Hands up who wants to play the healing battery?

[I'm A Banana]

I know that clerics in 3e were very powerful but what I was trying to get at is that they weren't really the 'healer'. If anything they just boosted themselves and made themselves even more powerful. Concentrating on nothing but healing wasn't really an option.

So, by your estimation, there wasn't a 'healing battery' at all in 3e?

Did you like playing the cleric in 3e? If not, why not? If so, why? Is the cleric in 4e a 'healing battery'? What about the rest of the Leaders?

IMO, the 3e cleric was as much a 'healing battery' as the 4e cleric. The spontaneous spell conversion was a real boon in 3e, because it meant you could 'play the healer' without dedicating all of your abilities to healing. Similarly, the 'attack + buff' pairing in 4e leaders means that you don't need to worry about memorizing anything that just heals, and it means that you can heal while kicking butt without spending more actions to do it.

Some people do have an issue with the suspension of disbelief that the 'attack + buff' concept requires, I've noticed, but I suppose since a lot of people have that problem with 4e in general, this specific item is just one more chip in the pile.

In 3e, the usefulness of the cleric as a tank with all those support spells and decent mid-line melee abilities eclipsed its role as a healer, which seemed to be an unintentional effect of that whole spontaneous cure thing combined with legacy spells that made clerics the best buffer in the game before (if they ever managed to cast a non-CureWounds spell). Clerics in 4e a certainly less able to leap roles like that, and I think that makes the class more iconic, more archetypal, which is a very good thing.

I really liked the cleric in 3e, but what I really liked about it was honestly the domains system: it let you play some very different kinds of clerics. I really like the idea that choosing a deity affects your abilities at every level and your role in the party, too.

I like the cleric a little less in 4e, even though it does its job better, mostly because it has weakened that "your god gives you specific god powers" mentality (alternate feats and paragon paths really don't do it for me -- I want to feel defined by my choice of deity). Though I enjoyed that aspect of the 3e cleric, it honestly isn't something that I should expect one class to fill the role of, so even though I'm less likely to play a cleric now, it's probably for the better.

I think what I really want is a way to make deity selection an important part of every character's ability suite. The cleric class should really not be expected to fill that role, even though it did in 3e, and I liked it.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Your experience does not mirror mine in any way. I wonder if its a regional thing. In the games I have been involved with, the cleric focuses on 2 things - buffing everyone and healing everyone - and in my current game healing everyone is top of the list for our cleric. I have yet to play with someone who plays a cleric to out fight the fighter.

I think it depends on a whole bunch of factors - party level, splat books available, errata in use, the other PC's builds, etc. 3e can be very variable. Imo healing isn't viable until 11th level when you can cast heal. Before then, the cleric's better off dealing damage. If the frontline PCs have buffed their ACs through the roof so opponents regularly need 20s to hit then combat healing may seldom be necessary. If one of the PCs is a raging barbarian with a 2-handed weapon then the cleric's whole job might be to keep him up.

The first time I played 3.5 was in a 3-man party of wizard (me), fighter and cleric. The cleric was a rocking combat god. He wouldn't enter the fight until he'd spent at least two rounds self-buffing with stuff like divine power and righteous might (I don't think we knew about the errata). Me and the fighter player figured out tactics to cope with this. The fighter would use defensive fighting and combat expertise to stay alive until the cleric was ready to join in. I'd cast ray of enfeeblement (we were often up against a single big monster) on the first round to help him. Later I hit on the tactic of starting with web, which was very effective as the campaign was set in a city. The cleric would go buff-buff-buff-buff then I'd cast haste and dispel the web. It was often an auto-win. I think the only time that cleric cast healing spells was once the fight was over.

 

[Kzach]

So, by your estimation, there wasn't a 'healing battery' at all in 3e?

Not really. I guess it comes down to player choice, but I never encountered anyone who would voluntarily build a cleric as a primary healer. They always went the nuke route.

And more to the point, I didn't feel like there were that many options to do so because most people wanted to move away from that stereotype and build, not towards it.

What feats were there or prestige classes that boosted your role as a healer, rather than ubermensche?

Did you like playing the cleric in 3e? If not, why not? If so, why? Is the cleric in 4e a 'healing battery'? What about the rest of the Leaders?

