Community

- Best healing/support class in the game by a long shot
- 2nd best AOE/Control class behind Wizard
- 3rd best tank behind Fighter and Paladin

I'd actually say he's the fourth best tank, putting him behind the Warlord as well thanks to the Warlord's innate shield proficiency, lack of need for a second magic item to fight with, and better melee combat abilities.

That is to say, what if the DM is, intentionally or not, metagaming slightly and having the monsters go after the healer despite the defenders marking them and doing their best to protect the cleric?

The DM is playing it correctly. All intelligent monsters should ALWAYS go for the healer first. Its not metagaming; it is correct play on the DM's part. The only monsters which won't make a beeline for the leader are animals, who will typically instead make a beeline for whoever is most lightly armed and armored - the Wizard, if there is one, or the Warlock.

This reminds me of the "Wizards DO suck" thread, where a DM can neuter a wizard simply by automatically spreading out the enemies before the wizard can even get a spell off. Now, if this behavior is observed with a wizard in the party, the same behavior should be observed without a wizard in the party. Otherwize, the DM is guilty of metagaming.

Except not. It is actually specifically noted in the adventure in the back of the DMG that the kobolds spread out to avoid AoEs, and it isn't as if it is hard to figure out there's a wizard in the party - remember, magic is common enough that people know what it is and how to deal with it to some degree or another.

Basically, the DM should do both of these things - swarm the leader and spread out to avoid AoEs. Even unintelligent monsters are likely to do the latter, though not necessarily the former.

I actually have seen DM's ignore the markings of Paladins and Fighters and still make the monster in question attack someone else. In the short term another hit or x+charisma mod damage isn't preventing the creature from attacking other people it just means they take some extra damage in between their turns. When you compare certain monsters hp you quickly notice that this is usually small pickings...

There's absolutely nothing wrong with ignoring a mark to attack someone else. People have this completely erroneous idea that marks should force enemies to only attack you. They shouldn't and don't; that's not the point of marks. The point is to punish people who attack other people. That's what marks are for. It makes them more likely to target the defender, but it doesn't mean that oftentimes not targeting the defender isn't the correct choice.

The only problem with ome of this logic is that there is no sign above the clerics head that says "Healer/Leader" he wears the same armor as most fighters and carries a weapon. His holy symbol never needs to be displayed only worn which means it could be underneath his armor (which in most cases it is, as depicted in one of the scenarios given in the book or the dmg about a enemy cleric the party just killed.)

Clerics are pretty likely to look different - they carry different weapons (and in fact are the ONLY heavily armored people likely to be carrying the weapons they do) and are not as heavily armored as a fighter or paladin (typically). Its not an unfair assumption to guess that the dude who uses a mace is a cleric because they're the only guy who DOES use them. It'd be far harder to distinguish the Warlord who, if wielding a two-handed weapon and wearing scale mail due to scale armor proficiency, is pretty much completely indistinguishable from a fighter until he does something. Clerics are much less so, and generally display their holy symbols anyway, plus their attacks are more obviously clerical.

I would say a monster could go after a cleric if it was at the end of the fight after they used their healing ability.

Actually, once the cleric has used up his healing, the monsters generally won't go after them because they cease to be as dangerous.

Your point about bunching up is well taken. However, this flies in the face that AoE is not effective battle field control, since even before the battle has started, the monsters are "controlled" into a particular mindset.

AoEs are quite effective for exactly this reason - you either punish foes for grouping up or you force them to spread out, which means other party members can potentially gang up on a single foe. Usually it is better to spread out.

All of this also flies in the face of planning adventures to allow everyone to shine. If the DM makes encounters to counter the party every time, then it's really more of a "DM vs. Players" game, and we all know who wins that one.

No. The DM isn't against the players, but it would be moronic to act as though monsters were retarded. Monsters aren't; they should use appropriate tactics. The PCs have the advantage even if the DM uses appropriate tactics, and it makes combat MUCH more interesting and exciting. Monsters should fight logically.

Chainmail wearing guy hanging around in the back or wielding a simple weapon is a good bet for a cleric. A magical holy symbol or the first Healing Word you toss is going to give you away fairly quickly as well.

If you cast a spell, the monsters are going to make a beeline towards you too, as it is incredibly obvious what you are.

I agree, if the gameworld have a high amount of clerics and the encountered enemies is bound to have been exposed to them. Then their importance should be well known and it they would be targeted. In this case I think it will be poor if the DM uses metagaming when the players make countertactics like having a cleric in scale with hidden symbol and another character (defender?) in chain wearing a symbol and faking healing not getting targeted.

