| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The fighter is supposed to be the fightingest class that ever was or is or ever shall be, so why does everyone else get full BAB next to him? He should have the most attacks and the most accurate attacks. Drop every other class that is full BAB to 3/4 BAB and every class that is 3/4 BAB down to half (take that monks) and watch the tears flow.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The fighter is supposed to be the fightingest class that ever was or is or ever shall be, so why does everyone else get full BAB next to him? He should have the most attacks and the most accurate attacks. Drop every other class that is full BAB to 3/4 BAB and every class that is 3/4 BAB down to half (take that monks) and watch the tears flow.
While I do feel that there are some Sacred Cows that need butchering, this might be a little bit much.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have the opposite view. Kill the Fighter. Don't have one designated "best at fighting" class. Have classes best at fighting certain ways, against certain foes, etc...
End the tyranny fighter holds over the other martials. The sooner people stop arguing about how X class feature makes Y other martial class feel useless, the sooner we can focus on the martial / caster disparity that's the actual issue.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I halfway agree with you about your assessment of Combat Expertise in the other thread, but now you're just getting silly.
The Fighter gets built in bonuses to attack and damage that reach the same levels as the most powerful magic weapons in the book.
BaB isn't the measure of how well a character fights. You need to look at their full bonus to attack.
A few classes can do it better in niche circumstances or short bursts, but a well made fighter puts out consistently high numbers all day long.
Nothing needs changed. You just need to look at the whole picture instead of one piece before making a judgement about what's in the frame.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
After reading both of Tom's post I think he needs a nap.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I hate this idea. Burn it in fire, smolder it with fighters' boots, and move on.
The fighter is supposed to be the fightingest class that ever was or is or ever shall be, so why does everyone else get full BAB next to him? He should have the most attacks and the most accurate attacks. Drop every other class that is full BAB to 3/4 BAB and every class that is 3/4 BAB down to half (take that monks) and watch the tears flow.
While a bold proclamation, after some consideration I actually think this might be decent. Honestly, it's kind of old school (check out the attack progressions for 1st/2nd edition).
But I would go:
--Other full BAB classes go to 3/4
--Some 3/4 classes (rogues, maybe bards, others who don't get spellcasting) go to 2/3
--Any 3/4 that gets decent casting (clerics and druids, I'm looking at you) go to 1/2
--Any 1/2 class goes to 1/3
And throw monks a frigging bone and let them keep 3/4 BAB, and be on par with Rangers and Paladins.
Next game I GM I plan to disallow the standard fighter and require taking an archetype. Archetypes are still very powerful and much more thematic, reflecting the variety on training that different people would receive
Do remember that fighters are essentially at greater than full BAB already from weapon training. Just how ineffective in combat do you want want clerics and druids to be?
Honestly? Pretty darn ineffective...without using their real class abilities, like spells and turning into a bear. I mean, Divine Power still exists, right?
Or, if they really want better BAB, they could *gasp* multiclass as a fighter! The horror!
Lets look at your suggested numbers at Lvl 13 (when fighters get their third weapon training)
Fighter: +16
Cavalier: +9
Rogue: +8
Cleric: +6
Wizard: +5The difference between 3/4 and 2/3 or between 1/2 and 1/3 at 13th level is just 1. Rogues have half the BAB of a Fighter. Cleric's and Druid's who try to do some fighting but also need a casting stat and really need con for HP are at a -10 disadvantage, they just can never hit anything.
All of that is before taking into account that the fighter is rather SAD but many of the 3/4 classes are more MAD so they can't pump STR as much so they are always further behind due to that.
*shrug* I'm sure there's room to play with it. I noticed you picked a perfect breakpoint to emphasize the fighter (just got new weapon training, AND other classes lose a point of BAB). Clerics and Druids and Wizards have (at 13th) tons of spells which can either close that gap (if they really want to hit stuff) or do other awesome things. Let the fighter be good at hitting stuff. If EVERYBODY is good at hitting stuff...why not have that AND full casting?
I feel a little bit for Cavaliers and other 3/4's...that might have been an overreaction. Have to look closer. Rogues' gap could be addressed by giving them an attack bonus when making Sneak Attacks...so they'll fit their niche: good when they can get a SA, worse when they can't.
Next game I GM I plan to disallow the standard fighter and require taking an archetype. Archetypes are still very powerful and much more thematic, reflecting the variety on training that different people would receiveExcept that it more or less removes either Armour Training, Weapon Training or both as an option for the character. I like archetypes too but a vanilla fighter is a very good option.
Now I'm thinking of allowing fighters to take an Archetype, and keep Armor Training and Weapon Training, in addition.
Do remember that fighters are essentially at greater than full BAB already from weapon training. Just how ineffective in combat do you want want clerics and druids to be?Honestly? Pretty darn ineffective...without using their real class abilities, like spells and turning into a bear. I mean, Divine Power still exists, right?
Or, if they really want better BAB, they could *gasp* multiclass as a fighter! The horror!
Lets look at your suggested numbers at Lvl 13 (when fighters get their third weapon training)
Fighter: +16
Cavalier: +9
Rogue: +8
Cleric: +6
Wizard: +5The difference between 3/4 and 2/3 or between 1/2 and 1/3 at 13th level is just 1. Rogues have half the BAB of a Fighter. Cleric's and Druid's who try to do some fighting but also need a casting stat and really need con for HP are at a -10 disadvantage, they just can never hit anything.
All of that is before taking into account that the fighter is rather SAD but many of the 3/4 classes are more MAD so they can't pump STR as much so they are always further behind due to that.*shrug* I'm sure there's room to play with it. I noticed you picked a perfect breakpoint to emphasize the fighter (just got new weapon training, AND other classes lose a point of BAB). Clerics and Druids and Wizards have (at 13th) tons of spells which can either close that gap (if they really want to hit stuff) or do other awesome things. Let the fighter be good at hitting stuff. If EVERYBODY is good at hitting stuff...why not have that AND full casting?
I feel a little bit for Cavaliers and other 3/4's...that might have been an overreaction. Have to look closer. Rogues' gap could be addressed by giving them an attack bonus when making Sneak Attacks...so they'll fit their niche: good when they can get a SA, worse when they can't.
Divine power was severely neutered from 3e. It no longer ups your BAB, so you'd still be nerfing the ever loving crap out of a class
Now I'm thinking of allowing fighters to take an Archetype, and keep Armor Training and Weapon Training, in addition.Next game I GM I plan to disallow the standard fighter and require taking an archetype. Archetypes are still very powerful and much more thematic, reflecting the variety on training that different people would receiveExcept that it more or less removes either Armour Training, Weapon Training or both as an option for the character. I like archetypes too but a vanilla fighter is a very good option.
That would be sweet. It is very difficult for me to consider taking most of the fighter archetypes right now because almost all of them drop armor training and replace it with worse abilities. Armor training is just too powerful for a fighter to give up.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Divine power was severely neutered from 3e. It no longer ups your BAB, so you'd still be nerfing the ever loving crap out of a class
You're asking me to cry for Clerics? Seriously?
You're asking me to cry for Clerics? Seriously?
Divine power was severely neutered from 3e. It no longer ups your BAB, so you'd still be nerfing the ever loving crap out of a class
More like saying nerfing something to the point that no one bothers because it used to be overpowered is not a good option. Instead of "punishing" the class just bring it back into line with the others >_>
I have the opposite view. Kill the Fighter. Don't have one designated "best at fighting" class. Have classes best at fighting certain ways, against certain foes, etc...
End the tyranny fighter holds over the other martials. The sooner people stop arguing about how X class feature makes Y other martial class feel useless, the sooner we can focus on the martial / caster disparity that's the actual issue.
While I agree with you, I don't think the fighter "class" should be eliminated. As it stands, right now the fighter is nothing more than cannon fodder, foot soldiers essentially recruited into the party as hired help rather than an equal.
So first of all, reduce the martial "prowess" of the fighter, so that there is no "fights better than anything 'class'" as you said, and give the fighter more flavorful builds.
First and foremost, they need many more class skills, and personally, I would like to see the fighter (being one of the most variable classes in DnD) have some sort of system kind of like the Cavalier, where certain fighter options provide different additional class skills. Their skillpoints per level should also be bumped up to 4.
