Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 6091605" data-attributes="member: 2067">I've said a few times that the level to which that "requirement" is felt is going to be different at different tables, but the basic idea is that a prospective player shouldn't have to choose between being effective and being the character they want to play. Any character they want to play should be as effective (generally, in different ways) as any other. If a cleric makes the party more effective, that forces the choice: If I'm not interested in playing a cleric, and the party doesn't have one, do I play a cleric anyway to make the party more effective, or do I play any other class, and thus make the party less effective? "Necessary" happens when a party without a cleric isn't going to be able to get as much XP between recharges by RAW as a party with one. If the player chooses not to play a cleric, the party will suffer in terms of not being able to meet their goals (inasmuch as goals are measured in XP). The metric is largely a mathematical one of XP earned between recharges. This maps, in general, to the level of challenge a party can face: a party with a cleric like some are proposing would be allow the party to face a greater challenge than a party without one (and with any other class instead). Not exactly.Every character in 5e measures progress toward their goals with XP. This is because XP serves as a measure of challenge: a critter (or, presumably, other obstacle) that is harder to beat is going to be worth more XP, and the more critters you beat up (or places you explore, or intractable political opponents you persuade to back down, or whatever), the more XP your party earns. Overcoming these obstacles is going to cost you something -- in combat, it costs you HP. The harder a thing is to beat, the more it costs you. You determine what things you can beat as a party by comparing your existing resources (HP) to what it might cost you (the damage you will take) to determine if you can tackle the challenge or not. If a cleric (or any other "designated healer") is designed to make the party go on longer, a party with one is going to earn more XP, by fighting more creatures, or by fighting tougher creatures, or otherwise taking on bigger challenges. Because of that, they'll make more progress toward their goal (the goal being XP). So, the ultimate effect is that adding a cleric to the party gets you closer to your goals faster than adding any other class. It's like saying "Because you're playing a cleric, everyone at the table gets 20% extra XP each time we play." And so you have a person who might not want to play a cleric having to choose between giving everyone at the table more XP and faster progress to their goals...or playing a character they want to play.Clerics would do this by virtue of making the party more robust and able to withstand punishment than it would be without one. In comparison, a party that swaps out a fighter for a rogue might just focus more on Sneak Attacks; a party that swaps out a rogue for a wizard might rely more on divination spells; a party that swaps out a wizard for a fighter might rely more on tricky maneuvers....etc. This is personal, though. At the basic level, which is facing newbies, we can't know if they're going to care about effectiveness, or if they're going to be playing in a group that cares about it or not. And I'd prefer not to create a situation where that choice needs to be made -- it's a false choice. If the cleric uniquely has the power to expand the adventuring day, it would be like the Fighter being the only one capable of making damage rolls, or the rogue being the only one allowed to make Perception checks. The point is that these things should be things that any character is capable of (the cleric might be the best/most versatile/most useful/whatever, but a fighter or rogue should be able to do it, too).A cleric made in this mode is the one who gives you progress toward any goal, by giving you more XP. I hope I've given enough maths and evidence that this is a legit concern if Clerics are the only ones that can extend the length of the day. If they're the only ones who can do that, there is pressure to choose them over another class that cannot do that, for the purposes of meeting the party's goals. Pfft, I'm just some jerk on the Internet with kind of weirdly strong opinions about magic gumdrop elves. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification