|
I would hope very much that players don't discount the cleric because they "like to be doing loads of damage in the front line". Is that the limit to our roleplay potential? Is it that Clerics need more utility spells, or a closer link to the crafting feats? What, apart from combat, could be done to make the cleric spellcasting more satisfying? Do they just need a better range of spells?
There is certainly an option to do more with channeling positive and negative energy and some feats exist to tune this. Are there enough of these and could any other interesting feat options be explored?
Or, after all this, is it just a matter of sacrifice. Much as in team fortress 2, few people play medics, but those who do can mean the winning or losing of a match. Is it that our clerics should get some sort of compensation for this back seat role, even, shock horror, more xp?
I have to sayy that I'm not sure where you are going with this. As far as utility spells, the cleric is on par with the wizard.
Crafting is only a so so power for many because it's something that can only be done outside of the adventure.
If you want to get out of the back seat, you are going to have to split the healing duties with someone.
|
|
I have come to LOVE playing the cleric. I MIGHT like it more than a fighter now. Toss up.
So far, I play my cleric completely opposite the fighter. I wear plate only so I don't take any accidental damage. I have no idea what my melee weapon is. Actually, I do. My melee weapon is the fighter.
As combat starts I start buffing like mad. Then I send in the tanks and follow right behind them. Our group has two fighters. They position, if possible to flank one opponent. I stay adjacent to one of them who is trying to "draw agrro." The other spams DPS. I sit back out of reach (hopefully but that is why I wear plate) and spam the heals on the tank.
It gets more complicated with more opponents of course.
Do I resent spamming heals? Nope. It's like a fighter who resents spamming melee attacks, or a wizard who resents spamming fireballs.
I cannot for the life of me remember the last time I drew a weapon.
Now that doesn't mean I don't do damage. I cannot tell you how many times Flame Strike has gotten us out of problems.
Our last big fight was against a demon and we were doing OK, but we were running out of helas and the wizard was running out of spells and the fighters were starting to be really hurt. The darn demon took a civillian hostage and we stood by trying to figure out what to do. Don't wanna kill the innocent. The darn demon ATE the civillian and healed. I was PISSED. We closed in again, not feeling too well now and it took another hostage. I knew what was coming and pulled out a Banish (I think it was Banish- sends him to his home plane) and he failed is SR and poof he was gone. We didn't kill it (needed to KILL it for the plot line). We lived and that hostage survived. By the way- that banish was my very last spell, too.
|
Does everyone see the healbot phenomena continue through higher level play? I’ve played clerics regularly in 3.0/3.5 edition, and generally the cleric doing nothing but healing tends to reduce as the party’s level increases. At lower levels (1st to 5th) the cleric regularly healing in combat is an absolute necessity.
As you advance through the proverbial “sweet spot” of D&D (6th to 14th), the need for the cleric to solely heal drops noticeably (at least in my experience). The other party members have improved their defenses, hit points, and alternative healing capabilities to the point that the cleric is free to do other actions for at least a few rounds every combat. That’s not to say clerical healing wasn’t needed between encounters, of course.
At high level play (15th+), the few clerics I’ve gotten to that level spent more time reinforcing buffs, summoning creatures, manipulating the battlefield, and dealing direct damage than healing in combat. Sure the front line sword-slinger needs a Heal spell or extra buff occasionally, but I’ve generally had plenty of time to do lots of different actions.
Has anyone had a similar experience?
Thanks for reading.
|
Jal Dorak - Having played a barbarian, and having seen the major issues that "rage points" are causing right now on the forums, I would rather avoid "faith points". A well meaning idea to be sure, but it will come with its own problems and that would rather sour the good bits.
I'm not disagreeing. I tend to use the boards like my own personal brainstorming session. I figure the more stuff that gets thrown against the wall, the more likely something sticks. I frequently post as soon as I get an idea, without review, just to get the idea out there. By no means do I endorse most of my ideas as anything but that.
Incidentally, this thread is on the Pathfinder forum, not the PRPG forum, so my suggestion was for roleplaying in general, not specifically for PRPG. Honest mistake, though. No hard feelings. :)
|
I was fairly surprised to see after GenCon reports of groups waiting around trying to find a Cleric. The Cleric and Druid have always been in my favorite classes, even back in 2nd edition, when they weren't quite so uber.
At least one other member of my gaming group feels the same way, and it's usually a sacrifice for us not to have *too many* Clerics and / or Druids! (Although a party of all Clerics and Druids is a freaking steam-roller, with decent core-only Animal Companion and Domain choices, and even ghastlier with non-core stuff.)
A Cleric is like a Bard with better hit points, better saves, better armor, better spells, better class abilities, equivalent weaponry and crap for skills. What's not to love?
A Druid has worse armor, but even better class abilities and some decent skill ranks.
If the 'healbot' thing is a stickler for some, I'd recommend looking at Monte Cooks Book of Experimental Might I. It's got some ideas for how to make the Cleric less of a healbot, such as a healing aura that triggers when an ally spends his action to touch you (so the action cost goes to the person being healed and doesn't subtract an action from the healer). I'm not in love with the mechanic, but it was specifically designed to address that issue.
|
|
Does everyone see the healbot phenomena continue through higher level play? I’ve played clerics regularly in 3.0/3.5 edition, and generally the cleric doing nothing but healing tends to reduce as the party’s level increases. At lower levels (1st to 5th) the cleric regularly healing in combat is an absolute necessity.
As you advance through the proverbial “sweet spot” of D&D (6th to 14th), the need for the cleric to solely heal drops noticeably (at least in my experience). The other party members have improved their defenses, hit points, and alternative healing capabilities to the point that the cleric is free to do other actions for at least a few rounds every combat. That’s not to say clerical healing wasn’t needed between encounters, of course.
At high level play (15th+), the few clerics I’ve gotten to that level spent more time reinforcing buffs, summoning creatures, manipulating the battlefield, and dealing direct damage than healing in combat. Sure the front line sword-slinger needs a Heal spell or extra buff occasionally, but I’ve generally had plenty of time to do lots of different actions.
Has anyone had a similar experience?
I'd say that was close to the experiance that I have had too. But Rezing was also needed.
Thanks for reading.
|
|
I was fairly surprised to see after GenCon reports of groups waiting around trying to find a Cleric. The Cleric and Druid have always been in my favorite classes, even back in 2nd edition, when they weren't quite so uber.
At least one other member of my gaming group feels the same way, and it's usually a sacrifice for us not to have *too many* Clerics and / or Druids! (Although a party of all Clerics and Druids is a freaking steam-roller, with decent core-only Animal Companion and Domain choices, and even ghastlier with non-core stuff.)
A Cleric is like a Bard with better hit points, better saves, better armor, better spells, better class abilities, equivalent weaponry and crap for skills. What's not to love?
A Druid has worse armor, but even better class abilities and some decent skill ranks.
When they mustered the tables in the Pathfinder Society games they made sure that there was a cleric at every taqble if they could. That says something.
|
|
If the 'healbot' thing is a stickler for some, I'd recommend looking at Monte Cooks Book of Experimental Might I. It's got some ideas for how to make the Cleric less of a healbot, such as a healing aura that triggers when an ally spends his action to touch you (so the action cost goes to the person being healed and doesn't subtract an action from the healer). I'm not in love with the mechanic, but it was specifically designed to address that issue.
Speaking of which, any update on when Paizo is publishing I&II?
First off, I must apologize for not reading all the posts here before dropping in my two cents but I have two questions for this topic:
First off, what about secularization? Is it possible that some feel unconnected to clerics because they are not affiliated with a religion/high power ( no offense intended to either group here).
Second, from a DM perspective, what if it were the case that the cleric just is not given enough to do besides the basic fight and heal? Maybe they would be more worthwhile if, as one poster said, they had to engage in other aspects of the class ( baptisms, sermons, gaining coverts, etc). I know none of this sounds exciting, but if done right, it would add challenges for the cleric besides those related to combat, and give more use to their skills.
The same argument could be made for other subtle classes, like bards, or Beguilers.
|
|
Does everyone see the healbot phenomena continue through higher level play? I’ve played clerics regularly in 3.0/3.5 edition, and generally the cleric doing nothing but healing tends to reduce as the party’s level increases. At lower levels (1st to 5th) the cleric regularly healing in combat is an absolute necessity.
As you advance through the proverbial “sweet spot” of D&D (6th to 14th), the need for the cleric to solely heal drops noticeably (at least in my experience). The other party members have improved their defenses, hit points, and alternative healing capabilities to the point that the cleric is free to do other actions for at least a few rounds every combat. That’s not to say clerical healing wasn’t needed between encounters, of course.
At high level play (15th+), the few clerics I’ve gotten to that level spent more time reinforcing buffs, summoning creatures, manipulating the battlefield, and dealing direct damage than healing in combat. Sure the front line sword-slinger needs a Heal spell or extra buff occasionally, but I’ve generally had plenty of time to do lots of different actions.
Has anyone had a similar experience?
I'd say that was close to the experiance that I have had too. But Rezing was also needed.
Ah, forgot about raising. Usually did that after combat. At high levels, I made sure everyone had a death ward effect and I kept an eye on their hit points. The non-core spell Close Wounds (cast as an immediate action) kept them going til I could hit them with a better healing spell.
|
|
First off, I must apologize for not reading all the posts here before dropping in my two cents but I have two questions for this topic:
First off, what about secularization? Is it possible that some feel unconnected to clerics because they are not affiliated with a religion/high power ( no offense intended to either group here).
Second, from a DM perspective, what if it were the case that the cleric just is not given enough to do besides the basic fight and heal? Maybe they would be more worthwhile if, as one poster said, they had to engage in other aspects of the class ( baptisms, sermons, gaining coverts, etc). I know none of this sounds exciting, but if done right, it would add challenges for the cleric besides those related to combat, and give more use to their skills.
The same argument could be made for other subtle classes, like bards, or Beguilers.
One big thing I miss from older editions was the Titles each class achieved as they progressed through their careers. That ties into what you are touching on here - playing a Cleric may not be interesting, but playing a High Priest might.
|
|
One big thing I miss from older editions was the Titles each class achieved as they progressed through their careers. That ties into what you are touching on here - playing a Cleric may not be interesting, but playing a High Priest might.First off, I must apologize for not reading all the posts here before dropping in my two cents but I have two questions for this topic:
First off, what about secularization? Is it possible that some feel unconnected to clerics because they are not affiliated with a religion/high power ( no offense intended to either group here).
Second, from a DM perspective, what if it were the case that the cleric just is not given enough to do besides the basic fight and heal? Maybe they would be more worthwhile if, as one poster said, they had to engage in other aspects of the class ( baptisms, sermons, gaining coverts, etc). I know none of this sounds exciting, but if done right, it would add challenges for the cleric besides those related to combat, and give more use to their skills.
The same argument could be made for other subtle classes, like bards, or Beguilers.
I believe that SKR is working hard on making the deity write ups as interesting as possible and giving insight as to what it's like to be part of the priesthoods. But not every high level cleric is going to be a bishop/high priest. To bad the organizations that existed for WOTC aren't OGL. I could easily see that sort of mechanic applied to fantasy organized religion.
|
|
First off, what about secularization? Is it possible that some feel unconnected to clerics because they are not affiliated with a religion/high power (no offense intended to either group here).
In my gaming experience, it works the other way around. Extremely devout people in my Bible Belt upbringing found the notion of playing priests of 'pagan gods' to be awful, and we would have to play in a variant game-world that had only Christian priests to accomodate them.
I am aware that there are militant atheists out there. (Dawkins, for instance.) But I've never met one.
Second, from a DM perspective, what if it were the case that the cleric just is not given enough to do besides the basic fight and heal? Maybe they would be more worthwhile if, as one poster said, they had to engage in other aspects of the class ( baptisms, sermons, gaining coverts, etc). I know none of this sounds exciting, but if done right, it would add challenges for the cleric besides those related to combat, and give more use to their skills.
Back in the day, there were 'ceremonies' that could be cast (I believe Unearthed Arcana had some, as well as Dragon magazine) such as baptisms and crop blessings and marriages. They were neat role-playing tools, but I think they'd work better at the cantrip level. A cantrip level version of gentle repose that just makes a corpse less likely to rise as an undead, or marriage ritual that makes a couple more likely to react favorably to each other for a month, or midwife ceremony that gives a mother-to-be (and her child) a bonus to their Fortitude saves for a short time, would be nifty, and not really affect the game outside of their specific uses (making them easy to ignore for anyone who has no interest in that sort of thing).
|
|
WHAT!?!?! at GenCon they were LOOKING for Clerics. Well that does it. I will definitely be a cleric for next GenCon's Pathfinder games.
