Do you let your clerics have all the spells?

[Lizard Lips]

I have a player (who always plays wizards) playing a cleric in my new campaign. He insists he's not min/maxing but most of his choices appear to be made solely for their tactical value ("cleric is just the best class", "I want to play a 'little person' who rides a dog and wileds a lance, but I'm not a halfling")

Just before my last session he hands me a stack of print outs. "I found a bunch of spells online for my cleric. They're all from WotC books so they're official." I tell him I'll need to look at them, and hey, it'd be nice if in the future you give me more of a heads up than 5 minutes before we play. "Ok. But they are official," he replies, honestly confused. In an email the next day ("have you looked at the spells yet?") he mentions that he's not trying to min/max, he just wants to add some variety, so he's not casting the same spells as the party beguiler, bard or druid.

So I take a look at the spells . What is the deal with all of the cleric damage spells? "Nimbus of Light"? "Deific Vengeance"? Maybe I'm an old curmudgeon, but shouldn't clerics be pretty limited to healing and buffing?

Sorry about the ranting, but how do you deal with new cleric spells? I find wizard spells easy to introduce. If i want a spell to be in, I throw a scroll into the next treasure hoard, or I let the player pick a couple when they level up. But clerics get access to everything. Isn't introducing tons of new spells a problem?

 

[Olaf the Stout]

I go with the rule that if a cleric wants to add a spell that is not in the PHB he has to permanently give up a PHB spell of the same level. If the cleric wants to cast a spell from the Spell Compendium then he has to give up a spell for it.

Another option that I am currently toying with introducing is that the cleric has to do some sort of holy quest or task for his god in order to get access to non-PHB spells. I thought of using this option because one of my players wants a few non-PHB spells but doesn't like the idea of giving up other spells for them.

I think that either option is reasonable. What I don't think is reasonable is that clerics can magically cast all the new spells that have come out in the latest sourcebook. Each new books gives them more and more flexibility, and with that more power. I think they are one of the strongest Core class going around already without giving them more and more spells to choose from.

Olaf the Stout

 

[Morrus]

I have a player (who always plays wizards) playing a cleric in my new campaign. He insists he's not min/maxing but most of his choices appear to be made solely for their tactical value ("cleric is just the best class", "I want to play a 'little person' who rides a dog and wileds a lance, but I'm not a halfling")

He always plays a wizard.... who rides a dog and wields a lance?

I agree with you. Clerics get access to "everything", so every time a new book comes out, suddenly your cleric has access to a whole slew of new stuff - unlike wizards, who gain new stuff gradually.

I allow all core spells. Anything else I introduce in the same way as a wizard spell - i.e. one at a time, and under my control. For example, in my last session, the cleric character came across some cave paintings which, when studied, revealed to him a new prayer.

I'd certainly never allow a player to come to me with a list of 300 new spells I've never heard of that he suddenly wants to be able to cast.

 

[Olaf the Stout]

I just re-read your post and I just wanted to clarify that I give PC clerics access to all PHB spells. If you wanted you could look at limiting spells based on what deity they worshipped. That would probably be a better option and it would stop all clerics from looking so similar but that's quite a big job. More effort than I'm willing to go to at this point in time at least.

Olaf the Stout

 

[VirgilCaine]

I go with the rule that if a cleric wants to add a spell that is not in the PHB he has to permanently give up a PHB spell of the same level. If the cleric wants to cast a spell from the Spell Compendium then he has to give up a spell for it.

Another option that I am currently toying with introducing is that the cleric has to do some sort of holy quest or task for his god in order to get access to non-PHB spells. I thought of using this option because one of my players wants a few non-PHB spells but doesn't like the idea of giving up other spells for them.

I would allow either approach to work in my game and use the former approach...Good clerics don't actually use Animate Dead, so why not replace it?

 

[JustKim]

Spellcasting is the cleric's class feature. Because their spell list is utilitarian and the core game assumes you have access to many of these utilities, a lot of clerics do end up exactly the same. If you allow fighters to take their bonus feats from noncore books, why not allow a cleric to prepare spells from a noncore book?

To answer your question, no, it has never been a problem for me, either as a DM or as the de facto cleric player.

 

[Morrus]

Spellcasting is the cleric's class feature. Because their spell list is utilitarian and the core game assumes you have access to many of these utilities, a lot of clerics do end up exactly the same. If you allow fighters to take their bonus feats from noncore books, why not allow a cleric to prepare spells from a noncore book?

For me, because the ability to suddenly cast any of 300 new spells isn't equal to the one-time choice of a single feat by a fighter. It's a massive, instant power-boost (in terms of flexibility).

In terms of a character's entire career - I agree with you a little more. The fighter's entire feat selection over 20 levels is a lot of stuff. But we're not talking about the cleric gaining those spells over 20 levels - he's suddenly gaining them all now.

I guess it also depends on how many spells we're talking. For example, if you total up every single 3rd level cleric spell from every book, you're talking a lot. If you're just looking at one book, it's a lot less.

The other issue is that I, as a DM, can't be familiar with it all. I don't know my players' capabilities, making it hard for me to run an interesting, challenging game for them. When a fighter wants a new feat from a new book, he can run it by me. Not so with a book full of spells!

If it's never been a problem for you, that's cool. I'm just saying it would make things difficult for me.

 

[mr_outsidevoice]

I say allow all PHB spells and either allow him to choose 3-5 non-PHB spells per level, or you can create a spell list for each god.

It is your campaign, it doesn't matter if a rule is "cannon", if you don't want it, it don't exist. just be consistent.

 

[Crothian]

I let Clerics have access to all spells on the cleric spell list. Sounds good for the PCs until they see that cleric NPCs have access to the same spells.

 

[Morrus]

I let Clerics have access to all spells on the cleric spell list. Sounds good for the PCs until they see that cleric NPCs have access to the same spells.

Heh. And suddenly running NPCs becomes ten times harder!

My problem when running a fight is that the PCs spend hours with their own, single character. They know them inside and out. They know every spell, every feat and every item on their character sheet, and how it works. Even better, they know how best to use them.

I, on the other hand, have to do that for every single NPC. Except that instead of weeks and months of learning how the NPC works, I get a few minutes (hours if I have the time to do enough prep).

Using the core rules plus some approved others makes that challenging at higher levels, but not impossible. Doing it with hundreds and hundreds of spells, items, feats, abilities, classes, etc. suddenly makes it too hard for me.

I admire anyone who can deal with that well. I know I can't. In that situation, my NPCs don't use their abilities properly.

So, simply for the sake of a smooth, challenging game, I have to approve non-core stuff on an item-by-item basis, whether that be spells, classes, feats, items, whatever.

Maybe I'm just not quick-minded enough.