One man's garbage, another's treasure... *flies his wyvern away*
Which was entirely my point. This was pre-Pathfinder. People raged at the idea of a cleric with a full BAB and a d10 HD who gave up their domains. Raged like a legion of barbarians on a booze binge with porcupines in their shorts. They raged because it was "so unbalanced" and "so overpowered", when factually it was weaker than the core Cleric that it was an archtype for. I personally liked it, even though it was indeed weaker than the core.
But that's just the thing. It was weaker than the core and people had no idea, and yet they raged. That is the essence of my point. People who have no concept of balance, or mechanics will still rage. Worse yet, most of the people I've found like this are also vehemently opposed to actually looking at the facts, mathematics, or experience behind such things.
Imagine how many people acted like the cloistered cleric was somehow neutered from a normal cleric (cloistered cleric had a 1/2 HD base attack, d6 HD, and light armor proficiency, got an extra knowledge domain, 6 + Int modifier skills, and access to several divination spells as cleric spells, and yet with a single buff spell it laughed at its +10/+5 base attack). Yet the cloistered cleric was actually stronger than the core cleric by a noticeable margin.
It saddens me. I feel like Paizo did a good job with Core Pathfinder, and I feel a lot of that work was so good because of the pressure of making sure it was well balanced and built on good mechanics. However, with each subsequent splatbook they are putting out, I notice the overall quality decreasing rapidly. We are getting more and more poor, trap, or outright useless mechanics; and I can't help but wonder if perhaps it is our fault.
By our fault, I mean we the fans. When Pathfinder was conceived, we were skeptical. We expected more. We demanded more than just a half-pitch effort. Now we have people who vehemently chastise people for caring about the mechanics at all, or will argue endlessly that Vow of Poverty is somehow not a bad game option, or forsake reasoning and cognitive ability to praise stuff that is worse than half the stuff you'll find being given out for free on Giant in the Playground's homebrew boards.
It makes me sad, and it makes me angry, to see this happening.
A cleric with full BAB and higher HD is weaker than one without?
A cloistered cleric is more powerful than a normal cleric?
You are going to have to walk me through that one again.
There was a cleric spell that gave you full BAB, so no loss for the Cloistered Cleric. Same thing for the Full BAB Cleric: losing two domains is not worth something that would cost you nothing more than a spell slot.
Hit it on the head. Persistent divine power >full bab and d10 HD.
Essentially the cloistered cleric could get full bab, more skills, and plenty of goodies.
That's not a failing of class balance. That's a failing of persistent spell and divine metamagic.
That's not a failing of class balance. That's a failing of persistent spell and divine metamagic.I'm inclined to agree. So much of the C part of 3.5 CoDzilla seemed to rely on that combination that it was hard to get past it to see what else might be in need of modification for better balance.
There were other things as well. Divine power alone was jsut an amazing buff even if you just got it quickened it did it's job. Why do you think it got nerfed so hard in pathfinder?
A cleric with full BAB and higher HD is weaker than one without?
A cloistered cleric is more powerful than a normal cleric?
You are going to have to walk me through that one again.
That's not a failing of class balance. That's a failing of persistent spell and divine metamagic.
Actually it wasn't. At low levels the BAB difference isn't great (3rd level cleric has +2 instead of +3, 4th level is +3 instead of +4, etc), and you're giving up 9 domain spell slots (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th), domain spells, as well as the domain powers of your domains for what amounted to +5 to hit and 20 more hit points. That's a horrible trade. It was compounded by the fact that Divine Power could be cast at 7th level or greater, last an entire combat, and give you a perfect base attack as well as other combat buffs for the duration. At very high levels it could be quickened and allow you to pop it without even losing action economy.
Even the Pathfinder Divine Power is pretty nasty. I'm not even certain it was really nerfed. While it doesn't give an extra attack due to high base attack bonus it gives a luck bonus to attack and damage with all weapons (not just melee) that reaches +6, and an extra attack, which means you can basically quicken it to turn yourself into a combat guru and haste yourself in the same action (+6 to attack/damage, +level to Hp, +1 attack/round).
