Clerics - What do you LIKE and DISLIKE?

[Hussar]

Wow, I think this has been the most consensus I've seen in one of these like/dislike threads.

Most people don't like turning. - Yup. I agree with that. It's such a limited ability anyway. If a campaign doesn't see a whole lot of undead, who cares if you can turn? Should be made into a feat (or possibly feat chain) with a will save or something like that.

Now, on the huge selection of spells, there's a couple of points to remember. No matter what, the cleric is only casting one spell per round (well maybe two with quicken) so, having that wide range isn't quite a powerful as it sounds. Also, there are so many very limited use spells (water breathing/water walking/etc) that the list of spells that are commonly cast is probably much smaller.

In 2e, I houseruled that clerics could cast any spell from their spheres whenever they wanted. No memorization at all. In the end, 95% of the spells were exactly the same as if they had to memorize. I'm not sure how much different it is today.

One thing that bugs me about clerics is people who play clerics as a fighter who can heal. Clerics should be devout with a capital D. You have a direct link to a GAWD. Not only that, but even at first level you can summon servants from your gawd's home plane. This does not make for Father Generic. The only reason we have paladins in the game as a base class is because people won't pony up to playing clerics as part of a faith.

 

[Keifer113]

Now, on the huge selection of spells, there's a couple of points to remember. No matter what, the cleric is only casting one spell per round (well maybe two with quicken) so, having that wide range isn't quite a powerful as it sounds. Also, there are so many very limited use spells (water breathing/water walking/etc) that the list of spells that are commonly cast is probably much smaller.

.

Wizards still can cast only 1 spell a round, two with quicken. They normally have fewer spells or access to fewer spells then clerics. If you are playing a true core rules game, clerics have access to ALL spells and wizards only to ones they get to pick and what the DM gives them.

The magic power jump is alot more then I think your are giving them.

 

[Jdvn1]

I like that I get full casting. I like that there's a lot of variety to how you can play a cleric. Decent BAB and HD means war cleric is possible, even if everyone hates it, and good spellcasting means caster is possible. Though, I suppose splitting the class could do that too. I like spontaneous casting. I like a wide variety of spells. I like domains.

Anyway, I dislike how turning works, but I don't really want it to change. I dislike that when I play a Cleric, I feel like a min/maxer.

 

[Hussar]

True, but, then again, wizard spells are a tad more combat oriented and damage oriented than cleric spells don't you think? There are very few save or die cleric spells, yet, wizards get one at first level - sleep. Realistically, in any given situation, there are only one or two spells that most people choose the vast majority of times.

It doesn't matter how long the list is when people tend to choose the same handful of spells.

I admit that having automatic access to the entire list is great. However, let's not forget that a large chunk of that list is extremely limited in use. While there are specific use wizard spells, there are also wizard spells which are very multipurpose - Shadow Evocation? Polymorph/Alter self for example. What cleric spells of the same level come even close to the utilty of an Alter Self spell?

 

[Klaus]

Dammit, Klaus - stop peeking in my house rules!

NEVER!!!

MWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

 

[wingsandsword]

I don't like the general D&D presumtion of the standard fantasy priest being a plate mail wearing, mace-swinging warrior who exists as a Cure dispenser and undead repulsion unit.

I know there are certain D&Disms that are just a part of the game because they've been there for decades, but aside from a very few historic/mythical examples mentioned in old AD&D books, the D&D cleric archetype is pretty much a D&D thing only. At least most of the D&D core classes have a significant list of mythical and literary sources, but the Cleric as a heavily armed and armored fighting man (who normally eschews swords for maces) who also happens to be a priest isn't overly common. (Archbishop Turpin is the main example always cited. I've seen it argued that Knights Templar are supposed to be Clerics, but I would think that they would be much closer to Fighters or maybe Paladins with some specific feats and skill choices in that they were significantly more martial than they were religious).

I do understand that the D&D Cleric is something that people expect from D&D, so I don't think it should be replaced outright, but I do think that a new priest class belongs in the game suitable for all faiths.

One of the few rules aspects I miss about 2nd Edition were the Specialty Priests of various faiths, where many religions would have a custom class for their priesthood other than the generic Cleric class. Cleric is supposed to be universal but it's not, it seems weird as a priest of a nature deity or deity of peace for example to go tromping around in heavy metal armor and a big shield. Also, it is a chance to fill the gap that I think exists in that there should be a spontaneous divine caster in the core rules.

From a rules standpoint, the Mystic from Dragonlance is the closest thing I've seen from WotC to what I want. The campaign-specific "fluff" about them can be removed, but a non-armored priest class that has greater spellcasting capacity and some more special abilities in exchange for less martial aspects is what I would like to see in a priest class in D&D.

 

[Klaus]

The cleric isn't standard priest, that's the adept. The cleric, as it is, is the champion of the faith. In a world with magic, the Knights Templar would certainly fit the bill (just check the Hospitaler PrClass to see what one of these orders would look like in a DnD setting).

Of course, one can always use the Cloistered Cleric variant from Unearthed Arcana, which, IMHO, represents an archetype popular enough to warrant inclusion in the core rules.

 

[wingsandsword]

The cleric isn't standard priest, that's the adept. The cleric, as it is, is the champion of the faith. In a world with magic, the Knights Templar would certainly fit the bill (just check the Hospitaler PrClass to see what one of these orders would look like in a DnD setting).

Of course, one can always use the Cloistered Cleric variant from Unearthed Arcana, which, IMHO, represents an archetype popular enough to warrant inclusion in the core rules.

Adept is clearly meant more as a tribal shaman, village witch/wise man, or local alchemist (under the 3.5 Alchemy rules) than it is the rank-and-file of the clergy.

Some tribal societies or less sophisticated religions don't have the resources to train wizards and clerics. Reflecting a lesser knowledge of magic yet an intriguing combination of arcane and divine skills, the adept serves these cultures as both wise woman (or holy man) and mystical defender.

By the DMG demographics rules, most villages and hamlets are going to have several low-level clerics in them: the local priests.

The Cloistered Cleric is an okay choice for this, the name is a little cumbersome for something in the core rules though. The more mystically and less martially oriented priest, preferably spontaneously casting, is something that belongs alongside cleric IMO.

 

[el-remmen]

Wow, I think this has been the most consensus I've seen in one of these like/dislike threads.

Most people don't like turning.

Just to present a counter-opinion - I LIKE how turning works and have ended up using the effective level portion of the turn check table (based on the CHA check) for a variety of abilities that are manifested by channeling energy.

 

[MarkB]

Dislike: Utterly banal class progression.

Level 1: Turn or rebuke undead.
Levels 2-20: Oh goodie. More spells.

Druids manage to be a full-casting class with lots of interesting class features. Clerics, with their varied faiths, have the potential to be even more customisable. And yet, they're bland, bland, bland.

What I'd like to see, even if it cuts down on spellcasting progression, is the domains being gained over time (starting with 1 at 1st level, going up to, say, 4 by 20th), a few bonus feats (put all the Divine feats, undead-turning-boosting feats, etc. on the list), and some alignment-based class features that give you different abilities depending upon alignment.