Post/Author/DateTime	Post
JulesCARV 05-06-06, 04:24 AM	Many consider the cleric and druid, with their full spellcasting and decent combat abilities, to be very powerful in comparison to most classes. I was wondering, would you consider favored souls and archivists to fall into the same "superpower" category? Do other divine casting classes fall into the same category? Shugenjas? Spirit Shamans?
Witch 05-06-06, 05:00 AM	Our Archivist doesn't seem too overpowered. Archivists are just... less melee oriented than Clerics.
Ghostwheel 05-06-06, 05:09 AM	Many consider the cleric and druid, with their full spellcasting and decent combat abilities, to be very powerful in comparison to most classes. I was wondering, would you consider favored souls and archivists to fall into the same "superpower" category? Do other divine casting classes fall into the same category? Shugenjas? Spirit Shamans? I am not a fan of the CoDzilla theory of DnD. Yes, both classes are playable through 20th level, and both are quite well-regarded. Both have built-in restrictions that should never be ignored lest they can be used as tools for abuse. Now to your question. I can only address the Favored Soul, since I have not taken a close look at the other classes that you are asking about. As for the Favored Soul, I think that it is a very well-designed class. Spontaneous casting of a limited number of divine spells is a good idea for the basis of a class. The rest of the package makes it very attractive: 3/4 BAB and all good saves makes them very well-rounded. The next time that I get an oppurtunity to play rather than DM, I hope that I get the chance to actually play one.
Talen Lee 05-06-06, 05:21 AM	If you can show me a passage of the SRD that mechanically states how the roleplay aspects of a Cleric or Druid restrains their mechanical power, I will be very, very surprised. Using 'Roleplay' to hinder raw power is not only a hallmark of bad design, it's the hallmark of a bad designer.
Witch 05-06-06, 05:22 AM	Using 'Roleplay' to hinder raw power is not only a hallmark of bad design, it's the hallmark of a bad designer. Hmm - I do believe that Tome of Magic balanced roleplaying against raw power with Pact Magic's "influence" mechanic.
Talen Lee 05-06-06, 05:42 AM	It did it with the 'influence' what?
Witch 05-06-06, 05:45 AM	A roleplaying mechanic. Really. If you don't have ToM, let me explain a bit: (From the excerpt) When a binder offers a pact, a contest of wills ensues between him and the vestige. This contest might be played out by means of an argument, a staring match, a riddle posed to the binder, or in any number of other ways. If the vestige ultimately wins, it maintains an amount of influence over the binder for the duration of the pact. If the binder does not act as the vestige wills, it can punish him. However, if the binder reigns supreme after the contest, the vestige quietly accompanies him. Some of the influences are: "Become extremely stubborn and refuse to take off your armor for any reason" or "Give a coin to every dwarf whose name you learn within 1 minute of meeting him". "Refuse to go into dark places without sufficient illumination". Those sort of things. If you don't abide them, you gain penalties on attack and damage.
Talen Lee 05-06-06, 06:37 AM	So, given that it has penalties and costs associated with it, with examples of how to do that, it might almost be ... a mechanic? *faints*
Witch 05-06-06, 06:43 AM	It still is in contradiction with this statement: Using 'Roleplay' to hinder raw power is not only a hallmark of bad design, it's the hallmark of a bad designer. Because simply, it's still roleplay.
Talen Lee 05-06-06, 06:54 AM	You seem to misunderstand what I meant. You can't simply say 'well, there are roleplay restrictions on the Druid and Cleric that limit their power', because there aren't and they don't. The limitations you speak of have definition - clear labels, rules, edicts from the designer making sure to cover his bottom rather than leave some vague, open ended option. The books don't even give the latter to CoDzilla - people have read into the game rules somewhere that indicates that you can bone the cleric or druid if they stop being Clerish or Druish in their behaviour. These problems exist in the Diplomacy rules as well, for what it's worth. With the Pact Magic (not having it myself), the fact that there are quantifiable results, examples, and mechanical fixtures indicates that this role-played effect still has mechanical impact and precedence.
Witch 05-06-06, 06:57 AM	Ah, yes. I think, perhaps it should be a good idea for clerics and druids to create a sort of Code of Conduct together with their DM when they roll up their character. It -might- help a bit.
Ghostwheel 05-06-06, 07:23 AM	I will try to reply to all of this succinctly. Divine casters do not have access to every spell on the cleric list. By definition they are spells granted by a deity or "power". That is a mechanic, and is subject to the DM's discretion, not the player's. The same mechanic applies to such things as Turning, Domain Powers, and other granted powers. In short, the DM determines what benefits a deity grants. That is all the mechanic anyone needs to adjudicate all such issues.
Talen Lee 05-06-06, 07:55 AM	It's also totally made up. A cleric has access to all spells on his spell list. Says so in the class description. Change if if you will, but then you're talking houserules.
Witch 05-06-06, 08:48 AM	I will try to reply to all of this succinctly. Divine casters do not have access to every spell on the cleric list. By definition they are spells granted by a deity or "power". That is a mechanic, and is subject to the DM's discretion, not the player's. The same mechanic applies to such things as Turning, Domain Powers, and other granted powers. In short, the DM determines what benefits a deity grants. That is all the mechanic anyone needs to adjudicate all such issues. I agree with Talen. That is the mechanic called "DM Fiat". Officially, a cleric can get any spell that doesn't have a descriptor opposed to his or his deities alignment.
