Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ferrous" data-source="post: 4271755" data-attributes="member: 61796">Guys, the point I was trying to make was about game logic and internal consistency.If one-handed shield + one handed weapon is balanced against two-handed weapon for the Warlord then it should be balanced for the Cleric. If this is not balanced i.e a shield is always better then remove two-handed weapons from the Warlord so someone does not make a poor choice. If this is balanced then Cleric should have the same option so that their choice can be about the character. I don't know what type of "double think" is going on with some people to think that +1 damage = +1 AC in some cases but not in others. Either it is balanced or it ain't. And if it is balanced then Clerics should have it to give them a genuine choice. And if this is balanced what does this say about a Fighter trading +2 AC for +1 damage?Allowing a Cleric a light shield does not suddenly make them a Defender their AC would then only be 17 which is the same as a Ranger with standard array. Just like using a two-handed weapon does not make a Warlord a striker. Note a Cleric could choose Scale armour instead of Light Shield for the  feat to get exactly the same bonus to AC and yet still wield a two-handed weapon for +1 damage (if constitution was 13). This is obviously better.If they had said that Clerics were only familiar with simple one handed weapons and not given them two-handed weapons I really would not have minded. This is internally consistent. As it is nearly all Clerics will use a two-handed weapon as the rules encourage this to the detriment of choice (and hence the game).I am not stuck in a 3rd edition mindset in that Clerics should be tanks. Clerics were overpowered in 3rd edition and I think that a downgrade to their relative power is a good thing. However I do want to see internal logic in the system. The actual difference between +1 damage per (W) and +1 AC is fairly trivial. The lack of internal logic though is not.P.SAnd the type of race does not really matter. A dwarven/eladrin Warlord can still choose between using the warhammer/longsword in one hand with a shield for +1 ac or using the weapon in both hands for the +1 damage. A dwarven/eladrin cleric will always use it in both hands for +1 damage unless there is some reason to use the weapon one-handed e.g hanging from a rope (but this is also true of the warlord).</blockquote>

Verification