D&D 5E Clerics in 5e - how do they play? The mega-buffs are gone...

[Ashrym]

So I was wrong (it's still there) but I was right (it's no longer a combat buff)?

Those spells are still there, yes, but they go against bounded accuracy concepts following previous versions so 5e has them modified to a more appropriate format. They are more for non-combat benefits and still have some combat application even so. Cat's grace, for example, would provide advantage on initiative so going first becomes a combat benefit.

Bards did not get any overboard treatment, BTW; full caster progression replacing 3e song abilities is largely a wash. Full caster and magical secrets are over-estimated in value. Bards don't even have much in the way of buffing outside of BI dice unless they add it via magical secrets. I would still look at clerics and paladins for buffs.

Stacking buffs aren't as possible (can still be done with multiple casters) but it's also not so necessary because of bounded accuracy. A cleric can go with a more combat oriented domain, heavy armor and shield, the bonus damage applied at 8th and 14th levels, and one buff or area spell limited by concentration to continue with the same general feel the 3.5 buffed out clerics had. Spiritual guardians was mentioned as a popular choice, as well as bless, but there are more options.

 

[CapnZapp]

full caster progression replacing 3e song abilities is largely a wash

Speak for yourself

I happen to think full caster progression is MUCH more fun, useful and valuable than d20 bardic abilities. Being forced into the "classic" trope works in a scenario that's hewing close to the stereotypical medieval fantasy world, with taverns and castles and what not. In many other scenarios, you simply need to shut the frack up and be a deadly murderhobo just like everyone else in your party!

The complete reliance on verbal and somatic components was simply too much. I much prefer to leave the choice of being a "traditional" bard (the singing, playing and dancing bard) up to the player. And in 5th edition, you actually CAN play a bard even if you find that stereotype a bit silly.

The Bard spell list might be a tad limited, but that's okay since bards can pick at least two fave spells from elsewhere.

Of course, the reason the d20 bard sucked wasn't the bardic songs fault.

 

[Ancalagon]

It started with 2e dividing the cleric & druid lists into 'spheres' and the 2e Complete Priests' Handbook introducing alternate granted powers and priesthoods, including priests of philosophies & forces. Really, 5e doesn't go as far as 2e did, in that sense.

They're wrong, but not wrong, it's just that "cleric" in that context means support-role-full-caster - it can be a Cleric, Druid, or Bard. It can even be a Paladin since they have support-oriented class abilities to supplement their half-casting, or several half-casters and feat-users sharing the duties. Or two or more of the above. It's hard to have too many full-casters or too-much support in a party.

Well.... It's hard to have too much of *anything* really. Adding a party member of *any* class will help an adventuring group, as long as it's not a weakling or disruptive.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Well.... It's hard to have too much of *anything* really.

Oh, you can certainly be over-specialized. Too much dedicated support, for instance, and you're "all multiplier, no force." But the existing support-capable classes are so flexible, as casters, that it's easy to avoid that sort of trap.

 

[Ashrym]

The reason I stated full caster progression vs ~2/3 spells and full caster level plus songs is because the songs could have just as easily been spells with more spell slots to match. Songs weren't dissimilar to simply having a lot more spell slots and spells known.

I liked 3.5 bards but agree that I like 5e bards better. The spell list and skills are more customizable and a single list for spells that can easily be a gray area for songs or spells is better for variations on flavour.

Off topic, though. ;-)

 

[Sword of Spirit]

To add to the above, 5E characters have HD and fairly generous long rests and don't need as much healing as 3E and earlier ones did. (4E is more complicated to compare, but could also involve a lot healing).

The fighter also has an under-rated self healing ability and barbarians get damage resistance. Paladins also have healing. This means that your front line melee characters, which could be huge healing sponges in past editions, can often get through a fight, then use HD to recover, with no or little healing from another character.

My players still haven't seemed to catch on to this. They keep casting healing spells mid-combat while I'm scratching my head wondering why they don't just smack the baddies, use HD afterwards, and use the healing spells as their last resort.

 

[Patrick McGill]

I've a player who is a Tempest Cleric in a current campaign, and he is down right nasty, especially outside. Their channel divinity that maximizes damage is turnt. And if he's not outside, it's shatter shatter shatter. He's crazy.

 

[Ancalagon]

He's crazy.

I can't see how a tempest cleric would be completely cool and collected...

 

[practicalm]

One player in my group is running a Trickery cleric and the Divinity power to create a duplicate of himself that he can cast touch spells through is crazy. Lots of good times in our last game where the cleric kept goblins guessing where the cleric really was.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I can't see how a tempest cleric would be completely cool and collected...

In my world, Tempest is the domain of the priests of a socially and politically powerful Lawful Neutral church. Institutionally, they're a pretty serious bunch. The Tempest domain reflects getting struck by lightning from the sky because you were bad. (There's also the storm = sky god = ruler element.)