Post/Author/DateTime	Post
xpochian 12-18-07, 05:06 PM	greetings all, i began DMing another campaign, much to my delight, and have accepted a friend of a friend who's new to the game, but played 2e extensively. he read over the allowed classes and really seemed to take to cleric, except he wants to take a level of barbarian at 4th level, so he can be a second tier melee character. they already have a solid melee character, a barbarian/fighter dwarf, who's been doing some fairly impressive damage with his greataxe. i tried to explain that he may want to go straight cleric, without hurting his caster level, but he doesn't care for my explanations. he is the only source of healing in the group, asides from scrolls and potions. should i be overly concerned with this? i'm not going to veto him, but just felt that he should be informed fully of what he plans on doing, as i am not using the character rebuilding system. thanks in advance.
Tony Vargas 12-18-07, 05:26 PM	A single non-caster level won't ruin his contribution as a cleric. More than that is really pushing it, though, so he should be careful. If he starts to lag the party by a level, they might genuinely notice the lack - OTOH, if, as happened in a campaign I was in, the Cleric with a non-cleric level turns out to have a player with perfect attendance and pulls ahead of the rest of the party, it just makes him a little less gross. You could also point out that there are spell options he already has that make him a reasonable second-string melee type, even with just a single self-buff cast at the start of combat (currently, Divine Favor, for instance). Another thing to consider is that barbarians tend to be a drain on healing a bit more so than other frontliners. Similarly, two-handed-fighting types do, too, since they have lower AC. They typical raging greataxe barbarian sucks up almost as much damage as he dishes out, and consumes a lot of healing. A wand of CLW is a good way to suplement general between-combat healing, but barbs often call for a big hit of in-combat healing, as well, so depending on what your barb is like, he may /need/ those top level healing spells.
BigGus 12-18-07, 05:30 PM	I'd say it depends what classes the rest of the party are. If there are no other PCs who are any good at melee, I'd say having a backup warrior is actually quite a good idea, especially if he's only planning to take one level of Bb. Some monsters are more vulnerable to physical damage than magic. I'd discourage him from taking any more levels though (if he wants more rages, I'd suggest to him taking the Extra Rage feat from Complete Warrior). Of course, if the party already has other PCs who are decent at melee, the party would be better served by a pure cleric, but hey, it's his character.
xpochian 12-18-07, 07:44 PM	interesting thoughts guys. i actually did mention divine favour but he isn't well known for his long-term planning; he explained it would be stupid to not take a level in barbarian for all of the perks it gives - he's also not known for eloquence, or taking advice well, but c'est la vie. the rest of the party is a human warlock 4, dwarf fighter 2 barbarian 2, human wizard 4 and himself, human cleric 3 barbarian 1; they do quite well, but he's very keen on taking combat-themed feats like power attack and raising his strength as high as possible and i fear he'll soon overshadow, or at least step on the toes of the dwarf.
Tony Vargas 12-18-07, 08:21 PM	A level of barbarian is pretty nice. You get rage, a boost to hps, more skill points (comared to cleric), and fast movement - if you're not in heavy armor. I wonder if he's considered that last bit, though. Does he have the DEX to get by with medium or light armor, on top of the WIS & CHA to be a worthwhile Cleric, and the STR & CON to rival a dwarf fighter/barb? Seems unlikely to me. I wouldn't worry about him overshadowing the dwarf. If he's not inclined to carefully planned combos, he won't come close, even with the level of barb and few feats. I would worry about him not being able to keep up with in-combat healing, and thus, indirectly killing the dwarf, though. With a warlock and a barbarian, the party should be putting damage on things pretty quickly. I'd think, ideally, the wizard would concentrate some on spells to slow the enemy, like web, grease, and the like, but if he's also inclined to blast, there's certainly no shortage of damage dealing. So in that party, second-string melee may not be the best way for him to contribute. Then again, with two archanist, a second frontliner may well be called for, just to protect them both.
BigGus 12-19-07, 07:41 AM	interesting thoughts guys. i actually did mention divine favour but he isn't well known for his long-term planning; he explained it would be stupid to not take a level in barbarian for all of the perks it gives - he's also not known for eloquence, or taking advice well, but c'est la vie. the rest of the party is a human warlock 4, dwarf fighter 2 barbarian 2, human wizard 4 and himself, human cleric 3 barbarian 1; they do quite well, but he's very keen on taking combat-themed feats like power attack and raising his strength as high as possible and i fear he'll soon overshadow, or at least step on the toes of the dwarf. OK, I see your problem. I'd definitely try to discourage him from spending ability increases on Str, he needs all the Wis and Cha he can get. But if he's not good at taking advice...all I can suggest is talk to the other players when he's not around and see what they think. It's them who'll lose out if his character doesn't fit the party, not you, so it's them who should be putting pressure on him to play a useful role. Of course, if they don't mind, no problem; just make sure there are some encounters which give them a chance to show off their strengths. (On the other hand, if they do mind, perhaps a few encounters where a Cleric's strengths would be really useful might get the point across better than arguing).
