|
3 months ago ::
Feb 17, 2013 - 6:39PM
#1
|
|
|
Actually, I don't hate them, I just mildly dislike them, but you don't get any comments if you simply state you mildly dislike something. :-) From a mechanical perspective, their lack of DPS tends to drag out combats (which is already a problem in 4e).
However, my bigger problem with them is from an RP perspective. Since at least 2nd edition, pacifist clerics get some sort of penalty when they directly cause damage. The idea, I assume, is that injuring another creature is physically or morally repugnant to them or they have made some sort of vow to their god. Interestingly enough, at least with the people with whom I've played, this has never actually translated into the way they play their characters (Granted, my data sample is two characters played by different people).
I mean, the pacifist clerics I've seen have never had any problem with the typical adventurer activity of heading into a dungeon, killing whatever is there and taking their stuff. They have never suggested disabling opponents rather than killing them. Generally speaking (though obviously there are exceptions), it doesn't seem that a pacifist cleric would be particular good fit as an adventurer.
So, is my experience atypical? Are there people out there who play pacifist clerics who give more than lip service to their vows? Am I misinterpreting how being a pacifist cleric impacts RP?
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 17, 2013 - 9:48PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Jun 19, 2004
|
I agree, I dislike pacifists. But mostly because they think of leaders as healers instead of leaders as enablers. Which makes combats take longer and gives them little useful things to do otherwise.
Currently working on making a Dex based defender. Check it out hereSpoiler:
Show
Need a few pre-generated characters for a one-shot you are running? Want to get a baseline for what an effective build for a class you aren't familiar with? Check out the Pregen thread here
If ever you are interested what it sounds like to be at my table check out my blog and podcast here
Also, I've recently done an episode on "Refluffing". You can check that out here
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 18, 2013 - 12:18AM
#3
|
|
|
That a class is poorly roleplayed is not a reason to dislike it. Now it can be reason to house rule or just read the rules more strictly to encourage the player to roleplay the class more.
Back in 3.5, a magic hating class was noted for being just as eager as other class to pick up magic. DMs started to rule that this was against the spirit of the class and cut their special powers in the most blatent cases. The players in question screamed, but the brass backed up the DMs. If the player did not sufficiently roleplay the class/race, he can be penalized.
The same applies to our pacificist cleric. If he is too bloodthirsty, the DM can impose weaknesses, particularly reductions in his ability to heal. Now we do have to consider how strong the class is. [At one point it was quite powerful, but there have been a nurf. The DM has to look closely before deciding the player is gaining a substantial advantage by playing a "healic" and not a healic.] But the ability to stun oneself is a major disadvantage, and it's at least arguable that this alone imposes enough roleplay.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 18, 2013 - 5:34AM
#4
|
|
|
I’m a bit confused. Are you mad because their class doesn’t offer enough to combat? Or at the way they are RPing? If it’s the strength in combat, then Eh, some people play OP classes some don’t. Not much you can do as a DM unless you’re just going to disallow cretin builds in your game (which I don’t recommend) As for Role Playing, I wouldn’t even sweat it. Role Playing is totally up to the Player, and it shouldn’t be hooked to a “Class” or theme or background. Role Playing is the fluff a player chooses to add to his character to give them life, the mechanics of the class IMO are just for what that character can or can’t do roll wise. So if they want to be a Cleric that is bloodthirsty, I simply Ask. What’s the big deal? Are they stealing the spotlight from other players? Have they become overpowered? Or do you just disagree with how they RolePlay because of the Class they choose? If it’s the last then I’d just let it drop; no one likes a DM who try to manages the parties RP. Why not just let the player have his Class but call it something else (Fluff it and say his class is a bloodletting cleric or something) Also, RP wise a Cleric doesn’t even know they are a Cleric, nor does a Fighter know he is a “Fighter” in the sense that they are bound to an unseen class (aka the mechanics of the game)
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 18, 2013 - 6:24AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Aug 26, 2007
|
I am playing a pacafist cleric PC at the moment. Although I have not taken the feat (I find it largely redundant), I am a pacifist cleric in every other way. Although they are not very popular, the 4th Edition incarnation of the class at least is not as bad as you make out.
My character is not making our combats any longer than they would otherwise be. Although I do not deal much or any damage myself, I am a very powerful enabler. Every turn, I give out multiple to-hit bonuses vs specific enemies. The strikers thus never miss. When the mage busts out his big spells it hits all the targets. When the defender uses his big encounter, it hits every time. Our combats are short and fun. By giving up any attempt to do damage personally, I enable the party as a whole to more more damage quicker. In this way my character can be similar to the warlord class.
Your problem, in any case, is with the roleplaying of the cleric rather than the class. And that has nothing to do with the class. You have simply had a bad experience with one or more players, and are taking it out on mechanics that have nothing to do with anything. There are multiple ways to roleplay a pacifist cleric - my particular one does not even worship a god so he has a very specific mentality. Some of them can make good adventurers, good roleplayers and good team-members - so long as the player is aware of the potential pitfalls of the class and makes an effort to play the game.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 18, 2013 - 7:35AM
#6
|
|
|
I am playing a pacafist cleric PC at the moment. Although I have not taken the feat (I find it largely redundant), I am a pacifist cleric in every other way. Although they are not very popular, the 4th Edition incarnation of the class at least is not as bad as you make out.
My character is not making our combats any longer than they would otherwise be. Although I do not deal much or any damage myself, I am a very powerful enabler. Every turn, I give out multiple to-hit bonuses vs specific enemies. The strikers thus never miss. When the mage busts out his big spells it hits all the targets. When the defender uses his big encounter, it hits every time. Our combats are short and fun. By giving up any attempt to do damage personally, I enable the party as a whole to more more damage quicker. In this way my character can be similar to the warlord class.
