I'm fine with this feat existing, just not being so powerful. I thought we were against making casters OP again. Inflating clerics' healing just to balance a single feat seems backwards to me. It's the feat that should be toned down. By like 50%.

And at least make it not usable in combat. There's no real way to apply bandages during combat while the victim is still moving around and fighting. If they're down, sure, but a single action "insta-heal" seems awfully fast, you'd have to be The Flash to apply bandages to someone in the same time it takes to swing a sword. And that's just a realism argument. From a balance standpoint, it's exactly the equivalent of a cleric's Cure Wounds spell, combined with spending an entire level in cleric so that you can cast it at higher caster levels.

Essentially 1 feat = 1 level of cleric. So at 4th level, anyone can multiclass into cleric for 1 feat and keep on their same main class, and have the cleric heal auto-scale up by character level. Is that the design? If so, I'd like to see it apply in other classes too, so it doesn't feel like the cleric is the ugly stepchild of the D&D world that nobody wants to play.

I want to play it, just not if it's going to be considered that way. I'd rather play a fighter + healer kit. Let's face it, healing is the main thing that clerics do. A feat should NOT come close to replicating another classes' main schtick. Way too cheap a price, way too unfair.

Clerics were completely superfluous in 4e because everyone else could heal themselves. Next is shaping up to follow the same path, all you need is one person in every group to take this feat (or have the DM give it to you), and voila, free, overpowered healing again for everyone for basically negligible cost.

Especially in groups that will houserule that you can grab both a feat and a stat bump (or maybe give away free feats at level 1), I see the cleric class being DOA in Next because of this.

Please either remove it or tone it down. We don't want another edition where Clerics are trash. We don't want them overpowered either, but if a single feat drastically reduces the benefit a single class brings to the party, especially one of the core 4, it needs to go or be toned down. 
If it costs the Cleric a feat to be able to fight as well as the fighter, that will be a nice change over certain editions where the Cleric was better all the time (feats or no). That said - I don't see the sole function of a cleric as a healer. I like to think that feat exists for parties w/o clerics or for clerics who'd rather have more fun with their spells (specifically for players who don't find spending all spells on healing as fun).



totally agree.

feats are a strict enough resource in 5e that i don't see this as a major problem.

if someone wants to be able to heal like a cleric, good for them.  the cleric still has a bucket of things that make them valuable.

Happy to be back on the best D&D forum on the internet!

The feat implies specialty, no?

Like heavy armor MASTER.

Seems like you'd be at least paramedic level if you took the feat.
If it costs the Cleric a feat to be able to fight as well as the fighter, that will be a nice change over certain editions where the Cleric was better all the time (feats or no). That said - I don't see the sole function of a cleric as a healer. I like to think that feat exists for parties w/o clerics or for clerics who'd rather have more fun with their spells (specifically for players who don't find spending all spells on healing as fun).



my problem is that in 4th edition the healing recource and the spell recource where split, to give the cleric more freedim in choice of his spells.

In DnD Next both healing and other spells once again take up the same spelslot recource,and you have less spell slots then you did for example in ADnD 2nd.
This leads to Cleric paralisis, where the player is to afraid to use his spells becouse the next fight might go badly and he might need them to heal.



 
If it costs the Cleric a feat to be able to fight as well as the fighter, that will be a nice change over certain editions where the Cleric was better all the time (feats or no). That said - I don't see the sole function of a cleric as a healer. I like to think that feat exists for parties w/o clerics or for clerics who'd rather have more fun with their spells (specifically for players who don't find spending all spells on healing as fun).



my problem is that in 4th edition the healing recource and the spell recource where split, to give the cleric more freedim in choice of his spells.

In DnD Next both healing and other spells once again take up the same spelslot recource,and you have less spell slots then you did for example in ADnD 2nd.
This leads to Cleric paralisis, where the player is to afraid to use his spells becouse the next fight might go badly and he might need them to heal.

 



Exactly this feat will in practice result in MORE healing than a cleric will provide, unless you play that cleric strictly as a healbot.

