Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="On Puget Sound" data-source="post: 5779136" data-attributes="member: 68988">I liked the 2e customization for flavor, but did not like it for playability.&nbsp; 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.&nbsp; &quot;Ow, I'm hit!&nbsp; Cleric, I need a heal!&quot;&nbsp; &quot;Uh, I'm not that kind of cleric.&nbsp; Would you like Grow Plants instead?&quot;3e's domain spells were weak sauce in terms of differentiation, but still miles better than 4e's Channel Divinity, which almost never sees play IME.&nbsp; The Essentials approach of completely different power lists for each specialty is good, but if you can't cross-poach it leaves too little customization, and if you can freely cross-poach all clerics will still end up looking alike, as some spells are always better choices than others.&nbsp; It's also a lot of work to make a complete power suite for every deity or sphere.*I think what I would like to see is a better-balanced version of the 2E approach: a menu of power lists linked by themes, with access to lists based on the deity's portfolio, but with all clerics able to do at least basic healing.*Actually, maybe 4e is more like 2e's specialty priests than I thought.&nbsp; Isn't an Avenger just a specialty priest of Justice/Vengeance, and an Invoker a specialty priest of the Elements?&nbsp; For that matter, couldn't you call your Warlord a priest of Battle, or your bard a priest of Music or Trickery?&nbsp; Perhaps the more basic question is &quot;what makes a character a cleric?&quot;&nbsp; Is it healing?&nbsp; Divine magic?&nbsp; Specifically being a divine healer?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="On Puget Sound, post: 5779136, member: 68988"] 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?" 3e's domain spells were weak sauce in terms of differentiation, but still miles better than 4e's Channel Divinity, which almost never sees play IME. The Essentials approach of completely different power lists for each specialty is good, but if you can't cross-poach it leaves too little customization, and if you can freely cross-poach all clerics will still end up looking alike, as some spells are always better choices than others. It's also a lot of work to make a complete power suite for every deity or sphere.* I think what I would like to see is a better-balanced version of the 2E approach: a menu of power lists linked by themes, with access to lists based on the deity's portfolio, but with all clerics able to do at least basic healing. *Actually, maybe 4e is more like 2e's specialty priests than I thought. Isn't an Avenger just a specialty priest of Justice/Vengeance, and an Invoker a specialty priest of the Elements? For that matter, couldn't you call your Warlord a priest of Battle, or your bard a priest of Music or Trickery? Perhaps the more basic question is "what makes a character a cleric?" Is it healing? Divine magic? Specifically being a divine healer? [/QUOTE]

Verification