A Cleric, by any other name, twould cast as sweet.

[TrippyHippy]

I think the Cleric has always been a tricky Class, not least because a fair amount of players just never found them cool, but their healing role made them indispensible to an adventuring party. The upshot was that playing the Cleric was a bit of a short straw situation. Later editions tried to make the Class more interesting by creating Domains and the like, but I still have a few issues:

- It's actually not that easy to play a simple Christian Cleric. I'm not religious, particularly, but playing in a Monotheistic setting is something that it's nice to have the option of doing.

- I always got confused as to the Clerics archetype, in relation to whether it was a Religious Warrior or a Priest. Not mutually exclusive, of course (in some cultures at least), but the additional presence of the much more fun-to-play Paladin Class just confuses me some more. How many fantasy books actually have adventuring Clerics as a protaganonist?

- Their magic system is, in my view, too similar to the Vancian system used by Wizards. I'd like something alternative, in the same way that Divine Magic is quite distinct to Sorcery in RuneQuest.

- I'd like healing to not just be the responsibilty/domain of one Class. I argued about this on another thread, but to me a Ranger could be legitimately be a type of healer (survival skills) and there are arguments for other classes too.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

"Ow, I'm hit! Cleric, I need a heal!" "Uh, I'm not that kind of cleric. Would you like Grow Plants instead?"

See, I LOVED that! It removed the cookie-cutter aspect of clerics. Very flavorful.

The last 2Ed cleric I played was from a barbarian culture, and could not turn undead. He could cause others to fly into a barbarian rage, but undead? His solution was whack 'em with weapons like the rest of his party. I even told my buddies this.

Surprised the heck out of everyone when they found out I was serious...

(He was a decent healer, though.)

 

[Dykstrav]

I liked the 2e customization for flavor, but did not like it for playability. Many of the options (e.g. Agriculture) were simply not adventuring material, and it was always problematic when a party member could not do what you expected them to. "Ow, I'm hit! Cleric, I need a heal!" "Uh, I'm not that kind of cleric. Would you like Grow Plants instead?"

This is part of the cognitive dissonance I experience with the cleric's perceived function in the game versus their perceived function in the narrative structure of the setting. Many players want a healer when their hit point totals start dropping and many players don't want to play clerics... So one player takes it for the team and plays a cleric as a straight heal-bot. It's sort of a self-perpetuating thing once you've been through a campaign or two with this attitude in place.

During the 3E/3.5 era, I remember getting strange looks when I actually role-played a cleric, or simply played a cleric as something beyond a straight healer.

An elf cleric is actually quite satisfying (mechanically) because their racial weapon proficiencies give you some options beyond simple weapons. For whatever reason, players assume that my elf wasn't a cleric because I'm using a longbow and a longsword. (Such players were absolutely gob-smacked when they discovered that I didn't take the Augment Healing feat at first level.)

I once played a cleric of Kord that was all about honorable competition, he was an athlete that sought to prove himself through athleticism. He'd often wrestle and subdue monsters because he thought that it was more glorious to win with his bare hands than with weapons. He'd also recite his full name and latest victory to every intelligent foe that he engaged. He wanted the foe to be able to talk about who slew them in the afterlife. In-game, the party's rogue was a bit on the obnoxious side, he'd give my cleric smart-ass comments about his notions of honor and frequently insulted his intelligence. Whenever he'd be low on hit points, the player had a problem with the idea that my cleric didn't respect his rogue, and considered healing him to be a dishonorable squandering of a divine gift on a coward that insulted Kord's glory on repeated occasions.

Admittedly, that was an issue with roots in that player's expectations and behavior... But it really stuck with me how players expect to have their characters be obnoxious jerks to the cleric and still expect the cleric to heal them without batting an eyelash.

I can respect 4E for trying to spread out the expectation of healing, even if it's not my game of choice.

If I were to try to "Pathfinderize" the old-school spheres, I'd use it as a guide for flavor and not try to update the system exactly from 2E. I think a good way to get the flavor of sphere access would be to treat it in a similar way to school specialization for wizards.

