D&D 5E (2024) Is the War Cleric Being Slept On?

[Minigiant]

I am still not sure if this is a great PC, but definitly easier to run similar things on these levels.

Well you'll have 3 attacks and a nice amount of spells.

And more importantly, not a headache for the DM.

 

[Tigris]

One level of Paladin with 19 levels of Whispers Bard and Green Flame Blade!

Full caster levels for smites all the way to level 20, Psychic Blades on top of that. Prayer of Healing at level 10 to recharge your Psychic Blades!

Wispers bard is a nice subclass (however, I dont get the strange progression, which also just stops at level 15... why not just give it a rogue-1 progression or so? Instead of these heavy damage jumps), but with smites and the pseudo sneak attack from whispers bard I would rather take 1 more level to get a fighting style to be able to do 2 attacks a turn to have a higher chance to hit.

Maybe/speculation.

Level 10+ in 4E is almost level 5ish with more hp. Vastly lower power scale.

This is mathematically wrong. Level 5 is in 5E and 4E pretty much the same from a power level. The power scaling is level 1 in 4E = level 3 in 5E, then 4E doubles in power to level 5, while 5E doubles from 3 to 5. And then both double in power level to level 9.

You have stronger non combats spells before level 11 in 5E than in 4E, but level 11 is where the paragon class comes in and where you get much stronger travel options with rituals etc. and also campaign scales typically changed quite a bit.

4E also created new problems. Bigger one being people didn't want to play lvl 1 (we made it to 7th hot enough xp for 8th).

5th edition quite literally had to make level 3 the starting level because no one wants to play the first 2 levels in 5E. The level 1 in 4E is about as strong as level 3/4 in 5E, so this is a 5E problem way more than a 4E problem.

Well you'll have 3 attacks and a nice amount of spells.

But low level spells, and you miss some of the high power martial options like the I cant die rage, or the "Saving throw passed anyway" fighter feature etc.

And more importantly, not a headache for the DM.

The DMs headaches are not my problem.

 

[ECMO3]

Wispers bard is a nice subclass, but with smites and the pseudo sneak attack from whispers bard I would rather take 1 more level to get a fighting style to be able to do 2 attacks a turn to have a higher chance to hit.

Extra Attack would require 4 more levels, which would result in slower spell progression and substantially delay your acquisition of psychic blades dice as well as the 5th level short rest recharge.

Psychic Blades is better than sneak attack in most situations. It works with every weapon, so you are typically using something with higher base damage like a Maul. It also works whether you have advantage or disadvantage, and whether there is someone next to the target or not. The only downside is the limited use, but with Prayer of Healing you can still use it a lot once that comes online.

I think a single level of Paladin is better at melee at almost every level as compared to 5 levels of Paladin, although you are losing your aura and other Paladin abilities.

2 levels of Paladin is a different story. That gives you a fighting style, but more importantly it gives you two more Paladin spells. There are 3 spells you really want on this - Wrathful Smite, Divine Smite and Searing Smite. You want Searing Smite at once you get 3rd level slots because it is better damage than Divine Smite, you want Divine Smite for crits and you want Wrathful Smite for control. You can only get 2 though on a 1st level Paladin. A 2nd level Paladin gets DS for free and gets you another spell on top of that. Then as you noted you get a fighting style.

Overall I think Whispers Bard is a pretty weak subclass, a Paladin multiclass is the only build I think it is effective on.

 

[Tigris]

Extra Attack would require 4 more levels, which would result in slower spell progression and substantially delay your acquisition of psychic blades dice as well as the 5th level short rest recharge.

Psychic Blades is better than sneak attack in most situations. It works with every weapon, so you are typically using something with higher base damage like a Maul. It also works whether you have advantage or disadvantage, and whether there is someone next to the target or not. The only downside is the limited use, but with Prayer of Healing you can still use it a lot once that comes online.

I think a single level of Paladin is better at melee at almost every level as compared to 5 levels of Paladin, although you are losing your aura and other Paladin abilities.

2 levels of Paladin is a different story. That gives you a fighting style, but more importantly it gives you two more Paladin spells. There are 3 spells you really want on this - Wrathful Smite, Divine Smite and Searing Smite. You want Searing Smite at once you get 3rd level slots because it is better damage than Divine Smite, you want Divine Smite for crits and you want Wrathful Smite for control. You can only get 2 though on a 1st level Paladin. A 2nd level Paladin gets DS for free and gets you another spell on top of that. Then as you noted you get a fighting style.

Overall I think Whispers Bard is a pretty weak subclass, a Paladin multiclass is the only build I think it is effective on.

I did not mean extra attack, I did mean dual wielding, but that does not even require the fighting style my bad, the weapon masteries on level 1 of a paladin are enough.

Sure you can use a big weapon, but using 2 attacks is just better because it has a higher chance to hit (and crit).

I think the subclass is quite strong since it adds a lot of damage, the problem is more that the bard has no good ways to take value out of it.

You don't have weapon masteries for nick, all the feats which could be useful are increasing dex or strength not cha. And there is no good way to get a weapon attack as a bonus action.

 

[Minigiant]

Maybe/speculation.

Level 10+ in 4E is almost level 5ish with more hp. Vastly lower power scale.

4E also created new problems. Bigger one being people didn't want to play lvl 1 (we made it to 7th hot enough xp for 8th)

4e was designed where making higher level PCs easier. You only have 10 powers before Paragon path.

A Fighter5/Cleric3 isn't too crazy to make. But more than 10 power bits.

But low level spells, and you miss some of the high power martial options like the I cant die rage, or the "Saving throw passed anyway" fighter feature etc.

It's not the most powerful.

EldritchKnight5/WarCleric3 is not bad. Then you can keep going cleric.

 

[Zardnaar]

Whispers Bard is an odd one with an *.

Its a 5.0 designed class that can be layered on the improved 5.5 classes.

Its better in a 5.5 game if allowed espicially on 5.5 bard as the base.

Mixing 5.0/5.5 can be done but youre gonna get cases like this.

Learned that off @Tigris regarding whispers bard as I kind of forgot it exists.

 

[Zardnaar]

Wispers bard is a nice subclass (however, I dont get the strange progression, which also just stops at level 15... why not just give it a rogue-1 progression or so? Instead of these heavy damage jumps), but with smites and the pseudo sneak attack from whispers bard I would rather take 1 more level to get a fighting style to be able to do 2 attacks a turn to have a higher chance to hit.



This is mathematically wrong. Level 5 is in 5E and 4E pretty much the same from a power level. The power scaling is level 1 in 4E = level 3 in 5E, then 4E doubles in power to level 5, while 5E doubles from 3 to 5. And then both double in power level to level 9.

You have stronger non combats spells before level 11 in 5E than in 4E, but level 11 is where the paragon class comes in and where you get much stronger travel options with rituals etc. and also campaign scales typically changed quite a bit.


5th edition quite literally had to make level 3 the starting level because no one wants to play the first 2 levels in 5E. The level 1 in 4E is about as strong as level 3/4 in 5E, so this is a 5E problem way more than a 4E problem.


But low level spells, and you miss some of the high power martial options like the I cant die rage, or the "Saving throw passed anyway" fighter feature etc.

The DMs headaches are not my problem.

Well I looked at the lvl 11 abilities in the 4E phb including paragon wizards and they're not great by 5E standards. Yes im aware 4E power scaling is different but a lot of 4E stuff phb is on par with lvl 11 approx 5E.

If you wondered why 4E combat is slow its your answer right there. Anemic damage vs 4E monster HP which is similar to 5E.

2 dice+ recurring damage. Its very similar to spirit guardians lvl 3 and that's AoE.

At level 20 its up to 6 dice plus recurring plus status effect.

If you released that nowadays you'll get laughed at. Cantrips dont scale until level 21.

Newbies generally like rolling lots of dice eg fireball.

Right there 4E phb. I can quote page numbers of you like. Should we compare a lvl 20 striker to meteor swarm?

Hence why they essentially stretched level 3-10/11 over 30 levels and took out the I win buttons. Not the first time its been done. Nothing wrong with that if you like it but I suggest a refresh look at your 4E phb. Its essentially lvls 3-11 in 5E, more HP (eg lvl 20 4E hp character using lvl 9-11 abilities) and some features at 11 and 21 then you layer magic item combos on top of that. Its very close looking at the raw numbers.

Would probably take around two years to hit lvl 30 playing frequently (3 sessions a lvl approx playing 75% weekly sessions). Maybe longer due to combat length and I'm cant recall the amount of combats required to level atm.

Theres your problem.

 

[Tigris]

Well I looked at the lvl 11 abilities in the 4E phb including paragon wizards and they're not great by 5E standards. Yes im aware 4E power scaling is different but a lot of 4E stuff phb is on par with lvl 11 approx 5E.

If you wondered why 4E combat is slow its your answer right there. Anemic damage vs 4E monster HP which is similar to 5E.

2 dice+ recurring damage. Its very similar to spirit guardians lvl 3 and that's AoE.

At level 20 its up to 6 dice plus recurring plus status effect.

If you released that nowadays you'll get laughed at. Cantrips dont scale until level 21.

Newbies generally like rolling lots of dice eg fireball.

Right there 4E phb. I can quote page numbers of you like. Should we compare a lvl 20 striker to meteor swarm?

Hence why they essentially stretched level 3-10/11 over 30 levels and took out the I win buttons. Not the first time its been done. Nothing wrong with that if you like it but I suggest a refresh look at your 4E phb. Its essentially lvls 3-11 in 5E, more HP (eg lvl 20 4E hp character using lvl 9-11 abilities) and some features at 11 and 21 then you layer magic item combos on top of that. Its very close looking at the raw numbers.

Would probably take around two years to hit lvl 30 playing frequently (3 sessions a lvl approx pkaying 75% weekly sessions). Maybe longer due to combat length and im cant recall the amount of combats required to level atm.

The two main reasons 4e combat is considered slow is that it was played by slow people. Often old people who started with really old dnd editions which are not used to needing to tactically play who took forever for turns especially with reactions. And since many of them were not really understanding gamedesign math or optimization fights took even longer Since the just used abilities Unoptimally like cantrips after level 11. And some people did compare abilities 1 by 1 with other editions ignoring everything around which cam improve damage like the 6 feats per 10 levels you get which can increase damage and the higher ability scores, weapon damage hit chance (via teamwork and else), environmental damage, paragon paths, action surge for everyone, way stronger opportunity attacks, more teamwork etc.


Bad players take 2h for an encounter in 4e while good players finish them regularily under 30 minutes. So just because your fights took forever you cant assume this is the case for everyone.


A well optimized striker in 4e can at every level even level 30 burst down a normal enemy in 1-2 turns. When some people need 6+ turns then well its on them. (And 4e encounter building is 1 normal enemy per player)


4e combat was built for 4-5 rounds (but 4 combats not 6-8 per long rest like 5e) which is 1 round longer than 5e yes, but thats hardly the main reason combats take long, its the decision time.


The second reason is that the verry first 4e book was a starting adventure and that was created by a realy bad designer who never understood encounter building. The adventure was awfull, combats dragged and were also boring. It was in fact so awfull WotC removed it from sale less than 1 year after release. And that was the first experience of many people playing 4e.


Also 4e had really really fast releases not like 5e including dragon articles so the time one would only play with PHB was really small, you soon had more options.


Also 5e, as you know, had completely broken encounter building, unlike 4e which had till the end the same encounter building math. And only lowered monster HP by 10-24% (level 11 to 30) while increasing monster damage by 10-24% (same levels) (So opposing power directions for slightly faster fights).

In 5.5 monster have roughly 50% more health and deal 50% more damage after level 5 or so then in 5e. And encounter xp budget is 2x as big in an average fight and on higher level even more.


So we can see that 5e encounterbuilding was completely non functional actually, and some 5e fans did not even remark it and were saying its fine and the same 5e fans are writing guides for 5.5 today.

So yes 5e fights were relative fast because you know there where roughly 200-400% too easy thanks to completely wrong encounter maths, thats hardly a plus.

I still had not a single good fight in 5e. You dont have to think tactical its so easy that you could even play a caster in melee and hit with basic attacks and cantrips instead of leveled spells. Thats why "optimization" talk is often for me so strange since people optimize damage numbers for fights which are a complete walk in the park. "I crit this incapacitated enemy for soo much damage".

 

[Not a Decepticon]

But thats the point of playing a team game, that you dont have to do anything yourself!

Yelling "Hey Cleric! Cleric! DM is asking me to roll! Cast Guidance on me!" every time you get asked for a skill check is not teamwork, it's being a pest to other player. Also with Bless you can free Cleric to use a different concentration spell, which is also a form of teamwork.

Yes? Burst is the most important part. Early damage in fights is important. And doing 1 less attack can make the difference between enemy getting 1 more turn.

Action Surge is a single use and I would rather have consistently more attacks with extra Bless to hit.

1d4 but still all bonuses and again for a much smaller cost. Also you can swap weapons in combat so you can still attack mostly with another weapon and then swap in the polearm for that attack.

How many characters, in fantasy fiction D&D tries to emulate, you know that just constantly swap weapons every six seconds to bonk you lightly on head with a stick after stabbing you?

Well the monk subclasses dont have much power budget, but Ranger and Fighter for sure have more power in the subclasses than clerics. Rogues are a bit strange, there it feels like most subclasses have mostly non combat power...

What this has to do with anything?

 

[Zardnaar]

The two main reasons 4e combat is considered slow is that it was played by slow people. Often old people who started with really old dnd editions which are not used to needing to tactically play who took forever for turns especially with reactions. And since many of them were not really understanding gamedesign math or optimization fights took even longer Since the just used abilities Unoptimally like cantrips after level 11. And some people did compare abilities 1 by 1 with other editions ignoring everything around which cam improve damage like the 6 feats per 10 levels you get which can increase damage and the higher ability scores, weapon damage hit chance (via teamwork and else), environmental damage, paragon paths, action surge for everyone, way stronger opportunity attacks, more teamwork etc.


Bad players take 2h for an encounter in 4e while good players finish them regularily under 30 minutes. So just because your fights took forever you cant assume this is the case for everyone.


A well optimized striker in 4e can at every level even level 30 burst down a normal enemy in 1-2 turns. When some people need 6+ turns then well its on them. (And 4e encounter building is 1 normal enemy per player)


4e combat was built for 4-5 rounds (but 4 combats not 6-8 per long rest like 5e) which is 1 round longer than 5e yes, but thats hardly the main reason combats take long, its the decision time.


The second reason is that the verry first 4e book was a starting adventure and that was created by a realy bad designer who never understood encounter building. The adventure was awfull, combats dragged and were also boring. It was in fact so awfull WotC removed it from sale less than 1 year after release. And that was the first experience of many people playing 4e.


Also 4e had really really fast releases not like 5e including dragon articles so the time one would only play with PHB was really small, you soon had more options.


Also 5e, as you know, had completely broken encounter building, unlike 4e which had till the end the same encounter building math. And only lowered monster HP by 10-24% (level 11 to 30) while increasing monster damage by 10-24% (same levels) (So opposing power directions for slightly faster fights).

In 5.5 monster have roughly 50% more health and deal 50% more damage after level 5 or so then in 5e. And encounter xp budget is 2x as big in an average fight and on higher level even more.


So we can see that 5e encounterbuilding was completely non functional actually, and some 5e fans did not even remark it and were saying its fine and the same 5e fans are writing guides for 5.5 today.

So yes 5e fights were relative fast because you know there where roughly 200-400% too easy thanks to completely wrong encounter maths, thats hardly a plus.

I still had not a single good fight in 5e. You dont have to think tactical its so easy that you could even play a caster in melee and hit with basic attacks and cantrips instead of leveled spells. Thats why "optimization" talk is often for me so strange since people optimize damage numbers for fights which are a complete walk in the park. "I crit this incapacitated enemy for soo much damage".

You wonder why 4E failed? Ive always said it's due to its playstyle.

You shouldn't need powergamers and optimization to make your fights go quicker than 1-2 hours.

To really make 4E sing you've basically admitted you need tactical players who can optimize out of thousands of feats, huge amounts of classes and essentially know the system inside out.

Recruiting a veteran player is difficult. Finding one who like tactics and that level of complexity is going to be very difficult. Let alone a DM as well. Its like dating more requirements you need you end up looking for a unicorn.

My combats took around 30-60 minutes in 4E. My 3E ones were probably closer to half an hour for a long one eg a complex one. 4E rewarded a complex set up as well. 4E adventures generally lacked that.

Out of my 6 players theres 2 who could do that well 1 who would enjoy it. I can run it but wouldn't want to. 1 plays Warhammer 40k another player WH40k is an active turn off for her. Wife she liked aspects of it her 4E barbarian. 2 newer player's would be lost. I could run it but you would have to pay. 3E and 4E complexity is an active turn off now. IRL time restraints mostly.

Lose the casuals your games dead. Almost any genre as well not just D&D. Movies, board games, video games etc. At least for mass market.

Funny insulting the designers. I still have my DDI subscription Dungeon magazines. Reread one recently. They couldnt figure it out either.

Monument of the Ancients Dungeon 170.