ok ill bite, and ill prolly get virtually attacked for saying this, but i cant stand the cleric. and its not because of the religion. i am a religious person and have always been quite interested in other religion and atheism, so ive played a number of different religious characters and atheistic characters in the past.
my first problem with the cleric is that they lack a lot of interesting class abilities that i can get from other classes. the domains to me seem lacking, granting abilities that are similar to powers from many of the sorcerer bloodlines. i.e. abilities that are ok at lower levels but utterly worthless at high levels. lets use a sorcerer bloodline power for example. why would i hit some mob for 1d6-1d8 + 20 when i could just disentigrate them? or why in the hell would i ever need claws and go into melee being a straight sorcerer? thats just dumb.
my biggest problem is action economy. not because of the healing. i can get around that. i mean, a cleric of gorum is not going to heal his party members in or out of combat save in extreme situations.
"heal me cleric."
"no. pick up your sword. im gonna teach you to fight properly."
"what?"
"one day, i wont be around to heal you. and at that point as you are now you will die cause i wont be there. if i teach you to fight properly, you may survive. now lets train. im gonna attack you and you need to do something you didnt do in the last fight."
"whats that?"
"move."
its the action economy of buffs. right now in my current campaign, we have an oracle. and we are about to fight a dragon and have ten rounds to prepare. here is where divine casters shine as they buff themselves to ridiculousness. but outside these situations, its too much. by the time im buffed, the fight is either over or the big bad guys are already down and theres just mobs. and situations like planning are rare.
now i know what youll say, that you can buff people going into said dungeon, fight, etc. wrong. lets say you buff yourself with a 1 min per level or 10 min per level spell and you go into the dungeon. then the rogue wants to find a trap. or you encounter a puzzle, or whatever. when youre not in combat rounds the gm has the final say on how much time passes in between. then youre out of those spells since the slot is gone and the duration is over. this is my same problem with ac spells for the sorcerer/wizard. it just sucks.
yes paizo made it a little better with divine might, righteous might, etc where you get a really good buff in one spell, and thats one round, not three, you have to waste. but in my opinion its still not enough. this isnt a viewpoint from just looking at the class. this is from me playing a few clerics and i hate that i have to take time to buff. give clerics the ability so many times per day to swift quicken a buff spell or something and then maybe ill consider it. until then, ill play something else instead.
just my 2 cp.
For me psionics and preparation of powers in daily slots are thematically completely incompatibile.Yes, I know, I described something that on a passing glance looks like D&D 4th edition.Actually to me it looks more like Psionics, with Cantrips added in. Higher-level caster still has a more limited variety of spells, but has more raw power to pour into them and increase their capability beyond that of a lower-level caster.
By contrast, I like me a kitchen-sink game. Traditional casters, power point casters, invocation casters (3.5's warlock and dragonfire adept), Incarnum, Pact Magic, Truenaming, Shadowcasting, Martial Maneuver users, etc. etc. etc. I use it all. They all likely originated in different locations, but by the point in the timeline most of my games are set they've migrated so with some effort or luck you can find any of them in a major city in my setting. =)
I don't care for Vancian magic personally, but the more I think about it the more I'm probably going to leave it in for the world's sake and for the sake of players who might enjoy it still being able to partake.
Clerics (along with inquisitors), to me, are the only truly offensive aspect of the game. I don't mind religions in games--the associated drama can be fantastic--but when a game attaches mechanics to an "existing" deity it becomes a different issue. And it's not just the patron requirement: deities in most settings are untouchable by even the highest HD mortal around. "Faith" is not magical and I'm sick of seeing mundanes drawing power from it.Atheism in a game where the gods can and sometimes do smite you is probably not a wise idea
;)
those arent gods, they are just powerful bullies. no more so god like than a dragon. hes just powerful and can beat me up. :P
im playing an atheist gunslinger right now in our current game and this is his viewpoint.
or as captain america put it in the avengers, "theres only one God maam, and im pretty sure he doesnt dress like that."
Clerics (along with inquisitors), to me, are the only truly offensive aspect of the game. I don't mind religions in games--the associated drama can be fantastic--but when a game attaches mechanics to an "existing" deity it becomes a different issue. And it's not just the patron requirement: deities in most settings are untouchable by even the highest HD mortal around. "Faith" is not magical and I'm sick of seeing mundanes drawing power from it.Atheism in a game where the gods can and sometimes do smite you is probably not a wise idea
;)
Wasnt it in greyhawk where atheists were severly punished in the afterlife? I remember a quote along the lines of 'In the real world, faith is a choice. Whether or not you choose to believe or what you choose to believe is a real question. In a world with literal walking miracles (clerics) performing the works of their deities every day, atheists are just being obnoxious'
Clerics have been my favourite class for 30 years. But I can see why some people aren't interested in them:
(1) Out of the "original" four classes (fighter, rogue, wizard, cleric), the cleric is by far the least represented in fantasy fiction.
