Please rebuild the Cleric into something awesome!!


Prerelease Discussion

1 to 50 of 84 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

4 people marked this as a favorite.

As it stands right now, the cleric is the worst class(features wise) out of literally all the classes in PF.

You get all your class features at first level, with a slight expansion at around 8th.

They also lack a capstone. 9th level spells are not a capstone, because wizards, druids and sorcerers all get something at 20th level.

There's zero reason to *ever* continue past 8th level as a cleric. Which is incredibly weird, because I remember how one of the driving sentiments when it came to designing PF classes was to reward players who stuck with ONE class to 20th level.

And, with the sole exception of the cleric, Paizo NAILED this. Now, obviously not every, single class is 100% awesome all the to 20th level, but they are all at least very solid 1-20.

Except the cleric.

Please, please, please, in PF2, fix this!! Find a way to give the cleric more class features beyond 1st level than just an increase in channel energy dice.

Please, give them a 20th level ability, even if it's just something like what the wizard currently has, which is a boost to their first level school power(Ie, clerics gain a boost to their 1st level domain powers).

This is literally my biggest problem with Pathfinder right now, and has been since the CRB was released.

Do not make the same mistake in 2.0!!

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

... have you been reading any of threads about classes and what they get thus far?


Nope. I looked and didn't see any specifically about them.

Links?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Clerics are awesome, and if you already took cleric to 8th level you'd be shooting yourself in the foot to abandon ship then.

That being said, everybody gets tons of stuff in the levels they don't get new spell levels now. [Look up the Level Up Blog Entry]


2 people marked this as a favorite.

What about getting their choice of several capstones? Maybe getting to select a class feature from a menu every other level? Maybe you’d like them to be able to pick up another domain if they want? Would that be enough, huh? I hope so, ‘cuz that’s about what they’ve announced so far! :D Clerics sound a lot better.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
kyrt-ryder wrote:

Clerics are awesome, and if you already took cleric to 8th level you'd be shooting yourself in the foot to abandon ship then.

That being said, everybody gets tons of stuff in the levels they don't get new spell levels now. [Look up the Level Up Blog Entry]

Why would I ever take a PF1 cleric past 8th level?

They get two features beyond 8th: More dice to channel energy, and more spellcasting.

There's tons of PrCs that add to my spellcasting, so that's useless.

And, depending on my concept, I may not care about being able to channel more than 4d6.

IF I did, I'm sure there are PrCs out there that increase that(Envoy of Balance, and Evangelist sprint to mind immediately).

Sooo, why, pray tell, should I keep taking levels in a class that lacks advancement beyond 8th level?

Please bear in mind, I am talking about how the cleric as it stands right now *sucks*, in Pathfinder 1st edition, and how I hope in 2ed, they make the cleric much more awesome.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Try dipping into another class to delay getting 9th-level spells, which are miles better than any class's capstone ability, until 20th level.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Monkeygod wrote:

As it stands right now, the cleric is the worst class(features wise) out of literally all the classes in PF.

You get all your class features at first level, with a slight expansion at around 8th.

Paizo agrees with you. Erik mona even mentioned cleric as one of the problems with version 1 since they were designed before they designed archetypes and they "didn't have anything to give up". It is in one of the youtube vids recently.

It looks like the new cleric will have some good options.
Link to the blog post (which you might have read now) showing a cleric specific leveling up:
http://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5lklr


Matthias W wrote:
Try dipping into another class to delay getting 9th-level spells, which are miles better than any class's capstone ability, until 20th level.

You clearly missed the part where I said all other classes were designed to reward players for sticking with the class to level 20.

The inquisitor is perhaps one of the best examples of this. Every time I've played a high level game, I am hard pressed to multiclass or pick up a PrC, due to all the great class features they get all the way up to 20.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Granted its early days on which to be saying anything definitive but the signs aren't good so far....

On the one hand Paizo have acknowledged that the cleric has been really hindered by a poor initial class design with a lack of 'tradeable options'. This is a positive.

On the other hand I would say that it was more of an unwillingness by Paizo to trade out in any meaningful way the options that the cleric did have.

How many badly designed cleric archetypes have there been?!? Almost all of them!

Channeling.... which deep down we all know is largely redundant in PF1 due to the plethora of healing options and the fact that its well.... crap. But how often was it traded out for something with more zip??

Already we can see the cleric is being dragged back into healbot territory with PF2!! And the enormous three legged elephant that is Channeling is still standing in the corner!

Clerics will never be sorted unless the base problem is addressed....

Stop trying to make them a gish class by default!

Warpriests, Alchemists, Inquisitors, Magus, Hunters and even Druids to a degree are far more suited to that role. That is what they are.

Leave the 'hit a bit, cast a bit' to these classes as their chassis is already built for it!

A cleric should be a robed holy man with a bare minimum of combat training.... not the 1st ed D&D relic that Paizo cant seem to let go of!

Should there be a way of making your cleric more 'hitty' via archetype or class feature?? Quite possibly. But having this as the default setting has been the albatross round the cleric's neck for years and years.

I cant see it happening though because the signs are that in PF2 the cleric will still for whatever bizarre reason be based on the concept of gish.

GROOOOOOOOAN!!!!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
doc roc wrote:
A cleric should be a robed holy man with a bare minimum of combat training.... not the 1st ed D&D relic that Paizo cant seem to let go of!

Is a robed holy elf woman okay?

By the way, I saw something..somewhere .. I forget where.. that let clerics use the channel feature (or was it turn undead from 3.5?) to power metamagic instead of higher slots/longer casts.

Um wait... I just started rebuilding my character in my mind as a robed cleric (isn't there an archetype for that already?) and realized that I would probably need better spellies for that.. so unless they're willing to buff healing and buffing... I'd need more crowd control, utility and blasting.

That would be....a wisdom-based wizard.

>.>


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Sounds like they might be pushing the 9 (10th? now?) level spells back from other classes.

At any rate, I totally agree with you. There cleric, design wise, is definitely one of the more boring classes. Personally, I hope the updated version will have more features that allow customization. A cleric of Asmodeus should feel completely different than one for Shelyn, or one for Gorum. To me at least, domain spells just don't do enough to differentiate worshippers.


Isn't the current understanding that every PF2 class will get "class feats" to select at even levels? At the very least this solves the core issue with the cleric- that you don't choose anything (except odd-level feats and daily spells) after level 1.

I mean, who knows how cool the cleric feats are going to be, but we've at least solved the issue in theory.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, they're changing that so... /thread?


PossibleCabbage wrote:

Isn't the current understanding that every PF2 class will get "class feats" to select at even levels? At the very least this solves the core issue with the cleric- that you don't choose anything (except odd-level feats and daily spells) after level 1.

I mean, who knows how cool the cleric feats are going to be, but we've at least solved the issue in theory.

Yes granted....we havent seen the feats yet so there are unknowns involved.

But nevertheless what is known is that Paizo have decided to keep with the 1st Ed D&Desque cleric template of 'Bit of armour, bit of weapon, some casting and some horrible channel'

Despite it being redundant in terms of the game and also having no cultural/fantasy reference point....

What is truly bizarre....in the last couple of years pretty much all the 3PP cleric material has been about getting away from that albatross as much as poss.... but has any attention been paid??

Its so frustrating to see a class with such enormous potential for material (and therefore $$$ for Paizo) to be wasted with an archaic chassis....

The cleric chassis that is still basically being held onto is almost 30 years old!.... It is now well and truly redundant!!


Good ol' sacred cows...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The excuse re: archetypes is silly, they barely try to use what they have.
Ditching Channel completely should be an option that opens up alot of trades, and it can always be traded away piecemeal, by giving up specific level progression AND most importantly doing so re: the level scaling DC. (there is a few which take away levels of channel dice progression but don't touch DC, even though that is the only part many channel augmentations care about)
Never mind touching it's armor, BAB, Saves.

I would say I hope they get rid of the stupid "Neutral Deities get more domains that aren't a boring alignment domain". That probably means not all deities get all alignment domains corresponding to their alignment, only ones that especially are dedicated/exemplify it... In other words, some deities might overall measure as Good/Lawful/etc but that's just because how their modus operandi ended up, and their main CONCERNS are less alignment related (although 1-step still applies). I get impression they will be moving away from Domains as primary differentiator, towards Deity specific codes & powers, although Domains likely continue in some form, like spells and being an optional set of powers aside Deity specific options. The powers you choose may have influence in your code of conduct distinct from other followers. (the deity code of conduct was very sparsely implemented in P1E)


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Quandary wrote:
this is a blatantly obvious issue

I played a cleric through a campaign and never noticed it. '+1 to caster level' is the best class feature there is. I never even contemplated taking a prestige class. And my channelling and domain powers got better too:

Quote:

Liberation (Su): You have the ability to ignore impediments to your mobility. For a number of rounds per day equal to your cleric level, you can move normally regardless of magical effects that impede movement, as if you were affected by freedom of movement. This effect occurs automatically as soon as it applies. These rounds do not need to be consecutive.

Freedom’s Call (Su): At 8th level, you can emit a 30-foot aura of freedom for a number of rounds per day equal to your cleric level. Allies within this aura are not affected by the confused, grappled, frightened, panicked, paralyzed, pinned, or shaken conditions. This aura only suppresses these effects, and they return once a creature leaves the aura or when the aura ends, if applicable. These rounds do not need to be consecutive.

Dimensional Hop (Sp): At 8th level, you can teleport up to 10 feet per cleric level per day as a move action. This teleportation must be used in 5-foot increments and such movement does not provoke attacks of opportunity. You must have line of sight to your destination to use this ability. You can bring other willing creatures with you, but you must expend an equal amount of distance for each creature brought.


Yeah, 8th level was already mentioned. Yes, Full Casting is powerful, that's why nobody said the class was WEAK, that it is strong is probably large part of why they left it as it was. But that doesn't make it interesting class design or worth staying in, when PrC give you CL and Channel progression as others already mentioned.

Anyways, Paizo devs have discussed that opinion of Cleric class design many times here on the boards. It's well established,
and you would be arguing with the devs opinion if you believe otherwise. (although I addressed why one criticism is less than well founded, since they didn't really attempt to do what they could re: archetype swaps)

Personally I think if they went to 6-level max casting that would be ideal in many ways. But 'good old sacred cows' as Neo says.

(I edited my previous post removing the section you quoted from, and Domain section, before I saw your response, I decided it wasn't productive or welcoming)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Cleric, Inquisitor, and Warpriest should really be remixed into a 9/9 (10/10?) spellcasting, d6, 1/2 BAB class and a 6/9 (7/10?) spellcasting, d8, 3/4 BAB class (and put the Inquisitor role into a prestige class where it belongs). Then make Domains work like mini-Mysteries with mini-Revelations (I guess this would fit into Cleric Class Feats?).


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

They could even merge the Cleric with the Paladin and keep the number of total CORE classes the same!

BONUS: No more moral debates!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:


They could even merge the Cleric with the Paladin and keep the number of total CORE classes the same!

Given that we don't have to worry about BAB for a frontline fighter anymore, Paladin being an archetype of Cleric could work out nicely.

Quote:
BONUS: No more moral debates!

BWA HA HA HA HA!!! Ooohhh... oh wow. I needed that. ;)


Cleric class is great! Most of the flavor comes from your roleplaying and choice of deity to worship.

Mechanically... Even Gygax in the 70s knew that nobody would play a literal healbot. One of the best parts about cleric is that you can build them to be almost anything! Melee attacker, range attacked, dex attacker, spell-casting support, pet-class, blaster (evil), debuffer... With the right domains, favored weapon and spells! The only thing they 100% sucked at was being Skill Monkeys.

