Unleash Your Creativity with the Crayola Magic Brush and Special Ink

Crayola has introduced a new product called the Crayola magic brush with special ink. This innovative tool aims to revolutionize the way kids create art and engage with their imagination. The magic brush consists of a specially designed brush and a cartridge filled with unique ink. The main idea behind the Crayola magic brush with special ink is to provide a magical and immersive art experience for children. The brush has a special feature that allows it to change colors as it is being used. This means that children can create artwork with a single brush that transforms into multiple colors, adding an element of surprise and excitement to their creations.

This means that children can create artwork with a single brush that transforms into multiple colors, adding an element of surprise and excitement to their creations. The magic brush is made possible through the use of special ink cartridges. These cartridges contain a mixture of colors that can be combined to create a variety of shades and hues.

Is a cleric needed?

Sparked from the "Party Design Coordination" thread, it seems that a lot of people suggest the "healer" role and the Cleric class are unneeded in a standard party.

I don't want to get into a discussion of "action economy" or what makes an effective character.

Rather, what do you do (as DM or player) when noone has access to Restoration, Heal, or Remove Disease (say, in a party of Wizard/Rogue/Fighter/. other wizard)?

There are some get-around tricks possible, with Summon or Call spells available to arcane casters, or natural healing, or just dealing with negative levels or ability damage.

But what happens when the party is in a dungeon, or out in the wilderness, and someone catches Mummy Rot? Or triggers a trap on the way into the dungeon (which they really SHOULD clear out, whether through plot reasons or because the enemies inside will only get worse with time) and suffers whole bunches of ability damage on the 1st trap in the place?

Do you just let the chips lie where they fall, and the next group comes better prepared? Do you avoid using things like Shadows or Ability Damage traps/monsters? Do you add in an NPC Cleric who follows along and throws free cures at the party?

For my part (I have a player who loves playing Clerics, so it's a moot point most of the time), I refuse to run NPC's for the party. It's my job as DM to keep track of monsters, NPC's, the world, the plot, and the maps/minis. I will not add on another level of complication, solely to make your adventuring easier.

Also, I do not avoid particular types of encounters simply because they will be difficult. In Savage Tide, one PC was a Cleric/Radiant Servant. There are a bunch of Undead encounters in that path, especially during the 2nd to last book - they became non-encounters with that PC at the table, but I didn't avoid their inclusion. Why would I go the other way?

So, what do you do?

So, what do you do?

I tell my players to play what they want and work around them. I have serious beef with the 'token cleric' that someone nearly always plays because 'the group needs one'.

Paladins can heal. Bards can heal. Rangers can heal. Druids can heal. Any character with sufficient ranks in UMD can heal.

As a DM I try and drop a wand of CLW a couple of sessions into the game if they haven't mentioned pooling some cash and buying their own.

Let the chips fall where they may. A party without a cleric will find ways to adapt to it, or die. Adventuring ain't easy.

I guess it's really a question of your style as a GM.

I consider ymself a fairly smart and flexible kind of GM. I am also a strong believer in "it is what it is". Just because a party does not have a cleric if a place in my world has, for example, a Mummy then that will not change just bcause the characters do not have access to a 'Cure Disease' spell.

My game also tends to be a lower magic game so things like "Wands of Cure Light Wounds" are not something you can just wander into a random town and buy.

I hav also found my combats tend to be much longer than what I am seeing from many examples here. For example, my group recently finished a 28 round combat. I also will tend to have multiple combats in a day so the 'Dump everything we have and rest' is not always a viable option.

With my style and especially if a group in play in "My" world they are almost certainly going to need some type of healing. Not necessarly a cleric, maybe a paladin or two would fill in the void.

Having no healer would be a real challenge with my style of running especially in the curretn environment in "My" world.

A Cleric is only needed if you want your party to be full of awesome. If you can settle for half-awesome, go forth without one.

I have been DM'ing for almost 20 years now, and have sorta insisted on a cleric and/or druid in the party. In fact in the last campaign I DMPC'd a cleric.

That won't happen again, and I have come to agree with what someone else said, "I have too much other work to do to add the level of complexity" so the next campaign (Kingmaker), they can play what they want.

