Healers

Hoy,

I still think this debate is to do with the fact that people want to PK with healers on a regular basis. Sure, right now the thrust of the argument is:

"Shouldn't healers be allowed to kill people who attack them? What, are they supposed to just sit there and take it!?"

This sounds reasonable enough, as the original author of the post knows, but how long do you really think that would remain the only situation in which healers thought it was alright to kill?

I think pretty soon we'd be hearing healers saying stuff like:

"Shouldn't healers he able to kill people who won't leave the area when they're ranking ... are they just meant to sit there and take it!?"

Or

"Shouldn't healers be able to kill people who talk crap to them ... Are they just meant to sit there and take it!?"

There are people out there, not saying you Icor, who want to play aggressive healers. This is because healers are the most invulnerable class in the game to death, while having some solid PKing skills. They run almost no risk of dying in any given fight if they're even a quarter way prepared.

If you allow leeway in the PK department, soon you'll have a bunch of boundary-pushers and rule-lawyers trying to take it further and further to allow them to aggressively PK with almost no decent RP reason.

I am not arguing the lifting of any pk restriction.

I am making suggestions of things which make healers not want/need to pk to occupy their time.

On my 2.0 healer, I LOVED EVERY SECOND...it was heavenly.

I remember getting called for resurrections of people Shendamarin or Cariousus or any other baddy had killed, and I would almost **** my pants...because they were going to be SITTING there...waiting.

It was so much fun. I would spend a long long time sometimes getting that res, and it meant so so so so much. Now, even if I did get it, who cares? Who is going to guard a corpse?

We need a new something for healers to do that is fun.

I think there's some truth behind the comment regarding resurrections... I remember when my healer was young, if someone died there was GOING to be a battle for the corpse. Healer's had a much greater purpose...

On the other hand... does anyone remember how much complaining there was about goods practically living forever? Did vet lightwalkers ever fear condeath way back when? And from the healers, being insistently harassed by the fallen - I recall perhaps Isabeau/Seiluna etc issuing fierce remarks that resurrections are a favour, not a responsibility...

I think the changes to resurrection were implemented for a sound reason... but I agree, it and various other changes have impacted on a healer's purpose immensely.

You are wrong because a healer is not to be an aggressor.

Period.

Don't tell me I'm wrong. Tell me why my reasons are wrong (if at all).

So far, what I see is... Healers' PK prowess is only dulled by their role play restrictions. If that’s the case, we have a class balance issue here, not an RP issue.

Irregardless, healers should not be allowed in cabals as they are now, at least, not cabals that are in active war. It, if I understand the immortals and their stubborn outlook on the class, would be stupid for a healer to join an actively warring cabal, and nigh unthinkable. Prevent healers from joining savant, tribunal, and knight, and I will be satisfied. Otherwise, change the help files and broaden the healers' role play options.

Icor, makin demands like that is very very bad idea when arguing with the IMPs.

You can read help knight, but also read help sigil, and you will see is is not NECESSARY that healers break that rp.

And a savant healer doesn't have to, either, as long as he only defends his cabal, rather than goes on the offense in cabal warfare.

---

So far, what I see is... Healers' PK prowess is only dulled by their role play restrictions. If that’s the case, we have a class balance issue here, not an RP issue.

Irregardless, healers should not be allowed in cabals as they are now, at least, not cabals that are in active war. It, if I understand the immortals and their stubborn outlook on the class, would be stupid for a healer to join an actively warring cabal, and nigh unthinkable. Prevent healers from joining savant, tribunal, and knight, and I will be satisfied. Otherwise, change the help files and broaden the healers' role play options.

Guess you'll just have to learn to live with disappointment. And it has nothing to do with "the immortals and their stubborn outlook". You act like this happened yesterday. Anyone remember Viri's Healer Mandatum post? These rules haven't changed. I do agree in part with Warpnow's thoughts on resurrection. While it didn't change the RP angle or anything with the class itself, it changed their role within the bigger picture of FL. As it stands right now, resurrection from PK only restores con but not a life. Thus, many might think getting resurrected is pointless. Boredom is not an excuse to PK however. I still say you're only as bored as you let yourself be. Healers have to make their RP work if they choose to join a cabal. I don't see the point of blocking them from cabals at all. They have plenty of RP options within their guidelines and are simply choosing to do something else outside them.

EDIT: Warpnow's got the right idea. The cabals that healers can join to do not force them to violate their RP.

They're built to take a beating, and avoid violence, according to the help file. If this the full case, they should not be a member of any war. It is very, very simple, and very, very boring.

I didn't make demands. I made suggestions. That's what this forum is for. And the debate will never, ever be closed until someone tells me why these explanations...:

Purity: if I were a healer following purity, I would kill every evil-doer I could to preserve and protect the lives of the millions and millions of innocents elsewhere. (If there is a man pointing a gun at my mom’s head, I am going to kill him to save my mother’s life). Or, if I were a healer following purity, I would kill every undead so that living things could preside over everything 100%, and kill every demon to end their suffering.

