Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 3876137" data-attributes="member: 4937">I reject this idea completely.&nbsp; It's not entertaining or enjoyable to help others?&nbsp; To work as a team?&nbsp; To be Mr. Fix-it?&nbsp; To be, most often, the single most important guy on the team?&nbsp; To be the one guy that the team can't afford to have go down, because everything else can be recovered from?&nbsp; To be the most flexible guy on the team in and out of combat?&nbsp; To be the one guy on the team who can always contribute in every situation because you are almost as good of a spell caster as the wizard(s), and/or almost as good of a combatant as the fighter(s).&nbsp; That's not fun?&nbsp; If that isn't fun, I'm not sure what is.If anything, the 3.X Cleric is _too fun_, _too attractive_, _too good_ and almost makes it so that, &quot;Why would anyone ever play anything else?&quot; is a legitimate question.&nbsp; You can play 'a party of clerics' and cover every role in the party far better than you can with any other class.&nbsp; You can have a cleric fighter (defender), a cleric wizard (blaster), a cleric cleric (leader), and with a bit of help from a PrC and a little multiclassing, a cleric rogue.&nbsp; I only wish every class was as well designed, as versital in role playing situations, as versital in character creation, as useful over a wide range of levels, and as fun to play as the Cleric.The Cleric is not an example of something in 3.X that needs fixing.&nbsp; It's an example of something that all the other classes should be aspiring to.&nbsp; I would have thought that the designers would be looking at the cleric and saying, &quot;This is the class that we did just about right.&nbsp; Let's make all the classes more like this.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 3876137, member: 4937"] I reject this idea completely. It's not entertaining or enjoyable to help others? To work as a team? To be Mr. Fix-it? To be, most often, the single most important guy on the team? To be the one guy that the team can't afford to have go down, because everything else can be recovered from? To be the most flexible guy on the team in and out of combat? To be the one guy on the team who can always contribute in every situation because you are almost as good of a spell caster as the wizard(s), and/or almost as good of a combatant as the fighter(s). That's not fun? If that isn't fun, I'm not sure what is. If anything, the 3.X Cleric is _too fun_, _too attractive_, _too good_ and almost makes it so that, "Why would anyone ever play anything else?" is a legitimate question. You can play 'a party of clerics' and cover every role in the party far better than you can with any other class. You can have a cleric fighter (defender), a cleric wizard (blaster), a cleric cleric (leader), and with a bit of help from a PrC and a little multiclassing, a cleric rogue. I only wish every class was as well designed, as versital in role playing situations, as versital in character creation, as useful over a wide range of levels, and as fun to play as the Cleric. The Cleric is not an example of something in 3.X that needs fixing. It's an example of something that all the other classes should be aspiring to. I would have thought that the designers would be looking at the cleric and saying, "This is the class that we did just about right. Let's make all the classes more like this." [/QUOTE]

Verification