Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Mommy was an Orc 04-19-07, 08:11 PM	Wood Elf Str 18, Dex 10, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 15, Cha 8 All stat bumps to Wisdom 1: Cleric 1(St. Cuthbert - Destruction, Strength): Power Attack 3: Cleric 3: Craft Wondrous Item 6: Cleric 6: Extra Smite 9: Cleric 9: Quicken Spell 12: Cleric 12: Divine Justice or Extra Smite 15: Cleric 15: Extra Smite Basically, the idea is to craft a Con Amulet ASAP. Buy Heavy Plate from RoS. Wield a longsword. Cast a buff spell, wade into combat. I like the relatively high Intelligence for either of the builds as it lets me have functions outside of combat. Anyone see something I'm missing? I rarely play clerics or tanks, but I think it is time for me to take the hit for my regular group...
JamesMaissen 04-19-07, 08:30 PM	Wood Elf Str 18, Dex 10, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 15, Cha 8 All stat bumps to Wisdom 1: Cleric 1(St. Cuthbert - Destruction, Strength): Power Attack 3: Cleric 3: Craft Wondrous Item 6: Cleric 6: Extra Smite 9: Cleric 9: Quicken Spell 12: Cleric 12: Divine Justice or Extra Smite 15: Cleric 15: Extra Smite Basically, the idea is to craft a Con Amulet ASAP. Buy Heavy Plate from RoS. Wield a longsword. Cast a buff spell, wade into combat. I like the relatively high Intelligence for either of the builds as it lets me have functions outside of combat. Anyone see something I'm missing? I rarely play clerics or tanks, but I think it is time for me to take the hit for my regular group... Well an odd str mod in the long run may work well for you as Divine Power gives +6 and Righteous Might gives +4. With a Human you could do the same as you've done for 2 less str but 2 higher con, a feat and half again as many skills. You'd need to choose a different weapon.. but morning star isn't that bad compared to a longsword. The crit range is worse, but the damage types are normally more in your favor. There are a 1000 different things to do with a cleric. I would consider strongly a turn based feat as many can do wonders (though some require more investment than others). Also figure that the level 6-8 range you will probably be better suited as support in a party with decent tank options. -James
copper_wyrmling 04-19-07, 10:29 PM	Wood Elf Str 18, Dex 10, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 15, Cha 8 All stat bumps to Wisdom 1: Cleric 1(St. Cuthbert - Destruction, Strength): Power Attack 3: Cleric 3: Craft Wondrous Item 6: Cleric 6: Extra Smite 9: Cleric 9: Quicken Spell 12: Cleric 12: Divine Justice or Extra Smite 15: Cleric 15: Extra Smite Basically, the idea is to craft a Con Amulet ASAP. Buy Heavy Plate from RoS. Wield a longsword. Cast a buff spell, wade into combat. I like the relatively high Intelligence for either of the builds as it lets me have functions outside of combat. Anyone see something I'm missing? I rarely play clerics or tanks, but I think it is time for me to take the hit for my regular group... It looks fine (I'm of the school of thought that says it's very hard to mess up a full-caster cleric with starting Wis at least 14), although as James said, I'd probably go human for the extra feat and Con. What skills are you taking? You definitely want to max Concentration - Spellcraft, Knowledge (Religion), Knowledge (The Planes) and Heal are all nice too (Heal mostly only if your region loves poisons and disease, although sometimes it's also good for forensics). Will you really want Con more than Wisdom as a full-caster cleric, or are you planning to just use the Con amulet early and swap it for a periapt of Wis at higher level? Once you get Quicken, high-level spell slots will be a fairly important resource. (Even before you get Quicken, in fact... a +2 periapt is an extra Divine Power at L7-11, and there usually is more than one fight in a day.) Two general pieces of advice: 1) Make sure your group recognizes that all your feats are going into being tankish, not standing behind the fighters and assiduously healing ;) 2) Don't assume your undead-turning will be useless just because you have Cha 8. Especially if you can get some of the nice items that boost effective turning level (phylactery, rod of defiance, lyre of the restful soul, sacred armor), your turning abilities can be used to one-shot nasty undead encounters right up to APL 16.
bhale187 04-19-07, 11:01 PM	Just a thought, but you are obviously not going to do the damage of a melee build past around level 3, so I like to switch roles over to an AC tank as the levels start to add up. I would adjust your feats to take craft arms/armor by level 9. You will be able to craft yourself into very high ACs from 9th to 15th levels when you combine level/3 bonus on a shield and your heavy plate plus wonderous items boosting AC. (I figure you may be going for a 2handed weapon since you took power attack, but you are just going to hinder the party at higher levels if you are trying to attack rather than do your job as a support character) That way you can still wade into combat at higher levels, but start wading in to heal and buff the real damage machines instead of wading in to help drop the badies like you do in the low levels.
Mommy was an Orc 04-20-07, 12:08 AM	It looks fine (I'm of the school of thought that says it's very hard to mess up a full-caster cleric with starting Wis at least 14), although as James said, I'd probably go human for the extra feat and Con. What skills are you taking? You definitely want to max Concentration - Spellcraft, Knowledge (Religion), Knowledge (The Planes) and Heal are all nice too (Heal mostly only if your region loves poisons and disease, although sometimes it's also good for forensics). Concentration and then putting some ranks into a smattering of various skills. One of the 'features' of having an 18 Strength is that no one will doubt your intent is to do damage. They may not believe you will succeed, but they won't doubt your intent. Will you really want Con more than Wisdom as a full-caster cleric, or are you planning to just use the Con amulet early and swap it for a periapt of Wis at higher level? Once you get Quicken, high-level spell slots will be a fairly important resource. (Even before you get Quicken, in fact... a +2 periapt is an extra Divine Power at L7-11, and there usually is more than one fight in a day.) I want Con more than Wisdom - I'll eventually have the 18 required for high level spells - and a 24 Wisdom is just going to get me an extra 5/6/7 slot, but an 18 Con means 45 extra hit points - likely enough to take one more hit. At levels 8-10, I've got the iterative and probably I've crafted a Belt of Strength +4. Make sure your group recognizes that all your feats are going into being tankish, not standing behind the fighters and assiduously healing ;) Probably, if I'm in a random group, I'll just claim to be a tank and then mumble something about being a cleric who doesn't heal in combat. ;) Just a thought, but you are obviously not going to do the damage of a melee build past around level 3. Not sure what kind of melee builds you play with, but he'll be doing more than APL*10 damage at the high levels with a very high to-hit roll and solid AC - and the ability to up the damage even higher than that. He should be fine in that regard.
Dr.Cornelius 04-20-07, 04:39 AM	Destruction and Strength are good melee domains, but did you consider taking the Domination domain for action at a distance? Also if you plan to do any healing, Divine Ward (feat, PHB2) is essential.
zoinks69 04-20-07, 05:00 AM	I play a the human version of your build, very similar through level 9. He's been lots of fun, though with all the DMM and other recent craziness, I rebuilt him (back in "those" days) ~character level 9 to be more of a caster. He can still throw down for a round, but he usually occupies his time chaining buffs or dispelling (thanks to Inquisition domain). I'll admit I'm not crazy about using Wood Elf for melee...the -2 con simply hurts too much. This might be a better build for Snow Elf if you have the card, or Dwarf (giving up some stats to get others). "But", you'll say, "I'm a cleric and can just heal myself..." Sure, you can do that, but then you aren't dishing melee damage... In any case, I'd be disappointed if you didn't wield a mace or club. The difference in damage is not very significant (imo) unless you have some loaded dice and your god will appreciate it...in some insubstantial way ;)
Sieylianna 04-20-07, 07:43 AM	Wood Elf Str 18, Dex 10, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 15, Cha 8 All stat bumps to Wisdom I think you're giving up too much by going for wood elf and 18 Str. The -2 Con really hurts and the +1 Dex isn't doing anything for you. The Con loss is particularly bad fsince there is the conflict with the periapt of Wisdom. I think Human will work better for this build. Ed
_metz_ 04-20-07, 09:20 AM	How about a Dwarf of Gendwar Angrim? I am very serious in this regard. stats: Str: 16 Dex: 10 Con:16 Int: 10 Wis: 15 Cha: 6 Stat bumps: wisdom, str, str or straight wisdom. Two choices here, can go strength and war domains and play with dwarven waraxes, with free weapon focus, or can also take destrucion domain 1: Cleric 1: Power Attack (Strength and war/destruction) 3: Cleric 3: Craft Wondrous Item 6: Cleric 6: Extra Smite (if destruction, different if war domain chosen) 9: Cleric 9: Quicken Spell with crafting you can make up for the charisma loss, and have an excellent wisdom and con, as you can choose to bump one or the other with a magic item. The dwarven speed isn't an issue as you will be wearing plate anyways, so speed isn't what you are after. Stability for bull rush etc is very useful as well as the bonus to saves (you are a frontliner) The waraxe is good for the crit, but can still take destruction... I just don't fancy the woodelf. Stats before items at level 12 will be: Str: 16 or 18# Dex: 10 Con:16 Int: 10 Wis: 16 or 18# Cha: 6 This gives you more options. Less worry about con AND wisdom then as both are at least 16 inherently, as is strength
Mommy was an Orc 04-20-07, 10:56 AM	The dwarven speed isn't an issue as you will be wearing plate anyways, so speed isn't what you are after. Stability for bull rush etc is very useful as well as the bonus to saves (you are a frontliner) That's a good suggestion. There's three problems: I'm not a fan of Dwarves, especially those of the Gendwar Argrim type. I don't do humorless, grim, end of the world types very well. Gendwar Argrim doesn't actually have the Strength domain. So no Enlarge Person. With Pearls of Power, at high levels, I'll be able to do this all day long. Or feat of strength. Depending on table variation, I'll also be able to Quicken Enlarge Person with my domain slot. I think the hitting of 26 Str/Enlarged vs 22/WF is pretty important to the damage curve. It represents about 5 points of damage per swing. Which is significant when you're trying maintain parity with the tweaked barbarian.
LachlarlanIII 04-20-07, 11:06 AM	With how low your HPs are going to be, I would suggest finding room for the Tempting Fate luck feat. As a tank, you WILL get hit, and having a low Con doesn't increase your survivability. Tempting Fate lets you reroll a stabilization roll, or (the better part) auto-stabilize at -9 if any damaging attack would outright kill you.
JamesMaissen 04-20-07, 11:07 AM	How about a Dwarf of Gendwar Angrim? I am very serious in this regard. Two choices here, can go strength and war domains and play with dwarven waraxes, with free weapon focus, or can also take destrucion domain Gendwar doesn't offer Strength Domain, Clangeddin does however. Though War and Destruction (unless you like the Law domain like I do) could suffice here. As to the woodelf choice, I think long term +1 str vs +1 con will prove to be a loss. You already recognize the need for Con, and that will just get worse with levels. Consider that the role trying to be filled is fighter and not cleric. With the woodelf you are akin to a 10 CON fighter. This is not good. Now consider that with Enlarge's +2 to STR the 18 STR vs the starting 16 STR only offers +1 to damage. You won't get to cast enlarge for each combat perhaps, but it's not a complete sacrifice in this regard. Finally if you are going sword and board (so to speak) the difference between a 16 STR and 18 STR is even less pronounced. If your goal is to tank more than to deliver damage then the CON is even that much more important. Towards that, the Dwarf base has merit if you have no intention of using the turning for anything and thus lowering the CHA doesn't harm you. -James
Mommy was an Orc 04-20-07, 11:13 AM	I think you're giving up too much by going for wood elf and 18 Str. The -2 Con really hurts and the +1 Dex isn't doing anything for you. The Con loss is particularly bad fsince there is the conflict with the periapt of Wisdom. I think Human will work better for this build. Ed There's no conflict with the periapt. I'm not planning on ever wearing a periapt unless I'm going to do something tricky with bonus spells at 10th+ - use up all the spells for a particular level - Hero's Feast and a Pact spell as an example at 12th.
Mommy was an Orc 04-20-07, 11:34 AM	I'm not sure where you guys think his hit points are going to be so incredibly low... He's often going to be +2 on the Constitution amulet compared to the Fighter as he's crafting and the fighter is not - and he has less need for the same level of Strength boosting. He's also going to be generating temp hit points when the Fighter is not and boosting his AC through spells the Fighter might not get. Yes, no Rage. He still should be at +26/26/21/16, doing 30-35 hp of damage per swing before Smite, Power Attack, Earth Hammer, or any spells other than GMW, Enlarge Person(30 vs 35), Quickened Divine Favor, and Divine Power at APL 12(assuming boots of speed). And not raging means his AC will be compensating for those lower hit points. Maybe not always, but it will be up there.
_metz_ 04-20-07, 12:03 PM	For some reason I thought Gendwar had Strength, must have confused him with another dwarven god like moradin. As for the not liking dwarves, when push comes to shove, any character should be waht you want, so when making a build, I'd encourage to say what you envision roleplaywise as well as ability wise :) The lower wisdom loses you bonus spells, I am not sure If I would go for that... Its better to have higher inherent con ALWAYS imho... hence I would lean towards human...
dark_poet 04-20-07, 12:34 PM	I think the hitting of 26 Str/Enlarged vs 22/WF is pretty important to the damage curve. It represents about 5 points of damage per swing. Which is significant when you're trying maintain parity with the tweaked barbarian. This leads me to a question I've been meaning to ask for some time. What do you guys consider the min starting str for a melee damage dealing cleric? Assuming the possibility of enlarge person and other standard buffs. I'm thinking 16. Regarding the character and the con. I think its workable although you would be slightly frailer than a fighter/barb performing your role even prob after the AC diff. I guess its just about choosing damage and survivability. Both ways are ultimately playable if you ask me.
daladinn 04-20-07, 01:38 PM	this may sound like an odd concept , but have you thought of a dip into battlesmith? its prolly a good bet lose, - 1 level of casting gain, - full bab vs 3/4 - add wisdom to weapon damage (not as percision) - free crafting feat - CL for crafting goes up by 3 instead of 1
cycloptic_squirrel 04-20-07, 02:05 PM	I'm not a fan of Dwarves, especially those of the Gendwar Argrim type. I don't do humorless, grim, end of the world types very well. The elf works, but I'm getting more of an impression that you want a clerical tank more than an elven clerical tank. Did you have some sort of personality in mind? What about another dwarven deity? Clangeddin Silverbeard gives pretty good domains and you can play it off a dwarf who's going to slay all who dare to stand in the way of the dwarven people. Or a jolly grandfatherly type. Many ways to do it. Dwarf Str 16, Dex 10, Con 16, Int 10, Wis 16(EDIT:15), Cha 6 Two stat bumps to Strength, last to whatever might be odd (EDIT: last to WIS) 1: Cleric 1(Clangeddin Silverbeard - War, Strength): Power Attack, (free WP & WF battleaxe) 3: Cleric 3: Craft Wondrous Item 6: Cleric 6: CA&A 9: Cleric 9: Quicken Spell 11. Contemplative 1 12. Contemplative 2: (free domain - courage) Blade of Force (use with Blade Barrier) 13: Cleric 11: 14: Cleric 12 15: Cleric 13: Retributive Spell Then proceed with your plan as you described. You might want that periapt more than the con amulet now, but now you can afford it. By level 8 you're back to your 18 strength. The feats are a matter of choice. Wear a buckler and fight one handed most of the time; when you use the strength domain, two-hand your axe and bring pain. You won't likely want to power attack much anyway until you can get an animated shield. The loss of the destruction domain hurts, but the war domain spells are more useful and it comes down to a trade between a smite and WF.
zoinks69 04-20-07, 02:31 PM	One other thing that you should consider -- -2 con (or -4 vs. dwarf) gives you -1 (or 2) to Concentration checks. It may not sound like much, but the extra chance of failing a critical roll (casting a heal/buff/Resurgence, etc in melee) is the extra chance of you or a comrade dying. With that in mind, consider Combat Casting for the low levels that you can retrain out of later.
Mommy was an Orc 04-20-07, 03:22 PM	The elf works, but I'm getting more of an impression that you want a clerical tank more than an elven clerical tank. Did you have some sort of personality in mind? Dwarf Str 16, Dex 10, Con 16, Int 10, Wis 16, Cha 6 I was really liking this until I pointed it out - 30 point buy...amazing how much difference two points makes. I'm not inherently attached to the wood elf. Though that does offer a really good solution to the problem: Snow Elf Str 16, Dex 10, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 16, Cha 6 or Human Str 16, Dex 10, Con 14, Int 8, Wis 16, Cha 8 Level Str twice, then bump Wisdom. There's a problem at 15th. I think I can live with wondering how to deal with that.
cycloptic_squirrel 04-20-07, 06:06 PM	30 point? Huh. I guess so. Stupid adding numbers in head. Doesn't change my suggestion beyond starting with Wis 15 and throwing the last bump there. Or the first. You're left either wearing an amulet or praying for an ion stone, but it works. Either way I like the dwarf better becasue your speed is the same, you get the stat bump to a 14, and you're more magic resistant. The darkvision is also nice. And you get to worship Clangeddin; very dwarfy, but not dour.
Sieylianna 04-20-07, 06:06 PM	I'm not sure where you guys think his hit points are going to be so incredibly low... He's often going to be +2 on the Constitution amulet compared to the Fighter as he's crafting and the fighter is not - and he has less need for the same level of Strength boosting. He's also going to be generating temp hit points when the Fighter is not and boosting his AC through spells the Fighter might not get. So if you have a +2 Amulet and the fighter does not, you'll be almost even with him (d10 vs d8 hit points) until he can afford an amulet. Then you fall behind. And the fighter has a better BAB and more feats to make up for your spells. I want my full casters to have a bonus spell by the time they can cast spells of that level. I suppose you may be able to pick up a +2 stat ioun stone during your career. Ed
Mommy was an Orc 04-20-07, 07:55 PM	So if you have a +2 Amulet and the fighter does not, you'll be almost even with him (d10 vs d8 hit points) until he can afford an amulet. Then you fall behind. And the fighter has a better BAB and more feats to make up for your spells. At the point in time where the Fighter is affording a +2 Amulet and +2 Gauntlets, that happens to cost 8K. 8K also happens to be the cost of crafting a +4 Amulet. That happens throughout the two builds(Fighter sells Gauntlets to buy Belt and upgrades the Amulet to +4. That costs him 26K. To upgrade the Amulet to +6 and craft a +6 Belt costs 28K) - only when the Fighter can actually afford the +6 Amulet will the Fighter move ahead. And that's only after spending 38K more than the Cleric on stat boost items. 38K is a phenomenally large number of Stalwart Pact castings on himself...(2.5 hp*CL) i.e. oddly enough, the Fighter is the one who falls behind in hit points.
_metz_ 04-20-07, 09:20 PM	I am still pro dwarf, with Clandeggin being a good choice. Dwarf: Level 12 Str 18, Dex 10, Con 16, Int 10, Wis 16, Cha 6 Wood Elf: Level 12 Str 18, Dex 10, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 18, Cha 8 With crafting the plus 4 con amulet, you can instead get a cloak of charisma +2 and a +2 Wisdom periapt. This way you can get to a plus 6 wis periapt and wis 22 eventually, whilst the elf will cap at con 18 and wis 18 - dwarf wis 22 con 16. Other stats will be largely the same, barring charisma, which shouldn't be a massive concern for a frontliner cleric. Clandeggin sounds like a really good idea. It depends if you really want to go for a heavy combat fella, you can have: Dwarf: Str 16, Dex 10, Con 17, Int 10, Wis 14, Cha 6 Craft your Wis amulet early and you will end up at level 12 with: Str 18, Dex 10, Con 18, Int 10, Wis 14, Cha 6 Thus you can craft your permanent periapt. This would leave you with final cap of 18 con and 20 wisdom, still two ahead of the cap of the elf. ((On a side note, permanent magic items allow you to cast high level spells yes? I could be wrong on that...))
Eric Anondson 04-20-07, 09:46 PM	I like this sort of build. Very basic. I dunno, I'm a fan of humans for the feat and extra skill point that compensates for poor Int. I'm also a fan of Divine Might, I'd probably find some way to shift some ability points over to Charisma for it. I might also choose instead a two-handed weapon to get some extra oomph out of Power Attacks. Overall, I like it.
Timlagor 04-20-07, 11:16 PM	While more is always better I think you can get away with a 14Str on a Cleric.
Dr.Cornelius 04-21-07, 03:58 AM	With how low your HPs are going to be, I would suggest finding room for the Tempting Fate luck feat. As a tank, you WILL get hit, and having a low Con doesn't increase your survivability. Tempting Fate lets you reroll a stabilization roll, or (the better part) auto-stabilize at -9 if any damaging attack would outright kill you.I believe there is a LG Campaign Card with a similar effect.
Timlagor 04-21-07, 07:23 AM	I believe there is a LG Campaign Card with a similar effect. Second Wind will stabilise you when you need to stabilise and give you 1d6HP back -nice but distinctly diminished as you gain levels and the chances of landing in the -1 to -9 zone falls. If I understand his post correctly, Tempting Fate actually prevents damage that would take you below -9 for a single swing (I assume that any subsequent swing could still kill you).
Drezden 04-21-07, 12:12 PM	There is no doubt that Cleric front-liners can be effective. I would really recommend the higher con builds though - Snow Elf, Human over Wood Elf. Dwarf is also very good. Also, if you really want to max Strength then you can go Half-Orc. Half-Orc also goes very well with a Barb. 1/Cleric X build. Take extra rage and you are golden. The lower hit points can become a problem - especially combined with the no uncanny dodge and poor reflex save. You are vulnerable to a sneak attacker or a combo fight with an AOE spell going off - also good chance of getting hit twice before you go - make sure you have Feign Surprise handy. The other problems with Cleric front-liners are: 1) sometimes combat happens before you can really buff; and 2) often - at higher levels especially - you might be better off buffing a BDF than buffing yourself. So if you have a few BDFs - Righteous Wrath is a better choice than Divine Power. Of course, I know you are a team player and would realize that. Overall, looks good - just go with a Con 14 build. Can never have enough HPs as a front liner. Daren
Mommy was an Orc 04-21-07, 03:48 PM	The other problems with Cleric front-liners are: 1) sometimes combat happens before you can really buff; and 2) often - at higher levels especially - you might be better off buffing a BDF than buffing yourself. So if you have a few BDFs - Righteous Wrath is a better choice than Divine Power. Of course, I know you are a team player and would realize that. As a player, I'm probably one of the most team oriented players I know - my primary is a buffer, my secondary is an archer who does trapfinding. This guy would be different - most primary fighters are not team oriented except in the context that they take on the front line position. He'd do the same thing - which is to say, cast Divine Power unless Righteous Wrath would do more for him individually than Divine Power. At which point, he'd cast Righteous Wrath. Yes, I'm aware that's hideously selfish and un-cleric like - but on the other hand, the fact that we're having this kind of discussion is the precise reason more people don't play clerics.
Drezden 04-21-07, 04:10 PM	I wouldn't call in un-Cleric; I would call it anti-team. A well-built, buffed, Cleric tank will never be as good as a well-built, buffed, straight Fighter/Barb. build. Insisting on only buffing yourself instead of buffing others (including yourself), especially when one (or more) of them is better at front-lining then you is not a good move for the party. Part of the advantage of playing a Cleric is that you have more options. One of them should be taking a secondary role when well built straight BDFs. Or just give in and play a nice Raging Barbarian like everyone else. :) Daren As a player, I'm probably one of the most team oriented players I know - my primary is a buffer, my secondary is an archer who does trapfinding. This guy would be different - most primary fighters are not team oriented except in the context that they take on the front line position. He'd do the same thing - which is to say, cast Divine Power unless Righteous Wrath would do more for him individually than Divine Power. At which point, he'd cast Righteous Wrath. Yes, I'm aware that's hideously selfish and un-cleric like - but on the other hand, the fact that we're having this kind of discussion is the precise reason more people don't play clerics.
TWG_Prometheus 04-21-07, 04:52 PM	Are we really talking about a tank cleric though? I'm not really seeing this guy as a tank of any kind...more like a Cleric that's mimicking a Barbarian. (Which isn't inherently bad. Clerics do a good job of mimicking a lot of things)
Mommy was an Orc 04-21-07, 05:23 PM	I wouldn't call in un-Cleric; I would call it anti-team. A well-built, buffed, Cleric tank will never be as good as a well-built, buffed, straight Fighter/Barb. build. Insisting on only buffing yourself instead of buffing others (including yourself), especially when one (or more) of them is better at front-lining then you is not a good move for the party. Sure it is. It just isn't the best possible move for the party. That doesn't make it a bad move. I've played with more than my share of Fighters I'd be happy to dump over the side of a boat for this guy. Sure, maybe the party BDFs would be happier if he cast something else - but then, party BDFs tend to be resource hogs where this guy is resource neutral. This is not to say he'll never cast a buff for the party(in particular, he'll be casting Heroes Feast without complaint, lesser vigors all around after a fight) - he just won't do it in combat unless it is the best possible buff for him personally.
Mommy was an Orc 04-21-07, 05:48 PM	Are we really talking about a tank cleric though? I'm not really seeing this guy as a tank of any kind...more like a Cleric that's mimicking a Barbarian. (Which isn't inherently bad. Clerics do a good job of mimicking a lot of things) Yes, he will invest in AC at the level that a typical tank fighter does. You don't really need CA&A to make that happen. And with Stalwart Pact, he'll have as many hit points as a Dwarf who focuses on doing that.