John Q. Mayhem 05-06-06, 10:56 AM	Ex-Clerics A cleric who grossly violates the code of conduct required by his god loses all spells and class features, except for armor and shield proficiencies and proficiency with simple weapons. He cannot thereafter gain levels as a cleric of that god until he atones (see the atonement spell description). By the RAW, if a cleric strays too far from their religion, they get smacked. That's what a DM needs to enforce. The codes of conduct aren't spelled out in the book, they're left up to the DM. Still, that is a built-in restriction. Thus, they "have built-in restrictions that should never be ignored lest they can be used as tools for abuse." EDIT: Likewise, Ex-Druids A druid who ceases to revere nature, changes to a prohibited alignment, or teaches the Druidic language to a nondruid loses all spells and druid abilities (including her animal companion, but not including weapon, armor, and shield proficiencies). She cannot thereafter gain levels as a druid until she atones (see the atonement spell description). If the DM determines that the druid has ceased to revere nature, they get smacked. Built-in restriction. Whether you think that's good design or not (I don't, I think it would only foster conflict if enforced), it is there.
Talen Lee 05-06-06, 11:34 AM	"If you do anything that's against something that has no rules definition, something bad can happen." Again, making it up. There are no rules for the code of conduct, there are no rules about 'revering nature'. It's a nondrawback.
beaver1024 05-06-06, 11:41 AM	Those ridiculously pathetic lose "restrictions" are not hard mechanical restrictions at all. They're as restrictive as the Elven Bladesinger's "restrictions" and human "benefits" in 2e. In any event it cannot be consistently applied because no two DM will enforce the restrictions the same. You cannot say 1 DM is doing a good job and the other DM is an idiot. Blaming the DMs who have problems with CoDzilla because they haven't enforced the role playing restrictions is like blaming the rape victim rather than the perpetrator. Furthermore in core rules you can be a cleric of philosphy. So the player can make up any old philosphy to suit the pathetic "restrictions". If role playing restrictions offsets mechanical benefits why then is the paladin so much weaker than codzilla? They have far more restrictive role playing restrictions than clerics yet do they get wildshape? Do they get miracle? do they get 9 levels of casting along with full bab?
NineInchNall 05-06-06, 11:45 AM	"If you do anything that's against something that has no rules definition, something bad can happen." Again, making it up. There are no rules for the code of conduct, there are no rules about 'revering nature'. It's a nondrawback. Sigged! :D
NilesB 05-06-06, 01:10 PM	Favored Soul: no Archivist: yes
Majorafire77 05-06-06, 02:46 PM	Favored Soul: no Archivist: yes The Archivist is powerful, but not nearly as much as a Cleric or Druid is. Whereas a Wizard is about equal to an Archivist (though a bit less powerful), the Wizard doesn't even come close to CoDzilla.
danielinthewolvesden 05-06-06, 09:42 PM	What the heck is a "CoDzilla"?
Talen Lee 05-06-06, 09:52 PM	CoDZilla is a slang term to refer to a Cleric or Druid. Basically, in almost any permutation of the game that's inclusive, they're the most powerful classes - by a long margin. The Artificer can scurry up behind them, but even then, all it's doing is abusing the same stuff they are. It's a longstanding problem that needs some dealing with. In an immediate sense, in any given game, any class can be broken and anything can be fair. But when you run the raw numbers of a given party, you'll find the cleric's ability and the druid's ability, assuming an equal starting point, outstrips everyone else.
Priest_of_Shaundakul 05-06-06, 09:59 PM	Is this term "C.O.D.zilla" an insultive, respectful or neutral term?
Vaelan 05-06-06, 10:04 PM	Hmm - I do believe that Tome of Magic balanced roleplaying against raw power with Pact Magic's "influence" mechanic. I do believe you're wrong. The fact is, roleplaying restrictions are not assigned in accordance to power. This fact can be observed in the case of the Paladin and, with experience playing the class, the Binder. These classes are not powerful, yet they have roleplaying restrictions. There are exactly two conclusions one could come to... 1. The designers meant to give powerful classes roleplaying restrictions and are simply idiots. 2. Roleplaying restrictions are a matter of flavor and have nothing to do with mechanical power. Believe what you will. What the heck is a "CoDzilla"? The response to DMs who blindly disallow all non-core material on the grounds that it isn't balanced. "CoD" is an abbreviation for "Cleric or Druid" and the "zilla" is an artifact of the manner in which the idea was presented.
Rpgraccoon 05-06-06, 10:06 PM	I don't think the Archivist (Divine Wizard) or Favored Soul (Divine Sorcerer) are very overpowered. Just because a class casts divine spells doesn't make them CoDzilla. I would of prefered the Favored soul have a non-deity option. Like celestial/fiendish blood and different abilites instead of weapon focus. I acctually think the druid should be a spontanious caster. Also, I'd like the clerics domains to be split by levels. 1st 10th 20th.
John Q. Mayhem 05-06-06, 10:12 PM	"If you do anything that's against something that has no rules definition, something bad can happen." Again, making it up. There are no rules for the code of conduct, there are no rules about 'revering nature'. It's a nondrawback. I beg your pardon? Making it up? I know you can't believe that I made up those quotes, so you must be talking about something else...*ponders* I see that you agree that it's a ****-poor way to balance the class. I question, though, your assertion that it is a nondrawback. Is the paladin's code a nondrawback? The fact that a cleric's code is up to the DM and PC to determine doesn't mean that it ain't a drawback. It's a "nonspecificdrawback," not a "nondrawback."
