Ancalagon
Dusty Dragon
Hello
It used to be that a cleric was almost mandatory in a party. However, in this edition of D&D, I've noticed how many classes have healing powers, that usually couldn't. A wizard (subclass transmuter) can heal with a philosopher's stone for example. In fact, more classes can heal than those that cannot.
Xanathar's guide has made this even more so by creating two subclasses that transformed two classes that couldn't heal (I think), the sorcerer and the warlock - into quite strong healers should a player choose to be so.
Of the 4 classes that still can't heal others (I think, I may have missed something), two can heal themselves (fighter, monk) and the last two have damage reduction (barbarian, rogue).
And don't get me started about fast natural healing, the healer feat, magic initiate...
So where does this leave the cleric? Does he still have a role, an identity? Role Playing wise, absolutely (worshiper of a deity is a pretty strong "identity") but "rule-wise", "party role wise" - what does the cleric do?
In 3e, the era of "COD-zilla" (COD standing for cleric of doom), a cleric could easily buff himself to become an absolute monster in melee combat and wreck everything. In 5e, this is less so, but spiritual weapon works really well in this edition (and doesn't require concentration), bless is superb and spirit guardian is just as good - if perhaps even better - than fireball. And most of the domains are pretty good and interesting, and allow cleric variety.
... but is it enough? I think it's great that no single class is "needed". The last thing I want is a game where one player has to "play class X" because no one else wants it and she's stuck with it. 3e's answer was to make the cleric extremely powerful. 5e's answer was to make the cleric not mandatory. But did 5e overshoot?
Some days, I wonder if it did...
It used to be that a cleric was almost mandatory in a party. However, in this edition of D&D, I've noticed how many classes have healing powers, that usually couldn't. A wizard (subclass transmuter) can heal with a philosopher's stone for example. In fact, more classes can heal than those that cannot.
Xanathar's guide has made this even more so by creating two subclasses that transformed two classes that couldn't heal (I think), the sorcerer and the warlock - into quite strong healers should a player choose to be so.
Of the 4 classes that still can't heal others (I think, I may have missed something), two can heal themselves (fighter, monk) and the last two have damage reduction (barbarian, rogue).
And don't get me started about fast natural healing, the healer feat, magic initiate...
So where does this leave the cleric? Does he still have a role, an identity? Role Playing wise, absolutely (worshiper of a deity is a pretty strong "identity") but "rule-wise", "party role wise" - what does the cleric do?
In 3e, the era of "COD-zilla" (COD standing for cleric of doom), a cleric could easily buff himself to become an absolute monster in melee combat and wreck everything. In 5e, this is less so, but spiritual weapon works really well in this edition (and doesn't require concentration), bless is superb and spirit guardian is just as good - if perhaps even better - than fireball. And most of the domains are pretty good and interesting, and allow cleric variety.
... but is it enough? I think it's great that no single class is "needed". The last thing I want is a game where one player has to "play class X" because no one else wants it and she's stuck with it. 3e's answer was to make the cleric extremely powerful. 5e's answer was to make the cleric not mandatory. But did 5e overshoot?
Some days, I wonder if it did...
Last edited: