D&D 5E Is the Cleric really one of the ‘core four’ anymore?

[TrippyHippy]

Is the Cleric really one of the ‘core four’ anymore?

The Cleric has always existed in the D&D game as the third Class (preceded by Fighting Man and Magic-User, and slightly earlier than the Thief). The Cleric role has always centred around being the party Healer, making it vitally important in some games.

However, it’s archetype has never really featured much in fantasy literature, and although some people liked playing them, for many it was a situation of the unlucky straw being drawn to have to play them in an adventuring party. The game has tried to boost their role through various editions to make them interesting play (like all Classes, in that respect), but as the number of Classes also expanded I wonder whether it can really be considered more ‘Common’ an adventuring Class than some of the others?

Does the Bard now do the buffing and healing role well enough to be considered more common? What is the relationship between Clerics and Paladins, or Druids for that sake?

 

[Ashrym]

Magical healing is only important for emergency healing in combat. I find that most healing takes place outside of combat, and the healer feat, potions, inspiring leader feat, and hit dice healing plus various class features do most of the work if we use that resource. The cleric is still a basic class and part of the basic rules, and the only healing class in the basic rules because there are also no feats so that sets them up as part of the core four expectation.

Roles and party functions are different from classes and clerics are definitely not required these days. There is no required class because of alternate classes and overlap. The "core four" could just as easily be a barbarian, bard, sorcerer, and monk; or paladin, druid, warlock, and ranger. The group generally needs damage and combat stability, support and healing, crowd management, and skill coverage but that's really easy to accomplish.

Clerics, bards, and druids are almost interchangeable in the party. They each heal and support, and have a couple of variations on healing. A bard can easily replace a cleric but doesn't do everything a cleric can. Clerics have better area damage spells and better area healing spells by default, and can swap in spells a bard wouldn't take because of niche use while a cleric can just exchange it back out the next day, and clerics have more prepared spells than bards know so they can make better use of ritual casting. Bards use more skills and controlling effects, and an almost identical spell list for healing, but don't have a lot of buffing spells (great mechanic in bardic inspiration but not a lot of spells), and rely more on party enhancement by imposing status effects on the enemy. Similar functionality while still different.

Paladins just do more combat and less magic while clerics do more magic and less combat. Domains and oaths define them better with more identity but they are similar. Paladins are good at the support role with class abilities that supplement the slower spell progression.

Druids are like moving a step farther from clerics than bards. They have a lot of similar functions as bards in controlling effects and healing, but less healing (goodberry is nice), and more damage as well, and supplement combat or utility with wildshape.

 

[delericho]

However, it’s archetype has never really featured much in fantasy literature...

The original cleric appears to be much more inspired by Peter Cushing's roles in Hammer Horror films than much else.

Which explains an awful lot, IMO.

 

[Pickles JG]

I dont think there is a core 4 anymore other than in basic or the minds of the designers for historical reasons (next to traditon probably the worst reasons).

A balanced party benefits from broad skill coverage a few guys who like to be in mêlée some ranged support and some spot heals to keep everyone going plus something to extend the adventuring day - buffs, magical healing or the two non magical options. Spot heals can be healer feat or potions or one of the classes that can do it.

 

[ad_hoc]

Well in D&D the 4 archetypes are: Arcane type, Divine type, Fighting type, Scoundrel type.

In 5e the first 3 are still alive and strong though there are a lot more hybrid classes than ever before. The Scoundrel type is the only one lacking. The Rogue's main thing is damage and the Bard is a full caster. No more is the Rogue needed for stealth and disarming traps. That can be done with a background.

 

[Croesus]

The original cleric appears to be much more inspired by Peter Cushing's roles in Hammer Horror films than much else.

Which explains an awful lot, IMO.

I think the D&D cleric also had a lot of Archbishop Turpin from the Song of Roland. Decades after reading that for a class, I still remember scenes where Turpin wades into battle, smiting infidels with his mace.

 

[Hereticus]

The Cleric has always existed in the D&D game as the third Class (preceded by Fighting Man and Magic-User, and slightly earlier than the Thief). The Cleric role has always centred around being the party Healer, making it vitally important in some games.

However, it’s archetype has never really featured much in fantasy literature, and although some people liked playing them, for many it was a situation of the unlucky straw being drawn to have to play them in an adventuring party. The game has tried to boost their role through various editions to make them interesting play (like all Classes, in that respect), but as the number of Classes also expanded I wonder whether it can really be considered more ‘Common’ an adventuring Class than some of the others?

Does the Bard now do the buffing and healing role well enough to be considered more common? What is the relationship between Clerics and Paladins, or Druids for that sake?

Core classes have been replaced with the four abilities they represented... heavy combat, stealth, healing, and arcane magic.

 

[Minsc]

As stated above, there is a lot of overlap between the classes now. You don't need a "core 4" anymore.

I have only played one session of D&D 5e. I haven't seen much combat.

I have a feeling that, while the party has some potions, the lack of any healing (aside from one Paladin and my Second Wind ability), the party is going to pay for it.

 

[SirAntoine]

The cleric is clearly as distinct and as knowledgeable as the fighter and the wizard, such that they remain part of the original four, but the rogue is on the edges now. They are treated more as martial characters, and their ability to use a broad variety of skills is put forth as a defining characteristic. The game has other warriors, and other users of those skills. The distinctive feature of the rogue that made him one of the core four classes was his ability to find and remove traps. That was why every group would have one thief, one fighter, one wizard, and one cleric.

 

[Minsc]

You know, the Fighter, Cleric, Thief, and Magic User should be called "the original four" or "the basic four"

It's fairly common and quite easy to form a very effective party without any of these classes.