As long as someone has UMD, or there is a ranger or paladin or bard in the group, they should not have a problem as I'll drop wands in as treasure.

I've also looked at the Trailblazer Rest Mechanic, and Action Points but have not made that call yet.

A Cleric is only needed if you want your party to be full of awesome. If you can settle for half-awesome, go forth without one.

*Looks for a dislike button*

Rather, what do you do (as DM or player) when noone has access to Restoration, Heal, or Remove Disease (say, in a party of Wizard/Rogue/Fighter/. other wizard)?

IMO, the cleric is more useful for those spells than for HP-healing. HP-healing can be handled by a level 1 adept with a wand (or almost half of the classes with a wand).

Anyway, some other classes can cast restoration, remove disease, and the likes. And some more with APG (the witch is a good choice if the party needs those spells but you want to be a wizard or a wizard-like). If nobody can cast those spells ? The party will sometime be in serious troubles, as will a party without any character able to do serious damages, without any character able to stand serious punishment, or without arcanist. Each class is designed to complete some parties but to need the help of other characters in some other fields: if some fields are missing in the whole party, there will be troubles.

As a related note, IMO all of the skills lack of some powerful/epic uses. The heal skill should give the ability of healing ability drain (and maybe permanent negative level), with a high-DC check and given enough time.

A Cleric is only needed if you want your party to be full of awesome. If you can settle for half-awesome, go forth without one.

you can possibly implement (many) divine pells into the wizard/sorcerer's spell list making cleric spells into arcane spells of 0 - 2 levels higher, so that the party isn't so dependent on clerical healing.

shillelagh, doom lvl 1
cure light wounds, command, sound burst lvl 2
cure moderate wounds lvl 3
cure serious wounds, lesser restoration, freedom of movement lvl 4
cure critical wounds, death ward lvl 5
restoration, breath of life, animate object lvl 6
raise dead lvl 7
heal lvl 8
resurrection, regenerate lvl 9

If you want a cleric then I suggest someone awesome as this one.

Click on Donager.

A dwarf in full plate with travel and liberation domains.

Speed is 30 (just like everyone else)

unless he casts longstrider for a bump up to 40.

Following the god of drink and ale!

You can get by without a druid/cleric.

A well rounded cleric brings several things to the table.
Healing in and out of combat.
Party Buffs, enemy debuffs
Secondary damage dealer
Secondary battlefield control

As long as you have most those things covered in some other manner you are fine.

I am currently playing in a game with no "Healer". We are a Swashbuckler, Rogue & Wizard.

I survive by Fighting Defensively ALOT.

We also rely on trying to ambush as much as possible and flanking so the Rogue and I get our Sneak Attack/Thrust damage and take things down as quickly as possible. The Benefactor that our characters are working for gives us two healing points each for our "missions" those run out fast. Basically it changes how you deal with encounters. Lots of sneaking, ambushing, even withdrawing at times and doubling back. It changes the tone of the game but doesnt make it impossible.

I find myself putting ranks in Heal just to get that extra few hitpoints restored once a day.

Unlike most editions of the world's oldest RPG (I can't speak for 4th Edition. my experience with it only includes reading the three core books, putting them back in the sleeve they came in and putting it on my shelf. just wasn't for me), no single class is absolutely necessary. It makes sense that it used to be this way.

The role may still be necessary, however. The party will still need access to healing, arcane magic, martial prowess and the ol' sneaky bastidges. The classes dedicated to those roles may be the best andd most efficient at them but other classes can cover them even if they can't do them as well.

Personally, I prefer it that way.

I'm currently getting ready to run Kingmaker and the players have created a party that does not include a cleric, fighter nor a rogue. They know they're headed out into a wild frontier where they won't be able to visit a big city for the services of those classes without completely diverting from their goals (at least at the start). The fact that these jaded players feel confident enough to play a campaign without these iconic roles says a lot. That I don't feel immediately compelled to provide NPC's to provide those services says at least as much.

