Will the Cleric still be an absolute requirement for a party?

[Falling Icicle]

One of the things that has always bothered me about D&D is how the Cleric is far more important than any other class - to the point of being a requirement for any party that wished to succeed without extreme difficulty. A Druid can fulfill their role somewhat, but there's just too many debilitating effects that only a Cleric can cure. A Party can get by without a Fighter or Rogue. They can take a Barbarian or Bard instead. But the Cleric role is one that no other class can fulfill to a satisfactory degree, in my experience.

In all my years playing this game I've known people who love playing wizards, fighters, rogues and even bards. But the Cleric has always been a source of contention. Nobody wants to play one. But somebody has to, or the party is screwed. So playing the class is done out of duty, not desire. I hope that 4e will change this. I hope that Clerics will be a class that people *want* to play rather than one that someone *has* to play because the group can't succeed without one.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Why does someone have to play a cleric? Is it just for Restoration?

 

[Falling Icicle]

Why does someone have to play a cleric? Is it just for Restoration?

Many reasons. They are by far the best healers. They are also the only class that can resurrect (don't even mention reincarnate ). They have the best protective spells and buffs. And yes, they have restoration.

Every time we've played without a cleric, we've ended up having to seek one out in town, which was not only a major inconvenience, it was very costly to the party to pay for the spells as well. There have been many times when we had debilitating effects put on us that the Druid just couldn't remove. And there have been countless times that the Druid ran out of healing spells due to his inability to spontaneously cast them.

The only other role in the game that is exclusive to one class is tapfinding with rogues. And that is nowhere near as important as the healing/buffing/restorative role of clerics. And traps can just as easily be dealt with by cheap animated undead or summoned creatures. But there is no replacing the cleric's spells. Even the designers have called them the "glue" that holds an adventuring party together.

 

[delericho]

Why does someone have to play a cleric? Is it just for Restoration?

It's the healing, pretty much. I would stop short of saying the Cleric is absolutely essential, but it's certainly the case that a (Good or Neutral) Cleric makes a huge difference to the survival of the party. Unfortunately, the Cleric's role (other than healing) seems to largely boil down to "the guy who makes everyone else better at what they do". So many Cleric spells are buffs of other characters, or healing, or Restoration, or whatever.

And being the guy who lets everyone else shine is generally a less fun role than being one of the guys who is doing the shining. IMO, of course.

 

[Szatany]

One of the things that has always bothered me about D&D is how the Cleric is far more important than any other class -

Yes, it seems that a cleric is still a vital part of the team of adventurers. However, we were pretty much assured that there will be (at least one) another class that can replace him in his leader role.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

Wasn't it said that the druid would be as good a healer as the cleric?

 

[MightyTev]

I've played in many games without a cleric, and we've done alright! Dungeonscape featured a very handy cleric-in-a-box kit we made heavy use of, and we made use of NPC healing when appropriate. It was never a major problem.

...

Although, thinking back, we've had a good few character deaths. But I don't think we've had any more than an average campaign.

 

[Belbarid]

Many reasons. They are by far the best healers. They are also the only class that can resurrect (don't even mention reincarnate ). They have the best protective spells and buffs. And yes, they have restoration.

Interesting how the concept of magical healing has become so ingrained that people can't imagine having a party without it.

And yet, what other kind is there? High level characters heal naturally more slowly than low level characters (what with having more HP, but regaining them at the same rate), and HP damage (*whatever* that concept is really supposed to represent) is dealt out at an astonishing rate. Sure, the vanilla D&D justification for HP is that it doesn't *really* represent damage, but the process of natural "healing" is scaled so that it takes several days (or longer) anyway.

The problem isn't the necessity of a cleric, or even of magical healing. The problem lies in a HP/Combat system that is an unwieldy kludge. The big question isn't "Are clerics necessary" or even "are party roles good/bad and what classes can fill them". The real question is whether or not WotC will kill this particular sacred cow.

 

[Nahat Anoj]

In 4e, I think the cleric won't be as essential. As Leaders, classes like the Warlord and Bard will be able to duplicate many of the Clerics functions. In addition, I believe every class will be able to possess some level of healing power, from Wizards casting arcane healing spells, Rogues using magic devices, and Fighters using the Heal skill. Indeed, much like in Star Wars Saga, the Heal skill will probably be much more useful than in previous editions.

I also think the rules for natural hp recovery will allow characters to bounce back more quickly than they do in 3e.

 

[Gloombunny]

Wasn't it said that the druid would be as good a healer as the cleric?

Not exactly. It was said that the 3e druid's inability to fully replace the cleric is an example of something they're trying to fix in 4e by having multiple classes that can fill each role with equal competence. We don't have any hard confirmation that druid will be one of the classes filling the same role as cleric.

I also have a strong hunch that they're going to try to make healing abilities less crucial in some way. We know that there's a warlord class filling the same leader role as the cleric but without any magic, so either the warlord is an amazingly good field surgeon, or a party can do fine without a strong healer. (We also know that there's a "second wind" rule to regain hit points presumably like the one in SWSE, which certainly undermines the necessity of magical healing to some degree.)