(2) Some people aren't interested in playing spellcasters, and even if a person is interested in playing a spellcaster, wizards spells are more flashy on average than cleric spells.
(3) Some people don't like the fluff of being a flunky for a higher power.
1. When they are represented they are often the bad guy. Also, when Salvatore made one a 'hero', he made him -- words fail me. And when you read those cleric books you wonder if Salvatore was just filling word count. Drizzt was at least a little entertaining.
2. No argument
3. For lazy unimaginative RPers like me that fluff is a bonus!
|
However, if you want to be an awesome caster who can wade into battle, play a cleric.No reason an Oracle can't do this either. They get the same armor and weapon proficiencies (minus the favored weapon thing, but a lenient GM will allow even that) and the same spells, minus only the Domain tricks and replaced with the various Mystery abilities. Still just as possible =)
Yeah, but I hate having a limited spell list. Especially when you don't have to cart around a spellbook to have access to all your spells.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
those arent gods, they are just powerful bullies. no more so god like than a dragon. hes just powerful and can beat me up. :P
In the words of the Binder from my first full campaign, "hopped-up Outsiders with an over-inflated ego"? ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1. When they are represented they are often the bad guy. Also, when Salvatore made one a 'hero', he made him -- words fail me. And when you read those cleric books you wonder if Salvatore was just filling word count. Drizzt was at least a little entertaining.
... Really? I enjoyed Cleric Quintet MUCH more than the Drizzt stuff. Granted that was mostly for Danica and the Bouldershoulder brothers, but Cadderly had his moments.
|
|
Clerics (along with inquisitors), to me, are the only truly offensive aspect of the game. I don't mind religions in games--the associated drama can be fantastic--but when a game attaches mechanics to an "existing" deity it becomes a different issue. And it's not just the patron requirement: deities in most settings are untouchable by even the highest HD mortal around. "Faith" is not magical and I'm sick of seeing mundanes drawing power from it.Atheism in a game where the gods can and sometimes do smite you is probably not a wise idea
;)
those arent gods, they are just powerful bullies. no more so god like than a dragon. hes just powerful and can beat me up. :P
im playing an atheist gunslinger right now in our current game and this is his viewpoint.
or as captain america put it in the avengers, "theres only one God maam, and im pretty sure he doesnt dress like that."
Fair enough. Just don't complain when Zon-Kuthon decides you're pissing him off and just arbitrarily slays you outright, because he can.
:D
I don't like the idea of organized religion, fantasy or not
Clerics don't have to be the paragons of a religion, they are also given powers by their beliefs which aren't tied to a deity. You don't have to worship a god, just a certain mindset. You were given powers by the forces of (lets say) the Plane of Fire because of your passion for fighting and fire. Or the Plane of Shadow empowered you to control darkness and become it's messenger on the material plane. You don't need a god, just beliefs.
those arent gods, they are just powerful bullies. no more so god like than a dragon. hes just powerful and can beat me up. :PIn the words of the Binder from my first full campaign, "hopped-up Outsiders with an over-inflated ego"? ;)
exactly
Clerics (along with inquisitors), to me, are the only truly offensive aspect of the game. I don't mind religions in games--the associated drama can be fantastic--but when a game attaches mechanics to an "existing" deity it becomes a different issue. And it's not just the patron requirement: deities in most settings are untouchable by even the highest HD mortal around. "Faith" is not magical and I'm sick of seeing mundanes drawing power from it.Atheism in a game where the gods can and sometimes do smite you is probably not a wise idea
;)
those arent gods, they are just powerful bullies. no more so god like than a dragon. hes just powerful and can beat me up. :P
im playing an atheist gunslinger right now in our current game and this is his viewpoint.
or as captain america put it in the avengers, "theres only one God maam, and im pretty sure he doesnt dress like that."
Fair enough. Just don't complain when Zon-Kuthon decides you're pissing him off and just arbitrarily slays you outright, because he can.
:D
really? hes got nothing better to do? ;)
1. When they are represented they are often the bad guy. Also, when Salvatore made one a 'hero', he made him -- words fail me. And when you read those cleric books you wonder if Salvatore was just filling word count. Drizzt was at least a little entertaining.... Really? I enjoyed Cleric Quintet MUCH more than the Drizzt stuff. Granted that was mostly for Danica and the Bouldershoulder brothers, but Cadderly had his moments.
