Why don't clerics get Shield proficiency?

[Mengu]

Warlock: 13 AC

Warlocks should be able to get a 14 AC fairly easily, with either 14 Dex or 14 Int.

 

[Daemocles]

Why does priests Clerics can't use shields?

I take it you never played WoW ...

Kidding aside, I have no idea an I found it a bit unfair....
Looking at all classes provided in this first PHB, Clerics are the worst when it comes to AC.

-They have poor Dex/Int, so light armor is not an option for them.
-The only heavy armor they got available is Chain, which is the worst among them, and even if you spend a feat, you might not meet the requirements.
-No shield profeciency.


Given that, I understand that the idea is to be a backliner (just like in... eh... WoW? I kid ,I kid )

Uhmm... Wizards, no nothing but their bright shiny underpants.... Unless I'm missing something.

 

[Ferrous]

Yup, you have missed the fact that Int now adds to AC and that staffs now add to AC as a Wizard. So a normal wizard will have an AC of 14 or 15 + a bonus if they wield a staff.

Majoru did a nice table earlier. However it should be noted that a shield is assumed for all who can use one rather than using a two-handed weapon. This perhaps gives a distorted view when for me a major point is that by not giving cleric shields you are dicouraging choice but not limiting power.

 

[Destil]

If it's that valuable spend the feats. If not then don't.

Feats are for customization in 4E. You can build a melee cleric that can easily have everything to be a tank except the super stickiness:

Dwarf Cleric (standard array: 16 14 13 12 10 8)
Abilities at 1st: Str 16, Dex 10, Con 15, Int 8, Wis 16, Cha 12
1st Feat: Dwarf Weapon Training
2nd Feat: Armor Prof (scale)
4th Feat: Armor Prof (plate), Str +1, Wis +1
6th Feat: Shield Prof (light)
8th Feat: Shield Prof (heavy), Str +1, Wis +1
10th Feat: Toughness
11th Feat: Armor Spec (plate), Paragon Path: Warpriest, +1 all scores
12th Feat: Dwarven Durability
14th Feat: Mettle, Str +1, Wis +1
16th Feat: ???

And there you have it. Yeah, you poured all your heroic tier feats and half of the paragon ones into taking. What else is a tank type cleric going to take? At this point our dwarf can mark anyone they hit melee and gets a free AoO when their marked target shifts or attacks someone else (no stopping movement).

AC is very good in 4E, and so is reflex defense. The extra 2 feats for 2 points of AC and reflex is a good investment at any level. You only start feeling reduced damage from one-handed weapons at high level where you're getting 5[W] powers and such. And by that level you've got enough feats to spread around that the cost isn't that big of a deal.

 

[Mirtek]

Yup, you have missed the fact that Int now adds to AC and that staffs now add to AC as a Wizard. So a normal wizard will have an AC of 14 or 15 + a bonus if they wield a staff.

Majoru did a nice table earlier. However it should be noted that a shield is assumed for all who can use one rather than using a two-handed weapon. This perhaps gives a distorted view when for me a major point is that by not giving cleric shields you are dicouraging choice but not limiting power.

However even being the worst heavy armor, the difference between chain and hide is so high as to cancel out the added stat mod of the light armor and still come out on top.

An epic cleric with tier 3 chainmail will have the same base AC as a ranger with tier 3 hide armor and adding 24 Dex

 

[AtomicPope]

This is a silly argument. Is the cleric balanced as is? If so, it doesn't need light shield proficiency, even if old clerics had it, and even if warlords have it now.

I also think its interesting that in a game with as many powers and feat slots as we have, people still focus on weapon choice as the defining issue of diversity of options.

It's the knee-jerk mentality. They're critiquing 4e mechanics based solely on 3e mechanics. In 3e where you don't have squat for feats it's a huge deal to spend a feat on a proficiency. It's because feats in 3e aren't just modifiers:

they're class features


It's the failure of 3e. There was no clear role for feats, classes, PC races or monsters. It was a mish-mash of stacking bonuses that never added up to a balanced total.

 

[AtomicPope]

However even being the worst heavy armor, the difference between chain and hide is so high as to cancel out the added stat mod of the light armor and still come out on top.

An epic cleric with tier 3 chainmail will have the same base AC as a ranger with tier 3 hide armor and adding 24 Dex

Provided that Cleric isn't a Warpriest

 

[Ferrous]

Destil no one is saying that you cannot spend the feats on a shield. What we are saying is that it is not a BALANCED option to do so as the cleric gets proficiency with simple two-handed weapons but not light shields. As stated earlier if one-handed weapon + shield = two-handed weapons for one then it should for all. Either 2+2 = 4 or it don't.

I think the main problem here is that everyone is excited about the release of 4E and so don't want to hear it has flaws, no matter how minor. However the reason we have a 4E is that the editions before had flaws! To think that 4E will not have any flaws is simply the triumph of hope over experience.

For me the main selling point of 4E over 3.E is one of balance. 4E has rebalanced caster classes versus martial classes to be much fairer. This is great. Balance makes the game more fun for most people as everyone can make an equal contribution. However a few gliches have slipped through. The most extreme example is Storm of Blades. If a tricked out 15th level Wizard being able to save or die stuff and dominate play is bad in 3E then it is equally bad for a 15th level Ranger to do the same in 4E. It is fairly hypocritical to think otherwise I feel.

At the end of the day clerics being mechanically disadvantaged for taking anything other than two-handed weapons is a minor quibble. However I am worried because if something as simple as this has not been thought through then what does this say about the more complex interactions between powers later?

P.S
Logic is knee jerk? I see. Well everything is for the best in this best of all possible (4E) worlds...

 

[AtomicPope]

I think the main problem here is that everyone is excited about the release of 4E and so don't want to hear it has flaws, no matter how minor. However the reason we have a 4E is that the editions before had flaws! To think that 4E will not have any flaws is simply the triumph of hope over experience.

No. I think your main problem is you think not having shield proficiency is a flaw while others see exclusion as an identifying feature. Long gone are the days where spell casting classes shared the same laundry list. Good riddance.

Edit: I notice your chose to ignore the hierarchy of armor, hence knee-jerk.

P.S
Logic is knee jerk? I see. Well everything is for the best in this best of all possible (4E) worlds...

Absolutely. Logic can be based on insufficient evidence that was quickly arranged with a superficial analysis, unconciously overlooking crucial factors through bias or prejudice:

Hence knee-jerk.

 

[darkdragoon]

The funny thing is there were quite a few people that complained that the old Cleric was too armored up and not priestly enough.

No shield was probably to accomodate.