As for the cloistered cleric, in Pathfinder it wouldn't be an obviously stronger option, but in 3.5 it was. You got an extra domain (knowledge), more spells (0—message; 1st—erase, identify, unseen servant; 2nd—fox's cunning; 3rd—illusory script, secret page, tongues (reduced from 4th level); 4th—detect scrying; 6th—analyze dweomer; 7th—sequester; 9th—vision.), many more skill points, more class skills (Decipher Script, Speak Language, and all Knowledge skills (from the Knowledge domain)), and bardic knowledge in addition to the cleric's turn undead.
In exchange it gets light armor proficiency and drops its BAB by 5 over 20 levels, and gets 20 less hit points over 20 levels. However, they could now be skill monkies while being a full divine caster, armor proficiency was easy to acquire (a single dip in another class could instantly grant it along with a buff to your saving throws), and by casting a spell you'd turn into a combat powerhouse, ignoring the BAB loss entirely (notice that casting the spell also offsets your Hp drawback as it gives you HP for a normal cleric).
So you end up with a cleric with more options than a normal cleric, 3 domains, lots more skill points, etc.
When the Complete Champion came out, it became even sweeter because of the domain feats. The Knowledge domain had a feat that you could take which allowed you to make a Knowledge check appropriate to gain bonuses to hit and damage against the creature. Since you automatically gained the Knowledge domain, as well as all Knowledge skills as class skills, it became a no-brainer. You could also take the Skill Trick (see complete scoundrel) which allowed you to spend a couple of skill points to gain a +5 bonus on all knowledge checks for the purposes of creature lore (which synergized well with the knowledge devotion feat).
EDIT: Even in Pathfinder where upping your BAB via divine power isn't as easy as casting a single spell, I'd still be pretty hesitant to trade my domains for what amounts to +5 BAB and +20 Hp over 20 levels. Doing so would lose me my domain slots (so I'd get -1 spell per spell level) and I'd lose access to the domain powers, many of which are quite good (stuff like animal companions, free-action freedom of movement, the ability to re-roll stuff, access to quickened true-strike, the ability to ignore all difficult terrain and teleport as a move action, destructive smite, freedom's call, etc).
Seriously, would you really trade something like this:
Freedom's Call (Su): At 8th level, you can emit a 30-foot aura of freedom for a number of rounds per day equal to your cleric level. Allies within this aura are not affected by the confused, grappled, frightened, panicked, paralyzed, pinned, or shaken conditions. This aura only suppresses these effects, and they return once a creature leaves the aura or when the aura ends, if applicable. These rounds do not need to be consecutive.
Or this:
Good Fortune (Ex): At 6th level, as an immediate action, you can reroll any one d20 roll you have just made before the results of the roll are revealed. You must take the result of the reroll, even if it's worse than the original roll. You can use this ability once per day at 6th level, and one additional time per day for every six cleric levels beyond 6th.
Or this:
Animal Companion (Ex): At 4th level, you gain the service of an animal companion. Your effective druid level for this animal companion is equal to your cleric level – 3. (Druids who take this ability through their nature bond class feature use their druid level – 3 to determine the abilities of their animal companions).
Or this:
Liberation (Su): You have the ability to ignore impediments to your mobility. For a number of rounds per day equal to your cleric level, you can move normally regardless of magical effects that impede movement, as if you were affected by freedom of movement. This effect occurs automatically as soon as it applies. These rounds do not need to be consecutive.
For this?
+5 BAB over 20 levels.+1 HP / Level.
-1 1st level spell.
-1 2nd level spell.
-1 3rd level spell.
-1 4th level spell.
-1 5th level spell.
-1 6th level spell.
-1 7th level spell.
-1 8th level spell.
-1 9th level spell.
Loss of all domain powers and domain spells.
I could see doing it under very particular circumstances, or if you were just wanting to do some sort of multiclass hybrid thingy, or be a different flavor of paladin (it made a decent alternative paladin), but most of the time it's not a good trade.
Thoughts on full BAB vs. the standard cleric.
You make some decent points, but you seem to forget the very core of the argument: a cleric who takes this archetype is a cleric who wants to fight with weapons. Not as a secondary weapon user like the standard cleric can be, but as a fully fleshed out combat beast.