FlameLover 05-06-06, 10:35 PM	Is this term "C.O.D.zilla" an insultive, respectful or neutral term? I see it as nuetral myself. Although it is obviously used by people who think Clerics and Druids are too powerful (I concur with that statement myself) it isn't necessarily saying that people who play them are being "min/maxers" or anything like that. And I just wanted to correct something. The Paladin has a roleplaying "restriction", while the Binder generally doesn't. It says so write in the Design & Development article: Influence: A vestige’s influence should not be a game balance factor. Influences in Tome of Magic serve as fun flavor for players who like to roleplay that aspect of their binder character. A player who doesn’t care to have his PC’s actions controlled in that manner can manage his chances by choosing less difficult vestiges or picking game mechanics that will help the PC succeed at the binding check. The restrictions of a Druid not wearing metal armor, and a Cleric not casting opposed-alignment psells, are mechanical restrictions. Saying that a Cleric or Druid can't lose reverence for there deity or nature respectivley, lest they be punished, is a "roleplaying something" - but not a restriction in my opinion. It would be different if actual examples of rules and punishments were given, but there not. It's like saying to the DM "give your Wizard however many spell-slots you think is appropriate". Uoi can find a balance, but it should be up to the designer and not the DM to do that. A Barb gets d12 HDs, not "whatever makes sense for there chosen style of fighting". A DM placing restrictions on Clerics or Druids which aren't clearly stated in the rules is house ruling, and is therefore not playing with the rules-as-written Cleric or Druid. If they did, they'd have a CoDzilla.
Talen Lee 05-06-06, 10:36 PM	It's a nondrawback because there are no rules governing how strict or how loose it is. Indeed, if you're a cleric of a philosophy which is in the core rules, it's totally nonexistant. The Paladin Code of Conduct is defined. It has specific things you can't do, things that will contravene that code of conduct.
strumbleduck 05-06-06, 11:16 PM	. . . and the "zilla" is an artifact of the manner in which the idea was presented. I always figured the term was meant to evoke the image of a gigantic cleric destroying Tokyo. By the RAW, if a cleric strays too far from their religion, they get smacked. This doesn't stop the Czilla. For example, Kord is a perfectly good deity for a Czilla, and I can't think of anything that would make Kord happier than having his clerics going out and kicking some a**.
Witch 05-07-06, 03:07 AM	And I just wanted to correct something. The Paladin has a roleplaying "restriction", while the Binder generally doesn't. It says so write in the Design & Development article: My mistake then. I believed I read somewhere on the site that the influences were "balanced in strength relative to the number of times they'd come up"
danielinthewolvesden 05-07-06, 03:15 AM	CoDZilla is a slang term to refer to a Cleric or Druid. Basically, in almost any permutation of the game that's inclusive, they're the most powerful classes - by a long margin. The Artificer can scurry up behind them, but even then, all it's doing is abusing the same stuff they are. It's a longstanding problem that needs some dealing with. Well, no. According to the Consensus: http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=369436 Druid is indeed, #1 buy a long margin. However, Wizard is #2, with Cleric behind only by a nose, and Artificer more or less equal. And, of course, WotC has 'dealt with it" by a recent serious nerf to Wildshape, and a little bit ago by nerfing the three most powerful Cleric self-buff spells. Only Wizard remains unnerfed. (I have never even seen an Artificer played, so....) Most of the percieved power of cleric comes from the CO boards, where classes are matched in a highly artificial "one off arena": where clerics are allowed unlimited self-buffs, don't have to worry about casting healing spells on their party (since there is no party), can use all their Turning on metamagic as they aren't concerned there might be some undead, and don't have to worry about the next 2, 3, 4 or dozen encounters before spells are recovered. :rolleyes: It also comes from matching up folks at the very unusual 2oth level, which few ever see in real table-top gaming, and most of the CO board builds (built on maximum offense and getting to 20th by fiat) would never survive the rigors of adventuring for the first few levels. In real-table top gaming, the Druid is the worst class possible until they can Wildshape, and now with the new Nerf are significantly less powerful. The cleric is generally eschewed- no one wants to play one. This would seem odd if its was really "the most powerful class in the game" until one realizes it is just middling in power in real table-top roleplaying adventuring, and in order to be most effective in a party setting- has to be a "healing monkey" (which is boring as hell). The "What's a DM to do" forum is full of DM's bewailing the fact that they can get anyone & everyone to play Arcanists, Psionics & sneaks, but no one wants to ever play a Cleric or other healer, and now what are they gonna do? :eek: :confused: :weep: If clerics really ruled, you'd have scads of threads with the exact opposite problem "No one wants to play a Wizard or Psion- they all want to be either a cleric or a druid- now what?" :rolleyes: but in my many years of posting here I have never seen a DM with that problem, always the other way around. Now, don't get me wrong- the top 13 most powerful classes (out of 20) are all full spellcasters, and that's no mistake. At the highest levels, there is no doubt at all that Spellcasters rule, and warriors drool. However, this isn't true of just "CorD" is true of all 13 full spellcasting classes ( I count "psions" as spellcasting for this purpose).