Compassion: if I were a healer following compassion, I would kill every evil-doer to display a simple form of justice (eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth) in hopes that they will abandon their evil ways by becoming wise with discipline, preserving lives in the end (I will execute the man that killed a citizen’s family to help teach the world the difference between right and wrong, and the consequences of ending life – I’m NOT going to sit back and allow that man the opportunity to continue threatening the existence of life). Or, if I were a healer following compassion, I would kill every undead or demon to end their suffering and help preserve life in the end. Or, if I were a healer following compassion, I would try to love my enemies and convince them diplomatically that they should change their ways, even if that means convincing them to cause turmoil without killing people.

Tranquility: if I were a healer following tranquility, I would likely, if wise, never attack anyone or anything, respecting the existence of all things, living and dead.

...Don't work.

Also, if the rules can be interpreted in different ways, the rules need to be rewritten.

Virigoths Mandatum for healers can be interpreted many different ways, and there are many different situations that are not explained. In this situation, no offense, staff, you are stubborn with the way you look at it. You're interpreting it one way, and completely ignoring what the playerbase may think about it, or suggest about it.

But really, I don't care anymore. I'm done playing healers.

Right, there you go. If healers are the most restricted and boring class, who's going to play them? I seriously don't want to play them anymore. I'll play something that's fun. -__-'

Purity: if I were a healer following purity, I would kill every evil-doer I could to preserve and protect the lives of the millions and millions of innocents elsewhere. (If there is a man pointing a gun at my mom’s head, I am going to kill him to save my mother’s life). Or, if I were a healer following purity, I would kill every undead so that living things could preside over everything 100%, and kill every demon to end their suffering.

help healer

Healer is a profession who devotes their whole life to protection of life.

They avoid violence, with exception of their well known crusades against

forces of undead. Due to their devotion, they receive incredible powers

from their gods to heal and protect themselves, as well as those around

them.

That is why a healer can't go on a rampage. Think of healers like priests. They can follow purity, SURE, but that doesn't change what their GUILD decided to say they HAVE to do or their GUILD will throw them OUT.

IG, its the healer GUILD saying they can't do this stuff, not the imms.

Compassion: if I were a healer following compassion, I would kill every evil-doer to display a simple form of justice (eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth) in hopes that they will abandon their evil ways by becoming wise with discipline, preserving lives in the end (I will execute the man that killed a citizen’s family to help teach the world the difference between right and wrong, and the consequences of ending life – I’m NOT going to sit back and allow that man the opportunity to continue threatening the existence of life).

Have you even read help compassion? If I were an imm and I saw a CLERIC of compassion with that RP he would get something...

Tranquility: if I were a healer following tranquility, I would likely, if wise, never attack anyone or anything, respecting the existence of all things, living and dead.

Of course, no one has a problem with that.

That's a biased interpretation, and isn't telling me that my logic is wrong. If the guild recognized that a healer was working for a greater good, would it still kick the healer out? The guild is full of idiots. Change it. Broaden the horizons. It doesn't even require any code, for God's sake. Make them fun to play, not a hastle to play.

Also, as for religion; healers shouldn't have different religions, by your interpretation. Their guilds forbid it. There is no versatility at all, and it's damn sad.

Okay then, let's gut them and let them pk whoever they want.

Oh wait...that's right. That's a cleric.

And I'm sorry, Icor, but telling us to do something and then saying that's the only way you'll be "satisfied" is a demand.

There are plenty of people who play healers for the RP challenge they present and their survivability. You don't like them, then don't play them. No one's forcing you to. I don't like invokers. I don't play them. Simple as that.

And regardless of the alleged lack of clarity on Viri's Healer Mandates, this interpretation of their RP guidelines and purpose has never differed. Perhaps it's time to turn them back into an application only class so those who don't wish to follow clearly stated guidelines and precedence won't have the ability to choose them.

ADDENDUM: And you're interpretation of the religion compassion is completely wrong I'm sorry to say, Icor. Compassion is less violent than purity, not more. You described purity and call it compassion.

And I'm sorry, Icor, but telling us to do something and then saying that's the only way you'll be "satisfied" is a demand.

Hardly. Wait, my opinion doesn't matter. So sorry.

There are plenty of people who play healers for the RP challenge they present and their survivability. You don't like them, then don't play them. No one's forcing you to. I don't like invokers. I don't play them. Simple as that.

Apparently, I'm not the first one to bring up healers. Maybe we have, like... feelings.

And regardless of the alleged lack of clarity on Viri's Healer Mandates, this interpretation of their RP guidelines and purpose has never differed. Perhaps it's time to turn them back into an application only class so those who don't wish to follow clearly stated guidelines and precedence won't have the ability to choose them.

It hasn't differed for the better, or for the worse? Are you dealing with people who don't like the current healer RP? Do you hear people thanking you that all the healers in the player base are exactly the same as one another(bland)?

Turn them back into an app class and you will be getting a new app from me every week...

You will reject one, then I will have another cleric at 30 with a new app the next day.

Think of healers as a guild, not just a classification of players...they follow a guild, from which ALL their skills and spells come from. This guild has a set of masters who set rules, one of which is anti-violence. Its just like the paladin guild requires certain things, the healer guild is just more strict...it even says that in help good:

"Of all classes, paladins clerics, and healers are the ones most expect to

uphold those ideals."

Just like even if a paladin followed guile or greed or crap, he would STILL be required to uphold certain beliefs, or be outcast by his guild...

Then someone in game could talk to those "masters" and convince them, in a debate, in game, that there are good reasons to be aggressive when it is required. I already listed some of those ideas. I could come up with more. Limiting creativity isn't going to do any good for anything or anyone.

Healers are not SUPPOSED to be in the PK spectrum at all, save against undeads.

What is the original purpose of healers as a class? Primarily, as a hard-to-be PK'd class for newbies to survive with, OR for those who prefer to RP rather than fight, much like the Herald cabal.

Healers are not aggressive, period. That's the sacrifice you make for being unkillable.

You can RP a healer all you want with clerics. But if you are not TOTALLY dedicated to non-violence/life, then DON'T make a healer.

If that makes them boring, so be it. They aren't MEANT to be an exciting PK class. They are meant as

1. A class for those who want to avoid PK, and

2. A class for those who want to explore the lands in relative safety, and

3. A class for newbies to learn FL.

If you want the RP of being kind and caring and helping people, while being allowed to PK, MAKE A CLERIC.

Healers have a specific reason to be unkillable; because they don't kill others, either. This is true both from an RP point of view, and, more importantly, an OOC BALANCE/CLASS DESIGN POINT OF VIEW.

I skimmed the first two pages and thats about it, so if I'm just repeating whats already been said cut me some slack.

People just want to be like clerics with the near unkillability a healer has. The main problem here comes when people choose races that they know won't lose many, if any spells if they become outcasted. then, essentially, they don't have to follow the RP of a healer because they have their little outcast flag, and don't really lose anything for it.

Healers just aren't meant to PK period, they're a class meant for RP, or else people who like to sit around and admire their score (Yeah, I'll point out that was a joke, since I got pounded on last time...).

I read one post by you Warpnow (this isn't a knock on you) where you said you went and got some crazy armor or whatever and now you couldn't do anything with it. There isn't really supposed to be something to do with it. I know from past experience that you do RP well on your healers (->their purpose) and genuinely enjoy doing it, but I don't think healers are made to get crazy equip/scores (unless you're new and are trying stuff out).

Whenever I right long posts I always get the feeling none of it makes sense right before I hit the submit button.

People just want to be like clerics with the near unkillability a healer has.

As I see it as well.

Errr while I was writing this Raar made a post that pretty much said the same thing ... but I spent a few minutes writing it to hopefully end this discussion so I guess I'll post it anyways (though I think the point has been made):

1. This is a game. A game has rules, so that it can be fair. If I am playing chess, and I get frustrated that my knight can only move two spaces up and one over, NO amount of debate will convince anyone that I should get to move it up three and over one. That's not how the rules are set up. I am a player ... I am not designing the game.

2. As far as convincing the "masters" of the guild in-game ... a "master" of the guild is just that. They are In Charge. They do not listen to you. They tell you what to do. A Guild in this medieval world is not a democracy.

3. Come to think of it, at what point did several coders and staff who built a game and have continued to run it free of charge decide to start a democratic system of rule-making? I don't remember them mentioning it. Because if they had, I would have quit playing. I don't want to think that every time someone gets peeved with their character and complain enough that the rules will change. That would suck.

4. As far as RP goes ... I think the point has been driven into the ground. Healers do not kill people. Think Martin Luther King Jr. They hit you, you turn the other cheek. They beat you senseless, you leave. As far as cabal warfare, a healer is a great asset. I remember healer allies in Savant in 2.0. They saved my life countless times ... just being there to heal and grant protections ... they're valuable.

5. Finally ... no, healers shouldn't kill things. But, healers don't die very often either. Considering they can run away from most fights, most healers end up being DECKED more often than not ... they've been collecting their gear for awhile. It's a tradeoff ... practical invincibility in return for only being able to use it offensively on undeads. They are the rock to vampires' scissors. They balance the game. When they go offensive, they UNbalance the game. Hence why offensive healers have to be outcasted. Most things in this game that the IMMs have to do, I think, end up being for balance reasons. RP is fun, sure ... the IMMs like it, I like it, it's impressive, and it'll get you places. But healers, I think, are the ONE class that has required RP for balance reasons. You KNEW that when you made the healer. If you didn't ... well, sorry ... go play an aggressive healer, get outcasted ... and the game balance is preserved. If healers were allowed to be offensive against all evil (and this point has been made before, but this IS the point that defeats your arguement), then NO ONE WOULD PLAY A GOOD THAT IS NOT A HEALER. No more paladins. No more good clerics. No storm giant zerks. No NOTHING. There would be NO POINT. And everyone would quit playing.

So like, please ... drop the arguement ... healers aren't going to be allowed to aggressively PK. At least, I hope not.

For you outcasted healers: did you just delete?