The fact that the Cleric knows all of the Cleric Spells and just prepares them each day leads to way too much variance in the Cleric from one day to the next.

I did the math for the number of different ways that a Cleric can picks spells and here it is.

 Level Combinations 1 66 2 220 3 1760 4 6160 5 49280

Now compare this to the Wizard

 Level Combinations 1 10 2 70 3 210 4 1400 5 4200

By level 5 the Cleric has more than 10 times the possible combinations of the Wizard who is known for their ability to drastically change from day-to-day. And this is assuming the Wizard prepares a different spell in each slot. If we use the more realistic scenario where the Wizard prepares a spell of each level twice we get and even larger disparity.

Wizard preparing a spell of each level twice

 Level Combinations 1 10 2 56 3 168 4 840 5 2520

Now the Cleric has 20 times the combonations at level 5.

Your Cleric could be all buffs one day and all debuffs the next and a thousand different things in between. Also this is just way too much choice for a player on a day to day basis. The Cleric should have a spells known list that is far less than "ALL CLERIC SPELLS".

How this Spells Known list should be determined, im not sure. Maybe Domain based, maybe the pick them when they level. Maybe a mix of the two. But how it currently stands is way to variable.
Phawksin
Joined Mar 2012
91 Posts
Pulling from some other threads, why not create an optional pre-package of spells in the domains? "For Domain X you gain spell A at level 1, B at level 3, ect. Most Clerics of X also prepair M, N and L each day at first level." It already (kind of) exsists in the Wizard's description, so would it be bad to extend it? That would mean your possible combinations are still incredibly high, but your likely combinations are far smaller.
CarlT
Joined Apr 2009
2977 Posts
Why is the number of different spell combinations an issue?

Carl
Koga305
Joined May 2008
289 Posts
Why is the number of different spell combinations an issue?

Carl

As I understand it, because Clerics have many more total options than the wizard does, which especially for the cleric with fighting ability doesn't make sense - if the Wizard is the master of exclusively magic, why does the Cleric with several secondary roles have so many more options?
channingman
Joined Jan 2012
109 Posts
Why is the number of different spell combinations an issue?

Carl

As I understand it, because Clerics have many more total options than the wizard does, which especially for the cleric with fighting ability doesn't make sense - if the Wizard is the master of exclusively magic, why does the Cleric with several secondary roles have so many more options?

Because Arcane spells are much much much more powerful than wizard spells.
Koga305
Joined May 2008
289 Posts
Why is the number of different spell combinations an issue?

Carl

As I understand it, because Clerics have many more total options than the wizard does, which especially for the cleric with fighting ability doesn't make sense - if the Wizard is the master of exclusively magic, why does the Cleric with several secondary roles have so many more options?

Because Arcane spells are much much much more powerful than wizard spells.

Sure, maybe in terms of mass damage (Burning Hands/Thunder Wave) and battlefield control. However, the cleric spell list still covers about the same range of options as the wizard list, and the cleric can pick from any of them (boost allies, disadvantage enemies, deal single-target damage, deal with undead, heal all kinds of things, protect yourself or others, scry on the future, preserve dead, save-or-suck, create nutrition, deal with all kinds of magic, communicate with dead). IMO the wizard ultimately has less options. Furthermore, the cleric automatically gains more with each new set of official spells the game uses while the wizard has to find them or wait a level.
CarlT
Joined Apr 2009
2977 Posts
They still do the same number of things per round and the same number of things per encounter.

The number of total choices is a false comparison.

If I added 23094389 crappy spells to the wizard - would that suddenly make the wizard more powerful?  If I stripped away 90% of the clerics spells - but made their few spells god-powerful - would that make the cleric less powerful?

This is a meaningless comparison.

Especially because - in practice - the majority of the spells given to both classes never see use in the typical day - or even in the typical campaign.

Carl
Eric888
Joined Mar 2007
1506 Posts
Because if clerics had to choose their spells then instead of having 4 interesting first level spells, 2 interesting second level spells, and a third level spell, they would have 7 cure light wounds. I played second edition, and that's what happened.

Cleric spells are situational. Create food and water or endure elements can help you a lot when you need them, but you very rarely need them. If you had to pick what spell you might need without knowing ahead of time, you would just take more copies of cure light wounds. The only way to stop that is to let clerics use all their spells for cure light wounds if they need to, but give them a few other options that won't take away their healing ability by taking "just in case."