It's awful design to have a single feat completely overshadow the value of an entire class' primary function. 

I thought specialists in things were encapsulated in classes, and they were supposed to be the BEST at those things. Right now, a cleric is only the best at healing compared to a single feat, if he / she does NOTHING else with her spells than heal.

Completely overpowered.

The equivalent would be putting the barbarian rage mechanic in a feat, or the rogue's sneak attack ability.

Potions and kits made by mortals should be strictly weaker than divine healing magic. Same with all the other classes' main schticks, I don't want a single feat to completely make their contributions superfluous and weaker than someone else who took a single feat.

Right now a cleric is forced to fual all her spell slots into healing to get the equivalent in HP to this feat. It's awful. And it only takes an action to apply a healing kit in combat? WTH.
And if a cleric's 'primary function' was to heal and heal alone, you might have a point.

"Lightning...it flashes bright, then fades away.  It can't protect, it can only destroy."

And if a cleric's 'primary function' was to heal and heal alone, you might have a point.



I do have a point, I rolled up a cleric today to do precisely that, and found out that even on days when I spend ALL her slots on healing, some guy waltzes by with his crummy medieval bandages and usurps my role in the party, at no cost to his primary function in his class other than +1 to hit.

+1 to hit is worth an entire, auto-levelling multiclass cleric 100% dedicating her spell slots to only healing? really?

Does that seem balanced to you? 

my problem is that in 4th edition the healing recource and the spell recource where split, to give the cleric more freedim in choice of his spells.

In DnD Next both healing and other spells once again take up the same spelslot recource,and you have less spell slots then you did for example in ADnD 2nd.
This leads to Cleric paralisis, where the player is to afraid to use his spells becouse the next fight might go badly and he might need them to heal.
 



As I've mentioned a few times already, if you're playing a Cleric of Life, which is the only type of Cleric I'm going to assume if you want to be a capital 'H' Healer, then you can use Channel Divinity to heal without touching your spell slots.  Restore Health can heal a character for way more than the feat-buffed healing kit can.

And if somebody really needs your help but you're out of spells, you've got Spare From Dying to keep picking him back up. 
I don't see what stops a cleric from picking the feat himself and still heal better than anyone else with the feat.
IIRC in 2nd edition, not every priest could even heal. And an evil cleric in 3rd edition also really had no healing duties.

I would like the game to not rely on clerical healing, or that feat. IMHO people should think more about fighting. Having lost half your hit points should mean, that you are not at full power anymore. This way, even little fights should be avoided. Of course, this is a playstyle thing. If you like it differently, healing powers of clerics should be increased.
Actually, that's a good point. Picking up that kit on my cleric will MASSIVELY increase the usage of all the other slots on the cleric for non-healing things.

Way to go for casters re-gaining the full use of their non-heals.

Perhaps that's the design. This kit benefits a party greatly without a cleric, but benefits a party with a cleric even more, since that cleric's otherwise-used-as healing slots will now be used as non-Cure Wounds.

I just don't like the idea that the main schtick of my class is usurped by a single mega-feat that replicates casting Cure Wounds as many times as a cleric can, and just as well.

I'm realizing the power of the pressure on higher level spell slots now, and why the cleric channel divinity is so good. Those spell slots are much better used for other buffs and fun things like Bless. I hope that stays as 1d4 instead of some lame +1

That feat, really, is a huge buff to clerics due to the way the slot usage is designed. I might be wrong about this feat, actually, but definitely not about the fact that it only takes a single action. Or if they leave that part in, they should tone down the healing value to be at least a bit lower.
Actually, that's a good point. Picking up that kit on my cleric will MASSIVELY increase the usage of all the other slots on the cleric for non-healing things.

Way to go for casters re-gaining the full use of their non-heals.

Perhaps that's the design. This kit benefits a party greatly without a cleric, but benefits a party with a cleric even more, since that cleric's otherwise-used-as healing slots will now be used as non-Cure Wounds.


