Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Darth_Cyric 07-05-07, 04:44 PM	Well, okay, not EXACTLY the 2e AD&D spheres. Those were flawed in execution. But they had the right idea, one that 3.x abandoned entirely to the detriment of game balance and the creation of the CoDzilla. Part of what makes clerics in 3.x grossly overpowered and easy to dominate with even in a beginner's hands is that they have access to every single cleric spell in the game. And domains only add to their repertoire, allowing them to cast spells normally restricted to arcane casters; or in some cases, the occassional domain exclusive. This problem only gets exacerbated with splatbooks. The more of those that get released, the more powerful clerics get by default. Instead, domains should each have their own lists of spells. In fact, if 4.0 follows the Star Wars Saga Ed. example, clerics and druids could both be subsumed into a slightly more catch-all Priest core class. I'm not as generic-izing-crazy as most who want to make 4.0 reflect Saga Ed., but in the case of clerics and druids, this could work. Priests select two (maybe three?) of these domains, as 3.x clerics do, but instead of those domains giving them additions to an already vast repertoire, they dictate the very spells they can cast. And these domains could still grant certain abilities and such, as they do now. In this respect, domains would be retooled to resemble the AD&D spheres. But all priests would have access to a Universal domain, which should have a VERY limited spell list. Essentially, Cure spells and Cure spells only. After all, one of the faults of AD&D Clerics was that they couldn't even be very effective healbots unless their diety had major access to the Healing sphere. Certain talent trees would only be opened up with the selection of an appropriate domain, for example. Example, the Druid talent tree would be opened up only if the Priest selected the Plant and Animal domains. Splats that came out for such a new edition would present new Priest spells as either additions to existing domains or as lists for new domains altogether.
Sphere 07-05-07, 05:12 PM	I think that they should be restricted in melee combat instead. A d6 HD, poor BaB and light armor (like the cloistered cleric variant) would go a long way to bringing them in line, while removing the "holy fighter in heavy armor" redundancy that the cleric shares with the paladin.
BlaineTog 07-05-07, 05:24 PM	I entierly agree that clerics should be restricted in their spellcasting. That said, as a practical matter, all clerics should have access to healing spells.
Tempest Stormwind 07-05-07, 05:36 PM	I was working on a similar change for an alternate system inspired by Star Wars d20, but put it on hold for Saga. Then Saga hit and it turned out to be almost identical to my proposition. The idea there was to reduce spells to augmentable effects and tie each one to a sphere, and limit clerics (in my system, "cleric" didn't exist; priests of Kord probably were barbarians with aptly-chosen feats, Olidammara's clergy likely were rogues with similar feats, and so on) to the general divine magic sphere (the basic list pared down DRAMATICALLY). Feats or PrCs would grant access to other spheres, but which spheres you had access to depended on your deity. Deity choice would also have a minor impact on how you cast spells -- for instance, using the above examples, Kord's clergy could substitute a weapon with his symbol on it in place of a divine focus, while Olidammara's clerics wouldn't need to call out a hymn if they were trying to be stealthy (using the Hide skill actively in a situation where discovery would mean trouble). I also went the route of psionics, removing all references to "spell" and "magic" (instead calling them miracles, hymns, and similar), which helps to distinguish them from other magic users. This also came with a split to skills (Spellcraft and Use Magic Device no longer apply to divine "magic", being replaced with Hymncraft and Use Ecclesiastic Device). However, transparency was still in full effect; you could detect, dispel, and interact with them all you wanted, unless the DM wanted to make them seem different. This allowed for three-way multi-transparency (arcane/divine/psionics, where any combination could be transparent with any other combination), allowing for a wide degree of preferences for gamestyle. (Note that in fully transparent games, I allow the -craft skill to operate on other types of magic at -4, and I allow full overlap between the Use Device skills.) If you're familiar with psionics, you may note similarities in the above approach to the ARDENT class (which is essentially a psionic cleric-of-a-cause, except I think they thematically do the job far better!). If I were rebuilding this using a class system instead of a feat system, I'd use the ardent as a baseline.
Flamewarrior 07-06-07, 10:37 AM	Tempest, is Divine Impetus nixed now due to the similarity? And out of curiosity, if nothing else, what did you plan to do with the divine spellcaster-only spells?
Tempest Stormwind 07-06-07, 11:14 AM	Tempest, is Divine Impetus nixed now due to the similarity?Pretty much, yeah, but some elements from it may show up in .secretproject. And out of curiosity, if nothing else, what did you plan to do with the divine spellcaster-only spells?Just like every other divine spell, completely rebalance them into something new and throw them into appropriate spheres. Divine Power, for instance, would likely go into a mantle keyed to physical combat and have a greatly diminished effect (likely rolled into other miracles that boosted attack or Strength).
Salla 07-06-07, 11:19 AM	My hope is that the hypothetical 4.0 flushes divine magic/classes/feats/entities entirely and just lets the arcanists heal.
Minmaximus 07-06-07, 11:50 AM	Thats a huge step back, and a mistake, i think. Clerics are not inherently broken. One 3 card combo is powerful. (Righteous might, persistent spell, and night sticks). The spell itself is not too powerful if you can't use it all day. So if you wanna break it up, you could stop selling your players nightsticks. Or if you must nerf, ban persistent spell. 99% of the spells are not too tough. 9th level spells are supposed to very powerful.
CryoSilver 07-06-07, 12:42 PM	I agree with the OP. In fact, I heavily modified the cleric in just such a fashion. My variant cleric has a very small list of base spells that all clerics can use, and gains access to domains (Which have been increased in power and uniqueness) over the course of 20 levels. It has d6 HD and no heavy armor proficiency. I like to think it accomplishes several things: making PrCing more of a choice than a necessity, lowering the power of clerics, and making each cleric more unique. Click Here for Details (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=718080)
crashlogic 07-06-07, 01:44 PM	The cleric is fine. Just make the cleric select the spells in advance each day, and don't let him use spells on an as needed basis. The cleric always has been the most powerful class in D&D, even in 1e and 2E, and OE as well. The trouble is that most people now playing are heavily influenced by the heal bot mechanics of the online clerics, and thus they think the class is overpowered. The really funny thing is that the same people seem to think ToB is reasonable. I say give it up, don't whine, and worry about playing the game instead of bemoaning what a class can theoretically do, if it is optimized correctly for a given situation and if all the proper spells are readied. this is a gmae of roleplaying and dice roles, and nothing is guaranteed to even the most optimized of characters. things are fine they way they are. Play the game, or, if you don't like clerics, create a world where the only spells a cleric can cast are helaing spells. Or , if you like mages, go play Ars Magica.
TheDarkestOfAngels 07-06-07, 02:36 PM	... I don't exactly think it should reinstate the spheres system, though I think it could be used as a baseline for something more interesting. Currently, the spheres system became the domain system available for modern clerics. In this theoretical system, you could pull a little closer to the original system and perhaps mix in a bit of the psion's discipline system for determining what spells a cleric gets while retaining a smidge of the domain system. What the result would be, I think, is that a cleric would have a 'common' list that all clerics get - perhaps modified by the cleric's alignment similarly to what exists today - that good clerics can't cast evil spells and so on. Each deity would grant a domain or pair of domains, which would be much larger lists than what exists in domains and when a cleric is a cleric of this deity, he gets the 'disciplines/spheres' that the deity grants and adds it directly to his spell list, but only to a smaller set of spells/day - similarly to domains [but more than just one/level.] ... I dunno. Then again I don't have much of a problem with modern clerics.
Aage 07-06-07, 02:51 PM	I agree with Tempest, Ardent is the way to go for clerics... If I had the time and determination, I would retool the cleric into a more ardent-like class myself...
The Crimson Dawn 07-06-07, 02:59 PM	For the most part the spheres have been kept. If you look at the spell list before and the spell list now for clerics (minus splat books in both lets keep it simple) they are very similar. The domains are also similar though those do allow you to cast spells outside of what a cleric had before but you could normally only cast that sort of spell once a day per spell level. Spheres were used in 2nd so that they could put all divine spells under one banner (cleric and druid) and have a way to seperate the two. The clerics original spheres of influence were huge and his selection of spells were very similar. When they came out with the cleric handbook in 2nd ed it even stated that the cleric had too many spheres of inlfuence and gave an alternative priest to fill in for the cleric with a much more restricted spell list. If you wanted to tone down the cleric you just have to limit what spells they have access to. If using spheres to tone down the cleric spell list makes you happy thats great but I just wanted to let you know that having spheres did not reduce the power of clerics in any way and that the spells of those spheres were much the same as the cleric has now.
Treantmonklvl20 07-06-07, 03:27 PM	[QUOTE=crashlogic;12981265]The cleric always has been the most powerful class in D&D, even in 1e and 2E, and OE as well. QUOTE] :uh-huh: Most powerful in 1E and 2E ??? I played A LOT of 1E and (to a lesser extent) 2E - probably with hundreds of different players - never met ONE who shared your belief. Cleric was ALWAYS the class we had to beg someone to play. They could heal (though not nearly as good as in 3E) - and weren't very good at anything else.
InkBlot 07-06-07, 03:38 PM	I want to do this in games I run - reduce the HD to d6, remove the cleric list, your spell list is your domains, but you get a new domain (complete with the granted ability) at 5th, 10th, 15th, 20th level. You can only use your domain spell slots for your two primary domains (the two you get at 1st level), but you can switch primary domains each time you get a new one. If you run out of domains for your diety, take a bonus metamagic feat instead. But I want to get more experience as a DM before doing stuff like that.
Minmaximus 07-06-07, 03:55 PM	I want to do this in games I run - reduce the HD to d6, remove the cleric list, your spell list is your domains, but you get a new domain (complete with the granted ability) at 5th, 10th, 15th, 20th level. You can only use your domain spell slots for your two primary domains (the two you get at 1st level), but you can switch primary domains each time you get a new one. If you run out of domains for your diety, take a bonus metamagic feat instead. But I want to get more experience as a DM before doing stuff like that. Think its hard to get someone to play one now. Try doing that and check out the look on your players faces
Tempest Stormwind 07-06-07, 04:02 PM	I want to do this in games I run - reduce the HD to d6, remove the cleric list, your spell list is your domains, but you get a new domain (complete with the granted ability) at 5th, 10th, 15th, 20th level. You can only use your domain spell slots for your two primary domains (the two you get at 1st level), but you can switch primary domains each time you get a new one. If you run out of domains for your diety, take a bonus metamagic feat instead. But I want to get more experience as a DM before doing stuff like that. Ah, the ardent approach I suggested above... more or less.
InkBlot 07-06-07, 06:57 PM	Yes, it is. I just wanted to specify the specifics. Think its hard to get someone to play one now. Try doing that and check out the look on your players faces It's never been tough to get people to play clerics. Clerics are powerhouses. Even if they divert some of their resources to healing, they're still powerhouses. I've seen a cleric solo a CR 20+ big bad evil guy, after having crawled through a hellish living dungeon, and he still had spells left over to patch up the rest of the party afterwards. I say solo, even though the rest of the party was there, because the cleric was the only person who wasn't either incapacitated or just plain unable to damage the creature. Anyway, like Tempest said, that's how the ardent is built. In the game I'm currently running one of the players is playing a shifter barbarian1/ardent4. This is the same guy who played the cleric in the previous big campaign. It wasn't hard to get him to play an ardent. He wanted to play an ardent. I could probably convince almost any one of the guys in my group to give the ardent a try. For guy who always plays pyromaniac ninjas, I would suggest swordsage 4/ardent 4 with Energy and Elements mantles. For the guy who always plays paladins/LG clerics, I would suggest straight up ardent with Life and Good mantles. For the guy who always plays skirmishers, I'd suggest warblade/ardent with Conflict, Freedom, and Physical Power mantles.
crashlogic 07-06-07, 07:07 PM	[QUOTE=crashlogic;12981265]The cleric always has been the most powerful class in D&D, even in 1e and 2E, and OE as well. QUOTE] :uh-huh: Most powerful in 1E and 2E ??? I played A LOT of 1E and (to a lesser extent) 2E - probably with hundreds of different players - never met ONE who shared your belief. Cleric was ALWAYS the class we had to beg someone to play. They could heal (though not nearly as good as in 3E) - and weren't very good at anything else. I have played a lot of clerics in 1e and 2e, in dozens of campaings with hundreds of players, and well, one of my favorite parts was the stunned look on thier faces when they realized clerics could do much more than heal. Clerics have always had spell access, good saves and the second best thaco in the game, they always had access to the heavy armoures, and there were a singnificant number of good bashing weapons. Simply the fact that a bunch of players don't share my belief does not mean I am wrong. Most players put the cleric in the healbot spot and never read the spell list beyone cure light, cure moderate, and heal.
Darth_Cyric 07-06-07, 10:16 PM	I have played a lot of clerics in 1e and 2e, in dozens of campaings with hundreds of players, and well, one of my favorite parts was the stunned look on thier faces when they realized clerics could do much more than heal. Clerics have always had spell access, good saves and the second best thaco in the game, they always had access to the heavy armoures, and there were a singnificant number of good bashing weapons. Simply the fact that a bunch of players don't share my belief does not mean I am wrong. Most players put the cleric in the healbot spot and never read the spell list beyone cure light, cure moderate, and heal. Second-best Thac0 didn't mean squat in AD&D when you had only ONE attack per round, while fighters, paladins and rangers had two or even more. The cleric may have been able to hit something now and again, but he never could do a warrior class' job the way he can in 3.x. AD&D clerics didn't have Implosion, either. And Harm required a regular attack roll. After that, their direct damage and save-tester spells were situational at best. And because of the way Spheres worked, not all clerics even had access to such spells. Clerics weren't exactly making mages turn green with envy, either, again the way they do in 3.x.
knuck 07-06-07, 10:56 PM	Priests select two (maybe three?) of these domains, as 3.x clerics do, but instead of those domains giving them additions to an already vast repertoire, they dictate the very spells they can cast. And these domains could still grant certain abilities and such, as they do now.That's exactly my idea. You rock. :clap: In addition, D6 HD, poor BAB, spell list up to 7th level. note: I dont really care if Clerics have been broken for the past 30 years. It doesn't mean it should remain broken.
Sphere 07-06-07, 11:13 PM	That's exactly my idea. You rock. :clap: In addition, D6 HD, poor BAB, spell list up to 7th level. note: I dont really care if Clerics have been broken for the past 30 years. It doesn't mean it should remain broken. Cutting them down to 7th level spells is too much. We don't want to make them a crappy bard with just a bit more spells now.
ravidubey 07-06-07, 11:18 PM	The only adjustments that's needed is to 1) limit spell acquisition beyond a core list 2) Restrict a couple of broken spells like Miracle (it should always cost 5000xp) and Firestorm (there's no wizard fire equivalent, nothing close in fact until Meteor Swarm-- that's bass ackwards). Clerics don't cast spells in isolation, they work in parties and those parties rely on them for defensive and curing magic. The use of this power usually cuts a cleric's overall spell power in half. Clerics also lack mobility and good ranged attack ability, and these things rule in 3.x. A clerics' summoning ability is also very restricted by their alignment.
knuck 07-06-07, 11:25 PM	Ah, Clerics should need a spellbook just like Wizards.
InkBlot 07-06-07, 11:56 PM	Clerics don't cast spells in isolation, they work in parties and those parties rely on them for defensive and curing magic. The use of this power usually cuts a cleric's overall spell power in half. The best defense is a good offense. If a monster is hitting your friend for about 50 damage each round, and you use your spell to kill the monster a round earlier than your friend could have alone, then your spell just "cured" your friend of 50 HP.
HammerSmashed 07-07-07, 12:18 AM	As explained clerics are Divine, they channel their energy by the gods. So really It would not make sense for them to have a spell book or be limited to spells. Now clerics are already limited to what spells they can and cant cast, good cant cast evil so on and so forth. Every cleric is going to be different becouse every player will choose spells to their liking. In any case most clerics end up healing anyways. But the thing is is that the cleric is perfectly balanced until the DM allows him to buy 30 NightSticks. All the heavy amor does is give Clerics something to do other than heal becouse if we went back to where clerics heal and only heal no one wants to be one. So the easy fix and really only fix is just to make some DM's learn to not sell the player a million NightSticks. I mean its like handing every Magical and wonderouse Item to a fighter and then complaining that he is OP.
knuck 07-07-07, 01:19 AM	As explained clerics are Divine, they channel their energy by the gods. So really It would not make sense for them to have a spell book or be limited to spells. I'm sure it wouldn't take more than 5 minutes to come up with a way to make Clerics not suddenly know every 6th level spell as soon as he reaches level 11. No study, no ranks spent in Knowledge (religion). They just need to pray and "download" a list of their new available spells. Now clerics are already limited to what spells they can and cant cast, good cant cast evil so on and so forth. Not all spells have alignment restrictions. And Neutral Clerics can get away with it easily anyway. But the thing is is that the cleric is perfectly balanced until the DM allows him to buy 30 NightSticks. All the heavy amor does is give Clerics something to do other than heal becouse if we went back to where clerics heal and only heal no one wants to be one. So the easy fix and really only fix is just to make some DM's learn to not sell the player a million NightSticks. I mean its like handing every Magical and wonderouse Item to a fighter and then complaining that he is OP. Wrong. Clerics have been broken long before DMM came up. DMM only made it worse.
danielinthewolvesden 07-07-07, 04:22 AM	Part of what makes clerics in 3.x grossly overpowered and easy to dominate with even in a beginner's hands is that they have access to every single cleric spell in the game. This is a false premise thus your solution is thus false. Clerics are NOT grossly overpowered or even overpowered. They are in the "Big Five" of Druid, Wizard, Artificer, Cleric and Psion, but I see few calling for a huge nerf to the other 4 equally powerful classes. And of the 5, there is no doubt at all that the Cleric is hands down the least popular, dues to the fact they are far too often forced into the "heal-bot" role. Party after party, thread after thread demonstrates that few- if any- will voluntarily play a cleric. Nerfing it would make it "OK the guy with thelowest roll HAS to play a cleric". Yeah, that would be fun.:rolleyes: Or everyone would just play druid, which is far more powerful anyway. All you have to do to "fix" cleric is to dump Divine Metamagic, and adjust a couple of spells. Meh.
Arniha 07-07-07, 07:15 AM	[QUOTE=Treantmonklvl20;12982488] I have played a lot of clerics in 1e and 2e, in dozens of campaings with hundreds of players, and well, one of my favorite parts was the stunned look on thier faces when they realized clerics could do much more than heal. Clerics have always had spell access, good saves and the second best thaco in the game, they always had access to the heavy armoures, and there were a singnificant number of good bashing weapons. Simply the fact that a bunch of players don't share my belief does not mean I am wrong. Most players put the cleric in the healbot spot and never read the spell list beyone cure light, cure moderate, and heal. I've always found that multiclass characters were the best, especially fighter mages, because in 2e ALL mc characters were gestalt.
Darth_Cyric 07-07-07, 04:48 PM	Clerics are NOT grossly overpowered or even overpowered. They are in the "Big Five" of Druid, Wizard, Artificer, Cleric and Psion, but I see few calling for a huge nerf to the other 4 equally powerful classes. Umm, people call for druids to be nerfed all the time. After all, CoDzilla stands for Cleric or Druid. As for the others, when they can make melee classes absolutely worthless in any and all situations the way CoDzilla can, then I'll clamor louder for nerfing the other three. And of the 5, there is no doubt at all that the Cleric is hands down the least popular, dues to the fact they are far too often forced into the "heal-bot" role. Party after party, thread after thread demonstrates that few- if any- will voluntarily play a cleric. Nerfing it would make it "OK the guy with thelowest roll HAS to play a cleric". Yeah, that would be fun.:rolleyes: Even if this were true, this would prove to WOTC that beefing up the power of clerics and druids isn't getting significantly more people to play them. More power, thus, does not always equal more interesting. So why make them more powerful? WOTC needs to seek another route. Heck, 2nd Ed. clerics were more interesting and flavorful than 3.x clerics, despite not being broken. Yeah, I went there. Or everyone would just play druid, which is far more powerful anyway. Oh, I have a beef with the druid, too. For starters, I'd redesign the whole Wild Shape and Animal Companion systems so that its power and its choices are entirely dependent on charisma score, and make a druid more of an MAD character. I remember when druids used to have a minimum charisma requirement in AD&D, so why not? All you have to do to "fix" cleric is to dump Divine Metamagic, and adjust a couple of spells. Meh. As many in this thread and forum have already proven, clerics were broken before Divine Metamagic. DMM only made it worse.
ninjarabbit 07-07-07, 08:26 PM	The two biggest problems with the cleric are its spell list and divine metamagic. It's spell list should be restricted. I'd have the cleric and druid only be able to know a set number of spells per level rather than automanically know them all. I'd also ban divine metamagic, that's what makes a spell like divine power seem so powerful. Without DMM persistant and DMM quicken, divine power for example merely becomes a very good spell rather than a broken spell.
Ocom 07-07-07, 08:43 PM	If you have a beef with your clerics then make them healers (MiniHB) If it comes out that you don't like 4.0 then heck, there is a lot of 3.5 material.
Arcane Guyver 07-07-07, 08:45 PM	If you have a beef with your clerics then make them healers (MiniHB) Whoa there. The guys here are talking about weaning the cleric off it's steroids, not hacking it's legs off at the knee.
Neutronium_Dragon 07-07-07, 09:18 PM	"Only knows a set number of spells" creates a different problem - every cleric is going to end up looking the same because they'll all be taking the most important and/or widely useful useful spells and virtually never going for the situational ones on the list. You already see this with classes like the Favored Soul and the Sorcerer. A better approach would be something along the lines of the Spirit Shaman, where you have access to the entire list but can only prepare a few at a time.
ravidubey 07-08-07, 12:10 AM	The best defense is a good offense. If a monster is hitting your friend for about 50 damage each round, and you use your spell to kill the monster a round earlier than your friend could have alone, then your spell just "cured" your friend of 50 HP. True, but how often does the scenario you described really happen? Normally mobility is the problem, clerics have a tough time getting into position to use their best offensive spells. Over the majority of a campaign you won't have access to high level spells like Destruction. You'd have to get close in to use Slay Living or Poison, and something dishing 50hp of damage a round is probably going to have a great fort save. As good a selection of spells as clerics have, it's nothing compared with the offensive selection of wizards, kineticists, sorcerors, and warmages. And when the party is hit with nasty stuff, cleric spells are usually the first and possibly only line of defense. Stuff like Mass Resist Energy, Dispel Magic, Silence, Protection Vs Evil/Magic Circle vs Evil, Neutralize Poison, Death Ward, Freedom of Movement, Blindsight, True Seeing, save boosts, attack/AC buffs, and of course cures can be the difference between life and death. DM's that don't throw attacks like poison or multiple mass-effect spells are treating their parties with kids gloves. They should expect their clerics to be ready for anything, and that's what I mean by defense and cures draining half your casting ability.
Salla 07-08-07, 12:17 AM	And when the party is hit with nasty stuff, cleric spells are usually the first and possibly only line of defense. Stuff like Mass Resist Energy, Dispel Magic, Silence, Protection Vs Evil/Magic Circle vs Evil, Neutralize Poison, Death Ward, Freedom of Movement, Blindsight, True Seeing, save boosts, attack/AC buffs, and of course cures can be the difference between life and death. DM's that don't throw attacks like poison or multiple mass-effect spells are treating their parties with kids gloves. They should expect their clerics to be ready for anything, and that's what I mean by defense and cures draining half your casting ability. Smart clerics will create or buy scrolls or wands of critical things like that so they can free up their spellcasting for beating things up.
ArcTan 07-08-07, 12:40 AM	I entierly agree that clerics should be restricted in their spellcasting. That said, as a practical matter, all clerics should have access to healing spells. Bah, let some people choose to forgo healing if they want to. It can be fun for experienced and clever players to try to find ways around the boring-as-dry-dust "Okay, let's all stand around and wait for the Cleric to recharge so he can blow all his slots systematically undoing everything that last monster did to us" grind.
