Is the Cleric class broken/unbalanced?

[Celebrim]

"You telling me a cleric of Mask shouldn't know how to Hide, Bluff, or Move Silently?!"

If a cleric of Mask takes the Thievery and Trickery domains, then he will have between the two most of the Rogue class skills. If he also picks up a few levels of Rogue along the way, then he will be essentially a less skillful Rogue that makes up for his deficiencies with access to some very very very helpful spells. And for the record, there is more than one way to do it with combinations of Domains and Feats.

Such a cleric would be very fun to play and would be in my opinion quite different than the average armored healer in flavor and abilities.

But what I will tell you is that a cleric shouldn't gain Hide, Bluff, Move Silently and lord only knows what other abilities people think he 'should have' because he worships X or Y without giving something up. In this case he is giving up other Domains, which is all the domain system really is - a method of adjudicating what one must give up to gain other powers. And I think it works very well, much better than having 50 specialty classes would. If you must have a specialty priest, make it a prestige class.

 

[Kalendraf]

Re: Re: Can't get anyone to play one, so they are obviously underpowered!

I on the other hand love playing clerics, but then I do like to play in campaigns with more focus on roleplaying as well as just combat

I like to have a lot of roleplaying in my campaigns as well. A group without a cleric has an enormous weakness if they face a lot of combat. Just who's going to heal them? I view clerics as being more than just healers, but most of the players I know seem to have a pretty 1-dimensional view of them: the combat medic. My group is starting to have an effect on my viewpoint. Clerics are probably a necessity in combat-oriented campaigns, but aren't as critical in campaigns with a different focus such as roleplaying, puzzle-solving, political intrigue, etc.

When people want to roleplay, it seems like they choose either Sorcerers or Bards, and the occasional charisma-based Rogue. But as other posters above have pointed out, even a party w/o a cleric can survive, and the one I'm DM'ing w/o a cleric has managed to survive for 9 levels so far. They are obviously doing something right. They can handle those roleplaying-intensive nights with ease. But they would have had a much easier time in many of the combat situations with a cleric in the group.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Re: Re: Re: Re: I voted Yes.

Lacking a Rogue can be down-right FATAL in some dungeon crawls.

However, if you want to nit-pick, having a Paladin, Druid, Bard, or a Wizard, Fighter, any other class with potions will pick up the slack of no healer in a party...

Lacking a Cleric is usually downright fatal in dungeon crawls. Potions and wands work in a pinch for pedestrian healing, but they aren't good enough against paralysis, poison, ability damage, or massive damage during combat.

I tried it once. It was UG-GLY.

Every once in a while we get a DM coming here asking what to do because his kooky players have chosen a party that are weak in _____. I would say 90% of the time the DM is talking about the lack of a Cleric. Maybe 9% he is talking about the Ftr/Bar grunt role.

If game balance collapses without a Cleric such that the DM must strategize to save his campaign, then that tells me something is wrong with the class. Or the game.

As for parties without a Rogue, you will need a good Search skill and some scouting abilities. A Ranger is good enough, or any Elf with Cosmopolitan or somesuch. There are many ways of dealing with traps once they are located.

 

[Incenjucar]

Sigh.

The cleric may have the most -potential- for misuse, and I too dislike the niche its been shoved into... There's only so many priesthoods where you'd have Plate Mail Armor and Turn Undead. What about, say, a traveler deity? A deity of seduction (I seduce you in my plate mail!), a Deity of dancing? Yes, there's room for the classical "Holy Warrior" thing... but the way its done only makes sense in maybe half of the situations. Then again, considering that clerics -pray-, it'd also make more sense for them to have spontanious casting for everything... a god is -not- a spell book...

What really needs to be done, is a source book designed specifically for making your own Priest classes. Yeah, it'd be a headache to set up, but I don't think that a Cleric of Sharress should be ANYTHING like a Cleric of St. Cuthbert. Let's see someone try to use Perform: Belly Dance in PLATE MAIL.

And yeah.. heh.. As the Cleric of the Great God of Farming.. I banish you, lich!

...Because we all know that its more important to be able to turn undead than VERMIN for a cleric of farming.

 

[Mistwell]

Why are so many of you dissing the Druid? I mean sure, the Druid cannot spontaneously cast heal spells, but other than that they are great healers! They have cure minor, light, moderate, serious, and critical wounds. They have Lesser Restoration, Delay and Neutralize Poison, reincarnate, healing circle, Heal, and Mass Heal. And Masters of the Wild gives the, Regenerate Light, Moderate, Serious, and critical, along with Regenerate Ring and Regenerate Circle. And they can, of course, make healing potions and make and use healing wands (if they have the appropriate item creation feats). That's a whole lot - Druids have almost all the healing spells that Clerics have.

So please stop saying that you NEED a cleric as a party healer. Not only do you have the other options mentioned (Bards, Paladins, magic items, etc..), but you have the Druid, an excellent healer!

 

[John Crichton]

So please stop saying that you NEED a cleric as a party healer. Not only do you have the other options mentioned (Bards, Paladins, magic items, etc..), but you have the Druid, an excellent healer!

I don't think anyone here is down on druids. Druids are different than clerics. If you want the best character for healing spells, play a cleric. If you want a character in tune with nature and can mimic some of its characteristics, play a druid. They are both fun.

It's just that because of the spontaneous healing, clerics make better healers.

 

[Thanee]

From a powergaming point of view, the cleric is broken.
From a roleplaying point of view, the cleric is just fine.

Yes, the cleric is an extremely capable class, but being devoted to a deity does bring a lot of limitations usually. These are purely in the roleplaying sector and therefore do not apply, if the class is used only for powergaming purposes.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Celebrim]

"As for parties without a Rogue, you will need a good Search skill and some scouting abilities. A Ranger is good enough, or any Elf with Cosmopolitan or somesuch. There are many ways of dealing with traps once they are located."

Err... correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding was that for traps with a search DC greater than 20 (that is to say almost all of them), ONLY a rouge could successfully search for them. (Dwarves are a slight exception.)

 

[Gargoyle]

Powerful or not, clerics just aren't sexy. If clerics were cool, the game would be more fun. Somebody write a d20 supplement to make clerics cool!!

(No, sorry I don't have time, and even though I'm certain I know what the problem is, I have no idea on how to fix it.)

 

[Sacrificial Lamb]

Frankly, if the cleric's title was renamed "crusader", and then they created a separate class called "priest", alot of these discussions might not be happening.

The "crusader" (which would be the cleric) would be the holy warriors or militant arm of many religions. You could then have a "priest" class, which focuses more on the spiritual well-being of the flock.

The "priest" might have d6 for hit dice, low or medium base attack bonus, and light armor proficiency, or perhaps no armor proficiency at all.

This priest would be more specialized than the crusader (cleric) to signify the differences of the varied religions. Give this priest access to four domains, and no other spells. He or she could have a more generous skill package, with access to Knowledge skills, and various Charisma-based skills (all the better to convert non-believers).

I'm sure some other abilities could be thrown in as well.

I'm working on something to that effect right now.

The funny thing is, the word "cleric" isn't cool, it's boring. That's why so many folks discard the cleric, even though the cleric is mucho powerful. If it had been called a crusader in the Player's Handbook, I'll bet twice as many people would have played that character class.

Of course, then you'd probably have TONS of people saying, "The crusader is too powerful! It's broken!" lol

I suppose what matters is how it affects your campaign. What do YOU think?