Also the math chart really doesn't matter. It reminds me of people in 4e who claimed Fireball was OP because as a burst 3 that dealt 3d6+int damage it had the potential of doing 8,232 damage (7*7*7*24). In practice it really never worked that way. And in practice clerics do not have near as much versatlity as you think they do. Especially when nine times out of ten they are all just gonna be cure lights anyway.
xerxes13
Joined Feb 2010
371 Posts

The number of total choices is a false comparison.

If I added 23094389 crappy spells to the wizard - would that suddenly make the wizard more powerful?  If I stripped away 90% of the clerics spells - but made their few spells god-powerful - would that make the cleric less powerful?

Especially because - in practice - the majority of the spells given to both classes never see use in the typical day - or even in the typical campaign.

Carl

Adding crappy wizard spells doesn't change anything, the wizard's combinations are based on what is in that wizard's spellbook, NOT the wizard spell list. So even if you add a ton of crappy spells the wizard will still put the same ones in their spell book and have the same amount of cominations as above.

And the point isn't about actions or recources they get in a day/encounter, it is about their ability to niche-jump on a daily basis. Regardless of a Cleric's domain, he can be a tank one day, a heal bot the next day, a laser cleric the day after that and a party buffer/leader the day after that.

I simply think having some sort of domain based restriction to the spells they can prepare would help flesh out each clerics role and purpose. As of right now the only significant difference clerics of different domains is their weapon/armor proficiencies. Their is currently no reason for anyone (outside of flavor or a fetish for one of the domain spells) for anyone to want to be a Sun Cleric. You can just be a War Cleric in Plate and Shield and do the same thing as Sun Cleric.

Because if clerics had to choose their spells then instead of having 4 interesting first level spells, 2 interesting second level spells, and a third level spell, they would have 7 cure light wounds. I played second edition, and that's what happened..

You misunderstand how Cleric spells are prepared and, as a consequence of that, the point I am trying to make.

Orkbard
Joined Mar 2012
522 Posts
Because if clerics had to choose their spells then instead of having 4 interesting first level spells, 2 interesting second level spells, and a third level spell, they would have 7 cure light wounds. I played second edition, and that's what happened.

Cleric spells are situational. Create food and water or endure elements can help you a lot when you need them, but you very rarely need them. If you had to pick what spell you might need without knowing ahead of time, you would just take more copies of cure light wounds. The only way to stop that is to let clerics use all their spells for cure light wounds if they need to, but give them a few other options that won't take away their healing ability by taking "just in case."

Also the math chart really doesn't matter. It reminds me of people in 4e who claimed Fireball was OP because as a burst 3 that dealt 3d6+int damage it had the potential of doing 8,232 damage (7*7*7*24). In practice it really never worked that way. And in practice clerics do not have near as much versatlity as you think they do. Especially when nine times out of ten they are all just gonna be cure lights anyway.

3rd edition had the spontaneous casting where clerics could sack a 1st level spell, non-domain, for a cure light, 2nd for cure mod, 3rd for cure serious, etc. With clerics here they can cast whatever spell they have prepared as many times as they can cast it, but only need to prepare it once. So yes you can cast 7 spells per day but you are going to have 4 potential cure lights, 2 potential cure mods, and 1 potential cure serious. You might never need to use all of those and get to use the other spells you prepared. Then there is Healing Word, a "healing-strike" spell, where you get a quick heal and still get to be functional. Its less effective than cure light but more versitile in combat.

I don't see the value in having clerics have to learn spells like a Wizard. If there really is a need to limit the spells available than there needs to be a stronger emphasis on the Domains and what spell lists they grant, with plenty of overlap, which I think is the point of the general Cleric spell list. That being the overlap as I'm thinking about this and looking at the list.

Also, I got 5 electrum that says, all the spells for Wizard are not in yet.
Edymnion
Joined Feb 2002
3246 Posts
Bottom line is that most people won't play a Cleric.  They get treated as walking bandaids who's only job it is to heal.  Doesn't really matter to most people what spells they actually have access to, the only ones that matter are Cure X Wounds.

Clerics were DRASTICALLY overpowered in what they could do back in 3e, and yet you still couldn't get someone to play one as anything other than a healbot.

They have to be overpowered just to get anyone to look twice at them.
the_yakk
Joined Jul 2008
156 Posts
An easy solution (if harsh) would be to make clerics like 3e sorcerers.  They have miracles known that they get to change when they level up.

(Multiple) domains would then fit in nicely, each being a package of pre-chosen spells with side benefits.
MindWandererB
Joined Apr 2005
2716 Posts
I do agree with the OP in two respects.

1) Clerics get more powerful every time a book comes out.  Even if it's 90% crap, any good spell that gets printed is instantly added to their repertoire.  Wizards have to give up an old spell to get a new one.

2) Prepping spells can take forever.  Especially once a few books have come out, and the cleric's player has to flip through all the books every game day.  It's a pain for them, and everyone else has to sit and wait.

"Edison didn't succeed the first time he invented Benjamin Franklin, either." Albert the Alligator, Walt Kelly's Pogo Sunday Book
The Core Coliseum: test out your 4e builds and fight to the death.

Joined Aug 2012
54 Posts
So lets take a serious look at the cleric.  Is he a magic user, or a miracle worker?  If he's a magic user, then he's really no different from a magic user, except he can wear armor and wield a weapon.

Now, if the guy is a miracle worker, then the spells granted to him are boons of his diety, thereby giving him the ability to use them repeatedly as needed.  Perhaps the whole class should be re-tooled along those lines.  In fact, I would say change the spells to "miracles" or "boons" and you transform the whole class into a God-fearing warrior who performs miracles.
Ctwilliams1990
Joined May 2012
34 Posts
So lets take a serious look at the cleric.  Is he a magic user, or a miracle worker?  If he's a magic user, then he's really no different from a magic user, except he can wear armor and wield a weapon.

Now, if the guy is a miracle worker, then the spells granted to him are boons of his diety, thereby giving him the ability to use them repeatedly as needed.  Perhaps the whole class should be re-tooled along those lines.  In fact, I would say change the spells to "miracles" or "boons" and you transform the whole class into a God-fearing warrior who performs miracles.

I like this. I play clerics. I play clerics A LOT. They are versitile and fun but in the end people always try to relegate them to healbot. When I first started that's just what I thought one was, but played it because it was what we needed at the time. My views have since changed but there is a flaw in the class that needs to be corrected. Clerics always seemed to be so flat. Yes a player could flesh them out and make them interesting but why? You are the niche filler. Oh fighters down? Pick up a mace. Rogue's gone? Use spells to detect/disable traps. Barbarians? Please bear's strength and bull's endurance is more effective. Wizard or Sorceorer... hahahahaha. With such a variety of roles you can pick up and put down developing a tone or voice for your cleric is hard. It's easier just to have a healbot who can hit stuff if they have to. I once played a game where the fighter literally had the cleric player in his backpack as his personal healbot.

The flaw if you haven't picked up on it is the cleric does too much at once. I have to fight to give my clerics personallity. I have to fight the rules and mechanics. I have to fight the parties demands. That shouldn't be the case. The voice of a character shouldn't have to struggle against the mechanics of the game.

I guess what i'm trying to say is the conclussion the OP reached is correct. The cleric has too much and needs to be scaled back. The problem is so many of the things clerics get make sense. Healing? duh. Buffs? of course. Damaging spells? It wouldn't make sense otherwise. All the utillity spells create food and water, various divinations, general miraculous works like mending and shape stone. They all feel like something a holy man should be able to get his god to do for him. Maybe I just like the power offered by the cleric in the right circumstances, and role play can almost always make the circumstances right, and don't want to give it up.

just my two coppers
sorry for the ramble
NullSheen
Joined Sep 2008
172 Posts
oh great another
"wahhhh" another class that does something better then the wizard" thread.

When will people get over the fact that the wizard is not the best at everything.....
tlantl
Joined Feb 2007
504 Posts
I am firmly in the "who cares" camp.
Chaosmancer
Joined Oct 2008
810 Posts
oh great another
"wahhhh" another class that does something better then the wizard" thread.

When will people get over the fact that the wizard is not the best at everything.....

So saying that a cleric is too much, and then comparing him to the only other "basic" casting class is whining about how wizards should be awesome at everything? This is a dsicussion about if the cleric needs to be reimagined, the post right above yours from ctWilliams does a great job at laying out the issue, and says nothing even close to "Wizards are L33t", in fact the only mention of wizards, to my recollection, is to show just how insane the cleric's spell list gets.

I am firmly in the "who cares" camp.

Who cares? People who want the game balanced and fun for all players. Clerics seem like they need a serious looking at to see if they can be improved as a concept instead of being "healbots" or being incredibly overpowered
Joined Aug 2012
54 Posts
Well I, for one, don't care about who's more powerful than who.  And balance is the least of my concerns.  What I care about is a character class that makes sense.  I would like to see the cleric tied even more closely to his deity.  Each deity should have a set of "miracles" based on what they are a deity of, and those powers are all their clerics have available to them.  Perhaps one domain per thing the deity is the god of.  This would take the cleric more out of the magic user class and put him more in a class of his own, tied more closely to the game world, and to the deity he serves.  It would also make the cleric as a mace wielding, shield bearing fighter make more sense.  This guy don't depend on magic at all.  He depends solely on his diety for everything.  It makes the symbiosis of the deity and the believer more real in game terms than just in theory.  The deity can't exist without the believer, and the believer can't use the deities set of miracles/boons/powers/whatever without the deity.

Again, I would strongly suggest changing cleric "spells" to something else.  Name them differently, but give them the "cleric spell" game mechanic, which is a little different from the MU spells anyway.
Ctwilliams1990
Joined May 2012
34 Posts
This is why in the game I play regularly my clerics spell preparation is a prayer roll. A percentile modified by acts he has done to please or displease his god recently. Roll too low, like 1-10, and you loose some to all spells. Middling rolls do nothing special. Hi rolls, 90-99, get boons like an extra spell maybe a clue to the story or hint at a new powerful artifact. Double aughts are usually a very very happy god that grants permanent blessings. My favorite was geting three of those in a week and advancing my spell scale by a level, but i digress. The cleric needs to be different in some fundamental ways from everyone else so he can develop.

The idea of the deity and believer being symbiotic is very good and I like it. It means that there could be a literal mechanic for deity "pleasure" with his cleric. A cleric who goes out and brings more into the fold is much more likely to get more and more powerful boons and miracles than one who alienates followers. It gives clerics a reason to adventure other than "those guys look like they may need some healing in the future." Which is seriously how most clerics get put in a party.

-Edit to expand point-

Oh and just in case anyone missed it clerics get the most damaging spell at each spell level, inflict x. Please check out those numbers and report back because that just seems wrong.
Joined Aug 2012
54 Posts
This is why in the game I play regularly my clerics spell preparation is a prayer roll. A percentile modified by acts he has done to please or displease his god recently. Roll too low, like 1-10, and you loose some to all spells. Middling rolls do nothing special. Hi rolls, 90-99, get boons like an extra spell maybe a clue to the story or hint at a new powerful artifact. Double aughts are usually a very very happy god that grants permanent blessings. My favorite was geting three of those in a week and advancing my spell scale by a level, but i digress. The cleric needs to be different in some fundamental ways from everyone else so he can develop.

The idea of the deity and believer being symbiotic is very good and I like it. It means that there could be a literal mechanic for deity "pleasure" with his cleric. A cleric who goes out and brings more into the fold is much more likely to get more and more powerful boons and miracles than one who alienates followers. It gives clerics a reason to adventure other than "those guys look like they may need some healing in the future." Which is seriously how most clerics get put in a party.

-Edit to expand point-

Oh and just in case anyone missed it clerics get the most damaging spell at each spell level, inflict x. Please check out those numbers and report back because that just seems wrong.

I actually got the deity/believer symbiosis thing from the Immortals Set.  Its not really anything new.  I like the idea of the diety "pleasure" mechanic.  It ties everything in to the character's standing with his diety.  Of course, I've been talking about the mace wielding cleric, but there can be other forms, like the book worm type, or the straight up priest, who are less of a fighter and more of a thinker.  But I can see the mace wielding cleric using the guardian specialty, while the priest would use the acolyte or healer specialty.  That would definitely make the cleric less of a heal-bot if you take certain specialties.  I could see the class broken into the Paladin, Monk and Priest sub-classes, depending on which specialty is taken.  It would certainly make those three classes (or rather sub-classes in this example) make sense in the game world.