Yeah, they didnt get a lot of class features, but that didn't make the Cleric Bad or anything, or their flavor wrong. If you want to just wear a robe and not have proficiencies, there's even archetypes for it!


I would be happy with d6-1/2BAB Cleric. On the other hand Inquisitors will not be core, and "sacred cows" (don't say to a cleric's face). If they don't do d6 Cleric in Core, I would hope they do so in next book, or next magic focused book. I would assume it would use different casting system, perhaps more like Arcanist or Shaman?


Cloistered Cleric as an archetype in the CRB sounds likely, though the exact shape of it is unlikely to look exactly like what we have now.


I'll just say that people here should read about D&D3e Miniatures Handbook "Healer" class (Wizard stats white mage) and what people who tried it have to say about it...


ChibiNyan wrote:
I'll just say that people here should read about D&D3e Miniatures Handbook "Healer" class (Wizard stats white mage) and what people who tried it have to say about it...

The problem with the Healer is the problem with 3P healing scaling.

Make the Healing Magic amazing (and keep them on the same spell level track as prepared casters) and its a ton of fun for those of us who enjoy 'white maging' now and then


Matthew Downie wrote:
Quandary wrote:
this is a blatantly obvious issue

I played a cleric through a campaign and never noticed it. '+1 to caster level' is the best class feature there is. I never even contemplated taking a prestige class. And my channelling and domain powers got better too:

The fact that there are SOME but by no means many good domain powers floating around really doesn't prove anything.

PF1 cleric is thematically redundant.... clerics of all kinds of deities are played in a very similar way because the core chassis is so limited, domain powers for the most part lack impact and bizarrely there a loads of domain spells that a cleric gets anyway!!

Thematically I always felt that...

a)Domain spells should be part of a clerics prepared list as they represent a key identifier of their chosen deity... there shouldnt be a bonus domain slot.

b) The spells should either be ones the cleric doesnt normally get ("Errrm yeah... thanks God for the blessing.... I can cast this spell anyway!") or if it is a spell already on the list it should have a bonus attached to it.

Eg) A cleric of a god of death who receives Harm at 6th can cast it as if using Reach metamagic for no spell level increase.

This neatly also gets round the issue of clerics having so few bonus class features and ties them closer to their deity.


UnArcaneElection wrote:

Cleric, Inquisitor, and Warpriest should really be remixed into a 9/9 (10/10?) spellcasting, d6, 1/2 BAB class and a 6/9 (7/10?) spellcasting, d8, 3/4 BAB class (and put the Inquisitor role into a prestige class where it belongs). Then make Domains work like mini-Mysteries with mini-Revelations (I guess this would fit into Cleric Class Feats?).

I agree with this...although the Inquisitor as a base class isnt something Im against, I just feel that an Inquisitor should be viewed as an elite member of the clergy. Its not a job they give to just anybody!

Of course you would have to design it as a PrC that was equally as accessible for a Cleric as a Warpriest


They could start by reducing the core spell list quite a bit and giving many more spells (5?) for each domain, to be prepared normally rather than in a domain slot. So a cleric might have 10 core spells and 10 domain spells to choose from. Then each religion's cleric would have to be different through having different spells. For example, a cleric of Iomedae might know Magic Weapon and Know the Enemy, but not Aspect of the Nightingale or Diagnose Disease. Maybe non-core, non-domain spells are 1 level higher, or take 2 slots, so everyone can take Lesser Restoration but it's harder for clerics of Nethys than of Shelyn.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Or Spontaneous Domain Substitution as the norm. With multiple other avenues for healing, Cure Substitution doesn't seem mandatory, especially if you don't actively choose it as option. Anyways, I like some ideas like Doc Roc posted, but these feel mostly expressed in terms of current class which will likely be irrelevant with strucutre of new class, although they sound like great suggestions for "Unchained 1st Edition Cleric".


1 person marked this as a favorite.