Now which deity to pick... always the tricky question... something I can get into and develop some real personality for.
BTW, teh cleric is the BEST characetr for ROLEplaying. The cleric I mentioned above worshipped a fire god. So his healing spells had an effect of burning off dead skin and such and encouraging the growth of new skin. Divination type spells used fire as a focus. Even my healing potions used degrees of hot sauce. The players always were leary of the Cure Critical potions... they bubbled.
Heck I even managed to set an entire sea on fire, something about the sie of Lake Michigan, in honor to my deity. had some help on that one.
|
|
Back in the day, there were 'ceremonies' that could be cast (I believe Unearthed Arcana had some, as well as Dragon magazine) such as baptisms and crop blessings and marriages. They were neat role-playing tools, but I think they'd work better at the cantrip level. A cantrip level version of gentle repose that just makes a corpse less likely to rise as an undead, or marriage ritual that makes a couple more likely to react favorably to each other for a month, or midwife ceremony that gives a mother-to-be (and her child) a bonus to their Fortitude saves for a short time, would be nifty, and not really affect the game outside of their specific uses (making them easy to ignore for anyone who has no interest in that sort of thing).
I remember those. Arguably you could make Knowledge: Religion checks for the same sort of effects. Anything that expands the use of skills is good by my book.
In the latest UA there were also a form of magic called rituals that were like weak spell casting and required Skill checks. That could do the trick as well. I have often thought that clerical rituals mixed with certain elements of Epic Spell casting could do some really cool things.
For example: A High priest is called upon to ordain the marriage of two nobles. He prepares for the ceremony by preparing the church, and the vows and leads the followers in prayer to bless the couple. Every 10 worshipers gives a +1 to the ritual check.
Perhaps weekly devotion ritual provides a 7 day long "Consecrate" effect.
Rituals provides a big way to have clerics interact with faith, and followers.
|
|
WHAT!?!?! at GenCon they were LOOKING for Clerics. Well that does it. I will definitely be a cleric for next GenCon's Pathfinder games.
Now which deity to pick... always the tricky question... something I can get into and develop some real personality for.
My main reason for loving the Cleric. I play a Cleric of Sarenrae, and it's 100% a different character than my Cleric of Urgathoa. A Cleric of Asmodeus is nothing like a Cleric of Cayden Cailean or a Cleric of Gozeh.
I *can* play many different types of Wizard or Fighter or Rogue, but with the Cleric class, most settings have anywhere from eight to twenty-four primary gods to choose from, and each of those gods may have two to four different aspects that they stress (a Cleric of Wee Jas, could stress Law, and be a judge or advocate, Magic, and be an arcane researcher / explorer, or Death, and be focused on undead fighting / necromancy, and be *very* different characters), which, combined with Domain choices, make for many different options, from even a small sample of dieties.
|
|
I remember those. Arguably you could make Knowledge: Religion checks for the same sort of effects. Anything that expands the use of skills is good by my book.
In the latest UA there were also a form of magic called rituals
Incantations being adapated to Knowledge (religion) lesser effects. Very cool idea.
Perhaps the more useful ones might require some divine spellcasting ability as well, allowing an Adept, Cleric or Druid to spend some slots, perhaps even just cantrip level slots, to power the effect.
Conjurers could become known as "White Wizards" for their healing ability, but would still not be as good as a Cleric with the healing Domain.
While I actually like the idea, it would require some radical changes in the game's cosmogony as, oficially, positive energy is the exclusive province of the gods.
Alas, there are other alternatives to distribute combat healing job. Given Vampiric Touch as an already existing precedent, a clever necromancer can research versions that instead divert the stolen life force from a Vampiric Touch spell to his allies rather than himself.
The cleric makes a great party leader. "Well, men, here's your dose of healing and buffs -- now let's do god's work!" The combat benefits of high Cha to the class (and Diplomacy as a class skill) also help ensure that they can act as a "face" when the bard is absent or annoying. The cleric is only a drag to play if he stays in the back and doesn't assert his non-healing advantages.
|
|
Conjurers could become known as "White Wizards" for their healing ability, but would still not be as good as a Cleric with the healing Domain.While I actually like the idea, it would require some radical changes in the game's cosmogony as, oficially, positive energy is the exclusive province of the gods.
Alas, there are other alternatives to distribute combat healing job. Given Vampiric Touch as an already existing precedent, a clever necromancer can research versions that instead divert the stolen life force from a Vampiric Touch spell to his allies rather than himself.
No thats not the case both arcane and divine spells use positive energy. I can't see how Glorion's cosmology has been writen to say anything about positive energy.
And I have no intention of argueing about spells that imitate healing. It's outside the scope of this discusion.
|
No thats not the case both arcane and divine spells use positive energy. I can't see how Glorion's cosmology has been writen to say anything about positive energy.
And I have no intention of argueing about spells that imitate healing. It's outside the scope of this discusion.
the only setting where spellcaster were able to use healing magic is the one of Arcana Evolved... and it was because there were no gods... no gods no clerics... do you like that idea? i don't!
and Golarion is not exactly built around positive and engative energy, but the cleric does :P, and is stipulated in the planes section (i think... i almost arrive to that part... reading Mendev right now)
|
|
No thats not the case both arcane and divine spells use positive energy. I can't see how Glorion's cosmology has been writen to say anything about positive energy.
And I have no intention of argueing about spells that imitate healing. It's outside the scope of this discusion.
the only setting where spellcaster were able to use healing magic is the one of Arcana Evolved... and it was because there were no gods... no gods no clerics... do you like that idea? i don't!
and Golarion is not exactly built around positive and engative energy, but the cleric does :P, and is stipulated in the planes section (i think... i almost arrive to that part... reading Mendev right now)
I could argue that clerics are spell casters, but I'm sure that you are trying to say arcane spell casters.
Look I'm really only interested the Pathfinder setting. If you can site the section where it is written that positive energy use is strictly for divine use, then fine, please post it. I haven't seen it, but maybe it does. I can't prove that it does.
I do know that bards are arcane casters and there for I can say that there is a precedent for that sort of activity already.
But I can't see however is how wizards casting cure x wounds changes Pathfinders cosmology. If anything it seems to me that it works even better in Pathfinder since there are atheists who believe that the "gods" are just a differant form of life.
And this is just a simulationist arguement. What I'm really instersted in is the mechanical side of the discussion. The gamist side of the arguement. What happens when you introduce cure spells to wizards and sorcerers.
People are reluctant to play clerics because DMs and players don't adjust their play style to accommodate any other role than heal-bot for the cleric.
First off, if you play in a regular published adventure or, god help you, a Paizo module, then the operating assumption is that you have someone to pull people back from the brink of death. So part of the reason is inexperience.
As the DM, if you want the cleric player to have fun too, then simply run the module when the players are two levels higher than the module recommends. If characters aren't on the edge of dying every combat, the cleric will have something to do. How hard a fix is this to think up? Will it kill it for the PCs to have a 30 minute work day? If you feel that it will lack some drama to have fights to the edge of their capabilities every 6-8 fights rather than every 4 fights, just add a ticking clock to your plot hooks.
As players, most hear the cleric player say that they're not running a heal-bot... and then change nothing about their behavior. They kick down the door. They take on opponents at the edge of their capabilities. They don't change their spending habits. They continue to act like they're in a high-magic game when they are now in something more akin to "grim n gritty" low magic. They need to work for every tactical advantage, use every boost at their disposal, use stealth and fight with cunning and military teamwork. But, all too often (and I include myself in this assessment), we don't.
The fault lies with the people, not the system.
b) Improve options for non-magical healing--make the Heal Skill more immediately useful (even if it does something like 1d4+level HP at DC 20, it's still more useful than it is now) and improve healing rates at rest. Don't make magical healing the only option for survival (though it should still be the more powerful option).
QFT. Far too few DMs give players enough time to take full advantage of the Heal skills ability to double natural healing.
The cleric makes a great party leader. "Well, men, here's your dose of healing and buffs -- now let's do god's work!" The combat benefits of high Cha to the class (and Diplomacy as a class skill) also help ensure that they can act as a "face" when the bard is absent or annoying. The cleric is only a drag to play if he stays in the back and doesn't assert his non-healing advantages.
This. IMO cleric, while not necessarily having loads of moments of glory can often be the glue who defines the group and what they stand for. They can be in the position to set the goals and motivate others.
That is, when they are not healer-bots who just follow the rest of the group to cast heals on them.And I do wonder if that is part of the reason groups I have been playing in usually have trouble following the level recommendations of published adventures, often finding them too tough, that nobody will play a healerbot cleric?
|
|
I could argue that clerics are spell casters, but I'm sure that you are trying to say arcane spell casters.
Look I'm really only interested the Pathfinder setting. If you can site the section where it is written that positive energy use is strictly for divine use, then fine, please post it. I haven't seen it, but maybe it does. I can't prove that it does.
mmm ok no i was reading yesterday the campaign setting and i could not find anythign specific about this issue...
butif we are giving healing to arcane casters (yes thanks i was meaning arcane casters) then we should give more offensive spells to the cleric... ok they have some nice offensive spells, but most are buffs, healing, etc... if you give healing to wizards (or sorcerors... someone want to play the celestial blooded sorceror healing bot?), then its in due to give more offense to priest.
beforehand i am drowned in the flame war... i do not agree to any of this... what i read is that even the gods have trouble surviving and channeling the power of the negative and positive plane, the positive is so much raw life an energy that it might even burn them (hey the stars and each world sun are considered natural portals to such a place)... while negative is quite the contrary... death, destruction, so much mass that absorbs anything that comes into contact... hungry for soul and mass (yes... black holes are portales to the negative plane)
why would a mere human... even a powerful one be able to control soemthing witrhout help, when clerics are only able becausethe gods dilute some of this power to them?
The cleric makes a great party leader. "Well, men, here's your dose of healing and buffs -- now let's do god's work!" The combat benefits of high Cha to the class (and Diplomacy as a class skill) also help ensure that they can act as a "face" when the bard is absent or annoying. The cleric is only a drag to play if he stays in the back and doesn't assert his non-healing advantages.This. IMO cleric, while not necessarily having loads of moments of glory can often be the glue who defines the group and what they stand for. They can be in the position to set the goals and motivate others.
That is, when they are not healer-bots who just follow the rest of the group to cast heals on them.And I do wonder if that is part of the reason groups I have been playing in usually have trouble following the level recommendations of published adventures, often finding them too tough, that nobody will play a healerbot cleric?
healing is ok with me... healing both.. never... the only ehaling both i used was the necromantic cleric of kelemvor
and that was ebcause the master was inexperienced and brought down the fighters... in every encounter!!!! if my cleric was not there they would have died... yes she was useless in a battle agaisn the living...but that is no excuse :P
|
|
I could argue that clerics are spell casters, but I'm sure that you are trying to say arcane spell casters.
Look I'm really only interested the Pathfinder setting. If you can site the section where it is written that positive energy use is strictly for divine use, then fine, please post it. I haven't seen it, but maybe it does. I can't prove that it does.
mmm ok no i was reading yesterday the campaign setting and i could not find anythign specific about this issue...
butif we are giving healing to arcane casters (yes thanks i was meaning arcane casters) then we should give more offensive spells to the cleric... ok they have some nice offensive spells, but most are buffs, healing, etc... if you give healing to wizards (or sorcerors... someone want to play the celestial blooded sorceror healing bot?), then its in due to give more offense to priest.
beforehand i am drowned in the flame war... i do not agree to any of this... what i read is that even the gods have trouble surviving and channeling the power of the negative and positive plane, the positive is so much raw life an energy that it might even burn them (hey the stars and each world sun are considered natural portals to such a place)... while negative is quite the contrary... death, destruction, so much mass that absorbs anything that comes into contact... hungry for soul and mass (yes... black holes are portales to the negative plane)
why would a mere human... even a powerful one be able to control soemthing witrhout help, when clerics are only able because the gods dilute some of this power to them?
Sorry if I came off sounding anything less than respectful, I was just trying to show that I was understanding part of your side of the arguement.
But what you are using to defending you point is not RAW. Which is my point. I get where you are coming from, but your bringing in Fluff from other games that really doen't have any point of the discussion.
