|
1 year ago ::
May 29, 2012 - 2:51PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
May 22, 2009
|
I believe that since 2nd ed. Clerics have always been the most powerful class to play. The cleric class was insane in 3.5 and then dulled down some in 4th ed. due to 4th's mechanics but all in all still the most powerful class.
--Looking into the cleric in 3rd ed.-- They can wear medium armor then Heavy with a feat gain, weild any weapon and use shields. They obviously heal, can turn undead, convert spells, gain Domains, very nice Fort and Will saves, have insane buff spells and can stack the living hell out of there AC with the right spells and armor etc...
--Looking into the cleric in 4th ed.-- Bascially the same as in 3rd ed. but with a big change in game mechanics. Can use all armor and weapons with proper feat picks, heal, good fort and will saves, Domains, Symbol Implement etc..
I have always been a major fan of Cleric's only allowed to wear up to Chainmail as in 1st edition and not ever allowed to wear anything heavier then that. For one it brings the Cleric more down to earth and not the "be all end all" class its been in the last 3 editions, Two it gives Paladins a good reason to play one for the benefit of being a semi healer that can wear Heavy armor (more of a front lines quasi healer) that I believe should always be the one in the "Thick" of it and not exactly the Cleric.
The Cleric in 1st edition was ideal due to they can charge into battle, heal, dish out a couple licks to the enemy and take a few himself before falling back. I think the Cleric should be focused on keeping the whole party alive and casting buff spells as well as to help the party rather then being the guy the can just simply charge in, out shine a Fighter in battle and make a Paladin rage quit his charater and just flat out own the battlefield.
Yes the Cleric is way overpowered since the change to the Cleric class since 2nd ed. and only allowing the Cleric to ever only wear up to Chainmail and no feats allowed for the use of anything higher then chainmail is the perfect way to reduce the God Class to be more in line with the other classes, a buffing healer tank is just far out too powerful hands down.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 29, 2012 - 2:53PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Jun 27, 2004
|
"Cleric is the most powerful class in 4e"? Wat? 5wat? 
Feedback Disclaimer
Show
Yes, I am expressing my opinions (even complaints - le gasp!) about the current iteration of the play-test that we actually have in front of us.
No, I'm not going to wait for you to tell me when it's okay to start expressing my concerns (unless you are WotC).
(And no, my comments on this forum are not of the same tone or quality as my actual survey feedback.)
A Psion for Next (Playable Draft)A Barbarian for Next (Brainstorming Still)My 4e Projects
Show
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 29, 2012 - 2:56PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Apr 21, 2004
|
Yes the cleric is the most powerful class in 4e as well as any addition. When you can melee almost as good as a pure melee class, cast almost as much damage spells and a wizard, summon to aid you, and have heals, and in 4e heal and damage in the same round. Err... what, what!
Yes the most powerful class.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 29, 2012 - 3:01PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Nov 30, 2010
|
hit as much as a pure melee class on 4e? hahahahahaha! so funny...and cleric implement attacks do things completly diferent from wizard and have nowhere as much control as wizard's. Summon aren't used for tactical adventage.
Cleric on 4e are very flexible depending how you build them, and they are one of the "best" class at it...but it's nowhere as strong to make it replace any other class that fill the role...cleric do alot of cool stuff on 4e...but because it's 4e, almost all clases do cool stuff too...
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 29, 2012 - 3:08PM
#5
|
|
|
I definantly agree on where the cleric should stand and Kelsfar does state my views on the subject. However perhaps the question is to bring in something similar to the Arcane Spell Failure of Arcane Casters. Meaning a Cleric would be a subject to some sort of a drawback if he uses anything beyond Chainmail in terms of heavier and thicker armours. This would also allow players to play a different sort of cleric when the feel like it. I find that variety in terms of character creation and build is important, because it's not fun to play the same thing all over again. This is why I highly praise the concept of having a lot open and providing rather different ways of playing a character (This comes by making choices which may give you a form of drawbacks. As well as the concepts of variants in class path and prestige classes and all sorts of stuff).
If the cleric wants to invest a feat into Heavy Armours, let him. But to balance him out, make him subject to a drawback. If he wants that drawback removed he could have to invest a second feat into a feat that does so.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 29, 2012 - 3:20PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
May 22, 2009
|
I definantly agree on where the cleric should stand and Kelsfar does state my views on the subject. However perhaps the question is to bring in something similar to the Arcane Spell Failure of Arcane Casters. Meaning a Cleric would be a subject to some sort of a drawback if he uses anything beyond Chainmail in terms of heavier and thicker armours. This would also allow players to play a different sort of cleric when the feel like it. I find that variety in terms of character creation and build is important, because it's not fun to play the same thing all over again. This is why I highly praise the concept of having a lot open and providing rather different ways of playing a character (This comes by making choices which may give you a form of drawbacks. As well as the concepts of variants in class path and prestige classes and all sorts of stuff).
If the cleric wants to invest a feat into Heavy Armours, let him. But to balance him out, make him subject to a drawback. If he wants that drawback removed he could have to invest a second feat into a feat that does so.
Some pretty good points you have made Gulli05. I can agree on atleast having some sort of setback going into using Heavy Armor. I also like the option for players to play out as many variations as possible within a certain degree and yes setbacks should be in place for being able to do things sort of out of your class, kind of like looking at a ECL class thats 2 and up, being more powerful then the rest comes with a XP penalty <----Example Only
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 29, 2012 - 3:34PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Nov 30, 2002
|
The question to ask yourself is: Why did they buff Clerics so much going from 2e to 3e?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 29, 2012 - 6:15PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
May 22, 2009
|
The question to ask yourself is: Why did they buff Clerics so much going from 2e to 3e?
Something to ask the big heads of D&D. It was quite a big jump for the Cleric from 2nd to 3rd/3.5 ed. but never the less Clerics were aloud from 2nd ed. on up to sport heavy armor, Shields and non blunt weapons. I really don't mind the blunt weapons but the armor should be a step back to Chainmail. Blunt weapons, the only reason I say to allow them to use weapons other then blunt like in 1st ed. is due to deities favorite weapons and a Cleric automatically gains (in 3-3.5ed.) the free feat to use that particular weapon, not the weapon class, from start unless they lose there dieties favor.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 29, 2012 - 6:28PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
May 22, 2009
|
BTW for the record I am not a Edition defender, I love alot of things about every edition and my OP is only something I wish would be looked at going into D&DN 
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
May 29, 2012 - 8:24PM
#10
|
|
|
I believe that since 2nd ed. Clerics have always been the most powerful class to play. The cleric class was insane in 3.5 and then dulled down some in 4th ed. due to 4th's mechanics but all in all still the most powerful class.
HAHAHA good one! I don't think you've ever played a 4e cleric, or ever even been in the same party.
This is the first time I have ever heard of anyone claim that that the 4e cleric was overpowered, or even "the best class".
|
|
|