To be perfectly honest, I realy hope they decide to do away with prestige classes once and for all. I don't feel they ever really worked in 3.? And were largely rendered redundant in PF anyway.

So many better ways to foster customization than devoting precious page-count towards something that'll only ever be used by the tiniest margin of players.


If they're doing away with them, they could go with "Prestige Class Feat Chains" in their lieu.


Crayon wrote:

To be perfectly honest, I realy hope they decide to do away with prestige classes once and for all. I don't feel they ever really worked in 3.? And were largely rendered redundant in PF anyway.

So many better ways to foster customization than devoting precious page-count towards something that'll only ever be used by the tiniest margin of players.

Prestige classes can be well-designed and work (for example, both types of Hellknight, although they need updating for more recent material, and Path of the Hellknight seems to have missed some opportunities in that regard). The thing is that they need to be classes of Prestige, not just generic ways to get something that you should have been able to get with archetypes and/or class talents (class feats in the future?).

Examples of prestige classes that should stay as prestige classes: Hellknight (both types), Eagle Knight, Lion Blade.

Examples of prestige classes that should become archetypes or hybrid classes: Arcane Trickster, Arcane Archer, Eldritch Knight, Rage Prophet, Stalwart Defender.

Examples of base classes that should become prestige classes: Inquisitor, Paladin, and maybe even Monk. (Unfortunately, it looks like at least the latter 2 of these stay as base classes in Pathfinder 2nd Edition.)

Examples of base classes that should stay base classes or become archetypes of other base classes: Most of the ones not listed above.


UnArcaneElection wrote:
Crayon wrote:

To be perfectly honest, I realy hope they decide to do away with prestige classes once and for all. I don't feel they ever really worked in 3.? And were largely rendered redundant in PF anyway.

So many better ways to foster customization than devoting precious page-count towards something that'll only ever be used by the tiniest margin of players.

Prestige classes can be well-designed and work (for example, both types of Hellknight, although they need updating for more recent material, and Path of the Hellknight seems to have missed some opportunities in that regard). The thing is that they need to be classes of Prestige, not just generic ways to get something that you should have been able to get with archetypes and/or class talents (class feats in the future?).

Examples of prestige classes that should stay as prestige classes: Hellknight (both types), Eagle Knight, Lion Blade.

Examples of prestige classes that should become archetypes or hybrid classes: Arcane Trickster, Arcane Archer, Eldritch Knight, Rage Prophet, Stalwart Defender.

Examples of base classes that should become prestige classes: Inquisitor, Paladin, and maybe even Monk. (Unfortunately, it looks like at least the latter 2 of these stay as base classes in Pathfinder 2nd Edition.)

Examples of base classes that should stay base classes or become archetypes of other base classes: Most of the ones not listed above.

After Path of the Hellknight I was sad. Adventurer's Guide was a new hope in the horizon... Then I read that book and cried. Reprinted identically! Identical suckage! Thank Asmodeus we'll now get a real new chance to redo Hellknight.


Unfortunately from my reading of the blog updates, Paizo is taking things back to 1st ed D&D in terms of how the basic classes.... fighter, rogue, wizard, cleric interact as a party.

I could be mistaken, but my feeling is I'm afraid that can only be bad for Mr Cleric...

Jees.... Paizo really is not giving up... on mace, shield, armour and buff n heal = cleric

Simultaneously....bizarre, hilarious, tragic and disappointing!!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Crayon wrote:
To be perfectly honest, I realy hope they decide to do away with prestige classes once and for all. I don't feel they ever really worked in 3.? And were largely rendered redundant in PF anyway.

When done right, prestige classes can be really cool, but most were not. Eberron in particular had quite a few great ones, like the Warforged Juggernaut (a warforged who emphasized the "construct" part of "living construct", growing spikes and becoming tougher and more resistant/immune to various things, including regular healing spells) or Moonspeaker (a 12-level PRC for shifter druids, gaining abilities based on Eberron's 12 moons and the planes they are associated with).

