Wisdom is a Dump Stat for Clerics

Right now the most important stats for my Cleric are Str and Con, with Dex slightly behind. Int, Cha, and Wis are effectively useless to me. While I can live with Int and Cha being not very useful to me (though I thought every ability was supposed to be important) the fact that as a Cleric my Wis score is largely irrelevant seems ridiculous. My Wisdom score is supposed to be my primary spellcasting ability, which should mean it affects the spells I cast. The problem is, it mostly doesn't.

My ability modifier is no longer added to the damage I deal with spells. That means it is only useful for when I am trying to hit a target with a spell or they are trying to save versus my spell DC. Unfortunately, since I am so starved for spell slots, I never have a chance to use any of my higher level offensive spells. Previously I took the feat chain for healing potions, and everyone in the party carried a maximized potion and that allowed me a lot more liberty in the spells I cast. That's gone now though. Since you don't need to succesfully roll an attack in order to cast a healing or buff spell, my spellcasting ability is entirely irrelevant for all my spell slots because - you guessed it - your Wisdom score also does not affect your healing in any way.

This still leaves at-wills though, right? Well, there's a problem there too. Yes, my Wisdom increases my ability to attack, and that's great. But as I've previously mentioned, there is no bonus to damage. So take Lance of Faith cast by a Cleric with 18 Wis at level one.

+5 to Hit, 50ft range, 2D6 damage

A Dwarf Cleric with 18 Str using a maul, however, does this.

+4 to Hit, Melee, 2D6+4 damage.

Plus the deities that grant martial weapon profeciencies also give access to heavier armor, so you'd be well protected in melee. If you really want to be ranged, an Elf with a longbow does comprable damage as well.

So since Wisdom does not increase my spell damage, only gives me +1 to hit with at-wills that do damage comprable (if not inferior) to weapon damage, affects my healing in no way whatsoever, and has no impact on the number of spells I can prepare or cast in a day, why should Clerics care about it? 
 
The lower reliance on Wisdom is a benefit, not a hindrance.  If Wisdom was needed, then any cleric hoping to be a front-line melee character would need a high Wisdom, high Strength, and probably a decent Constitution.  That is too much.

I think it is great that you can make a Cleric whose primary stat is Strength, using spells that don't rely on Wisdom.  I also think it is great that you can make a Cleric whose primary stat is Wisdom, using spells that have attack rolls or saving throws.

That said, I do think it would be nice for your stat to add to damage for spells that require an attack roll, just as for attacks with weapons.

I think it is great that you can make a Cleric whose primary stat is Strength, using spells that don't rely on Wisdom.  I also think it is great that you can make a Cleric whose primary stat is Wisdom, using spells that have attack rolls or saving throws.



That would be nice if it were true, but unless you have another Cleric in the party to cast healing spells for you, you're going to need all of the spell slots you have for heals. That's part of the problem. You don't have the versatility at this point to toss out cool attack spells.

I think it is great that you can make a Cleric whose primary stat is Strength, using spells that don't rely on Wisdom.  I also think it is great that you can make a Cleric whose primary stat is Wisdom, using spells that have attack rolls or saving throws.



That would be nice if it were true, but unless you have another Cleric in the party to cast healing spells for you, you're going to need all of the spell slots you have for heals. That's part of the problem. You don't have the versatility at this point to toss out cool attack spells.

We seem to just have very different playstyles.  In all of my playtests, the cleric has never used all his spells to heal.  In fact, one session he didn't cast a single healing spell (and used up all of his spells).

Healing is a bonus, it isn't required to play.

The monsters so far have been pretty much cakewalks. Our DM houseruled a buff in their attacks and damage, because the party was starting to feel guilty about killing monsters barely capable of fighting back. If you can go through a whole dungeon relying just on your Hit Dice for healing, I'd say there are probably other balance issues that need to be worked out.
The monsters so far have been pretty much cakewalks. Our DM houseruled a buff in their attacks and damage, because the party was starting to feel guilty about killing monsters barely capable of fighting back. If you can go through a whole dungeon relying just on your Hit Dice for healing, I'd say there are probably other balance issues that need to be worked out.