I just don't like the idea that the main schtick of my class is usurped by a single mega-feat that replicates casting Cure Wounds as many times as a cleric can, and just as well.

I'm realizing the power of the pressure on higher level spell slots now, and why the cleric channel divinity is so good. Those spell slots are much better used for other buffs and fun things.

That feat, really, is a huge buff to clerics due to the way the slot usage is designed. I might be wrong about this feat, actually, but definitely not about the fact that it only takes a single action. Or if they leave that part in, they should tone down the healing value to be at least a bit lower. 



And enlightenment occurs.  Always a wonderful thing to see.

"Lightning...it flashes bright, then fades away.  It can't protect, it can only destroy."

The feats intended purpose is to allow a party to function, a bit, without the need for the cleric role. There are some limitations on the feat such as you can gain its benefits once without a short rest, cant be gained until 4th level, and uses up an extreamly finite resource.

Also, as a person who LOVES playing clerics, I have no problem with the feat. For one, it removes some of the pressure of playing HP Babysitter and it opens up more spells which adds more versatility for me to be awesome.
forgoing a stat bumb is worth a lot more than a measly +1 to attack. you forget that it could potentially raise two odd stats for a dual 5% better rate of succeding at anything tied to those stats. even going for the double bump to increase one stat is going to make for a 5-10% increase in everything that stat does.

Happy to be back on the best D&D forum on the internet!

Actually, that's a good point. Picking up that kit on my cleric will MASSIVELY increase the usage of all the other slots on the cleric for non-healing things.

Way to go for casters re-gaining the full use of their non-heals.

Perhaps that's the design. This kit benefits a party greatly without a cleric, but benefits a party with a cleric even more, since that cleric's otherwise-used-as healing slots will now be used as non-Cure Wounds.


I just don't like the idea that the main schtick of my class is usurped by a single mega-feat that replicates casting Cure Wounds as many times as a cleric can, and just as well.

I'm realizing the power of the pressure on higher level spell slots now, and why the cleric channel divinity is so good. Those spell slots are much better used for other buffs and fun things.

That feat, really, is a huge buff to clerics due to the way the slot usage is designed. I might be wrong about this feat, actually, but definitely not about the fact that it only takes a single action. Or if they leave that part in, they should tone down the healing value to be at least a bit lower. 



And enlightenment occurs.  Always a wonderful thing to see.




I, unlike other people on this board, can admit when I'm wrong about something.

Maybe others here should learn that same trick. It's a neat one to have, speaking as an adult. 
The feats intended purpose is to allow a party to function, a bit, without the need for the cleric role. There are some limitations on the feat such as you can gain its benefits once without a short rest, cant be gained until 4th level, and uses up an extreamly finite resource. Also, as a person who LOVES playing clerics, I have no problem with the feat. For one, it removes some of the pressure of playing HP Babysitter and it opens up more spells which adds more versatility for me to be awesome.



+1.

Ok, I agree with the feat now.

Besides, it will be nice to see the 4e fans squirm that they have to spend one of their precious min-max ability bumps to do something their characters had for free. I.e. clerics provide something they need, but don't want to invest in themselves.  And if I finally decide to play a fighter instead of a cleric when the final rules come out, I could risk rolling my stats to get an 18 in strength and take this healing kit feat instead of playing a cleric too, should I so desire.

Next = Win

So long as in practice I can get enough healing out of my channels that I can cast some other spells than healing, I'm happy. Just don't want to have to take that feat to have my class function properly. Name one other class that needs a feat so they can use all their abilities. Well, mages don't even get the equivalent, do they. 

Are those feats for mage spells any good? I didn't read them yet. 
I posted in the other thread where this rant is playing out, but really the feat does not make a person into a healer.


That little analysis you quoted completely ignored the Cleric of Life's Channel Divinity.

So your level 4 Cleric of Life could heal 20 hp per fight without casting Cure even once.  You'd trade that for the ability to heal someone 1d6+4+level once and then nothing else on that guy until after the fight? 



The cleric of life's channel divinity completely ignores the the fact that it's only available to 1 of 4 spell healers and only a limted selection of those.  ;)
Actually, that's a good point. Picking up that kit on my cleric will MASSIVELY increase the usage of all the other slots on the cleric for non-healing things.

Way to go for casters re-gaining the full use of their non-heals.

Perhaps that's the design. This kit benefits a party greatly without a cleric, but benefits a party with a cleric even more, since that cleric's otherwise-used-as healing slots will now be used as non-Cure Wounds.


I just don't like the idea that the main schtick of my class is usurped by a single mega-feat that replicates casting Cure Wounds as many times as a cleric can, and just as well.

I'm realizing the power of the pressure on higher level spell slots now, and why the cleric channel divinity is so good. Those spell slots are much better used for other buffs and fun things.

That feat, really, is a huge buff to clerics due to the way the slot usage is designed. I might be wrong about this feat, actually, but definitely not about the fact that it only takes a single action. Or if they leave that part in, they should tone down the healing value to be at least a bit lower. 



And enlightenment occurs.  Always a wonderful thing to see.




I, unlike other people on this board, can admit when I'm wrong about something.

Maybe others here should learn that same trick. It's a neat one to have, speaking as an adult. 






Just use one of your feats the cleric gets for it and you're fine again.  The illustration was to demonstrate the relative value of the feat.



Told ya.  ;)

 
Besides, it will be nice to see the 4e fans squirm that they have to spend one of their precious min-max ability bumps to do something their characters had for free. .
 


With people like this being endorsers of Next, I pity the franchise's future.  How do you get to that point.....having such vitriol towards people who happen to like a particular edition of a ROLE PLAYING GAME?  It's laughable. If design features of Next truly cause people to "squirm" then the development process has gone horribly wrong. 

completely agree with the OP. healer feat is super OP, i cannot believe they made such a travesty. that single feat completely undermines the natural healing rules and not auto full heal every day. its not like its crazy hard to die already. omg, epic fail. one solution: make it temp hp only which only lasts till the next short rest. that would be a useful, balanced feat.

 
Besides, it will be nice to see the 4e fans squirm that they have to spend one of their precious min-max ability bumps to do something their characters had for free. .
 


With people like this being endorsers of Next, I pity the franchise's future.  How do you get to that point.....having such vitriol towards people who happen to like a particular edition of a ROLE PLAYING GAME?  It's laughable.   



I like how it immediately followed the "I'm a mature adult!" post.  Care for some popcorn, Gareson?

"Lightning...it flashes bright, then fades away.  It can't protect, it can only destroy."


 
Besides, it will be nice to see the 4e fans squirm that they have to spend one of their precious min-max ability bumps to do something their characters had for free. .
 


With people like this being endorsers of Next, I pity the franchise's future.  How do you get to that point.....having such vitriol towards people who happen to like a particular edition of a ROLE PLAYING GAME?  It's laughable.   



I like how it immediately followed the "I'm a mature adult!" post.  Care for some popcorn, Gareson?


I mean, I am a big 4e-fan and I don't care for what I see in Next...but I would never wish discomfort on someone. Unbelievable. 
Besides, it will be nice to see the 4e fans squirm that they have to spend one of their precious min-max ability bumps to do something their characters had for free.


If Second Wind remains a Fighter-only feature, I may just give the Healer feat to everyone for free at level 2.  That's the beauty of the home game.  I can give everyone a pseudo-second wind if I want to.  Oh, sure.  They can't use those characters in LFR.  But no one I knows plays LFR.  So, it's all good.

And, the more they can heal, the more they're willing to do before they start the search for a place to hole up and rest.

Besides, it will be nice to see the 4e fans squirm that they have to spend one of their precious min-max ability bumps to do something their characters had for free.