That +5 BAB over 20 levels that you so quickly dismiss is a lot more important than I think you might realize. BAB determines how many attacks you get per round, and medium BAB means that you're getting your second attack two levels after the fighter, your third attack four levels after the fighter, and never quite achieve that fourth attack. You can counter this with "Yes, but the cleric can cast Divine Power to make up for that"- but so can the Crusader. Additionally, BAB also determines access to many combat feats that play a significant role in your ability to maintain a combat presence later in the game. By taking a medium BAB class you're delaying access to these feats by 1-5 levels, if you get access to them at all.
And let's be clear on the domain slots: domain spells are nifty, but more often than not they're over specialized and simply not useful on a day-to-day basis. Over nine spells it's common that the good domains have 3-4 spells you're excited about and the rest are duds. For a cleric who decides to focus on weapon combat, giving up 9 spell slots over the course of 17 levels isn't a bad shake. The only thing that they're likely to truly miss is the domain powers, which are randomly awesome.
If you're going melee, the only feat you need to make your presence known is Power Attack. Tactical feats such as Step-Up don't require BAB. Likewise, I said that there are corner cases where it might be worth it to a specific concept, but as far as raw power goes, you are definitely getting the short end of the stick here.
If you're going melee, the only feat you need to make your presence known is Power Attack. Tactical feats such as Step-Up don't require BAB. Likewise, I said that there are corner cases where it might be worth it to a specific concept, but as far as raw power goes, you are definitely getting the short end of the stick here.
You did say that, yes, but my point is that the Crusader is a stronger choice for players who are actively interested in pursuing a combat role as a cleric. Not a stronger character over-all.
Also, power attack/deadly aim is now based entirely on BAB, and thus adds another strength to the Crusader. The Crusader succeeds on being exactly what it means to be: a stronger combat cleric. It's not an example of a poor archetype at all.
If you're going melee, the only feat you need to make your presence known is Power Attack. Tactical feats such as Step-Up don't require BAB. Likewise, I said that there are corner cases where it might be worth it to a specific concept, but as far as raw power goes, you are definitely getting the short end of the stick here.
Did you just use PF domain powers to defend your stand on the 3.5 cleric ?
The domain powers in 3.5 weren't that great and easily copied with magic items or spells, the full BAB was one of the few things that kept the warrior classes floating. With this option a quickened divine favor allowed them to be better than the fighter without buffing time.
Actually it wasn't. At low levels the BAB difference isn't great (3rd level cleric has +2 instead of +3, 4th level is +3 instead of +4, etc), and you're giving up 9 domain spell slots (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th), domain spells, as well as the domain powers of your domains for what amounted to +5 to hit and 20 more hit points. That's a horrible trade. It was compounded by the fact that Divine Power could be cast at 7th level or greater, last an entire combat, and give you a perfect base attack as well as other combat buffs for the duration. At very high levels it could be quickened and allow you to pop it without even losing action economy.
If you are going to be fair, be fair.
If I'm only 4th-level, I AM only gaining 1 point of BAB, as you say. However, I am NOT giving up a 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th level spell slots for that. Since I am only 4th level, I NEVER HAD THOSE TO GIVE UP IN THE FIRST PLACE. I've only given up a single 1st and 2nd level spell slot each day. That is a much more reasonable exchange.
The tradeoff becomes larger at higher levels, sure, but the gain is larger as well.
You skew perceptions when you imply you gain a +1 or +2 BAB in exchange for losing 9 spells per day. That simply isn't true.
Keep it in context, keep it honest.
The rest of your post seemed perfectly fair. This is the only portion I took issue with.
B) His experience and analysis is no way definitive either way. His experiences are due to variance/chance and so judgement cannot be drawn from such a small sample. Another "play-tester" could just as easily conclude that the grit-mechanic sucks because he played for 7,000 hours and never got a crit or killing blow. Both posters fail to prove anything.Anecdote of my own: I ran the World's Largest Dungeon several years ago. It ran for around two years, and I had two players make it all the way from the entrance to the exit. Only one of those managed it with his original character - a spear-wielding half-dragon fighter, IIRC.
We had 4-5 hour games once a week for almost two years. Hundreds of encounters. Thousands of attack rolls. This character only successfully landed a single crit. EVER. Every other time he threatened (which was rare in and of itself), he missed or the monster was immune to crits. It became a running joke, and we all celebrated when he did finally land a crit.
This is certainly not proof that crits don't happen, but it is proof that really long runs of bad luck can happen.
Ouch, that is a terrible run of bad luck. I feel for that player. Chance can be an evil mistress.
If you're going melee, the only feat you need to make your presence known is Power Attack. Tactical feats such as Step-Up don't require BAB. Likewise, I said that there are corner cases where it might be worth it to a specific concept, but as far as raw power goes, you are definitely getting the short end of the stick here.Did you just use PF domain powers to defend your stand on the 3.5 cleric ?
The domain powers in 3.5 weren't that great and easily copied with magic items or spells, the full BAB was one of the few things that kept the warrior classes floating. With this option a quickened divine favor allowed them to be better than the fighter without buffing time.
No I wasn't. I was noting that in 3.5 that the BAB issue was meh 'cause it was easily replaced by a single spell at the beginning of mid-levels, and that if you used the variant in Pathfinder where the BAB isn't easily replaced you would be giving up legitimately awesome abilities.
Actually, yes.
1/ The extra attack doesn't stack with haste. Since you acquire the spell at 7th, it means a PC cleric generally doesn't have this extra attack.
2/ The attack bonus doesn't stack with divine favor, and divine favor give the same bonus until level 11.
Divine power generally doesn't worth his spell slot for a PC: divine favor is 3 level lower, quickened divine favor is only 1 level higher (and actually the same level with the magical lineage trait). For a NPC, divine power is more useful, since NPC don't always have an haste-bot with them.
Maybe quickened divine power does worth his slot, but I'm still unimpressed (+5 or +6 to hit and damage, vs +3 for divine favor - and at this level, you should be perma-hasted).
I'm aware that you lose the extra attack and that it doesn't stack with Divine Favor. Pathfinder, however, doesn't have persistent metamagic however, so in a core game it's still amazing due to action economy, allowing you to effectively haste yourself, gain a +6 to hit and damage (that's like weapon training +6), and gain temporary HP equal to your level. It also lasts longer than divine favor as soon as you hit 11th level, and if it is quickened can easily last an entire fight.
Also it's worth noting that the original divine power gave a +6 enhancement bonus to Strength. That means it only gave a +3 to hit and damage and didn't stack with magic items. The new one gives a +6 to hit and damage and stacks with every buff EXCEPT the 1st level spell divine favor.
The Power Attack issue is considerable, but honestly don't think that the base attack bonus would be worth giving up those spells and domain powers in Pathfinder. Maaaaaybe in 3.5, but some domains were just insanely good in 3.5 so it's a bit of a toss up.
But of course, that's the whole point. People raged about something that's probably not stronger than a normal cleric the vast majority of the time but may fit their concept perfectly. It shows a severe lack of balance consideration.
If you are going to be fair, be fair.
If I'm only 4th-level, I AM only gaining 1 point of BAB, as you say. However, I am NOT giving up a 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th level spell slots for that. Since I am only 4th level, I NEVER HAD THOSE TO GIVE UP IN THE FIRST PLACE. I've only given up a single 1st and 2nd level spell slot each day. That is a much more reasonable exchange.
The tradeoff becomes larger at higher levels, sure, but the gain is larger as well.
You skew perceptions when you imply you gain a +1 or +2 BAB in exchange for losing 9 spells per day. That simply isn't true.
Keep it in context, keep it honest.
The rest of your post seemed perfectly fair. This is the only portion I took issue with.
I noted that they give up all that for +5 over 20 levels. Let me break it down and we can look under the hood so to speak (I know you, Ravingdork have an appreciation for mechanics).
At 1st Level: You get +2 Hit Points and a +1 BAB (as it +5% to hit). In exchange you give up a 1st level spell slot and both of your domains. In 3.5 giving up your domains meant loosing the option to cast arcane spells from wands and scrolls as a wizard 1/2 your level, or giving up proficiency in a martial weapon and an automatic weapon focus feat in your deities' favored weapon.
At 3rd Level: You give up a 2nd level spell. You have an average of 2 HP more than a normal 3rd level cleric.
At 4th Level: You get a +1 BAB and another +1 HP, so you are now lacking both domains, a 1st level spell, and a 2nd level spell, for 5 Hp and a +1 higher BAB.
It goes on from here. When your base attack begins to pull away from the normal cleric, you are giving up much higher level spells. Most are comfortable with the assessment that spells are generally very useful and higher level ones quite powerful. You yourself have said that you generally prefer specializing high level magic. A standard cleric in a single round at 15th level can pop Divine Power as a swift action, freedom of movement as a non-action, and remove all manner of terrible status ailments from himself and all party members within a 30 ft radius as a non-action, and still have a standard and move action as normal. That's just with 1 domain! :P
A +6 bonus to attack and damage is much more valuable on a guy with full BAB than it is on a guy with half BAB.
The former can Power Attack AND Combat Expertise effectively and STILL hit his target (subsitute whatever other feats or abilities you want that trade attack/damage for something else).
The latter on the other hand, has graduated from being a useless melee/ranged combatant to a barely functional one.
As it is, the Paizo developers were smart enough to choose a middle ground in the current game.
|
RD - Animal Companion wrote:
Animal Companion (Ex): At 4th level, you gain the service of an animal companion. Your effective druid level for this animal companion is equal to your cleric level – 3....
Yep. Figh1/clerX[animal] + Boon Companion = same number of feats as straight cleric, all armor/weapon profs, and takes a spell level delay for a full character-level AC.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
But I'll doubt you will reach a satisfying conclusion unless you put them to the test in the game.
Dude, my dad can diagnose what's wrong with a car by listening to the engine run over the phone.
You do something long enough, with enough understanding of how it works, you just get a feel for it. It's not always a perfect gauge, but the better you get the smaller that margin of error gets. Especially when they system you are messing with is based something very predictable, like mechanical devices, or math.
There are people on these forums who's familiarity with the rules and ability to draw conclusions from thought experiments and statistical comparisons is equally as impressive as my dad's ability with cars. Cartigan is one of them. He's not always right, but his intuition is good and he backs up his thoughts with examples that are hard to refute. You can't invalidate his claims by saying "You didn't playtest, so you can't know."
|
|
In my mind, for an archetype to actually be a failure it has to meet the TV Tropes standard for "So bad it's horrible."
1) In concept, it must appeal to only a limited niche of players.
2) It must then fail to appeal even to those people.For me, the First Worlder comes pretty close (It promises the ability to call a powerful fae and have abilities tied to the First World, and then proceeds to be almost a straight nerf of the base Summoner) but the one and only true failure is the Cloistered Cleric.
1) Apparent concept: A (wo)man of the faith with no need for armor or fighting - faith in his religion alone is enough defense against the world and power against harm for this character. Sort of a "divine wizard" if you will, who may not get armor or weapons but has extra spellcasting 'oomph' in exchange.
2) Failing in this by reducing both martial and spellcasting abilities in favor of two more skill points.
I don't have a problem with the CC; I'd always assumed the sort who would take the archetype would be a high DEX build which has no use for medium armor proficiency, has other tricks to exploit the "mass aid another" aspect, and in general wants to be a wizard-like skill monkey from a divine point of view.
I.e. a straight-class elven archer cleric with decent CHA, who, with a 14 starting INT + racial bump + headband or Ioun is pulling in ~8 skills/level compared to your average human or dwarf lunkhead cleric -- and gets lvl/2 bonus to all knowledge checks (which is pretty damned useful when some weird new monster pops up, or that oddball PFS faction mission requires a DC 25 check). Since you're shooting your bow in combat most of the time, you don't cast spells as often, and half of them usually "go to waste" at the end of the day anyway. Dress like a wizard, and let the bad guys waste fort-save magic on you.
- - - - -
The real trap archetypes, IMO, are all the fighters ones which rename "Weapon Training" (so Gloves of Dueling don't work), and the various barbarian and rogue ones which forfeit Uncanny Dodge.
