Healing doesn't really work very well in combat until you reach higher levels and gain access to the spell Heal. All the spells that cure before that just don't heal enough damage to bother with casting during combat, unless an ally is about to fall unconscious or die. That is why you fight, and then someone uses a wand of CLW wounds to top everybody off afterwards.
My recommendation is, have something else you want to do primarily and play a class with the cure spells, heal, and status removal spells on your list. Inquisitors, Warpriest, Clerics, and Oracles can all fit the bill. For Inquisitor and Oracle I strongly recommend using a Mnemonic vestment with scrolls for the various (and less common) status removal spells then spending a spell known slot on them.
Oh right...Core Rules only. Of the core classes I think only the cleric gets access to all the status removal spells. Paladins can fake it by selecting the right mercies. Bards have CLW on their spell list, but I don't know if they have any condition removal spells.
Edit: As I'm reading through your post and preparing my response I'm getting to the point where you said you already have read about the first thing I talked about. But yes it's still valid. There isn't really a need for a dedicated healer because healing spells just can't keep up with damage dealt (by a wide margin) until you get the Heal spell. And as long as no one goes unconscious or dies...1 hp is as good as full in terms of what a character can do.
As to your question of core, no archetypes or anything like that are core. These are you core classes, no archetypes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Read This Guide and Abandon the concept of Tank, Healer, DPS as a balanced team idea.
Is that still a relevant way of thinking and approaching the healing role for the party?
If you're playing Core only, things won't have changed from how they were six years ago on these forums.
It's generally better to make a character who can heal but who does something else as their primary combat function. All positive-aligned clerics can heal roughly equally well (with a few exceptions - see Healing Domain), so they should aim to find something else they can be good at and heal only when the other options aren't looking so useful.Are wands very common in the game, or will they possibly be impossible to get depending on what the GM wants?
By default, you get lots of money from questing, and after a few levels you can afford enough wands of Cure Light Wounds, which are (by the rules) commonly for sale in towns. Similarly, you can buy scrolls to replace other useful Cleric spells. Your GM might decide to change things (or send you on adventures in the middle of nowhere where there are no shops) so it might be worth checking if this is likely to happen in your game.
Can other classes with UMD and wands really heal in a competent way?
Wands are hard to UMD early on. However, anyone with Cure Light Wounds on their spell list (such as Paladins and Rangers) can use that wand without needing to make a check.
Whether out of combat healing will work for you is hard to say. Players who are accustomed to being in a group of effective characters usually find they don't need in-combat healing to survive a battle. In which case, in-combat healing just means you're healing some damage that could have been healed cheaper later on, and you were using up high level spells when you could have been attacking and finishing the battle faster, reducing the total damage you take. This is not everyone's experience - some people come to think of in-combat healing as a necessity. (Which leads to tedious arguments that you've probably already seen. "It isn't a necessity, that's a self-fulfilling prophecy!" "What would you know? You're not in my game!" etc.)
I find that Cure spells heal on average about half the damage dealt by a typical enemy. So if you're healing constantly, you might be enabling your melee guy to go on fighting for twice as long, which usually wins the battle, but not in an efficient manner.
|
Don't. Playing a healer is effectively detrimental to a party that is all core. If a dm balances for a party of size of X then playing a dedicated healer is making the effective party size X-1.
Here is an example take a strength 20 figther 4.
Hand him a greatsword and take power attack. Get the feats to improve damage for greatsword.
He will 2d6 +17 damage on each hit. Average is 24 damage.
A fourth level cleric will heal max 22 with cure moderate wounds.Average is only 13.
Healing is not a good strategy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
After doing some research, most comments tend to say there is no need for a dedicated healer in a party (though it's welcome if there is one). Many posts comment that in-combat healing tends to be reserved for avoiding deaths, and much of the player healing is done to stabilize outside of combat, via spells or wands. As a result, players can choose to focus on a healing character if that is what they want, or they can focus on doing more damage/buffing/tanking and the off-heals they bring will be enough in most situations.
Is that still a relevant way of thinking and approaching the healing role for the party?
Yes. You can restrict yourself to just healing, and it will occassionally save your party. But it's more effective if you do more than healing.
Are wands very common in the game, or will they possibly be impossible to get depending on what the GM wants?
It depends on the GM indeed. As a GM, I don't hand out such wands if a dedicated healer is around - I don't want to take away their spotlight. Since this has quite some impact on your role, you should ask your GM about his stance.
Can other classes with UMD and wands really heal in a competent way?
Depends. Wands do ok when the urge of healing is not immediate - and when you can buy / loot more if necessary. In very deadly combat and deep in a big dungeon a party is better off with a dedicated healer.
My friends have mentioned a few times that in their past campaigns, just an off-healer was not enough, and given hints that a Cleric as a dedicated healer is extremely powerful. Should I be worried that that may indicate their campaigns tend to throw lots of damage at PCs and roll a build with that in mind?
I'd trust their judgement.
I've read about Oradins but with no multi-classing/core classes-only currently, I'm not sure if it's possible.
Oracle is 'just' Advanced Player's Guide, the first big book right after the Core Rulebook, so they might accept it.
Cleric has full access to his spell list every day, but (in my opinion) it's otherwise a dull class. Domains can add a bit of variety, make sure to pick two which sound interesting to you.
I've seen mention of Hospitaler Paladins, are they technically considered "core?"
Hospitaler is an archetype from Advanced Player's Guide, hence not.
I've also seen some builds with support Clerics focusing on Archery which could be fun too.
Archery needs quite a few feats to work, but it fits well the 'stay behind' approach of a healer. An alternative would be to focus on channel energy (Extra Channel, Improved Channel, Selective Channeling) - but 1d6 per 2 levels is not that amazing. As a second alternative you could craft items out of combat, if your GM is ok with it and if the campaign provides enough in-game time for it.
My friends have mentioned a few times that in their past campaigns, just an off-healer was not enough, and given hints that a Cleric as a dedicated healer is extremely powerful. Should I be worried that that may indicate their campaigns tend to throw lots of damage at PCs and roll a build with that in mind?I'd trust their judgement.
I wouldn't. They may think that a healer would be a good idea, but in reality, someone who prevented the damage being done in the first place would be better. Dead enemies don't do damage. Attacks that miss due to buffs don't do damage. Debuffed enemies do less or no damage.
These things cost fewer actions than healing and last longer.As a GM, I don't hand out such wands if a dedicated healer is around - I don't want to take away their spotlight.
And in doing so, you make sure that they need to spend all their spell slots on healing, and have no chance of ever doing anything else. Wands are for outfight healing, I seriously doubt anyone wants to play a character that does absolutely nothing in combat and only heals outfight. THat means that it is absolutely impossible to steal anyone's spotlight by handing out wands.
Archery needs quite a few feats to work, but it fits well the 'stay behind' approach of a healer.
How do you stay behind as a healer when cure spells have touch range? Reach metamagic so that they heal even less?
In combat healing is a great thing to have. But someone who focuses on it? Not so much. Buffing is often better than healing, at least int he first 2 rounds.
Yes, a cleric with a high CHA, one who can do more channeling is great. Rather than burning thru all your WBL constantly by wands. That cleric can also be the face. Selective channel is a great feat, too.
Healing does indeed keep up with damage coming in, especially if you are playing APs., where the foes are not super optimized. That Fighter example above? is he in any AP?
I certainly would want a cleric, and maybe one other PC that can sometimes use a wand of CLW.
But healing is only one thing in a decent clerics arsenal.
Thanks for all the great responses so far, they have helped clear up a lot for me and it's nice to have all those questions answered. My friend and I really are clueless; I've bought the core rulebook and researched roles but haven't had the chance to really read through the game rules so far (the experienced players were also going to help once we started playing).
It's a change for me mentally too since in other games (MMOs mainly) I am used to using heal spells constantly throughout the fight and it quickly became apparent that that wouldn't work in a pen & paper. I like the idea of having healing spells but actually being more useful in a tank or damage role when healing isn't needed, and it sounds like that would probably be viable in our group of players based on the responses.
Thanks again! And also thank you Louise Bishop, I am at work but I have that guide you posted loaded on my tablet to check out during break.
Not a problem. I play lots of MMOs and RPGs and had to make that change too years ago. The Guide I listed is not class specific guide but is totally accurate on how to make a balanced group and how the Pathfinder system is designed combat wise. It is worth reading for ANY player that wants to do well in pathfinder.
As far as a core only game, I do not like that playstyle as Core only is super limited and has just as many "Broken" or "OP" options as some of the newer materials. Things like Leadership, crafting feats, and 9th level casters.