What I want to discuss is if cure spells reall effect game ballance.
IMHO I think you bring up a very imaginative veiw however and I'm sure that it pays of in the games that you are a part of.
As far as giving clerics more offensive spells, I don't think they really need to have it. The have better BAB, armore and weapons than most arcane casters, plus no spell failure.
I have to sayy that I'm not sure where you are going with this. As far as utility spells, the cleric is on par with the wizard.Crafting is only a so so power for many because it's something that can only be done outside of the adventure.
If you want to get out of the back seat, you are going to have to split the healing duties with someone.
I actually really enjoy clerics as characters, they previde me with some of my only good memories of pre-paizo DnD. There are a few points i want to make with regards to this.
Firstly, while the cleric gets some cool utility spells, it also gets some stuff that to me atleast, does not feel like Miricle but rather magic Just of the top of my head Find trap, Glyph of warding, helping hand Meld with stone. These things do not feel like they belong in the spell list of a cleric. Also the speak with dead and animate dead spells being either cleric only or got by clerics before wizards feels kind of weird. I mean, the cleric makes a better Necromancer than the Necromancers does. I would like to see many such spells replaced with Abilities to get divine or extra planer advice or insperation, and miricles dedicated to shifting public opinion and controlling mobs. I would also like to see clerics being spontanious casters.
With regards to the concept that 'Crafting can only be done outside of the adventure.' I would say this is frankly wrong. It is entirely possible to engage in crafting during an adventure, i know this because only two week ago, i dipped into my craft poisons skill to solve a 'problem' that stood in my way. Certainly, it is harder with magic items, but the benifits of being able to produce you own items is stagering, not to mention very cool. It can also be the insperation for entire adventures, as the players set of to find a rare reagent for the production of the magic sword the wizard is forging.
Lastly the idea that a healer is required is innately flawed. An adventuring party can survive entirely without magicial healing, using heal checks, natural healing and careful tactics. In fact, such games can be enormous fun, but they must be written with this in mind, and the challenges in place must be appropreate. I am currently playing two clerics in seperate games(or atleast will be by satureday) and i can happily say that neither will be performing healing duties, despite being the only 'healer' in both groups. In the Satureday game, our fighter has use magic device, some potions and the notion of buying a wand, until then we'll get by mostly on natural healing and on sunday....we have a hireling adept with cure light wound wand, and a cure moderate wounds wand, not to mention, may potions.
|
|
One issue I have with Clerics is that, mechanically, they don't have a true niche of their own, and this was particularly true in 1st edition.
The Magic-User had the spellcasting thing, and Clerical spellcasting was weaker and had less exciting spells. Even with the huge upgrade to Clerical spellcasting in 3rd edition (8th and 9th level spells), there are still big differences between, say, Scorching Ray, the 2nd level Arcane level 'I throw fire rays at him!' and Searing Light, the 2nd level Divine 'I throw fire rays at him!' spells.
The Fighter covers the fighting angle, and from the introduction of Weapon Specialization to the extra Feats of 3E, has always developed further into that niche.
The Cleric ended up being the first 'hybrid.' Sure, he's got some spells that Wizards don't get, but he's still just a weak fighter with some lesser spellcasting ability. (Even one of the most 'broken' uses of the Cleric just uses Righteous Might to turn him into, woo-hoo, a Fighter.)
Were I redesigning the game from the ground up, I'd ditch the part-Fighter / part-spellcaster mechanic and make a Priest class based entirely around channeling energy. Every day they'd get X number of Channel attempts (and be able to get more with feats, and more based on their level, like Bardic Music uses), and they'd start with two or three different ways to use that Channeled Energy, say, to Heal injuries, or to Buff an ally, or to Smite an enemy. The Priest would gain bonus Feats with levels in the class that they can only use to get more Channeling Feats (either to add more options, such as learning to Channel to Summon up Outsiders in service to their God, or create a protective Ward, or purge / dispel certain effects, *or* to add more Channeling uses / day, *or* to further improve on the Channeling options they already have, to heal more conditions and not just hit point damage, or to Smite people at a range and not just by touch, etc.).
It would be a different mechanic than spellcasting, and there would be no daily preparation. In a way, it would be like a Warlock, but with more options for powers than the Warlock gains Invocations, a limited number of Channelings per day, and the option to further enhance certain Channelings (such as pumping more Feats into Smite, and becoming able to Smite at range, Smite multiple targets, levy curses or maledictions / lingering effects on those smited, etc.).
Religious rituals, such as blessings, marriages, funerals, etc. would be handled through the Knowledge (religion) skill, which would have expanded functionality only usable by those with Channeling abilities (allowing them to take 10 minutes to actually bless someone, expending a Channeling, but doing so with a Skill use and not having to buy a Feat just to sanctify a gravesite or bless a newborn or consecrate a marriage).
But, that's an idea whose time is past. We've got the Cleric we've got. A kinda-sorta Wizard whose also a kinda-sorta Fighter.
To me, clerics present several "problems".
Firstly, as many have said- no one likes to play a class who's actions and very class-option decisions get mandated by the party. "what do you mean you didn't memorize another heal spell?" and so on. Its bad enough as a spell caster, having to predict what'll happen that day without having people die just because you decided to memorize a different spell. (heal, by the by, isn't a "cure" spell and as such can't be spontaneously cast, unless I missed a rule somewhere).
Secondly; No one wants to be told what to do. The cleric not only gets told what to do- but his very existence as a cleric mandates that he tells everyone else what to do. You are supposed to be an example of your faith, and you should spend at least some of your time not only trying to convert the party to your faith, but to keeping them from breaking the tenants of your faith. Afterall- you are guilty by association. You can't just let them do what they want to do, you have to try and make sure they follow the goals and whims of your god. If you don't- you can lose your powers, or at the very least be forced into leaving the group to find those more in tune with your philosophy.
Unless the party is in agreement with alignment and general philosophical ideals before the campaign sets out, the two problems can amount to an extremely unhappy player- not to mention what happens when two players choose different gods. Take for example a cleric and paladin, or cleric and druid who worship different deities. Now the party gets to listen to Two people trying to tell them what to do, with the cost of failure being the potential loss of the spellcasting ability.