Give them some useful class abilities. If fighters are one of the most universally employed classes, surely they should have a way of making lots of contacts that can benefit the party by being well connected? In essence, the fighter needs to have more social focus, because fighters are not dumb brutes or buffed up NPC companions (which they often get treated as). They should especially get class skills and a class abilities related to wisdom (ESP PERCEPTION) to make them less SAD and more MAD.
|
Personally I think those who want fighters to be better then what they are relative to everyone else are people who have the misfortune to be stuck with second rate GMs, who can't properly balance the encounters to the players(or refuse to fudge things as appropriate)
Truthfully, if you have that much of a problem with it you could always use my custom class rules to make characters that fit your concept. Oh wait that does exclude the powergamers who generally are the ones who have problems of this sort, oh well nevermind.
note; if you're interested in custom class rules you can pm me.
You're asking me to cry for Clerics? Seriously?
Divine power was severely neutered from 3e. It no longer ups your BAB, so you'd still be nerfing the ever loving crap out of a class
No, just think about it. They can't "close the gap" because they have no way of getting the extra attack that the fighter would. Buffs only go so far.
Yep. If only they had something like a full casting progression culminating in true resurrection and miracle. Or maybe phenomenal energy channeling. That might balance the fact that clerics don't keep up with the most martially-dedicated base class in the game. ; )
Yep. If only they had something like a full casting progression culminating in true resurrection and miracle. Or maybe phenomenal energy channeling. That might balance the fact that clerics don't keep up with the most martially-dedicated base class in the game. ; )
There's a little bit of a difference between wading into combat with a medium BAB and spells than with a poor BAB and spells.
Also, if you modify the BAB, what about the HD?
Wait, who said Divine Power was nerfed? It got buffed!
The up to +6 bonuses on attack/damage/str checks is higher than the bonuses in 3E, and I'd MUCH rather take an extra attack at highest BAB than one at abysmally low BAB (gained by jumping to full BAB).
Here, just compare the 3E and PF versions:
You get between a +1 and +5 attack bonus and possibly an extra attack at very low to hit due to BAB going up; you get a str bonus that will NOT stack with a permanent +str item, and even if you have none is only giving you +3 on str checks, attack rolls, and damage (4.5 on damage if using the weapon 2H); and temp hp = to CL.
You get an extra attack but this time at highest BAB; you get a scaling bonus on attack/damage/str checks of up to +6 and WILL stack with your belt of strength; and again you gain the temp hp.
PF version sounds way better to me. Maybe if you receive Haste every combat it's less appealing, I dunno.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have the opposite view. Kill the Fighter. Don't have one designated "best at fighting" class. Have classes best at fighting certain ways, against certain foes, etc...
End the tyranny fighter holds over the other martials. The sooner people stop arguing about how X class feature makes Y other martial class feel useless, the sooner we can focus on the martial / caster disparity that's the actual issue.
Only if Armor Training and Weapon Training become feats or series of feats or something.
Armor Training and Weapon Training are amazing class features and Armor Training specifically is why I love Fighter tanks so much. If that could be given to other classes when the Fighter class is finally killed, I wouldn't mind in the least.
I would just add a fighter only feat that increases BAB by 1. Not just +1 to hit but really +1BAB with everything that comes along.
Make it a once only feat and you're good to go.
This was the fighter can get his secont attack one level earlier, he gets +1 CMB and CMD but you don't have to change all the other classes.
Dedicated fighter
Prerequesites: Fighter 3rd level, no casterlevel, SLA or su abilities.
Benefit: BAB increases by 1
Special: If the character would later gain a casterlevel, SLA or su ability he can choose not to gain those abilities, keeping this feat instead or he can loose access to this feat.
Can not be taken more than once.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The fighter is supposed to be the fightingest class that ever was or is or ever shall be, so why does everyone else get full BAB next to him? He should have the most attacks and the most accurate attacks. Drop every other class that is full BAB to 3/4 BAB and every class that is 3/4 BAB down to half (take that monks) and watch the tears flow.
And wizards should have +0 BAB at 20th level.
|
I hate this idea. Burn it in fire, smolder it with fighters' boots, and move on.
Don't mind Tom, he's just angry.
The fighter is supposed to be the fightingest class that ever was or is or ever shall be, so why does everyone else get full BAB next to him? He should have the most attacks and the most accurate attacks. Drop every other class that is full BAB to 3/4 BAB and every class that is 3/4 BAB down to half (take that monks) and watch the tears flow.
Alternate possibility: Take every non-magical class (e.g. rogue, cavalier, barbarian) and merge them into the fighter class. Rename it "Adventurer" or "Hero" or something.
The paladin can just be a cleric archetype or something.
The paladin can just be a cleric archetype or something.
Please don't! That might remove all the wonderful "will action X or Y stop mig pally from being a pally"-threads...
|
I hate this idea. Burn it in fire, smolder it with fighters' boots, and move on.Don't mind Tom, he's just angry.
Looking at his posting history, Enchanter Tom apparently absolutely hates Paizo, Pathfinder, and everything about them, and has 'left the game' at least once two years ago. One wonders why he continues posting here.
More like saying nerfing something to the point that no one bothers because it used to be overpowered is not a good option. Instead of "punishing" the class just bring it back into line with the others
Let me be clear...are you claiming that if Clerics had 1/2 BAB, no one would ever play one? Because I have a hard time believing that.
No, just think about it. They can't "close the gap" because they have no way of getting the extra attack that the fighter would. Buffs only go so far.
Why do Clerics need to 'close the gap'? The whole POINT of reducing their BAB is so they CAN'T close the gap! If they can close the gap, they are flat-out better than fighters. Because they can fight just as well, AND get spells!
There's a little bit of a difference between wading into combat with a medium BAB and spells than with a poor BAB and spells.
So maybe Clerics shouldn't be able to wade into combat as confidently as fighters? Maybe they could hold back and cast spells, maybe even *gasp* buff the fighter! Or if they want, multiclass with Fighter...that's why the multiclassing rules exist.
Take a look at 12th level...core rules, Clerics would have +9 (from 3/4) BAB, and in my proposal they'd have +6. That's a 3 point difference.
So take your 12th level character and make them a 8th level Cleric and 4th level Fighter. Now they have +4 from Cleric and +4 from Fighter...total of +8 BAB. Still down a point, but if they take 1 more level of Fighter they get weapon training and another point of BAB. Now they can fight, but they actually have to give something up for it (a spell level or 2).
Also, if you modify the BAB, what about the HD?
I don't care, let 'em have their HD.
I really don't have any opinion about whether the fighter should be the ONLY class with full BAB, but I think the full, 3/4 and 1/2 is way too limiting. There should be more gradations of combat ability, more like a continuum instead of these arbitrary quanta.
Only if Armor Training and Weapon Training become feats or series of feats or something.
Armor Training and Weapon Training are amazing class features and Armor Training specifically is why I love Fighter tanks so much. If that could be given to other classes when the Fighter class is finally killed, I wouldn't mind in the least.
That's fine, at least armor training. Weapon Training just a bunch more mindless +X attack and damage stuff that feats like weapon focus and specialization already handle. Want to make more of them? Sure.
Armor training is actually unique and interesting. But there are already others that get it, at least in a partial sense. Emissary Cavalier gets AT 1 at 1st level, aside from the lowered armor check penalty. Dwarf basically comes with the unchanged speed aspect of medium/heavy armor right from the start, too. Lame cursed Oracle also eventually picks up such abilities. There's probably other examples, too.
I find it funny if you look at teh Op threads he started he wanted to know why the magus didn't have full bab?
This also makes it so a two handed fighting paladin can't take power attack or weapon focus at level 1.
Also wouldn't this make the warrior npc class even more pointless.
This also makes it so a two handed fighting paladin can't take power attack or weapon focus at level 1.
And your point is?...
Also wouldn't this make the warrior npc class even more pointless.
Not possible. :)
More like saying nerfing something to the point that no one bothers because it used to be overpowered is not a good option. Instead of "punishing" the class just bring it back into line with the othersLet me be clear...are you claiming that if Clerics had 1/2 BAB, no one would ever play one? Because I have a hard time believing that.
No, just think about it. They can't "close the gap" because they have no way of getting the extra attack that the fighter would. Buffs only go so far.Why do Clerics need to 'close the gap'? The whole POINT of reducing their BAB is so they CAN'T close the gap! If they can close the gap, they are flat-out better than fighters. Because they can fight just as well, AND get spells!
There's a little bit of a difference between wading into combat with a medium BAB and spells than with a poor BAB and spells.
So maybe Clerics shouldn't be able to wade into combat as confidently as fighters? Maybe they could hold back and cast spells, maybe even *gasp* buff the fighter! Or if they want, multiclass with Fighter...that's why the multiclassing rules exist.
Take a look at 12th level...core rules, Clerics would have +9 (from 3/4) BAB, and in my proposal they'd have +6. That's a 3 point difference.
So take your 12th level character and make them a 8th level Cleric and 4th level Fighter. Now they have +4 from Cleric and +4 from Fighter...total of +8 BAB. Still down a point, but if they take 1 more level of Fighter they get weapon training and another point of BAB. Now they can fight, but they actually have to give something up for it (a spell level or 2).
Also, if you modify the BAB, what about the HD?I don't care, let 'em have their HD.
If I understand you correctly, proposed cleric would have:
1) a horrid BAB2) no ability to make up the difference with buff spells
3) no ability to protect themselves from combat manuevers (BAB is a big part of that)
4) less spells per day than other full-casters
5) a limited spell list that is focused on heals & buffs (for other people only, apparently)
6) healing spells that only work at touch (I wonder why Clerics go into melee so much. Its a good thing they cant be tripped/grappled/sundered that easily with their CMD... oh wait)
7) channel energy
6) domains
So, you advocate taking a class that is already pushed by many groups into a "Healbot" role and removing any chance they have of doing anything in combat other than healing and buffing without multiclassing.
And so, per your advice so that they can gain back 2/3rds of the BAB they lost, they multiclass into a 4 cleric/4 fighter. Now they can cast lvl 2 spells and channel 2d6 postive energy. And now your whole party is screwed because your group is level 8, and have, effectivly, a lvl 4 healer.
EDIT:
Let me be clear...are you claiming that if Clerics had 1/2 BAB, no one would ever play one? Because I have a hard time believing that.
No, I doubt anyone will want to play a cleric like this. People will still play one because they will be pressured by the group members that want their own personal healbot, but I don't think it would be enjoyable.
The fighter is supposed to be the fightingest class that ever was or is or ever shall be, so why does everyone else get full BAB next to him? He should have the most attacks and the most accurate attacks. Drop every other class that is full BAB to 3/4 BAB and every class that is 3/4 BAB down to half (take that monks) and watch the tears flow.
I like Tom's idea. You could run with this, and give other classes benefits to make up for the fighter being the king of the bab hill.
So the barb loses the bab of the fighter, but gains more damage and stays slightly tougher than the fighter (through d12 and dr). For winning quickly.
The monk and rangers have more attacks, on a lowish bab, but you have to be careful their damage doesn't go too high. Bag of dice opponents, great for thinning the herd or exploiting low ac opponents.
Knight/cavalier have great hp and great ac. They win over time.
The rogue can become a debilitator, a master of called shots and adding hindrances to damage (some 3.5 feats played with this idea).
Fighter gets the best bab, and has some protection of their mastery of combat maneouvres.
Every new idea is worth some consideration. Keep working on this Tom, you might make some good stuff. You can always take pieces of the system, break down the classes and rebuild it back up for your games.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No, I doubt anyone will want to play a cleric like this. People will still play one because they will be pressured by the group members that want their own personal healbot, but I don't think it would be enjoyable.
Let me be clear...are you claiming that if Clerics had 1/2 BAB, no one would ever play one? Because I have a hard time believing that.
I've played a 1/2 BAB cleric before, and willingly.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Re: This thread:
Edit: And, for the sake of playing along with teh funny...
Fighters are already the most powerful class in the game, why would you want to make them even better? A change like this means that nobody would play any class other than fighters, and the 1/2 BAB characters would need to be nerfed even further to not outshine the existing full-BAB classes being demoted.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The problem with fighters is a simple one: weapon training is too good. Especially with the 15,000 gp gloves of dueling. The fighter is a full BAB class. He is SAD, so his Strength WILL be quite high. He can take Weapon Focus and Greater Weapon Focus, which means that he gets an additional +1 bonus over ALL other full BAB classes anyway. He is the only one that can take Weapon Specialization and Greater Weapon Specialization, for a +4 bonus on damage.
Get rid of Weapons Training completely. Rework Paladin Smites, Cavalier Challenges, and Ranger Favored Enemies to remove the bonus on attack rolls. And that is all we really need. Fighter is still the top of the pile at hitting things and dealing damage in general. Barbs are better when they rage (as they should be), Paladins are better at damage when they smite (as they should be), Rangers deal more damage against their favored enemies (as they should be), Cavaliers deal more damage when they issue a Challenge (as they should be).
But what this change does is remove the huge gulf between full BAB attacks and 3/4 BAB attacks.
That's how I see it.
Master Arminas
This also makes it so a two handed fighting paladin can't take power attack or weapon focus at level 1.And your point is?...
