You would be better off going about 10th level same states, same race and same god. Best way to compare
|
I guess the big issue here is the variability of the domains. If you have good domain choices it's a push or maybe not a good choice but if you have bad domains it's a no-brainer.
One of my gripes about 3.5 was the number of players who chose their god based on domains because there was such a huge difference in power between them. Seems like the tradition continues :(
|
|
One of my gripes about 3.5 was the number of players who chose their god based on domains because there was such a huge difference in power between them. Seems like the tradition continues :(
+1 on this comment.
A completely separate discussion could be had here. Your standard Pathfinder NPC Cleric of Desna, or Cleric of Shelyn can outperform a Cleric of Gorum or a Cleric of Iomedae in a duel by taking advantage of the little perks their domains grant.
Oh, and WTB a board admin to correct the misspelling of "Opinion" in the thread's title!
This came up in a PbP game's OOC thread - is the Holy Warrior variant of Cleric balanced as it exists in the Pathfinder Campaign Setting (pg.43)?
If the Holy Warrior variant wasn't overpowered in 3.5 than it certainly won't be in PF. He gives up way more now than he did before. That said, I'm not a big fan. It seemed overpowered before and it just appears to encroach on the melee character's turf too much. Full BAB and full (9 levels) spell casting just seems like too much. Never seen it in action though so I really don't know for sure.
This has nothing to do with the "best" way to play the character, and is totally native to the Legacy of Fire campaign we're playing, but my "normal" cleric if Sarenrae with the healing domain with his heavy armor and shield that mainly supported everyone in combat was a much better part of the party as a support character that could take some lumps and helped everyone out did much better as part of the party than my "I'll use all of my spells to heal everyone after combat or to save you in combat if we get to that point, but otherwise I'm hitting them as hard as I can" cleric of Gorum that used the Holy Warrior variant.
To a degree, its a matter of role. If you have full BaB, its kind of a waste not to use it, but if you do use it, you aren't buffing the party and taking away bad conditions, etc.
Plus, you are putting yourself in danger, and you are the one that patches everyone else back up again.
Its kind of a weird option that looks a lot better on paper than it really is. You have "tank" bells and whistles, but if you really try to do that, you don't help the party out that much. Sometimes things like BaB and armor proficiencies are as much about nudging you towards what you should do as much as being an actual class feature.
(Cleric of Sarenrae lasted several levels and months of real time, whereas the cleric of Gorum debuted in one session, didn't do much in combat the first session, then died in his second encounter of his second session)
To a degree, its a matter of role. If you have full BaB, its kind of a waste not to use it, but if you do use it, you aren't buffing the party and taking away bad conditions, etc.
That's also very true - my HW of Sarenrae didn't get a lot of use out of her holy warrior-ness because at higher levels she was standing there pouring heals into the party most of the time.
But I think people are saying "but what if you're one of those clerics who refuses to heal and puts all their spells towards turning themselves into a superfighter?" More of the paladin role. Is it a "better paladin than a paladin?" I think it does have its advantages, but that the lack of rounds to do things (including cast all those buff spells so you can be all uber) in high level combat makes it all work out. A lot of high level fights in 3.5 are over in 2-3 rounds one way or the other.
Another benefit from full BAB: when casting "spiritual weapon" or "spiritual ally" which use BAB+Wis of the caster.In addition, once Harm becomes available, a Holy Warrior (with Step up?) looks attractive. Domain powers are sometimes very cool, but usually cost a standard action to activate...
The Campaign Setting was a 3.5 product. Applying it to Pathfinder system is the same as anything else from 3.5 it is very hit and miss.
Dead threads walk again! :p
Didn't James or Jason say that they won't use the Holy Warrior variant anymore in the updated campaign setting, since having a full caster with full BAB turned out to be unbalancing?
Dead threads walk again! :p
Didn't James or Jason say that they won't use the Holy Warrior variant anymore in the updated campaign setting, since having a full caster with full BAB turned out to be unbalancing?
They did indeed state this.
|
It would seem the biggest objection would be a cleric with this variant would be stronger than a Paladin.
If it's overpowered, what would you do to balance it?
Or how would you tune it so you'd allow a player to use the variant for their PC?
Why is it such a problem at all? Does it fit a niche in the group dynamic? If it does then it works for the group. Balance only truly applies to the MMO world and not a Pen and Paper game like Pathfinder. If it is truly a question of Balance then you might want to change to the other publishing house that is using 4E to be more like an MMO.
Overpowered does not apply when you are NOT fighting other PC's or doing PvP. If you are doing either or both then yea I can see it being overpowered and in need of a balancing stick but this is not the case. Role Playing games are not about balance as in every character class needs to be equal but every class needs to fit a niche in the group or team dynamic and not be so overbearing that the DM wants to exclude them from the game. Even if the DM wants to exclude them from a particular games still does not mean that it can not be used in ANOTHER game.
Balance it seems is a word that is thrown around a lot with out the definition and letting others know what you mean by it. Is it your purpose to want all the class so that they put out the same amount of damage per round as any other character class and not overshadow another character class? Or do you want it so that a character fills in the spots where other characters are weakest and uses that strength to unify the group and make it stronger as a whole instead of weak as a bunch of individuals?
I am actually playing a Holy Warrior in ROTR and so far I haven't overshadowed anyone. In fact it seems the the loss of a spell per level is what my fellows PC's have noticed, it seems I never have enough healing for them.
I am actually playing a Holy Warrior in ROTR and so far I haven't overshadowed anyone. In fact it seems the the loss of a spell per level is what my fellows PC's have noticed, it seems I never have enough healing for them.
Clerics never have enough healing for their party. I typically tell them to **** off or pony up for a wand. They get my channels and that's it. :P
I personally don't like the idea of a full caster with full BAB on principle, but in practice I don't find the HW Cleric to be more powerful than a regular Cleric. A spell per level and two cool abilities for what boils down to two extra favored class bonuses doesn't seem unbalanced. The only time I felt I was getting a good deal was at levels 6 when I had my extra attack. The extra attack at level 11 didn't feel as good, by then I wished I had the extra 5th and 6th level spells.
I glossed over the rest of the posts after about the third post. My answer: The holy warrior variant is actually less powerful than a standard cleric, especially after the release of the APG and sub-domains. Domains and Domain powers have become quite attractive.