Help me convince my players that the Cleric is cool

[The Thayan Menace]

Ehlonna's Clerics & Grevious Plot Hammering

I know my players quite well thank you and yes, it is with the cleric class that they have a problem. I have asked them to do a few things with their characters before (pick a feat, boost a skill) and they have no problem following my drift. They are not so insecure with their playing as to balk at any demand of their Dungeon Master.

The key word is demand. Ideally, it should be a request.

Do not tell me that you are actually forcing PCs to pick certain skills and feats.

You might as well run the characters yourself.

I really appreciate the community's help, and sometimes in the past they have flagged something in my game that after consideration I decided to adjust and made me a better DM. I am not so full of myself that I don't think there is room for amelioration. But, believe you me, this is not one such instance.

There should always be room to search for Truth (i.e., practice free speech) amongst friends.

As someone who appreciates open discourse, I am both dismayed and saddened by your veiled rancor and apparent disregard for your players' gaming options.

Even so, I bear you no ill will.

In fact, you have inadvertently given me some great ideas for my campaign (e.g., treant bodyguards and myconid cohorts) ... so I thank you for the conversation; at least it has been insightful to me.

So, you see, I'm not that fascist all-controlling DM some of you might have thought I am. In fact, I let my players do whatever the hell they feel like doing, even making stuff up.

So long as they do not criticize your campaign plot by questioning your insistence on them playing a female cleric of Ehlonna.

Man, if I was having this problem, I would simply insert an appropriate NPC and save my players the headache.

Although you seem to be a succesful DM with a dedicated group, I would still give some serious thought to your primary goal:

You should be making a campaign that everyone will enjoy.

Although clerics of Ehlonna can be really neat, not everyone will want to play one simply because the plot calls for it.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Are we to assume that break enchantment, heal, and regeneration are "irrelevant" measures?

If we are to add the manifold benefits of miracle, and the numerous restorative spells from other official WotC supplements, would you still champion the "irrelevancy" of clerical aid?

Yup. Break enchantment is a lower-level alternative to a group of spells which are all wizard spells, and is, itself, a wizard and bard spell. Heal is just more hitpoints - it's comparable to many magical protections vs damage. Regeneration is a joke - a spell who's sole purpose is to mean that a condition which can only be dealt out by DM fiat cannot be dealt with by any other healing spell.

Miracle! Pah. Low level spell at best, plot device at worst.

Any DM that manages to drain 9th level PCs to level 1, without killing the entire party, is not playing hardball appropriately.

I would accuse this aforementioned DM of fudging the encounter to save an obviously floundering campaign and quit gaming with them.

The PARTY will do it. It's not a single encounter. Since against level drainers hitpoints don't matter, the wizard is just as good a melee tank as the fighter. So the entire party will take a turn at sucking back the brunt of any assault (assuming no cleric) until they can retire and recoup.

Then, next day, they'll permanently lose half those levels.

IOW - the cleric MUST have restorations. It's the only solution to the problem. And that bites.

Having to load up on restoration? Um, scrolls! Scrolls scrolls scrolls. And wands.

A cleric should have scrolls of any spell which has a circumstantial or occasional use, like remove poison (unless you are headed into the Dungeon of Extreme Poisonous Monsters). A cleric should have wands of any low level spell that is useful to cast in large numbers between encounters (IE: the wand of CLW)

Which basically covers every situation EXCEPT restoration.

A wand of restoration is ludicrously expensive.

Restoration spells are unlikely to be circumstantially or occasionally useful - if you meet level draining undead, you're likely to need a lot of them.

So far disease and poison have had relatively little impact upon our games - they've been there, they've been a minor hassle, but they've not really been that bad, especially with the ability of the healing skill and antitoxins and anti-disease serums to aid against them.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

This thread has been interesting for me as well. Up to this point, I would have never conceived of developing a plot that required certain elements to work. I usually develop a few bad guys, and then have them plot to take over the world. Then the PCs (whatever they may be) try to stop them. I center the villain's plot on the villain, basically. Not on the PCs, who are the center of the campaign as a whole as they try to foil the plot.

