Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ridley's Cohort" data-source="post: 240278" data-attributes="member: 545">I think it is plausible to replace all fighters in the party with clerics but only if you carefully build a team that can cover a few key common weaknesses of clerics:(1) Archery.  An optimized  low or middle level archer can give a Barbarian or Sorceror a run for the money in damage dealing over the course of the day.  A middle or high level Fighter can easily be a devasting archer as well as a great grunt.  Clerics need to spend precious feats to fill this gap.  Spells do not always cut it here especially at long range where their offensive spell selection is skimpy.(2) Spring Attack and reach.  SA "solves" a really ugly tactical problem.  If you lack this ability in your party should expect to need that healing...(3) Grapple.  I think the Improved Grab is one of the more likely causes of a sudden higher level character death.  Every little bit of BAB and room for that CQF feat can save a life.(4) Clearing a room of fodder quickly.  A Fighter or Barbarian is much more efficient at clearing a room of orcs (or even ogres) at low to mid levels.  The better BAB and easy access to cleave preserves this advantage even after the cleric gets his second attack.None of the above are insoluble.  I think the "cleric solution" looks very attractive at very low or very high levels.  Fighter and Barbarians look pretty good at mid levels IMO.I would also like to reiterate an astute observation by Vax: If a Cleric may be as good as a Fighter when fully buffed, just imagine what a buffed Fighter could do?</blockquote>

Verification