If Second Wind remains a Fighter-only feature, I may just give the Healer feat to everyone for free at level 2.  That's the beauty of the home game.  I can give everyone a pseudo-second wind if I want to.  Oh, sure.  They can't use those characters in LFR.  But no one I knows plays LFR.  So, it's all good.

And, the more they can heal, the more they're willing to do before they start the search for a place to hole up and rest.




But...wait...then there would be no squirmingFrown  .


 
Besides, it will be nice to see the 4e fans squirm that they have to spend one of their precious min-max ability bumps to do something their characters had for free. .
 


With people like this being endorsers of Next, I pity the franchise's future.  How do you get to that point.....having such vitriol towards people who happen to like a particular edition of a ROLE PLAYING GAME?  It's laughable.   



I like how it immediately followed the "I'm a mature adult!" post.  Care for some popcorn, Gareson?


I mean, I am a big 4e-fan and I don't care for what I see in Next...but I would never wish discomfort on someone. Unbelievable. 



Pretty much everything 4e fans post here makes me uncomfortable in some way, and you are very well aware of it and yet do it anyway, as if you're going to turn back the clock and make most D&D fans out there suddenly like that game, and get them to re-write D&D Next to make stuff like Second Wind universal.

Compare a fighter's Second Wind, at level 1 (50% HP per day), with a Paladin's level 18 Divine Recovery (40 HP). And then tell me it's not waaaaaay overpowered. 

Then, add Healer for free since the fighter has enough ability boosts to get a 20 in their main stat by level 8 (same as a paladin), despite getting Healer feat "for free" at level 4. Fighters get 7 ability boost and Paladins get 4.

You MUST assume, given how good Healer is, that every fighter will take it.

How does this impact The Paladin, The Ranger, The Druid, and The Cleric? ONLY the cleric dedicated to healing will have more daily healing potential than the fighter who spent one of his innumerable feats on it. The paladin might too, but then again, the paladin is absolutely weaker in so many other ways, it's not even funny, especially considering Second Wind is available to a fighter at level 1, and a paladin only gets something (weaker), at level 18.

This one feat breaks the balance of all the other non-healing focused classes that can heal, by providing SUPERIOR healing to every single one of them.

So yes, I do get a little bit of glee that min-maxers will put off that feat choice at level 4 and kill themselves in the process. It's way better than any other feat, IMO. Tell me, can a cleric take a single feat and get the main fighter DPR ? No.

So, yes, the feat is overpowered. I was so happy when they gave cure wounds to rangers and paladins at level 1 two packets ago, I thought that was terrific. And now they pull this auto-awesome overpowered feat on us.

When a single feat is EQUIVALENT in one way to the main schtick of an entire class, and SURPASSES every other class such as the paladin and ranger that has Cure Wounds as class features, that is called a broken feat.

I changed my mind, and that's what I submitted after I read and re-read every single class today and spent 5 hours giving considered, careful feedback to every class.

Almost every survey feedback I've seen at least one, and sometimes several, of my suggestions in the next packet. That doesn't mean they listened to just me, it just says that I'm merely one of the people who noticed such things, and my own interpretation more often than not is congruent with that of the majority.

I severely doubt that Healer feat + Second Wind will be untouched for the next packet, if they're in there at all. 
How much does a healer kit heal with the feat? d6+2+level or something like that right (I don't have the packet on me)?

So as an action you can heal a small amount of damage which is great out of combat, but in combat most classes have better things to do like kill a monster so he won't deal that same damage and more next round. A cleric in contrast can heal much more in any individual round, making him terrific if you want to be able to substantially heal in-combat.
The Oberoni fallacy only applies to broken rules, not rules you don't like. If a rule you don't like can be easily ignored, it should exist in the game for those who will enjoy it.

How much does a healer kit heal with the feat? d6+2+level or something like that right (I don't have the packet on me)?

So as an action you can heal a small amount of damage which is great out of combat, but in combat most classes have better things to do like kill a monster so he won't deal that same damage and more next round. A cleric in contrast can heal much more in any individual round, making him terrific if you want to be able to substantially heal in-combat.



Not only this, but most people don't have healer's kits in their off hand.  It's going to take time to access it.  Also, a person can only recieve the benefits of a healer's kit once every short rest.  so at least an hour in between them.

Combine that with the fact that healing isn't the cleric's only skills, and I don't see a problem with it.

Pretty much everything 4e fans post here makes me uncomfortable in some way, and you are very well aware of it and yet do it anyway, as if you're going to turn back the clock and make most D&D fans out there suddenly like that game, and get them to re-write D&D Next to make stuff like Second Wind universal.

Compare a fighter's Second Wind, at level 1 (50% HP per day), with a Paladin's level 18 Divine Recovery (40 HP). And then tell me it's not waaaaaay overpowered. 

Then, add Healer for free since the fighter has enough ability boosts to get a 20 in their main stat by level 8 (same as a paladin), despite getting Healer feat "for free" at level 4. Fighters get 7 ability boost and Paladins get 4.

You MUST assume, given how good Healer is, that every fighter will take it.



Observe the bolded part.  Keep it in mind.

How does this impact The Paladin, The Ranger, The Druid, and The Cleric? ONLY the cleric dedicated to healing will have more daily healing potential than the fighter who spent one of his innumerable feats on it. The paladin might too, but then again, the paladin is absolutely weaker in so many other ways, it's not even funny, especially considering Second Wind is available to a fighter at level 1, and a paladin only gets something (weaker), at level 18.

This one feat breaks the balance of all the other non-healing focused classes that can heal, by providing SUPERIOR healing to every single one of them.

So yes, I do get a little bit of glee that min-maxers will put off that feat choice at level 4 and kill themselves in the process. It's way better than any other feat, IMO. Tell me, can a cleric take a single feat and get the main fighter DPR ? No. 



Okay.  Here's a problem I'm running into.  First, you claim that you MUST assume EVERY fighter will take this feat -- in old-school parlance, a purely min-max way of thinking.  THEN you go on to say that it makes you gleeful that min-maxers will kill themselves by NOT taking the feat choice (when the min-max way of thinking -- that you must take it -- is the position you've apparently adopted).  One of these things is not like the other, and this inherent contradiction makes your entire post...difficult to understand.


"Lightning...it flashes bright, then fades away.  It can't protect, it can only destroy."


How much does a healer kit heal with the feat? d6+2+level or something like that right (I don't have the packet on me)?

So as an action you can heal a small amount of damage which is great out of combat, but in combat most classes have better things to do like kill a monster so he won't deal that same damage and more next round. A cleric in contrast can heal much more in any individual round, making him terrific if you want to be able to substantially heal in-combat.



Not only this, but most people don't have healer's kits in their off hand.  It's going to take time to access it.  Also, a person can only recieve the benefits of a healer's kit once every short rest.  so at least an hour in between them.

Combine that with the fact that healing isn't the cleric's only skills, and I don't see a problem with it.




It takes one action to use a healer kit, and zero actions to take it out, for the same reasons it takes zero actions to draw your sword : they got rid of minor actions in this game.

The actual healing provided is 1d6 + 4 + the level of the person being healed. It's too fake to apply bandages in a 6 seconds.

Personally, I don't think it's a must have feat for fighters at all.  Not when you consider all the other options.

It's a bulky mechanic; breaking into your pack in the heat of combat to heal an ally that might not even be anywhere near you, for what?  1d6+4+level hit points?  And only being able to heal that person once per hour?

Heck no man.  the fighter should be fighting things.  Keeping the enemies off the squishier classes.  It's nice to have as an option, especially if you don't have a cleric around, but hardly a must have.
How much does a healer kit heal with the feat? d6+2+level or something like that right (I don't have the packet on me)?

So as an action you can heal a small amount of damage which is great out of combat, but in combat most classes have better things to do like kill a monster so he won't deal that same damage and more next round. A cleric in contrast can heal much more in any individual round, making him terrific if you want to be able to substantially heal in-combat.