But my suggestion for a good Arm (Support) style character is either a Cleric or a Bard. You will need a Wand of Cure light wounds to heal between battles. I do recommend having something to contribute more than just buffs. A Longspear and combat reflexes (Reach build) is a good go too. As are other spells that do damage like Spiritual Weapon. Or you can try your hand at a Arm/Anvil style and use control spells like Command to reduce incoming damage by controlling the enemy. If done right you can even give the frontliner extra attacks with command. On bards Archery is a thing as well to help contribute to some damage.
Honestly, I say play a bard.
They have cure light wounds on their spell list. The use charisma so you can get a decent UMD quickly, which will allow you to use scrolls of status removal spells.
Also, you can buff your party into being substantially more effective at doing things which is always great.
May I reccomend a middle ground? Play a summoning style cleric that focuses on summoning creatures that can heal and use other supportive effects
If you are limited to the core rule book only a cleric is going to be the best healer. Do you have any information on the campaign? Knowing more about the nature of the campaign will help to figure out your best options. For example if the campaigns is heavy on undead than certain domains become very useful. If you are never going to encounter undead they become a lot less useful.
As long as you are willing to study up on your spell list a cleric is actually a decent class to play. Since they automatically know their entire spell list for any spells they are high enough to cast you really need to know your spells. This also allows you to almost totally change your character based on what you need. Your direct attack spells are weaker than a wizard except vs undead and outsiders. Since you can convert any spell into a cure never memorize any of the cure x spell. Use scrolls for condition removal spells. This means you fill up your spells with buff and combat spells. As Dastis suggests summoning spells work very well.
Without knowing more about the campaign I can only give some general advice. Play a human and use your first two feats for spell focus conjuration and augmented summoning. Since cure spells can also be used to damage undead and belong to the conjuration school spell focus can have some use.
You may also want to consider picking up scribe scroll if your GM allows it. Not only does it allow you to save money on purchasing scrolls it also allows you to get exactly the spells you want. In some campaigns you may even get the rest of the players to pitch in for the cost of creating scrolls. In most of the games I play it is not uncommon to give characters able to create magic items the gold to create the items. The understanding is that any items created are party items.
A druid also could be cool :)!
I'd say cleric and bard are two good choices for support. And as mentioned a cleric has a few surprises up his or her sleeve if among the spells picked are Summon Monster. Even a core cleric can grab a longspear (or, based on god, a more fun weapon), too. Imagine the character you'd like to have, and try to build around that.
As mentioned, in-combat healing is for emergencies. They WILL happen, of course, but a good offense is a good defense.
They may think that a healer would be a good idea, but in reality, someone who prevented the damage being done in the first place would be better. Dead enemies don't do damage. Attacks that miss due to buffs don't do damage. Debuffed enemies do less or no damage.
These things cost fewer actions than healing and last longer.
Sometimes a proactive strategy doesn't work. You can get ambushed, the foe might be immune to damage or weakening conditions and it's simply out of reach. Yes, you can counter such situations with higher Perception, Knowledge, initiative, backup weapons, pounce etc. - but the more resources you put into it, the more the general advantage of a proactive strategy diminishes. Up to the point where a reactive strategy becomes the better choice, because it's much cheaper.
Don't get me wrong: In average the proactive strategy is better. But I wouldn't rely just on it.
As a GM, I don't hand out such wands if a dedicated healer is around - I don't want to take away their spotlight.And in doing so, you make sure that they need to spend all their spell slots on healing, and have no chance of ever doing anything else. Wands are for outfight healing, I seriously doubt anyone wants to play a character that does absolutely nothing in combat and only heals outfight. THat means that it is absolutely impossible to steal anyone's spotlight by handing out wands.
It's not that extreme in actual play. I have a player who enjoys being the healer, and he is happy to occassionally use his scimitar and his fire bolts - for him it's the right mix. A wand would take away spotlight from him, because then it would be more the item than him which helps the party to recover.
How do you stay behind as a healer when cure spells have touch range? Reach metamagic so that they heal even less?
No offense, but you are thinking in extremes again. If the healer has the fellow party member between him and the monster, the healer already stays behind, to some extent. It's not without risk, but usually an acceptable one.
They may think that a healer would be a good idea, but in reality, someone who prevented the damage being done in the first place would be better. Dead enemies don't do damage. Attacks that miss due to buffs don't do damage. Debuffed enemies do less or no damage.