Grey_Mage 05-07-06, 03:55 AM	*shakes head* Before I came to these boards I never saw or heard Anyone claim that the cleric or druid was a "broken" class. In fact Ive seen over and over again how few people want to be a cleric. Ive been welcomed into many groups mearly on the fact that I could play the supporting cleric player and enjoy it. So they dont suck ass in combat. Thats good... cause a great deal of their spells are more for buffing and healing. Especially in the clerics case. *shakes head*. They need to be able to help out as the companies secondairy or tertiary combatants... or the group as a whole is screwed. But wait... they are full casters! Why yes... yes they are. Cause they are magical classes first and formost. If you take away the clerics casting ability then you not only cripple the class, you cripple the part that they are reutinely healing and buffing. The druid has much the same problem... though wildshape itself getting hurt wont kill the party as a whole, or the druid for that matter. You tell me that cause the DM has control over the situation that the drawbacks are none existant? I say shame on you. Take some responsibility as a player, as a DM. Its your game. The mechanic is there... Use it. Perhaps if the Paladin didnt have so strict a code on him people would "abuse" him too... as it is by placing even minor mechanics on him hes been crippled. Why dont they do this with a cleric or druid? Cause there are so many gods to worship, and so many druidic traditions that they cant possibly have an example for every alignment. The strictures are there. If you dont feel the need to utilize them then YOU are the one house ruling it. The consequences are ruled out... no more spells for them if they screw up. They screw up pull their spells. RAW.
Talen Lee 05-07-06, 04:04 AM	Oberoni Fallacy, thread over.
Cadfan 05-07-06, 04:22 AM	First, that's not the Oberoni fallacy. I think we need a new fallacy- the Oberoni Fallacy Fallacy. For when people use the Oberoni Fallacy in a fallacious manner. Second, the reason the cleric's theoretical code of conduct isn't a balancing factor isn't because it requires DM intervention to work, its because it doesn't balance anything important. The cleric excels at killing things in melee, casting spells that kill things and/or cause them to die in melee, and utility spellcasting. This creates a problem because the cleric, with a particular combo of spells, can equal or exceed the fighter's "killing things in melee" abilities, while still retaining all of his other sweet powers that the fighter doesn't have. A drawback that says you have to be nice to puppies doesn't balance out your killing things ability.
JulesCARV 05-07-06, 04:41 AM	I suppose on issue is that barring stuff with, say, Sacred Exorcists, Favored Souls and Archivists don't have access to Divine Metamagic, allegedly one of the biggest sources of clerical power.
strumbleduck 05-07-06, 04:42 AM	So danielinthewolvesden makes some very valid points for why clerics aren't as "broken" as the CO folks seem to think. Indeed, the reasoning he's using is probably the same as the reasoning WotC used when they decided to give clerics so much power. The truth is that clerics are too powerful, but it's not actually a problem in most games. In most games, here's what happens: Everyone agrees that the party needs a cleric (because every party needs a heal-monkey). No one wants to play the cleric, because it's no fun playing a heal-monkey. Someone eventually agrees to play a cleric. They have lots of powerful spells, but they all get spent on healing and buffs for the party. They maybe take a divine feat or two, but they end up saving their turn undead attempts for actual undead. Because no one likes playing a cleric, it's almost impossible for the party to end up with two clerics. But say we take our standard four-person party and replace the fighter with a second cleric. Here's what happens: The party doesn't actually need more healing than one cleric can provide, so the the second cleric isn't a heal-monkey. In particular, the second cleric finds that he has all these great attack spells, wonderful buff spells for himself, and plenty of low-level spells left over for buffing the rest of the party. He also figures that, since the first cleric probably has the undead covered, he might as well go all out with the divine feats. He takes Divine Metamagic, and depending on which metamagic feat he chooses, he's either an uber-buffer or he casts uber attack spells. Basically, since the second cleric isn't needed as a heal-monkey, he can become the cleric from the CO boards: super-self-buffing, persistent divine powered, attack-spell-casting Czilla. And the next time the group starts a new campaign, all four players want to be clerics.
Cadfan 05-07-06, 04:47 AM	stumbleduck basically sums it up. His reasoning also explains why I'm so afraid of domain channeling. It relieves the "spent all my good spells on healing" effect.
DarknessEternal 05-07-06, 01:59 PM	The truth is that clerics are too powerful, but it's not actually a problem in most games. In most games, here's what happens: Everyone agrees that the party needs a cleric (because every party needs a heal-monkey). No one wants to play the cleric, because it's no fun playing a heal-monkey. Someone eventually agrees to play a cleric. They have lots of powerful spells, but they all get spent on healing and buffs for the party. They maybe take a divine feat or two, but they end up saving their turn undead attempts for actual undead. Is this your actual experience? It certainly isn't mine. My group played so frequently with no Clerics that everyone knows how to not need much healing. They certainly need only a small fraction of the healing potential of a straight Cleric. We see any Cleric as an engine of destruction who can still supply overkill in healing to a 5-6 person party.