Most classes can't heal much more at low levels, and that's the point.  Cure wounds heals an average of 11 hit points, or requires using higher spell slots.  At 4th level, a the healer feat heals 11.5 hit points on average and can be used more times per day than those other classes have spell slots, let alone spell slots to exclusively devote to cure wounds.  Clerics casting cure wounds also have that same action cost that could be spent doing something else.

Players who want to heal should take the feat so they can spend their spells elsewhere, but the estimating the relative strength of the feat it's pretty strong.
It takes one action to use a healer kit, and zero actions to take it out, for the same reasons it takes zero actions to draw your sword : they got rid of minor actions in this game.

The actual healing provided is 1d6 + 4 + the level of the person being healed. It's too fake to apply bandages in a 6 seconds.





It takes zero actions to dig into your pack and pull something out?  I mean, your sword sheath is right there.  That's one thing.  Digging into your pack, that you probably happen to be wearing, is different.

Oh, and applying a field dressing in 6 seconds isn't that unreasonable.  I've done it.  Dozens of times.  It's just a field dressing.  I'm assuming they aren't talking about pressure dressings or tourniquet.
And if a cleric's 'primary function' was to heal and heal alone, you might have a point.



I guess it would depend on playstyle but when we played ADnD 2nd and 3rd edition, a claric had to alocate about 50% of his spell slots to healing and removing ewffects, to keepup with the chalanges a day of adventuring would bring.

so when we play the style and amount of encounters in a day we are used to the priest runs into truble.
Where even with healing hitdice ( that can only be used during an hour rest so often can't be fit into a adventuring day) the cleric must dedicate so much of his spells slots to healing.

How much does a healer kit heal with the feat? d6+2+level or something like that right (I don't have the packet on me)?

So as an action you can heal a small amount of damage which is great out of combat, but in combat most classes have better things to do like kill a monster so he won't deal that same damage and more next round. A cleric in contrast can heal much more in any individual round, making him terrific if you want to be able to substantially heal in-combat.



Most classes can't heal much more at low levels, and that's the point.  Cure wounds heals an average of 11 hit points, or requires using higher spell slots.  At 4th level, a the healer feat heals 11.5 hit points on average and can be used more times per day than those other classes have spell slots, let alone spell slots to exclusively devote to cure wounds.  Clerics casting cure wounds also have that same action cost that could be spent doing something else.

Players who want to heal should take the feat so they can spend their spells elsewhere, but the estimating the relative strength of the feat it's pretty strong.


I'm not saying it's not a potent feat, but I don't think it invalidates the cleric as a primary healer especially considering the cleric can also get the feat, and the feat can only be used 1/short rest (someone said that, I'm not looking at the packet right now).
The Oberoni fallacy only applies to broken rules, not rules you don't like. If a rule you don't like can be easily ignored, it should exist in the game for those who will enjoy it.
If it costs the Cleric a feat to be able to fight as well as the fighter, that will be a nice change over certain editions where the Cleric was better all the time (feats or no). That said - I don't see the sole function of a cleric as a healer. I like to think that feat exists for parties w/o clerics or for clerics who'd rather have more fun with their spells (specifically for players who don't find spending all spells on healing as fun).



my problem is that in 4th edition the healing recource and the spell recource where split, to give the cleric more freedim in choice of his spells.

In DnD Next both healing and other spells once again take up the same spelslot recource,and you have less spell slots then you did for example in ADnD 2nd.
This leads to Cleric paralisis, where the player is to afraid to use his spells becouse the next fight might go badly and he might need them to heal.



 



I agree. That is why I like healing is based on multiple resources, i.e. character (surges/hit dice/equivalent), class ability, and external sources like potions, healing kits, natural or anything else you can think about. With so many layers, it allows you to adjust the campaign style with a great amount of flexibility. It also helps isolate healing, if you want to strip off layers, starting with external resources, class ability and finally the characters ability to heal. It can also free up a class that is based on healing to do other things.
Sign In to post comments