Your problem, in any case, is with the roleplaying of the cleric rather than the class. And that has nothing to do with the class. You have simply had a bad experience with one or more players, and are taking it out on mechanics that have nothing to do with anything. There are multiple ways to roleplay a pacifist cleric - my particular one does not even worship a god so he has a very specific mentality. Some of them can make good adventurers, good roleplayers and good team-members - so long as the player is aware of the potential pitfalls of the class and makes an effort to play the game.
+1
I played a Pacifist once for a short 5 level campaign. It was great fun in both the RP and mechanical sense. I dare say more fun I had than when I first played a standard laser cleric in 4e for the first time 
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 18, 2013 - 9:53AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Apr 14, 2011
|
I also find pacificist cleric distasteful. From 2 angles. First mechanically, lack of DPR and ridiculous amounts of healing make combats a grind. I don't care how much enabling you do. All you have done is remove swinginess in favor of dragging things out. And the amount of healing is way beyond what is ever realistically needed. You just don't need that much. The game is designed such that regular healing word, maybe with one boosting feat to get a small bonus, is enough. Sure taking someone from death's door to full HP, twice per encounter, is cool, but there is a reason we have second wind: because we don't need to rely on a healic in 4E Second, how are you supposed to RP that? The pacificist cannot bash something brains in, but its OK for him to enable other characters to do it? That's just dumb. And the pacificist gets dazed from scratching a bloodied creature, but its ok to smash minions' brains in cause they aren't bloodied? It's nonsensical. Pacificist clerics are strictly for munchkins. If you want to be an enabler, play a warlord and RP your religion. TjD
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 18, 2013 - 11:23AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Aug 15, 2011
|
When you're playing, don't play one.
When you're running, don't allow one.
Problem solved.
P.S. Contrary to apparently popular belief, just because one lives by a code doesn't mean you have to try to force everybody around you to live by it as well.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 18, 2013 - 11:42AM
#9
|
|
|
When you're running, don't allow one.
Problem solved.
P.S. Contrary to apparently popular belief, just because one lives by a code doesn't mean you have to try to force everybody around you to live by it as well.
It humors me you can contradict yourself in less that 40 words.
|
|
|
|
3 months ago ::
Feb 18, 2013 - 12:19PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Jun 19, 2004
|
Here is the issue. A vast majority of the time when people talk about "Pacifist Clerics" they do not mean a holy man who has taken a vow for non-violence. What they mean is "A Cleric who has taken the feat "Pacifist Healer". So lets clear that up right away, they are different things.
Mechanically speaking I do not like their mechanical choices that reflect their mechanical role in combat. Nothing to do with RP, all mechanics. Now, the mechanics and the role play should reflect one another, although a certain divide should still exist between the two. You want the powers to feel like they make sense with your character, but you also want them to be effective. Generally this is accomplished through picking a class/race/etc that is close to what you are going for (mechanically speaking) and then refluffling to fill in the gaps.
So again, mechanical topic, mechanical problem, mechanical responses. Please separate from the RP responses (which are equally valid, but separate).
Now, from the RP side I don't see the way that most people interpret "Pacifist" to make a lot of sense either. Basically anyone can look at the situation and go "If you support the bloodthirsty barbarian but act like Gandhi yourself you are just being a hypocrite". I think that is a valid point of view to take. Often times that point gets hand-waved away and/or ignored and/or is never brought up. So, in my opinion, to keep things interesting you have to do something about that issue. Here are some possible solutions:
- "Never bring it up, its just a game and this is how I want the mechanics to work." - Perfectly valid. Stress the separation in mechanics and RP and have fun with it if that is the kind of game you like.
- You as the player know that your character at some point is going to realize this problem and it is going to rock his/her world. This is a problem but it might be one that, for whatever reason, your character has not encountered yet. This is an RP gold mine, so use it if you like. Don't cut off your arm so you can lend someone a hand.
- Your mission is to get your group to be non-violent. If that is the case this should be something that is at the fore-front of your character. Something that you bring up constantly and work against. The pacifist surrounded by a world of blood and gore is going to need justification for why they should continue to be with a group. Some groups can't handle this kind of intra-party strain so be careful.
- Your group is one of those rare groups that can actually follow the path of non-violence as a group. Does your group not really fight much and is interested in intrigue, politics or investigation? You could totally make that work. A group that works as bail-bond enforcers that try to never harm the people they find and bring back to Justice could work for a pacifist. This route might also lead you to one of the others. What happens when someone brings up to the pacifist that by helping the group someone they captured is executed? Does that conflict with their pacifist code?
Now, to be clear, I don't like pacifist clerics. The reasons I don't like them are as follows:
- Mechanically speaking they are weak and counter-productive. Yes their heals are good, but they waste a lot of time/good options at table and few players can build them to be non-useless. These are the same kind of people that look at BCL and go "no thanks, I'll take Wis mod to my heals" without realizing how terrible of a plan that generally is.
- Roleplaying wise I don't like them because nearly every interaction I've ever had with a pacifist in group has been exceedingly boring. They don't contribute anything interesting to making the battle faster, or making the story more interesting and vivid. This is, once again, anecdotal and generally linked to the kind of player that envisions their character as a pure-healer. Someone who doesn't need to be on the front lines doing their thing but is more of a healing totem who will take their turns making sure the party doesn't fail as contrasted to the other players who are taking their turns making sure the party does succeed.
Currently working on making a Dex based defender. Check it out hereSpoiler:
Show
Need a few pre-generated characters for a one-shot you are running? Want to get a baseline for what an effective build for a class you aren't familiar with? Check out the Pregen thread here
If ever you are interested what it sounds like to be at my table check out my blog and podcast here
Also, I've recently done an episode on "Refluffing". You can check that out here
|
|
|