Votan 05-07-06, 02:23 PM	So danielinthewolvesden makes some very valid points for why clerics aren't as "broken" as the CO folks seem to think. Indeed, the reasoning he's using is probably the same as the reasoning WotC used when they decided to give clerics so much power. The truth is that clerics are too powerful, but it's not actually a problem in most games. In most games, here's what happens: Everyone agrees that the party needs a cleric (because every party needs a heal-monkey). No one wants to play the cleric, because it's no fun playing a heal-monkey. Someone eventually agrees to play a cleric. They have lots of powerful spells, but they all get spent on healing and buffs for the party. They maybe take a divine feat or two, but they end up saving their turn undead attempts for actual undead. Because no one likes playing a cleric, it's almost impossible for the party to end up with two clerics. But say we take our standard four-person party and replace the fighter with a second cleric. Here's what happens: The party doesn't actually need more healing than one cleric can provide, so the the second cleric isn't a heal-monkey. In particular, the second cleric finds that he has all these great attack spells, wonderful buff spells for himself, and plenty of low-level spells left over for buffing the rest of the party. He also figures that, since the first cleric probably has the undead covered, he might as well go all out with the divine feats. He takes Divine Metamagic, and depending on which metamagic feat he chooses, he's either an uber-buffer or he casts uber attack spells. Basically, since the second cleric isn't needed as a heal-monkey, he can become the cleric from the CO boards: super-self-buffing, persistent divine powered, attack-spell-casting Czilla. And the next time the group starts a new campaign, all four players want to be clerics. A couple of points: 1) The extreme buff tactics tend not to work until level 9/10. Sure, there are theoretical options like planning and undeath to speed the process up but, in most games, it may be hard to get a DM to agree to these combinations. A 6th level cleric is going to have a hard time keeping up with a 6th level fighter in melee unless the cleric is able to plan each combt precisely. Without persistent spell (and to a lesser extent quicken spell), the cleric buffs take a lot of effort to put up. In practice these spells have issues in real combats in that they cost actions which are extremely valuable in high level play. 2) A party of all clerics tends to have issues. These "vague" roleplay restrictions to keep the class generic do need to be considered when mixing many clerics or druids together. The silver bullet against this (the dietyless cleric) does not even exist in all offical setting which might be a hint as to the quality of this idea in actual practice. It is true that if the game starts at 15th level, the cleric is going to look really good compared to fighters because, at that level, the party has way more control over pacing (teleport) and the ability to react fast via careful builds that prepare for surprise. If I begin a campaign at 15th level I will expect to see NO melee classes at all unless somebody loves playing one. I'll be surprised if there is a rogue. A pure spellcaster party at this level can solve problems using raw spellpower very efficiently. But that isn't a clue at to the 20 level pattern.
danielinthewolvesden 05-07-06, 02:26 PM	Basically, since the second cleric isn't needed as a heal-monkey, he can become the cleric from the CO boards: super-self-buffing, persistent divine powered, attack-spell-casting Czilla. And the next time the group starts a new campaign, all four players want to be clerics. But, it doesn't happen. Never seen it in any game. It's possible, I admit, and an "all cleric" party (other than skill checks and traps) would be interesting, indeed. :eek: And, the Czilla is only great IF there is only one or two combats a day- not 5, spread out over 20 hours. AND if the monsters either sit around waiting for the cleric to self-buff, or they can't cast Dispel magic. Generally, we only know there's cobat is when the DM says "roll your Spot checks. Those who got made a Spot of 20, roll initiative". Thus, there is no time at all for the cleric to self buff. Every round spend sell-buffing is a round where the rest of the paty has to get hit hard while 1/4 the party is doing nothing to help at that particular round. True, with Persisitan and Divine Metamagic (and that's TWO freaken feats to allow you to have one decent self buff spell up for all day. Meanwhile the other cleric has Improved Toughness and Aguement healing, which help all day long) he has some decent buff spell already- but with one buff spell, no cleric is the match for a fighter with a dozen or so Combat oriented feats. And, maybe he could have another "hour per level " spell up, sure. Still not equal to the Fighter in melee combat. Once you get into three spells, the cleric is close, sure. But that's only if you compare purely damage caused. That's a nice number, but the fighter has feats that allow him to act tacticaly- such as Improved crit, spring attack, elusive target, great cleave, blindfight, close-quarters fighting, etc. Other than Improved crit, none of those add to just plain calculated damage, but all can mean the difference between winning or losing. And I know it, having watched a "battle-cleric" get caught by a Grapple monster, but my Fighter/Templar had close quarters fighting and killed another of the monsters through it's continued failed attempts to grapple- not to mention killing the BBEG more than once with a single power-attacked X4 crit.
danielinthewolvesden 05-07-06, 02:31 PM	1) The extreme buff tactics tend not to work until level 9/10. Without persistent spell (and to a lesser extent quicken spell), the cleric buffs take a lot of effort to put up. In practice these spells have issues in real combats in that they cost actions which are extremely valuable in high level play. It is true that if the game starts at 15th level, the cleric is going to look really good compared to fighters because, at that level, the party has way more control over pacing (teleport) and the ability to react fast via careful builds that prepare for surprise. If I begin a campaign at 15th level I will expect to see NO melee classes at all unless somebody loves playing one. I'll be surprised if there is a rogue. A pure spellcaster party at this level can solve problems using raw spellpower very efficiently. . Right- eveyone forgets levels 1-9. I agree that a 15th level party woul likely do best with almost all spellcasters, but a Sneak will help a lot. No great use for warriors at that levle, although it is fun playing one, esp with some multiclassing and a PrC or 2. With an odd race, two classes and a PrC, I made an almost ukillable fighter who could stand there and take scads of damage whilst the spellslingers moved the enemy down.
Cadfan 05-07-06, 02:49 PM	We have a player in one of our games who uses essentially a CODzilla. The strategy was this- the fighter would enter the combat, and tank up there for three rounds. After three rounds, the fighter would be pretty darn wounded, and would retreat to the cleric, who would cast Heal on him. Then the cleric would KILL EVERYTHING. It was an openly accepted fact that the cleric was better than the fighter once he got his three rounds of buff spells. The fighter's entire job in the party was to delay the enemy that long, and he was paid by having himself healed up afterwards. I'm not entirely sure this is how the game ought to go.
