Why Is the Cleric Unfun?

[Gargoyle]

Some individuals love playing a cleric, but many people just don't have as much fun playing a support role. It's a matter of taste or gaming style if you will.

My problem with clerics is that players feel like they *must* have a healer. So if I have a group of players that happens not to include anyone who likes to play clerics, someone usually does so anyway. Sometimes they warm to it, and sometimes they just put up with it.

It's a role that has too much importance in most campaigns, I think.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Cleric is one of those classes apparently considered 'unfun' to play. The most cited reason for this appears to be the fact that he often spends a lot of actions on healing his companions. Why, though, is healing considered unfun?

I love playing clerics and healing in combat involves similar complexity of decisions to attacking with spells (which ostensibly is not considered unfun) or weapons, ranging from how to get to the people who need it, through whom to prioritize when, to the type of spell used. I don't find it any more boring than hacking at an opponent, the prime occupation of classes such as the barbarian - why do other people find it so boring?

Obviously, you are having wrongbadfun.

Clerics are unfun.

That is all.



RC

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I find clerics to be sub-par spellcasters and sub-par fighters. Which would be ok if the cleric spells were interesting. I just find them to be very dull, even without the healing issue. They might help others do more fun things, but to me that is not in itself fun -- and to have to do that for weeks or months or years in a campaign ... ick. I think this is why I do not like the bard much either.

The dullness of Clerics is really a strange animal.
1) I mean, they are primary spellcasters.
2) They can fight in melee.
3) They are represents of a god.
4) They are the best weapon against undead.
All these things sound pretty fun, but somehow, mixed together with healing makes the class unsatisfying to play.

Maybe the problem really is that Clerics could do a lot of things well, but unfortunately, most of the time they are the healer. I guess that's one of the things 4E is trying to address - yes, healing is inevitable, but you can do more _despite_ being the healing battery in every round.
If you don't heal as a Cleric, you can outfight a Fighter and compete with a Wizard in spellcasting. But since the rest of the group needs your healing, you are taking the spot-light twice - You are (even if only after 3 rounds of buffing) outfighting the fighter, and at high levels, you have comparable spells to that of the wizard, but for all your powers, your allies suddenly have to hold back and be extra careful.

 

[Wormwood]

Because not everyone enjoys the role of Heal-Bot™.

Another contributing factor is the feeling that every party "must" have a cleric---and if nobody wants to play one, you end up drawing straws.

Options like reserve points and per-encounter spells and abilities helped make the cleric a little more flexible in my 3.5 game---and a little less 'necessary'.

 

[GlassJaw]

I like playing the role of party support and crowd control, which the cleric (and bard) does very nicely.

While I have no problem healing those that deserve it (hehe), I also like to show the non-believers that the cleric can be so much more than that.

The cool thing about the cleric is that it can be played many different ways. You can be a healbot, warpriest, party support/buffer, etc, and oftentimes change from battle to battle depending on what is required. I think part of the problem is that many players see the cleric as healbot only (perhaps from MMO experience) and overlook the cleric's other options.

 

[Cadfan]

I like clerics, but I certainly understand why other people don't. You spend tons of actions putting people's hit points back together, and you have to watch all your best, coolest spells go away in order for you to do it.

Pro Tip 1: The more HP you can heal with a single spell, the less spells you have to spend healing. Consider feats that make you heal more efficiently.
Pro Tip 2: Spiritual Weapon attacks every round so you don't have to.
Pro Tip 3: Diplomacy is a class skill. If you can't dominate in combat, dominate out.

 

[Doug McCrae]

You get more plaudits for the score than the assist.

Personally I like to be the assist guy but I dislike having to play a strongly religious character. Unfortunately in D&D to be the assist guy you either have to be a god botherer or a musician. The warlord can't come soon enough for me.

 

[wgreen]

Here are my thoughts on the matter:

Before 3e, clerics had a choice when preparing spells: prepare cure spells, or fail to do their job properly. Players of other characters would lambast the cleric's player for not being a proper heal-bot, and, in fact, it might be that they were in the right for doing so. I'm not sure. (Before 3e, I only played 2e, and I was in high school, and was more interested in playing than analyzing play itself.)

3e made things a bit better by allowing (most PC) clerics to spontaneously convert spells into cure spells. But we still have the problem we had in 2e, to an extent -- now, instead of feeling pressure to prepare those spells, we feel pressure to refrain from casting non-curing spells, so that we can convert them to cures later.

I fully expect 4e to have a certain amount of siloing for a cleric's healing abilities -- that the cleric will have healing abilities fully separate from his non-healing spellcasting ability. He won't have to make the choice between casting a "fun" spell or saving it for a cure.

The extreme end of the spectrum, which we know 4e is at least poking at, is the cleric not even having to sacrifice an action to heal his comrades. We know he can, in 4e, in at least some circumstances, attack and heal at the same time. I'm not sure how far it will be taken, nor am I sure how far it should be taken. But siloing is definitely a step in the right direction, IMO.

-Will

 

[wgreen]

Pro Tip 1: The more HP you can heal with a single spell, the less spells you have to spend healing. Consider feats that make you heal more efficiently.
Pro Tip 2: Spiritual Weapon attacks every round so you don't have to.
Pro Tip 3: Diplomacy is a class skill. If you can't dominate in combat, dominate out.

Protip 4: Killing your enemies more quickly so they can't hurt you more is almost always more efficient than just letting them get that extra damage on you and patching it up with cures later. If only more players understood this...

-Will

 

[Mathew_Freeman]

I like playing Clerics! Especially in Planescape games, where faith really matters.

But Clerics (at higher levels anyway) get so many fun and excellent spells, and have such natural good flavour to them ("Cower and die, blasphemers!") that they can't be anything but fun.

And healing? that's for OUT of combat, and only if the other players ask NICELY.