D&D 5E Why ever play a cleric?

[Dausuul]

Weapon : 1d8+melee modifier (or Wisdom modifier if you have Shillelagh, Nature Cleric only)
Green-Flame Blade cantrip : 1d8 at level 5, up to 3d8 at level 17
Damage feature : 1d8 at level 8, 2d8 at level 14

Then you use Spiritual Weapon, that allows you to make a Melee spell attack with a Bonus Action :

Spiritual weapon : 1d8+wisdom modifier at level 3, up to 4d8+wisdom modifier at level 15 with an 8th level spell-slot.

Okay, let's break this down at a reasonable level, say 8th. We'll use Life domain and a greatclub (simple weapons only), and assume a Strength-first build since that gives the best DPR: Strength 20, Wisdom 16.

Your base damage, using no daily resources, is 1d8 (greatclub) +1d8 (green-flame blade) +1d8 (Divine Strike) +5 (Str). You're doing 3d8+5 damage, averaging 18.5. In addition, when there is another enemy within 5 feet of the first, you get to tack on an extra 1d8+3, averaging 7.5. We'll say that happens 50% of the time, so it's an extra 3.75 damage, for a total 22.25.

If you add a base-level spiritual weapon, you pile on another 1d8+3, but slightly less accurate since it's a spell attack and you went Strength-first. Assuming a base chance to hit of 75%, your spiritual weapon attack hits 65% of the time, which is equivalent to reducing its damage by a little over 13%. The damage contribution of a 2nd-level spiritual weapon is thus 6.5, for a total of 28.75. A 4th-level spiritual weapon is worth 10.4, for a total of 32.65.

The designers assume 6-8 encounters per day and 2-3 short rests, but I suspect 4 encounters and 1 short rest is more realistic. You have two 4th-level spell slots, so you'll be doing 32.65 half the time and 28.75 the other half. Final average: 30.7.

A greatsword EK at the same level deals 2d6+5+1d8 with green-flame blade, and then gets a bonus action attack from War Magic for 2d6+5. That's 4d6+1d8+10, and re-roll any d6 that comes up 1 or 2, for a total of (4.17 x 4 + 4.5 + 10) = 31.17. You also get the same fifty-percent chance of dealing 1d8+3 to another target, bringing us up to 34.92.

However, Action Surge lets you make two regular attacks for 2d6+5 each, averaging 26.67. If each fight lasts 5 rounds, and you get 1 short rest per day, that's 2 Action Surges over a total 20 rounds of combat, so you get the benefit 1/10 of the time, which comes out to another 2.67 damage. Final average: 37.58.

So the EK wins handily, unless I've overlooked something.

 

[Sacrosanct]

So the EK wins handily, unless I've overlooked something.

I know you're just comparing direct attacks, but if you're gonna use all of the EK's abilities (like action surge), I would expect the EK to do more damage because if you factor in all of the cleric's abilities (like spells), the total DPR per adventuring day probably goes the other way in the cleric's favor. Which is really the same way it's always been. Fighter types do less maximum damage, but can do it all day long, while casters can do more max damage, but limited amounts of times. So if you're only looking at weapon attacks, I would think the EK would be higher. If it weren't, I'd have serious balance concerns.

For example, my aforementioned tempest cleric probably does the most damage per adventuring day, except for maybe the sorcerer. AoE spells really bump that number up.

 

[n0nym]

So the EK wins handily, unless I've overlooked something.

You're right, I was just throwing stuff quickly to show that clerics aren't what you would call "sluggish" in melee (and I somehow forgot that EK also had Green-Flame Blade ^^). You have to admit though that the DPR difference is marginal, considering the cleric is not meant to be a primary melee damage dealer.

This thread is great help anyway, since my players think clerics are outright bad (mechanically). I'll be able to convince them otherwise now.

 

[GrumpyGamer]

Okay, let's break this down at a reasonable level, say 8th. We'll use Life domain and a greatclub (simple weapons only), and assume a Strength-first build since that gives the best DPR: Strength 20, Wisdom 16.

You could play a life priest that goes Strength build for story reasons, but trying to use this as a comparison for DPR using a club borders on absurd. Life priests are caster first and foremost.

 

[Dausuul]

I know you're just comparing direct attacks, but if you're gonna use all of the EK's abilities (like action surge), I would expect the EK to do more damage because if you factor in all of the cleric's abilities (like spells)...

I am factoring in the cleric's spells. The cleric is burning two 4th-level spells (both of her top-tier slots!) and two 2nd-level spells on spiritual weapon. Without that boost, the cleric's damage output plummets.

It's true I'm not factoring in the cleric's other spell slots and Channel Divinity. But then, I'm not factoring in the EK's d10 hit die, spell slots, bonus feat, and Second Wind either. I do need to get some actual work done today.

You could play a life priest that goes Strength build for story reasons, but trying to use this as a comparison for DPR using a club borders on absurd. Life priests are caster first and foremost.

I was challenging n0nym's contention that a melee cleric using green-flame blade and spiritual weapon can outdamage an Eldritch Knight. Therefore, I went out of my way to squeeze the cleric for all the weapon DPR I could. Even so, the EK comes in solidly ahead, showing that the claim is false.