Taste's vary. It may have been the age when I read the books too. I read Drizzt a long time ago. I read the cleric books only 10 or so years ago. I haven't picked up anything by Salvatore since.
|
|
really? hes got nothing better to do? ;)Clerics (along with inquisitors), to me, are the only truly offensive aspect of the game. I don't mind religions in games--the associated drama can be fantastic--but when a game attaches mechanics to an "existing" deity it becomes a different issue. And it's not just the patron requirement: deities in most settings are untouchable by even the highest HD mortal around. "Faith" is not magical and I'm sick of seeing mundanes drawing power from it.Atheism in a game where the gods can and sometimes do smite you is probably not a wise idea
;)
those arent gods, they are just powerful bullies. no more so god like than a dragon. hes just powerful and can beat me up. :P
im playing an atheist gunslinger right now in our current game and this is his viewpoint.
or as captain america put it in the avengers, "theres only one God maam, and im pretty sure he doesnt dress like that."
Fair enough. Just don't complain when Zon-Kuthon decides you're pissing him off and just arbitrarily slays you outright, because he can.
:D
Sometimes a god has to make a point.
he must have some priority issues then :P
Clerics (along with inquisitors), to me, are the only truly offensive aspect of the game. I don't mind religions in games--the associated drama can be fantastic--but when a game attaches mechanics to an "existing" deity it becomes a different issue. And it's not just the patron requirement: deities in most settings are untouchable by even the highest HD mortal around. "Faith" is not magical and I'm sick of seeing mundanes drawing power from it.So, in a nutshell... magic, dragons and the like are perfectly fine with you, but the thought that there are beings whose power is, by definition, vastly superior to the characters using lesser beings (aka mortals) as their agents does not fit with it?
I must admit, I fail to follow your train of thought.
Dragons don't come with a built-in plot armor bonus.
Deities existing in campaigns caters exclusively to theists (not just the religious). In a game where magic is possible, the only things that should be "superior" to the PCs are creatures with higher HD.
Even if some god doesn't chose to smite you, very few adventurers don't need the occasional healing.
I don't think my cleric would continue to heal someone who either professed to not believe in gods or insisted that my god was just a inflated ego bully.
Clerics (along with inquisitors), to me, are the only truly offensive aspect of the game. I don't mind religions in games--the associated drama can be fantastic--but when a game attaches mechanics to an "existing" deity it becomes a different issue. And it's not just the patron requirement: deities in most settings are untouchable by even the highest HD mortal around. "Faith" is not magical and I'm sick of seeing mundanes drawing power from it.Atheism in a game where the gods can and sometimes do smite you is probably not a wise idea
;)
All the more reason for some good ol' deicide.
I don't think my cleric would continue to heal someone who either professed to not believe in gods or insisted that my god was just a inflated ego bully.
Lucky for Lucas, he didn't have a cleric in the party - an equally misotheistic Knight (who was originally neutral on the subject, but got mad when the gods didn't step in to stop an asteroid from hitting the planet), and a Scout and Dragonfire Adept who simply didn't care. The only religious person in that particular party was the Monk, who worshiped Bahamut, and they were okay with him since Tiamat was their main opponent.
Party healing was done by a magic sword called Woundhealer ;)
For my own, I like having deities in settings. But I also don't mind having misotheistic PCs.
|
Cleric is hands-down the Favored Class of the Set-animal.
Although I do agree with the sentiment upthread that the 2nd edition spheres and specialty priests were amazing for adding some versatility to the 'priest' class, with the (admittedly scanty) guidelines in the DMG for 'customizing' your own priest, with different armor and weapon proficiencies, different 'skills' (NWP), different 'BAB,' etc., etc. The choice of domains, while intriguing, and nicely customizable (in that a cleric of Nethys with Magic and Knowledge is significantly different, thematically, than a cleric of Nethys with Destruction and Protection), still feels like thin gruel to the meatier distinctions between priests of different gods available through the use of specialty priests.
The ties to the diety are one of my favorite parts of the class, as it adds a ton of flavor, and you can play it straight, or take it in a funky direction. (There's no rule, for instance, strictly forbidding a cleric of Calistria from being a CG virgin, if you want to play against stereotype.) That said, I find pantheism and ancestor worship and animism / totemism to also be fascinating, and enjoy those types of religious characters in game-settings that don't forbid them.
I've always seen Fighters and Rogues as Fighters and Rogues. But you play a Cleric, and in most game settings, there's anywhere from a half-dozen (in, say, Al-Qadim) to *over a hundred!* (the Forgotten Realms) very distinctive options, each with their own churches, their own tenets, their own 'holy animal' and 'favorite color' and 'holy days' and, in Greyhawk/the Realms/Golarion even *faith-specific spells!* It's an embarassment of riches. One cleric (of, say, Urgathoa) and literally be *nothing* like another cleric (of Tymora, or Trithereon, or Chardun, or Lunitari).
That being said, I think the healbot thing is a proud nail that needs to be pounded out of sight. With bards, alchemists and witches now all providing options for arcane healing, whatever backwards-compatability bugbear was responsible for sorcerers & wizards not having access to cure wounds spells is pretty much on the ground bleeding out anyway. Might as well finish him off and just take the load off the cleric completely by opening up healing options to *everyone.* Buff up that Heal skill. Let monks share their wholeness of body and use it more often by blowing ki points. Give barbarians a fast healing rage power. Allow a rogue to use a rogue talent to specialize in 'street medicine,' enhancing his use of the heal skill to do things beyond a normal healers ability, just as trapfinding allows him to do things with perception/disable device that joe schmoe can't do.
If there's one thing that justifies the rabid loathing of the cleric class, it's that they are shoved down the throat of the gamer, who is told that he can't possibly live without one, and that someone has to 'take one for the team' and play a cleric. (They actually called it that, in the RPGA! If a table didn't have a cleric player, someone could 'take one for the team' and play a pregen cleric, and would get credit as if he'd played his actual character. That's how friggin' 'required' it was considered to have a dedicated cleric! Lame!)
Even if some god doesn't chose to smite you, very few adventurers don't need the occasional healing.
I don't think my cleric would continue to heal someone who either professed to not believe in gods or insisted that my god was just a inflated ego bully.
true, yet my character in our current game cant use magic items or benefit from magical healing or beneficial spells, although harmful spells still affect him, and i can still use potions created through herbalism and alchemy. and our oracle hates the gods anyways, and actually worships Menkare.
and we actually got by our first 10 levels with no healer. and even in groups where we do have them, i for one have never really asked for healing. i usually just get it, but i dont expect it. too many games where we didnt have them so my characters are self sufficient.
Even if some god doesn't chose to smite you, very few adventurers don't need the occasional healing.
I don't think my cleric would continue to heal someone who either professed to not believe in gods or insisted that my god was just a inflated ego bully.
That's why I love white-mage style witches, none of that divine hang up for healing.
he must have some priority issues then :PDepends on the PC I think. If some level one mook is running his mouth, eh probably nothing going to happen. But if some level 15 PC, hero of the kingdom, starts talking s$$!, well, a god's gotta have a code. If you know what I mean.
depending on the setting. the church is more likely to kill you before the deity itself, unless youre in greyhawk.
By contrast, I like me a kitchen-sink game. Traditional casters, power point casters, invocation casters (3.5's warlock and dragonfire adept), Incarnum, Pact Magic, Truenaming, Shadowcasting, Martial Maneuver users, etc. etc. etc. I use it all. They all likely originated in different locations, but by the point in the timeline most of my games are set they've migrated so with some effort or luck you can find any of them in a major city in my setting. =)For me psionics and preparation of powers in daily slots are thematically completely incompatibile.Yes, I know, I described something that on a passing glance looks like D&D 4th edition.Actually to me it looks more like Psionics, with Cantrips added in. Higher-level caster still has a more limited variety of spells, but has more raw power to pour into them and increase their capability beyond that of a lower-level caster.
I think I shouldn't used the term "incompatibile" - I didn't meant that they can't exist next to each other, but that there is no way I will accept psionic mechanis that would use daily slots and preparation as it completely loses the flavor psychic powers. I have no problem with psionics existing in the same world as magic and I have no problem with different types of power using different mechanics. In fact I am liking the direction the D&D Next took with Sorcerer (who in current playtest is a spell points-based caster) and Warlock (who has encounter powers) to make them different from Wizard.
Main reasons for me:
- I do prefer the spontaneous caster to the prepared. I find it easier to make harder decisions each level rather than easier ones each day, even with baseline spell preps for various situations.
- I tend to avoid support-oriented roles, and between healing and the large number of powerful buff spells, the cleric feels like a support class to me.
- While the cleric can make a great melee combatant, they rely more than I like on self-buffs, and I don't like to play a character who needs to cast self-buffs in combat before he can start actually fighting.
A little while ago I was actually looking at an oracle, rather than a cleric (the spontaneous over preferred issue), as a potential replacement for my magus... not because I was unhappy about the magus, but I wasn't sure the party could get by without more than a wand of cure light wounds. I had an interesting concept lined up, but I just couldn't find enough suitable offensive spells to make the character feel like he'd be effective at anything but support.
Basically, they just don't fit my preferred playstyle.
Side note on Salvatore's Cleric Quintet I happen to remember the foreword noting that originally it was going to be the monk quintet, but 2e didn't have monks as a baseline class.
That's why I love white-mage style witches, none of that divine hang up for healing.
To be honest, my clerics often end up as generic spellcasters who say stuff like "By the hoary hosts of Hoggoth!" rather than "Expelliarmus!"
I think I shouldn't used the term "incompatibile" - I didn't meant that they can't exist next to each other, but that there is no way I will accept psionic mechanis that would use daily slots and preparation as it completely loses the flavor psychic powers.
Oh no, that's not what I meant at all. I meant the actual 3.5 ExPH/PF Dreamscarred press stuff, just with the at-will Wiz/Sorc style Cantrips tacked on. That's what your example reminded me of.
Clerics tend to fall into a support role. Whether it be healing or buffing. If you like being a support person then Clerics are for you.
I personally don't mind running a support character once in a while. I don't want it to be the only thing I'm playing at any given time but I'm fortunate to have 3 characters in rotation right now over 2 games so i don't grow bored with it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's definitely the heal monkey perception. Last time I played a cleric, every time one of the other characters got so much as a paper cut, they started crying "heal me! heal me!"
The other thing is that clerics are too generic. Other than domains, there isn't much to separate a cleric of a god of war from one who worships a god of love.
+1
These are just my opinions, but here they are. Notice that I'm not saying or even implying that the cleric is a weak class. Because it isn't.
They are challenging to create and to play.
You need to prepare your spells Edit: Even heal spells if you want to cast them and aply meta magic to them. Since spontaneously casting and meta magic is a full round action (say Say rod of Reach spell and cure spells).
Once you pick your god you are stuck to her/him. Same goes with your domains.
Alignment is also an issue.
Even if it is a full caster you can't really play it as a full caster. Certainly not if you want to avoid being a healbot.
Even if it is a full caster it is really is a hybrid class. This means they are somewhat MAD. If you want to play a jack of all trade cleric you won't be much of a blaster nor a good debuff cleric and if you want to play a caster cleric you will be frustrated until you reach really high levels, but then a lot of your low level spells will be more or less useless.
Versatility is a burden.
Simultaneously it a versatile class and not a versatile class. Playing a cleric - a versatile class (?) - means that other players demand you have prepared the right spells or/and having the right scrolls just in case.
My current cleric is a caster cleric and my previous class was a bard (Arcane Duelist). Even though the bard wasn't a full caster she was far more versatile, easier to play as a versatile character and was more fun.
Yep, Versatile was fun when I played the bard. Versatile is not fun when you are a cleric.
Its far more fun casting Glitterdust than casting invisibility sphere.
It is more fun to buy utility scrolls when you are a bard or wizard since those spells are more sexy than cleric spells. Honestly, The only spells I really missed on the bard list was mage armor, fly, arcane eye and teleport.
Bards (and druids?) are easier and more fun to play as a support character
the healbot curse.
As soon as you have a cleric in the party a lot of players start to get sloppy. Including the one playing the cleric.
Generically boring.
-Clerics get noting at even levels. Once you get your second domain power at level 8, or even at level 6, even levels are really boring.
-2 skills per level so you can't really be a skill monkey at lower levels when you don't have that many spells slots.
-As Greatbear pointed out "there isn't much to separate a cleric of a god of war from one who worships a god of love". That said it does gives the player some good role playing options, but that only matters if the rest of the players focus on role playing.
Boring/problematic spell list.
- The spell list is not very sexy and it is not as versatile as the arcane casters, especially the bard. I would even go as far as saying that the druid spell list is more sexy and more versatile. Also the druid doesn't have to worry about being the healboot.
- The cleric also suffer from a 'less that fantastic spells' at higher levels. Sure they get summon spells, but it's easier for a Wizard, Witch or Druid to use summons since they don't have to worry about alignment and unlike clerics they can actually make use of spell focus conjuration if they want to grab augmented summoning.
- A lot of the spells on the cleric list doesn't Scale very well.
-Not many low level spells are useful at higher levels or/and have short duration.
- Not a very good buff class, even though I agree that Blessing of Fervor has helped. In fact Blessing of Fervor is the far best buff spell or even one of the best cleric spells. So is almost mandatory to prepare it now.
- the "heal monkey perception"
- Versatile but not really that versatile and certainly not as fun as arcane spells.
Personally I find Clerics to be one of the most versatile classes in the game. In fact, with their host of buffs and domain abilities, a Cleric that is properly designed can be a strong melee combatant. They can also multi-class as Wizard and take the Mystic Theurge class if you want to be more of a caster, or if you want heavy armor and some tanking power you can go Holy Vindicator.
Also, with the release of the race guide, Aasimar got many of the abilities only available to Tieflings, so depending on your alignment you have the option of two very well designed races that offer quite a bit of flavor and variety for a divine caster.
Personally I'm fond of the Holy Vindicator class, which I think is an excellent alternative to a Paladin if you want to focus more on lawbringing than spreading good.
You need to prepare your spells (even heal spells since they are a full round casting if you cast them spontaneously).
Where did you get that? Spontaneously cast cures have their casting time extended only if you apply a metamagic feat to them.
|
|
I believe the problem is that ultimately, they are forced to heal in combat, and even though it's not the best tactic, it is necessary, and it is their best tactic at that time. Clerics have lots of buff spells of course, and with time, they are very good at getting the party setup offensively or defensively.
However, I have seen over and over and over again, in home games and in PFS, that a cleric ends up channeling from rounds 2-4 in order to keep the fighter/barbarian alive so that character can deal 40+ damage per round to take care of the threat with other characters doing offensive things or trying to counter a spell. Even a well-played cleric might not have be able to do something better than heal the main damage dealer so we can survive this encounter.
A optimized fighter will out damage a cleric. So the cleric gets discouraged and starts buffing/healing instead. It's not even because the cleric is a healbot or wants to do it, but because it is the MOST EFFICIENT way to end the encounter. A big boss encounter arrives. The wizard casts his powerful spell, but the boss saves. Boss attacks and does heavy damage to the fighter. Fighter has to stay in there to soak up damage and to dish it out. The cleric doesn't have time to cast a buff spell, and if the fighter goes down, the party is screwed unless boss fails a save against the wizard. So what ends up happening? The cleric heals the fighter, and is stuck doing it for the rest of the combat.
Unfortunately, this scenario happens a lot, even with experienced players. I hated that clerics got channeling when I first saw PF because I knew they were going to fall back to that role, even if they weren't planning on it.
I don't know where the line is between 3.5 CoDzilla and PF channeler is. We want fighters to deal damage. We want clerics to fight well and cast spells. But far too often, the cleric being effective and to contribute is to heal the main damage dealer or to channel and to heal everybody. Otherwise, people start dropping, and the fight ends really fast once that happens.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
In my experience (which is all PFS), people who mention not wanting to play a cleric tend to say things like "I don't like playing healers" or "I don't want to be treated like a healbot". So it seems to me that the people I'm encountering either don't understand how many different roles a cleric can fill, or expect that their tablemates won't understand.
The first level spells are a bit boring. I am playing one and understand they are a hybrid class.
|
|
My players tend to pick Oracles and Witches over Clerics due to the restaurant menu problem that prepared casters have.
Also, there's this whole "gotta RP the religion" thing that doesn't gel with my players well - they tend to be rabidly Chaotic Whatever and few deities, if any, float their boat (Cayden being one exception).
What about Desna? Although I can't find much on her, the little bit I know of her sounds nice:
-She's a Goddess of the night (or thereabouts), luck, travelers, and dreams.
-She favors explorers, dreamers, travelers, etc.
-She has the Domain of "Liberation" which sounds downright awesome.
-She's also the same alignment as Cayden.Really, the only thing that would make me like her more is for somebody to mention that she has a whole set of Night based Chaotic Good outsider I can get my characters to hang out with.
...
That reminds me, I'll have to make a thread about possible candidates for that in the morning.
Better question is why be a Cleric of anyone BUT Desna? She's the most broken f#*~ing diety in the game. Just look at Luck, Freedom and Travel Domains.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Better question is why be a Cleric of anyone BUT Desna? She's the most broken f~!&ing diety in the game. Just look at Luck, Freedom and Travel Domains.
I'd contest that. Sun Domain's 8th level power is the perfect answer to at-will deeper darkness, and is unique in that respect. The Heroism subdomain lets you take a 3rd-level touch spell, one of the best buffs in the game, and turn it into a swift-action aura.
You need to prepare your spells (even heal spells since they are a full round casting if you cast them spontaneously).Where did you get that? Spontaneously cast cures have their casting time extended only if you apply a metamagic feat to them.
That's what I meant. Bad editing.
They are challenging to create and to play.
Since when is it a problem to play a challenging class? I find it extremely enjoyable to work out my characters path ahead of time and see how closely I can stick to it during the course of the game. That's part of the appeal of the class.
You need to prepare your spells (even heal spells since they are a full round casting if you cast them spontaneously).
Incorrect. They only cast spontaneously as a full round action if they apply metamagic feats to the spells. Simply casting spontaneously does not require a full round.
Once you pick your god you are stuck to her/him. Same goes with your domains.
Committment issues? Seriously, how many characters do you play that hop from deity to deity? A cleric is a servant of a particular god. Speak to your DM beforehand and see if there are any deities that will be of prominence in the campaign, and create the class accordingly, or simply decide what type of character you want to play and pick a god that fits.
Alignment is also an issue.
