|
I have found the Druid and the cleric to be exceptionally powerful characters when compared to the other staple characters like the fighter rogue and wizard. Now with the pathfinder game there is a relationship between your base attack bonus and your hit dice. If you have a +1 or a good base attack bonus you have a D 10 hit dice. If you have a 3/4 base attack or a medium base attack bonus then you have a D 8 hit dice. And if you have a 1/2 or a poor base attack bonus you get a D 6 hit dice. I like this change.
I have watched the development of the new classes like the alchemist, the inquisitor, the summoner and the magus. I noticed that the developers used the bard with his 3/4 BAB D 8 hit dice and most importantly the bard's spell casting schedule as a template to build from. I like these developments. It sets up a pattern. It seems that your spell casting is tied to your BAB and your hit dice. So +1 BAB D 10 hit dice gives you the spell casting of a paladin. A +3/4 BAB D 8 hit die gives you spell casting of a bard. And a +1/2 BAB D 6 hit die gives you the spellcasting of a wizard.
What If I gave the cleric the Druid and the oracle spell casting similar to a bard and I home brewed a 1/2 BAB D6 version of a cleric and a Druid and an oracle with the spellcasting similar to a wizard? I know my players probably wouldn't like it, but from a GM/ game designer perspective would a change like this upset the game balance and mess things up?
What do you think?
Clerics and druids have full casting, yes. You need to compare what the spells themselves do as well as just the levels and numbers to get a clear idea of the caster's power, though.
|
In my experience, a 'battle cleric' will never be able to outdamage or outmaneuver a halfway decent fighter or paladin build (although I've heard good things about the battle oracle...).
A 'caster cleric' may have a few domain spells that are nice picks from the Sor/Wiz list, but will only be able to cast those spells once a day, while a sorcerer or wizard might be able to cast the same spell six times a day (making any specialization they've taken, such as Spell Focus feats or Metamagic options, for those spells, multiply times more effective than the once/day cleric).
And a cleric who uses find traps is no substitute for a rogue, who has class abilities other than trapfinding.
The problem, IMO, lies in the other direction. A team can function without a rogue, or an arcanist, and, sometimes, even without a pure melee 'tank.' But without a healer, life gets hard, and while a cleric can be a crappy second-rate tank, or a crappy second-rate arcanist (assuming that he's got a domain or two that gives him at least access to wands of useful control or blasting spells), most classes are far worse at attempting to be a healer, than the cleric is at attempting to be a tank or blaster.
And while a cleric (or druid) can, in a pinch, serve as a blaster or a tank, a sorcerer / wizard or fighter / monk / barbarian *cannot at all* serve as even a healer-of-last resort. (A ranger can at least fire up a cure light wounds wand, and a paladin is probably better at backup healing than a druid.)
That's really my issue with the cleric, is not that he can do other people's jobs and not utterly suck at it, but that nobody else can do his job without sucking by comparison.
Channel (positive) Energy is just probably too good. (Channel negative energy, OTOH, pretty much sucks.) Everyone else got the drop in the bucket that is the new Treat Deadly Wound option to the Heal skill, while the cleric is drinking directly from the firehose that is Channel Energy.
I don't like 'roles.' I hate in online games when I am told that my class can only do one thing, and almost always end up playing the classes able to do a little of this or a little of that, like a Druid or Necromancer in EQ2, or a Druid or Warlock in WoW, or the insane glory that is a Mastermind in CoV or Bonedancer in DAoC. If the wizard has focused on using polymorph magic and transmutation buffs to be a halfway decent melee combatant, that's fine with me. If the rogue has Skill Focus UMD and has wands of stuff that my arcanist can't even use, that's fine, too.
But you pretty much have to use third-party stuff or house rules if you want a healing-focused tank or arcanist or skillmonkey (ooh, I tremble at the thought of a skill-based healer!), and I wouldn't mind walking that sacred cow down the ramp to the dude with the .45.
Yes, you have problems without a healer, but quite a few classes can heal:
Bard (passable)
Cleric (best)
Druid (OK)
Paladin (second to cleric)
Ranger (trailing last place)
Fortunately, with the right items any of these classes can do the healing job for the most part. The real problem is not usually hit point damage, but ability score damage and negative levels. Without a cleric or paladin, these get hard to fix very quickly.