Solutions? There are no good solutions to this. It's just a problem that folks have to deal with. It can make for some interesting role play but even that gets tiring by the 3rd month of weekly game sessions, with the cleric of Pelor trying to convert the Rogue- who would really like nothing better at this point than to slit the clerics throat than listen to yet another sermon about his "thieving ways".
-S
|
|
Were I redesigning the game from the ground up, I'd ditch the part-Fighter / part-spellcaster mechanic and make a Priest class based entirely around channeling energy. Every day they'd get X number of Channel attempts (and be able to get more with feats, and more based on their level, like Bardic Music uses), and they'd start with two or three different ways to use that Channeled Energy, say, to Heal injuries, or to Buff an ally, or to Smite an enemy. The Priest would gain bonus Feats with levels in the class that they can only use to get more Channeling Feats (either to add more options, such as learning to Channel to Summon up Outsiders in service to their God, or create a protective Ward, or purge / dispel certain effects, *or* to add more Channeling uses / day, *or* to further improve on the Channeling options they already have, to heal more conditions and not just hit point damage, or to Smite people at a range and not just by touch, etc.).
good luck with this...
i for one would never play such a charactersounds limited
i don't like playing a niche, but an individual... and i do not like the Warlock, nor what 4.0 has been doing,... this Priest sounds very much like just that.
Sorry if I came off sounding anything less than respectful, I was just trying to show that I was understanding part of your side of the arguement.
?_?
no, i do understood your point correctly, and i did looked for mechanics... right int he Campaign Setting that should not affect the Pathfinder RPG book...if mechanics are due... just the part than not even the Druid, who is a divine caster of Nature, is not able to call for the power of life (positive channeling) should do the job.
and i just point, if you give wizards something that would make them more independient and powerful (even if some would not use that) then you need to boost the cleric capabilities... i can understand a sorcerer with celestial tiescasting positive energy spells but not a wizard
the only campaign (again) wherei saw this... had NO clerics that was the reasonto use it arcane spell
and the bard is not a real arcane caster... ok he has similar powers, but he has something more akin to useful tricks of the trade, the pwoer is not in his blood, nor does he lears from books...
the bard is an oddity
|
|
no, i do understood your point correctly, and i did looked for mechanics... right int he Campaign Setting that should not affect the Pathfinder RPG book...
if mechanics are due... just the part than not even the Druid, who is a divine caster of Nature, is not able to call for the power of life (positive channeling) should do the job.
and i just point, if you give wizards something that would make them more independient and powerful (even if some would not use that) then you need to boost the cleric capabilities... i can understand a sorcerer with celestial tiescasting positive energy spells but not a wizard
the only campaign (again) wherei saw this... had NO clerics that was the reasonto use it arcane spell
and the bard is not a real arcane caster... ok he has similar powers, but he has something more akin to useful tricks of the trade, the pwoer is not in his blood, nor does he lears from books...
the bard is an oddity
The bard is an odity, but yet WOTC did make the Bard a arcane caster.
I really don't see giving cure spells to arcane casters as making the cleric that much weaker, but given my experience with 3e spells is that 1. Domains often give arcane spells to clerics and 2. More and more spells come out over time for all casters be that arcane, divine or both.
The original point of the thread is that some people avoid playing the Cleric because of the baggage that come with it. The cleric still come up with some very cool powers, but hate doing the healbot. If someone else in the party could handle the healing duty. I think that more people would play clerics because they could be more dynamic.
If healing becomes less of a focus for Clerics I honestly think that will give them more time for other things and not just fighting.
Unless the party is in agreement with alignment and general philosophical ideals before the campaign sets out, the two problems can amount to an extremely unhappy player- not to mention what happens when two players choose different gods. Take for example a cleric and paladin, or cleric and druid who worship different deities. Now the party gets to listen to Two people trying to tell them what to do, with the cost of failure being the potential loss of the spellcasting ability. Solutions? There are no good solutions to this. It's just a problem that folks have to deal with. It can make for some interesting role play but even that gets tiring ...
I think you're overstating the problem a bit. There's always going to be the potential for friction between PCs, just as there can be friction between the players. It's just a given with a group activity.
But I've never played in a game where the divine casters were expected to continuously attempt to convert everyone around them or risk losing their powers. If the goal is worthy, your god should cut you some slack on who your associates are.
Otherwise, the cleric should be able to pray for divine aid in detecting and disabling traps.
"Oh lord, I have driven the infidel rogue from our party, as thou wisht. Now my tank lies bleeding at the bottom of a spiked pit. I'll be needing the trapfinding class ability, or extra healing spells, or you can just rid this dungeon of traps and locks with your divine grace. Whatever is most convenient for you. Amen."
Seriously though, I think that the idea that divine casters could lose their powers over associates and lack of coversion is a bad precedent. It implies way too much direct observation and involvement from the cleric's god. It could be a real can of worms if you're not careful.
Any time an NPC cleric is acting like a bag of d!cks, the players could just say "that guy should lose his powers". And what about clerics living where they are a minority religion? Do they have to meet some conversion quota or leave the city to avoid losing their powers? What if the king says that foreign clerics can minister to other foreigners but can't try to convert natives?
The goddess of Rivers and streams, for example, does have value...or rather did, as 4th ed vaporised her for being "unimportant". Water, one would have thought, is rather important for survival and civilisation, but clearly in 4th ed they drink "pure manly warfare" or somesuch.
:D
Thank you so much for saying this! For some reason, I find this quote endlessly amusing. I don't think I can say "they drink "pure manly warfare"" out loud without laughing. Hilarious!
---
Anyway... my one real solid 3.0-3.5 attempt to play a cleric, an Aasimar priest of Kord in Forgotten Realms, kind of fell apart partly because at low levels, the +1 level adjustment really crushed me, and partly because the game ran maybe 2-3 sessions anyway before petering out.
In general, though, I never play a cleric, and the reason, at least the one I usually cite, is because I can't think of a cleric character idea I really want to play. A concept that resonates with me.
I think when you get right down to it, the very concept of a cleric runs counter to what I usually want to play at being in a fantasy game. I don't want my character to have faith in an uber-being, (let alone, one who tells her where to go, who to be, and claims credit for her doings,) I want her to have faith in herself. (And her friends.)
|
|
I have been thinking about the Healbot role of the cleric and what causes it and how to change it.
Personally I think the real problem came about with 3.5
For me, as a cleric, the standard combat goes like this:
Rounds 1-3 Buff Fighter and Rogue
Round 4 start healing
Round 5-6 more healing
ROund 7 everyone is doing better so I prepare an offensive spell but the fight ends.
Healbot.
Under 3.0 combat went like this
Start of day, buff Fighter and Rogue
Rounds 1-3 get in some really good offensive spells
Round 4-5 Heal
Round 6 Combat is over
Never felt like a Healbot
To me, the problem was nerfing the buff spells from hour/level to minute/level. This means that the first few rounds of combat require me to buff. Then characters need healing. Under the old system I could go right into combat and drop into healing after a few good damaging spells were cast.
The second problem with changing buff spells to minute/level is that it reinforced the 15 minute adventuring day. Before, the Buff spells could last several encounters. Now, unless you are restricted to a dungeon crawl, they last one fight. At the end of the fight the cleric can not cast the buffs again (unless he prepared multiples of the same spells).
|
I have been thinking about the Healbot role of the cleric and what causes it and how to change it.
Interesting thoughts on buffs, I'd never really noticed the change until you pointed it out. Question though, wouldn't player always be buffed? Wouldn't the fighter get Bull's Strength every morning and always have the bonus? But I guess you can't hit "all day" = 8 hours until 8th level.
I also more access to non-divine healing would take some pressure off clerics - allow the Heal skill to restore some HP, alchemical or herbal salves that restore a few HP or at least stabilize the dying, allowing players to recoup a few HP by taking a time-out during combat and only defending.
Interesting thoughts on buffs, I'd never really noticed the change until you pointed it out. Question though, wouldn't player always be buffed? Wouldn't the fighter get Bull's Strength every morning and always have the bonus?
When we played 3.0, every spellcaster always used all their 2nd level slots for stat boots spells, and acquired a ring of wizardry II ASAP so they could cast more of them. There were no other 2nd level spells in the entire game.
|
|
Interesting thoughts on buffs, I'd never really noticed the change until you pointed it out. Question though, wouldn't player always be buffed? Wouldn't the fighter get Bull's Strength every morning and always have the bonus?When we played 3.0, every spellcaster always used all their 2nd level slots for stat boots spells, and acquired a ring of wizardry II ASAP so they could cast more of them. There were no other 2nd level spells in the entire game.
Similar experience, Kirth - though I wonder how much that has to do with the enomorous overabundance of buffing and utility spells at 2nd level, and the lack of good damaging and controlling spells.
Similar experience, Kirth - though I wonder how much that has to do with the enomorous overabundance of buffing and utility spells at 2nd level, and the lack of good damaging and controlling spells.
Glitterdust? Blind whole handfuls of enemies. Web? And hideous laughter was like a save-or-die.
Shoot, rope trick, as far as utility spells go? All sadly underused because bull's strength gave you the equivalent of a 16,000 gp item for the cost of a 2nd level spell slot. Nerfing the duration of those spells forced everyone to look at alternatives (and, sadly, helped lead to all clerics taking Extend Spell, Persistent Spell, Easy Metamagic, and Divine Metamagic as their 3rd, 6th, 9th, and 12th level feats).|
|
Similar experience, Kirth - though I wonder how much that has to do with the enomorous overabundance of buffing and utility spells at 2nd level, and the lack of good damaging and controlling spells.Glitterdust? Blind whole handfuls of enemies. Web? And hideous laughter was like a save-or-die.
Shoot, rope trick, as far as utility spells go? All sadly underused because bull's strength gave you the equivalent of a 16,000 gp item for the cost of a 2nd level spell slot. Nerfing the duration of those spells forced everyone to look at alternatives (and, sadly, helped lead to all clerics taking Extend Spell, Persistent Spell, Easy Metamagic, and Divine Metamagic as their 3rd, 6th, 9th, and 12th level feats).
You bring up the best examples, to be sure. For my part, I was thinking more along the lines of cleric. But in 3.0 the ability buffs were also randomized. I didn't mind that balance.
For my part, I was thinking more along the lines of cleric. But in 3.0 the ability buffs were also randomized. I didn't mind that balance.
Hold person and resist energy ("elements") stand out, and I've gotten a lot of mileage out of sound burst. But, yeah, clerics were less spectaular.
I'd temporarily forgotten about the +1d4+1, but that just made people want to cast bull's strength even more times, to keep trying for that +5 for the fighter! I'm SO glad they reduced the duration, I can't express it.
|
|
To me, the problem was nerfing the buff spells from hour/level to minute/level. This means that the first few rounds of combat require me to buff. Then characters need healing. Under the old system I could go right into combat and drop into healing after a few good damaging spells were cast.
The second problem with changing buff spells to minute/level is that it reinforced the 15 minute adventuring day. Before, the Buff spells could last several encounters. Now, unless you are restricted to a dungeon crawl, they last one fight. At the end of the fight the cleric can not cast the buffs again (unless he prepared multiples of the same spells).
that is why we use spell durations of 3.0 and we very much hate 3.5
its lame the spell duraton of just seconds or rounds :SI have been thinking about the Healbot role of the cleric and what causes it and how to change it.Interesting thoughts on buffs, I'd never really noticed the change until you pointed it out. Question though, wouldn't player always be buffed? Wouldn't the fighter get Bull's Strength every morning and always have the bonus? But I guess you can't hit "all day" = 8 hours until 8th level.
I also more access to non-divine healing would take some pressure off clerics - allow the Heal skill to restore some HP, alchemical or herbal salves that restore a few HP or at least stabilize the dying, allowing players to recoup a few HP by taking a time-out during combat and only defending.
the Pthfinder Chronicles Campaign Settings gives an option for players of a godless country
Godless Healing is a feat that lets once per day recover 1d4+1 hp per level, it takes 1 round of concentration
but again, is a regional feat... i won't it allow to anione except maybe atheist... but i am thinking if the gods will decide not to heal them... making the clerics healings unsuccessul for such characters
of course this last option is my own idea
For my part, I was thinking more along the lines of cleric. But in 3.0 the ability buffs were also randomized. I didn't mind that balance.Hold person and resist energy ("elements") stand out, and I've gotten a lot of mileage out of sound burst. But, yeah, clerics were less spectaular.
