Battle Cleric vs. Warlord

[tiornys]

Yeah my tactical warlord is my favourite character & usually feels effective. Effectiveness does vary with party composition - leaders do seem to be most sensitive to this.

We played LFR the other day with 3 tactical warlords which meant oodles of buffs & healing & free saves. The barbarian made a lot of attacks . I think the 5 tactical warlords party is the best delving party (maybe splashing some resourceful ones). MC fighter for Rain of Blows & go nuts with APs. Possibly one MC wizard for Flameshroud (?).

Two Tactical, one Resourceful, one Bravura, and a melee striker is likely superior. If all you give is attack bonuses, you reach a point of diminishing returns--damage boosts and extra attacks become superior to further attack bonuses. And a dedicated striker is the perfect recipient of all those extra attacks....

Back before they nerfed Guileful Switch, there was an amusing post about a party of each Warlord build and their Barbarian buddy, and how they could be expected to start each combat by dropping at least two enemies before they had a chance to act.

t~

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Two Tactical, one Resourceful, one Bravura, and a melee striker is likely superior. If all you give is attack bonuses, you reach a point of diminishing returns--damage boosts and extra attacks become superior to further attack bonuses. And a dedicated striker is the perfect recipient of all those extra attacks....

Back before they nerfed Guileful Switch, there was an amusing post about a party of each Warlord build and their Barbarian buddy, and how they could be expected to start each combat by dropping at least two enemies before they had a chance to act.

t~

No love for Inspiring Warlords? I think you need someone that gives good healing and saving throws, and so far it seems the Inspiring Warlord is the best at that.

We have faced a lot of condition-save-ends-type monsters in our Paragon Campaign (soon Epic), and the same was true in our Level 21 oneshot. I wouldn't leave home without save granters and boosters.

 

[tiornys]

No love for Inspiring Warlords? I think you need someone that gives good healing and saving throws, and so far it seems the Inspiring Warlord is the best at that.

We have faced a lot of condition-save-ends-type monsters in our Paragon Campaign (soon Epic), and the same was true in our Level 21 oneshot. I wouldn't leave home without save granters and boosters.

With 4 leaders in the party already, more healing is absurdly redundant, and I'm sure they can find room for some save granting powers. Inspiring presence is the only one that doesn't add to the ridiculous offensive potential of action points in that group, although I admit that some of the better Inspiring powers would fit in nicely.

That said, one of these days I am going to put together a party of a Warlord of each build + a Striker just to see if it actually works in practice.

t~

 

[Victim]

With 4 leaders in the party already, more healing is absurdly redundant...
t~

Sort of. While lots of healing can be a huge edge, having someone able to add lots of HP per surge can do a lot for per day lifespan. Lots of relatively smaller heals means that characters deplete surges more quickly than with fewer bigger heals.

 

[tiornys]

Sort of. While lots of healing can be a huge edge, having someone able to add lots of HP per surge can do a lot for per day lifespan. Lots of relatively smaller heals means that characters deplete surges more quickly than with fewer bigger heals.

While this is true, I don't see what an Inspiring brings that another build can't cover, aside from his presence, which would often go wasted since this party will tend to spend its action points very aggressively. The Bravura can be just as good with Improved Inspiring Word/Rousing Assault, and if one of the TacLords is Eladrin he'll have access to Tactical Inspiration. I don't see any Cha-based healing powers based on Inspiring presence that are better than Inspiring Word for single target healing.

t~

 

[Blackbrrd]

While this is true, I don't see what an Inspiring brings that another build can't cover, aside from his presence, which would often go wasted since this party will tend to spend its action points very aggressively. The Bravura can be just as good with Improved Inspiring Word/Rousing Assault, and if one of the TacLords is Eladrin he'll have access to Tactical Inspiration. I don't see any Cha-based healing powers based on Inspiring presence that are better than Inspiring Word for single target healing.

t~

The Inspiring warlord gives you some really nice powers with Inspiring-only-kickers. Some low-level examples:
Level 2 utility - Inspired Belligerence - allies adds your cha to damage
Level 3 encounter - Warlords strike - allies adds your cha+1 to damage
Level 7 encounter - War of attrition - allies adds cha to att/dmg for basic/at-will attacks

Since the other characters adds a big load of to-hit, the damage bonus the Inspiring warlord grants is even more valuable. (+5 damage with a 50% hit chance is worth 2.5 damage, +5 damage with 75% hit chance is worth 3.75 damage).

Regarding the healing, you have Rousing Words (level 6 utility) which has a Inspiring-only kicker adding 5+cha to the two healing surges. It isn't more efficient than Healing word at level 6, but it does more healing. I agree that the healing granted by 4 leaders is waaaaay overkill anyway, just wanted to point out the above power.

 

[Danceofmasks]

Battle clerics with 20 str usually have terrible ACs.It doesnt give you many points for armor spec. or prof.

Do you claim that Fighters with 20 str have terrible ACs too?

1) Battle clerics need 2 stats. Str and Con. A bit of wis doesn't hurt, but that's all you need. For those who say '18 is enough,' what stats can you possibly want that compensates for +1 on a D20 roll every single combat round in the character's career? That's not even mentioning +damroll or +brand bonus.
2) Battle clerics are choc full of powers that buff AC for the whole encounter. Precast a shield of faith or whack a few foes with a shield of the gods, and you have defender AC.
3) Your heavy melee hitters will delay until after you ... so whomever you attack (note that this build optimises hitroll) will also be targeted by a harder hitting ally. You tell me whom the mobs will rather aim at (especially if you have scale armour, which my build starts with).
4) A well played Battle Cleric picks encounter powers that 'crowd controls,' such as Split the Sky and Awe Strike, 'cos 'buffing' encounter powers aren't as good as brand. So they also have the option of immobilise + shift or prone + stand 1 square away.

This is a leader that has multiple encounter-long AC buffs .. and heavy armour.
Mentioning AC as a fail point is downright laughable.

Teh battle cleric even does well in melee 1v1. Yes, it can duel. Seriously.
In a circumstance when brand is useless.
Heck, I'd bet on it winning a fight vs. the goliath from the "are wardens overpowered" thread.
Wait, human cleric. I ma callin' him David.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

No, AC is really the worst counterargument. Since you at least have chain... which actually most clerics should wear.

However will and reflex are lacking seriously... also your healing spells are reduced in efficiency. I would strongly consider 20 Strength, but if it doesn´t fit with my race i wouldn´t worry at all.

And an elven battlecleric with 18 strength and a fullblade can easily kill a warforged battlerager with 20 strength pre errata with executioner axe if it survives the fighter´s alpha strike with action point. Actually in a duel, the +1 to hit will help you only in about 1/10 of your fights... your +2 to healing word may help you more often... also +1 to initiative from higher dexterity can give you one more attack in 1 of 20 fights... (note: the elf overcompensates the lacking to hit bonus with his racial)

 

[Badapple]

Well it's all fun theorycraft, but once the dice hit the table all bets are off. This is my experience, and of course it's all totally invalid because every group plays different, has different builds, different situations, blah blah blah. So here's my useless, but hopefully interesting, anecdotal two cents:

So far I've DMed a group to 9-10th level, and played in a group that just reached 10th level. Our groups have kept the same characters since first level. Party sizes vary from 5-7 players. So I can't speak for paragon+, but over the course of play we've had a chance to see 2 warlord builds and 2 cleric builds in action. One group has a taclord and a lazer cleric, the other group has a str cleric and an inspiring warlord. Based on my experiences I'll make the following generalizations:

1. Warlords and Clerics are great complements to each other, and I'd rather have one of each in the group than two clerics or two warlords. All those warlord powers that are great, buuuut you have to hit? Well brand lets you hit!