I can't remember the last time we had a cleric in one of our parties. We just work our way through. As DM, I don't provide the players with anything extra. They need to figure out how to handle the problems that come with not having a cleric. Currently what they've done is invest in Use Magic Device and use wands and potions. The party also has a paladin, druid, and inquisitor. I am running them through the Age of Worms. They are adapting. That's what I expect from my players and that's what I do when I play.

A Cleric, specifically, isn't needed. There are several classes who can fill the healer/buffer role to varying degrees of effectiveness. Clerics are the best at it, but by no means the only viable choice.

Now, doing away with that role altogether is much more difficult. Still doable, but it requires careful consideration on the part of the DM because the game is designed assuming the party has access to heals and buffs.

One thing I've done is port in reserve points from Iron Heroes. Essentially each character has RPs equal to their max HP. Outside of combat they can spend 1 minute of rest to convert one RP to a HP (essentially they spend this time first aid, reset the joint or just gritting their teeth and pushing on). Off hand I can't recall how quickly they recover them (it might be level + Con score per 8 hours rest). Either way, handy for the party without the cleric and even with the cleric. Combats remain just as challenging, deadly and if needed they can still gulp down a potion of cure mod.

Otherwise in response to the original question, clerics aren't necessary but they do make things a lot easier.

I'm about to start Kingmaker too as the DM and I don't think our party will have a cleric or fighter type to take the big hits. Should be interesting but I won't modify the game simply to avoid cheapening the experience.

If the party really needs a cleric or fighter type they can always try to hire someone for the job!

Just something from the Wizards forums I like to post every time this question comes up.

Healin'. Patchin' up the wounds. Sewing the Fighter's larynx back in after he took an arrow through the neck and lived and wanted to tell about it. Every player knows the drill. But oddly, a lot of players just use really. silly methods of going about healing themselves, and have some wild misconceptions about how to do it effectively and even how much of a priority it should be.

Some players think they *have* to have a cleric or druid to cover the healing role, and place healing as an extremely high priority, even in combat, and even if they don't, many even spend inordinate amounts of money on extremely inefficient healing items that may hurt them more than help them.

• Players overprioritize healing in combat when there are more effective options available to them.
  
• Players spend too much money on healing, often spending wads of cash on things like potions of Cure Moderate Wounds.
  
• Players believe they can't heal efficiently without a Cleric or Druid or similar class in the party, and view such as an essential role, to the point where some even *force* others to play a Cleric or Druid just so that they can have a dedicated healer, and then downplay the extraordinary talents of those classes and belittle them to a mere healing role, making for an unenjoyable experience for the victim of this treatment.
  
• Many players just don't know how to get the best healing for their buck.
  

Some Information and Comparisons

First, an effort at dispelling some of the myths. First off, you should probably never be buying healing potions, perhaps with the exception of Cure Light Wounds or a similar level 1 spell. The reason for this is simple. The cost is exorbitant, and it's really not worth it. A Cure Serious Wounds potion will heal, on average, 18.5 hp, and it will cost you 750gp, and it will take either a standard or a full round action to use, and it will provoke AoOs unless you did some further investment to prevent that, and on top of that it probably smells bad and tastes bitter. Yuck. For the same price, you could have gotten a Wand of Cure Light Wounds (275hp total instead of 18.5hp), a Wand of Lesser Vigor (550hp total instead of 18.5gp), or a Healing Belt (Either 6d8 hp (average 27 hp) a day, or 18 hp (same as the potion!) per day if you burst heal, usable as a standard action that does not provoke attacks of opportunity.)) Would you rather get 18 hp, or 18 hp per day? Now would you rather use a standard or full action that provokes AoOs, *and* need to draw the item, or would you rather use a standard action that doesn't provoke AoOs? And hey, wouldn't you like the option to heal even more for efficiency, outside of battle? There's even another option, this one for artificers, that costs a mere 50 gp a pop: Infuse an ally with Greater Healing armor. This will give them 6d8+30 total healing (3d8+15 as a swift action, usable twice). As an added bonus, it will even automatically heal you if you get knocked unconscious. The point is. potions are bad. Potions are inefficient. So are scrolls of Cure Moderate Wounds, Cure Serious Wounds, and so forth.

Second, a dedicated healer is not a necessary combat role. Seriously.

First off, healing often does not outpace damage. Moreover, removing an enemy a threat can often be much more effective at saving your allies' necks than going up and poking them with Cure X Wounds. If an enemy were to deal 50 damage to an ally, and you can take that enemy out by either disabling or killing them, then you've "healed" that ally of the 50 damage he would have taken. Additionally, as healing often does not keep up the pace with damage, even if you can't disable the enemy, healing the ally might not be good enough to save them. Instead, you might want to use an ability to help the ally escape, or block the enemy from attacking them (this can be something as simple as Benign Transposition, really). In fact, healing in combat is only situationally a good choice, and is often a subpar tactical option.

Secondly, you can get very efficient out-of-combat healing quite easily without a Cleric or Druid, and indeed a Rogue, Artificer, Paladin, Ranger, Factotum, Warlock, or Bard could fill the healing role with a wand of Cure Light Wounds or Lesser Vigor. In fact, you can even get good, cheap burst healing comparable to the Cleric or Druid's ability at low levels with items like the Healing Belt.

Actually, the Artificer can prove to be a fantastic healer, cheaply (we're talking 37.5% market price here) turning out healing belts, wands of lesser vigor, and providing Greater Healing armor infusions (a mere second level infusion) at an early level. The Paladin and Ranger can use wands of Cure Light Wounds without penalty, and the others can use UMD to master the efficient wands. On top of that, members of *any* class can easily chip in with the very efficient Healing Belt.

These things considered, you really can get by without a Cleric or Druid. In fact, if you do have a Cleric or Druid, they're probably going to be more useful in most combats if they are doing something OTHER than healing, since they have considerable talents in many regards.

How to Heal Effectively
(Author's note: I have excluded a few very potent and efficient means of healing because things like the infinite-healing-for-cheap trap and other such things are just plain abusive, and few sane DMs will allow them)

Sparked from the "Party Design Coordination" thread, it seems that a lot of people suggest the "healer" role and the Cleric class are unneeded in a standard party.

As the brush is used, the ink from the cartridge is released and applied to the paper, resulting in vibrant and stunning artwork. Not only does the Crayola magic brush with special ink offer a unique and captivating art experience, but it also promotes creativity and imagination in children. The ability to change colors while painting encourages kids to experiment with different techniques and explore their artistic skills. It also fosters problem-solving skills as children learn to mix colors and create their desired shades. Moreover, the use of the magic brush and special ink provides a mess-free art experience. Unlike traditional paints, the special ink is contained within the cartridge, eliminating the need for water or additional supplies. This allows children to create art without the worry of spills or stains, making it an ideal choice for both parents and educators. Overall, the Crayola magic brush with special ink is a groundbreaking tool that combines technology, creativity, and convenience. With its ability to change colors and its mess-free application, it offers a unique and engaging art experience for children. This innovative product is sure to inspire young artists and provide endless hours of artistic fun..

Reviews for "The Crayola Magic Brush and Special Ink: An Innovative Tool for Artists of All Ages"

1. Sarah - 2 stars - I was really disappointed with the Crayola magic brush with special ink. The brush itself felt flimsy and the ink barely showed up on the paper. It was advertised as "special" ink, but it just seemed like regular watercolor paint to me. The colors were also not as vibrant as I had hoped. Overall, I felt like I wasted my money on this product and would not recommend it.

2. Michael - 1 star - The Crayola magic brush with special ink was a complete letdown. The brush quickly became frayed and difficult to use after just a few uses. The ink also did not last very long, and I was constantly having to refill it. The colors did not show up well on the paper, and the finished artwork looked faded and dull. Save your money and invest in a better quality paint set instead.

3. Emily - 2 stars - I purchased the Crayola magic brush with special ink for my daughter, and we were both disappointed with it. The brush itself was difficult for her to control, and the ink did not show up well on the paper. The colors also did not blend smoothly together, making it frustrating for her to create the artwork she wanted. I would not recommend this product, especially for young children who may become frustrated with its lack of performance.

The Crayola Magic Brush and Special Ink: A Game-Changer for Artists