So that only goes one way, only applies to channel energy not to heavy armor? Interesting.And here you nailed it. This is a matter of taste, pure and simple. Since the cleric is, by nature, a multi-concept class, being as varied as the gods (literally), I think a good design for the class should include abilities which are shared by most cleric concepts, while allowing space for learning deity-specific powers/feats/skills.
Now, channel energy is a great ability because it encompasses a greater number of the cleric concepts. Particularly war-like deities might probably have many clerics which are not capable of healing, instead focusing on the more destructive negative energy chanelling.
As for heavy armors, which are (in my opinion) used more often by war and guardian clerics (a niche among the many possibilities), can be obtained easily by spending a feat, which are also more abundant now.
I liked the change, of course some will dislike it. It doesn't make it specifically *wrong*, though.
But all I see if you think it applies to your choice ability but not to mine in this case. Lets really look at which gods think healing is something all important.
Honestly why are gods of fire, the sun, plants, earth, community, water, air, or any of a number filled with all this power that can be used only to heal (except against undead). For a cleric of a god of healing sure it makes sense, maybe even a god with the good domain (reverence for life and all), but Law, Chaos, Freedom?
Seems like a real nitch ability that now all clerics have.
I am not against sponteous casting, that fits a need I guess, but channel energy is vastly different. It is a power that has but two uses for good aligned clerics, heal the living or harm the undead. Why is a cleric of the forge so very focused on such things that he grants this?
Yep it is called house ruling.
Very interesting. So it works when you want an ability, but not when you don't. Very interesting logic and reasoning.
But you do see what I am saying don't you? If the logic support removing heavy armor because not all clerics would be trained in its use, then it should also support removing channel energy since clearly not all gods would be so determined to make their prime followers into healing batteries.
He means he has no valid defense for his stance so has turned to name calling.Who is Krom? Do you mean Crom?I think a cleric of war would think this a very handy ability and would be most thankful to his war god for allowing his troops to refresh after a bloody battle.That's what the "lamentation of their women" is for! :D
[C]KROM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Did Thurgon just make a joke?!?
If that was intentional, that was brilliant.
Heh. Funny I suppose in that dude with no sense of humor said soemthing that could be interpreted as funny sorta way...
He means he has no valid defense for his stance so has turned to name calling.Who is Krom? Do you mean Crom?I think a cleric of war would think this a very handy ability and would be most thankful to his war god for allowing his troops to refresh after a bloody battle.That's what the "lamentation of their women" is for! :D
[C]KROM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Did Thurgon just make a joke?!?
If that was intentional, that was brilliant.
I tried but when I realized I had to explain it I knew I blew it. Happens.
|
I tried but when I realized I had to explain it I knew I blew it. Happens.He means he has no valid defense for his stance so has turned to name calling.Who is Krom? Do you mean Crom?I think a cleric of war would think this a very handy ability and would be most thankful to his war god for allowing his troops to refresh after a bloody battle.That's what the "lamentation of their women" is for! :D
[C]KROM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Did Thurgon just make a joke?!?
If that was intentional, that was brilliant.
Not in the no sense of humor way. I don't know you so how would I guage you sense of humor?
No, I mean as a cleverly laid pun if you understand what invoking the name of Crom usually means in the Conanverse.
I tried but when I realized I had to explain it I knew I blew it. Happens.He means he has no valid defense for his stance so has turned to name calling.Who is Krom? Do you mean Crom?I think a cleric of war would think this a very handy ability and would be most thankful to his war god for allowing his troops to refresh after a bloody battle.That's what the "lamentation of their women" is for! :D
[C]KROM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Did Thurgon just make a joke?!?
If that was intentional, that was brilliant.
Yeah, cos I don't get it.
Like I said, it’s like playing an 18th level ranger who uses only a two-handed sword. (Something everyone here would agree is a waste of a class feature)
I guess I'm going to sound like an idiot here but you just slammed my favorite type of character. It's a Ranger who focuses on archery and melee ability equally (typically a Bastard Sword in two hands but the Elven Curved Blade looks particularly nice for this now). I love the idea of being able to pick apart my enemies from a distance with a bow and then dropping it and drawing my sword when they get up close (and being just as effective). Sure, I'm not a powerhouse in either field but I'm still very good in both. Plus very skillful to boot.
Have two optional builds for the cleric...
Replace all the channeling entries with “Path of Faith”Under “Path of Faith” all clerics must chose a path at 1st level, the path of the “Consecrated Cleric” or the “Crusader”
Path of the Consecrated Cleric gives 2 domains and channeling (right out of the PF book)
Path if the Crusader gives 1 domain and weapon focus at 1st level in the gods chosen weapon. After that each “Path of Faith” entry gives the cleric a bonus feat (like the fighter) but they would have a smaller list possable bonus feats they can take, and it would include a few feats like combat casting.
I liked where you were going until you got to the Crusader. Here would be my suggestion. This is based on simplicity and with the attempt to make as many people happy as possibile.
Consecrated Cleric: Just like PF core
Crusader: Exchange channel energy for Turn/Rebuke undead and up armor profiency to heavy.
No, I mean as a cleverly laid pun if you understand what invoking the name of Crom usually means in the Conanverse.
Been reading Conan books and comics since the I saw the movie in the theaters.
Consecrated Cleric: Just like PF core
Crusader: Exchange channel energy for Turn/Rebuke undead and up armor profiency to heavy.
Kind of like rogue abilities this kind of I can swap things around thing would have improved the cleric. Dropping the traditional for the new just doesn't improve the class it vastly alters it.
But I am still troubled with the healing power of the Paladin.
Kind of like rogue abilities this kind of I can swap things around thing would have improved the cleric. Dropping the traditional for the new just doesn't improve the class it vastly alters it.Consecrated Cleric: Just like PF core
Crusader: Exchange channel energy for Turn/Rebuke undead and up armor profiency to heavy.
I have a feeling that you'll see something remarkably similar to this in the APH.
But I am still troubled with the healing power of the Paladin.
You and me both. The Paladin overall just appears way over the top. I reserve judgement until I see them in action, though. I remember thinking the same thing about the Monk.
Kind of like rogue abilities this kind of I can swap things around thing would have improved the cleric. Dropping the traditional for the new just doesn't improve the class it vastly alters it.Consecrated Cleric: Just like PF core
Crusader: Exchange channel energy for Turn/Rebuke undead and up armor profiency to heavy.I have a feeling that you'll see something remarkably similar to this in the APH.
But I am still troubled with the healing power of the Paladin.You and me both. The Paladin overall just appears way over the top. I reserve judgement until I see them in action, though. I remember thinking the same thing about the Monk.
I have hopes and dreams about the APH, but I had them about the core book and well that ended poorly. I will try and not get my hopes up too high.
I am in the same boat with the Paladin and Monk, the next AP I am running will likely be Curse of the Crimson Throne and the players are talking about building the same party classwise as the NPCs so I should get a chance to find out. That could be months away though, we just started book 4 of RotRL.
Been reading Conan books and comics since the I saw the movie in the theaters.
No, I mean as a cleverly laid pun if you understand what invoking the name of Crom usually means in the Conanverse.
I just finished the first book in the Conan the Cimmerian collection and I read the comics religiously and I have no idea. Conan usually invokes Crom (thanks for the help with the spelling), it seems, when the god has dealt him a nasty hand.
Kind of like rogue abilities this kind of I can swap things around thing would have improved the cleric.
I like the Rogue and Barbarian abilities. I wouldn't have minded it if all the other classes received the same treatment even though I'm happy with what we've got now - as long as those abilities didn't allow a super-stacking munchfest of course.
But you do see what I am saying don't you? If the logic support removing heavy armor because not all clerics would be trained in its use, then it should also support removing channel energy since clearly not all gods would be so determined to make their prime followers into healing batteries.Yep it is called house ruling.
Very interesting. So it works when you want an ability, but not when you don't. Very interesting logic and reasoning.
Not really no. Your talking of a setting thing not a rules thing.
|
It would seem that we are trying to justify the un-justifible in real terms. Fact is Jason would have seemed to want to make a larger gap between fighting classes and clerics. A line blurred beyond recognition in 3.5e. Does that make the cleric a "white mage", rubbish, how many medium armour wearing mages you seen lately?
Please don't drag up some silly 3.5e splat book reference to a Full-plate wearing, Full BAB, Two-weapon wielding, Bow specialist Wizard - for me they all should have been titled "Complete Guides to Spending Money you don't have to or need to and NOT add anything to your game - in fact breaking it".
I'm with loopy in that I don't see the issue with having to customise your cleric to get what you want, it's what we do with all classes to some degree. Clerics heal, that IS what they have done and why they exist (to some degree) since the year dot (Gygax calendar). Why does this sudden shock people so?
pfRPG has allowed them to heal that AND do other things, why would this be a bad thing? Now people are starting to say that the paladin heals too well, yet in the same breath comment the cleric shouldn't be seen as a healer only class? By uping the healing of the paladin it becomes an alternative to having a cleric. How again is that a bad thing?
4e solved the problem, EVERYONE can heals themselves - that should have made people happy, right? Oh, hang on Edition Wars - guess not...
Jason dude, your damned if you do and damned if you don't. Bottom line for me is I'm loving DMing the new game and not one player (including the cleric) is having any issues. Initially the fighter said hey my AC has gone down, then again so did the cleric. But we went with - this IS pfRPG (not 3.5e), the rules seem clear enough on who wears what and who gets what feats lets go with them as written. Are they the "right rules", first what are "right rules" vs "wrong rules". At least my group is having fun, so Jason for us you have written the "right rules". Thanks for your (and teams) hard work at getting pfRPG off the ground. I'm sure you are looking forward to the day some of the nay-sayers put their money where their mouth is and write (finally) for the world "The Absolute Right Rules".
Regards,
S.
|
Finally someone praising the loss of heavy armor prof.
I said "amen!" when I saw that. Why? because now clerics do look like a little more like clerics of varied gods than the christian middle age war priests! That was the image of AD&D, with only blunt weapons and such. And to think about it, most clerics of other cultures, when they used armor, it was never the heaviest kind of armor possible in that culture.
Praise the medium armor prof. And if you want tanker cleric just buy it with a feat! There aren't really many feats that a cleric needs to be a total baddass (the class still overpowrs non-casters a lot), and you can burn a feat in this anyway.
it's even better in my games, because we use Class Defense bonuses instead of armor defense bonus. So they know medium armor and have less defense than the fighter or paladin. Glorious.
Well said, gods be praised!
I'm with loopy in that I don't see the issue with having to customise your cleric to get what you want, it's what we do with all classes to some degree. Clerics heal, that IS what they have done and why they exist (to some degree) since the year dot (Gygax calendar). Why does this sudden shock people so?
Clerics heal using spells. That is what they always did. They never had the ability to fart out AoE heals without actually casting using core books. Now they all do if they are good. What is there to customize to do this, it's part of the core class now.
From 3.5 to Pathfinder the fighters AC went up, he gets more dex to apply when wearing armor, medium and heavy armor went up by 1 in ac. So I'm not sure how he lost anything AC-wise.
Not really no. Your talking of a setting thing not a rules thing.But you do see what I am saying don't you? If the logic support removing heavy armor because not all clerics would be trained in its use, then it should also support removing channel energy since clearly not all gods would be so determined to make their prime followers into healing batteries.Yep it is called house ruling.
Very interesting. So it works when you want an ability, but not when you don't. Very interesting logic and reasoning.
So your saying in all setting, or even most, clerics should be able to act as healing batteries without any specialized training. I see that as a case of good for A but not B, because you don't like B.
I just finished the first book in the Conan the Cimmerian collection and I read the comics religiously and I have no idea. Conan usually invokes Crom (thanks for the help with the spelling), it seems, when the god has dealt him a nasty hand.Been reading Conan books and comics since the I saw the movie in the theaters.
No, I mean as a cleverly laid pun if you understand what invoking the name of Crom usually means in the Conanverse.
He uses it more or less as a curse.
I am still befuddled by the logic that says that because some (most?) clerics don't wear heavy armor due to deity's/order's preference/flavor, then no cleric should get heavy armor by default. It is like saying, since most barbarians use two-handed weapons, then no barbarian should be proficient in light or one-handed weapons without spending a feat on it. I just can't wrap my mind around that kind of logic.
I total understand people saying, "Heavy armor doesn't fit for a cleric of this deity." Awesome, don't wear it. Why does the fact that this cleric doesn't use heavy armor matter if another cleric gets it right out of the box? If you could justify the heavy armor for ANY deity and ANY of their clerics right out of the box, then I would think the clerics should get the proficiency as part of their class (yes, I realize that some "smart" person is now going to strawman that). Those that don't need it don't lose anything, those that do can now spend their feat on something actually useful (of course there has been some discussion that at least some feats should be used for flavor purposes with no benefits, so maybe that is where the thinking comes in).
Also, I wonder if people might not want to consider a different class besides cleric for the role of a deity's representatives. Bard would seem to fit better with someone like Desna, then the default character class for that role. I could see a druid fitting for a nature deity better than a default cleric. Heck even monks might work for some lawful deities.
Pathfinder Clerics must eat a lot of beans.
|
|
Clerics heal using spells. That is what they always did. They never had the ability to fart out AoE heals without actually casting using core books. Now they all do if they are good. What is there to customize to do this, it's part of the core class now.
From 3.5 to Pathfinder the fighters AC went up, he gets more dex to apply when wearing armor, medium and heavy armor went up by 1 in ac. So I'm not sure how he lost anything AC-wise.
When clerics healed only with spells (still required during a battle) very few people wished to play the cleric, even less so prior to spont. cure casting (3e). The channeling ability is a nice way to address this problem without fundamentally changing the clerics spell ability (cf: 4e).
Fighters lost the "armor training +1 AC" meaning our 6th fighter as lost 1 point of AC. Unless he gets hit with the "magic stick of increasing DEX" before 7th level he will have lost effectively 2 AC. Also if he were to get an increase in DEX he still loses the +1 AC per armor training of pfRPG-beta as it also included the increased addition of DEX to armor.
S.
We went into beta knowing that some stuff in it wasn't going to make final cut. You can't lose something that really wasn't in in the first place.
|
|
We went into beta knowing that some stuff in it wasn't going to make final cut. You can't lose something that really wasn't in in the first place.
True, we also went into pfRPG knowing full well it wasn't 3.5e but it hasn't stopped some "interesting and ongoing discussions"... :)
Human nature, what can you do? Well other than genicide.
Pathfinder Clerics must eat a lot of beans.
The higher the charisma the more beans a cleric can eat, I hear tell there are even feats like selective stink and more stink.
Pathfinder Clerics must eat a lot of beans.The higher the charisma the more beans a cleric can eat, I hear tell there are even feats like selective stink and more stink.
Um...Improved Stink actually.
Pathfinder Clerics must eat a lot of beans.The higher the charisma the more beans a cleric can eat, I hear tell there are even feats like selective stink and more stink.
I have that feat.
Not my character.
Um...Improved Stink actually.Pathfinder Clerics must eat a lot of beans.The higher the charisma the more beans a cleric can eat, I hear tell there are even feats like selective stink and more stink.
Focused stink could be bad, imagine what would end up of a fumble on that.
Reminds me of a game I once played, call battle lords. There was a race called Ram Pythons that used to believe farts were words from their gods. So before fights they could rip one and they rolled on a chart to see what effect was. A fumble was well messy. A critical success was literally deadly to other air breathers.
Um...Improved Stink actually.Pathfinder Clerics must eat a lot of beans.The higher the charisma the more beans a cleric can eat, I hear tell there are even feats like selective stink and more stink.Focused stink could be bad, imagine what would end up of a fumble on that.
Reminds me of a game I once played, call battle lords. There was a race called Ram Pythons that used to believe farts were words from their gods. So before fights they could rip one and they rolled on a chart to see what effect was. A fumble was well messy. A critical success was literally deadly to other air breathers.
So are we to assume that troglodytes will still be picking cleric as their favored class most of the time.
If you could justify the heavy armor for ANY deity and ANY of their clerics right out of the box, then I would think the clerics should get the proficiency as part of their class (yes, I realize that some "smart" person is now going to strawman that).
It is already strawmaned, no extra work necessary.
|
|
Hey Thurgon, (and others), this http://paizo.com/store/byCompany/l/louisPorterJrDesign/downloads/pathfinder RPG/v5748btpy89qv might be of interest.
You have tried to imply that I think changes should be made to suit my personal tastes. I never said such a thing. This is a personality trait I do not possess, that of forcing my tastes onto others, which is the particular idea I was tryng to convey in my original post. This does not mean, of course, that I don't have my preferences.
So you were perfectly fine with heavy armor clerics in 3.5, they made total sense to you then. But now that the gods on high have come down and removed heavy armor from the default cleric, you now see the error of your ways and rejoice in the new enlightenment. Is that right?
I actually, I implied that changes were made to suit "people like you". Wait, that's wrong, I didn't imply that. I actually said it.
You don't think the classes should be nerfed to satisfy yourself, but you are happy with a change that nerfs a class to satisfy people like yourself? Ah, ok.
Did you, yourself petition for the change? Well I have no way of knowing for sure, but I'll assume you are being truthful when you say you didn't. That doesn't mean that others, perhaps even some within the final decision making process, didn't have similar views as yourself, and thus choose certain things to suit their view (a view you have indicated you share).
You said that you never houseruled out heavy armor. Why not? Did you never realize that heavy armor was "silly" for clerics and it was only when you saw it in the PF rules that you saw the truth in it? Or did you realize it but have other reasons for not doing it? And if so, what reasons were they, that were powerful enough for you not to be willing to correct such a fundamental flaw, but are not powerful enough anymore? Are you one of those RAW only folks?
I have one player planning to start a tanky cleric who was talking about dumping Dex, because "that's what plate is for." I broke the news about heavy armor proficiency being removed. His response? "Oh. Well... that's one feat spent, then."
I really do fail to see the Big Deal.
You have tried to imply that I think changes should be made to suit my personal tastes. I never said such a thing. This is a personality trait I do not possess, that of forcing my tastes onto others, which is the particular idea I was tryng to convey in my original post. This does not mean, of course, that I don't have my preferences.I actually, I implied that changes were made to suit "people like you". Wait, that's wrong, I didn't imply that. I actually said it.
You don't need to nerf the class for everyone just to satisfy yourself.
Ok.
You said that you never houseruled out heavy armor. Why not? Did you never realize that heavy armor was "silly" for clerics and it was only when you saw it in the PF rules that you saw the truth in it? Or did you realize it but have other reasons for not doing it? And if so, what reasons were they, that were powerful enough for you not to be willing to correct such a fundamental flaw, but are not powerful enough anymore? Are you one of those RAW only folks?
strawman alert.
Quote me stating it is "such a fundamental flaw".
One can have many issues regarding a particular ruleset, but lack the will, the time, or interest to change all of them. When this change was announced, it made sense to me and my players. Simple as that. Move on.
You have tried to imply that I think changes should be made to suit my personal tastes. I never said such a thing. This is a personality trait I do not possess, that of forcing my tastes onto others, which is the particular idea I was tryng to convey in my original post. This does not mean, of course, that I don't have my preferences.I actually, I implied that changes were made to suit "people like you". Wait, that's wrong, I didn't imply that. I actually said it.Ok.
You don't need to nerf the class for everyone just to satisfy yourself.
And that was a statement directed at you personally or just a statement in general? Looking back, that statement was actually a response to a statement by Thurgon. If anyone should be upset that I was suggesting something about them personally it would be him. Of course it wasn't directed at him either, it was just a general statement of belief.
And that was a statement direct at you personally or just a statement in general? Looking back, that statement was actually a response to a statement by Thurgon. If anyone should be upset that I was suggesting something about them personally it would be him. Of course it wasn't directed at him either, it was just a general statement of belief.
Proceed a bit further and you'll see:
a) Me, clarifying my position as one of personal preference, not fact-based mathematical-proof theory;
b) You, making this personal.
And that was a statement direct at you personally or just a statement in general? Looking back, that statement was actually a response to a statement by Thurgon. If anyone should be upset that I was suggesting something about them personally it would be him. Of course it wasn't directed at him either, it was just a general statement of belief.Proceed a bit further and you'll see:
a) Me, clarifying my position as one of personal preference, not fact-based mathematical-proof theory;
b) You, making this personal.
Hey, if you don't want to give personal reasons for your beliefs, that is fine. I just am failing to see why something was a legitimate concept in 3.5 for you, and why suddenly it is no longer other than merely because some game designer decide it didn't fit anymore. You don't want to clarify that, fine. You have just indicated that there are reasons for your view. I was trying to understand the shift in your view is all. Sorry for trying to have a dialogue.
|
|
My group and I aren't having any issues to date because we play RAW. If it's in pfRPG it's allowed and we play it, if not then it's not in and it ain't played. We don't try to second guess why this or that was changed we just get on a play. Any "real" problems I'm sure will be picked up and an official errata will be posted. All this talk in the cleric debate is "personal preference". House rule anything you like but RAW quite clearly states who has what and when (even if you disagree). If you have issues with this you are just going to have to live (or ignore) with it - because current RAW is what it is.
S.
Hey, if you don't want to give personal reasons for your beliefs, that is fine. I just am failing to see why something was a legitimate concept in 3.5 for you, and why suddenly it is no longer other than merely because some game designer decide it didn't fit anymore. You don't want to clarify that, fine. You have just indicated that there are reasons for your view. I was trying to understand the shift in your view is all. Sorry for trying to have a dialogue.
As I said before, I always thought that only a small subset of clerics should actually be trained in heavy armor, for flavor reasons. I never house-ruled it before for two reasons:
a)There are many small ideas one may have concerning a given ruleset, and houseruling all of them would be a nightmare. This was not one that I deemed crucial, or that occupied a lot of my thinking time;
b)For some reason, most of my players played clerics of this smaller subset.
There was no "shift" in my view. I just find convenient that the Pathfinder RAW includes something I always thought reasonable, but had not the interest to house-rule.
I have one player planning to start a tanky cleric who was talking about dumping Dex, because "that's what plate is for." I broke the news about heavy armor proficiency being removed. His response? "Oh. Well... that's one feat spent, then."
I really do fail to see the Big Deal.
Smart player.
Its not like they banned the cleric from heavy armor. Or even (contrary to what some people think) gave them godlike healing powers. The cleric is no more pigeonholed now than they were in 3rd. They just are much less abusive than they were in 3.0/3.5 . I guess I some people missed their cheese but still had some whine left *shrug*
Like I said, your player is smart =)
I believe that the drop in the Cleric's armor proficiency is part of Pathfinder's desire to normalize the system. Just like HD and BAB are tied to each other, armor and BAB are also now tied but also come with a one step swing based on "mitigating factors". Just imagine for a second, all of the classes getting armor prof. based on their BAB and consider the following.
- Barbarian: Starts with Heavy but drops due to fast movement/mobility
- Bard: Starts with Medium but drops to light because skillful and casts arcane spells
- Cleric: Starts with Medium without any other factors to bring it up or down
- Druid: Starts with Medium without any other factors to bring it up or down
- Fighter: Starts with Heavy without any other factors to bring it up or down
- Monk: Wears no armor (class features grant it)
- Paladin: Starts with Heavy without any other factors to bring it up or down
- Ranger: Starts with Heavy but is a skill based, stealthy class so it bumps down to Medium
- Rogue: Starts with Medium but is a skill based, stealthy class so it bumps down to Light
- Sorcerer: Starts with Light but is an arcane caster class so it bumps down to none
- Wizard: Starts with Light but is an arcane caster class so it bumps down to none
I'm sure everyone will rip this normalization theory apart but to me, it seems like the "logic" behind how armor proficiencies were set. I'm not really taking any sides in this argument. Personally I don't really care one way or the other and the above logic seems fairly consistant. I'm sure somebody will argue that the Cleric needing to be up in melee should count as a mitigating factor to bump him up to heavy and I have nothing to counter that. That's apparently not what the designers decided to go with.
Take it for what it's worth. It's just my opinion and could be 100% inaccurate to how they actually decided on this. It's a decent theory though, you gotta admit. :)
And I take my leave of the Cleric armor debate just as fast as I enter it.
Its not like they banned the cleric from heavy armor. Or even (contrary to what some people think) gave them godlike healing powers. The cleric is no more pigeonholed now than they were in 3rd. They just are much less abusive than they were in 3.0/3.5 .
Sadly you had to include insults if that is what your side has turned to I guess we can judge the strength of your sides arguements by that.
But do you really think heavy armor + turning is more powerful in any real sense then channel energy?
More then that do you really think a power that makes you into a healing battery isn't pigeonholing a class far more then the ability to wear plate ever did?
And that was a statement direct at you personally or just a statement in general? Looking back, that statement was actually a response to a statement by Thurgon. If anyone should be upset that I was suggesting something about them personally it would be him. Of course it wasn't directed at him either, it was just a general statement of belief.Proceed a bit further and you'll see:
a) Me, clarifying my position as one of personal preference, not fact-based mathematical-proof theory;
b) You, making this personal.
All I see is you have two types of logic, one you apply when you agree with a rule, one you apply when you don't.
You can't argue for or against this topic without invoking some kind of opinion because balance in a game is sometimes a judgement call, not a pure haxxor of numbers. In my original post, perhaps I should have labeled each of the individual points as Judgements of a Process rather than Givens of a proof. When Paizo weighed the class they had certain things in mind for it and I'm trying to divine what those things are in order for us to accept this damned thing for what it is (a balanced platform for building Clerics of many varieties) and move on.
All I see is you have two types of logic, one you apply when you agree with a rule, one you apply when you don't.
Yes, in one case I state I agree with the rule and say why. In the other case I state I disagree and say why.
Concur with the OP.
Through my experience of playing a Cleric of Sarenrae (Fire/Healing) in Rise of the Runelords under pathfinder beta and now final, I believe I can say that the sky is not falling in any sense for the Cleric.
With a bit of planning and deliberation about your build you are a solid rock foundation which keeps the party going and can get involved in ANY aspect of any situation.
a) I dont wear heavy armour, no big deal, I bought a scale variant from the setting which fits my new limitations, a nice big shield, a few items along the adventuring way. I ensured I favoured dex over strength (your not the main fighter people and besides you have buffs and other spells) and ensured the armour allowed me to utilise it as much as possible. I can even be buffed higher if need be but at standard Im still one of the heavier armoured folk in the party.
b)We enjoy challenging fights, some take their toll but I have always been standing at the end and in some won the day as the last man standing. I dont fret everytime I get into battle, you are a fundamental tactical part of any battle as you can turn the tide due to your multifaceted nature, YOUR NOT JUST A HEALING BATTERY.
c)You get to be a fundamental part of any situation, think about it. At the start, I can buff if needs be, I can turn undead etc. If at a certain point of the fight Im needed at the front, I can hold my own for a suprisingly long time to give others time to do what they need to do.
Hell suprisingly, I have stopped multiple encounters from being automatic fights by using the old head and my skills as a cleric to talk people down, intimidate whatever it takes.
Its not all about mechanics and rules. Enjoy yourselves and create an interesting versatile character which is what the Cleric is all about.
Drac.
You can't argue for or against this topic without invoking some kind of opinion because balance in a game is sometimes a judgement call, not a pure haxxor of numbers. In my original post, perhaps I should have labeled each of the individual points as Judgements of a Process rather than Givens of a proof. When Paizo weighed the class they had certain things in mind for it and I'm trying to divine what those things are in order for us to accept this damned thing for what it is (a balanced platform for building Clerics of many varieties) and move on.
See as a guy who has a degree in mathematics I do judge things as I would an equation. Balance is achieved when both sides are mathematically equal. Not equal because it sounds cool or I agree with it. Now that doesn’t mean that liking a feature doesn’t enter into the set up of the equation that surely does. You add what you want the class to have, then look at what power level you are shooting for, then start removing or nerfing features you wanted in the class to fit it in this case. But if you have a class that is seen as one of the most powerful what you don’t do is add two features you want, remove two you don’t and call it balanced without really looking at the power levels of those features.
So it comes down to are channel energy and favored weapon more powerful or less then heavy armor and turning? Clearly in any objective look this isn’t even a debate. Channel energy alone is far more powerful then both heavy armor and turning.
The favored weapon feat thing is just a bad idea from a balance stand point all on its own, since some clerics will receive a benefit not based on domains, but based on name of their god. I can pair up many gods from various D&D pantheons that shared two or more domains were one has a martial weapon as a favored one and the other a simple weapon. There are cleric martial clerics with mace as favored weapon because it was and still is a rather iconic clerical weapon. But it is also a simple one so these clearly martial clerical orders will not gain the benefit of the free feat which according to Jason was meant to help balance out the loss of heavy armor for the martial deities.
Personally I also see the domains as seriously balance flawed, but I am also seeing why as I try and rework them. It’s brutal hard to come up with fun, sensible, and yet balanced powers for all. I have even tried to create cap stone powers but that too is not working well. If I am not careful I will remake the issues the cleric had in 3.5 thanks to the splat books. A simpler solution is add back turning, move favored weapon, channel energy, and heavy armor to certain domains and grant weapon focus in the case of simple weapons. That to me is a far more generic starting point from which to build toward your more specific cleric for each faith based more on domain choice and less on base cleric abilities and burning feats to recapture lost powers.