2. I have yet to see any one of these four leaders consistently outperform any of the others to the point where one build seems broken or gimped.

3. Warlords are more "swingy". There are some fights that become utter brutal kill fests because of warlord bonuses. Other fights the warlord is a useless appendage. Clerics are very solid, consistant performers. Want to neutralize a warlord? Run a battle on a very large battlemat with the PCs all spread out... or with hedges or walls all over the place. Quickly the warlord bonuses are unable to be effectively applied. Oh or have zones and stuff that block line of sight... guaranteed frustration to the warlords!

4. If the party size is less than 5, clerics are better. For every party member over 5, warlords just get more and more appealing, as their bonuses tend to be party wide bonuses.

5. The healing pecking order seems to be lazer cleric > inspiring warlord > str cleric > taclord, but I suppose that varies highly based on feats/gear etc.

6. The str cleric does very well being in the front lines, with the warlords being ok, and the lazer cleric being not good. The str cleric can take gobs of damage and usually never runs out of healing surges.

The two parties work pretty well in their own ways:
Party 1: Has two defenders and great healing from the lazer cleric. The tac lord gives out great offensive bonuses. This party has occasionally gone utterly ballistic and annihilated stuff, but also they have gotten their asses handed to them more regularly. They were almost total party killed once (last fight of thunderspire labyrith) and have had a character die. They seem to be a little more swingy.

Party 2: Has only one defender, but the str cleric and inspiring warlord both are competent healers. More strikers in this party mean more damage overall, so this party doesn't miss the taclord offensive boost. This party has yet to have an "oh crap I'm not sure we'll survive this" encounter.

Interestinly RB hasn't been the super dominant kick ass at will that everyone says it is... yet... It's a great power yes, but at lower levels we noticed it being no better than a basic attack over 80% of the time. Of course a bunch of circumstances caused this: (in no particular order of frequency)

1. The cleric killed his enemy with the RB attack
2. Someone else killed the enemy before the guy with RB bonus got to attack
3. The person with the RB bonus missed anyway
4. The person with the RB bonus hit anyway
5. The person with the RB bonus attacked a different target
6. The person with the RB bonus got affected by some status condition that prevented him from attacking the target
7. The cleric missed with RB

Then of course sometimes the cleric had to charge or use a ranged attack, or used an encounter power instead of RB.

Over the first 3 levels (we kept track) RB only actually caused someone to get a hit on an attack simply because of the RB bonus 2 times. Two times in about 20 combats! Meanwhile in the other group the warlord was letting the rogue reroll a sneak attack with commander's strike or having the fighter do his basic attack with +4 damage over and over. So at low levels, commander's strike was seriously outperforming RB. The inspiring warlord's at wills weren't all that inspiring (though rousing attack is a welcome addition). The lazer cleric's at wills were ok.

At the mid to high heroic levels, brand is getting to be very nice and the ranger of course loves getting the bonus, and it sets up the warlord's attacks very well. But the str cleric's encounters/dailys seem to be more meh than the other 3 leaders. We'll see at paragon, but it seems to me just from scanning the books that battle captain and radiant servant will trump whatever the str cleric and inspiring warlord wind up taking. Any thoughts on if this is true or not?

 

[Blackbrrd]

...The inspiring warlord's at wills weren't all that inspiring (though rousing attack is a welcome addition).

Hmm... So no uses of any of the following powers?
Level 2 utility - Inspired Belligerence - allies adds your cha to damage
Level 3 encounter - Warlords strike - allies adds your cha+1 to damage
Level 7 encounter - War of attrition - allies adds cha to att/dmg for basic/at-will attacks

Especially Inspired Belligerence should be possible to use in every encounter. The encounter powers means you have to hit for them to take effect, but that should happen more than 50% of the time...

The reason I like the Inspiring Warlord is that his kickers come from his encounter powers, so he is able to do some ok damage AND buff the party. In addition, he can do them every encounter.