Why are people reluctant to play clerics?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

251 to 261 of 261 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

"Devil's Advocate" wrote:
Gods and Magic, a few AP articles, and other random books do add things to Clerics of specific deities Summon List, if that helps any, but over all I agre with you.

Well the big problem I'm having right now is if that applies to PFS play which right now seems to be the only way I'm going to get to play anytime soon. In my home games this is a much easier thing to pull off as I gm or know the gm so we can theoretically hash something out I just wish that this was a system that supported characters other then Evil in some flavor of Lawful.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
see wrote:


Yeah, the real problem isn't players who are inexperienced, but players who are stupid. An intelligent player doesn't actively make it unpleasant for someone to play a cleric by being a crybaby demanding magic healing for every papercut his character gets.

Yes players who ask for too much healing can be a problem yet the class does require more work to use in game than say a melee type. For the longest time i mainly played fighters. Once I played a cleric it was somewhat daunting at first. Which spell should I take. Whcih healing spell would I need to cast a light or medium version. After playing the class for awhile I got the hang of it. Why do some in the hobby assume eveeryone is as good as thy are in playing a class.Being insulted at being called inexperienced then refering to other players as being stupid well lots of irony right there imo.

Shadow Lodge

doc the grey wrote:
"Devil's Advocate" wrote:
Gods and Magic, a few AP articles, and other random books do add things to Clerics of specific deities Summon List, if that helps any, but over all I agre with you.
Well the big problem I'm having right now is if that applies to PFS play which right now seems to be the only way I'm going to get to play anytime soon. In my home games this is a much easier thing to pull off as I gm or know the gm so we can theoretically hash something out I just wish that this was a system that supported characters other then Evil in some flavor of Lawful.

I'm pretty certain most of them, if not all, are legal for PFS play as part of the Additional Resources doc. The issue with Summon Monster (and worse so a Druids Spont Summon Natures Ally) is that it is so useful in so, so many different ways. A Caster that opts to summon more lower spell level creatures can both dominate and flood a combat, basicaly acting as both a summoner and crowd control at the same time, with one spell. Can bypasse traps, be a "buffer"/"debuffer" by both protecting actual players from taking damage as the pets absorb it all, (and as they vanish will not be taking up any healing), force NPCs to spread out attacks, help with flanking, or inflict penulties (triping for instance), or allow the caster to be in more than one place at a time. A caster that onl focused on Summon Monster could still effectively do the job that their role is normally required very well, even without taking Feats to boost Summoning.

Shadow Lodge

memorax wrote:
Why do some in the hobby assume eveeryone is as good as thy are in playing a class.Being insulted at being called inexperienced then refering to other players as being stupid well lots of irony right there imo.

Just goes to show how different people assume/demand the the Cleric be played a certain way, but no one agrees what that is suppossed to be. :)

I wouldn't say inexperienced is an insult, and I'm sorry it came off that way from people. Like age, experience (ironic to the topic: wisdom), is something earned, not granted.

As far as the stupid, that stems from people having a certain style of play, and believing that their style, usually with preset assumed factors and house rules slightly altering their game, is true for everyone else. Everyone does this. There are people here that swear by their numbers calculations and databases (even though they have never actually played what they are arguing about) that this or that is broken. There are people that only go off of their personal experience, (in just PF, PF & 3E, and all D&D games since 1st). There are people that only get their information from sorces of Character Optimization, and honestly believe that everything they read/see is true, but haven't actually see it in game, or for more than a single game.


My favorite Cleric was one who decided to keep track of "killing blows" and while several people were dying, decided to cherry pick a weak enemy instead of say, channeling. And then with no irony at all he said "that's how you play a cleric right *smile*"... he also prepared Cure spells at one point and thought two domains meant you had to worship two gods >_>

It's ok if you don't know what exactly a class does, but if you were playing one you'd think you'd look over the material a bit >_<... that aside that player was hardly the only problem player from that game, but still.

Liberty's Edge

Beckett wrote:

Just goes to show how different people assume/demand the the Cleric be played a certain way, but no one agrees what that is suppossed to be. :)

I wouldn't say inexperienced is an insult, and I'm sorry it came off that way from people. Like age, experience (ironic to the topic: wisdom), is something earned, not granted.

As far as the stupid, that stems from people having a certain style of play, and believing that their style, usually with preset assumed factors and house rules slightly altering their game, is true for everyone else. Everyone does this. There are people here that swear by their numbers calculations and databases (even though they have never actually played what they are arguing about) that this or that is broken. There are people that only go off of their personal experience, (in just PF, PF & 3E, and all D&D games since 1st). There are people that only get their information from sorces of Character Optimization, and honestly believe that everything they read/see is true, but haven't actually see it in game, or for more than a single game.