But the cool ones are really narrow concepts, and one can certainly question whether that's worth the word and page count.


8 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm just hoping clerics are more flavored towards their deity. I really would like some strong differentiators between a cleric of Serenrae and a cleric of Desna. Different abilities, different spell options, different channels, something.

I really liked how back in 2e, your choice of a god dictated what spells you had access to. I'd love to see something like that again.


I like that clerics are getting room for archetypes. I just hope they don't lose two domains. Being able to mix and match is a very nice element of PF1. I've missed it in 5E and was among the things that made me happy switching back to PF.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I too would like to see clerics (and oracles!) more in tune with their gods. Not only in their spell selection, but also how melee/ranged/caster-oriented they are, if they use heavy, light or no armor, and other similar class features.


BryonD wrote:
I like that clerics are getting room for archetypes. I just hope they don't lose two domains. Being able to mix and match is a very nice element of PF1. I've missed it in 5E and was among the things that made me happy switching back to PF.

We have an implied guarantee of being able to get two domains, although you might have to give up one of your class feats. There’s a class feat to get another domain- meaning you get at least one to start, and can grab at least one more.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
doc roc wrote:

...Already we can see the cleric is being dragged back into healbot territory with PF2!!...

Stop trying to make them a gish class by default!

Warpriests, Alchemists, Inquisitors, Magus, Hunters and even Druids to a degree are far more suited to that role. That is what they are.

Leave the 'hit a bit, cast a bit' to these classes as their chassis is already built for it!

A cleric should be a robed holy man with a bare minimum of combat training.... not the 1st ed D&D relic that Paizo cant seem to let go of! ...

To Doc Roc, it seems like you don't want to focus on healing or fighting so i'm curious on what kind of design you have in mind for the cleric.

What role would your cleric have?
What type of spell list would it have?
What would separate it from a caster based divine caster like the storm druid?
What would be the "fun" playing aspects of your cleric?

Dark Archive

5 people marked this as a favorite.

Give me contract masters that summon devils clerics of Asmodeus
Give me kaiju clerics of Rovagug
Give me master spy clerics of Norgorber
Give me body masters/super human clerics of Irori
Give me merchant masters of Abadar
Give me paladin like clerics of Iomedae
Give me torturer master clerics of Zon-Kuthon
Give me battle monsters of Gorum
Make clerics unique!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

To be fair I also feel like the "robed holy man" fits the priests of almost every religion in the real world better, and the gish cleric is a role best filled by the paladin. And the warpriest shouldn't even exist except as an archetype and most of it that isn't archetyped out should just be merged into the paladin, and the paladin in turn wouldn't be LG only because it would be the "holy warrior" of whatever church it belongs to.

So viewing from this perspective, the robed holy wo/man cleric would retain by far the best and most bursty healing / channel / exorcism powers. They could still have some moderate martial training but not to the extent of our familiar plate-wearing face-beaters, except again in a warpriest archetype. They would spread the word of their god or goddess, they would be much more focused on working powerful miracles (spellcasting), they would exemplify multiple domains of their deity and use those powers and different variants of Channel to set themselves apart as a distinct class design space.

But I'm resigned to old-style cleric probably appearing yet again. I just hope they give it more of an identity this time.


QuidEst wrote:
BryonD wrote:
I like that clerics are getting room for archetypes. I just hope they don't lose two domains. Being able to mix and match is a very nice element of PF1. I've missed it in 5E and was among the things that made me happy switching back to PF.
We have an implied guarantee of being able to get two domains, although you might have to give up one of your class feats. There’s a class feat to get another domain- meaning you get at least one to start, and can grab at least one more.

Cool and some trade off is fine. Clearly they are making them more flexible. That is one very clear thing they said. If I build a cleric and drop a domain because an even more cool options was there, then that is great.


