Do You Feel The Cleric Is Balanced?
- Thread starter Merlion
- Start date
KB9JMQ
First Post
Honestly I have never had anything become unbalanced, broken, shafted, etc. in my campaign and we havent house ruled a thing.
My group started with 3E thru The Burning Plague, The Sunless Citadel and The Forge of Fury and are currently into RttToEE and are 6th level and have yet to break or unbalance something.
This group is 4 characters - A straight cleric (played by a medic), A straight Rogue, A Fighter and A Sorcerer. All are human except Sorcerer (going for Arcane Archer)
Actually the only issues I have had was I originally didnt understand CR/EL very well and threw things at them that were to easy.
YMMV.
Darrin
My group started with 3E thru The Burning Plague, The Sunless Citadel and The Forge of Fury and are currently into RttToEE and are 6th level and have yet to break or unbalance something.
This group is 4 characters - A straight cleric (played by a medic), A straight Rogue, A Fighter and A Sorcerer. All are human except Sorcerer (going for Arcane Archer)
Actually the only issues I have had was I originally didnt understand CR/EL very well and threw things at them that were to easy.
YMMV.
Darrin
Shard O'Glase
First Post
Re: Re: Re: hmmmmm
Until the heal spell, the reason you don't worry about healing until after the battle is because the amount you heal just isn't worth the lost attack. Lets say your 5th level you now heal 3d8+5 with you best shot. Is 18-20hp really going to save the day for your fighter, or jsut keep him up for one more round. Would it be better to heal for 3d8+5 or to cast hold, hit some one with your mace, , cause blindness, poison, contagion etc them. 9 times out of 10 your better off with the attack, since a dead foe/ incapacitated foe doesn't hit you any longer. At higher elvels until heal it gets even worse, flame strike, slay living or 5d8+10. And heck even with the heal spell if you are facing small numbers of foes chances are harm will be better than heal since you instantly take someone out of the fight.
Ogre Mage said:
Until the heal spell, the reason you don't worry about healing until after the battle is because the amount you heal just isn't worth the lost attack. Lets say your 5th level you now heal 3d8+5 with you best shot. Is 18-20hp really going to save the day for your fighter, or jsut keep him up for one more round. Would it be better to heal for 3d8+5 or to cast hold, hit some one with your mace, , cause blindness, poison, contagion etc them. 9 times out of 10 your better off with the attack, since a dead foe/ incapacitated foe doesn't hit you any longer. At higher elvels until heal it gets even worse, flame strike, slay living or 5d8+10. And heck even with the heal spell if you are facing small numbers of foes chances are harm will be better than heal since you instantly take someone out of the fight.
RigaMortus2
First Post
Shard O'Glase said:
I know this, but the point is that they are guidelines. If you do not follow them, it doesn't mean you are playing "incorrectly". There is no "standard DnD world" which defines that you MUST have cure wands in towns with X population.
Also, the DMG gives you GP vaules of magic items found there. That doesn't necessarily mean it has to be a healing potion or wand.
So basically the only person at fault for making cure wands readily avalable and common to get is the DM.
RigaMortus2
First Post
Re: Re: Re: Re: hmmmmm
Yes, it is...
Of course it all depends on what you are fighting. Actually, it depends on a LOT of factors. Are you fighting casters? Does the fighter have a good AC? And so on...
If you are fighting creatures that do 30 damage per hit, than that 18-20 point heal won't make a difference, and I'd agree with you. If they can't hit the fighter's AC, accept on a natural 15 or better, I might take the risk and do something other than heal the fighter, hoping luck is on my side and the DM rolls badly. If I am fighting creatures that seem to be hitting the fighter often, but not for a lot of damage (1-4 damage) I would be more inclined to heal the fighter as taking one creature out using a Hold Person spell won't matter much since there are 10 more to worry about.
Shard O'Glase said:
Yes, it is...
Of course it all depends on what you are fighting. Actually, it depends on a LOT of factors. Are you fighting casters? Does the fighter have a good AC? And so on...
If you are fighting creatures that do 30 damage per hit, than that 18-20 point heal won't make a difference, and I'd agree with you. If they can't hit the fighter's AC, accept on a natural 15 or better, I might take the risk and do something other than heal the fighter, hoping luck is on my side and the DM rolls badly. If I am fighting creatures that seem to be hitting the fighter often, but not for a lot of damage (1-4 damage) I would be more inclined to heal the fighter as taking one creature out using a Hold Person spell won't matter much since there are 10 more to worry about.
Default Name Player
First Post
This is all IMO - just wanted to get that off first 
Since 3e first came out, I've spent half of that time playing a cleric (whether in a face to face or online game) mainly because I was usually the last to join the group - and you guessed it, that was the last "slot" that needed to be filled.
...and no, I'm not bitter about that because I've come to enjoy playing clerics
Now, gathering what I've learned playing a cleric in 3e in various groups (not to mention prior cleric gaming in 1e and 2e), I've generally experienced this:
Besides the usual toiling me and the wizard usually have in deciding what spells to memorize, as well as deciding the appropriate time to use such spells, the difference is with the clerics "spontaneous curing" ability.
Lets say I love spontaneous curing because it opens up a lot of options, but it's also a double edged sword. In 1e, all I had to do was say "I memorize Cure Light Wounds for all my first level spells, Cure Moderate Wounds for...etc". In 3e, I've actually had to put some more thought into spell choice since for once, I can actually pick up some "non-curing useful spells) for once. A great day indeed!
However, in turn, that affects the "when should I use a spell decision". This is where it depends on the DM and game style: some games have plenty of resting so that the spellcasters can burn off spells, while others have less resting so that spell casting has to be somewhat on the conservative nature, so hard choices have to be made.
More Resting = cleric can use spells more for buffing, combat, non-healing, etc.
Less Resting = cleric (or spellcasters in general) must maintain a balance for a possible next encounter, with a lot of "what if" decision making
Then that brings in the availability of "other healing" whether it's because of other PCs (another cleric, druid, bard, paladin, etc) or availability of potions, wands, etc. that helps with healing.
More "other healing" = takes the burden off clerics to maintain a certain level of healing spells available
Less "other healing" = party depends on the cleric more for their primary healing.
Hence, that finally leads to my: "Is the cleric overpowered?" IMO, and this is going to be a cheap answer, but it depends. In a "less resting, less other healing" party, the cleric will almost very likely be like the 1e cleric where all of their spells will likely be used for healing. In a "more other healing" party, less of a burden is placed on the cleric, and they can do some nasty stuff (I love Divine Power, but have only managed to use it once in 3 years
).
At the moment, I am in a game that's "less resting, more other healing", so that I generally keep enough healing for emergencies during combat, but there's an abundant of healing post-battle.
I have to say it's a bit of a transition because most of the games I've been in prior usually were "less other healing" and that made me much more conservative in spell casting non-healing spells. Someone recently had to remind me that I can use Cure spells as an offensive attack against undead, since it's been so ingrained in me that I might need that Cure for "later".
Since 3e first came out, I've spent half of that time playing a cleric (whether in a face to face or online game) mainly because I was usually the last to join the group - and you guessed it, that was the last "slot" that needed to be filled.
...and no, I'm not bitter about that because I've come to enjoy playing clerics
Now, gathering what I've learned playing a cleric in 3e in various groups (not to mention prior cleric gaming in 1e and 2e), I've generally experienced this:
Besides the usual toiling me and the wizard usually have in deciding what spells to memorize, as well as deciding the appropriate time to use such spells, the difference is with the clerics "spontaneous curing" ability.
Lets say I love spontaneous curing because it opens up a lot of options, but it's also a double edged sword. In 1e, all I had to do was say "I memorize Cure Light Wounds for all my first level spells, Cure Moderate Wounds for...etc". In 3e, I've actually had to put some more thought into spell choice since for once, I can actually pick up some "non-curing useful spells) for once. A great day indeed!
However, in turn, that affects the "when should I use a spell decision". This is where it depends on the DM and game style: some games have plenty of resting so that the spellcasters can burn off spells, while others have less resting so that spell casting has to be somewhat on the conservative nature, so hard choices have to be made.
More Resting = cleric can use spells more for buffing, combat, non-healing, etc.
Less Resting = cleric (or spellcasters in general) must maintain a balance for a possible next encounter, with a lot of "what if" decision making
Then that brings in the availability of "other healing" whether it's because of other PCs (another cleric, druid, bard, paladin, etc) or availability of potions, wands, etc. that helps with healing.
More "other healing" = takes the burden off clerics to maintain a certain level of healing spells available
Less "other healing" = party depends on the cleric more for their primary healing.
Hence, that finally leads to my: "Is the cleric overpowered?" IMO, and this is going to be a cheap answer, but it depends. In a "less resting, less other healing" party, the cleric will almost very likely be like the 1e cleric where all of their spells will likely be used for healing. In a "more other healing" party, less of a burden is placed on the cleric, and they can do some nasty stuff (I love Divine Power, but have only managed to use it once in 3 years
).At the moment, I am in a game that's "less resting, more other healing", so that I generally keep enough healing for emergencies during combat, but there's an abundant of healing post-battle.
I have to say it's a bit of a transition because most of the games I've been in prior usually were "less other healing" and that made me much more conservative in spell casting non-healing spells. Someone recently had to remind me that I can use Cure spells as an offensive attack against undead, since it's been so ingrained in me that I might need that Cure for "later".
Merlion
First Post
Well this has been a very interesting discussion.
From what has been said I belive the cleric class does have some mechanical issues...I think a cleric can very easily be created and played in a way that he/she becomes very dominant in a party...this is true of all classes but I think its easier for the cleric than for most.
On a flavour level I have decided that if I actualy do run a campaign as I am considering, I will be removing the Cleric and the Arcane/Divine magic split. The cleric is going to be "replaced" with a new class I am designing. you can see a bit about it as it develops here
From what has been said I belive the cleric class does have some mechanical issues...I think a cleric can very easily be created and played in a way that he/she becomes very dominant in a party...this is true of all classes but I think its easier for the cleric than for most.
On a flavour level I have decided that if I actualy do run a campaign as I am considering, I will be removing the Cleric and the Arcane/Divine magic split. The cleric is going to be "replaced" with a new class I am designing. you can see a bit about it as it develops here
Norfleet
First Post
I made healing potions relatively available anyway. Players used them. Lots of them. Because they had become addicted to healing potions. Muhuhahahaha.
All you need to cut down on healing potion use is to quietly cause people to become addicted to healing potions, and, as a result, seem to take extra "illusionary" damage from weapons, which promptly convinces them to.....you guessed it: Drink a healing potion. Which only makes the problem worse, and the vicious cycle of healing potion addiction continues.
A second solution you can apply in a tabletop game is, every time a player drinks a healing potion, you give him something to drink. However, healing potions are medicinal. As everyone knows, medicine tastes absolutely awful. So every time the player's character drinks a healing potion, the player must also drink a "potion". Something that tastes awful, to get him in the proper frame of reference. Then maybe they won't WANT to drink healing potions anymore: "I'm okay! I'm okay! Please don't make me drink that crap!".
You can even combine the approaches. Healing potions that are addictive, AND taste awful!
All you need to cut down on healing potion use is to quietly cause people to become addicted to healing potions, and, as a result, seem to take extra "illusionary" damage from weapons, which promptly convinces them to.....you guessed it: Drink a healing potion. Which only makes the problem worse, and the vicious cycle of healing potion addiction continues.
A second solution you can apply in a tabletop game is, every time a player drinks a healing potion, you give him something to drink. However, healing potions are medicinal. As everyone knows, medicine tastes absolutely awful. So every time the player's character drinks a healing potion, the player must also drink a "potion". Something that tastes awful, to get him in the proper frame of reference. Then maybe they won't WANT to drink healing potions anymore: "I'm okay! I'm okay! Please don't make me drink that crap!".
You can even combine the approaches. Healing potions that are addictive, AND taste awful!
Shard O'Glase
First Post
RigaMortus2 said:
Yeah I'm fairly sure I mentioned that these were jsut guidelines, and I'm fairly sure I put no value judgements on the style of play. "Now obviosuly these are jsut guidleine and you could easily detail a town of 2000 or so that has only one church who dosn't sell ehaling potions, or who a town that doens't sell magic at all for whatever reason. " Yep there I said these are just guidelines.
Anyway the point is while you don't have to follow any guidelines, the standard setting under which classes are balanced uses the guidelines. And using the standard guideline in a dicscussion of balance makes the most sense since settings can drastically effect the balance of campaigns. In an underdark game a pure spellcaster, and those without darkvision are seriosuly disadvantaged thanks to the darkness and preponderence of SR. In a low magic purchase campaign item creation feats become more valuable since that is one of the few ways to cusotmize your equipment and one of the few ways to be able to maintain a group of magic utility items.
For the purposes of deteminng the supposed burden of healing how you run the ability to aquire healing potions/wands has a large effect. But again for the purposes of balance its best to assume the guidelines are in place. It doens't mean the guidelines are better or worse just that as the default its the only real point of reference people can reliably use. Since we all know the default, and its how the camapign guideline on which the classes were supposed to be balanced.
Similar Threads
- Poll
- Poll