My post was not directed at you Beckett as imo your one of the more level headed posters on these forums. Just sick and tired of the gamer elitism prevalent in the hobby. It can never be the fault of the rules. If there is a problem with the rules it's the person fault never the rules along with calling said person idiotic, stupid etc. Are their players who do theior damn best to ruin a game for others yes. They are players new to the hobby and who have better things to do then memorize every single spell on the spell list. Casters when played for th first time can be daunting and not for everyone. That in no way shape or form is due to the person intelligence.

Shadow Lodge

memorax wrote:
My post was not directed at you Beckett as imo your one of the more level headed posters on these forums. Just sick and tired of the gamer elitism prevalent in the hobby. It can never be the fault of the rules. If there is a problem with the rules it's the person fault never the rules along with calling said person idiotic, stupid etc. Are their players who do their damn best to ruin a game for others yes. They are players new to the hobby and who have better things to do then memorize every single spell on the spell list. Casters when played for th first time can be daunting and not for everyone. That in no way shape or form is due to the person intelligence.

No worries, brother. I didn't take offense, and was more just saying sometimes we all say thing we didn't mean to come off one way or another. In my experience, (even here) a lot of people that you might think you would hate to have anything game/nrd related with tend to be very friendly and fun people in real life, once you understand where they are coming from. As someone that often playes Clerics (casters), I don't even know every spell, (even in the Core rules).

I do want to raise two quick points though, about the opinions about stupid/idiot and similar name-calling. Actually 3.

1.) A lot of times, especially here, people say things in a joking way, and it doesn't always come across if you are not really familiar with the person's posting history. Or sarcastic, or meant to be taken less than seriously.

2.) A lot of times, threads (like this one, actually) come up over and over), and people that have been active for a while tend to have already had the discusions over and over. This also means, their faut or not, we tend to assume people have already also read the same information for various points and counterpoints. I swear, I've probably been in at least 10 200+ post threads about Clerics being bad on one way or another since the Core PF book came out, and at least 2 where 1,000+ post threads.

3.) There is also the notion that people coming from other games, WoW, DDO, D&D 3E/4E, all have ideas about (in this case) the correct way to play a Cleric, and what the design goals where, etc. . . , and also people that have heard that more than once, and realize that (in this case) the Cleric isn't really the same thing, or there is a difference in system rules, or whatever.

Somewhere, I have a half-page list of official things that have been errated out (just relate to the Cleric), where Paizo published rules and concepts (mechanics) for non-deity powered Clerics (either through a pantheon, through a philosophy, Concepts, etc. . ., so even within the rules, there is a lot of variaton people do not know about.


I've always found healbot syndrome to be a big aggravation for playing clerics. I remember getting particularly annoyed with a player in a campaign I was running who went on and on about how clerics are only good for being healbots despite the fact that the party had an awesome battle cleric. I found such utter intransigence in the face of empirical evidence to the contrary incredible.


Neutral Good Cleric of Pharasma (or any Neutral God/dess of death) healer is my fall back decision. There's something to be said for the role play opportunities, such as when dealing with a noble who would just piss in the fighter's Wheaties, but has to show you some respect because of your status, meanwhile the party rogue steals his jewel encrusted chamber pot (or something, I don't remember) because you're holding up the narcissistic tub o' lard with all the formalities he can't skip! :D

Shadow Lodge

That's actually another aspect of the class that's always bugged me. Being a spokesperson for a deity, especially in a fantasy D&D setting should have some political say-so. But the Cleric class has no actual ability to do anything like this. Part of being a priest is the soothsayer, wise-person role, above and beyond the Oracle, Paladin, and Wizard, but there is nothing really in the classes machanics for this. Being a priest is a title that is usually above and outside the normal nobility.


"Devil's Advocate" wrote:
That's actually another aspect of the class that's always bugged me. Being a spokesperson for a deity, especially in a fantasy D&D setting should have some political say-so. But the Cleric class has no actual ability to do anything like this. Part of being a priest is the soothsayer, wise-person role, above and beyond the Oracle, Paladin, and Wizard, but there is nothing really in the classes mechanics for this. Being a priest is a title that is usually above and outside the normal nobility.

You mean like the Oracle is not really an oracle?

Anyway, what you describe is a function that depends on the form that society takes. There can be no class mechanics to accomplish that.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
"Devil's Advocate" wrote:
Being a priest is a title that is usually above and outside the normal nobility.

And is entirely a roleplaying concern. There is no mechanical representation of this because ANY class can become this. You don't have to have cleric levels to be a priest.

251 to 261 of 261 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Why are people reluctant to play clerics? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion