| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
What if, and this is a big "what if", we reduced the clerics spell list but vastly changed how domains worked. So that domains determine the majority of the spells available to you (as a simple example, if you have the Fire Domain you got access to Fireball (and pretty much any fire spell) and could cast them out of any of your slots, no more restricted to domain slots). Then because the spell list is weaker, we could potentially give more class features similar to Oracles revelations.
It would be a lot of work to determine every spell that should be granted by a domain and what spells to remove from the general cleric list, but it could make clerics a lot more interesting even if less powerful.
I've always viewed the cleric as slightly more casty and slightly less martial than a Inquisitor or Paladin (or now Warpriest) so they should still have some powerful high level magic, but that magic should reflect their connection to their deity more in my opinion.
What if, and this is a big "what if", we reduced the clerics spell list but vastly changed how domains worked. So that domains determine the majority of the spells available to you (as a simple example, if you have the Fire Domain you got access to Fireball (and pretty much any fire spell) and could cast them out of any of your slots, no more restricted to domain slots). Then because the spell list is weaker, we could potentially give more class features similar to Oracles revelations.
It would be a lot of work to determine every spell that should be granted by a domain and what spells to remove from the general cleric list, but it could make clerics a lot more interesting even if less powerful.
I've always viewed the cleric as slightly more casty and slightly less martial than a Inquisitor or Paladin (or now Warpriest) so they should still have some powerful high level magic, but that magic should reflect their connection to their deity more in my opinion.
The issue is that with an 'Unchaining' is that changes don't tend to be seismic. A massive restructuring of the cleric spell access and its domains is never going to happen.... thats well and truly into D6 divine (new class) territory. Even then a 'prayer book' approach is going to be probably be the best idea in terms of changing spell access.
If however youre sticking to the cleric as a D8 then that changes things.
One of the reasons why an Unchaining for the cleric is required IMO is down to poor archetype design.... in many cases poorly balanced trade offs.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean the real problem is that the cleric doesn't really have any class features aside from spell casting, channel, domains and the basics like BAB, saves, and weapon/armor proficiency. There isn't really much to trade out to even make things interesting.
Domains aren't great for the most part. They're restricted by deity choice, which is logical from an RP point, but most domains are terrible. The grant you spells you already know, and you're restricted to only casting the ones that aren't normally on your spell list out of your single domain slot. Fire cleric of Sarenrae? I don't think so. You can cast fireball once per day.
I was not imagining taking the cleric's d8 hit dice or weapon/armor proficiency.
I want to:
- Increase skill points per level (at least 4, literally no class should have 2+int per level unless its an int based class)
- Leave weapon and armor proficiency as is
- Leave saves as is
- Massive overhaul of cleric spell list (severely reduce what is on the general list)
- Overhaul domains to grant a large number of thematic spells (Fire domain grants you access to basically any fire spell in the game).
- No more domain spell slots, you can cast domain spells out of any spell slot. No more once per day fireball.
- Add better domain powers, most are very underwhelming.
It would be a huge undertaking to do this, and is not a simplification of the class but to me is much more fitting with the idea of the partially holy warrior of their deity. The cleric has never in my mind been a "cloth caster" who completely eschewed martial ability like 1/2 BAB arcane casters, you just need to reduce the power of the spell list to compensate for this.
"Changing" spell lists by requiring a pray-book (spell-book) isn't going to do anything. The problem is literally having access to the spells they do at all. Early level cleric spells aren't amazing, but they sure do get awesome as you reach a certain point. The fact that those spells are available is the problem. What happens if you require a spell-book to be able to prepare them? Nothing, everyone learns those spells (just like a wizard does). When has a wizard having to buy spells and put them in a book really ever been a restriction? Never. Sure, you might destroy the spell-book to neutralize your wizards power but now you're being a jerk instead of addressing the root problem, the spells themselves. Sure it's thematically different, and it means they don't have access to "every" spell but I can guarantee that all the "good ones" that will be picked up because that's what people do. Beyond that, a spell-book is just a gold sink to eat up some wealth by level. A with a blessed book, you can get access to other spell books very cheaply to add spells to your spell book.
I mean the real problem is that the cleric doesn't really have any class features aside from spell casting, channel, domains and the basics like BAB, saves, and weapon/armor proficiency. There isn't really much to trade out to even make things interesting.
Yes and no...
Yes the cleric doesnt have loads to trade out but the simple fact is that what is available very rarely gets used or gets used but with a complete lack of balance.
Channeling for example rarely gets traded out, or if it does in a half hearted fashion (eg lose 1 or 2D6). Spontaneous heals/harms very rarely get touched either.... why not? Med armour and shield use should be something that gets traded up/down in every single archetype but rarely does.
If you dont have a lot to begin with, then you have to make the most of what you have
Paizo devs should apply this a lot more often when trades are being made!!
A simple question should be asked... "Is this archetype supposed to be more or less martial than the base cleric, and to what degree?"... This then clarifies very simply what needs to be done.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
An idea I had a long time ago that might go along way to fix a lot of the above is to simply overhaul the Domains a little.
The three parts I had in mind where to:
1.) Attach a single skill to each Domain which is then treated as if at max ranks for all purposes. Many of the Domains themselves are pretty easy matches, and for the most part, this could easily be done to also include SubDomains the same way, with only a few SubDomains also altering the skill associated. An additional side effect is that this would also allow for each Domain to have a built in "constant" ability instead of those annoying #/Day or Rounds per day abilities they seem to like. This would help to bypass the 2+Int Skill Points as well, but in a somewhat restricted way, and if Two Domains grant the same skill, the player could automatically choose something like Know Religion instead for one of those Domains.
2.) Domain spells are automatically added to the Cleric Spell list. And honestly, I'm not sure why this was not done originally, except that maybe there was so much conflicting ideas when it came time for the PF CRB to come out after Alpha & Beta? Possible remove the +1 spell per spell level Domain Spell.
3.) Similar to the automatic Skill Point, maybe add in a small pool of Bonus Feats that the Cleric (and only Cleric) can pick at certain levels. For example, lets say that at 5th, 10, 15th, and 20th they get a Bonus Feat, similar to the Wizard, but they have to choose from a pool based on their Domains. Each Domain might have 2 Feat options available, even if one of them is Skill Focus.
- Air Domain: Acrobatics
Feat: Agile Maneuvers or Wind Stance
Animal Domain: Handle Animal
Feat: Mounted Combat or Toughness
Artifice Domain: Craft (any one)
Feat: Item Creation Feat
Chaos Domain: Acrobatics
Feat: Alignment Channel or Strike Back
Charm Domain: Bluff
Feat: Blind-Fight or Catch Off-Guard
Community Domain: Diplomacy
Feat: Extra Channel or Stand Still*
Darkness Domain: Stealth
Feat: Blind-Fight or Dodge
Death Domain: Know Religion
Feat: Command Undead or Deceitful
Destruction Domain: Intimidate
Feat: Channel Smite or Improved Unarmed Strike
Earth Domain: Climb
Feat: Diehard or Great Fortitude
Evil Domain: Bluff
Feat: Alignment Channel Good/Evil or Strike Back
Fire Domain: Acrobatics
Feat: Disruptive* or Eschew Materials
Glory Domain: Intimidate
Feat: Improved Shield Bash or Iron Will
Good Domain: Diplomacy
Feat: Alignment Channel or Improved Unarmed Strike
Healing Domain: Heal
Feat: Combat Casting or Improved Unarmed Strike
Knowledge Domain: Know Arcana
Feat: Combat Expertise or Improved Counterspell
Law Domain: Know History
Feat: Alignment Channel Chaos/Law or Quick Draw
Liberation Domain: Escape Artist
Feat: Defensive Combat Training or Fleet
Luck Domain: Appraise
Feat: Silent Spell or Still Spell
Magic Domain: Spellcraft
Feat: Arcane Strike (with Divine Spells rather than Arcane) or Weapon Focus Tough Spell/Ray
Nobility Domain: Know Nobility
Feat: Mounted Combat or Iron Will
Plant Domain: Know Nature
Feat: Improved Grapple ** or Toughness
Protection Domain: Sense Motive
Feat: Armor Proficiency or Eschew Materials
Repose Domain: Heal?
Feat: Channel Smite or Endurance
Rune Domain: Linguistics
Feat: Alertness or Spell Focus (Abjuration)
Strength Domain: Climb
Feat: Cleave** or Endurance
Sun Domain: Know Planes or Survival ?
Feat: Turn Undead or Wind Stance**
Travel Domain: Survival
Feat: Endurance or Skill Focus: Know Geography/Local
Trickery Domain: Escape Artist
Feat: Blind-Fight or Step Up
War Domain: Know Engineering
Feat: Intimidating Prowess or Weapon Specialization***
Water Domain: Swim
Feat: Elemental Channel (Water/Earth/Fire) or Point-Blank Shot
Weather Domain: Survival
Feat: Alignment Channel (Air/Earth/Fire) or Improved Trip**
* = May ignore Class Level prereqs, instead treating their Cleric level as the appropriate Class. Must meet all other prereqs.
** = May ignore prereqs
*** = With Deity's Favored Weapon only
I say give each domain one or two more feats to pick from, after all bloodlines have more feats to pick from than you'll get throughout your adventure. And some domains might need spell revamping if we're getting rid of the domain bonus spell slot since many domains have spells already in the cleric spell list.
An idea I had a long time ago that might go along way to fix a lot of the above is to simply overhaul the Domains a little.
Yes I quite like these ideas... the thing is with any Unchaining it has to be realistic to implement.
I think as well as having a pool of bonus domain specific feats there should always be 2-3 options that are common to all domains:
Item creation feat, Spell Focus and Iron Will for example.
I also do think that the base cleric should be light armour and shield only or possibly even only light armour.... Warpriest and Inquisitor should really be given the divine warrior type role....
And some domains might need spell revamping if we're getting rid of the domain bonus spell slot since many domains have spells already in the cleric spell list.I don't think revamping to get rid of cleric spells is viable at all. Name nine spells suitable for the healing domain that aren't on the cleric list.
You have a point there. Best to not remove the domain slot then.
If you could spontaneously cast your domain spells, that would probably be worth the loss of the bonus spell slot, especially if you have the Healing domain.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm gonna be honest, if I had to take the healing domain to be able to burn spells to cast CLW I would have never played a cleric without the healing domain.
I kind of agree with what I've heard the devs talk about; rather than just one unchained cleric, alternate classes or unchained variations based on deity or possibly some sets of deities would probably feel more appropriate in the world. There's little reason why clerics of Erastil and Iomedae should be so similar, even with the same alignment.
An idea I had a long time ago that might go along way to fix a lot of the above is to simply overhaul the Domains a little.
i have been working on a similar idea recently. though my overhaul is a bit more dramatic as i'm also trying to prune the spell list and make a second more castery divine caster. but i liked the idea of the domains having an associated skill and feats that a cleric could take as bonus feats. i also think there should be more and better domain powers and that they should work more like oracle revelations. you get to pick so many as you level from either of your domains. also, i definitely agree that they should not be limited to one casting of a domain spell per day via domain slot, but then i always feel bad about the redundant spells in a lot of domains (though in my setting clerics are spontaneous casters and get domain spells automatically added to spells known so that's not really an issue).
the bottom line, though, is more pools of options for meaningful choices will make clerics more interesting and different from one another (hopefully..).
What if, and this is a big "what if", we reduced the clerics spell list but vastly changed how domains worked. So that domains determine the majority of the spells available to you (as a simple example, if you have the Fire Domain you got access to Fireball (and pretty much any fire spell) and could cast them out of any of your slots, no more restricted to domain slots). Then because the spell list is weaker, we could potentially give more class features similar to Oracles revelations.
But if you're getting lots of spells from Domains that can be bast with any slot, then your spell list ISN'T worse, in fact it will be better because players can optimize spell list alongside feat/archetype build etc. I'm not AGAINST that approach to spell list/domains, in fact I prefer it, but it's not grounds to give Clerics MORE powers on the side as well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What if, and this is a big "what if", we reduced the clerics spell list but vastly changed how domains worked. So that domains determine the majority of the spells available to you (as a simple example, if you have the Fire Domain you got access to Fireball (and pretty much any fire spell) and could cast them out of any of your slots, no more restricted to domain slots). Then because the spell list is weaker, we could potentially give more class features similar to Oracles revelations.But if you're getting lots of spells from Domains that can be bast with any slot, then your spell list ISN'T worse, in fact it will be better because players can optimize spell list alongside feat/archetype build etc. I'm not AGAINST that approach to spell list/domains, but it's not grounds to give Clerics MORE powers on the side as well.
eh... worse and better are subjective here. you're trading versatility for specific power or utility. you become better able to specialize and less able to do whatever is needed on the fly. so i don't know if "better" is quite appropriate.
Yes the cleric doesnt have loads to trade out but the simple fact is that what is available very rarely gets used or gets used but with a complete lack of balance.
Channeling for example rarely gets traded out, or if it does in a half hearted fashion (eg lose 1 or 2D6). Spontaneous heals/harms very rarely get touched either.... why not? Med armour and shield use should be something that gets traded up/down in every single archetype but rarely does.
If you dont have a lot to begin with, then you have to make the most of what you have
100% agreed, it's almost a joke everytime I've seen Paizo staff trot out the "Clerics don't have alot of abilities to change/replace".
The -d6 Channeling modifications don't affect DC at all, which is central to MANY uses of Channel... so they're skipping the biggest trade-space there. Never mind that very few archetypes even touch Channel at all... I mean, imagine if Paizo never touched Fighter Weapon Training, and blamed the lack of archtypes/power of archetypes on the lack of class abilities to change/replace. Even in Druid we have stuff like Storm Druid that not only gets Spontaneous Domain Casting, but actually gains more Domains to boot.If you actually touched all those things, then it's pretty easy to imagine an archetype as different as Arcanist to Wizard, or there abouts. For all the talk of "Unchained" Cleric, I think all that is needed is some good archetypes, they are possible they just aren't being made by Paizo.
The martial side of things is already well covered between vanilla Cleric + Archetypes + PrCs, Paladin, Warpriest, Inquisitor... The "non-martial" side is lacking, but is easily remedied IMHO. The non-martial stuff they have done, not only refuses to change enough, but over-estimates the value of what they give...
E.g. Cardinal getting skill ranks... Great, but they aren't better at those skills than a normal Cleric. I guess giving them Unchained Rogue Skill Unlocks would be a start, but their whole pespective on it seems off. OK, they don't want to boost casting too much, fine, but getting the same max skill rank (char level) in a few more skills is just not that altering of game balance.
it's true. there are some really good variant channeling options, but many are pretty lackluster. it would also be nice if there were just more options for that (portfolios and effects).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What if, and this is a big "what if", we reduced the clerics spell list but vastly changed how domains worked. So that domains determine the majority of the spells available to you (as a simple example, if you have the Fire Domain you got access to Fireball (and pretty much any fire spell) and could cast them out of any of your slots, no more restricted to domain slots). Then because the spell list is weaker, we could potentially give more class features similar to Oracles revelations.But if you're getting lots of spells from Domains that can be bast with any slot, then your spell list ISN'T worse, in fact it will be better because players can optimize spell list alongside feat/archetype build etc. I'm not AGAINST that approach to spell list/domains, in fact I prefer it, but it's not grounds to give Clerics MORE powers on the side as well.
That is tempered mostly by tightly limiting the basic cleric list and what spells you add from the domain.
I was a exaggerating when I said "every" fire spell, but rather the fire domain would include a lot of fire spells but not necessarily every spell.
It would allow for more potent combinations perhaps, but the clerics usual power was their versatility. Now we are removing the versatility by severely limiting their basic spell list.
The issue is that with an 'Unchaining' is that changes don't tend to be seismic. {. . .}
That may be true most of the time, but Unchained Monk sure broke that mold . . . .
An idea I had a long time ago that might go along way to fix a lot of the above is to simply overhaul the Domains a little.
The three parts I had in mind where to:
1.) Attach a single skill to each Domain which is then treated as if at max ranks for all purposes. Many of the Domains themselves are pretty easy matches, and for the most part, this could easily be done to also include SubDomains the same way, with only a few SubDomains also altering the skill associated. An additional side effect is that this would also allow for each Domain to have a built in "constant" ability instead of those annoying #/Day or Rounds per day abilities they seem to like. This would help to bypass the 2+Int Skill Points as well, but in a somewhat restricted way, and if Two Domains grant the same skill, the player could automatically choose something like Know Religion instead for one of those Domains.2.) Domain spells are automatically added to the Cleric Spell list. And honestly, I'm not sure why this was not done originally, except that maybe there was so much conflicting ideas when it came time for the PF CRB to come out after Alpha & Beta? Possible remove the +1 spell per spell level Domain Spell.
3.) Similar to the automatic Skill Point, maybe add in a small pool of Bonus Feats that the Cleric (and only Cleric) can pick at certain levels. For example, lets say that at 5th, 10, 15th, and 20th they get a Bonus Feat, similar to the Wizard, but they have to choose from a pool based on their Domains. Each Domain might have 2 Feat options available, even if one of them is Skill Focus. ...
It is in my opinion that this is the best and simplest fix to unchain the cleric. I'm going to use this and your recommended skills/feats. Which subdomains would get changed?
There's little reason why clerics of Erastil and Iomedae should be so similar, even with the same alignment.They need to be so similar because they need to fill the same role in the party that very few non-clerics can fill anywhere near satisfactorily. If only clerics of a minority of gods could heal properly there would be no purpose to the other gods. Their clerics would be cut rate blaster wizards or necromancer witches or other inferior and redundant garbage like that. The self buffing spells can't be domain locked either. Many deities with a strong battle cleric bent have no combative domains. Torag has Earth, Artifice, and Protection. Erastil has Animal, Community, and Plant. Because domain sets like that exist the core list needs to supply the spells for some combat role.
And that train of thought is how you end up with a stagnant boring class with no real class features to speak of because the one good thing they have (their casting & spell list) you don't want to change.
I will agree with you that cure x wounds spells and inflict x wounds spells probably shouldn't be restricted. But maybe Heal is. You don't get the one really good healing spell unless you worship a deity with the appropriate domain. Self buffing can totally be removed from the general list, you simply wont be that kind of cleric. You wont be as good in combat and wont be able to buff your allies as much. These are trade-offs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oi, careful with the spell list please! There are three classes that rely on that you know!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
^And those should probably get reworks as well. (While we're at it, I would also recommend doing the same thing for the arcane classes.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Give Cure x Wounds some credit dude, HP damage is a major thing for some tables, especially tables that play the low levels and tables that don't have wands.
Oi, careful with the spell list please! There are three classes that rely on that you know!
Yes for an 'Unchaining' the cleric spell list cant really be altered as several other classes feed off it
That may be true most of the time, but Unchained Monk sure broke that mold . . . .
A good point sir!...And useful as it does give precedence for widescale change...
And that train of thought is how you end up with a stagnant boring class with no real class features to speak of because the one good thing they have (their casting & spell list) you don't want to change.
I disagree there is lots that could be changed, the problem is full commitment by developers and awareness of the 'even trade'..... try a thought experiment:
You have a cleric archetype to create, any and all of the following can if you want be completely removed (or partially modified) and exchanged for something else:
Channeling, med armour prof, light armour prof, shield prof, spontaneous heal/harm, 1 domain, simple weapon use, BAB (Cardinal set precedent)
GO!!!! :))
|
|
It is in my opinion that this is the best and simplest fix to unchain the cleric. I'm going to use this and your recommended skills/feats. Which subdomains would get changed?
Feel free.
As to SubDomains, I meant that as both a catch all for any further SubDomains that might come up as well as a few, (and I haven't really went through and looked at them all recently) if the SubDomain is flavored or themed just enough that the base Skill or Feat just didn't really work so well.
Something I also wanted to point out in my intent behind that list was that I wanted to stay Core only with the options, but I also wanted to, in most cases offer 1 combat focused Feat and 1 Social/Skill/Magic related Feat, with a few exceptions, allowing for a little bit of a "path" feel in building. I also tried to stay away from what I generally consider the better Feats, (and also Skills), wanting to go with the ones, at leas in my opinion, are not great but not bad.
For all the talk of "Unchained" Cleric, I think all that is needed is some good archetypes, they are possible they just aren't being made by Paizo.
Things can get a bit X-Files here.... Herald Caller is widely recognised as the best designed cleric archetype (not a lot of competition I know)....its source book, The Monster Summoners Handbook has a lot of writers that dont seem to be from the usual Paizo developer crowd...
|
|
The Herald Caller is also an odd example in that it actually works out better than other Archetypes at their own game. In a lot of ways its a better skilled Cleric than the Cardinal that gives up way, way too much for so little. Herald Caller if combined with the Reach Cleric build makes for a pretty great battle Cleric, too, easily fills the generic warrior-priest vanilla Cleric, as well as a decent job at the White Mage a few people want.
Oddly, earlier, I was using the Herald Caller as the perfect example of not following the guidelines for developing a balanced Archetype, (trading out features you where probably not going to use anyway or are easily regained for things that are overwhelmingly better), but I deleted it, (read like a personal attack which was not the intent).
So, while I agree that the Herald Caller, (and also the Roaming Exorcist from Undead Slayers, to a point) are the best Cleric Archetypes, it's a combination of the lack of other decent options and the that it basically goes against the "how to make an Archetype" guidelines.
It is a valid point though that Quandry makes... Paizo on the whole really dont do 'Cleric' very well. Whether this is intentional is another question.
Conversely to yourself, I think Herald Caller is a great example of how to do a cleric archetype. Heaven forbid but it actually enables the cleric to be good at something and do it with a bit of flavour!!.. GASP!
Removing a whole domain from a cleric is a BIG DEAL and is something that Paizo frequently underestimates. Removing med armour + shield is a great idea for the archetype too.
Whats very clever about it when comparing it vs base cleric is that it simultaneously manages to be better at summoning but also worse due to the restrictions and the fact that you cant be a 'cleric of a philosophy' with the archetype. Well balanced and thematic.
It really is very telling IMO when you look at the writing team of the MSH....
Fast forward to the forthcoming 'Mythos Cultist' from Horror Adventures (and the usual Paizo devs) which is CHA based.... I'm prepared to eat my hat but I smell another batch of poor Cleric trades!
As an addendum to the above.... if I was a betting lass (lady in Yank speak!;)), I would wager that the Mythos Cultist is set up similar to the Feyspeaker druid archetype.... ie) 1/2 BAB, CHA for casting (instead of WIS) and a few token spells from the wiz/sorc list at a delayed level. Shame with that druid archetype.... good idea, bad execution.
|
One of things that you notice about cleric players is that irrespective of their deity they pretty much all have the same spells and this is a big part of the cleric blandness problem.
Reducing the spell list to all of the Domain spells for your deity, plus whatever cure or inflict spells you could channel would be one way to individualize different clerics. Any additional cleric spells would be added one or two per level, similarly to how a wizard gains their spells, or could be learned from scrolls, etc. again, similarly to how a wizard gains spells. Spells from subdomains available to the clerics gods might also be added to the automatically-known list.
That would probably be my number one choice to change clerics (and druids) would be to reduce the spells available from 'everything ever' to a smaller number limited to the acquisition methods of the wizard (or sorcerer, for spontaneous cleric/druid types). Instead of knowing every single cleric (or druid) spell, automatically, including new spells introduced every couple of months in new products, they'd have to select a smaller subset of spells to know (adding Domain / cures or inflicts or summon nature's ally, so still being quite superior to a wizard).
Increasing the number of domains / subdomains available, either as class features, or through feats, might help to mix things up, as well as letting some of the domain powers scale, instead of remaining at 1d6 hp +1 hp/2 levels.
Any additional cleric spells would be added one or two per level, similarly to how a wizard gains their spells, or could be learned from scrolls, etc. again, similarly to how a wizard gains spells.
That level of Unchaining could IMO only be justified if creating a new D6 class. And would I think be essential in order to make it distinct from the cleric.
|
|
It is a valid point though that Quandry makes... Paizo on the whole really dont do 'Cleric' very well. Whether this is intentional is another question.
Conversely to yourself, I think Herald Caller is a great example of how to do a cleric archetype. Heaven forbid but it actually enables the cleric to be good at something and do it with a bit of flavour!!.. GASP!
Removing a whole domain from a cleric is a BIG DEAL and is something that Paizo frequently underestimates. Removing med armour + shield is a great idea for the archetype too.
Whats very clever about it when comparing it vs base cleric is that it simultaneously manages to be better at summoning but also worse due to the restrictions and the fact that you cant be a 'cleric of a philosophy' with the archetype. Well balanced and thematic.
I think you are missing what we are saying, though. I do agree it's a good Archetype, and I'd say it basically puts 95% of Cleric Archetypes to shame. But, the point I was trying to make is that it does so by do the exact opposite of the "how to make a balanced Archetype" guidelines.
I would disagree that removing a Domain is that important, as most Domains are terrible and not balanced at all. Unless your character picks the right deity to cherrypick Domains, it really doesn't even matter in most cases.
From my perspective, while I understand something had to go, Armor and Shield really do not make any sense thematically for the Herald Caller, nor is it something unique or new for Cleric Archetypes. Personally, I'm not a fan of the White Mage Cleric idea, and I think we have enough Cleric Archetypes that ditch armor as is.
Cardinal
Cloistered Cleric
Evangelist
Ecclesitheurge (looses Light Armor too)
Roaming Exorcist
The main problem with removing Armor/Shield Proficiency is, it's not really a hindrance in most cases. Either it's something that you probably wouldn't be using anyway (such as with the Ecclesitheurge), something you will probably easily bypass, (dip in Monk is generally pretty great), or easily regained (with a dip into basically any other class that gives it right back to you). If you are going for a casty Cleric, the penalty for just wearing armor anyway isn't really going to affect you that much.
Something I wish that would be utilized more often is to remove specific spells from the Class List based on theme, remove Spontaneous Cure spells, and remove aspects of Channel Energy, (like the ability to use it for healing the living, or the ability to use it for blasting enemies).
Looks like we will just agree to disagree on domains and armour....
You cant just blithely say "Oh removing med armour and shield doesnt count"!!! They are worth feats... they ALWAYS count! The loss of AC ALWAYS counts. The loss of a domain ALWAYS counts.
According to your logic we should just remove Mage Armour as a spell for wizards??!
And taking a dip in anything is a massive deal for a full caster... and certainly not a justification for saying "Oh removing med armour and shield doesnt count!"
Again to according to your logic we should make wizards D4 again... after all they shouldnt be near the fighting and can just dip a couple of fighter levels to get some HP anyway....!
Part of the reason why Ecclesitheurge struggles to work is that the complete removal of armour and shield (and critically the inability to regain the proficiency) combined with the other stuff just isnt balanced.
Removing med armour, light armour, shield = worth feats/equivalent ability
Removing med armour, light armour, shield + inability to gain proficiency = worth feats/equivalent ability +
This is cold maths... no ifs buts or maybes.
We clearly come from 2 very different school regarding the notion of balance
Removing armour and shield from the Cleric eats away their role/is just a flat feat tax. Not good design.
It's a good alternative but not a good baseline.
But if youre trying to breathe life into one of (if not the) blandest classes in the game via an archetype.... you have to remove them to greater or lesser degree IMO.
And what is almost always forgotten when discussing clerics and archetypes is:
1) That they are feat starved already! So removing med armour and shield IS A BIG DEAL.... you can't just say "Oh you can just get them back with proficiencies...it doesnt matter...etc". Spending a feat for a cleric is a huge investment!
2) Related to the above, the clerics main class ability - channeling, is also massively feat (and stat) reliant.
When you combine the 2 above points.... clerics arent just feat starved, they are feat emaciated!
And that's why it's not a good idea.
But if you want to create meaningful cleric archetypes you have to.
Its Paizo's reluctance to significantly trade out the clerics class abilities that result in the poor archetypes generally available. Or if they do they greatly underestimate the values and/or do half measures.
In most cases.... you generally end up back at square 1.... playing a bland, boring cleric.
Ah, sorry, I thought this thread still discussed Unchaining/nerfing the Cleric and not Archetypes.
There are some on this thread who believe that the cleric doesnt need 'Unchaining'...merely decent archetype design.
There are others who believe that 'too much water has flowed under the bridge'..... and it needs Unchaining.
There are pros and cons on both sides I guess!
I think some Unchaining is needed to enable proper design of more than a couple of archetypes.
I think some Unchaining is needed to enable proper design of more than a couple of archetypes.
My personal preference is:
Minimum - Unchained cleric
Ideal - Unchained cleric + new D6 divine class (thus giving the D6 - D10 range of options)
Similar to what happened with Unchained monk, it could well render many archetypes unuseable but I would be fine with this, as the vast majority are either good ideas but poorly executed (eg Theologian, Undead Lord, Ecclesitheurge, Divine Scourge) or just plain crap (Cloistered Cleric, Cardinal, Appeaser, Scroll Scholar).
|
|
Honestly, I'd like to see the Unchained Cleric be a nearly complete rewrite of the class that makes it possible to make better and more Archetypes, and also leaves room for customization throughout the levels of play, while removing the many dead levels.
Main focus should probably be making it so all choices are not made at level one.
I really do not see a need for a cloth Cleric, since that can already be handled with the base Cleric and choices, and really isn't what the Cleric is supposed to be anyway. In my opinion, the Oracle class makes a better white mage style priest anyway. I'd actually much rather see the Class start taking some ground back from the other divine warriors, (Inquisitor, Warpriest, and even Paladin) and finally find a solid niche. Something more like a combat medic/holy knight the class concept was based on.