Elyas, if you look at the spell lists for divine casters in general, they focus on several themes: healing, buffing, debuffs, divinations, etc. This is more true of the cleric than the druid, but it still stands that these classes have certain strengths and weaknesses in their spell lists. If you create a d6 hd, 1/2 BAB caster with the cleric spell list, be prepared for problems. Many cleric spells are reactive, not proactive; they fix things after they happen, instead of preventing things from happening. Buff spells are obviously an exception. This kind of character is really a support character; they won't be the kind of caster that a wizard or sorcerer is. Wizards and sorcerers solve problems before they start: they control the battlefield, they manipulate the enemy, and on occasion just screw someone over outright (or more often as the caster prefers). You'll find that the cleric-in-wizard's-clothing can't do these things very well, as clerical battlefield control is limited to summon spells, maybe a few others. They'll buff, but there are limits to how much buffing they can truly do. Overall, it relegates them to a support role very much like a 1E or 2E cleric, as clerics don't have the plethora of direct combat magic available to them of a mage.
As for the bard spell progression on the standard cleric chassis, this delays access to certain key spells by a good bit. This includes restoration and even more important, heal itself.
|
|
Set, Dabbler, and Lithira, thank you for your thoughts.
Set, I suppose, with so few people wanting to play a cleric, the designers are hesitant to make another class be as good at healing. Also I like to make characters that do something their class wasn’t initially inteded to do. For example a monk ( with a tonsure) who is a devine spell caster, and also a lore master, but not a combatant. I am sure there are a few other examples but I cant think of them at the moment.
Dabbler we may want to add the Alchemist and possibly the witch, with a healing patron. These two do get access to remove disease and restoration spells.
Lithira, good point the cleric is reactive rather then pro actively controlling the battle field.
If I do something like this, I guess I will have to make a customized spell list if I go the bardic rout to make sure , the “Cleric” with the bard spell progression, and the druid with the “bardic spell progression, “ have their bench mark spells available at their appropriate classs level, and dropping some spells down a level to make sure they gain acess. For example dropping restoration down to third spell level so a character gets acesss to it by 7h level when a bard would get acess to third level spells rather then 4th level spells at 10 level.
Changing the cleric to having the bard spell progression, and creating a “wizard “ like devine caster, and doing the same to the druid, was just something I was thinking of. I suppose as GMs we all love to tinker with things.
Thanks.
I may just end up leaving things as is.
I'm playing an Oracle (Battle) right now in one campaign, and this would completely wreck my character. I'm focusing on melee combat, but I'm definitely behind the Fighter in the group (I'm doing about 1/3 his damage, but I'm short an iterative attack right now). I can get close to him, but it takes me a round or two to buff up, meaning that I'm missing out on a round or two of attacks.
The cleric and oracle are versatile in how they can be built, but reducing HP and BAB means you're making characters who are focused in a much different way. Think of wizards, you don't see many wizards who focus Str of Dex equal to Int. My oracle above actually has a higher Str (17) than Wis (16).
One thing, a lot of self-buff's on the cleric list start to become pointless without modification:
Divine Favor - is an early equalizer between cleric and fighter, but costs the cleric an action.
Diving Might - just a higher level version of the Divine Favor
Righteous Might - Increases damage output, but still needs one of the previous two to keep the attack bonus relevant.
Those are just a couple that would need to be buffed or replaced to keep the spell list relevant.
A divine version of the Eldritch Knight would help. Adding more evocation spells to blast and battlefield control would be good, but now you're just making a wizard who can heal.
{some ideas}
Interestingly, bardic progression is not far from the original cleric/druid progression way back in 1st ed. However, this was dropped in favour of wizard-like progression ...
Clerics are powerful, it's true, and druids also. However ... few people seem to want to play them. Without the power attraction, what is there? Not saying I don't like them, but some classes have a strong 'flavour' that clerics at least struggle to acquire.
I have been tinkling with the idea on and off for a while. I have pretty much made the inquisitor the "warrior" of the faith and moved cleric back to more a wizardly type.
I dropped BAB and HD down, Gave em 6+int skills per level, opened up the skill list to include all knowledge skills. I left channel alone, did drop them to one domain and added breath of knowledge and well read as well as requiring a prayer book.
They do feel like they are missing something however.
I am still tinking with the druid.
|
|
Irontruth, I’m not trying to wreck anyone’s game. This is just an idea I am chewing over. I may decide to try it in my home game I may not.
I suppose my basic idea would be this: Just as BAB is linked to Hit Dice, I would like Spell casting to Hit dice as well.
So if you want a more combat oriented character with some magic, you get the Ranger / Paladin type spell casting.
