I think that's a hold-over from older editions, where most of the divine spell caster's spells were memorized as healing spells, anyway. I don't mind it in modern editions, as a nice nod to the old days.
... but, then again, I also remember the rule from back when, where the Cleric would pray for his spells, and his/her god (read: Game Master) could veto or alter any spell they didn't want the cleric to have that day. I'm much more inclined to do that to divine players these days than back then (since they can usually be spontaneously converted to healing, anyway).
|
In the PF core book (and previous editions of D&D), the four divine spellcasters automatically know every spell they are capable of casting from their class's spell lists.
Back in the days of CoDzilla complains, I'd tinkered with the idea of all spellcasters either using the spontaneous casting of a Sorcerer (more castings / day, flexible use of spells known, very limited number of spells known) *or* the prepared casting of a Wizard (using a prayer book or ogham record or hymnal, etc. depending on whether one is a Cleric, Druid, Bard, Paladin, Ranger, Adept, whatever, and only gaining 2 spells automatically per level to add to that book, and needing to locate and pay for other additions to the book like a Wizard).
Back in 3.X, when the Sorcerer had no class abilities anyway, it would have meant that the class could have been utterly dropped, as well, as there would no longer be a need for a 'spontaneous Wizard' when one could just choose to play a Wizard, who chooses to cast spell spontaneously at 1st level and never looks back, and gets to keep the bonus feats of being a Wizard. (So I kinda killed the Sorcerer, in the process of toning down the 'knows all spells' issue of the Cleric and Druid, but, since none of my players ever tuched the Sorcerer, it was an acceptable bit of collateral damage for me.)
With the reductions Pathfinder has made to the most egregious Cleric options, and to Wild Shape, and the lack of certain non-core 3.5 options (Divine Metamagic, Persistant Spell, Nightsticks), I don't think it's a 'balance' issue quite as much these days as it would be a flavor issue.
A simple fix that I like:
If a cleric wants any spell from outside the core, they must give up one core spell on their list.
Now, you might want to actually smooth out the number of spells available per level, but this rule is a pretty good start.
* Of course, I don't actually apply this rule as a GM because when I play, I roll clerics. Let's be honest, they're freaking awesome.
|
My question: do you like this? Are arcane spells simply more powerful and/or useful in comparison, thus necessitating this seeming inequality? Is it problematic that, with each new PF supplement, clerics, druids, rangers, and paladins automatically know a bunch of new spells while arcane casters don't?
The divine auto-know feature is fine when dealing with a list of reasonable length. When the number of spells available becomes large, it becomes increasingly strong in a manner that is tied solely to what spells are allowed in the campaign. In WotC only D&D 3.5, the list of clerical 1st level spells grew to over 100, IIRC. My approach to it has been to limit divine casters to a list of five spells per spell level from sources outside of the core list from GM determined spell list, which can be changed on level up. The rationale being that this provides a reasonable degree of flexibility, doesn't overwhelm the GM with spells to be known mechanically, and it limits the increasing level of character power that is based solely on rules sources used rather than the character class itself.
Another method, only logical if you trust your GM implicitly:
The cleric has a default prepared spell list. Any time he wants to prepare a cleric spell not on the list, he has to pray for it. The GM decides whether or not the god answers the prayer.
This is the paperwork-light version of Set's "spheres" suggestion, above.
With a cool GM, this might actually feel a little more "divine" as the GM can help to guide your spell list to upcoming events in a prescient manner befitting a deity.
|
... but, then again, I also remember the rule from back when, where the Cleric would pray for his spells, and his/her god (read: Game Master) could veto or alter any spell they didn't want the cleric to have that day.
Specifically, the study and dedication required to become a cleric granted access to 1st level spells, continued service as a loyal cleric allowed access to 2nd level spells. At 3rd, 4th, and 5th levels, the cleric only received his spells via intercession by the supernatural servants of the deity (Heralds, anyone?), and 6th and 7th level spells were granted directly by the deity. I believe the intent with the supernatural servants restriction was that they only taught spells they had access to in their statlines or that duplicated their inherent abilities - so clerics of Asmodeus would be contacting different types of devils depending on their spell load out.
Paladins and Rangers had the same deific access restrictions.
Some questions arise, if we wish to use these guidelines (which I love), given Golarion's cosmology:
Can clerics of Aroden still wring low-level spells out of the cosmos just by virtue of having gone to Aroden Bible College?
Clerics of Rovagug - low level and high level spells are no problem, but what to do with the mid-level spells?
Philosophical Clerics just throw this ALL out of whack.
Of course, back then, Clerics were on a 1-7 scale for spell levels, as opposed to the 1-9 scale for Magic Users. I'm not 100% on how to convert 1e scale to PFRPG scale.
In my FR campaign, I allow clerics to take an initiate feat (usually at level 5 or 7) which expands the clerics' spell list with a number of extra spells from different sources per level (usually adding 3-4 spells per level). These can be memorized as part of the clerics' normal daily allotment of spells.
It's extra work, but flavour wise, it really helps to differentiate a cleric of Helm from a cleric of Lathander, for example.
As another solution, allow a cleric to gain access to two spells from the extra lists for each level gained. It's less work on the GM's part (aside from approving the choices) and allows the players access to the spells they want.
Deciding for the player which spells their cleric memorizes daily seems a bit heavy handed.
|
|
I think it works just fine like that, yes, and I like it like that. I don't see how changing this would make the game more fun for people. Druid, Ranger and Paladin spell lists are centered around themes (and really Rangers and Paladins barely get any spells to cast) and the Cleric spell lists assumes that a pretty big chunk of spells per day for the Cleric are going to be in pre-selected domain slots.
Do we really need more of these, "I don't like it because it's not symmetrical" things? I suppose if you really want to make a cleric lug around a prayer book and spend insignificant amounts of gold updating the thing it's in your right but it seems like a waste of time and energy to me.
Personally, it doesn't bother me too much that clerics get to know every cleric spell, as long as cleric spells aren't too flashy. Likewise for druids (although some druid spells are a bit flashier).
I'm much more annoyed by spontaneous casters having so few spells known.
In my home games I often make have them use "prayer books" with spells known in them. They can only cast whats in the book, just like a wizard.
Druids I have often went toward spells known like a sorcerer.
One compromise would be to allow all core book spells to be known, but other spells from odd sources might be tracked down and added to a "prayer book".
I also think the Arcana Evolved system is kind of interesting: all spells are split into simple, complex and exotic categories, as well as groups like Plant, Electricity, Rune, etc. Then you can create a bunch of subsets of the spell universe (e.g. the Greenbond class knows all simple spells and all complex Plant spells).
|
Can clerics of Aroden still wring low-level spells out of the cosmos just by virtue of having gone to Aroden Bible College?
I was quite surprised they didn't, to be honest.
Had that been the case, it would have been a) a nod to the old-school, and b) opened up plenty of roleplay/plot issues.I.e. if villagers could see their low-level priest was still carrying on, business as usual, they would have grounds for denying the god was dead. The high priests, in the big cities, know something is wrong, but are keeping it a secret to prevent widespread anarchy, and the PCs get clued in when they have enough reputation to investigate the cause.
(Though, I admit, it would suck to be playing a cleric of Aroden, at that point...)
Of course, back then, Clerics were on a 1-7 scale for spell levels, as opposed to the 1-9 scale for Magic Users. I'm not 100% on how to convert 1e scale to PFRPG scale.
Minor, Medium and Major?
1-3, 4-6, and 7-9?The same classification as spell auras and magic item groupings would be the most consistent and least confusing.
|
|
I also think the Arcana Evolved system is kind of interesting: all spells are split into simple, complex and exotic categories, as well as groups like Plant, Electricity, Rune, etc. Then you can create a bunch of subsets of the spell universe (e.g. the Greenbond class knows all simple spells and all complex Plant spells).
They also had a system for over- and under-casting some spells, which was quite interesting.
The spell's official spell level acted as a threshold for learning it, but the effect could be adjusted to a higher or lower-level slot, if you added or subtracted from its utility.
E.g. a spell may be level 2, for personal use, but level 3 to cast on others, level 4 to cast at range. Do you prepare it at level 3? Or at level 2, and hope no-one else needs it? Even the level 2 version may use up a lower slot, but still requires the caster to be level 5+ to learn it, thus still controlling the point in the campaign it becomes available.
That helps offset those spells which are borderline cases between two spell levels. And it allows for a greater variety of uncommon 'metamagic' adjustments, building them into the spell itself.
Should divine spellcasters know all spells from their lists?Yes.
It's a world where you can literally talk to your God, and most of the Gods have long-standing organizations dedicated to serving them. It seems ridiculous to the point of stupidity that at least the neutral and good Gods would play stupid head-games with their most select followers, and not tell the church all the ways that they can call on them for help.
I suppose some of the evil gods might screw with their best servants, just because they're jerks that way.
Other than that, the only reason I can think of to limit Cleric access to Cleric spells that makes sense to me is in the case of Clerics devoted to no particular God, just a philosophy. They don't have the organization and it's libraries to learn from.
-Kle.
I think most people have a problem with it from a meta-game power creep standpoint. Where the more books that get printed, the more options clerics have, without doing anything. Wizards at least have to go through the mechanics of finding and scribing new stuff, but divine casters just look through the 4th wall, notice something new on the player's shelf, and start casting.
Role play reasons and common sense curb some stuff as well. It doesn't matter that you found the gruesome heartripper spell from the book of vile icky-ness, or how brokenly powerful it is; when you worship the goddess of love and fluffy bunnies she is NOT granting it to you.
Yes.
It's a world where you can literally talk to your God, and most of the Gods have long-standing organizations dedicated to serving them. It seems ridiculous to the point of stupidity that at least the neutral and good Gods would play stupid head-games with their most select followers, and not tell the church all the ways that they can call on them for help.
Yet if you look at each spells as a unique ritual and prayer needed to summon forth your gods power it makes more sense not to know them all.
After all they are not 9 levels of the"any spell I need to have right now" spell but each a different spell with a different prayer and way of casting it.
Why should you not be expected to learn the correct way to call each of your gods gifts?
... but, then again, I also remember the rule from back when, where the Cleric would pray for his spells, and his/her god (read: Game Master) could veto or alter any spell they didn't want the cleric to have that day. I'm much more inclined to do that to divine players these days than back then (since they can usually be spontaneously converted to healing, anyway).
This isn't still true?
I most have not noticed when reading the Core rules. I assumed that divine casters still did not "get" anything automatically.
If the deity does not check over and possibly modify the requested spells for the day then clerics of all faiths are much too identical!
|
|
Domains: A cleric's deity influences her alignment, what magic she can perform, her values, and how others see her. A cleric chooses two domains from among those belonging to her deity. A cleric can select an alignment domain (Chaos, Evil, Good, or Law) only if her alignment matches that domain. If a cleric is not devoted to a particular deity, she still selects two domains to represent her spiritual inclinations and abilities (subject to GM approval). The restriction on alignment domains still applies.
It's important to remember that a cleric doesn't have to worship a deity and the other divine casters likewise aren't automatically assumed to be getting spells directly from one either. Domains and Role-playing is how clerics are set apart from one another. You can have 4 wizards sit around and all prepare the same spells as one another every day just like clerics can. Every spell casting class can do that.
Also be careful changing large class mechanics because you don't like the flavor of something. "Flavor" is just there to help explain mechanics and rules in the game. Your players should surely be involved in any kind of decision like that and you should always make sure that everyone agrees that they want to play with them. The changes to the game should make the game more fun for the people playing it. Doing things on a DM Fiat is just a good reason to either not play at your table at all or at least not bother playing a nerfed class.
In the PF core book (and previous editions of D&D), the four divine spellcasters automatically know every spell they are capable of casting from their class's spell lists. Arcane spellcasters, on the other hand, are limited in this regard. The cleric and druid have a daily allotment of spells that equal the wizard and have decent combat abilities. My question: do you like this? Are arcane spells simply more powerful and/or useful in comparison, thus necessitating this seeming inequality? Is it problematic that, with each new PF supplement, clerics, druids, rangers, and paladins automatically know a bunch of new spells while arcane casters don't?
I don't think this is a problem. For one thing, two of the divine classes you mention are the Ranger and Paladin, both of which are "half-@$$ed" spell casters to me. They don't get to cast any spells until level 4, and even then they get very few spells per day, etc. They're both really more fighters with a smattering of spell casting. Another one, the druid, is not a terribly good class overall in my opinion, at least not in terms of spells. As a healer class, the druid is bad because he doesn't ever get access to Restoration, Raise Dead, Remove Curse, etc and as an offense class, his blasty spells aren't as good as the Wizard, who gets Fireball at level 3 and Scorching Ray at level 2, which beats anything the druid get's for artillery. He's kind of mediocre at everything, and great at nothing.
That leaves the cleric, which is a class many people shun because they don't want to be the healer. Also, a lot of the spells the cleric get's are only situationally useful in the first place (like Remove <anything>, etc). The cleric's days as a melee combatant on par with or better than the paladin, fighter or barbarian are, in my opinion, over, based on the fact that the cleric's "self buff" spells no longer last long enough or stack with each other like they used to in 3.0. The cleric is a good class, but it could be argued that the spells he needs to spontaneously cast aren't the "Cure Wounds" spells (which you generally know you're going to need every day anyway, plus you usually make a wand of CLW as soon as you can) but rather the aforementioned situational restorative and curative spells like Remove Paralysis, Lesser Restoration, etc.
Why should you not be expected to learn the correct way to call each of your gods gifts?I didn't say you shouldn't.
I said that your church teaches them to you, which is why you're a cleric.
So they learn a different ritual for every single spell ever, all of them 1-9 and all at level 1? No they don't they do not have learning roll (they should) they do not have to learn different spells or ritual (they should) they just pray and get what they want. No learning new ritual or prayers required by the rules.
It never did set right with me they did not have to learn the spells/prayers to bring about their gods magic.
What I usually do when making a cleric or druid is start with the core book, and than, depending on the level and the character's theme, find around a half dozen to a dozen thematically appropriate spells, often substituting them for core spells that just don't quite fit the theme. When a new source book comes out, I examine those spell lists, and if I see anything thematically appropriate, I add it. This keeps the overall number of spells to a reasonable level while ensuring that I will have a good mix of pure utility and pure theme. It also helps make the character feel less generic.
No, they learn them all at the appropriate level to cast them.
Each spell describes the "ritual" they have to learn, under the "spell components" entry.
-Kle.
Lol no, just no. There is no learning by RAw they just know them. They do not have to learn anything, they do not have to hunt sacred rituals to cast rare spells, they auto know them all.
Show me where it says of learning a new spell? They should have to learn them, but as written they do not.
In my home games I often make have them use "prayer books" with spells known in them. They can only cast whats in the book, just like a wizard.
Druids I have often went toward spells known like a sorcerer.
Yup. What he said.
The other thing to remember is that at least in 2e (haven't played older I'm afraid), the divine spell list was exclusive rather then inclusive.
In 3e, you have a huge list of CLERIC SPELLS with a much, much, much smaller list of domain spells. In other words, all clerics get a huge list that's shared, and nine "extra" spells.
In 2e it was the opposite. Each god had a different set of spheres, and you got spells of those spheres only - and not even all the spells if it was a minor sphere!
Having "all the spells" made sense because the list was dramatically smaller, and each cleric could have a radically different list. In 3e, it becomes exceptionally powerful because now each Cleric spell goes to every cleric.
In 2e it was the opposite. Each god had a different set of spheres, and you got spells of those spheres only - and not even all the spells if it was a minor sphere!
Having "all the spells" made sense because the list was dramatically smaller, and each cleric could have a radically different list. In 3e, it becomes exceptionally powerful because now each Cleric spell goes to every cleric.
Your description of 2e holds for specialty priests, but not for the PHB cleric and druid; the standard PHB cleric and druid had standard sets of spheres that applied no matter who your god was. For the most part, the cleric and druid classes proper had the same spells in 1e that they had in 2e that they had in 3e, whether via a dedicated class list in 1e and 3e or by them being grouped into the spheres on the class list in 2e. (Well, 1e had a shorter list in the PHB than 2e or 3e, but the combined 1e PHB+UA list was roughly the same as 2e.)
And if you had something like the three-volume Priest's Spell Compendium at hand in 2e, you had a ton of spells to choose from. To the point that said Compendium had multiple categories of rarity applied to spells (common, uncommon, rare, very rare, and unique) and the rule was you didn't have access to all spells in your spheres by default, only the "common" ones.
The other thing to remember is that at least in 2e (haven't played older I'm afraid), the divine spell list was exclusive rather then inclusive.
In 3e, you have a huge list of CLERIC SPELLS with a much, much, much smaller list of domain spells. In other words, all clerics get a huge list that's shared, and nine "extra" spells.
In 2e it was the opposite. Each god had a different set of spheres, and you got spells of those spheres only - and not even all the spells if it was a minor sphere!
Having "all the spells" made sense because the list was dramatically smaller, and each cleric could have a radically different list. In 3e, it becomes exceptionally powerful because now each Cleric spell goes to every cleric.
This, and even more. The cleric having access to every spell of the list makes very difficult balance things.
Would have been better a common spell list, and then use the old spheres to add flavour. You get class features like domains, and specific spells.
Say, every evil cleric can cast animate dead (say). Only Death clerics can cast Create Undead.
Elemental clerics would lose all the holy and unholy stuff, but would keep resurrections and heals and few vlasting spells. And so on.
Just examples. I would apply this to wizard schools too, BTW :D
Having a virtually endless number of spells known is one of the main reasons that casters, both wizards and clerics are regarded as the most powerful classes.
Spells known should be limited, this makes metamagic feats more useful (relatively speaking ofcourse) and limits power of casters without major revisions to the system, feats and favored class bonus might expand this number. Not sure how many spells that should be, probably a fixed number depending on level and a bonus based on casting ability score.
