Is the Cleric class broken/unbalanced?

[CrusaderX]

Psst- it is called the bard.

FD

Yeah, but who plays Bards???

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

I voted Yes.

It is not necessarily broken insofar as it rarely significantly hurts game play. I would say it is unbalanced relative the other classes, though.

The overpowered cleric class does break the Paladin IMHO (except in heavy RP campaigns).

The designers overpowered the cleric to make it an attractive class to compensate for it being less "sexy" than other classes.

I think it is very telling that campaigns can break if there is no cleric in the party. Isn't that proof the class is imbalanced? I would call that a design flaw in the system.

 

[Furn_Darkside]

Re: I voted Yes.

I think it is very telling that campaigns can break if there is no cleric in the party. Isn't that proof the class is imbalanced? I would call that a design flaw in the system.

I guess with that criteria, the rogue is imbalanced.

FD

 

[Henry]

However, I contend that you cannot say any longer that a Cleric is absolutely necessary to have any longer. the new 3E Rules have introduced Bardic healing, Faster hit point recovery, more easily attainable magic items, more flexible paladin healing, etc. - all to remove the absolute necessity that clerics had under earlier editions.

I played in a group once that had THIRTEEN players in it. The party consisted of fighters, rangers, paladins, rogues, monks, wizards, bards and sorcerers - and NOT ONE CLERIC, until we hit 9th level.

How did we do it?

Wands and potions - LOTS of them. We fought ungodly HORDES of orcs, lizard men, frog people, multi-classed kobold tribes, beasts magical and non-magical, etc. - And still we came through time and again.

It is indeed possible to adventure without a cleric in the party. NOT AS EASY, but still absolutely possible.

 

[the Jester]

Clerics are buff, yes, but are only broken if a dm lets a powergamer get away with breaking them.

I do have to echo the sentiment several posters expressed above: they're too generic. In 2e, I didn't allow generic clerics, everything was specialty priests. Domains go a long way towards fixing this issue, but I kinda wish instead of all of them getting turn/rebuke undead there was a list of five or six abilities and each cleric got to choose one. What's art or agriculture have to do with undead?

 

[Buttercup]

I choose door #3- it is like most other classes. It can be cheap with the right player/dm combination.

No need for me to say more, since Furn summed it up.

 

[ForceUser]

In the hands of a smart player, the cleric class can stump the DM. I'm not certain this is overpowered in and of itself, but when you allow clerics to take over-the-top prestige classes such as Radiant Servant of Pelor or Hospitaler, then yeah, clerics are too powerful. I'll agree with the chorus, though, that clerics have a decidedly "uncool" factor about them that 3E strove to overcome. I have a love-hate relationship with the class; I love the package, I hate being some diety's lackey

 

[CTD]

No other class is asked to contribute their powers and abilities to others more often than a Cleric, so it all balances out. [/B]

I'd differ. I have seen a PC make a cleric that was entirely focused on himself. His spell selection was based on things that would make him stronger in melee (battle priest). Bull's Strength, Magic Weapon, etc.

Things like Bless help him and have indirect benefit of helping those who are near enough, but he did not cast it deliberately to benefit anyone other than himself.

The only things that he did do for others was convert spells for healing in emergencies. He never intentionally learned a cure spell as a part of the daily plan. It worked quite well.

I made a wizard that was all about helping others. A Diviner no less. 80% of my non-divination spells were about helping other characters. Given a few rounds to prep my 10th level Diviner would drop: Bull's Strength, Cat's Grace, Endurance, Haste, Stoneskin, Displacement, and Keen Edge on a character and turn a non-fighter into a fighter or a fighter class into a +4 ECL fighter.

With a selection of great spells like that I made our lead warriors ugly. Then I'd have my diviner pull out his missile weapons and use them round to round while waiting for enemy spellcasters to drop Dispel Magic on as a counter.

It was a lot of fun. More fun than fireballing (as it was a refreshing change).

Just about any character class can be made to exist as a "service" character for the rest of the party. It's not the exclusive domain of the cleric. They are quite good at it, but I challenge a cleric to do more for buffing up a person than a determined wizard can.

 

[Psion]

Re: I voted Yes.

It is not necessarily broken insofar as it rarely significantly hurts game play.

And what greater criteria is there for balance?

I think it is very telling that campaigns can break if there is no cleric in the party. Isn't that proof the class is imbalanced? I would call that a design flaw in the system.

My last/currently on hiatus campaign has run from 1st-17th level with no clerics.

 

[Buttercup]

It is indeed possible to adventure without a cleric in the party. NOT AS EASY, but still absolutely possible.

There is no cleric among my players at this time. I've arranged for low-level healing potions to be available to anyone who has the herbalist skill. The party has a druid and a bard, so that's healing enough.

I've played a 3e cleric, and she wasn't overpowered at all. In fact, she was well nigh useless until she hit about 3rd level. But then, she was painfully shy and confused about why someone as unworthy as herself would be chosen by her goddess to adventure with big, scary humans. (She was a half-elf, who had never seen a full blooded human before.) I really liked her, in spite of her flaws. Or rather, because of them.