I would probably try and convert the “Holy Warrior” of Green Ronin’s Book of the Rightous, to try and make “Paladins” of a variety of faiths and alignments.
There is also the Ranger, for a more druidic feel, and I would probably dust off the Hex blade, for a more arcane flavor.
If you want some sort of a “hybrid” you have the Medium base attack bonus, and the Bard / alchemist/ inquisitor / summoner/ Magus. I think if I did another sort of “cleric” with bard spell casting, I would certainly need to do allot of work and make a customized by class spell list for each variant.
I am thinking of snipping out the cleric druid and oracle, because they don’t fit this pattern
If you want something more spell focused, you have the Wizard/ cleric/ witch….
And ill need to make some more stuff up. A clerical devine character who doesn’t whear armore isn’t a combatant, but focuses on devine magic.
Dabbler, you have hit the nail on the head….so few people want to play a cleric. I am one person who happens to like clerics. Yes so few people like ot play clerics, and they play a pivotal roll in terms of buffing, secondary “meat shield” and healing. I think you are right the developers have decided to stack the cleric with more goodies to make it more attractive to play. In 2003 at I Conn in Stoney Brook Long Island, I was at a panel with Monte Cook, Bill Slavisak (my apologies for the mis spelling) and Skip Williams. They were extolling the new 3.5 revision that was coming out that summer. I asked the panel if I was wrong in my perception that the cleric was simply more powerful then the other basic classes. Skip Williams answered me, he said, ( now I don’t answer his exact words) “ yes the cleric is more powerful. We decided to give it more powers and stuff, to make it more attractive to play. The cleric is always the last class filled up, and the “NPC” the DM most often has to provide.” So yes, the developers have deliberately tried to make the cleric more powerful by offering it more goodies. I don’t think this “goody “ loading has been successful at drawing more people to play clerics. While I am sure most people won’t play clerics without the “power package”. I don’t think it has made more people want to play the class. I do think the clerics, well in flavor terms you get out of them what you put in. I have three clerical characters in PFS. One is a cleric of Pharasma, another a cleric of Asmodeus, and a third a cleric of Sarenrae…they all play both in terms of rules and flavor play very differently.
But I digress.
Seeker for shadowlight, thanks those are some good ideas.
I’m not finished tinkering, and I appreciate your thoughts.
I realize that yanking out the cleric and druid, might be like pulling off a leg off of a four legged chair. It might create more problems then it solves.
One other thought I had was to take the bard, and simply switch his spell acces to the cleric spell list…. That might make for some interesting possibilities. I might want to drop some splls like restoration etc…to make sure it is accessed at 7th level etc.
Another was to use the wizard class template, and have a pre prepared devine spell caster like a wizard, complete with spell book….perhpas the domains could be like the “wizard school, and we could leave Channel energy alone.
For the spontaneous Oracle we could use the sorcerer class structure, with the Mystery replacing the blood line.
Havn’ t quite finished tinkering with the druid. However I think it would be interesting to make a “spontaneous casting” druid type character.
Druid Animal friend
Alignment: any neutral
Hit Die: D8
Class Skills
Climb Craft Climb Fly, Handle Animal, Heal, Knowledge geography, Knowledge Nature, Perception Profession ride Spell craft, Stealth, Survival Swim
Skillls by rank per level: 6+ intelegence modifier: club, dagger, quarder Staff, Sscimiar, sythe, sickle and short spear, Long bow and Short bow.
Spells,
Spells per day and spells known as bard
The druid Animal friend cast spells spontenaously They draw their spells from the druid spell list.
Special:
Osirions,
.Seeker for shadow light, thanks those are good ideas.
I’m not looking to make the replacements to the cleric and druid equal to those classes, I am probably trying ot lessen these classes.Anyways these are thoughts and ideas im just chewing over. My players may balk at the ideas anyways and that would make things moot. It is just fun to tinker
Again thank you for your thoughts
|
In my mind, the problem with separating the cleric and druid into two separate classes (medium bab, bard spellcasting and low bab, wizard spellcasting) is making the medium BAB version appealing. I'd take a look at giving low BAB clerics access to 3, or maybe eventually 4 domains, and keeping the medium BAB version at 2 domains, and maybe giving alternate uses for Channeling energy, even going so far as to allow multiple variations, perhaps gained at different levels (the pfsrd has some great options in this regard). That way, the classes would still feel "cleric-y", but be different for the most part.