Here's another thought.  Since demons can fall in the rhelm of "immortals", perhaps the Warlock class could be included in these mechanics, instead of its own class.  Dunno.  That might be unpopular, and it might not work.  I'm just thinking out loud here.
Ctwilliams1990
Joined May 2012
34 Posts

I actually got the deity/believer symbiosis thing from the Immortals Set.  Its not really anything new.  I like the idea of the diety "pleasure" mechanic.  It ties everything in to the character's standing with his diety.  Of course, I've been talking about the mace wielding cleric, but there can be other forms, like the book worm type, or the straight up priest, who are less of a fighter and more of a thinker.  But I can see the mace wielding cleric using the guardian specialty, while the priest would use the acolyte or healer specialty.  That would definitely make the cleric less of a heal-bot if you take certain specialties.  I could see the class broken into the Paladin, Monk and Priest sub-classes, depending on which specialty is taken.  It would certainly make those three classes (or rather sub-classes in this example) make sense in the game world.

Here's another thought.  Since demons can fall in the rhelm of "immortals", perhaps the Warlock class could be included in these mechanics, instead of its own class.  Dunno.  That might be unpopular, and it might not work.  I'm just thinking out loud here.

I don't know about folding them into warlock, at least mechanicly. I would think you would run into the same kind of situation where a cleric would feel lacking that uniqueness they deserve.

Perhaps:
Clerics gain miracles that they can perform at the pleasure of they're diety. These miracles require a verbal prayer, genuflection, and focus upon a holy symbol of his diety. Minor miracles, equate to current 1-2nd level spells, require little of a cleric other than his continued devotion therefore he may cast them after succeeding a prayer roll modified positively by his wisdom. Moderate miracles 3-5 require more of the cleric and may also require services to his deity and count as 3 miracles. They are modified the same. Major miracles 6-9 require true sacrifice perhaps even the clerics life if the need is great enough major spells are not modified by wisdom and count as 6 miracles. Clerics may only use as many miracles per day as half their wisdom SCORE.

minor
10+miracle level

moderate
10 + 1.5xmiracle level (round up)
-table of services-
or dm descretion

major
10+2xmiracle level
-table of sacrifices-
or dm descretion

Spell alignment: Any spell whose alignment matches the dieties is moved down one category, minimum of minor. Any spell whose alignment is counter to dieties alignment raise one category, if forced beyond major miracle is unavailable.

Deity Pleasure: Clerics are required to fulfill the commands of their chosen deity. Depending on the god he worships these commands can vary wildly however the more satifactorally a cleric fulfills these his deity will grant boons to the cleric. These may take several forms the most common is a bonus to miracle checks. However, if a deity becomes displeased a cleric may lose all access to miracles untill he has made his pennance. The pleasure of a clerics god may be determined by dm fiat or a roll at the begining of each day which may be modified if the cleric has fulfilled his gods wishes. A result of 1 or lower will result in loss of miracles. A result of 20 or higher will grant the cleric a boon.

Then what qualifies as a minor, moderate and major spell would change as the cleric levels up. But a 9th level cleric miracle would never be less than moderate.

this is pretty much off the cuff take it or burn it but some feedback would be nice
Joined Aug 2012
54 Posts
I kind of like it.  It keeps the spells, but renames them.  It keeps the mechanics, but altars the language.  It adds some flavor, plus, it adds new rules specific to the class.  I particularly like how it ties everything in to the pleasure of the deity.  It probably could be tweaked here and there, but as a beginning, I really like it.

I think I would take it further.  If the spell don't fit in with the deity's alignment or the domains the deity grants, it becomes a major task.  There should be cleric spells that are cut off from certain clerics, due to their service to a specific god.  And, of course, I'm still for eliminating calling them spells at all.  Eliminate the term "divine magic" from the rules entirely in favor of "divine gifts" or something along those lines.
Ctwilliams1990
Joined May 2012
34 Posts
I figure that for major miracles the sacrifice or service the god would demand would have to take place before the gift is given. As far as spells and alignment I think only diometrically opposed alignments would be cancelled. Lawful good gods can't give chaotic evil spells and vice versa. However, that makes neutral gods more appealing ...
Joined Aug 2012
54 Posts
That's why I liked the idea of expanding the domains to encompass all that the cleric could do.  He would only have available the spells/miracles that were assigned to his domain.  Anything outside of it would be near impossible for him to accomplish, given his god don't grant that.
pauln6
Joined Jan 2004
3153 Posts
They do need to have restricted spell lists.  3e clerics had so many spells to choose from; it was horrendous.  At least with restricted domains, it limits broken combinations.  They should have access to a limited list of 'core' cleric spells, a selection of domain spells, and a few deity-specific spells and spell-like abilities.
Joined Aug 2012
54 Posts
I agree, with the continued caveat that the word "spells" is replaced with "miracles" or "boons" or something else.
tlantl
Joined Feb 2007
504 Posts
I'm sorry but there's nothing miraculous about daily spell casting. Clerics cast spells just like any other spell slinger does.
Unwise
Joined Nov 2010
2 Posts
- Edit - Oops I posted this in the wrong thread, though it is still somewhat relevant, so I will leave it here.