So this thread has given me a new way to look at campaign development. Not sure I will ever require a player to be a female cleric of Ehlonna, but the viewpoint may come in useful at some point. Only time will tell.

 

[The Thayan Menace]

Clerical Restorative Magic & Level-Draining Undead

Yup. Break enchantment is a lower-level alternative to a group of spells which are all wizard spells, and is, itself, a wizard and bard spell. Heal is just more hitpoints - it's comparable to many magical protections vs damage. Regeneration is a joke - a spell who's sole purpose is to mean that a condition which can only be dealt out by DM fiat cannot be dealt with by any other healing spell.

Miracle! Pah. Low level spell at best, plot device at worst.

You have some points here (esp. regarding regenerate and miracle), though I think you speak far too lightly of a class that can use those spells without consulting a spellbook.

The PARTY will do it. It's not a single encounter. Since against level drainers hitpoints don't matter, the wizard is just as good a melee tank as the fighter.

I'm sorry, but 1st level PCs can be pummeled unconscious and finished off in their sleep by any determined undead adversary (and don't even get me started about fighting vampires).

I stand by my first assessment.

High-level PCs that get drained to 1st level by a high-level threat should probably die. If they do not, it strains the game's verisimilitude to a breaking point.

 

[The Thayan Menace]

Excessive Storytelling = Plot Hammering (a.k.a. Railroading)

This thread has been interesting for me as well. Up to this point, I would have never conceived of developing a plot that required certain elements to work. I usually develop a few bad guys, and then have them plot to take over the world. Then the PCs (whatever they may be) try to stop them. I center the villain's plot on the villain, basically. Not on the PCs, who are the center of the campaign as a whole as they try to foil the plot.

You sound like a DM I'd be proud to game with.

Frankly my friend, I would stick with your current campaign methodology. Trust me, your players will appreciate it if you do.

Trainz's "storytelling" style, while valid (esp. for neophytes), tends to leave many veteran players dissatisfied.

Still, I will give this much to Trainz: His desire to promote clerics of Ehlonna has finally allowed me to see how cool the Plant domain can be.

Go forth my myconid army! Choke our enemies with your spores of doom! (points bony finger)

 

[Nightfall]

Bah. My cleric of Chardun with his Monk of the Sacred Chain friend and his three Infernal Sentinels will easily take down your pitiful little Elhonnan!

(Plant domain is decent. Pestilence is better.)

 

[The Thayan Menace]

Myconid Madness

Bah. My cleric of Chardun with his Monk of the Sacred Chain friend and his three Infernal Sentinels will easily take down your pitiful little Elhonnan!

(Plant domain is decent. Pestilence is better.)

Perhaps, but myconids have telepathic rapport spores.

I can direct my army safely from miles away and destroy you with wave after wave of kung-fu fungus fighters.

<adopts Bruce Lee stance and throws purple spores in your face>

Seriously though ... as someone who bought Relics & Rituals when it just hit the shelves, I concede that Scarred Lands clerics do indeed rock.

My myconids will still get you though.

 

[Saeviomagy]

You have some points here (esp. regarding regenerate and miracle), though I think you speak far too lightly of a class that can use those spells without consulting a spellbook.

Oooooh, scary. Big bad cleric doesn't need a spellbook.

I'm trying, here, to point out that a cleric isn't essential in a party unless the DM and the rules conspire to make him essential. Furthermore, when the DM and rules conspire to make him essential, they do so in a way that spoils his and everyone else's fun.

Either you're in a situation where
a) The cleric's post could be handled by other classes
b) The cleric is stuck having to prepare boring spells which make an encounter or encounters trivial.

That's it. Clerics ARE a good class if you avoid those situations which fall into point B. Why? Because clerics can then contribute to EVERY situation instead of being pidgeonholed.

I'm sorry, but 1st level PCs can be pummeled unconscious and finished off in their sleep by any determined undead adversary (and don't even get me started about fighting vampires).