As for the druid, you may want to look at the Shapeshift variant druid from 3.5 if you can find it, and use that as a foundation for a medium BAB druid. For low BAB, I'd allow 2 domains instead of just one, or even go one step beyond that, remove Wild Shape, and let the low BAB version get 2 animal companions at full progression for melee goodness.
The thing is you do not need to make them 4 classes. Look at the cleric, the inquisitor already fills that Med BAB 3/4th divine caster of a god role pretty well.
With the druid you do not need a 9th level druidic caster at all. That role would be filled by the nature cleric.
I do agree shapeshift is the way to go and has been what I toyed with for a 3/4th caster druid.
Hmm, I haven't tried this out yet, but if I were to replace/power down the cleric, I would try to go with things that already existed in the system. Possible alternatives to the normal cleric I see:
- the oracle, especially one of life/death. Get some channel energy and you're good to go. This alternative may be useful b/c they can spit out the heal all day and have something of a more limited spells known while keeping full casting progression.
-the inquisitor has already been mentioned.
-the cloistered cleric archetype (from Ultimate Magic) has been noted as a bit of a step down in power from the normal cleric, in that it can cast less spells per day as well as having fewer weapon/armor proficiencies. it has a few knowledge abilities resembling a bard, so it may be along the lines of what you're looking for.
Irontruth, I’m not trying to wreck anyone’s game. This is just an idea I am chewing over. I may decide to try it in my home game I may not.
I suppose my basic idea would be this: Just as BAB is linked to Hit Dice, I would like Spell casting to Hit dice as well.
My point wasn't "you're wrecking my game", my point was that a common trope within this game, the melee divine caster, is removed. The paladin is a melee combatant, who gets some casting, the cleric/oracle, is a divine caster, who gets some melee. It's the spell selection that changes how a cleric is played and moving them down to a 1/2 BAB removes that option.
The problem with the paladin IMO, is that your most significant choice during character creation is what type of weapon you wield (2h, sword and board or archery typically). You're usually focusing on hitting stuff with a weapon.
To allow the commonly seen character archetypes within the cleric class, you have to do a LOT of work, adding prestige classes and core classes, changing spells, adding new spells, changing spell lists. But all you're doing is going the hard way to achieve what is already achievable.
|
|
Thank you all for your thoughts.
Davor, those are some excellent suggestions. I may end up using them.
Seeker of Shadow light. I often forget that there is a “nature cleric” rather then a druid. Perhaps that is a good solution.
Dreaming Psion, Perhaps it is better to stick with what is there. I have seen the cloistered cleric archetype in the Ultimate Magic. I understand that the archetypes are slight variations within a class, where you change the class abilities, and leave alone the base attack bonus saves hit dice etc. I suppose the designers had little room to maneuver. Cutting into the magical access in terms of domains, I find un- appealing.
I think there already exists in the Un earthed Arcana a more appealing version. The unearthed arcane version has a poor base attack bonus, poor armor and weapon selection, and d6 hit points. The class variant has expanded magical options, like an extra knowledge domain, and that bardic knowledge, and maybe 6 skill points per level. I think there is also the Priest class in the Tome of Secrets.
Iron truth, yes I guess you are right; I would be cutting out the combat capable option for the cleric. On the other hand, it has been a little bit of a struggle to introduce, a non -combat magically oriented version of a divine caster.
Again this may be more work then its worth.
If I was going to remove the cleric druid and oracle, because I felt they were a little “too powerful” I think I would be in for allot of work to replace the options they offer.
I would probably need to add a “Devine warrior” a flexible paladin type class for every alignment… this might be able to handle those that want to go into combat. I would probably use the divine warrior from the Book of the Righteous from Green Ronin.
I would probably need to introduce six variant classes, two for the cleric druid and oracle each. There would have to be one version with the ¾ base attack bonus, bard spell progression and a customized spell list, and a another version at ½ BAB d6 hit points, and full “ wizard, sorcerer” spell progression. I would probably have to sort domains and mysteries, between the two cleric variants, putting the more combat oriented ones with the 2/3 bard progression, and the others with the ½ one.
Yes there is already the Inquisitor. I find I like this class very much.
I suppose all of this stems from my opinion that the cleric/druid/ oracle, get more goodies then the others, and I would be interested in doing a little “trimming”. I may be creating more problems then I’m solving. But as GM’s we love to tinker. I may do this I may not. I may just leave things well enough alone. In a party of 4 adventurers there does need to be some redundancy.
Well Thank you all for your thoughts.