I had a pretty simple fix for the concerns expressed earlier in this thread. I just told the party's cleric that they could not prepare more than half of their spells as healing spells, because:

A) HP were a resources that I as a GM wanted to be able to manage and predict during an adventure. A cleric preparing 7 healing spells makes for a very different game than one preparing 1. Never knowing what was going to be prepared made planning difficult. They were safer this way, as death are more likely when I plan around them having lots of healing and find they have none.

B) It is more fun for the player when they can get to use their other cool abilities without the rest of the party moaning at them. It is also less harsh on the cleric when somebody dies, the whole party is not there thinking "gee, you just had to use that Smite rather than keep a heal for us..."

Everybody was cool with this, in fact more people expressed an interest in playing a cleric who had this restriction than before I put it in place. The player who always plays druids asked me to put the restriction in place for him when they are released.
Joined Aug 2012
54 Posts
I'm sorry but there's nothing miraculous about daily spell casting. Clerics cast spells just like any other spell slinger does.

The whole idea is to transform the cleric into a miracle worker for his deity, instead of a heal-bot with spells.  So the deity don't grant magic, instead the deity grants miracles and boons according to the domains that god gives.  The "spells" would be transformed into those miracles and boons, thereby connecting the cleric more closely to the setting the DM is using.  It also gives the cleric more of a reason to exist and explains why the cleric can have armor and still function "magically".  It does away with "divine magic" and replaces it with "divine pleasure".  All rolls to use the miracles and boons would be favor rolls.  A 20 gives you somthing more and boosts the favor.  A 1 shows the god's displeasure with you, and penalizes you for it.  Each cleric has only those miracles and boons granted to him by the domain of his god.  Any given god will only grant the miracles and boons conected to the domains the god is connected to.  Its really simple, and makes the cleric unique.

But mechanically, it probably wouldn't be much different than it is now.  It would only get a few tweaks.
tlantl
Joined Feb 2007
504 Posts
I'm sorry but there's nothing miraculous about daily spell casting. Clerics cast spells just like any other spell slinger does.

The whole idea is to transform the cleric into a miracle worker for his deity, instead of a heal-bot with spells.  So the deity don't grant magic, instead the deity grants miracles and boons according to the domains that god gives.  The "spells" would be transformed into those miracles and boons, thereby connecting the cleric more closely to the setting the DM is using.  It also gives the cleric more of a reason to exist and explains why the cleric can have armor and still function "magically".  It does away with "divine magic" and replaces it with "divine pleasure".  All rolls to use the miracles and boons would be favor rolls.  A 20 gives you somthing more and boosts the favor.  A 1 shows the god's displeasure with you, and penalizes you for it.  Each cleric has only those miracles and boons granted to him by the domain of his god.  Any given god will only grant the miracles and boons conected to the domains the god is connected to.  Its really simple, and makes the cleric unique.

But mechanically, it probably wouldn't be much different than it is now.  It would only get a few tweaks.

I'm all kinds of happy with the cleric as the guy you go to for healing it's their place in the game.

I'm sorry but WotC's track record with their casters is horrible. The cleric never had second or third level cure spells until WotC bough the game. Clerics were never designed to use their spells in combat. The absolute best a cleric could do was a second level spiritual hammer and a fifth level flame strike. A cleric needed hundreds of thousands of experience points to reach ninth level to be able to cast one.

Clerics get weapons and armor so they can fight with them. Once upon a time the cleric and the rogue could actually do something in combat, neither needed lazer beams or 24/7 sneak attacks. The fighter was better but that was because he was the fighter. The game wasn't based around how bad assed the fighter was it was based on the cleric more than any other class and some creatures were a cake walk for the wizard and his dagger.

You want a bad assed holy warrior play the paladin that was his job, hit like a fighter and represent your church. Paladins didn't get spells until they were lords.