Shadowfax7 12-19-07, 07:45 PM	IMO let people play what they want to play . . . the character is for their enjoyment.
Jaxgaret 12-19-07, 07:55 PM	Shouldn't be a problem at all. If he's going to be wearing Heavy Armor, he should think about switching to a different Barb totem. Check out the totem variants here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/variantCharacterClasses.htm#barbarianVar iantTotemBarbarian). I suggest Boar or Dragon.
elonin 12-19-07, 08:53 PM	What domains does he have? I've played a cleric that had the str and war domains and while he wasn't a fighter by any means he was still a decent front line combatant.
xpochian 12-20-07, 12:16 AM	What domains does he have? I've played a cleric that had the str and war domains and while he wasn't a fighter by any means he was still a decent front line combatant. renewal (from dragon magazine), which grants 1d8+cha. as an immediate action to any attack that brings you down to 0 hp and sun, for turning undead...with his 9 charisma. he's very decent as a front-liner, but he doesn't like listening to anyone's advice, including 'don't put the 15 in dex, as eventually, heavy armour is going to negate that' or 'a charisma of at least 10+ is preferred if you're planning on taking the sun domain'
Jaxgaret 12-20-07, 12:54 AM	he doesn't like listening to anyone's advice, including 'don't put the 15 in dex, as eventually, heavy armour is going to negate that' Not true. Mithral Full Plate has a Max Dex Mod of +3, which is perfectly compatible with Dex scores of up to +17.
elonin 12-20-07, 05:55 AM	Not true. Mithral Full Plate has a Max Dex Mod of +3, which is perfectly compatible with Dex scores of up to +17. The spirit of xpochian's post was that dex becomes more of a dump stat for your typical cleric. in general by the time you can afford mithrial plate you can also afford gloves of dex or something like that. I'd just let him play the character he wants to play.
xpochian 12-20-07, 08:17 AM	this is very true. we've had a last-minute adjustment and a human scout 4 has joined our group so we've a nice balance of classes. i think renewal was a great choice as he ignored some advice from the party barbarian/fighter about packs of wolves and trip and found himself at -2 hp fairly quickly! he enjoys his melee-cleric, and that's what is really important, i just hope rash decisions don't become a hindrance for everyone involved.
Grizzled Gryphon 12-20-07, 08:31 AM	From yuor various posts, it sounds like all the players are having fun. If that is the case, then CONGRADULATIONS!!! YOU HAVE WON AT DnD!!! OK, that may be a bit over the top, but it is fundamentally true. You are running a game everyone playing is enjoying. That, my friend, is success.
Jaxgaret 12-20-07, 10:43 AM	The spirit of xpochian's post was that dex becomes more of a dump stat for your typical cleric. in general by the time you can afford mithrial plate you can also afford gloves of dex or something like that. Right, but if you already have the high Dex, you can spend the money on something else. I do agree that Dex is normally a dump stat for your typical Cleric. I'd just let him play the character he wants to play. Agreed.
WarpigX 12-20-07, 11:52 AM	IMO let people play what they want to play . . . the character is for their enjoyment. I second that. We used to play by filling certain roles, but it almost always led to someone playing a class that they just didn't like. Now we play the class that we want to play and adjust HOW we play as a party. I definitely wouldn't have discussions behind his back. If others are that upset about not having a cleric, then maybe they should take some levels of cleric. I'll bet that they won't appreciate being told what they should do with their character.
madbliza 12-20-07, 12:09 PM	As a DM you can easily solve this problem. Kill his character. Then he has to make a new one, and then he might actually listen to advice if you tell him what he could've done to prevent his early demise. Of course, if he continues to play as you describe, I'm sure he'll present many opportunities for a good beating.
