Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MechaTarrasque" data-source="post: 7712788" data-attributes="member: 6801226">It is historical, but history has affected the mechanics.&nbsp; To borrow a 4e phrase, the warlock has always been a striker, even before that was a concept.&nbsp; Although 5e doesn't acknowledge that role, mechanically the 5e warlock doesn't stray very far from being a striker, and where it does is almost always in being sneaky.&nbsp; On the cleric side, historically the class was built to handle a bunch of rare conditions (and heal to boot).&nbsp; Since being a &quot;healbot&quot; is often assumed to be low status position for a PC, D&amp;D has striven to let you be a &quot;healbot&quot; and do other things at the same time as a cleric.&nbsp; This is the primary reason clerics don't have to go around praying at different temples to get new spells (like wizards having to find theirs).&nbsp; There is a lot of flexibility built into clerics (which maybe why you find it boring, I mean a Swiss army knife is nice, but it is no machete).&nbsp; In contrast to the warlock, it is completely possible to be a 5e cleric that doesn't do anything related to the leader function.It is easy to see how the clericlock could be reduced to &quot;healbot with eldritch blast&quot;, because the warlock doesn't have as much flexibility to be good at healing/condition removal and something else at the same time, unless they were to substantially adjust healing (make the basic healing &quot;healing touch&quot; like the angel's MM entries--you can't heal everyone all the time, but you can take care of a bunch of things when you heal someone).&nbsp; I am not opposed to that, but it may require adjustments for the other primary healing classes.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MechaTarrasque, post: 7712788, member: 6801226"] It is historical, but history has affected the mechanics. To borrow a 4e phrase, the warlock has always been a striker, even before that was a concept. Although 5e doesn't acknowledge that role, mechanically the 5e warlock doesn't stray very far from being a striker, and where it does is almost always in being sneaky. On the cleric side, historically the class was built to handle a bunch of rare conditions (and heal to boot). Since being a "healbot" is often assumed to be low status position for a PC, D&D has striven to let you be a "healbot" and do other things at the same time as a cleric. This is the primary reason clerics don't have to go around praying at different temples to get new spells (like wizards having to find theirs). There is a lot of flexibility built into clerics (which maybe why you find it boring, I mean a Swiss army knife is nice, but it is no machete). In contrast to the warlock, it is completely possible to be a 5e cleric that doesn't do anything related to the leader function. It is easy to see how the clericlock could be reduced to "healbot with eldritch blast", because the warlock doesn't have as much flexibility to be good at healing/condition removal and something else at the same time, unless they were to substantially adjust healing (make the basic healing "healing touch" like the angel's MM entries--you can't heal everyone all the time, but you can take care of a bunch of things when you heal someone). I am not opposed to that, but it may require adjustments for the other primary healing classes. [/QUOTE]

Verification