Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Leatherhead" data-source="post: 6500447" data-attributes="member: 53176">Now that is an interesting question.The Cleric, in nearly every rendition I have seen in a game (be it D&D or Video game), is more a gameplay patch than an actual narrative archetype. This isn't to say that religious types aren't in literature, but rather when shown as the "hero" of the story they resemble something more akin to a Paladin or Magic-User (or I guess Warlock/Sorcerer nowadays) . In game they are used as a walking first-aid kit, to counter debilitating effects. While this is certainly useful, in stories it is often regulated to a side character who cares for a third character while the hero goes and slays some dragon for a magical cure potion ingredient, or as a plot device in stories because it can be kinda boring to read about. The reason it gets included as a role in games is because nobody likes to sit around the table for extended periods of time doing nothing while resting off the effects of whatever malady befalls them.Personally, I hate their (now infamous) role in gameplay, combat healing is a self-justifying role: By adding combat healing you need combat healing because the baddies have to get badder in order to combat the combat healing and any team without combat healing has to compensate harder for it. But that has more to do with the nature of hit points and their effect on combat pacing than anything else.</blockquote>