Fixing Sacred Circle

[dangerous jack]

The PCs in my campaign just hit level 2 and are choosing utility powers. The Paladin wanted Sacred Circle, but it doesn't seem to offer a single advantage over the Cleric's Shield of Faith, and they don't even stack.

Shield of Faith: bigger burst, bigger bonus, bonus stays with allies affected
Sacred Circle: smaller burst, smaller bonus, PCs need to stay in one spot on the map.

Ideas I've had or read elsewhere to make Sacred Circle more palatable:
* Change +1 to AC to +1 to all defences
* Allow the Paladin to move it as a minor or free action
* Prevent allies from granting combat advantage

Has anyone done anything else? Or does anyone disagree that it's a problem?

 

[DanmarLOK]

The paladin power has the Implement keyword which should mean you get to add the enhancement bonus of the implement by RAW to attack rolls and damage rolls but since this power has neither I would have to assume that means you add the implement's enhancement bonus to the AC?

So by level 30 a Paladin could if that holds true add +7 AC to allies in a zone while the cleric is still limited to +3.

That does seem to balance to me. A fixed small diameter zone that at level 1-5 (assuming not out of range gear) adds +2 AC, 6-10 adds +3 AC etc. And assuming the paladin has a +x holy symbol or holy sword.

While the wording of Implement in all cases specifically mentions attack rolls and damage rolls, the only reason to have it on a power is to allow it augment something. As a DM that's how I'm going to rule it if someone actually plays a paladin in my group. That the +1 AC for the paladin power is a power bonus of 1 + Implement Bonus to AC to allies in the zone.

 

[dangerous jack]

Interesting. I had noticed the Implement keyword, but thought it was probably a cut-and-paste error.

I don't think I'll go with that solution though, since it would make the cleric's power fairly trivial at high levels.

 

[CapnZapp]

Huh? When did a power become bad just because somebody else does it better? There's nothing wrong with Clerics doing the "protecting allies" better than the Paladin.

Besides, why are you assuming there is both a Paladin and a Cleric in the party? Yes, sure, if there are, and both characters choose the respective option, then the Paladin gets outshined by the Cleric.

But if they don't both take these options. Or if indeed there isn't any Cleric at all?

 

[CapnZapp]

I agree the Implement keyword doesn't do much for Sacred Circle. It certainly doesn't mean you get to add its bonus to "anything related to the power". DanmarLOK, it's best to simply remove/ignore the keyword.

It simply gives a +1 power bonus. At any level. If this means it won't be used by Epic tier characters, that's okay. Expected, even.

Do note Sacred Circle is a zone and not an instant (a normal burst). This restricts the movement of anyone interested in keeping the bonus, but it does allow new allies to benefit even if they weren't around when the prayer was cast.

Conclusion: whether Sacred Circle is balanced for second level, I don't know. But what I do know that comparing it with another class is wildly inappropriate, especially when that other class has the power's effects as its primary niche.

 

[Stalker0]

In my game we made it in encounter power and its worked fine.

 

[dangerous jack]

I don't think that powers need to be equal in power level, and I'd been fine if they were comparable depending on the situation. But I think it's an extremely contrived situation that makes the paladin's power better:
1) the party is more than 5 squares from the Cleric
2) the Paladin decides that he needs the +1 to AC immediately while other PCs aren't nearby.
3) the party then collapses to surround the Paladin and then doesn't move far.
(Actually, this sounds like an interesting encounter...)

Since the benefits don't stack, if the Paladin decides the situation warrants a Daily power, as soon as the Cleric uses his own Daily power the Paladin's is rendered obsolete.

 

[dangerous jack]

In my game we made it in encounter power and its worked fine.

This seems like a simple solution to try out.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

I don't really see the problem either.

The cleric is PRIMARILY a class which uses its powers to heal and protect the rest of the party. In order for clerics to be effective in that role and contribute substantially to the party they need protective powers which are flexible. Granted a cleric can fight, and might be a pretty decent combatant, but that isn't their primary role.

The paladin on the other hand is primarily a melee combatant with some secondary healing and protection functions thrown in. So naturally the paladin's protection powers are less flexible than those of the cleric.

So it seems to me fine as it is. Your party could have a cleric, who protects and heals really well and can fight some, or they might have a paladin who can fight well and heal or protect some. This lets a paladin fill in for a cleric in a pinch, but he won't do a s good a job. Still, depending on the composition of the party and the types of encounters you have it might be better to have one or the other, or even one of each.

 

[dangerous jack]

Unfortunately I do have a cleric and a paladin, and they chose those two powers, each thinking it was good. And they are concerned that the cleric's will make the paladin's useless in every (non-contrived) situation.

Consider other comparable level 2 utility powers:

Tumble (Rogue) vs. Expeditious Retreat (Wizard): wizard can shift further, but at least it's a Daily power vs. Encounter

Great Leap (Rogue) vs. Jump (Wizard): wizard can jump further, but at least it's an Encounter power vs. At-Will