Isn't the latter known as a paladin?

But really, they're going to focus on the sod using a basic weapon wearing heavy armor, as he's pretty obviously a cleric. And once you cast a spell, the jig is up.

Not to mention the fact that monsters know what conditions are on them and the like, so they know the consequences of engaging the fighter the same as the party knows the consequences of engaging enemies.

Also, if the monsters know of the PCs, they may well know who to target first.

1.) Not every cleric wears chainmail. This should have been the most obvious thing that kicked your rebuttal to the curve. Depending on the cleric in questions Dex or Int they may very well opt to wear lighter armor like leather or clothing. Next depending on their Con and Str they very well could have opt to gain Platemail proficiency further destroying your claim.

Clerics do not have that high of intelligence or dexterity, frankly, and if they do, more power to them. But it doesn't matter, because they're still obvious once they start casting spells, and if there is no leader, then the first order of business is "kill the squishies". As you look like a squishy, you're still a prime target. The armored dudes are the people you want to engage the least, but generally you end up having to take them out fairly early in the order because they force you to via marking.

2.) The Cleric is a BATTLE LEADER, which probably means he wont be hanging out back when the encounter starts or at the very least isn't necessarily all the way in the back. He could very will be upfront or in the middle. Depending on Race or even Feat choice a cleric can use a wider selection of weapons. As I pointed out a lightly armored cleric might be hanging in the back and if its a Elf you can almost assume they'll have a bow and fight long range. Now let's think What class uses light armor and bows? Oh I know it's a Ranger!! So now your little Metagaming monster loving DM can no longer hide behind meta-gaming logic of "Oh the monsters will know which ones the cleric by clothing and weapons."

The cleric is still blatently obvious. Outside of the guy who has invested feats in basically not looking like a cleric (a dwarven cleric, for instance, may be difficult to distinguish if he uses an axe or hammer and wears heavier armor) you're the only guy who wields simple weapons and wears heavy armor. This means that you're someone whose expertise lies outside of combat, as clearly you lack the combat training to use military weapons. Thus you're probably either some guy who sucks and is along for the ride (in which case you go down easy) or you're a cleric (in which case they want to target you).

People seem to feel entitled to monsters behaving like morons, but they aren't behaving any less intelligently than the PCs are - PCs do have ways of figuring out who is the healer pretty rapidly. If I throw a group of foes at you, and one of them is wearing chainmail but carrying a mace, are you going to assume he's a cleric, even if he has no visible holy symbol? Most players would.

If you're using a bow, hanging back and shooting, and there is no obvious healer, then you're high on the monster wish list to kill anyway, though they may not figure out what you are until you cast a spell.

3.) Holy Symbols only need be worn, not presented. This is again meta-gaming as most monsters have no knowledge skills and even if they did considering the closed avenues of exposure. There is no way a hoard of Kobolds know squat about Pelor or any other non Kobold God related deity, and this goes for a large amount of the creatures in the monster manual. With only the highest level creatures actually ever displaying any kind of faith.

This is just moronic. The kobolds don't know about Pelor? Heck no. The kobolds know the names of all the gods as well as PCs do. They know who Pelor is. The idea that they wouldn't is just plain old dumb. Its common knowledge. Everyone in the world knows who the gods are. They may not know much about them, but they know the basics. This goes for every intelligent monster.

4.) Have you read Healing Word? It's a whispered Prayer! that showers a person in Divine Light. That means the light is coming down on the person from out of no where, and unless every monster in your campaign has a super high perception check I find it hard to believe they will hear the exact person some 70 or 80ft if not more feet away whispering to something they don't even comprehend as a god or goddess.

Have you read the books? People know where effects originate from, unless it SPECIFICALLY SAYS OTHERWISE. It does not specifically say otherwise, therefore they know where it came from. Quit whining, you're wrong.

The issue I'm finding is that as I look ahead as a cleric, I'm becoming exponentially more powerful. To the point that I'm wondering why I keep everyone else around. I mean the wizard at lvl 17 is doing 3d6+10 damage and might burn me area 2. And I'm doing 2d10+12 area 2, healing my allies, and I don't have bad armor.

The cleric is solid, but he's not as good at anything but healing as anyone else. He's a decent controller and an okay tank.

And dealing less damage than the wizard is pretty poor damage in general.

Again looking forward by epic levels the Cleric outshines everyone else, doing
6d10 + 31 + 6d6 crit to area 5 range 20, sustainable and heaven forbid if any enemy in the area is vunerable to lightning, cold, fire or thunder.