I'd temporarily forgotten about the +1d4+1, but that just made people want to cast bull's strength even more times, to keep trying for that +5 for the fighter! I'm SO glad they reduced the duration, I can't express it.
i suppose as much as i hate it
i casted i bull's strenght... one only for each character i did (usually the paladin (before be became an evil fighter) and me) if the dice said +2... so bad... i don't have more spells to waste... the spell was not acumulable.i tried using Hold afew times... 80% it failled...
also considering you need to memorize... gave us few options.
Clerics have been also less spectacular... but hey... that is our job :P, i solve it withamgic vestment, magic weapon, divine power... yes... it was a pain to arrive to level 7... but it was absolutely worth
|
|
Thank you all for your thoughts.
You all have brought up lots of good points. I can see how people most people would prefer to be the person dealing direct damage to the enemy and killing them. And as Mr. Jacobs mentioned the rewards are much more subtle.
I have read many of the Elis Peters Brother Cadfael Mystery books, and I have watched the PBS Cadfael mystery series as well. Derek Jacobi played Brother Cadfael. I found Brother Cadfael was a very informative role model for my clerics. I have often stolen the character whole cloth, and simply called my clerics Brother Cadfael.
I would often play a Neutral Good cleric of Pelor with the Healing and Sun domains. I know people will groan heal-bot. As for skills I would often pick Concentration, Heal (for the setting of bones, lacerations and surgery), Knowledge religion and if I could afford it, Profession Apothecary (for the herbal remedies), and Craft Poison making (for the antidotes). I find that using the recitation, or prayer, bless and Doom in my opinion does as much to sway the battle in our favor as a well-placed fireball. This combination is not as flashy but very effective in my opinion. Being a competent combatant, I can move into fill gaps where necessary, or help the rogue with flanking etc. The healing is always welcome. And there are few things as satisfying as a flame strike spell. I know you can clear a room of goblins with a fireball spell, but with a flame strike, you have called down the wrath of your god upon your enemy.
In terms of healing, this extends beyond the party. Whenever we could come into the a new village, my character would find the local temple, and if it was an allied temple, he would roll up his sleeves and help the local priest with tending the sick etc.
This was an excellent way to a) generate good will for the party within the community and b) gather all sorts of information. As a competent healer, most doors were open to him. There was always a noble’s cough to recommend a tea for, or a peasant to heal.
Although...
I play mine similar, although I never did take the profession or craft....I'll have to add that to the mix next time.
And yes, its amazing how many doors open for you when your willing to heal the sick and injured sans payment.....
|
|
I am not sure where to stick this post. I have a question. I have noticed over the years playing D&D in general people do not like playing clerics. Usually it is the last role to be filled in a gaming group, and the DM often has to NPC Clerics. I know that there are a handful of players who like playing clerics. I happen to be one of them. Looking from a crunch perspective, they are a pretty good deal, with their d8 hps, their medium attack bonus, their ability to use all armor, and cast spells in them. I could go on for quite a few more lines, but in short they are a pretty good deal.
So why is it that many people do not like to play clerics? What are your thoughts?
Actually, one of my friends used to play the cleric all the time. Although he could heal, his main focus was fighting. He would dual wield maces, go wading through enemies, and most of his spells were to help the entire party fight more effectively or bolster the defense of the party should they need to escape quickly. He would heal if the need was great.
I had another cleric, she was neutral, and chose to use Inflict spells. Sure, she slotted heals, but everyone knew she was not going to be the "healing battery". Her job was to demoralize the foe, and she did it well.
A cleric can be played in many ways. Its up to the players at the table to decide in what way they want to portray themselves (and their characters beliefs in the deity). Not all of them have to be mindless healing bots that tend to end up more boring than watching reality TV...
Me and my wife dont mind playing clerics, or playing the band-aid box. But that is assuming there is a line where one stops and the other begins.
Example: Genon, 12th level Healer (thats right, the healer class!) DMPC in the Shackled City game I am running. His Cure Serious Wounds Mass does an average of 45 points per target. When undead come out, the party laughs and watches Genon drop the hammer. The few that remain get personal applications of Heal (which he casts at CL 15 already, due to feat choices). He is an unbeleivable healer, but not much else. The party loves him, never takes him for granted, and have launched retributive crusades against the people who try to harm him (which is actually not that many, thanks to the Sanctuary spell).
Now lets try Kor, from the Age of Worms game run two years back. Cleric/Entropomancer. NOT A HEALER. Did she get asked to heal? Yes. She firmly reiterated that her faith lay in the ultimate collapse of all things, and that she would not blaspheme herself nor the wounded by magically exorcising a perfectly natural condition with the precious gifts given to her by entropy. What did the party do? Stocked up on healing potions and wands, spent a few ranks of use magic device here and there, and while our weapons and gear may have been about 10% less valuable, we had a cleric on our side that could practically annhailate whole sections of the map.
Its true that there is a personality paradigm with the "healer/bandaidinabox/partybuffer" role. My wife loves bards, but then again, my group gives all credit for attacks that hit to the bard if the deciding modifier was within the bonus given by bardic music. Which is more often than not most of the important ones.
I'd say that people dont neccessarily "dislike" playing clerics, or bards, or any other support class. But I would say most people dislike not being given credit/acknowledgement/appreciation for what they help to accomplish through those classes.
Yes yes, barbarian McMunchkin, you leap attack-power attacked with your scythe and got a crit. The enemy is a messy pair of stains on opposite sides of the room. But who cast the bless weapon that made it auto-confirm against that evil foe? And who gave the bardic music that allowed you to power attack for so much yet still have a good chance of hitting? And who gave you the freedom of movement that prevented the evil beasts reaching tentacles from grappling you out of the charge before you even swung?
When credit is given where credit is due, all classes are more fun. The game is more fun. Its a social game. Which means it takes social skills to fully enjoy it and experience it. That might be my own solitarity opinion, and you can disagree from your own experiences, but thats just how I see it.
I have never seen a shortage of clerics in comparison to other classes.
What I have seen is sometimes, nobody wants their character to be a cleric... just like sometimes nobody wants to play a ranger, monk, fighter, or bard during the session. This isn't really people "not" wanting to play clerics, but what can become apparent is that missing a cleric sometimes sucks for the party. This makes it seem like clerics don't want to be played.
The only characters I see being played more often than clerics in the groups I've seen are rogues and wizards. That's just because everybody wants to be the cool kid. :P
