Playing without a Cleric

Discuss Pelgrane Press's 13th Age rules here. Discussion of the Dragon Empire campaign setting can also be held here.

Moderator: Blacky the Blackball

Post Reply
johnsonny
Orc
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 4:28 am
Gender: male
Contact:

Playing without a Cleric

Post by johnsonny » Mon Jun 10, 2019 8:37 pm

Most times, in F20 games, playing with a cleric is a forgone conclusion. It is one of the most, if not THE most, vital roles in the dungeon delving party. But your 13th Age party just _might_ be absent a cleric...what then?
https://iconicpodcast.com/2019/06/07/pl ... -a-cleric/
Listen and subscribe to the Iconic Podcast, which is about all things 13th Age.

User avatar
Tim Baker
Axe Beak
Posts: 2448
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2016 7:51 am
Gender: male
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Playing without a Cleric

Post by Tim Baker » Mon Jun 10, 2019 11:26 pm

My main group lacks a cleric, but the commander gets the job done. Plus, the paladin/fighter in the party has such a high AC, he often doesn’t need much healing.

In my work group, players come and go each week as their schedules allow. Lately, we haven’t had a healer of any kind in the party. The group relied on their rallies and have made it a point to stock up on more healing potions when they get to the nearest town.

I use Battle Healing in my 13th Age Glorantha games. I find that combat is still more frenetic without a healer, but Battle Healing does help prevent PCs from dying.

Jer
Goblin
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2011 8:36 pm
Gender: male

Re: Playing without a Cleric

Post by Jer » Wed Jul 03, 2019 3:26 pm

My group has been playing without any healing class for the entire campaign. Handing out extra healing potions, though helpful, was never enough. So early on I ported over a house rule that I'd been using in 4e for the exact same issue (my group has a long history of no one playing a cleric across multiple editions of D&D) - instead of a standard action, you can rally as a move action.

My rationale for it was that the characters who most need to rally are usually the front-line fighter and ranger who are taking the hits (they do a good job of keeping the spellcasters protected most of the time). If they have to stop to take a standard action to rally, then often what we were seeing was the rally was useless - they would spend their action healing, take a hit or two from monsters, and be right back where they were before their next attack. By making it a move action you don't get that situation - the rally actually gives them at least one more round with a chance to hit. And it fits with how it would work with a cleric in the group - with a cleric in the group you'd be able to spend a recovery on the cleric's turn and not have to sacrifice your own action to do it. I'm not sure if I'd keep this rule in play if we actually had a cleric in the group or not - I'd have to see if it was stealing the cleric's thunder.

(I think it also helps that the fighter is a forgeborn, which means that a good chunk of the time he goes to 0 hit points and then gets back up again.)

User avatar
Tim Baker
Axe Beak
Posts: 2448
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2016 7:51 am
Gender: male
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Playing without a Cleric

Post by Tim Baker » Wed Jul 03, 2019 8:38 pm

Jer wrote:
Wed Jul 03, 2019 3:26 pm
My group has been playing without any healing class for the entire campaign. Handing out extra healing potions, though helpful, was never enough. So early on I ported over a house rule that I'd been using in 4e for the exact same issue (my group has a long history of no one playing a cleric across multiple editions of D&D) - instead of a standard action, you can rally as a move action.
I could see implementing this in my game if we had no healing class at all. It still protects the dwarf's "Is That Your Best Shot" racial ability, too.

Post Reply

Return to “13th Age”