You can certainly say that, but I disagree; I think the current goal is for Clerics (and other healers) to not be required.  In other words, if your only healing comes from your hit dice, you will be fine.

We seem to just have very different playstyles.  In all of my playtests, the cleric has never used all his spells to heal.  In fact, one session he didn't cast a single healing spell (and used up all of his spells).

Healing is a bonus, it isn't required to play.


No, healing is pretty much the whole reason you want a cleric in your party. They have other cool things they can do with their spells, but everything else they do is done better by another class. You want a cleric in the party for heals.

I agree that wisdom is fairly underwhelming. There is not a single non-attack spell in the game that gets anything out of wisdom, unless I missed one.

You can try to work on improving Lance of Faith as your main attack, but since you can cast a healing spell in the same round you make a weapon attack, building your character around weapon attacks instead of Lance of Faith is the clear winner. The Lightbringer offers some insentive for wisdom builds, but that is really the only one, and its not an amazing domain.
Sanctuary benefits from Wisdom, but that was the only buff/heal/protect spell I found in the packet.
I like having the chance to play a low Wisdom cleric, i feel like that is step in the right direction.


The problem is that as of now it looks like there's few builds where Wisdom is actually important, let alone more important than Strength. And those builds revolving around WIS instead of STR are looking to be weaker.


I think you should add WIS mod to known cantrip and prepared spells.


But I feel as the problem is the lack of spells, casting only a few spells per day, especially at the lower level makes the cleric a subpar martial character all day except by 2 rounds of spells and 1 or 2 channel divinities.

I believe that the daily spell system is the root of the problem, but allowing having spells by encounter would break healing and utility spells. I would pretty much like to keep utility healing spells as our current daily spells, but also have a combat spell allowance in a  per encounter basis.

Healing is not, and should not be the main reason (and absolutely shouldn't be the only reason) that a player wants to play a Cleric.

That's an extremely limiting view that pidgeonholes the class into a single archetype...

Clerics should be the class people turn to when they want to play a pious character that gains power from their faith, which each different religion granting powers that fit the theme of their faith - and some of those should not even have access to healing magic.

"Healer" should be a party role that anyone who wants to can do something to adequately accomplish, much like "Damage dealer" should be something any class can focus on being rather than being forced into being "pretty much the whole reason" for a specific class to be desired.

Matter of Fact: before 3rd edition there were things called "specialty priests", and their particular specialty (their faith) determined their spell list... rather than every cleric regardless of their actual deity's portfolio having equal access to every divine spell.

ATTENTION:  If while reading my post you find yourself thinking "Either this guy is being sarcastic, or he is an idiot," do please assume that I am an idiot. It makes reading your replies more entertaining. If, however, you find yourself hoping that I am not being even remotely serious then you are very likely correct as I find irreverence and being ridiculous to be relaxing.

it goes the same for wizards. if you wish you can have a dex focused wizard using finesse weapons and using all their spell slots for personal/party beneficial spells, and AOE (yes i know int applies to DC, but they will still affect  them) spells
Healing is not, and should not be the main reason (and absolutely shouldn't be the only reason) that a player wants to play a Cleric.

That's an extremely limiting view that pidgeonholes the class into a single archetype...

Clerics should be the class people turn to when they want to play a pious character that gains power from their faith, which each different religion granting powers that fit the theme of their faith...



Amen. (If you'll pardon the expression.) In my experience, it's a rare player who wants his or her cleric PC to be primarily a medic. I remember one campaign where our medic-cleric was an NPC henchman since no one else wanted the job. (No one volunteers for torch bearer or piss bucket boy either.) But a combat cleric who can do a bit of healing has always been popular with us.
"Healer" should be a party role that anyone who wants to can do something to adequately accomplish, much like "Damage dealer" should be something any class can focus on being rather than being forced into being "pretty much the whole reason" for a specific class to be desired.

As much as I would like to see that, I can't really wrap my head around a martial healer without first turning HP into a measure of morale.  I really like the physical wounds model, so if the choice comes down to "only the cleric can heal wounds" or "nobody can heal wounds because HP are just morale" then I'll choose the former over the latter any day.

I would like the see an arcane healer, though.  I mean, wizards should be able to learn healing spells, at the expense of some of their other schools - not as a power grab for wizards, but just to allow for a non-religious healer type.

The metagame is not the game.
As much as I would like to see that, I can't really wrap my head around a martial healer

Perhaps you should crack open your playtest packet and take a good look at the Herbalism feat.

just to allow for a non-religious healer type.


Herbalism feat, Healing Initiate feat (no religious connotation attached), Magical Rejuvenation feat (still no religious connotation attached), and Restore Life feat (again, no religious connotation).

They even have the specialty of Mystic Healer which combines the above as suggestions, and has zero religious connotation.

ATTENTION:  If while reading my post you find yourself thinking "Either this guy is being sarcastic, or he is an idiot," do please assume that I am an idiot. It makes reading your replies more entertaining. If, however, you find yourself hoping that I am not being even remotely serious then you are very likely correct as I find irreverence and being ridiculous to be relaxing.

It's more than sufficient for keeping people up between combats, but Hit Dice alone can do that (for the most part).

I'm talking about healer as a combat role, which would mean plenty of spell slots and spells strong enough to warrant spending an action on them.  Of course, as of present, there is no way to play a healer of that type, so I guess I'll keep waiting.
The metagame is not the game.
...I can't be the only one who finds it funny that one of wildefox's complaints is:
"I am spending all my time casting healing spells because its absolutely necessary"
and then goes on to say that his DM buffed up all the enemies in his campaign because they "felt too easy."

In short, the cleric doesn't need to be healing all the time if your DM isn't running buffed up monsters.

Sounds like you have a complaint with your DM, not the rules.
...I can't be the only one who finds it funny that one of wildefox's complaints is:
"I am spending all my time casting healing spells because its absolutely necessary"
and then goes on to say that his DM buffed up all the enemies in his campaign because they "felt too easy."


I tend to intentionally ignore the parts of people's statements that do that whole "I have decided I have a problem, despite me only seeing this problem because of some ridiculous insistance of my own or my DM's that I am not recognizing as being ridiculous."

@Saelorn, I guess you are right... but I have never actually understood why someone would want to have "healer' be a combat role in the first place...

I've always been of the mind that stopping the source of damage is infinitely more important that creating more HP to be lost to damage, and so expect that every character would, while in combat, attempt to end the combat before and instead of attempting to recouperate from the combat.

ATTENTION:  If while reading my post you find yourself thinking "Either this guy is being sarcastic, or he is an idiot," do please assume that I am an idiot. It makes reading your replies more entertaining. If, however, you find yourself hoping that I am not being even remotely serious then you are very likely correct as I find irreverence and being ridiculous to be relaxing.

I've always been of the mind than stopping the source of damage is infinitely more important that creating more HP to be lost to damage, and so expect that every character would, while in combat, attempt to end the combat before and instead of attempting to recouperate from the combat.

That might be true from a practical standpoint, and it was definitely true in 4E, but there are any number of reasons why it might not be the case.  The two major ones are 1: because it fits the character (stories are full of characters who only have defensive magic - and sometimes actual healing - but rarely if ever make an attack), and 2: because it keeps you alive (having a floating pool of party HP that you can hand out as needed prevents enemies from focusing their fire, and any damage done by someone you keep alive is bound to be better than what you could do with your own attacks).

I suppose you could design a game such that in-combat healing wasn't a thing, but that would deprive players of the unique challenges involved with the role - things like managing your resources (which spell to use when), and getting in close enough to touch your ally without making yourself into an obvious target for enemies.
The metagame is not the game.
Healing is not, and should not be the main reason (and absolutely shouldn't be the only reason) that a player wants to play a Cleric.

That's an extremely limiting view that pidgeonholes the class into a single archetype...

Clerics should be the class people turn to when they want to play a pious character that gains power from their faith, which each different religion granting powers that fit the theme of their faith...



Amen. (If you'll pardon the expression.) In my experience, it's a rare player who wants his or her cleric PC to be primarily a medic. I remember one campaign where our medic-cleric was an NPC henchman since no one else wanted the job. (No one volunteers for torch bearer or piss bucket boy either.) But a combat cleric who can do a bit of healing has always been popular with us.



While I agree with you from a roleplay perspective, when it comes down to combat senarios and dungeon crawling, the raw power to keep people alive when things look grim is what the cleric class brings to the table that no other class can even come close to matching. To act like that's not true is... Ignoring the obvious, IMO. No offense intended.

Anyways, I love the DDN cleric, and I've really enjoyed playing mine. They've done a really good job with the Words of Power that allow the Cleric to not be pidgeonholed as the healbot when encounters get tough... I can drop the desperately needed cure criticals without missing a swing with my Greataxe. LOVE IT!

Wildefox has a very valid point though. Wisdom is most definitely a dump stat for most clerics now, especially considering all the perks they've added for making your cleric melee-heavy, and group-buffing. You can argue whether that's a good thing or not, but his point is quite accurate.

IMO, I don't really like it like that. I dropped an 18 in Wisdom at the beginning of the playtest, assuming it would be the best use of my 18. My cleric is 8th level now, and the only time I've ever seen any real benefit from it is for Spot checks, the occasional Lance of Faith I launched when I was lower level, hitting with those horribly broken "Inflict" spells before they got nerfed, and the few times I've cast Hold Person on the BBEG. I'm not saying these uses are insignifigant, but they really don't justify the 18 I plopped into wisdom at the beginning of the playtest at this point. I'd have been much better served with an 18 strength.

-Just my 2 coppers! Game on, comrads.
No one is stopping you from dedicating yourself as a healer, DnD isn't about making a class for only you guy. People WANT to play clerics in a variety of ways.
There is nothing wrong with that. Now you get to choose what is important for yourself instead of inputting what they decide is beneficial. It makes you be able to build what you want to and that's honestly great.
IMAGE(http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/RockNrollBabe20/Charmed-supernatural-and-charmed_zps8bd4125f.jpg)
As written, at least at lower levels, adding a Fighter to a party adds nearly as many HP to the parties HP pool as adding a Cleric, before accounting for Maneuvers.

Yes, you cannot allocate it where you want.  But if you are healing the party Fighter, you should replace your Cleric with another Fighter, at least at moderate levels.
Okay so what does Fighter + Fighter grant you, that Fighter + Cleric does not, or visa versa? What are the pros and cons Yakk? (Or anyone else can chime in).

AD&D 1st Edition Character (Simplified)

BIOGRAPHY
Name: Brother Michael
Adventuring Class: Cleric
Adventuring Experience: 1446 out of 1501
Bonus Experience: 10%
Languages Known: Common, Orc, Elven.
Alignment: Lawful/Neutral Good
ABILITY SCORES
Strength: 10
Dexterity: 10
Intelligence: 11
Charisma: 11
Constitution: 14
Wisdom: 16
WEAPONS: HIT; MEDIUM; LARGE
Footman’s Flail: 1d20; 1d6+1; 1d4
Hammer (Thrown): 1d20; 1d4+1; 1d4
Sling: 1d20-3; 1d4+1; 1d6+1
MAGIC
Today’s Prepared Spells: Cure Light Wounds x2, Command x1
Spells Spent: Cure Light Wounds x1
Other Cleric Abilities: Turn Undead
Spell Failure: 0%
Magical Attack Adjustment: +2
DEFENSES
Armor: 5 (-4 Armor, -1 Shield)
Maximum Health: 10
Current Health: 9
CONSUMABLE ITEMS
Water Skin
7 Days of Trail Rations
7 Pints (Flasks) of Oil
1 Ounce (Vial) of Holy Water
4 Parchments
12 Sling Bullets
6 Pieces of Silver
8 Pieces of Twine

Okay so what does Fighter + Fighter grant you, that Fighter + Cleric does not, or visa versa? What are the pros and cons Yakk? (Or anyone else can chime in).

the fact that it is a viable working option is the point.

it means that reliance on group comp is breaking down, which in turn means that groups can pick a group comp style, and have fun doing it.


Expand on your thought here, "comp" is also not a word that I am sure that it is short for, is it... complimentary? If so again, maybe just use synonyms to describe what you are trying to say, rephrase it even if you can't or wont expand. I just don’t quite get it. Are you saying that 2 fighters are equivalent (maybe the wrong word here) to a fighter and a cleric? or that you are now allowed to do this without being penalized? Short Rest + Hit Dice etc.

AD&D 1st Edition Character (Simplified)

BIOGRAPHY
Name: Brother Michael
Adventuring Class: Cleric
Adventuring Experience: 1446 out of 1501
Bonus Experience: 10%
Languages Known: Common, Orc, Elven.
Alignment: Lawful/Neutral Good
ABILITY SCORES
Strength: 10
Dexterity: 10
Intelligence: 11
Charisma: 11
Constitution: 14
Wisdom: 16
WEAPONS: HIT; MEDIUM; LARGE
Footman’s Flail: 1d20; 1d6+1; 1d4
Hammer (Thrown): 1d20; 1d4+1; 1d4
Sling: 1d20-3; 1d4+1; 1d6+1
MAGIC
Today’s Prepared Spells: Cure Light Wounds x2, Command x1
Spells Spent: Cure Light Wounds x1
Other Cleric Abilities: Turn Undead
Spell Failure: 0%
Magical Attack Adjustment: +2
DEFENSES
Armor: 5 (-4 Armor, -1 Shield)
Maximum Health: 10
Current Health: 9
CONSUMABLE ITEMS
Water Skin
7 Days of Trail Rations
7 Pints (Flasks) of Oil
1 Ounce (Vial) of Holy Water
4 Parchments
12 Sling Bullets
6 Pieces of Silver
8 Pieces of Twine

Comp was short for composition, as in "our group composition suffered when we lacked a dedicated healer".
No one is stopping you from dedicating yourself as a healer,



Except that the game totally is. If I pick the Lifegiver deity, which is obviously the healing orientated God, what advantages do I get?
1. Channel Positive Energy and Channel Regrowth
2. My healing spells restore extra hit points equal to 2 + spell level

Lightbringer and Protector both also have Channel Positive Energy, which I'll admit is a pretty decent heal, but it's not exclusive to the 'healing' Cleric. Channel Regrowth is, which means your healing Cleric has the amazing ability to ... reduce damage dealt to him by 10? Not super impressive. The Protector has the exact same channel, but they can cast it on someone else instead which could be argued to be the better option if you are going for a traditional style healer. Channel Radiance, which the Lightbringer gets, far outstrips them both.

But at least you get a bonus to your healing spells, right? That 2 + Spell Level means that when you cast  Cure Serious Wounds you get to add a whopping extra hit points onto the ... 3D8 + 8 it does already? On a spell you can't cast until level five anyway? I suppose it makes your Cure Minor Wounds heal for 3 instead of 1 though, so yay?

The benefits you get from being a "healing" Cleric as opposed to a "hit things with my mace" Cleric are so marginal, and so easily outclassed by the abilities "non-healing" deities give you there is no reason to ever choose it.

DnD isn't about making a class for only you guy. People WANT to play clerics in a variety of ways.



That's actually the crux of my argument. My issue with the class right now is that there are only a few good ways to play it, none of which I like. I would like to see some versatility in the useful builds of clerics.
But at least you get a bonus to your healing spells, right? That 2 + Spell Level means that when you cast  Cure Serious Wounds you get to add a whopping extra hit points onto the ... 3D8 + 8 it does already? On a spell you can't cast until level five anyway? I suppose it makes your Cure Minor Wounds heal for 3 instead of 1 though, so yay?


Actually... you get a bonus to your domain spells. Cure Minor Wounds isn't technically a Domain Spell so I don't think the bonus applies. Although that strengthens your argument, so yay!
The only arguement I see supporting yours is a critique of a mudwizards tomb playtest at level 15 were the cleric ran out of heals to cast suggesting a slight buff to the number of casts but not the health restored.  I don't have enough experience to critically suggest anything more, but I'm not sure drastically enhancing cleric heals imporves the game, especially at later levels.
The Fighter + Fighter vs Fighter + Cleric debate has nothing to do with the value of wisdom as a stat for clerics. This thread's main topic is important and it's getting derailed. 

Back to the issue, I think the best solution is to give each domain (or whatever it's called) some bonus out of wisdom. Lifegiver getting extra healing and Lightbringer depending on Lance of Faith for defense are good starts, but most of the others don't really get anything out of wisdom. Each one should have its major domain mechanic firmly rooted in wisdom.

Healing spells should remain the way they are though so a guy who wants to play a protector build with lots of strength and con does not have to deal with all the QQing from his friends for being a bad healer. 
Need a Cha Cleric... evangelical
Need a Wis Cleric...  ascetic 
Need a Int Cleric ... teacher (who actually needs all three). 
 
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

I don't see what is so new about dumping Wis during the creation process of a Cleric.

My favorite build for a cleric is a "Reach Cleric" which has High Str/Con/Dex but keeps Wis high enough to cast spells (12 to 14 upon creation) and I never touch spells that require attack rolls or to be saved against... Mostly cause you don't need them :P

Of course I've played some casting clerics too but they get to be to much like wizards for my taste (though hey throwing around mass destruction can be fun every once in a while... Comet Fall :p)

Expand on your thought here, "comp" is also not a word that I am sure that it is short for, is it... complimentary? If so again, maybe just use synonyms to describe what you are trying to say, rephrase it even if you can't or wont expand. I just don’t quite get it. Are you saying that 2 fighters are equivalent (maybe the wrong word here) to a fighter and a cleric? or that you are now allowed to do this without being penalized? Short Rest + Hit Dice etc.




comp is short for composition, it's nearly general termonology, internet wise. the argument is sayign that it doens't matter which is better between 2 fighter or fighter and healer, the fact that a 2 fighter group is even a consideration means that dedicated healers aren't needed, meaning clerics don't need to be dedicated healers, meaning they shouldn't have to prioritise wisdom for everything to do with their class. 

my favorit class in 3.5 was the bard. followed by the favored soul. yeah sure, my classes could heal, but they also did a whole lot of other things and my group never suffered for it. in fact i was very well known by my DM for using utility spells to swing fights in our favor in odd and unexpected ways.

Most people seem to be upset that they cannot effectively play the cleric they want to. Honestly, I think that weapon proficiency shouldn't be tied to the domain nor should be cantrips. If you simply got to choose whatever weapon and 2-3 cantrips you wish then you could play it however you want. This is what they should do. Because what if you want to play a Lightbringer with a weapon instead of using spells? Its the same problem Wizard has, tbh. One way is simply the best over everything else and that just isn't good. 
IMAGE(http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/RockNrollBabe20/Charmed-supernatural-and-charmed_zps8bd4125f.jpg)
Most people seem to be upset that they cannot effectively play the cleric they want to. Honestly, I think that weapon proficiency shouldn't be tied to the domain nor should be cantrips. If you simply got to choose whatever weapon and 2-3 cantrips you wish then you could play it however you want. This is what they should do. Because what if you want to play a Lightbringer with a weapon instead of using spells? Its the same problem Wizard has, tbh. One way is simply the best over everything else and that just isn't good. 


I don't think allowing clerics to pick any weapons they want is a good idea. Not all weapons are equal and they are not meant to be. Classes and builds that focus more on spells get traditionally worse weapons and vice versa. It is those distinctions that add flavor and balance to the various builds, races, and classes of the game.