These things cost fewer actions than healing and last longer.Sometimes a proactive strategy doesn't work. You can get ambushed, the foe might be immune to damage or weakening conditions and it's simply out of reach. Yes, you can counter such situations with higher Perception, Knowledge, initiative, backup weapons, pounce etc. - but the more resources you put into it, the more the general advantage of a proactive strategy diminishes. Up to the point where a reactive strategy becomes the better choice, because it's much cheaper.
Don't get me wrong: In average the proactive strategy is better. But I wouldn't rely just on it.
I strongly disagree. Even if you are ambushed, it is better to try to go out fully offensive and disable your attackers than trying to heal up the damage they've dealt.
The only time healing is useful is when it keeps someone from going unconscious or dying. At 1 hp a character is just as effective as they are at 100 or 1000, because Pathfinder doesn't have penalties for damage received or anything like that. So unless an ally is about to be taken out of the fight, healing is less helpful than doing something else. Usually this shows up the most at low levels, when combat is swingy and a single attack can represent 50% or more of your health. By level 10 it's rare for an enemy to do such significant damage in a single turn, and you usually have about 3 turns before you really need healing to conscious in combat (this is just rough estimation by the way).
So, it's not that you never need healing. It's just that dealing damage to take out an enemy will prevent more damage than spending a spell slot to heal with actually help a PC to recover.
After these comments, I started to swing towards either Cleric or Bard.
I think I may go Cleric since it seems a safe pick for filling in whatever niche I end up in, and I'll have the GM help me finalize the details with the caveat I not be solely focused on healing. Picking from Domains sounds really interesting, and I honestly had no idea they were so flexible in the roles they could play (such as melee support or summoner) - again, completely clueless here!
Thanks again, it's refreshing to see such an awesome community and my friend and I are excited to get into the game.
Here is a fun Core only Bard Build you may like.
20 PB Human:
Str: 14, Dex: 14, Con: 14, Int 10, Wis: 10, Cha: 16
Feats:
Human: Combat Reflexes
1 HD: Improved initiative
3 HD: Power Attack
5 HD:
7 HD:
9 HD:
9 HD (Bloodline): Toughness or Great Fortitude
Some Good Feat Choices:
Arcane Strike
Save boosters (Staying alive is a goal)
Stand Still (Good control with a spear)
Intimidating Prowess (Good for Intimidation if you decide you want it)
Lunge (More reach)
Combat maneuvers (Sunder can be useful)
Craft Wondrous Item (Very strong Option if Crafting is Allowed)
Weapon Focus, Dazzling Display, Shatter defenses (It is a line of Feats but if you have a rogue in the party it is game on for them)
Extend Spell
Leadership (If not banned...Bards CHA is amazing...get a Wizard Crafter and have access to cheap items. Or a Cleric for Removal and healing. Lots of Options here.)
If you get above Level 11 you can choose to go back to bard (more prefered) or continue to 8 Dragon Disciple grabbing up more ability Boosts, Natural armor, Feats, and more 12HD. But it is a basic reach build to use with a Longspear. Sadly Core only does not give you Flagbearer + Banner combo but this build is still strong without it.
Some advice on a Cleric Build:
Avoid Channel Feats and a Cha of 12+. (It's a trap) Channels are a nice side feature but terrible to focus on. Especially in CORE only.
Be very picky with your Domains. The level 1 powers are gravy, the Level 8 Powers are the Mash potatoes, and the SPELLS are the Meat of the ability.
Decide what you want to focus on and do not deviate. If you want to build a Full caster then starting with a 14 Str and Dex keeps points out of your Wisdom that you need to max out. Do not spread yourself so thin that you become mediocre at everything. We can defiantly help you design the character to best do the role you pick. But you can build a cleric to do just about anything. Melee, Archery, Casting, Summoning...they truly are one of the most powerful and versatile classes in the game.
|
You can see what I've done with a Core healer here. She runs out of things to do fairly quickly, so definitely put your focus somewhere else. But having the option is never a bad thing.
Personally, I like Clerics a lot -- even with just Core rules, they offer a lot of fun roleplaying hooks and have a solid spell list. (Unless you build them as heal-bots, in which case they can be boring.) ...And, unless you *try* to make a cleric that's bad at healing, you've got lots of other paths you can focus on and still have a perfectly capable healer.
If you want to be able to fulfill the role of healer with out actually allotting any of your resources (such as spells and feats) towards it, then I recommend the cleric. You can prepare whatever non-healing spells you like and then swap them out on the fly for cure wounds spells. You also have Channel Energy, which is good for healing the group outside of combat and sometimes very handy in emergencies. I strongly recommend putting some ability score points into Strength. This will allow you to contribute during a combat without casting a spell every round.
A paladin can also handle this role. The greatest strength of the Lay on hands ability is that you can heal yourself as a swift action and still continue to be a rockstar in combat. You can also heal your allies, but not as well as the cleric.
I don't know how you feel about skills, but both of these classes are low on skill points. Both can do well as a party face, if you enjoy that role, but neither will have the skill versatility of many other classes.
As another option you could look into the oracle class. Its spellcasting is a cross between the cleric and the sorcerer: fewer spells known, but more spells per day. You also have access to a bunch of interesting class features. It does a little better with skills, but has the worst saving throws of the three. Also a strong choice as a party face.
As another option you could look into the oracle class. Its spellcasting is a cross between the cleric and the sorcerer: fewer spells known, but more spells per day. You also have access to a bunch of interesting class features. It does a little better with skills, but has the worst saving throws of the three. Also a strong choice as a party face.
Core only.
May I reccomend a middle ground? Play a summoning style cleric that focuses on summoning creatures that can heal and use other supportive effects
summoning creatures that can heal? Which are those at lower levels?
None at low levels.
The Lantern Archon (Summon Monster 3) can cast Aid at will, which grants temporary hit points. The Bralani Azata (Summon Monster 5) can cast Cure Serious Wounds a couple of times. The Trumpet Archon is a decent healer if you're willing to wait until you're a level 17 cleric.
None at low levels.
The Lantern Archon (Summon Monster 3) can cast Aid at will, which grants temporary hit points. The Bralani Azata (Summon Monster 5) can cast Cure Serious Wounds a couple of times. The Trumpet Archon is a decent healer if you're willing to wait until you're a level 17 cleric.
Not really gonna help him, then. eh?
Just play a cleric. Give him/her a decent CHA bonus. Pick sarenae for a nice weapon, fire and heal domains. Take selective channel when you can. Take diplomacy.
Boost, fight, heal.
The more I've goptten into it Pathfinder has less in common with WoW and more in common with overwatch.
WoW is about pattern play and adjusting to disruptions in the pattern. Boss uses weird ability? Stop pattern, adjust, repeat.
Overwatch is about control, damage, support and positioning. Four essential things to Pathfinder. There are more than a few obvious differences but from a strategic and tactical they're rather alike.
With that in mind support in Pathfinder is not about sustain but more about working to make your group better and to solve any issues that arise. Clerics are extremely good at this. They have most if not all the status removing spells, plenty of healing, and a large number of decent to great buffs.
So, playing support your first priority is to get your group buffed either to help them take less damage, deal more damage or simply to let them get into better positions to allow for both. After that, you should support them by either solving problems like nasty status effects or mobility/action issues, or looking to control ground or deal damage to help the fight get done faster.
The more I've goptten into it Pathfinder has less in common with WoW and more in common with overwatch.
I haven't played Overwatch, but WoW (at least PvE) is indeed a very bad comparison. I haven't played WoW in a while, but back then, there was very little protection - disciplin Priest's shields, mainly, and bosses were immune to all but two debuffs that lower their damage (-3% hit chance and -20% attack speed). If healing is the only defense, it's obviously the best defense. If you've ever played PvP in WoW, you'll know about the power of crowd controll.
If you happen to have played Guild Wars 1, you should probably also know about the power of defensive buffs and debuffs; and that even in a game with de facto mandatory infight healing, a pure healer is often not the best choice.
I definitely did need to get my head thinking differently from WoW/Overwatch in the sense of how the roles work together compared to Pathfinder. I really like the dynamic from what I've read in Pathfinder though; seems to give everyone versatility for their role or task.
The important thing top understand is that there are no solid roles. Good characters are able to fulfill different roles, often even at the same time. For instance, if you're playing a summoner Cleric, than you are basically the tank (by proxy via your summons). You're also the healer (Pathfinder healer, i.e. mostly out of combat), and dending on what you summon, possibly DD. As there is no aggro mechanic, tanking is done with either "I deal you so much damage you need to hit me back", bodyblocking, or crowd controll (e.g. combat maneuvers like trip).
My friend is planning to stay Druid with the idea to eventually being more melee/Wildshape focused (we understand the Druid will still have plenty of good Druid spells they will still use, they just hope to be more melee during combat).