Clerics can be of ANY alignment, and do not have Paladin restrictions for working with other alignments. In fact, it creates roleplay opportunities to have an alignment disparity within a party, and it's usually not a problem unless one person is of a diametrically opposed alignment to the others.
Even if it is a full caster you can't really play it as a full caster. Certainly not if you want to avoid being a healbot.
There are a number of available attack spells that a Cleric can use, though admittedly a number of them have an alignment descriptor attached which can limit your selection. Even still, it is perfectly acceptable to play a full caster cleric and NOT be a healbot.
Even if it is a full caster it is really is a hybrid class. This means they are somewhat MAD. If you want to play a jack of all trade cleric you won't be much of a blaster nor a good debuff cleric and if you want to play a caster cleric you will be frustrated until you reach really high levels, but then a lot of your low level spells will be more or less useless.
How is it a hybrid class? As a full caster progression you can either focus on healing or focus on offensive spellcasting/debuffs, and with spontaneous healing you can actually do both relatively well. If you want to play a melee character, a Cleric is actually an excellent option because Divine Power effectively removes the problem of a medium Base Attack Bonus. They also get Greater Magic Weapon and thus never have to spend money upgrading their weapon higher than +1 before stacking other abilities on it, giving them a leg up on other melee classes. They can also be relatively self sufficient as a melee/tank character, taking pressure off of a dedicated healer if your party has one.
Simultaneously it a versatile class and not a versatile class. Playing a cleric - a versatile class (?) - means that other players demand you have prepared the right spells or/and having the right scrolls just in case.
Not true. Again, with spontaneous casting you do not need to prepare heal spells as long as you have Channel Positive Energy, and generally you will want to have some buffs/debuffs prepared regardless of your character design. As an evil cleric, you are more likely to be selfish and unconcerned with healing your "allies" so that doesn't even matter. One of the most interesting characters I ever played was a Lawful Neutral Cleric/Holy Vindicator that channeled negative energy. He used his abilities to channel-smite lawbreakers and bring them to justice, and had he progressed into a bit higher level he would have taken the Versatile Channeler feat in order to channel positive energy to heal his allies.
My current cleric is a caster cleric and my previous class was a bard (Arcane Duelist). Even though the bard wasn't a full caster she was far more versatile, easier to play as a versatile character and was more fun.
That sounds a lot like personal preference. I have found the Bard class to be lacking quite a bit myself, and I played one for a short campaign and have not tried again since. Perhaps you should revisit the Cleric, and I should revisit the Bard, hmm?
Yep, Versatile was fun when I played the bard. Versatile is not fun when you are a cleric.
Your perception of fun anyway. Personally I find it entertaining to play a utility character that can also fight in melee or deal damage with ranged spells.
Its far more fun casting Glitterdust than casting invisibility sphere.
It is more fun to buy utility scrolls when you are a bard or wizard since those spells are more sexy than cleric spells. Honestly, The only spells I really missed on the bard list was mage armor, fly, arcane eye and teleport.
Bards (and druids?) are easier and more fun to play as a support character
Again, who wants easy? Simply taking the easy option is not fun.
the healbot curse.
As soon as you have a cleric in the party a lot of players start to get sloppy. Including the one playing the cleric.
With so many characters out there that posess the ability to heal or use defensive abilities, I actually find this much less of a problem in Pathfinder. Almost every class has some ability to keep themselves alive and relieve the primary healer from having to be everywhere at once. Paladins can LoH on themselves as a swift action. Alchemists have healing extracts. Sorcerers and Wizards have a host of spells like Fly, Invisibility, Greater Invisibility, False Life, Displacement, Fog Cloud, Etc...which serve to protect them from damage in a fight, and they get some version of these starting at reasonably low levels. And that barely scratches the surface. I think Pathfinder has done a lot of good with the game in this particular area, making it so that a party can survive with two half-healer classes, or a primary healer and a few classes that are somewhat self sufficient.
Generically boring.
-Clerics get noting at even levels. Once you get your second domain power at level 8, or even at level 6, even levels are really boring.
-2 skills per level so you can't really be a skill monkey at lower levels when you don't have that many spells slots.
-As Greatbear pointed out "there isn't much to separate a cleric of a god of war from one who worships a god of love". That said it does gives the player some good role playing options, but that only matters if the rest of the players focus on role playing.
This is the only one I actually agree with. Most other classes get something at every level, but Clerics only get Channel every odd level and nothing else. Their Domains are supposed to make up for it, but they don't do a whole lot once you are past level 8. That's one of the reasons I like the Holy Vindicator class, because after level 7 it helps remove some of the boring aspects of the Cleric.
Boring/problematic spell list.
- The spell list is not very sexy and it is not as versatile as the arcane casters, especially the bard. I would even go as far as saying that the druid spell list is more sexy and more versatile. Also the druid doesn't have to worry about being the healboot.
Druids can be primary healers in a party, and if there is no other healing class I would imagine they have the same problem Clerics do in that regard.
- The cleric also suffer from a 'less that fantastic spells' at higher levels. Sure they get summon spells, but it's easier for a Wizard, Witch or Druid to use summons since they don't have to worry about alignment and unlike clerics they can actually make use of spell focus conjuration if they want to grab augmented summoning.
I wouldn't call their spells "Less than fantastic." They don't have the big nukes that arcane casters get, but they do have some powerful magic focused in other areas, and they do get some spells like Stormbolts, Storm of Vengeance and Implosion that give them some offensive abilities.
- A lot of the spells on the cleric list doesn't Scale very well.
-Not many low level spells are useful at higher levels or/and have short duration.
To a degree, sorcerers and wizards have this problem. Outside of Scorching Ray and Magic Missile, almost nothing is useful once you get spells like Hellfire Ray, Cold-Ice Strike and Delayed Blast Fireball.
- Not a very good buff class, even though I agree that Blessing of Fervor has helped. In fact Blessing of Fervor is the far best buff spell or even one of the best cleric spells. So is almost mandatory to prepare it now.
I would agree that they are not the best PARTY buffers. Blessing of Fervor is an amazing party buff, but most of the other useful buffs they have are self only like Divine Power and Righteous Might, and serve to promote the Clerics martial abilities in combat. If you intend to play primarily party support, there are better options.
I think the perception of the class is a holdover from D&D where they were designed to be a healbot and not much else. It wasn't until the release of the Spell Compendium and spells like Greater Visage of the Deity that the Cleric really became a viable combat character in 3.5, and by then Pathfinder was being developed and did a lot more with the class. To be honest, Cleric is my go-to class these days.
@ Aldarionn
A) I know "They only cast spontaneously as a full round action if they apply metamagic feats to the spells". I have edited my post.
B) I have given my opinion on why some people reluctant to play clerics. I'm not saying there is a right or wrong answer. If you don't agree. Fine.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Better question is why be a Cleric of anyone BUT Desna? She's the most broken f~&#ing diety in the game. Just look at Luck, Freedom and Travel Domains.My players tend to pick Oracles and Witches over Clerics due to the restaurant menu problem that prepared casters have.
Also, there's this whole "gotta RP the religion" thing that doesn't gel with my players well - they tend to be rabidly Chaotic Whatever and few deities, if any, float their boat (Cayden being one exception).
What about Desna? Although I can't find much on her, the little bit I know of her sounds nice:
-She's a Goddess of the night (or thereabouts), luck, travelers, and dreams.
-She favors explorers, dreamers, travelers, etc.
-She has the Domain of "Liberation" which sounds downright awesome.
-She's also the same alignment as Cayden.Really, the only thing that would make me like her more is for somebody to mention that she has a whole set of Night based Chaotic Good outsider I can get my characters to hang out with.
...
That reminds me, I'll have to make a thread about possible candidates for that in the morning.
Because there is plenty of people who don't care about having broken diety.
|
|
Because there is plenty of people who don't care about having broken diety.Better question is why be a Cleric of anyone BUT Desna? She's the most broken f~&#ing diety in the game. Just look at Luck, Freedom and Travel Domains.My players tend to pick Oracles and Witches over Clerics due to the restaurant menu problem that prepared casters have.
Also, there's this whole "gotta RP the religion" thing that doesn't gel with my players well - they tend to be rabidly Chaotic Whatever and few deities, if any, float their boat (Cayden being one exception).
What about Desna? Although I can't find much on her, the little bit I know of her sounds nice:
-She's a Goddess of the night (or thereabouts), luck, travelers, and dreams.
-She favors explorers, dreamers, travelers, etc.
-She has the Domain of "Liberation" which sounds downright awesome.
-She's also the same alignment as Cayden.Really, the only thing that would make me like her more is for somebody to mention that she has a whole set of Night based Chaotic Good outsider I can get my characters to hang out with.
...
That reminds me, I'll have to make a thread about possible candidates for that in the morning.
Have fun dying. ;)
I once played a half-orc cleric of Tempus with the idea of being a war priest. I figured I would heal the party some but that wouldn't be the main focus of my character. The DM looked at me and saw hit points recharging. "The villagers come to you for healing."
AM SMASHING VILLAGERS FOR FUN.
"Oh, you're healing people in town."
AM HEALING STUPID WITH BLOWS TO HEAD.
Last time I played a cleric, every time one of the other characters got so much as a paper cut, they started crying "heal me! heal me!"
AM POURING SALT ON PAPERCUT, AM LAUGHING.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The class isn't offensive enough for me to care for it and its amount of skills sucks.