Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 7539188" data-attributes="member: 6704184">And I’m challenging your premises. We’re talking about the idea that clerics are “themed wizards” because they have cantrips that are stronger than their weapon attacks. I’ve presented the arguemrnt that this is false because cantrips are only 1 small part of what the class does, and what the class does is quite different. The idea that any primary spellcaster is a themed wizard is too absurd to even meaningfully interact with, but that seems to be your position in this post.  most characters of spellcasting classes (except warlock) spend more time casting leveled spells and using class features than they do using cantrips. A feature can’t be the character’s primary thing, if it’s used less than other features.  Word of Radiance. If your cleric concept is centered on dealing damage, there are some cantrips and a whole subclass for that. Not all clerics have any focus at all on directly dealing damage. It is good that the game supports both, and supports them well.  No. if you can’t handle the occasional tangential aside, don’t discuss things with me. I’m not going to change how I post at your whim. What’s more, we’ve both already been discussing what could best be done to fix the issue that you have with the classes. You’ve even agreed that a feature or cantrip that simply makes the cleric’s weapon attacks do extra radiant damage would fix the issue.A few things here. Yes, my clerics are in melee range of enemies quite often. Some take damage cantrips, some don’t. Some are specifically playing a 4e invoker style “wrath of god” cleric (which has been a thing since at least 3e), while some simply want a ranged backup. Including the couple warpreists we’ve had at the table. Still others only have a weapon for when there is no other action to take, and will rather use Help than attack most times, if there are literally only the two options. All of them are in melee range of enemies frequently, because they have to be within the movement speed of enemies to do most of the things they can do that are of any use, unlike the wizard. If you are seeing clerics always in the “backfield” never in any physical danger, your DM is very nice, or not very tactical with enemies. Or your cleric players are playing full on invokers with little interest in keeeping allies up and buffer and enemies debuffed. But the thing you keep ignoring, it seems, is that “cast a spell” doesn’t mean anything. No one describing a fight would be like, “and then the cleric cast a spell, and the wizard cast a spell, and then...” because that would be a completely useless description of events. Wizards and clerics do completely different things with their spells, and have completely different class features. The fact they both have spells is beyond irrelevant to a discussion of how similar or different they are. If you can read the cleric spell list, and think “sounds like a wizard”, I can’t imagine what your conception of any of the classes even is.</blockquote>

Verification