RadicalTaoist 05-07-06, 02:55 PM	But, it doesn't happen. Never seen it in any game. It's possible, I admit, and an "all cleric" party (other than skill checks and traps) would be interesting, indeed. :eek: 'Never seen it' doesn't mean 'it can't happen'. And, the Czilla is only great IF there is only one or two combats a day- not 5, spread out over 20 hours. AND if the monsters either sit around waiting for the cleric to self-buff, or they can't cast Dispel magic. Incorrect. If you allow DM: Persistent, than a single cleric can handle those combats no problem, with everything up ahead of time. If you do not, then clerics depending on Quicken Power can still have 4 combats worth of spell power, especially if you've got two clerics instead of a cleric and a fighter. And even Core, the cleric can get high CLs and generally make Dispel a statistically foolish tactic. Generally, we only know there's cobat is when the DM says "roll your Spot checks. Those who got made a Spot of 20, roll initiative". Thus, there is no time at all for the cleric to self buff. Which makes DM: Persistent so dangerous. Ditto for DM: Quicken, Metamagic Rods of Quicken, and Contingencies as items from Complete Arcane. Every round spend sell-buffing is a round where the rest of the paty has to get hit hard while 1/4 the party is doing nothing to help at that particular round. There is one round spent at most, if the cleric is good. Every round the cleric saves whomping the opposition faster is less pain the party takes. This is assuming the right divine offensive spells like Holy Word don't end combat right away. True, with Persisitan and Divine Metamagic (and that's TWO freaken feats to allow you to have one decent self buff spell up for all day. Have two clerics. One is the archer with persistent Divine Power. One the tank with persistent Righteous Might. Meanwhile the other cleric has Improved Toughness and Aguement healing, which help all day long) he has some decent buff spell already- but with one buff spell, no cleric is the match for a fighter with a dozen or so Combat oriented feats. Depends on the buff spell - some supplements have crazy broken nonsense. And a well prepared cleric will have at least two whenever he needs it. And, maybe he could have another "hour per level " spell up, sure. Still not equal to the Fighter in melee combat. You are not aware of the power of cleric buffs. Once you get into three spells, the cleric is close, sure. But that's only if you compare purely damage caused. That's a nice number, but the fighter has feats that allow him to act tacticaly- such as Improved crit, spring attack, elusive target, great cleave, blindfight, close-quarters fighting, etc. Once you get into the high levels, the Fighter is not going to get modifiers that allow him to grapple Gargantuan monsters, or trip Huge quadrupeds. The Cleric, in the meanwhile, has Air Walk to bring melee to to the flyers, Freedom of Movement to ignore grappling, Holy Word & Co. to stun without saves, and so on. In short, the cleric's spells grant him as many tactical options, except his tactical options don't grow less viable as you go into higher and higher levels. Other than Improved crit, none of those add to just plain calculated damage, but all can mean the difference between winning or losing. And I know it, having watched a "battle-cleric" get caught by a Grapple monster, but my Fighter/Templar had close quarters fighting and killed another of the monsters through it's continued failed attempts to grapple- not to mention killing the BBEG more than once with a single power-attacked X4 crit. Your battle-cleric was not fully optimized. Your anecdotal evidence is situational, I'm afraid. TO THE OP: Favored Soul is not a CoDzilla's level of power, no. Archivist can't be without some twinking - you're going to need PrCs, or spells and feats and items from other supplements. Heroes of Horror is not enough. You can make some ungodly powerful Archivists, though.
Votan 05-07-06, 03:52 PM	Which makes DM: Persistent so dangerous. Ditto for DM: Quicken, Metamagic Rods of Quicken, and Contingencies as items from Complete Arcane. Part of this is what material is available. In practice, Divine Metamagic [Persistent] eats up at least 4 feats {extend spell, persistent spell, divine metamagic [persistent spell] and, for cleric with less than 18 charisma, extra turning}. But once it's purchased (in practice level 6 or level 9, strange exceptions to the contrary) the cleric is going to have Divine Power up all of the freaking time. Quicken stuff helps alot but isn't as broken as it at leas has usage limits that are arrived at much more rapidly. Contingency (also available via the Kobold Domain -- the same one that gives search and disable device as class skills plus trapfinding) massively breaks the cleric. Being able to manufacture contingencies pretty much begs for spellcasters who are nice or who dislike outshining the party. :) There is one round spent at most, if the cleric is good. Every round the cleric saves whomping the opposition faster is less pain the party takes. This is assuming the right divine offensive spells like Holy Word don't end combat right away. The buffing thing really does seem to work out less cleanly then this in practice unless the character is extremely high level. A round in which the cleric does nothing can be the round in which the fighter is trashed or the opposition sees the cleric buff and decides to neutralize him. Sure, at level 15 I can get around this but at level 5 I am unaware of ways to make this worth the cost in actions. Examples?
Cadfan 05-07-06, 04:09 PM	Sure, at level 15 I can get aroudn this but at level 5 I am unaware of ways to make this worth the cost in actions. Examples? There are no examples. The CODzilla doesn't come into full form until level 7 or 9.
strumbleduck 05-07-06, 04:31 PM	I agree -- there's nothing special about a 5th level cleric. His buff spells just haven't come in yet. The same holds for druids who don't yet have wild shape.
Votan 05-07-06, 04:35 PM	There are no examples. The CODzilla doesn't come into full form until level 7 or 9. If it is level 9, I note that 40% of gameplay is over by then. Not a reason for the class to explode at this point but worth noting when considering just how potent this particular option is. Four clerics at level 1 might be competent but would have a challenging time of it.
Cadfan 05-07-06, 04:45 PM	The four cleric party may be weak from levels 1 through 9, but its not THAT weak. You've still got four tanks with decent melee damage. In any case, people rarely actually use four clerics from level 1 on up. More likely, the party fighter will have a string of bad luck around leevl 11, and just decide that he'd rather not be resurrected. He'll roll up a caster... perhaps a cleric!
Votan 05-07-06, 04:53 PM	The four cleric party may be weak from levels 1 through 9, but its not THAT weak. You've still got four tanks with decent melee damage. In any case, people rarely actually use four clerics from level 1 on up. More likely, the party fighter will have a string of bad luck around leevl 11, and just decide that he'd rather not be resurrected. He'll roll up a caster... perhaps a cleric! With this generous policy towards swapping out characters, I can pretrty much assure you that I'd be surprised to see a wizard in a 1st level party (but would be shocked not to see a couple at 18th level). Four clerics isn't abjectly weak but I find the real explosive problems really kick in around level 15 or so. At that point the fighter can no longer pretend that he is useful unless he has made extremely aggressive moves not to be rendered obselete. The loss of trapfinding as a rogue exclsuive ability to clerics with a domian choice really did a lot to make 4 clerics viable, however, as they no longe rhave the "largely theoretical" vulnerability to traps. I see this as a small point because rogues ar often not actively searching when a trap is placed carefully enough or they can miss the (difficult) DCs to find them. At some point you just suck up the trap . . .
strumbleduck 05-07-06, 04:57 PM	If it is level 9, I note that 40% of gameplay is over by then. Not a reason for the class to explode at this point but worth noting when considering just how potent this particular option is. Four clerics at level 1 might be competent but would have a challenging time of it. They tend to start getting pretty good around level 7, and by level 9 the transformation from lesser character to Czilla is complete. Even a 5th level cleric can be ok . . . if you're human, you can use DM to have two spontaneously quickened spells per day by level 3. At level 1, I think four clerics would be a reasonably nice party, although admittedly two clerics and two barbarians would be much better. It's weird: barbarians tend to be able to smash everything up until about level 4.
Talen Lee 05-07-06, 05:23 PM	Someone refresh me how, at level 5, two points of Base Attack Bonus is that big a deal. Indeed, who the hell sticks with Fighter for that long?
Cadfan 05-07-06, 06:03 PM	With this generous policy towards swapping out characters, I can pretrty much assure you that I'd be surprised to see a wizard in a 1st level party (but would be shocked not to see a couple at 18th level). It doesn't require any particularly generous policy of swapping out characters. Eventually, characters get killed. If you've been feeling kind of uninspired with your current character, you might want to just get a new one when the character kicks the bucket, rather than get raised. You're more likely to feel uninspired by your character if you've been noticing your character becoming increasingly overshadowed by other party members. If you're a fighter type character around level, say, 12, you've recently been noticing that your party cleric, when not healing you, casts two spells and receives the following bonuses: +6 enhancement to str +4 size bonus to str fighter BAB temp hp equal to caster level +2 size bonus to con, and corresponding hp increase +2 enhancement bonus to natural armor damage reduction 6/evil (more or less depending on level) large size, and corresponding penalties to attack and ac, and bonuses to reach and weapon damage. and its not like that's his allotment of spells for the day. He's got more. So you're probably feeling a bit overshadowed. Your level 12 reward for your character class is a feat that gives you +2 damage. The cleric gets more of this. It doesn't take generosity on the DMs behalf. All he has to do is not forbid you to decline resurrection.
Kresalak 05-07-06, 06:33 PM	Well, this has strayed far from the original topic. So I'll put my experience. Favored Soul is a pretty balanced class. It's good, but not on the level of our good friend the CoD. Archivist is ok with just his base spells and cleric scrolls for extra, but it's when he gets access to the druid, ranger, and paladin lists that he gets strong. Give him the Spell Compendium and money to buy scrolls and he should be able to overshadow the cleric or druid. Talen said that the Artificer is behind the CoD. I beg to differ. The artificer is miles ahead of any other class. Not only can his items duplicate every trick the cleric has, and every spell the druid has (no Wildshape, but he can get Polymorph), he can also grab the affects of every other spell he needs, and get them 2 levels earlier than anyone else. Then there's Metamagic Spell Trigger at level 6 and Metamagic Completion at level 11. The second one is crazy uber good, and the first awesome. Artificer motto: Anything you can do, I can do better, and 2 levels quicker.
strumbleduck 05-07-06, 06:54 PM	Yeah, returning to the original topic . . . Favored Soul is a pretty balanced class. It's good, but not on the level of our good friend the CoD. I agree. Archivist is ok with just his base spells and cleric scrolls for extra, but it's when he gets access to the druid, ranger, and paladin lists that he gets strong. Not to mention adept spells and cleric domain spells. Archivists are a very nice class. Give him the Spell Compendium and money to buy scrolls and he should be able to overshadow the cleric or druid. Though I'm not sure I agree with this. A straight archivist has no divine metamagic, no wild shape, and no animal companion. Their dark secret class features are pretty nice by themselves, but archivists don't strike me as on par with CoDzillas. They seem to be more like the power of a wizard (or perhaps slightly better). On the other hand, an archivist with the right presitge classes (e.g. Sacred Exorcist to get Turn Undead) will break the bank.
Reversefigure4 05-07-06, 07:02 PM	It's a nondrawback because there are no rules governing how strict or how loose it is. Indeed, if you're a cleric of a philosophy which is in the core rules, it's totally nonexistant. The Paladin Code of Conduct is defined. It has specific things you can't do, things that will contravene that code of conduct. I think that's because Paladins tend to fall into the same bracket. Regardless of which deity your Paladin worships, you are still a holy warrior (and restricted to LG), which means you'll defend the helpless, not steal, etc, etc. Whereas Clerics have no alignment restrictions, so they can be Clerics of whatever you like. A LG Cleric of Pelor will have a completely different code of conduct to a NE Cleric of Fharlanghn, so it would be silly to put a code in the core rules saying "A Cleric must do X, Y, and Z." If you make up your own gods for the game, you'll need a new code of conduct instead. It's up to the DM to set what code is suitable for what cleric.
danielinthewolvesden 05-07-06, 10:42 PM	If you're a fighter type character around level, say, 12, you've recently been noticing that your party cleric, when not healing you, casts two spells and receives the following bonuses: +6 enhancement to str +4 size bonus to str fighter BAB temp hp equal to caster level +2 size bonus to con, and corresponding hp increase +2 enhancement bonus to natural armor damage reduction 6/evil (more or less depending on level) large size, and corresponding penalties to attack and ac, and bonuses to reach and weapon damage. Which two spells are these?
Votan 05-07-06, 11:23 PM	Which two spells are these? Divine Power (cleric 4) and righteous might (cleric 5). The classic combination. Note that the second was nerfed in errata and it used to be much stronger as spell.
Cadfan 05-07-06, 11:25 PM	Level 4 cleric spell, Divine Power. Level 5 cleric spell, Righteous Might. Both in the core rules. Here's links to the SRD. http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/divinePower.htm http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/righteousMight.htm Both have durations of 1 round/caster level. So you can only use them for one fight. And you have to cast them immediately before combat. Plus, DR 6/evil is kind of obnoxious for a good cleric, because most enemies will be evil. But everything else it gives is still absolutely amazing...
Cadfan 05-07-06, 11:27 PM	Was righteous might nerfed more than I know about? I quoted direct from the SRD as it was hosted on a 3rd party website, and am not sure if the errata is applied to that or not. If its been errata'ed, could you please tell me any changes?
StruckingFuggle 05-08-06, 01:12 AM	If it is level 9, I note that 40% of gameplay is over by then. ... Uhm, I don't think so. How do you figure?
Malakai_Demonos 05-08-06, 01:57 AM	Not to sure about the favored soul, but I have some experience with the Archivist. Love the class, not as good at healing as the cleric, no spontanous heal unless you take a feat. But with a CLW and LV wand, who needs more healing power than that, except an odd CCW until you get Heal. I think that the Archivist classifies as COD power because he can know any divine spell. Be it cleric, domain spells, druid, ranger, sugenja, paladin, etc. Because of this ability and the Spell Compendium, the archivist can have almost any spell imaginable, even arcane only ones because of access to all of the domains. An archivist with SC could be unstopable. Plus he rates above the wiz with his d6 Hit die, medium armor casting, 4 skill points, five spells per level, dark knowledge, and good fort save. The only thing which brings him down is his duel caster stats. Which do you favor more, DC or spells per day?
Votan 05-08-06, 07:21 AM	... Uhm, I don't think so. How do you figure? There are 20 levels. A standard target is 4 sessions per level each with 4 encounters (or level appropriate challenges) per session. There are 20 pre-epic levels. It is 80 sessions (or about 2 years of gameplay) to go from level 1 to level 20. By the time that you are level 9 (the level people are saying the cleric begins to dominate) you have played 36 sessions (or 40% of a level 1 to 20 campaign). It's not a perfect algorithm. Living Greyhawk, for eample, cuts off at level 16 so 9th level is 50% of gameplay. Specific campaigns, of course, may vary.
Votan 05-08-06, 07:27 AM	Was righteous might nerfed more than I know about? I quoted direct from the SRD as it was hosted on a 3rd party website, and am not sure if the errata is applied to that or not. If its been errata'ed, could you please tell me any changes? No, no -- you have the correct version. I was just remembering the bad old days when the DR and bonuses were a LOT higher. In particular, the combination of teleport and Righteous Might on a Paladin/Divine Crusader was extremely annoying as he could drop into battles with DR 15/evil up. You would think a lot of opponents coul pierce DR -/evil but it was surprising what couldn't and, as a result, he was able to completely clobber. The stacks with everything strneght bonus is also less than it once was. So if the current cleric can abuse this, the pre-errata cleric was really out of callibration.
StruckingFuggle 05-08-06, 05:17 PM	Specific campaigns, of course, may vary. Which was my point... Though I'd use "will" instead of "may" vary. Yes, Level 9 is 40% of your character's progression, but I've not known anyone, anywhere, ever, who played a campaign that both started at level 1 and ended at level 20, and that spent the same ammount of time between all of levels; or anything even close to such a case.