priest and theologian

[David Bofinger]

One solution would be:

• Split up magic into different kinds, schools or whatever.
• A character might have access to zero, one or more schools.
• Some schools are accessible by wizards using regular spell-casting rules.
• Some schools are accessible by priests of a particular god using the miracle rules.
• Some schools are only accessible to the weird folk.
• Some schools are accessible via multiple sources.
• Which school is accessible how varies according to the campaign.
• Healing is one of the schools.

This would be good in a magic-heavy campaign, where your party had multiple wizards in it and you wanted them to have different capability sets, or with a campaign where you expect everyone to have a little magic. It fits less well with the paradigm that there's exactly one wizard in a party.

[David Bofinger]

Originally Posted by Rick_Smith

Having a healer is a needed job in an adventuring party, but it is kinda dull.

This is an important point that deserves more thought. What kind of healing is fun? Should the healing rolls be implemented as battles between the healer and the patient on one hand and the disease on the other, where everyone has to think about how to best apply their resources? Should demonic possession work the same way? Assuming sickness and demonic possession are even different things.

[David Bofinger]

Originally Posted by ak_aramis

Some religious groups are genuinely all about the smiting their enemies. [...]

Also: the warrior Buddhists of Japan, such as the souhei.

[ecz]

Originally Posted by Rick_Smith

Hi Everyone, JLV.
(...) Having a healer is a needed job in an adventuring party, but it is kinda dull. (...)

In my CGs each hit point healed is worth 5 EXP points for the healer (obviously taken in a hazard situation only). This made the healing skills more attractive.
I added also "First Aid" IQ9, 1 Point cost, allowing to heal 1 hit . Then Physicker costs only one IQ for who already has "First Aid".

[Rick_Smith]

Originally Posted by ecz

In my CGs each hit point healed is worth 5 EXP points for the healer (obviously taken in a hazard situation only). This made the healing skills more attractive.
I added also "First Aid" IQ9, 1 Point cost, ...

Hi all, ECZ.
My question is "Does anyone take that talent?" With the healing talents, the answer is yes. One or two people in every party take Physicker. So in that respect, there is no reason to make the talents more attractive. People take them, even without the extra 5 exp bonus.

Now you could say that the +5 exp bonus for healing makes healer less of a hot potato. ("You take the healer! No, you take it! No, I took it last time! Ah, come on! I always end up as healer!"). But in my campaign, people are pretty good about rotating the chore.

However, even your +5 exp bonus, does not really make healer more fun. Healing remains a dull, but important chore.

Perhaps this is OK. Not every subsystem of a game has to be awesome fun.

But let us say that we want to make healing more fun. You could make a rite where a cleric can heal figures. But it gets a big bonus (say it heals double the normal amount), if the healing is done within 2 turns of of when the wound is made. (The turn that the wound is caused counts as turn zero, so the cleric has two movement phases and action phases to do the healing.)

Now that puts some bite into healing! There cleric can keep on fighting OR he or she can stop doing fighting things for a combat medic action. High risk for high reward. I think the next time I do a healing rite, I may try this.

Warm regards, Rick.

[David Bofinger]

Originally Posted by Rick_Smith

One or two people in every party take Physicker.

Normally only a hero would take Physicker, since it costs extra for wizards. In standard TFT many fighters have little need for IQ so they never acquire enough IQ to take Physicker, and so the pool of characters that can take Physicker is small and the job usually falls to the party skill monkey, scout, thief or whatever.

But in your version of TFT everyone needs IQ because there are talents for fighters at IQ similar to what's needed for Physicker. So all the hero characters have enough IQ and any number of people might pick it up.

Not sure exactly what this is changing but I'm pretty sure your rules would change this dynamic a lot.

a big bonus (say it heals double the normal amount), if the healing is done within 2 turns of of when the wound is made.

I like the idea, if only because it makes players scream for help at each other, but I'm not sure it makes being a healer more interesting. Yes, a decision is good, but on the other hand he misses out on the chance to participate in combat which is actually a reduction in how interesting the role is.

[Rick_Smith]

Originally Posted by David Bofinger

...
I like the idea, if only because it makes players scream for help at each other, but I'm not sure it makes being a healer more interesting. Yes, a decision is good, but on the other hand he misses out on the chance to participate in combat which is actually a reduction in how interesting the role is.

Hi all, David.
An interesting decision is always good. The healer can always CHOOSE to stay in the fight. And that decision carries some drama.

Rick

[Terquem]

One thing that complicates "healing" for me, from the perspective of using magic, and a unique magic using class of characters, is how the game uses Strength in the first place.

It's not the same as some other games where there is a Strength ability/characteristic and some other characteristic (constitution/hit points) that determines when your character no longer capable of going on.

In Melee and Wizard, you can keep fighting all the way down to 2 ST with no significant restrictions (other than those temporary restrictions imposed by the loss of ST during the round).

So If healing becomes a "keep the character fighting because the monster might win" variable, I'd rather not have it in the game. You either beat the monster, or run away before it can beat you, or get beaten by the monster (all are workable role playing game contingencies). The last thing I’d like to have to start dealing with are the discussions, such as the ones plaguing Pathfinder these days, about the “importance” and “proper use” of cure light wounds wands, and how no one wants to play the cleric anymore because no one wants to be the “default” healer.

The adventure game itself is what I am talking about, and what it means to play a character in an adventure game, and not in a combat simulation that is geared, almost exclusively, to allowing the player characters to win and get better gear to fight better monsters with no serious fear of the character dying, no plan on the player charter’s part whatsoever of maybe needing to run away.

[Rick_Smith]

Originally Posted by Terquem

...

In Melee and Wizard, you can keep fighting all the way down to 2 ST with no significant restrictions (other than those temporary restrictions imposed by the loss of ST during the round). ...

Hi Terquem, everyone.
When your ST is adjusted to 3 or less, you are at a permanent -3 DX until you rise above that level again.

Warm regards, Rick.

[Jim Kane]

Originally Posted by Rick_Smith

Hi Terquem, everyone.
When your ST is adjusted to 3 or less, you are at a permanent -3 DX until you rise above that level again.

Warm regards, Rick.

Correct.

JK