Be sure your friend knows that he/she has to at least generally decide before starting the game - melee Druid really wants high strength, while caster Druid wants high wisdom. Out of combat they basically play the same.
This makes the group seem very melee heavy. When I made my character, I focused more on expecting to be at range in order to diversify our skills a little. Does that make sense, or is it not needed? I am sure four melee characters would work, but when I picture encounters on maps with multiple enemies and the four PCs all going melee it seems like it might hurt in some ways.
That really depends on the campaign. In narrow dungeons, four melee characters are often very problematic for obvious reasons. Otherwise, if they have solutions for when the enemies have defenses like flying, multiple melee characters isn't bad because they can flank with each other.
Feats Empower Spell (I have no clue if I should augment damage, being the only focused caster)
Don't! Damage dealer caster, a.k.a. blaster, is among the weakest ways to play a full caster, and cleric isn't exactly made for blaster, either. If you buff your martial characters, the overall damage will be higher. Also, metamagic is only useful at higher levels (double digits, roughly). Goods feats for a support focused Cleric would be Improved Initiative (buffing your teammates befor their turns is obviously a good idea), and Selective Channeleling (so if you do want to heal with Channel Energy you don't also heal the enemy).
Your ability scores are also good enough to try archery Cleric if you want to play a more direct role in combat.
Empowered spell is a waste of time for a low level character. Meta magic spells usually increase the level of the spell they are applied to. In the case of empowered spell it increases it by 2 levels. That means to empower a 1st level spell you have to have use a 3rd level slot. A first level cleric does not have any third levels slots available and does not until at least 5th level. Even at 5th level the cleric does not really have good enough blast spells to make it worthwhile.
Also keep in mind that as a prepared divine caster you can totally change the nature of your character simply by changing the spells you memorize. Blasting is usually not a very effective tactic especially for a cleric. The exception to this is if you are facing undead or outsiders. Many cleric spells are designed to do extra damage vs these types of foes. Searing light for example normally does 1d8 points of damage per two caster levels, vs undead this goes up to 1d6 per caster level., and vs undead that are vulnerable to bright light it does 1d8 points of damage per caster level. It is also a ranged touch attack that has no saving throw.
If you go with the first build and find a situation where you are going up against undead or outsiders all you need to do is to change your spell selection. Also talk to the GM and see how common undead will be. If they are going to be common change your fire domain for sun. A cleric with the glory and sun domains is incredibly powerful vs undead. The only thing more powerful is an Aasimar cleric with the glory and sun domains.
First of all, heavier armor does not cause AC ("AC" is traditionally read as "Armor Class) penalties it causes Armor Check Penalties (ACP penalties, which is redundant like ATM machine, PIN number, LCD display, etc.) This is to model that it's hard to be especially graceful when you're wearing 150 lbs of steel. The ACP penalty has two effects-
1) When you're wearing heavier armor, you take the ACP penalty to skill checks that are based on Dexterity or Strength (e.g. Acrobatics, Swim)
2) If you're using armor in which you are not proficient, you take your ACP as a penalty to your attack roles.
Since Clerics have very few skill points per level, I wouldn't worry about investing heavily acrobatics or swim. So you're more or less fine in the heaviest armor you're proficient in.
Though your second response suggests that you are interested in ranged weapons, so there's a second effect heavier armor has that you will be concerned about: the heavier your armor, the less you are allowed to apply your Dexterity modifier to your Armor Class (shown as Maximum Dex Bonus in the table). If you have a Dexterity of 16 you would normally add +3 to your armor class, but if you're wearing chainmail you would only be able to add +2.
Ranged characters depend on both dexterity and strength: dexterity to hit (how well you can aim) and strength (to determine how hard you hit.) A character using a bow with a 14 DEX and 12 STR would add +2 to their attack rolls but only +1 to their damage rolls. With few exceptions, characters in Pathfinder are not particularly well-suited to fighting at both range and in melee, because feats etc. you spend on one option are things you did not spend on another option. Archery is a particularly feat intensive combat style (though very effective) and I wouldn't necessarily recommend it for a core-only Cleric.
The traditional Summoner/Support Cleric wears the heaviest armor they can wear, grabs a longspear, and takes the feat "Combat Reflexes" so they can make additional attacks of opportunity. On their turn, they cast spells and if any enemies run up close you whack them on their turn. This doesn't actually work well with summoning since summoning is a one round action (so you don't actually finish until the start of your next turn, leaving you unable to make attacks of opportunity). The traditional fix to that was the Sacred Summons feat, but that's in Ultimate Magic. There are still, however, plenty of useful things you can do with spells that aren't summoning though.
Is there any benefit for going with a Light starting armor
Generally you want to go with either a Chain Shirt or a Breastplate, assuming your character is strong enough to handle the weight.
Medium armor (if not made of expensive mithral) slows down your character. A human will move at 30 feet per move action with a Chain Shirt, but only 20 with a Breastplate. So for those 2 extra AC, you might find you can't get to your ally in time to heal them. If you're going to fight toe-to-toe with the enemy, the Breastplate is probably better.
Mostly you don't need to worry about ACP (unless you fall into the ocean and drown).
I am also still a little clueless with ranged weapons, since Abilities in a game like WoW work differently. If I were to get a bow of some kind to use during combat when I don't want to use spells, would my attack roll and damage still be based on Strength?
All ranged attacks use dexterity for attack rolls and none add dexterity to damage. Only composite bows, slings and thrown weapons add your strength bonus to damage.
There are two basic types of archery in Pathfinder: characters who specialise in it and do massive damage most rounds, and characters who carry a backup missile weapon so they can attack enemies on rounds where they would otherwise be useful. Clerics aren't the best class for archery.
For starting gear, I did see Clerics are proficient in Light/Medium Armor and Shields. Getting a Buckler for the AC and still having a free hand made sense to me. I did read that higher levels of armor cause higher -AC penalties, which mainly affected Dex Skills from what I can tell. Is there any benefit for going with a Light starting armor such as Studded Leather and a low -AC penalty, or based on Skills a Cleric typically uses, is less -AC penalty not as valuable as a straight higher AC?
Depends a bit on the campaign (for instance, for an underwater dcampaign, you don't really want penalties on swim), but normaly, the armor check penalty isn't much of a problem. There are also a lot of spells that negate the need for dex- or str-based skills, e.g. Air Walk makes climb checks unnecessary.
Indeed, you could even wear heavy armor. Unless you take the Heavy Armor proficiency feat the AC penalty will also apply to your attack rolls, but if you'reIf I were to get a bow of some kind to use during combat when I don't want to use spells, would my attack roll and damage still be based on Strength? Or would I want better Dexterity? And would a -AC penalty affect ranged weapons?
Ranged attack rolls always use dexterity rather than strength. Thrown weapons use strength for damage rolls (but you don't want to focus on throwing), ordinary bows don't add neither (but read up on composite bows).
Armor check penalties only apply to attack rolls if you don't have proficiency with the armor/shield. When in doubt, wear a breastplate.An archer Cleric will want light armor, though, because of the "maximum Dex" limitation almost every armor has.
Your optimal ability scores really depend on what you want to do. Archer Cleric would want high dexerity and not-too-low strength (for composite longbow) because without high dexterity, you won't hit much. If you don't want to use weapons much, Dex is still not a bad stat (as it boosts initiative, AC, and Reflex saves), but constitution, wisdom and (depending on how much you want to use/focus on channel energy), charisma can be more important. Highest stat should always be what your attack form mainly scales with (strength for melee, dexterity for ranged, wisdom for spells). To ease your mind, your rolled stat's are pretty good for a cleric!
Important to note is that you get a +1 to any one ability score every forth level - the first two should really be put into the 17 and 15 because that way you get an immediate benefit.
If you want to go a bit more in-depth, you could read this guide. I do suggest the main page and possibly the "cleric roles" page, but don't feel you need to read the whole guide to play a cleric. Especially the "leave spell slots open" thing is basically what makes you a good healer.
Higher AC is more important than armor check penalties. Recognize that Medium armor will reduce your movement speed compared to light armor. Luckily a lot of Pathfinder involves Rock em Sock 'em robots so it may not matter for you if you plan to make a tank. But if you plan to be mobile you'll have to stick to light armor.
|
I have been playing a cleric in the PFS Core Campaign. With 3/4 BAB and medium armor proficiency, the cleric is reasonably competent in melee. I choose spells to aid myself and my allies, because my wisdom is relatively low (for a cleric). Low wisdom means that making saving throws against my spells would be relatively easy.
Here is my build:
Race: Human
Class: Cleric (Cayden Cailean)
Domains: Strength, Travel
Feats: Toughness, Rapid Reload (light crossbow)
STR: 17
DEX: 11
CON: 14
INT: 10
WIS: 15
CHA: 10
You might want to take Spell Focus (Conjuration) instead of Rapid Reload. I like being able to load my crossbow without using a move action. I don't use summoning spells very often.
Because this is PFS we are allowed two traits, but traits are from the Advanced Player's Guide. I took Birthmark and Tomb Raider for traits.
I have been playing a cleric in the PFS Core Campaign. With 3/4 BAB and medium armor proficiency, the cleric is reasonably competent in melee. I choose spells to aid myself and my allies, because my wisdom is relatively low (for a cleric). Low wisdom means that making saving throws against my spells would be relatively easy.
Here is my build:
Race: Human
Class: Cleric (Cayden Cailean)
Domains: Strength, Travel
Feats: Toughness, Rapid Reload (light crossbow)
STR: 17
DEX: 11
CON: 14
INT: 10
WIS: 15
CHA: 10You might want to take Spell Focus (Conjuration) instead of Rapid Reload. I like being able to load my crossbow without using a move action. I don't use summoning spells very often.
Because this is PFS we are allowed two traits, but traits are from the Advanced Player's Guide. I took Birthmark and Tomb Raider for traits.
Well most classes with a 17 Str and a 14 con can be useful in Melee.
Whats with Rapid Reload if your doing melee?
|
|
I have been playing a cleric in the PFS Core Campaign. With 3/4 BAB and medium armor proficiency, the cleric is reasonably competent in melee. I choose spells to aid myself and my allies, because my wisdom is relatively low (for a cleric). Low wisdom means that making saving throws against my spells would be relatively easy.
Here is my build:
Race: Human
Class: Cleric (Cayden Cailean)
Domains: Strength, Travel
Feats: Toughness, Rapid Reload (light crossbow)
STR: 17
DEX: 11
CON: 14
INT: 10
WIS: 15
CHA: 10You might want to take Spell Focus (Conjuration) instead of Rapid Reload. I like being able to load my crossbow without using a move action. I don't use summoning spells very often.
Because this is PFS we are allowed two traits, but traits are from the Advanced Player's Guide. I took Birthmark and Tomb Raider for traits.
Well most classes with a 17 Str and a 14 con can be useful in Melee.
Whats with Rapid Reload if your doing melee?
I am sometimes obliged to do ranged combat, and I don't like having to use a move action to load my crossbow.
Many would disagree several aspects of this build. I like mobility in combat, skill points and action economy. Many would suggest dumping INT and/or CHA, but I don't like doing either of those things.
I have been playing a cleric in the PFS Core Campaign. With 3/4 BAB and medium armor proficiency, the cleric is reasonably competent in melee. I choose spells to aid myself and my allies, because my wisdom is relatively low (for a cleric). Low wisdom means that making saving throws against my spells would be relatively easy.
Here is my build:
Race: Human
Class: Cleric (Cayden Cailean)
Domains: Strength, Travel
Feats: Toughness, Rapid Reload (light crossbow)
STR: 17
DEX: 11
CON: 14
INT: 10
WIS: 15
CHA: 10You might want to take Spell Focus (Conjuration) instead of Rapid Reload. I like being able to load my crossbow without using a move action. I don't use summoning spells very often.
Because this is PFS we are allowed two traits, but traits are from the Advanced Player's Guide. I took Birthmark and Tomb Raider for traits.
Well most classes with a 17 Str and a 14 con can be useful in Melee.
Whats with Rapid Reload if your doing melee?
I am sometimes obliged to do ranged combat, and I don't like having to use a move action to load my crossbow.
Many would disagree several aspects of this build. I like mobility in combat, skill points and action economy. Many would suggest dumping INT and/or CHA, but I don't like doing either of those things.
Prepare or buy scrolls of Spiritual weapon. Your Wisdom is much Higher than your Dex and you will hit more, use less feats, and do more damage (especially vs. Incorporeal). Force damage is hardly ever resisted or effected by things like wind wall, en-tropic shield and all those kinds of spells. Later levels you can then grab SM3 and blast spells if you need to be the ranged guy for that day.
Plus Firing into melee without Precise shot is just a pain.
No problem! The nice thing about starting with Core is that it's easier to make choices because there are fewer ones. Choice paralysis is real!
Have an idea of what you want to do with your character, then build them along the way.
Have fun in Pathfinder!