In my mind, for an archetype to actually be a failure it has to meet the TV Tropes standard for "So bad it's horrible."
1) In concept, it must appeal to only a limited niche of players.
2) It must then fail to appeal even to those people.
For me, the First Worlder comes pretty close (It promises the ability to call a powerful fae and have abilities tied to the First World, and then proceeds to be almost a straight nerf of the base Summoner) but the one and only true failure is the Cloistered Cleric.
1) Apparent concept: A (wo)man of the faith with no need for armor or fighting - faith in his religion alone is enough defense against the world and power against harm for this character. Sort of a "divine wizard" if you will, who may not get armor or weapons but has extra spellcasting 'oomph' in exchange.
2) Failing in this by reducing both martial and spellcasting abilities in favor of two more skill points.
"Cloistered Cleric (Archetype)
Cloistered clerics typically live in a temple and rarelyinteract with the outside world. They are bookish and well
learned in the lore of the faith, paying less attention to its
magical and martial aspects. A cloistered cleric has the
following class features."
How is that the apparent concept, the apparent concept is clearly stated as being different from what you described.
Quite obviously it's archetype is much more focused on being a sagely sort focusing on knowledge rather than magical or martial prowess. It's abilities might be underwhelming to you, but it does have more skill
points which I consider a fair trade for reduced weapons and armor.
reduced spells and scrapping of one domain might be a bit harsh, but breadth of knowledge is pretty good and I like the aid another action ability, with some feats it can become a pretty good ability.
Well read is not great, and a bit clumsily described imo.
Scribe scroll is fair enough, but I'd have liked to see a few more bonus feats (every 4th level or so ?) focused on item creation and class skills to make a more natural fit to get into the lore master PrC.
It does come a little short, but it isn't the worst archetype ever.
I.e. a straight-class elven archer cleric with decent CHA, who, with a 14 starting INT + racial bump + headband or Ioun is pulling in ~8 skills/level compared to your average human or dwarf lunkhead cleric -- and gets lvl/2 bonus to all knowledge checks (which is pretty damned useful when some weird new monster pops up, or that oddball PFS faction mission requires a DC 25 check). Since you're shooting your bow in combat most of the time, you don't cast spells as often, and half of them usually "go to waste" at the end of the day anyway. Dress like a wizard, and let the bad guys waste fort-save magic on you.
Or you could be an Elven Bard [possibly Archivist] instead.
And you do NOT have a bow unless your specifically an Elf, so your example is exceedingly specific to the point of irrelevant. A Cloistered Cleric is normally only proficient with a sling as a ranged weapon, not even crossbows. Unless you take a race with automatic proficiencies, you aren't doing crap in combat either.
|
|
I.e. a straight-class elven archer cleric with decent CHA, who, with a 14 starting INT + racial bump + headband or Ioun is pulling in ~8 skills/level compared to your average human or dwarf lunkhead cleric -- and gets lvl/2 bonus to all knowledge checks (which is pretty damned useful when some weird new monster pops up, or that oddball PFS faction mission requires a DC 25 check). Since you're shooting your bow in combat most of the time, you don't cast spells as often, and half of them usually "go to waste" at the end of the day anyway. Dress like a wizard, and the bad guys waste fort-save magic on you.And this is a precise summary of why I consider it a failure. 1 is equal in importance to 2 here. You've just created a cleric that is more martially inclined than the baseline out of an archetype that appears to be keyed towards making it less so.
<hand toss> -- If he stayed in the monastery full-time, how many posts would there be disparaging the archetype as worthless?
...Imagine the type as a Sherlock Holmes: very smart, very wise, but no slouch in fisticuffs or swordplay if he properly puts his mind to the problem.
Or you could be an Elven Bard [possibly Archivist] instead.OK...but then you're a bard and not a cleric. Perhaps you want to be a cleric because you like divine spell progression. To each, his own.
And you do NOT have a bow unless your specifically an Elf, so your example is exceedingly specific to the point of irrelevant.
Barbarian[urban]1/clericX -- now your DEX blows an elf's away if you want it to.
- - - -
There are many archetypes that are mechanically lame; cloistered cleric isn't one of them.