As I said, in previous editions and in other systems I've never even considered playing one because I felt the options just weren't that enticing. I spent most of my time behind the DM's screen so I made up my fair share of characters and many of them were clerics simply because they made such excellent bad guys, but as a player I just wasn't excited by their options as a healer/leader type.

I also tend to steer clear of things that are obviously overpowered as I find no enjoyment out of such characters. I prefer a challenge.

Clerics in 4e a certainly less able to leap roles like that, and I think that makes the class more iconic, more archetypal, which is a very good thing.

I've always preferred a more focused and specialised character. I like a character to be able to do a few things really well, rather than everything just OK.

And when focusing on healing, the cleric in 4e can be an absolute powerhouse of leader/healing which I really enjoy. Like I said earlier, with 2d6+7 on his main healing power, plus the character's healing surge, he can get someone from close to 0 to full health at 1st-level. I love that. "Rise, my brother, and be renewed by the power of the gods!"

I really liked the cleric in 3e, but what I really liked about it was honestly the domains system: it let you play some very different kinds of clerics. I really like the idea that choosing a deity affects your abilities at every level and your role in the party, too.

Heh, not to criticise you personally, but I bet if I could search the forums I could find a gazillion quotes of people claiming the 3.x cleric was too 'the same' and that domains didn't differentiate clerics enough, lol. I distinctly remember that being one of the big complaints of 3.x.

Anyway, my argument wasn't that one was superior than the other, it was merely that in previous editions and systems I never enjoyed the 'healing battery' concept. Whatever mystical, magical, fairy godmother thing that the 4e healing cleric has that makes me like it so much, it has in abundance, and at the end of the day, it's perception that matters in these things, not fact

 

[tuxgeo]

(Not all Leaders heal)

So, by your estimation, there wasn't a 'healing battery' at all in 3e?

Did you like playing the cleric in 3e? If not, why not? If so, why? Is the cleric in 4e a 'healing battery'? What about the rest of the Leaders?

RE: What about the rest of the leaders: I want to reply to this one (and why is ENWorld flagging the word "reply" with red underline as not being a word?):
It depends. Among the WotC Leaders, all (as I understand the situation) do have the "Heal" skill on their class skill list; however, the APG (by Ari) has a Leader class ("Troubadour") that does not have that skill at first level.
I'm still fiddling with a 4e (haven't played her yet) Troubadour (think Inspiring/Phantom) from Ari's APG who has to take "Skill Training (Heal") as her Level-2 Feat because it's not on her class skill list. Sure, she can cause 2 allies per Encounter to regain [=1 Healing Surge] of HP per Encounter; but her "Stabilize-The-Dying" Standard Action is at a mere 1d20+1 (WIS bonus) against DC 15, since the Heal skill is not available for her at first level.

 

[carmachu]

But you're being a little unfair to the D&D Cleric now. Don't know about the older ediitons (I started in 3rd), but in 3rd edition, the cleric was an uber melee killer machine, better than the fighter and the paladin, and "oh, if I have to I guess I can heal you, sure" guy.

Now, he's a lot more focused at healing. I still enjoy playing him a lot, but there's now doubt he's become more focused on being the healing bot than in 3rd edition.

Uhm, no. Your only the uber combat guy if you build it that way. My 3.5 cleric is the uber healer, and lets the F/cl and barbarian do the real melee.

My cleric is totally focused on healing. And very good at it.

 

[Lord Ernie]

I've played my Elf Cleric of the Raven Queen for a while now, and I've mainly noticed it's a lot more fun to be the cleric in 4th than in 3.X; being able to be pro-active and actually do something else than keep everyone alive is something I find to be an enormous improvement, and with the addition of surges and making most healing surge-based, the problem of rolling 1's on your cure spells is mostly gone. Indeed, my DM sometimes despairs when I bust out my full healing power in the heavier encounters.

With the coming of Divine Power, I actually feel compelled to take up some invoker powers (through either multi-class or hybrid), since with Healer's Mercy, Astral Seal, and a couple of other new powers, you can give a cleric a bit too much healing. Add to that that our party is damage-light (fighter, wizard, warlock, paladin, cleric; the paladin player lost his rogue character last session), and I fear that encounters could go for a very long time if one character does not contribute to the damage dealt at all.