I stand by my first assessment.

High-level PCs that get drained to 1st level by a high-level threat should probably die. If they do not, it strains the game's verisimilitude to a breaking point.

Ok, so I exaggerated. As a hypothetical situation, a part without a cleric that faces level-draining undead will rapidly end up in a situation where it cannot continue to adventure, or worse, where SOME members of the group cannot continue to adventure.

The alternative is having a cleric who is expending most of his spell slots avoiding the situation. Which means you have to have a cleric in the party who is having a significantly reduced enjoyment of the adventure.

 

[The Thayan Menace]

Clerical Riposte

Oooooh, scary. Big bad cleric doesn't need a spellbook.

Tell the wizard that next time he refuses to research abjuration spells in favor of evocation and necromancy magic.

Better yet, tell him that when he hasn't had sufficient time to do spell research or locate enough enemy spell books to fill out his repertoire.

I'm trying, here, to point out that a cleric isn't essential in a party unless the DM and the rules conspire to make him essential. Furthermore, when the DM and rules conspire to make him essential, they do so in a way that spoils his and everyone else's fun.

What can I say? People get hurt, and healing gets expensive without a priest. If that's a conspiracy, then D&D is most certainly guilty.

 

[Trainz]

The key word is demand. Ideally, it should be a request.

Do not tell me that you are actually forcing PCs to pick certain skills and feats.

You might as well run the characters yourself.

...

You are extrapolating a lot from little.

My players trust in me to give them a fun game. I have never failed them.

That's the bottom line.

There should always be room to search for Truth (i.e., practice free speech) amongst friends.

As someone who appreciates open discourse, I am both dismayed and saddened by your veiled rancor and apparent disregard for your players' gaming options.

Wow. Bold statements. Are you vulnerable to fire and acid, tall, ugly, and can regrow severed body parts ?

Even so, I bear you no ill will.

Was beginning to wonder...

In fact, you have inadvertently given me some great ideas for my campaign (e.g., treant bodyguards and myconid cohorts) ... so I thank you for the conversation; at least it has been insightful to me.

I am glad I could assist in this. Thank you.

So long as they do not criticize your campaign plot by questioning your insistence on them playing a female cleric of Ehlonna.

You must be thinking that I am an absolutely despecable person. If so, I am sorry.

Man, if I was having this problem, I would simply insert an appropriate NPC and save my players the headache.

I have from time to time in the past. I don't like doing this. I certainly don't want to for this campaign.

Although you seem to be a succesful DM with a dedicated group, I would still give some serious thought to your primary goal:

You should be making a campaign that everyone will enjoy.

They always have. You seem to have a hard time accepting this.

Although clerics of Ehlonna can be really neat, not everyone will want to play one simply because the plot calls for it.

You stated earlier (or someone else did) that a successful game session is accomplished through the collaboration of all participants, players AND DM. I absolutely accept this.

Someone (maybe you) stated that the DM should modify his adventure to please the player's desires. Fine. What about the other way around ? We just established that BOTH PARTIES need to do their share.

This implies that while the players are in their right to expect that the DM will forge his campaign so that the players can play with their toys, so the players must allow themselves some adaptation to the DM's game so that he can further the session in whatever web he has prepared for them.

It goes both ways you know. Collaboration. The DM is certainly not the player's slave, answering their every fantasy, throwing away all he has planned and prepared. The DM has also his toys, and the players must allow him to play with them too. The secret is in not overdoing it on both sides.

You might feel that asking ONE player, ANYONE, to play a specific character is, in fact, overdoing it on the DM's side. Well, that's your opinion, and we could discuss it ad nauseam, what good would it serve ? You certainly have made your views quite clear. Need we hijack this thread more ? For what purpose ? Burst my balloon ?

Certainly, I'm sure you're a more caring and gentle person than that. You see, you may give me little credit, but I personally think that you're a very interesting and enlightened individual, although you do seem quick to jump the gun on me based on a few lines on a message board.