 

[Dausuul]

You're right, I was just throwing stuff quickly to show that clerics aren't what you would call "sluggish" in melee (and I somehow forgot that EK also had Green-Flame Blade ^^). You have to admit though that the DPR difference is marginal, considering the cleric is not meant to be a primary melee damage dealer.

This thread is great help anyway, since my players think clerics are outright bad (mechanically). I'll be able to convince them otherwise now.

I wouldn't call it "marginal," but the cleric certainly deals respectable damage. And the non-DPR benefits of having a cleric in the party are enormous. Turn Undead alone is enormously valuable, particularly if the DM takes an old-school attitude ("Five wraiths against a 3rd-level party? Sure, why not") toward adventure design.

 

[Tony Vargas]

I'm not trying to be inflammatory here, I just simply cant wrap my head around why someone would play a cleric other than filling the healing role in a party.

The Cleric's always been an less-popular, underappreciated class. Part of it, it's always seemed to me, was just that many people aren't entirely comfortable with a religious leader/scholar/warrior/zealot as a PC.

But, as you point out, the healing burden was perhaps the biggest part of the problem. You'd play a Cleric, you'd get this long spell list, but at the end of the day, most of those spells would have to go to Cure..Wounds or your party's be in trouble and your time in the dungeon shortened. You'd end up healing and turning undead, and occasionally braining a kobold with your mace. Ho-hum.

Every edition after 1st has tried to make the Cleric more appealing. 2e had over the top specialty priests from Legends&Lore, and less over the top ones from CPH. 3.x, of course, brought us CoDzilla. 4e introduced Healing Surges & heal-from-0 & overnight healing and gave everyone Second Wind, neatly balanced all the classes, and gave 'Leader' ('healer' with some positive spin) classes their basic surge-triggering power up-front over and above the usual number of powers each class got, /and/ let them trigger an ally's surge /and/ still take a standard action in the same round, so the traditional 'healer' role became much more dynamic. It also introduced the Warlord as a non-Cleric 'Leader' who could Inspire back hps instead of heal them. You still occasionally had problems filling the Leader spot, even if nothing like in the old days, and with less severe consequences if you did without.

5e classes (that were around in 2e) tend to harken back to the 2e version and the Cleric is no exception. It's a very capable healer, has other support potential (mostly via spells), Turns Undead, and has lots of spells that reach beyond those basics including blasting, control, and other offensive ones (though, with neo-Vancian casting, it has an excellent chance of casting some of them as something other than Cure Wounds now and then).

I understand domains help them specialize and give them interesting options, but why choose a cleric with a certain domain over a class that functions the same way, just better?

If you want to be a capable warrior with divine magic, go paladin.

The Cleric casts more and higher-level spells than the Paladin.

If you want to be a capable caster, why go light domain cleric over, say, warlock/sorcerer/wizard?

You get a very different spell list.

If you want to be a gish, like tempest or war domain clerics, why not just go eldritch knight?

Both the above: more & higher level spells from a very different list.

I look forward to being enlightened and perhaps converted to actually trying a cleric one of these days.

If the concept doesn't appeal to you, don't worry about it. As long as there's at least one class that does appeal to you, just enjoy playing.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I am factoring in the cleric's spells. The cleric is burning two 4th-level spells (both of her top-tier slots!) and two 2nd-level spells on spiritual weapon. Without that boost, the cleric's damage output plummets.
.

Where exactly are you factoring them? Spirit Guardians is 3d8 damage every round to every creature within 15r of the cleric. What are the two 4th level slots on?

 

[Sacrosanct]

To give an example of my tempest cleric on actual play experience, if I know I'm going to be in melee, this is my typical set up: (STR 14, WIS 16)

Spiritual weapon (1d8+3) Does not require concentration
Spirit Guardians (3d8, 15'r). Save for half, which means even if you miss with an attack, you are still doing damage. Almost always I was impacting two opponents with this, up to 6 in one combat.

So even at 5th level, I'm doing 1d8+2 (weapon) + 1d8+3 (spiritual weapon) + 3d8 (spirit guardians). That's 5d8+5, with an AC of 20 (plate and shield). AND I'm also doing damage to any other opponent in my radius. If a fighter does 1d8+4, for 4 total attacks (2 plus action surge), is 4d8+16 that much greater than 5d8+5? 34ish to 28ish? Yeah, that's more, but again, I'm also damaging every other nearby enemy as well, so if an average of two enemies are nearby, add 13.5 to my DPR (the 3d8 from SG).

IMO, no cleric worth his or her salt should plan on spending any significant time in melee without SG up. Also, resilient and warcaster feats are a must.

*Edit* Also, SG has some impacts that are hard to measure. Monsters DO NOT want to be subject to it, so we found it an excellent spell to control the battlefield, and force enemies to move where they didn't want to move because I was standing there with my guardians

 

[Istbor]

I do so love me some War and Tempest Cleric. Not sure why but it just FEELS different from Paladin you know?