I once had a newbie player (fresh from NWN) that wanted to play a two-handed sword wielding cleric with strength 10. He planned to use Divine Mights for combats. After calculating what kind of damage he would do, and adding in his spells, I altered Divine Might to get rid of the Fighter BAB so that it only gave strength 18. That shows my stance on clerics with fighter BAB.
-
The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Cleric wants fighter BAB
- Thread starter FreeTheSlaves
- Start date
My biggest disappointment with 3rd edition was that the Paladin was still Lawful Good. Why is it that only the deities of LG (and sometimes CE) want to have a holy warrior? I use the Holy Warrior class from Book of the Righteous because of just this problem.
I dearly hope that in some far future edition of D&D, that we finally get a Holy Warrior who can be any alignment (as long as it is the alignment of their deity) and gets abilities based on the deity he worships.
I dearly hope that in some far future edition of D&D, that we finally get a Holy Warrior who can be any alignment (as long as it is the alignment of their deity) and gets abilities based on the deity he worships.
FreeTheSlaves
Adventurer
I've been yarning with the player and I'm working in this direction.
Fighter BAB =
- Bad will, thinking like a fighter
- No heavy armour prof., cannot tank like a fighter.
- Reduced spells per day whilst retaining caster level. Less miracles to call upon each day, but those that do are still potent.
He's thinking on it.
Fighter BAB =
- Bad will, thinking like a fighter
- No heavy armour prof., cannot tank like a fighter.
- Reduced spells per day whilst retaining caster level. Less miracles to call upon each day, but those that do are still potent.
He's thinking on it.
Better make it 1/2 caster level.
But then, this sounds more and more like an PRC.
An I still say let this guy multiclass to cleric/fighter instead of changing classes around where no one is sure if it is balanced.
And if he really wants to play an fighting religious, let him play an paladin and change the alignment to Any Lawful or something like this. Fewer fuss than changing the whole cleric class.
But then, this sounds more and more like an PRC.
An I still say let this guy multiclass to cleric/fighter instead of changing classes around where no one is sure if it is balanced.
And if he really wants to play an fighting religious, let him play an paladin and change the alignment to Any Lawful or something like this. Fewer fuss than changing the whole cleric class.
Last edited:
Chacal
First Post
FreeTheSlaves said:
That sounds quite right (keep in mind that your second restriction isn't that restrictive (especially if he finally takes a fighter level)
How do you reduce Spell per day ? half progression ?
I like the flexibility offered by not tying caster levels with spell progression.
If you have time, I agree that you should make it a PrC ( with prerequisites that the PC meet, of course), it will have the benefits of not altering the core cleric class, giving the PC a sense of "elite", and add a bit of flavour.
Chacal
FreeTheSlaves
Adventurer
I have been thinking about the spell progression as that seems to be the issue.
Thought #1
Reduce all spell levels number of slots per day by one. The level at which new powerful spells are attained, i.e. 1st, 3rd, 5th, etc would thereby be delayed by one level.
The rationale is that these levels have a "dash" and not a "0". Paladin-like spell progression usues the "0" mechanic to allow spells for higher wisdom scores. However clerics do not use this mechanic normally and there is no reason to institute it.
The effect will be like an inverted sorceror progression, i.e. delayed spell levels, full caster power but fewer rather than more spell slots.
Thought #2
As above but institute the "0" mechanic for base spells per day that have reduced from 1. This is clearly more generous as this cleric will have a high enough wisdom to largely ignore this for the early to mid levels.
Domain spells can only exist either way if other like levelled spells are castable (such a word?).
I have never been a big fan of prestige classes and this campain may not go to high levels. My friend does not want to multiclass and I like tinkering with classes,
I just like doing it.
BTW thanks for all the opinions for and against, I was in danger there for a while of making a monster of things. Question is, generous "o" or strict "-"?
Thought #1
Reduce all spell levels number of slots per day by one. The level at which new powerful spells are attained, i.e. 1st, 3rd, 5th, etc would thereby be delayed by one level.
The rationale is that these levels have a "dash" and not a "0". Paladin-like spell progression usues the "0" mechanic to allow spells for higher wisdom scores. However clerics do not use this mechanic normally and there is no reason to institute it.
The effect will be like an inverted sorceror progression, i.e. delayed spell levels, full caster power but fewer rather than more spell slots.
Thought #2
As above but institute the "0" mechanic for base spells per day that have reduced from 1. This is clearly more generous as this cleric will have a high enough wisdom to largely ignore this for the early to mid levels.
Domain spells can only exist either way if other like levelled spells are castable (such a word?).
I have never been a big fan of prestige classes and this campain may not go to high levels. My friend does not want to multiclass and I like tinkering with classes,
I just like doing it.BTW thanks for all the opinions for and against, I was in danger there for a while of making a monster of things. Question is, generous "o" or strict "-"?
FreeTheSlaves
Adventurer
Righty, I've sorted out a trial basis for the new warring-cleric and we will use the nice "0" mechanic.
We're gonna sort out a cool religious philosophy and code now.
We're gonna sort out a cool religious philosophy and code now.
FreeTheSlaves
Adventurer
I considered the loss of domains Technik4, but that I thought, would be too much flavour lost.
Given that we are playing a RttToEE/Middle earth bastardized-hybrid campaign and his cleric serves the elemental lord of flame and war, well, it wasn't an option in the end.
Given that we are playing a RttToEE/Middle earth bastardized-hybrid campaign and his cleric serves the elemental lord of flame and war, well, it wasn't an option in the end.
Madefromletters
First Post
It's my first and it tickles
firstly
yes i'm the one screwing with the cleric class of War and Fire.
To me multi classing a spell casting person is wrong and the actual classes that are avalible are just complex templates to be changed and PrC are just a way of saying that d20 really wants a classless system but anyhow.
nextly
Firoke the fire/war cleric
- High BAB.
- Less spells (1s are 0s, 2s are 1s etc)
- No heavy Armour
- good fort, bad ref/will.
- Seems our elemntal gods were at constant war, i may make it that air and water based spells can't be cast (don't thint that will effect much but who gives a bathtub1)
I would consider using druid spells or a paladin style but the other characters are those just mentioned.
1 I'm guessing this is a non swearing forum
firstly
yes i'm the one screwing with the cleric class of War and Fire.
To me multi classing a spell casting person is wrong and the actual classes that are avalible are just complex templates to be changed and PrC are just a way of saying that d20 really wants a classless system but anyhow.
nextly
Firoke the fire/war cleric
- High BAB.
- Less spells (1s are 0s, 2s are 1s etc)
- No heavy Armour
- good fort, bad ref/will.
- Seems our elemntal gods were at constant war, i may make it that air and water based spells can't be cast (don't thint that will effect much but who gives a bathtub1)
I would consider using druid spells or a paladin style but the other characters are those just mentioned.
1 I'm guessing this is a non swearing forum
Similar Threads