For example, a cleric can freely prepare and cast any spell that appears on the domain list for any domain granted by the deity. Those spells represent fundamental areas of concern and influence. For other cleric spells, you could require the cleric to expend an additional slot to prepare the spell.

Or you could require them to make a caster check (DC 10 + spell level) to prepare or cast a spell that doesn't appear in one of the deity's domains.

Or another method that strikes me as perhaps the coolest... Simply reduce the cleric's effective caster level by 3 for spells that don't appear on their domain lists. A cleric of a deity that doesn't grant access to the Healing domain couldn't cast cure light wounds until they reach 4th level (and then, would do so as a 1st-level caster).

I'd do something about spontaneous cure spells... Probably take them away as a cleric class feature. After all, clerics can channel energy to represent a baseline talent for healing as a class.

 

[Greg K]

See, I LOVED that! It removed the cookie-cutter aspect of clerics. Very flavorful.

Agreed.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Something I liked about 2Ed Player's Option, 3Ed and 4Ed was being able to do more things with the cleric's unique ability to channel divine energy beyond merely turning undead.

I also appreciated how it was expandable/continued/expanded/refined via feats in the latter two editions.

Yeah, I think i have my clerical wish list for the next edition:

1. Clerics abilities- weapon selection, armor proficiency, etc.- customized top to bottom to their particular deity. (2Ed)
2. Major/Minor access to spells (assuming Vancian casting). For those unfamiliar, that means your access to spells was limited by your Domains (then called Spheres)- Major access meant you could learn spells of that kind of any level; minor access capped it at 3rd level. (2Ed)
3. Domain powers. (3Ed, 3.5Ed)
4. Customizable channelling of divine energy. (3Ed, 3.5Ed, 4Ed)
5. Ritual Magic. (4Ed)

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

- I'd like healing to not just be the responsibilty/domain of one Class. I argued about this on another thread, but to me a Ranger could be legitimately be a type of healer (survival skills) and there are arguments for other classes too.

I don't see how survival skills could possibly compete with magical divine healing.

 

[Nagol]

I don't see how survival skills could possibly compete with magical divine healing.

Depends on the world (game system) doesn't it? I'd be happier with the promise of survival skills than the promise of divine healing in a non-magical d20 Past game!

I do take your point though. In a universe as magic-rich as D&D that is as poor in other resources like healing herbs as D&D, it's hard to expect non-magical sources to be as effective.

 

[Lwaxy]

In a universe as magic-rich as D&D that is as poor in other resources like healing herbs as D&D, it's hard to expect non-magical sources to be as effective.

Usually I offer plenty to my players in the way of herbs, mineral earths/waters etc to deal with healing. It is just that for an adventuring party, at least of the upper levels, it is usually a lot more effective to just cast a spell or drink a potion.

Which is why in some campaigns I reduce the level of available magic.

Something we do in a game just started - the clerics to not have spells as such but pray to their gods for healing (or anything else). If their god does not agree with what they plan, it won't work. PCs are well advised not to anger the god of their cleric

 

[Corathon]

I liked the 2E approach in principle, but found it kind of unworkable in practice. A cleric with, e.g., no access to healing sphere couldn't fill a cleric's normal role in a party. In my 1E campaign created an individual spell list for each religion. Each was strongly based off the generic cleric spell list, but with a few spells added (and some removed) to conform to the ethos of the god.

 

[Viking Bastard]

So with that, can I presume that something like the 2e Sphere of "Combat" suffices for you? Or is that a bit tooooo broad in scope?

Are separate Domains for things like "War", "Blood", "Destruction", "Dwarf" (if you were a dwarven cleric of a battle/war oriented god), "Kickin' Butt n' Takin' Names Every Second Tuesday" still beneficial/preferred for your ease of flavor and style of play?

I think I'd place "Combat" on the other end of the broad/specific scale, with "War" being broad on the other end. "Dwarf" and "Blood" seem totally superfluous. I waver on "Destruction".

I rather like how Essentials did it–but it needs more domains.

There's the adept, which seems to fill the role of "primitive spellcaster." They do have some cure and protective spells and actually cast divine spells, but they also receive a familiar and have access to some spells with a traditionally arcane bent (invisibility, wall of fire, and the like).

That's probably what I'm thinking of.