I know of one way to make the cleric better, well as it stands now in pf1 ( errata this please) is to merge the cleric and warpriest together,


2 people marked this as a favorite.
BryonD wrote:
I like that clerics are getting room for archetypes. I just hope they don't lose two domains. Being able to mix and match is a very nice element of PF1. I've missed it in 5E and was among the things that made me happy switching back to PF.

I'd actually say give them ***3*** Domains, which would be constituted like mini-Mysteries, and by default no Channel Energy or Spontaneous Spellcasting. Certain Domains would have Channel Energy and/or Spontaneous Spellcasting as one of their 1st level Domain Powers, with the type of Channel Energy being set by the Domain. So if you want Pathfinder 1st Edition Channel Positive Energy and Spontaneous Curing, take the Curing Domain; if you want Pathfinder 1st Edition Channel Negative Energy and Spontaneous Infliction, take the Infliction Domain; if you want Pathfinder 1st Edition Alignment Channel (but have it actually work right), take the appropriate Chaos, Good, Evil, or Law Domain; if you want Pathfinder 1st Edition Elemental Channel, take the appropriate Elemental Domain. If you don't want to be a healbot badgered into Channeling Energy and casting Cure Wounds all the time, don't take the Curing Domain.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.

A version of the cleric that had a spell-list compiled from a vastly reduced list of 'generic cleric spells' and then the spells from all five of the Domains granted by their god (and perhaps increasing the number of domain spells, two per level, or something), could be interesting, and make different clerics look quite a bit different.

And I'd definitely want something more from channel energy than channeling positive or negative energy. I'd love to see a cleric of a Weather god channeling a thunderstorm, or a cleric of a god of War 'channeling' a blade-barrier like storm of swirling weapons or combat-rage or something.

A priest class that didn't use spells at all, but simply channeled divine power to an assortment of uses (depending on class feats taken), including healing, purging outsiders or repelling undead, etc. could be interesting, but the presence of huge (and ever-growing) spell lists in this game seems to encourage that more and more classes *use* those spell lists. (I remember being disappointed that five out of six Advanced Player's Guide classes and five out of six Occult Adventures classes had spell-lists.)


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
UnArcaneElection wrote:

Cleric, Inquisitor, and Warpriest should really be remixed into a 9/9 (10/10?) spellcasting, d6, 1/2 BAB class and a 6/9 (7/10?) spellcasting, d8, 3/4 BAB class (and put the Inquisitor role into a prestige class where it belongs). Then make Domains work like mini-Mysteries with mini-Revelations (I guess this would fit into Cleric Class Feats?).

out of interest why does the Inquisitor belong as a prestige class?


QuidEst wrote:


We have an implied guarantee of being able to get two domains, although you might have to give up one of your class feats. There’s a class feat to get another domain- meaning you get at least one to start, and can grab at least one more.

This illustrates my point perfectly....

So in PF1 a vanilla cleric gets 2 domains, and lets be brutally honest, domains are on average underwhelming and underpowered for a variety of reasons.... all in all you can't really tell the difference mechanically between cleric of God X and cleric of God Y

And here we are with PF2 being told that in order to get 2 domains, you have to give up a class feat?!?!

Ermmmm.... what?

This can only imply one of 2 things either:

1) The whole domain thing has been dramatically overhauled to increase the power/usefulness of each

2) Paizo have got their sums very wrong indeed!!!

Granted I havent seen the full details, but its looking like already a bit of mess for the cleric in PF2...

Still with the bewildering instance of gish, still with echoes of 1st Ed Healbot, still will the stubborn instance on forcing a cleric to take the notoriously bad channel at first and by the looks of things, some serious questions over how domains will be implemented....

Its tragic.... I have seen several 3PP products that have absolutely wiped the floor with Paizo's PF1 rigid cleric interpretation. The result?..... a profitable 3PP product!

Paizo unfortunately are seemingly oblivious!

Numerous opportunities to sort the class out through various means have been and gone.... I see no reason to believe based on the evidence that things will change...

1 to 50 of 84 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Please rebuild the Cleric into something awesome!! All Messageboards