Lol no, just no. There is no learning by RAw they just know them. They do not have to learn anything, they do not have to hunt sacred rituals to cast rare spells, they auto know them all.Show me where it says of learning a new spell? They should have to learn them, but as written they do not.
Ah, I see what you mean, now.
OTOH, you don't have to "learn" skills or feats, either. Only the Wizard, IIRC, actually has to "learn" anything.Why you think the Cleric of all classes should also have to do this, when their God can just insert the knowledge into their heads if so desired, is beyond me.
-Kle.
"God did it !" makes kinda a lame excuse for.. just about anything, learning the proper rituals and such makes sense, at the very least it is more flavorful.
I would rule however that cleric spells are relatively simple rituals many common spells/rituals could be described in a simple prayerbook, and should be quite easy to learn. Some instruction or time spent studying the ritual should be sufficient to learn a new spell without the costs wizards have to face, though a priest might still demand some payment or service for the sharing of his knowledge. Likewise casting a spell from a scroll could allow the cleric to learn the spell if he makes a knowledge religion check to prepare the spell the next day.
With the posting of an alternate Cleric (non-generic, I think) on these boards, I have begun re-tooling my campaign Clerics to better fit my deities. The access to and restriction of spells are factoring in the system, helping to render the choice of deity very interesting. I have both removed certain spells from some deity lists and changed the level at which some spells are available, usually up. E.g.: a god of Death and Destruction had all his Heal spells jump a level and lose all dead-to-live spells and effects. His Harm, etc. spells are more potent, though.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Would a compromise be research?
For example, like Cantrips, the Cleric/Druid knows all the spells in the CRB. They have to research/discover spells outside of the CRB.
Thus they can keep the flexibility, but expansion will require resources, just like the Wizard.
Would a compromise be research?
For example, like Cantrips, the Cleric/Druid knows all the spells in the CRB. They have to research/discover spells outside of the CRB.
Thus they can keep the flexibility, but expansion will require resources, just like the Wizard.
That is a compromise I have seen used, and it works fairly well.
I would rule however that cleric spells are relatively simple rituals many common spells/rituals could be described in a simple prayerbook, and should be quite easy to learn. Some instruction or time spent studying the ritual should be sufficient to learn a new spell without the costs wizards have to face, though a priest might still demand some payment or service for the sharing of his knowledge. Likewise casting a spell from a scroll could allow the cleric to learn the spell if he makes a knowledge religion check to prepare the spell the next day.
I do it somewhat like this. They need to find someone who knows the ritual and is willing to teach it to the cleric, they still must make learning rolls, but once they have done so there is no extra cost to putting it into a prayer book.
|
|
Would a compromise be research?
For example, like Cantrips, the Cleric/Druid knows all the spells in the CRB. They have to research/discover spells outside of the CRB.
Thus they can keep the flexibility, but expansion will require resources, just like the Wizard.
And, depending on the god, the 'research' might not require book study, so much as acts of devotion, or costly rituals, or items / animals to sacrifice, to earn the right to ask that specific favor of their deity.
There are plenty of cleric spells that would never see the light of day again if players were forced to choose which ones to know. Over half the spells would fall by the wayside as roleplayers everywhere would deduce the most efficient spell options.
I like it as it is.
|
The totally over-the-top solution is to assign all cleric spells into 'spheres' that would be available to only clerics of specific dieties, based on their themes, domains and portfolios, but that way lies madness. :)
Tell me about it.
I'm seriously thinking about making them all spontaneous casters and being done with it.
|
In my experience the cleric has more often then not, been the last role to be filled at a gaming table, if it is filled at all. In my gaming group, I am the one who usually ends up playing a cleric. Perhaps they don’t like the idea that their power is granted to them by another source, and the plug can be yanked. Perhaps some people simply don’t like “religion” and what the cleric represents. I find the majority of players don’t like playing clerics.
Over the Editions of the D&D game, From 1st edition, to 2nd edition, through 3rd edition, 3,5 edition to Pathfinder, the developers decided to load the cleric with goodies to make it more attractive to play. The result has been a slightly more powerful class, when compared to the classic fighter / Rogue / wizard bread and butter classes. I think allowing clerics access to every spell per level is one of these “goodies”. I think this access is a bit much.
Ideally I would like the idea of a cleric having a “prayer book”. By following the example of the wizard, you could give the cleric all Orisons in his “prayer book” when he starts out along with say 3 + his wisdom modifier first level spells of his choice. And then he gets to add spells as he finds the scrolls. This is an idea that I like.
Perhaps a compromise, as an earlier poster suggested, is to give the cleric access to all of the Core Rule book spells, but they have to find anything that is outside the Core.
Anyways that’s just my two cents.