I am hoping for a bit of a history lesson from veteran players. I find it strange that a Cleric can cause 3d10 points of damage easier than curing the same amount of HP. As 1st level spells, wouldn't you think a Cleric would have a better ability to heal than to hurt? Has there been a discussion about this already? A follow up question is about Domains. Are there any Domains that make the Inflict Wounds even more deadly? I might have missed it, and do not have a players manual. Thanks in advance!
You have to considerer another thing about the game design.
Monsters usually have more hp than a character. So, the scale from damage and heal is different
I don't agree. Monsters do not have more hit points than characters. A Goblin, which is the equivalent of a level 1 character, has an average of 7 hit points. usually a character at level 1 has more.
You have to considerer another thing about the game design.
Monsters usually have more hp than a character. So, the scale from damage and heal is different
I don't agree. Monsters do not have more hit points than characters. A Goblin, which is the equivalent of a level 1 character, has an average of 7 hit points. usually a character at level 1 has more.
Goblin is a 1/4 CR monster. A CR 1 monster, for example, has more than 20 hp (dryad has 22 hp and it's not a tank monster, instead is a caster)
A 4th level barbarian with 18 con will have 49 hp. Chuul, a CR 4 monster has 93.
If you go to monster creation section on DMG you will see how it scales.
You have to considerer another thing about the game design.
Monsters usually have more hp than a character. So, the scale from damage and heal is different
I don't agree. Monsters do not have more hit points than characters. A Goblin, which is the equivalent of a level 1 character, has an average of 7 hit points. usually a character at level 1 has more.
Goblin is a 1/4 CR monster. A CR 1 monster, for example, has more than 20 hp (dryad has 22 hp and it's not a tank monster, instead is a caster)
A 4th level barbarian with 18 con will have 49 hp. Chuul, a CR 4 monster has 93.
If you go to monster creation section on DMG you will see how it scales.
Yes but the CR is not equal to the level. If you check the Encounters builder section, a single CR 1/4 is a medium challenge for a single 1st level character. A CR 1 monster is a medium encounter for four 1st level characters. That's why I used a Goblin for the comparison against a 1st level character.
Yeah, I understand this. But you have to understand, also, that a party of character have the expectation to fight some monsters of equal CR one time or another. Since the spell costs resources, you can't balance it for a "single monster on a medium challenge"
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
I'm really curious if improving Cure Wounds to the same level as Inflict was ever actually playtested. If Cure was 3d8 (or even 2d8 if you want to consider the monster vs PC hitpoints discussion above) plus another for each higher level cast, it would feel more balanced to me. I'm not interested in real world justifications, nor in folks who want to keep a cleric from being able to do real damage because that offends their sense of what a cleric is.
What I really want is to get away from clerics being forced into the party's "healbot," feeling like they have to save all (or half or whatever) of their spells for healing, because the economy of hitpoints per healing spell is so very low. This is one of the very few areas of gameplay that I feel 5e has taken a huge step backwards.
I tried making a dark cleric of death, and I found that at low levels he couldn't afford to do anything other than healing spells if he wanted the party to survive, especially in a dungeon crawl scenario where you have to survive several back-to-back encounters without a long rest. It felt wrong for my character concept to be subverted by the necessity of the game system to keep the party alive. Some of this I blame on party balance discussions, because I was very clear that I was not going to be a "healing cleric," and yet nobody else took a healing class in our party. Nonetheless, it felt unbalanced being forced into a role like this. Why even have domains other than healing/life if every cleric gets forced into this role? It's not okay for everyone else at the table to get to play their character's personality from level 1, but unless s/he's a nurturing and caring type the cleric can't really express his/her personality or values through action until 5th-ish level.
Short rests allow use of a HD pool to heal, healing kits are excellent...
You chose to play a "dark cleric of death" as if he were Florence Nightingale. Don't take ANY healing spells, or only use your resources on yourself, and either the party will adapt, or your DM will counter the weakness in the group. Or you'll suffer a TPK. Which may be a good thing.
In 4TH Edition, parties were encouraged to be balanced and matched perfect/staggered special to be monster-mincing machines. It was, in short, a complex boardgame. Apparently not many people liked it.
