OMG: The Core Cleric

[Brian Gibbons]

I think the general conclusion is that it is theoretically possible for a Cleric to be overpowered, but it is rather rare to see it happen in actual play.

It's easy for it to happen in actual play--all you need are situations where the cleric has the opportunity to fully buff before entering combat, as well as the willingness to expend the lion's share of their resources in one combat.

I would expect there to be a high correlation between campaigns with overpowered clerics and campaigns where most meaningful combats begin with a fully-rested party doing a Scry-Buff-Teleport.

Buffing the Fighter is just so easy, resource efficient, and tactically versatile.

It's also not very exciting. Most people don't sit down at a table to play St. Joe the Bureaucrat.

One of the important concepts to remember in game balance is that the most important balance is not mechanics on paper, but rather the amount of spotlight time each character gets during the campaign.

Having a cleric spend their time in combat healing and buffing other party members may be useful, but it is also completely self-effacing and typically requires little to no actual tactics or player skill, and receives few to no accolades or glory.

 

[frankthedm]

I just don't see it.

I can't see how any cleric of equal level would survive more than a round against my 14th level wizard who has so many things he could do to him with no save...let alone Globe of Invulnerabiltiy and other Cleric Gimping effects. The cleric might take out a Fighter after a long, hard battle though...I'll give him that.

Sorry...I just don't see it.

Well, you'll have the battle if you lock the Cleric in a solid-walled forcecage, but thats a pricey option. Other than that, you'll either need a nice fort save, spell turning or a way to block line of effect/sight on that incoming Destruction spell.

 

[joshjurg]

No, Infiniti - I was implying that many of the groups I have played in, and especially the one I play in now, there are no free lunches. Depending on the group and makeup of players, any type of character could be the biggest threat. What I was implying is that if the enemies have a lick of sense, they will see the character that is the biggest threat - regardless of character class and get to him before he gets any worse.

Clerics are simply an common example of that.

 

[Brother MacLaren]

I would expect there to be a high correlation between campaigns with overpowered clerics and campaigns where most meaningful combats begin with a fully-rested party doing a Scry-Buff-Teleport.

I think you're right, but what fraction of actual campaign time, among all the 3.5 campaigns that have been played, includes Scry-Buff-Teleport as a routine tactic? I'd guess less than 10%. It has been used in ONE 3.5 gaming session that I've been involved in (out of 70 sessions that I played and 45 sessions that I DM'ed). I think it's a hypothetical tactic that doesn't see all that much play in actual gaming.

Here's my take on it:
1) Most gaming occurs below level 9. Let's say 70% of the gaming, leaving 30% where SBT is even possible.
2) Where SBT is possible many groups don't use it. Let's say 50% avoid it, leaving 15% of all campaign time to see it as even a potential tactic.
3) Even when it is a potential tactic, there are times when it's just not possible. This likely pushes the actual occurence below 10%.

Why isn't it that common in actual play?
1) The party composition doesn't allow it. The game in which I'm a player went without a primary arcane caster until level 12, and when she showed up, she was an arcane trickster sorceress with LA+1. In the game that I ran, the wizard was also an arcane trickster, with conjuration as a forbidden school.
2) The DM doesn't allow it. Shortly after our one-shot level-13 PCs used SBT to free the regular PCs from captivity, the DM removed all Teleport magic from the world.
3) The players feel it is a cheap tactic that will just annoy the DM.
4) Defenses are not too hard to put up (e.g. Mordenkainen's Private Sanctum, Forbiddance).

And, if they DO use it frequently, the DM eventually gets annoyed and frustrated, and either takes steps to prevent it or ends the campaign sooner rather than later.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

I think it's a hypothetical tactic that doesn't see all that much play in actual gaming.

The thing is, we the players have to metagame to find reasons for our mid-level characters to not want to use it.

In our game, our characters have slaughtered a powerful Red Dragon with relative ease, and butchered an evil party with similar capabilities that couldn't quite BST us first. This tactic is the preferred method because of the chances of success when using a sudden heavy offence. It is more rare because the foe has to be both worthy and succeptible, but it is definitely preferred.

(It must be acknowledged that it can be thwarted by a similarly powerful, forewarned and alert foe - but their defences too can be thwarted with enough effort and luck.)

The Cleric proves to be singularly useful in preparing for and participating in this tactic, although a Wizard can be easily developed into the role.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

It's easy for it to happen in actual play--all you need are situations where the cleric has the opportunity to fully buff before entering combat, as well as the willingness to expend the lion's share of their resources in one combat.

Certainly the potential is real.

The number of people reporting that they have seen Cleric superstacks in play is not small. However, the number of people reporting that Cleric superstacks are a genuine campaign-harming issue is very small (to zero). I therefore conclude that this is rarely a real problem.

It is all about frequency.

If the Cleric pulls off a Divine Power Righteous Might smackdown and steals the show for 1 in 20 combats, I would call that the spice of life rather than a problem. If this happens for 1 in 5 combats, we probably have to do something about it.

My suspicion is that DMs with campaigns very vulnerable to such exploits already have to watch the Wizard for nova stacks, even if it is the baby nova tactic of burning spells quickly and resting after a short day. Such DMs are naturally inclined to be suspect of Persistent Spell and DMM.

If Persistent Spell and DMM are curbed by the DM, then pulling off the Cleric superstack is entirely situational, and therefore within the ability of most DMs to keep infrequent enough as to not be a problem.

 

[Darklone]

I've seen many strong clerics in my games (see sig), most of them were the uncrowned party leader. Yet, most of my games have:
- scarcely resting time
- unlimited combats (see sig, both clerics were out of spells)
- status quo campaign
- Righteous Might errata

Still the clerics rock. Not as bad as they might otherwise... but they do.

 

[Voadam]

In my high level game the cleric 12/fighter 4 is the strongest melee combatant in the group. The straight elven fighter archer does more with his bow, the vow of poverty druid warshaper master of many forms can grapple better than anyone else, the archmage arcane trickster does nasty sneak spells, and the paladin is great against undead and fiends, but the cleric most often is the spotlight melee guy of the group.

 

[Nail]

The buffing of the warriors tends to bring deminishing returns as the characters get higher level.

I've not found that to be the case, and I've played a cleric all the way to 21st level. Buffing the high level party properly was usually the difference between a "win" and a "lose". If I had taken the time to simply buff myself instead, we would have had more in the "lose" column.

YMMV.

 

[Gaiden]

I would like to point out a few nuances that I think most people miss.

The cleric is not the most powerful standalone core class. That role hands down goes to the wizard. A cleric by himself would get hosed by almost any encounter - they have no ability to spot, move slowly and if they have a detection spell up move REALLY slowly. They are asking to be ambushed. They also typically are not built to go first (dex is typically a dump stat and few have improved initiative).

The reason the cleric is so good is that in a group of other party members, enemies can't just focus on him and thus he has time to buff and doesn't have to worry so much about ambushes. Moreover, for almost every spell that he can self buff with, it is ALWAYS better to buff the tanks. Except for divine favor/divine might, almost all other buffs are or have options to effect one or more allies. The cleric is a powerful class FOR A GROUP! He adds both offensive and defensive ability to every other member of his team - that is what makes him invaluable. A self-buffing cleric is frankly a sub-optimal use of a cleric's ability.

A druid is more of a lone wolf. While the cleric is most powerful in a group, the druid's abilities are not relative to whom she is with. She has the versatility of the cleric but can handle herself fine in any situation without preparation time.