Domains handle it pretty well right now. You have the Warbringers and Protectors who focus more on strength and get better weapons while you also have the squishy lightbringers in cloth with slings and maces but more potent spells. It is unfortunate that the weapon-based classes don't get anything of substance from wisdom, and that needs to be fixed, but I don't think just saying everyone can use whatever they want is the answer.
I saw several mentions of people upset with spending all their time healing.

I may be missing something, but aren't the Cure * Wounds spells labeled with (Word of Power)?  And not just that but they have a range?  Doesn't that mean you can thwack a bad guy with your mace, and during the same action you can heal the fighter on the other side of the room?  

I know the Word of Power description is missing...did they take the concept out entirely?  I thought I heard somewhere that the concept is still supposed to be in there, but there was an oversight with the writing of the Classes document and to keep playing as though you had it.  If this is the case, you should never be "just healing" in a fight.
Most people seem to be upset that they cannot effectively play the cleric they want to. Honestly, I think that weapon proficiency shouldn't be tied to the domain nor should be cantrips. If you simply got to choose whatever weapon and 2-3 cantrips you wish then you could play it however you want. This is what they should do. Because what if you want to play a Lightbringer with a weapon instead of using spells? Its the same problem Wizard has, tbh. One way is simply the best over everything else and that just isn't good. 


I don't think allowing clerics to pick any weapons they want is a good idea. Not all weapons are equal and they are not meant to be. Classes and builds that focus more on spells get traditionally worse weapons and vice versa. It is those distinctions that add flavor and balance to the various builds, races, and classes of the game.

Domains handle it pretty well right now. You have the Warbringers and Protectors who focus more on strength and get better weapons while you also have the squishy lightbringers in cloth with slings and maces but more potent spells. It is unfortunate that the weapon-based classes don't get anything of substance from wisdom, and that needs to be fixed, but I don't think just saying everyone can use whatever they want is the answer.


Well maybe not any weapon they want but I think some choice should be there. Personally though, I would be perfectly fine playing a spell-focused cleric. I just think one option is kind of sucky for a domain since it used to be that the class itself would have more than one choice.
IMAGE(http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/RockNrollBabe20/Charmed-supernatural-and-charmed_zps8bd4125f.jpg)
I saw several mentions of people upset with spending all their time healing.

I may be missing something, but aren't the Cure * Wounds spells labeled with (Word of Power)?  And not just that but they have a range?  Doesn't that mean you can thwack a bad guy with your mace, and during the same action you can heal the fighter on the other side of the room?  

I know the Word of Power description is missing...did they take the concept out entirely?  I thought I heard somewhere that the concept is still supposed to be in there, but there was an oversight with the writing of the Classes document and to keep playing as though you had it.  If this is the case, you should never be "just healing" in a fight.


Oooooooo you can do that now? That's amazing. I know it kind of stinks to have always had to make the choice between healing and attacking before. To be honest I wish my group was interested in playtesting. 
IMAGE(http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/RockNrollBabe20/Charmed-supernatural-and-charmed_zps8bd4125f.jpg)
I saw several mentions of people upset with spending all their time healing.



Not spending all your time healing. That is actually balanced pretty good because of the words of power, which was a really good idea. The problem is that you use all your spells healing. There is no point in having access to all the Cleric spells available (except level 0s) and preparing an interesting variety if you are just going to have to cast heals the whole time. It's pretty cool that my storm Cleric has the ability to cast Lightning Bolt, but it is very frustrating that I never have the chance because I am too starved for spell slots and the party needs healing. 
Ah!  I gotcha.

Well, you certainly won't get any argument out of me that clerics probably need more spells per day.  =)
I think their curing abilities should be seperate from spells to be honest. I love how channel has more options but I hate how using the healing one only gives the effect to one target. 
IMAGE(http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/RockNrollBabe20/Charmed-supernatural-and-charmed_zps8bd4125f.jpg)