Why do 3E clerics get such good press?

[MarauderX]

Playing a Monk1/Cleric10 now with Fire and Strength domains. With spell buffing, the cleric had the best attack, damage, saves, and second best AC without armor in a party of 6. And this cleric still has blasting, blinding, insta-death and healing spells for support. Silence, buffing, and miscellaneous area spells make it easy to control a battlefield against archers, melee or casters as necessary.

Beyond the battles the cleric is the only source for many of the ailments from the monster list - negative levels, ability drain, fast healing, etc. Add to that spell list Zone of Truth, Sending, Scry, and others make the cleric able to communicate, spy and get by failed skill checks by others. Apply Silence and other spells to mimic a rogue, Air Walk to fly, the list of applicable uses for the spells can keep going to match or bypass a need for having a physical skill.

 

[stevelabny]

A lot of you have added at least one level of other classes to a cleric, I've already agreed that multi-class clerics can provide some fun characters.

A lot of you mention that a cleric can be tank-like with the str/war/destruction domains, this is true. You can also use your domains to mimic another type of character. But this leads to part of my problem.

Once you choose a certain type of cleric, I feel that you become a "scripted" character.
At almost every combat, you will do the same exact thing... righteous might, divine power, attack. etc. The cleric's imaginary versatility is at character creation, where you can choose to be a war cleric or an elemental blaster cleric or a rogue cleric. But after that selection, you will probably fall into a pattern.

While this is true to an extent of ALL characters, it feels like its more true of the cleric.

This isn't helped by the spell list, which I feel always has a "best spell" or "best two spells" at every level, so you constantly see clerics use the same spells over and over. A wizard always seems to find a new spell to pull out of his hat or a new use for an old spell that fits the current situation.

The role-playing aspect might be another problem, as I have issues with religion in real-life, and while I have no problem a zealot-paladin, or a cleric who worships an "elemental force", but a subtler kind of regular god-worshipping cleric is bizarre to me.
While I havent yet played in an overly-roleplay-heavy campaign, I just feel that the non-crazy religious character has limited personal options, as he has obviously already decided what he believes.

I feel that the cleric is the most stagnant character after creation. In combat, out of combat, and in terms of personality-growth.

I guess everyone has to have a least favorite class and personal defects, and this is mine, and i suppose its not too big a deal. Next time I play, I'll probably wind up playing a cleric type again because thats how I am.

At least I won't outlaw them from my game

 

[S'mon]

The 3.0 Cleric was the most powerful class by a long way - arguably in 3.5 the Druid is stronger, anyway both are far more powerful than Fighters in a standard campaign. I don't like playing Clerics though, I prefer Fighters but I wish they weren't so weak.

 

[MonsterMash]

I think in 3.5 the balance has shifted somewhat to Druid being most powerful, but Cleric is still powerful at all levels. I find that the other classes have odd patches where they are strong, but may be weak before or after, e.g. at 1st or 2nd fighters are fairly strong due to high HP, bonus feats, but soon get a bit weak while Wizards definitely don't get particularly powerful till higher levels (much stronger than OD&D or 1e MU though at low levels).

 

[tetsujin28]

I agree with the original posters that their low level spells aren't very exciting. I hate playing clerics of less than 3rd-level.

Domain spells and abilities tend to be where the nift factor of playing 1st and 2nd level spells comes from. And I've found Death Knell to be pretty cool

 

[Lord Pendragon]

For me, the trick to playing a fun cleric is to separate the class into two parts: to use the popular vernacular--the fluff, and the crunch.

Now, the crunch mostly takes care of itself. The Cleric is loaded with goodies, and while you suggest that the cleric will fall into a routine as far as spellcasting, I haven't seen that be the case any more than any other spellcaster. A wizard will do exactly the same thing. Indeed, I've found the cleric far more likely to experiment with off-the-wall spells, because A) he has access to every cleric spell without paying for them, and B) even a situational spell whose situation never comes up can be converted to healing on the fly, meaning that no spell will ever be completely useless.

Fluff, on the other hand, is something else. If you limit yourself to thinking of the cleric as the party medic/buffer who must devote all his spells to healing/buffing everyone else, then yes, I believe you will most likely find yourself bored out of your mind. Balance is key. Find a concept that you like, and devote some of your spellcasting to that. I'm not saying to let the party die, but if the fighter wants spell resistance that badly, perhaps he should think if putting SR on his armor. He doesn't have the right to allocate your spells to himself.

The most fun cleric I ever played was a LN cleric of the Devourer Worm, in an Iron Kingdoms game. He was part of a death cult that sent out priests to join adventuring groups (good or evil, it didn't matter). Once they became a part of that group, they were loyal to it (otherwise nobody would ever trust a priest well-enough to let him join a group). But their main mission was to cause as much carnage and death as possible. To serve their God.

Death Knell is a beautiful spell. And a greataxe (War domain) is a beautiful weapon. Especially when wielded by an Ogrun.

Oh sure, I healed if it became necessary. But the fun came from the looks on the other players' faces when I first reached down to the dying foe I'd just almost chopped in half, and sucked the life out of his body to buff myself.

"As the energy of their disembowled ally flows into my body, I look over at the man's comrades...and smile."

 

[tetsujin28]

The turning oriented feats in Complete Divine/Defenders of the Faith are great. +CHA bonus to my shield AC and my to hit with shield bashes, lasting CHA bonus rounds, for 1 turning attempt? Yes please.

 

[glass]

A lot of the Clerics are uber comments are fuelled by perhaps the most insane feat ever printed by WotC: Divine Metamagic from the Complete Divine.

The comments about uber clerics predate the existance of that feat by about four years! The only thing divine metamagic did is give clerics a clear lead again after druids closed the gap in the 3.5 revisions.


glass.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

The turning oriented feats in Complete Divine/Defenders of the Faith are great. +CHA bonus to my shield AC and my to hit with shield bashes, lasting CHA bonus rounds, for 1 turning attempt? Yes please.

This is 3.0, which is of course relevent to the discussion, but for completeness' sake, I believe the wording of the 3.5 version prevents Divine Shield from improving a Shield Bash.

 

[Jupp]

Never did play a cleric in 3.0 but I have a dwarven cleric of Moradin in a 2e game and in the last big fight (party level 4-5) I just rooted (Entangle) 12 of the 16 orcs running at us form out of the woods (we were defending a small hamlet). The others coming from the other side over a bridge were taken by a grease spell from the wizard and a sleep spell. I then happily cast heat metal on some of the orcs in heavy armor. Then I put a Snare in front of them to be on the safe side and finally cast spritual hammer and started hammering. Meanwhile the others in the group either concentrated on the 4 other orcs or peppered the entangled ones with arrows and magic missiles...Our DM wasnt that happy about me that day since he totally forgot about the entangle spell Though I have to give him that he apparently didnt have too much luck when I rolled for the saving throws of the orcs *g*