No.

The cleric does, with Astral Storm, 6d10 + 8 or 9 + 6 damage with astral storm, or 6d10+15, plus ongoing damage to those in the area (maybe, it does require another attack roll). It is very strong, but it doesn't do nearly as much damage as a fighter can do. The cleric may add +3 to that damage if he's got an elemental boosting feat for one of the elements (Astral Fire, likely) and he exploits vulnerabilities, but most monsters lack those.

+31? How did you figure +31? Even fighters barely scrape that unless they're pit fighters (and you have to be Kensei to even get to 31), and they've got the highest bonus in the game.

The cleric is quite potent, but he's by no means broken and Astral Storm isn't even the best level 29 daily.

That is the problem I am seeing in playing 4e. Most of the guys I game with don't want to do the bookkeeping needed to play the game smoothly.

I'd recommend printing out and using power cards; they make bookkeeping a lot easier.

Kurama Youko wrote:

I've been dying for them to finish fixing the damn boards so I could responded to this post..
1.) Not every cleric wears chainmail. This should have been the most obvious thing that kicked your rebuttal to the curve. Depending on the cleric in questions Dex or Int they may very well opt to wear lighter armor like leather or clothing. Next depending on their Con and Str they very well could have opt to gain Platemail proficiency further destroying your claim.
2.) The Cleric is a BATTLE LEADER, which probably means he wont be hanging out back when the encounter starts or at the very least isn't necessarily all the way in the back. He could very will be upfront or in the middle. Depending on Race or even Feat choice a cleric can use a wider selection of weapons. As I pointed out a lightly armored cleric might be hanging in the back and if its a Elf you can almost assume they'll have a bow and fight long range. Now let's think What class uses light armor and bows? Oh I know it's a Ranger!! So now your little Metagaming monster loving DM can no longer hide behind meta-gaming logic of "Oh the monsters will know which ones the cleric by clothing and weapons."
3.) Holy Symbols only need be worn, not presented. This is again meta-gaming as most monsters have no knowledge skills and even if they did considering the closed avenues of exposure. There is no way a hoard of Kobolds know squat about Pelor or any other non Kobold God related deity, and this goes for a large amount of the creatures in the monster manual. With only the highest level creatures actually ever displaying any kind of faith.
4.) Have you read Healing Word? It's a whispered Prayer! that showers a person in Divine Light. That means the light is coming down on the person from out of no where, and unless every monster in your campaign has a super high perception check I find it hard to believe they will hear the exact person some 70 or 80ft if not more feet away whispering to something they don't even comprehend as a god or goddess.

And using Meta-game knowledge some how makes them shine more? Who's reading comprehension is at fault now? Listen the already allows for tactics on a believable yet none meta-gaming level, it also allows for intelligent battle parties in terms of what monsters are normally grouped together while allowing you to come up with some of your own. Clerics rarely excel better than members of other classes outside of healing, so certain types of enemies will be find the cleric is the person who does okay, but never totally dominates in any particular battle. This does not mean the Cleric doesn't shine, but it also means that he doesn't out shine anyone else. You're last example is flawed as the Cleric is not shining but is actually contradicting your opening statement about using monsters stupidly. The Cleric is being targeted by while the monster is focusing only on him because he has a higher AC (this is idiot logic) the Paladin or Fighter gets freak attacks against it which helps to bring it down faster if not right away depending on how combat went earlier.

I haven't checked out this thread for a few days but I'm going to enjoy tearing this post apart.

Guy wearing chainmail wielding (wearing) holy symbol, basic weapon = cleric. If you don't, then this clearly doesn't apply to you. Move on to step two: being noticed casting healing spells. Your nonsense about clerics having other equipment options is irrelevant.

Monsters not having knowledge skills is simply to streamline their entry in the MM. Do you notice PH race entries in the MM having knowledge skills? The Human Mage has no knowledge skills. I guess this means he doesn't know who Pelor is either.

As already pointed out, combatants are aware of effects and sources. If you prefer, you can play non-awareness both ways and the players can make 'super high' perception checks to figure out which goblin is healing the rest.

Your grasp of battlefield tactics is similarly poor. If you are playing the healer and mitigating large amounts of damage, the monsters are forced to take OAs and attack with penalties to eliminate you and stand a chance. If they stupidly bounce off the defenders and let whatever damage they do get healed/mitigated, they lose. By standing in the back and improving your defenses as best you can, you exploit the monsters' dilemma. The cleric is being attacked because of his healing ability, not because of his higher AC, thus the idiot logic is yours.