Cleric changes explained (Podcast)

[Neverfate]

Dungeons & Dragons Roleplaying Game Official Home Page - Article (D&D Podcast: Class Compendium Cleric)

This links to the podcast where they discuss the changes to the Cleric that we saw last week. Some answers are good and other are week (specifically where they are asked why choose the Cleric in-comparison to the superior Warlord). They also talk of the Pacifist Healer feat and other feats. They will eventually add the update to those feats so that they work as they were originally intended to. I have a feeling this has to do with only adding major errata in June/December (which is dumb).

 

[BobTheNob]

Pretty much what I expected to hear. For me, errata to date has never gone in the wrong direction, and these latest changes are no different. To those flaming WOTC, have a listen.

 

[Mummolus]

Pretty much what I expected to hear. For me, errata to date has never gone in the wrong direction, and these latest changes are no different. To those flaming WOTC, have a listen.

I don't think the actual errata is the problem so much as the fact that the cleric is where WoTC chose to start this process. There's a sound argument that the cleric needed some work, but that same argument applies much more to a number of other classes, particularly the warlord (since we're in the "leader" family right now).

 

[Zaran]

I do not agree on what they said about bursts. The number of monsters do not change at epic levels but sizes and battlemaps do. It would get harder and harder for a cleric to hit the same number of targets with a close burst 2.

 

[ppaladin123]

1. The warlord can do more damage at-will by granting an ally a basic attack than the cleric can do with any of the encounter powers that were nerfed.

2. The warlord and shaman and bard, "heal" better than the cleric by making sure the enemies are dead faster. This results in less damage done, less surges spent, longer adventuring days, and shorter/less-grindy encounters. They do this by granting attacks, buffing allies, debuffing enemies, and repositioning everyone. And if all that fails, it is pretty easy to make one that heals just as well as the cleric anyway. The cleric just heals. "Nobody heals like the cleric," is a very limited design philosophy to build a class around.

Note: You can at least do some enemy debuffing with one cleric build, a "laser" cleric with very high charisma, but that leaves you with very poor defenses for a character who is expected to weave through the fray using "ranged 5" powers. And those powers typically do no damage so you have to think long and hard about whether the effect will create a net gain for your party over a damaging power lest you fall into the grind again.

 

[MrBeens]

I don't think the actual errata is the problem so much as the fact that the cleric is where WoTC chose to start this process. There's a sound argument that the cleric needed some work, but that same argument applies much more to a number of other classes, particularly the warlord (since we're in the "leader" family right now).

What do you mean by "starting the process"?
The fighter and warlord have already been done, unless you are saying that the warlord is going to be errated again on top of the marshall set of erratas the other month?

 

[Raith5]

I do not agree on what they said about bursts. The number of monsters do not change at epic levels but sizes and battlemaps do. It would get harder and harder for a cleric to hit the same number of targets with a close burst 2.

I agree. I thought the "table doesnt get any bigger" was a strange thing to say and contradicts my experience. That said close burst 8 is still too big!

 

[Raith5]

Pretty much what I expected to hear. For me, errata to date has never gone in the wrong direction, and these latest changes are no different. To those flaming WOTC, have a listen.

I think they went too far with the cleric errata but the podcast is a good explanation and good effort to communicate.

I agree with the idea of cutting down massive close blasts (and I appreciate what they said about large blasts removing the need for tactical movement/placement). But I still reckon they overreacted as CB2 is trivial at high paragon/ epic large scale fights with large enemies

Why dont they make turn undead a blast rather than close burst?

 

[MrBeens]

I think they went too far with the cleric errata but the podcast is a good explanation and good effort to communicate.

I agree with the idea of cutting down massive close blasts (and I appreciate what they said about large blasts removing the need for tactical movement/placement). But I still reckon they overreacted as CB2 is trivial at high paragon/ epic large scale fights with large enemies

Why dont they make turn undead a blast rather than close burst?

The invoker equivilent is a blast.

they should have made TU 2/3/4 - hopefully they might change this, as pretty much everyone agrees this is a good compramise.

 

[Destil]

Anyone who sees issues with this should do what they say at the end and Email them. I just did.

In general about what I expected to hear. The issues it raises:

Turn Undead was overnerfed. Abjure Undead, for example, still rocks just as hard as ever. And to some degree it was feat/paragon path support that make this such a big deal. I suggested that if it's such a big deal the X undead series could be made non-rechargeable, and that any feats/paths/powers that make it stronger than intended should be looked at for balance, rather than the core power, if they cause issues.

While area damage powers do constrain design space for other cleric powers, they do so for powers that only deal damage. Clerics don't really need more powers that only deal damage, so those should be fine. Powers with leader effects would naturally deal less damage, and thus not be an issue on their own.

The only powers I really take issue with here are Firestorm and Astral Storm, both of which I think could either be smaller and ally-unfriendly or loose dice and nothing else. Doing all three is overkill.

Also, both large bursts they shrunk could still be a little bigger than they put them without causing issues (burst 2 is fine for Enthrall and Sacred Word).

I do not agree on what they said about bursts. The number of monsters do not change at epic levels but sizes and battlemaps do. It would get harder and harder for a cleric to hit the same number of targets with a close burst 2.

Yeah, I also mentioned that you tend to fight more big monsters at epic, so you do actually need a bit more space. Also PCs have more crazy movement powers (shift your Dex mod squares is a lot bigger). Making bursts something like 2/3/4 instead of 2/4/8 is a good move.