5TH Edition, for many people has gone 'back' to a stronger roleplay aspect. My advice is play the character you want, and let the dice land where they will. I can't imagine Darth Vader healing anyone, but Hannibal Lecter did, so there is no right/wrong.
What I really want is to get away from clerics being forced into the party's "healbot," feeling like they have to save all (or half or whatever) of their spells for healing, because the economy of hitpoints per healing spell is so very low. This is one of the very few areas of gameplay that I feel 5e has taken a huge step backwards.
The only thing forcing clerics to play healbot is player and table expectations. The rules don't force you that way at all. I've successfully played games without a healing class, and let me tell you that it works just fine. Sometimes its touch and go when we need access to a Lesser Restoration spell, but in terms of hp restoration and resurrection? Potions for the former case, and the latter simply hasn't come up.
I find the idea of boosting healing spell performance to be more around the same number of dice that damage-dealing spells use... but I also don't see much need for it in practice, as thus far in my 5th edition campaigns it has seemed extremely easy for a party that includes a character that cares about healing to go without ever using more hit dice during their short rests than can be recovered on their next long rest, while the healing-oriented character still uses a noteworthy amount of their spell slots for non-healing spells.
I'm really curious if improving Cure Wounds to the same level as Inflict was ever actually playtested. If Cure was 3d8 (or even 2d8 if you want to consider the monster vs PC hitpoints discussion above) plus another for each higher level cast, it would feel more balanced to me. I'm not interested in real world justifications, nor in folks who want to keep a cleric from being able to do real damage because that offends their sense of what a cleric is.
What I really want is to get away from clerics being forced into the party's "healbot," feeling like they have to save all (or half or whatever) of their spells for healing, because the economy of hitpoints per healing spell is so very low. This is one of the very few areas of gameplay that I feel 5e has taken a huge step backwards.
I tried making a dark cleric of death, and I found that at low levels he couldn't afford to do anything other than healing spells if he wanted the party to survive, especially in a dungeon crawl scenario where you have to survive several back-to-back encounters without a long rest. It felt wrong for my character concept to be subverted by the necessity of the game system to keep the party alive. Some of this I blame on party balance discussions, because I was very clear that I was not going to be a "healing cleric," and yet nobody else took a healing class in our party. Nonetheless, it felt unbalanced being forced into a role like this. Why even have domains other than healing/life if every cleric gets forced into this role? It's not okay for everyone else at the table to get to play their character's personality from level 1, but unless s/he's a nurturing and caring type the cleric can't really express his/her personality or values through action until 5th-ish level.
I've actually found the opposite to be true. 5e requires less Cleric-healing than older editions. Short and Long rests cover most, if not all, out-of-combat healing. Healing Potions are plentiful, maybe more than in older editions. Healing Kits can be used by anybody. There's a Healer Feat which is especially good for Rogues (and arguably makes them better combat healers than Clerics). Fighters get in-combat self healing. Druids get excellent combat and out-of-combat healing spells. Bards get bonus action healing spells. Hell, we even got healing Sorcerers and Warlocks now! :D
Huh. I'm glad you guys have had more supportive cleric experiences than I have. I guess I need a group or DM who's more willing to support my character concept.
I am hoping for a bit of a history lesson from veteran players. I find it strange that a Cleric can cause 3d10 points of damage easier than curing the same amount of HP. As 1st level spells, wouldn't you think a Cleric would have a better ability to heal than to hurt? Has there been a discussion about this already? A follow up question is about Domains. Are there any Domains that make the Inflict Wounds even more deadly? I might have missed it, and do not have a players manual. Thanks in advance!
Inflict wounds require a spell attack roll. Cure wounds doesn't.
A discusion about Inflict wounds is here.
basicly a solid rule in life in general . destroying is much easier than building .
and building requires dedication !
Lead designer of: Druid Wild Shape Revised, Druid: Circle of Monstrosity (Homebrew class), Revised Classes : Focus on level 20.
Homebrewer of: Halwasa`s Mushrooms of fluid movement (Item), Giraffe (Beast), Displacer Panther (Beast) (heavily modified Displacer Beast that is owned by WoC), Lightning whip (2nd-level Spell), Lesser Shapechange (5th-level Spell), Investiture of Lightning (6th-level Spell), Touched by the magic (Feat).
You have to considerer another thing about the game design.
Monsters usually have more hp than a character. So, the scale from damage and heal is different
Goblin is a 1/4 CR monster. A CR 1 monster, for example, has more than 20 hp (dryad has 22 hp and it's not a tank monster, instead is a caster)
A 4th level barbarian with 18 con will have 49 hp. Chuul, a CR 4 monster has 93.
If you go to monster creation section on DMG you will see how it scales.
Yeah, I understand this. But you have to understand, also, that a party of character have the expectation to fight some monsters of equal CR one time or another. Since the spell costs resources, you can't balance it for a "single monster on a medium challenge"
The key word there is party.
However I would agree the spell can't really be balanced for a specific CR and difficulty.
Well, indeed, I do agree that I am counting monster vs. party. Individually a "level" is about 2/3 of its CR.
For example: A mage is a CR of 6 but is a 9th level spellcaster (wizard). Archmage is a CR 12 and an 18th level spellcaster.
Click Here to Download my Lancer Class w/ Dragoon and Legionnaire Archetypes via DM's Guild - Pay What You Want
Click Here to Download the Mind Flayer: Thoon Hulk converted from 4e via DM's Guild
“It is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine punishment.” ― Oramis, Eldest by Christopher Paolini.
I'm really curious if improving Cure Wounds to the same level as Inflict was ever actually playtested. If Cure was 3d8 (or even 2d8 if you want to consider the monster vs PC hitpoints discussion above) plus another for each higher level cast, it would feel more balanced to me. I'm not interested in real world justifications, nor in folks who want to keep a cleric from being able to do real damage because that offends their sense of what a cleric is.
What I really want is to get away from clerics being forced into the party's "healbot," feeling like they have to save all (or half or whatever) of their spells for healing, because the economy of hitpoints per healing spell is so very low. This is one of the very few areas of gameplay that I feel 5e has taken a huge step backwards.
I tried making a dark cleric of death, and I found that at low levels he couldn't afford to do anything other than healing spells if he wanted the party to survive, especially in a dungeon crawl scenario where you have to survive several back-to-back encounters without a long rest. It felt wrong for my character concept to be subverted by the necessity of the game system to keep the party alive. Some of this I blame on party balance discussions, because I was very clear that I was not going to be a "healing cleric," and yet nobody else took a healing class in our party. Nonetheless, it felt unbalanced being forced into a role like this. Why even have domains other than healing/life if every cleric gets forced into this role? It's not okay for everyone else at the table to get to play their character's personality from level 1, but unless s/he's a nurturing and caring type the cleric can't really express his/her personality or values through action until 5th-ish level.
Short rests allow use of a HD pool to heal, healing kits are excellent...
You chose to play a "dark cleric of death" as if he were Florence Nightingale. Don't take ANY healing spells, or only use your resources on yourself, and either the party will adapt, or your DM will counter the weakness in the group. Or you'll suffer a TPK. Which may be a good thing.
In 4TH Edition, parties were encouraged to be balanced and matched perfect/staggered special to be monster-mincing machines. It was, in short, a complex boardgame. Apparently not many people liked it.
5TH Edition, for many people has gone 'back' to a stronger roleplay aspect. My advice is play the character you want, and let the dice land where they will. I can't imagine Darth Vader healing anyone, but Hannibal Lecter did, so there is no right/wrong.
Roleplaying since Runequest.
I find the idea of boosting healing spell performance to be more around the same number of dice that damage-dealing spells use... but I also don't see much need for it in practice, as thus far in my 5th edition campaigns it has seemed extremely easy for a party that includes a character that cares about healing to go without ever using more hit dice during their short rests than can be recovered on their next long rest, while the healing-oriented character still uses a noteworthy amount of their spell slots for non-healing spells.
Huh. I'm glad you guys have had more supportive cleric experiences than I have. I guess I need a group or DM who's more willing to support my character concept.