ArcTan 07-08-07, 12:43 AM	Whoa there. The guys here are talking about weaning the cleric off it's steroids, not hacking it's legs off at the knee. Admittedly, it's not *just* hacking off its legs, it's also ripping off its balls and turning it into a cute little girl with a unicorn. And having a spigot shoved into the side of its head labelled "ENDLESS FOUNTAIN OF HIT POINTS".
danielinthewolvesden 07-08-07, 01:27 AM	Umm, people call for druids to be nerfed all the time. After all, CoDzilla stands for Cleric or Druid. As many in this thread and forum have already proven, clerics were broken before Divine Metamagic. DMM only made it worse. They have PROVEN nothing; they have only asserted it. :rolleyes:
Empiro 07-08-07, 02:47 AM	Having something like spheres of spells could play an interesting role, and could be accomplished by expanding the role of domains in current D&D 3.5. Basically instead of giving Clerics only 9 spells per domain, and one power, a domain might have an entire set of powers, and a large number of spells of each level (that the cleric may prepare normally, eliminating the domain slot altogether). All clerics should have healing spells, but what you could do is also make more aggressive and violent deities have those spells at higher levels (like a druid), while clerics of Pelor might get a healing spells lowered a level. On one hand, it could encourage more RP opportunities as the party might have to negotiate with clerics of other faiths in order to get certain spells cast. It makes clerics of different faiths (and even the same faith) better differentiated and more unique as well. On the other hand, it could stall out adventures if PCs repeatedly have to head back to a city to get important spells. It's also much harder to balance.
Treantmonklvl20 07-08-07, 11:53 AM	[QUOTE=crashlogic;12984737] I've always found that multiclass characters were the best, especially fighter mages, because in 2e ALL mc characters were gestalt. No question about it. I guess Clerics were good if you did the 1/2 elf Cleric/Wizard (specialty Cleric of Mystra). Point was that the preposterous notion that Clerics were the most powerful class in 1E and 2E was mentioned. Not only that, it was mentioned like this was some well known fact for anyone who played these editions. Ludicrous! Heck, in 1E, Clerics weren't even the best healer! Druids leveled so much faster that they became far better healers, fighters, and utility spellcasters. Back on topic - limiting spellcasting versitility is definitely an option for future editions - don't limit it to just Cleric though!
Obi-Wan Shinobi 07-08-07, 02:24 PM	as for the cleric and druid gaining every spell on their list when they gain a new level, which is increased everytime a new splatbook comes out, this is how i handle it in the games i run: the cleric and druid do indead gain every spell that is contained in the PhB. to get the spells from other sourcebooks, however, they have to do it like a wizard has to. they have to find a scroll containing the new spell, do some spell research, have someone show them the spell, etc. also, when they gain a new level of spells (such as finally being able to cast 4-th level spells, etc) i allow them to choose a few new spells from other source books (kinda like how a wizard is able to gain 2 free spells per level), with DM help. the spells they choose must be something that is closely attached to their religious ethos- no getting a kill everyone on the planet type spell for a cleric of Pelor, for example. that way they dont automatically gain every spell in existance, they have to find some of the spells. in game, i consider them to be lost lore from a time long ago or maybe some high priest opened some strange link to the gods that allowed him to "create" a new spell. just because you are a conduit for the gods doesnt mean you know everything the gods do :)
UnknownCorrespondent 07-08-07, 03:39 PM	I'm with the OP. Divine Spheres were one of the few things I liked about 2e. With some tweaking along the lines he suggests, it would allow more diversity and flavor.
HammerSmashed 07-10-07, 02:27 AM	Not all spells have alignment restrictions. And Neutral Clerics can get away with it easily anyway. Wrong. Clerics have been broken long before DMM came up. DMM only made it worse. Before DMM wizards where stronger and druids where op...... Cleric really fel third. And your spell restrictions are based or rebuking or turning. So a neutral cleric cant really get away with it. Unless the DM is an ar-tard. In the end its up to the DM to make sure to read and know the rules and hopefully smart enouph to interperet what they actually mean, or if they are flawed its up to him to not let it get out of hand. Also I would like to point out the most ridiculously OP builds ever made where not clerics. Examples: Uber Vermin Lord, Pun Pun, Blingy the Psy Crystal, The Hulking Hurler, and a phew others.....
Gyrofthewastes 07-10-07, 06:26 AM	I have played a lot of clerics in 1e and 2e, in dozens of campaings with hundreds of players, and well, one of my favorite parts was the stunned look on thier faces when they realized clerics could do much more than heal. Clerics have always had spell access, good saves and the second best thaco in the game, they always had access to the heavy armoures, and there were a singnificant number of good bashing weapons. Simply the fact that a bunch of players don't share my belief does not mean I am wrong. Most players put the cleric in the healbot spot and never read the spell list beyone cure light, cure moderate, and heal. Clerics had an absolutely hideous xp curve in 1e and 2e. While they may have "technically" had a decent thac0 as compared to other classes of equal level, they were always levels behind (except vs Paladins or Rangers). End result: mediocre hp, mediocre attack, mediocre spells.
Clawhound 07-10-07, 08:40 AM	I think the solution to cleric is to rethink healing. Once there is a class-independent form of healing, then the cleric stops being a "must have" class, and it can be toned down a little.
Clawhound 07-10-07, 08:50 AM	They have PROVEN nothing; they have only asserted it. :rolleyes: DMM isn't broken. It's only a problem at extremely high levels. In order to get a DMM cleric, the player must choose a sub-optimal build for 12-15 levels. Even then, the cleric is still behind on feats. Add in a 25 point build, and you have a mess. Folk have done the math. Once you account for all factors, a player would be nuts to level up a DMM cleric. It's a huge bet that the adventure will reach a high-enough level that you will get payback on your build. The DMM cleric only works if you start your characters at a high level. Even then, a player will quickly realize that playing the cleric as a spellcaster is more powerful than playing him as a tank.
Darth_Cyric 07-10-07, 09:33 AM	In order to get a DMM cleric, the player must choose a sub-optimal build for 12-15 levels. Umm, there's no such thing as a sub-optimal cleric build. You could pick feats that make absolutely no sense to pick and still outclass any other class in the game (sans the Druid) at its own job.
crashlogic 07-10-07, 01:08 PM	hmm, a lot of commentary here from people who obviously rarely playerd clerics in 1e or 2e. Yes in general, multiclassing was a very good thing prior to 3.0. The trouble with multiclass was that the characters never go really good at any one thing. Ultimately though, we are talking about 3.5 e here. and 3.5 the cleric is hardly broken. I mean the cleric has access to any spell on the divine list, but still must prepare a limited number of spells per day. Its not like you can just pray for the needed spell.
Clawhound 07-10-07, 02:10 PM	Umm, there's no such thing as a sub-optimal cleric build. You could pick feats that make absolutely no sense to pick and still outclass any other class in the game (sans the Druid) at its own job. I heard this about fighter, so I sat down with a cleric enthusiast, drew up a good, single-class build for each (as we sought to be equitable) and we both found that trying to design the cleric as a fighter got us a cleric that wasn't a very good fighter. We heard that buffing was supposed to rule. Nope. Without DMM, you are action-starved in getting those buffs out. With DMM/Quicken, you become starved for turns. MAD means that you are always gimping yourself on something that you need. DMM/Persistant was even worse. Most "cleric RULE" assertions come from pre-errata builds. Once you apply errata, the clerics are good but flawed. We heard that DMM was supposed to rule. Nope. Even our most efficient build fell behind the fighter.
danielinthewolvesden 07-10-07, 03:37 PM	Umm, there's no such thing as a sub-optimal cleric build. You could pick feats that make absolutely no sense to pick and still outclass any other class in the game (sans the Druid) at its own job. Not the Wizard, Artificer or Psion. These- and the Druid & Cleric- are the "BIG FIVE; and all rate about the same power-wise. Thus clearly an optimized BIG FIVE PC will beat an un-optimized BIG FIVE PC. Cleric is way broken mainly only when you can custom design a high level cleric from the ground-up: knowing a certain foe. Yu can custom design a high level cleric to beat nearly anything. However, IRL D&D does not work like that. You choice of Domains and feats are usually fixed, and more often you are playing at level 5,not 20.
Darth_Cyric 07-10-07, 04:40 PM	Not the Wizard, Slay Living, Harm, Holy Word/Blasphemy/Dictum/Word of Chaos, and Implosion. Done. If it weren't for Sleep, Wizards would've been outclassed from Lv. 1.