WarpigX 12-20-07, 12:23 PM	As a DM you can easily solve this problem. Kill his character. Then he has to make a new one, and then he might actually listen to advice if you tell him what he could've done to prevent his early demise. Of course, if he continues to play as you describe, I'm sure he'll present many opportunities for a good beating. Why should the DM solve the problem when it isn't really a problem. Let alone kill characters for no reason. Since when is it anybody's place to tell players how they should play their character when they aren't doing anything wrong. All he is doing is making a combat medic instead of a doctor.
elonin 12-20-07, 12:50 PM	[QUOTE=Jaxgaret;14630488]Right, but if you already have the high Dex, you can spend the money on something else. I do agree that Dex is normally a dump stat for your typical Cleric. Just to clarify if this group is using a point buy, then it's cheaper to buy dex boost items and have a bit more points for other things. If rolling and all of the stats are that good, then have at it.
madbliza 12-20-07, 12:58 PM	Since when? Since always. I don't see any rule that says otherwise. Sure if you don't want to be a mean person about things, that I understand. And from a DM standpoint, I could see how that could be a discouraging thing to start killing people. However, you can talk anyone into be okay with nearly anything, even an early demise.
elonin 12-20-07, 01:12 PM	That last comment was troubling Madbliza. If I had a dm who Arbitrary killed off pc 'cause they didn't optimize the character, I'd leave that game. While I do optimize my characters I have once and again experimented with a few shaky builds to see if they were enjoyable. You might be missing the point of the game.
Dog_O_War 12-20-07, 03:47 PM	Okay, after quickly scrolling through and not actually reading any of the reponses beyond the first couple, just let your buddy play what he wants. What you're trying to do here is force learning and evolution; they cannot be forced. He needs to make his own mistakes; and besides all that, a barbarian cleric is still pretty solid. Sure, he might not be able to pounce-kill a god, or DMM ten spells, but he'll be multidimentional and interesting, and fun for the player. Everyone else that says otherwise can go play diablo II.
Jaxgaret 12-20-07, 06:16 PM	I second that. We used to play by filling certain roles, but it almost always led to someone playing a class that they just didn't like. Now we play the class that we want to play and adjust HOW we play as a party. Complete agreement here. 'Filling the party roles' is not only limiting on an individual character level, it is limiting at a party level. What's so wrong about having a party of three Rogues and a Wizard? Or 2 Barbarians, a Healer, and a Druid? Two Bards and two Crusaders? They'll all have their problems, but they are absolutely playable, and the party dynamic won't be the usual same old same old. I definitely wouldn't have discussions behind his back. Agreed. It's really not a big deal. As long as everyone's having a good time and he's not being an active detriment to the party, all's well. If others are that upset about not having a cleric, then maybe they should take some levels of cleric. I'll bet that they won't appreciate being told what they should do with their character. You tell 'em. As a DM you can easily solve this problem. Kill his character. Then he has to make a new one, and then he might actually listen to advice if you tell him what he could've done to prevent his early demise. Of course, if he continues to play as you describe, I'm sure he'll present many opportunities for a good beating. This approach to DMing saddens me. You know that D&D is not 'the DM vs. the players', right? Okay, after quickly scrolling through and not actually reading any of the reponses beyond the first couple, just let your buddy play what he wants. What you're trying to do here is force learning and evolution; they cannot be forced. Put in an odd way, but what you say has some merit. He needs to make his own mistakes; and besides all that, a barbarian cleric is still pretty solid. Sure, he might not be able to pounce-kill a god, or DMM ten spells, but he'll be multidimentional and interesting, and fun for the player. Everyone else that says otherwise can go play diablo II. QFT.
Lord_Zeb 12-20-07, 07:09 PM	Got a Barb/Cleric Dwarf in my group, that is doing a huge load of damage-dealing as well as contributes with decent Healing ability. We are somewhat low-leveled in this group still, but there will be a bit of a problem with the Multi-classing issues, but it seems like the Dwarf will end up a Battlerager with minor spell abilities. Would be nice with a bit more Healing, but one learns to depend a bit on Heal skill, and the Paladin and Bard healing abilities, making the most of what one got. DM also like it that we become quite battered after a while. ;) In general though, the concept works well and is quite fun if one is devoted to the right kind of God, but do have 1 major drawback: May not use spells or spell-completion items when Raging.
xpochian 12-22-07, 03:33 PM	I should mention, that ironically this player is the one demanding people 'fill roles' within a party and has been discussing with others what they 'should' be doing and/or taking. i joked with him that i found it pretty funny that the person so concerned with 'filling specific party roles' and having such a great concern for what others are doing is also the one who's seemingly ignoring his own 'rules' about playing. we all got a laugh, and i left it at that. also, i'm not trying to force him into doing anything or taking any class or sticking to some made-up ideology of gaming. i just want to make sure that everyone is happy with what they've chosen, because in the past this player has liked to ask for 'do-overs' for rather permanent character decisions (at least back in 2e) when things don't go his way.