Also wouldn't this make the warrior npc class even more pointless.Not possible. :)
I am one to always keep warriors in the worlds I run. Some hate them, look down on them, think all "warriors" should be fighters. I'm not of such an opinion, they are also a valid pc class with just a small change. How do I do this? Well it is easy. The warrior class is underpowered and not balanced to the other classes. So make the warrior, the master of the basics, and a tough sort to boot, and weigh their levels differently to other classes.
Every third level, the warrior player gains another level of warrior for free, they do not count these free levels towards their effective level. So a level 3 warrior has 4 bab and 4 hit die. At level 6, they have 8 bab and 8 hit die, and so on. Bab sure is useful, as is hit die. It can also allow early entry into prestige classes. By sticking to the absolute basics and not gaining special abilities and extra feats, the warrior masters those basics, and steadily grows in these areas.
One player was a warrior grappler, and they became very strong. All that bab, mmmm.
This of course, doesn't work if you want the fighter to be the bab king.
1) a horrid BAB
As bad as a wizard is now, or 1-3 points worse than a cleric is now, for lvls 1-12 (the range most people I know play at).
2) no ability to make up the difference with buff spells
Incorrect; SOME ability to make up the difference, just not enough to be as good as a fighter.
3) no ability to protect themselves from combat manuevers (BAB is a big part of that)
Again...you're only losing 1-3 points most of the time. Clerics who are worried about combat maneuvers can't take feats? Or get bonuses to AC (which also add to CMD)?
I want them to be wizards with better armor and HD. Wow, how horrible that would be.4) less spells per day than other full-casters
Uh...what? Last I checked, clerics get MORE spells per day than wizards (who I hope no one is arguing are too weak). And full access to their entire spell list (no spells known or spellbook). Is that not enough?
5) a limited spell list that is focused on heals & buffs (for other people only, apparently)
Yeah, because clerics don't get spells like Inflict X Wounds, Hold Person, Augury, Find Traps, Spiritual Weapon, Animate Dead, Bestow Curse, Dispel Magic, Searing Light, Chaos Hammer, Holy Smite, Greater Magic Weapon, Lesser Planar Ally, Slay Living, Summon Monster, or the TONS of other great control, utility, and direct damage spells they get.
Oh wait...
Please don't whine about how the cleric's spell list is so limited. They have an awesome spell list.
6) healing spells that only work at touch (I wonder why Clerics go into melee so much. Its a good thing they cant be tripped/grappled/sundered that easily with their CMD... oh wait)
#1: most healing is done between combats, not during.
#2: Reach spell, what's that?7) channel energy
6) domains
Yes.
So, you advocate taking a class that is already pushed by many groups into a "Healbot" role and removing any chance they have of doing anything in combat other than healing and buffing without multiclassing.
Only if you completely misunderstand what I wrote, or how good the cleric class really is.
Re: Master Arminas's statement about Fighters being SAD...are you crazy? Fighters need Str, they need Con, they often need Dex, and if they want to have nice things like feat prereqs, decent Will saves, or out-of-combat abilities, they shouldn't dump Int, Wis, or Cha either.
Fighters are no more SAD than Clerics or Wizards, and I would argue less so.
No, I doubt anyone will want to play a cleric like this. People will still play one because they will be pressured by the group members that want their own personal healbot, but I don't think it would be enjoyable.
Let me be clear...are you claiming that if Clerics had 1/2 BAB, no one would ever play one? Because I have a hard time believing that.I've played a 1/2 BAB cleric before, and willingly.
The 3.5 Cloistered Cleric was interesting. You gave up combat ability for greatly improved skills and knowledges. It really depends on the type of character you wanted to play. Also, Divine Power gave you a Full BAB, regardless of your starting point, and Knowledge Devotion could allow you to be very effective against creatures you could identify.
But 3.5 Cloister Cleric to a 1/2 BAB Pathfinder Cleric is sort-of and apples-to-oranges comparison. 3.5 had a much larger collection of spells you could pick from, including the old version of Divine Power. Combat manuvers were very different. And you gained utility to make up for your lost combat prowess.
I stand by my opinion that if you reduce a Pathfinder cleric to a healbot, far fewer people will want to be one.
BTW:
The Pathfinder Cloister Cleric one keeps 3/4 BAB and but losses domains and is overall much worse than his 3.5 cousin, IMHO.