Just my 2 cents is all.
Joined Aug 2012
54 Posts
Well, I'm not trying to give him offensive magic.  I'm trying to make the class make sense.  He's a fighter, who happens to be in the good graces of his deity.  Or he's a priest or monk out teaching the theology of his deity.  He also happens to be able to perform miracles.  The miracles should be the "spell" mechanic.  That's all I'm saying.  And the mechanic should be slightly different, and dependent on the character's standing with his deity.  And the miracles granted should be solely dependent on the deitie's domains.
Diffan
Joined Sep 2006
5496 Posts
Apparently I'm not seeing the problem with the Cleric as presented in the playtest. As for extreamly strict domain spells being the only ones cast, I think that's a horrid idea. Mainly because the cleric has to fullfill multiple roles within the game. He's the healer (ie. needs healing spells). He's the secondary tanks (ie. he needs armor/weap prof). He's the secondary utility guy (ie. he needs non-combative spells). He's the secondary magic user-guy (ie. he needs a few offenseive spells like inflict light wounds and flame strike).

None of this is new or different than the last 3 editions. What domains are and have been are specialties that give them differences based on their god's ethos/ideals/etc.

So instead of trying to bring down/change the cleirc, why not try to build up the Wizard? I've always been a firm believer in building UP instead of tearing DOWN classes. For example, there were a ridiculous amount of Crappy classes in v3.5 that people compared to the Wizard/Cleric/Druid. And instead of trying to limit/break/restrict those 3 classes, why not try to BUILD UP the crappy ones? So the wizard needs more versatility in his spell-per day? Ok, how about allowing him to swap spells from his spellbook during a short rest? How about providing more spells learned at each level-up? How about removing the ridiculous amout of time needed to "prepare spells" at the beginning of the day? Changing or removing these elements might make the wizard stand out more as a magic-specialist than playing second fiddle to the cleric's versatility.

Ctwilliams1990
Joined May 2012
34 Posts
Apparently I'm not seeing the problem with the Cleric as presented in the playtest. As for extreamly strict domain spells being the only ones cast, I think that's a horrid idea. Mainly because the cleric has to fullfill multiple roles within the game. He's the healer (ie. needs healing spells). He's the secondary tanks (ie. he needs armor/weap prof). He's the secondary utility guy (ie. he needs non-combative spells). He's the secondary magic user-guy (ie. he needs a few offenseive spells like inflict light wounds and flame strike).

None of this is new or different than the last 3 editions. What domains are and have been are specialties that give them differences based on their god's ethos/ideals/etc.

This is the problem though the cleric is too much. He is the healer, a tank (he can out tank the fighter by level 5), utility, and mage cannon. Too mcuh he needs to be scaled back. I understand not wanting to tear down classes but when every class can do everything its just a gray slurry of blah. The domain spell/miracle lists would be expanded and there would be universals it would be like wizard schools in a way. The people who are concerned about the clerics power level, at least from what I've seen, aren't wizard or fighter players they are people who regularly play clerics. That should say something.

Thank you
Joined Aug 2012
54 Posts
Apparently I'm not seeing the problem with the Cleric as presented in the playtest. As for extreamly strict domain spells being the only ones cast, I think that's a horrid idea. Mainly because the cleric has to fullfill multiple roles within the game. He's the healer (ie. needs healing spells). He's the secondary tanks (ie. he needs armor/weap prof). He's the secondary utility guy (ie. he needs non-combative spells). He's the secondary magic user-guy (ie. he needs a few offenseive spells like inflict light wounds and flame strike).

None of this is new or different than the last 3 editions. What domains are and have been are specialties that give them differences based on their god's ethos/ideals/etc.

This is the problem though the cleric is too much. He is the healer, a tank (he can out tank the fighter by level 5), utility, and mage cannon. Too mcuh he needs to be scaled back. I understand not wanting to tear down classes but when every class can do everything its just a gray slurry of blah. The domain spell/miracle lists would be expanded and there would be universals it would be like wizard schools in a way. The people who are concerned about the clerics power level, at least from what I've seen, aren't wizard or fighter players they are people who regularly play clerics. That should say something.

Thank you

What he said.  When I play (as opposed to DM), I play a cleric.
Diffan
Joined Sep 2006
5496 Posts
Apparently I'm not seeing the problem with the Cleric as presented in the playtest. As for extreamly strict domain spells being the only ones cast, I think that's a horrid idea. Mainly because the cleric has to fullfill multiple roles within the game. He's the healer (ie. needs healing spells). He's the secondary tanks (ie. he needs armor/weap prof). He's the secondary utility guy (ie. he needs non-combative spells). He's the secondary magic user-guy (ie. he needs a few offenseive spells like inflict light wounds and flame strike).

None of this is new or different than the last 3 editions. What domains are and have been are specialties that give them differences based on their god's ethos/ideals/etc.

This is the problem though the cleric is too much. He is the healer, a tank (he can out tank the fighter by level 5), utility, and mage cannon. Too mcuh he needs to be scaled back. I understand not wanting to tear down classes but when every class can do everything its just a gray slurry of blah. The domain spell/miracle lists would be expanded and there would be universals it would be like wizard schools in a way. The people who are concerned about the clerics power level, at least from what I've seen, aren't wizard or fighter players they are people who regularly play clerics. That should say something.

Thank you

What he said.  When I play (as opposed to DM), I play a cleric.

I've played clerics for the past 3 editions and I don't see a problem with this one presented. The fact that I have a tiny bit more versatility in how I spell cast hasn't shown to be a problem and I don't see why a Wizard would have a problem with it either. And I wouldn't consider this a "Power" discrepancy either, it has to do strictly with versatility. Do clerics get big area spells? Can they end encounter with 1 spell? Can they deal TONS of damage with their attacks? Are they better fighters than actual Fighters? Can they be better at Finding/Disarming traps better than Rogues? The answer I've seen to these questions is "No". The fact that clerics can function in these rules, albiet limitedly, is what makes them a good class. Reducing their spellcasting to a few spells in their sphere domain reduces their function pretty significantly.

Lets look at their progressions: Weapon attack is half of what a Fighters is at 5th level. Spell attack is half of what a Wizards is at 5th level. Only War Domain clerics get prof. with armor and martial weapons. Now if you were to reduce what spells a War Domain cleric can cast to say.....offensive spells and some defensive spells then I'd say your better off just playing a religious Fighter because he gets better mechanics via Combat Superiority. If you wanted to player a sneaky cleric who can hide and get spells for disabling traps, then I'd say your better off just playing a religious Rogue. The cleric's niché IS being versatile, working in a specific way as a "fill-in" for a very short duration. Looking back at 3E, one of the cleric's biggest hey-days, it's easy to see the disparity between himself and say....the Fighter but it wasn't because of his versatility, it was of his PROLONGED versatility (ie. 24-hr buffs).

pauln6
Joined Jan 2004
3153 Posts
No, once you added in the additional books there was a problem with versatility.  Clerical spell lists were huge and daunting to novice players.  The wide selection of spells allowed power gamers to pick the biggest, most damaging spells as well as the most powerful buffing spells and in the new system, imagine being able to cast them as often as you like.  If it's versatility you want then allow clerics to add some 'known' signature spells outside their core and domain lists but the total number of spells known needs to be bounded somehow.
Diffan
Joined Sep 2006
5496 Posts
Or you could, ya know, not print a ridiculous amount of spells. Besides, I dare say 70% of the cleric's spell list in v3.5 was so specific in it's function that you might only see it once in a blue while. Additionally, we don't know how many spells they're going to create for the cleric of this edition and thus, shouldn't pigeonhole a class based on what possibly might happen.
Joined Aug 2012
54 Posts
Well, I was just throwing it out there to chew on anyway.  Its a way the cleric could be re-tooled.  More of a holy-man, miracle worker than a spellcaster.
Chaosmancer
Joined Oct 2008
810 Posts
I like the direction you guys are going with the cleric, that being said I'm a little worried about rolling every time. I think all the role-playing groups I'm in are cursed, but we seem to always roll low. I've seen a lot of 1's. Removing a clerics spells for a bad roll (which is how I see the "favor roll" at the moment) seems harsh. I know it usually won't happen, but I can see that possibility being a problem. After all, why change from a reliable system to an unreliable one. Is there a way to tweak the system to make it harder to randomly lose the deities favor? I mean, if you haven't done anything to upset your diety why is he refusing to grant your "miracles"

Also, a little clarification on the "minor" -> "moderate" -> "Major" system. Does the level of the cleric play into that? Because if high-level spells stay major then your system is extremely under-powered at high levels. I think this was your intent but you didn't say.
Qmark
Joined May 2002
18912 Posts
Maybe, just maybe, the 4E cleric should be dropped into 5E pretty much intact: Just straight-up Divine AEDU powers.