Eagle Prince 04-21-07, 07:07 PM	High Str is good. You don't really need Con, you can dump that to get a positive Dex/Cha or more Int (maybe drop wis to 14 for another 2 Int). Start with a lvl of ranger and then shoot for Seeker of the Misty Isle and maybe Radiant Servant too. Go for survival instead of paying upkeep, plus you can still use it for track and other times it comes up. Destruction domain + extra smite is good, might have to choose between that and Radiant Servant (can't remember if any Radiant Servant gods have Destruction.. but if you go for Radiant Servant, Plant domain is also good). If you're going to use Power Attack, get a 2-handed weapon and animated shield or Improved Buckler Defense. Get some ranks in handle animal and ride, and a heavy warhorse; that should help you survive lower levels. A riding dog could work too if you're on a mission where mounts are unhelpful, but the warhorse will give you a lot better mobility and offensive power. If you do use the riding dog, get him the assist attack trick, then he only needs to hit AC 10 to boost your Att, plus he will flank if possible. Aid and divine vigor are also useful if you feel some damage coming on. Or if you think you need extra time to buff, you can usually buy some by summoning in a meat shield. Lesser rod of extend is also good for this at lower levels, you'll only be able to cast up to 3rd level spells anyway and double duration on summon monster or spiritual weapon can be pretty big. You can use level boosts to up Str or Wis. Of course if you do Wis, you'll definatily need the periapt of Wisdom. I'd probably boost Wis and go for the periapt over the amulet of health anyway, and if I felt like I really needed the extra Con, cast bear endurance. Upping your save DCs is also good, b/c even if you don't put all this effort into maxing spell DC, you will still run into the occational monster with low saves. Sometimes a bestow curse or greater command will help you tank a lot more than another 30 hp or +2 AC.
_metz_ 04-21-07, 09:19 PM	positive dex? he's making a CLERIC. dex 10 is all he needs, leaves room for some goves of dex, and boom, optimised for plate. Clerics get bugger all skills and feats, if you want a mounted damage producer thats not the way to go. Frankly can't see a better way of doing it then the dwarf. That way can have 16 str 16 con and 16 wisdom at level 4 when your crafting kicks in. Issue is finding the rolplaying reason for it, Mommy doesn't seem pro dwarf.
Evanta 04-21-07, 10:54 PM	I might suggesting making it a more traditional tank by going Cleric 4/Barbarian X/Mutt X (Kord w/ Greatsword would be fun), keep WIS at 12 (or perhaps 14, if the combat focus feats look fun to you) It's more like the BDF, you lose 1 BAB and 5 hp for CWI for the enormous discount on all the +stat items, a bonus on will saves and 2 domain powers, which should more than balance out. If you have buffing time pre-combat, a simple Aid would cancel out the negatives. And you can heal a little if neccessary. And you get a bonus of not having people expect u to heal in the middle of combat.
Mommy was an Orc 04-21-07, 10:58 PM	Frankly can't see a better way of doing it then the dwarf. That way can have 16 str 16 con and 16 wisdom at level 4 when your crafting kicks in. Issue is finding the rolplaying reason for it, Mommy doesn't seem pro dwarf. It isn't just a roleplaying reason, there's a table reason - I think having an 18 Str is just confusing enough at the table will get rid of a lot of the 'well, if you're a cleric looking out for the welfare of the party, you'd buff and heal like the rest of 'em.' - one smack for 20 hp of damage on average at 3rd tends to erase that. Also, the elf gives me a couple of interesting options. I'm not sold on Strength/Destruction domains - Magic/Travel seem interesting - better crafting options, more free feats, and reasonably easy to get into Seeker of the Misty Isle for the martial weapon proficiency/lots of extra skill points if I find access. Not to mention, there's an Elven god who has just those two domains...
_metz_ 04-21-07, 11:34 PM	Strength is mainly for enlarge, and the ability to use wands of enlarge. The power is kinda useful when smiting etc, but hey. I think an Elf god makes more sense than a Wood Elf of Cuthbert! There is also some seeker access out there somewhere, sure I saw it in a current core lol, and it pops up a bit in Nyrond Metas...
Mommy was an Orc 04-22-07, 12:22 AM	Strength is mainly for enlarge, and the ability to use wands of enlarge. The power is kinda useful when smiting etc, but hey. I think an Elf god makes more sense than a Wood Elf of Cuthbert! There is also some seeker access out there somewhere, sure I saw it in a current core lol, and it pops up a bit in Nyrond Metas... Magic can use wands of enlarge, too as well as other interesting spells off of scrolls...not quite as useful as strength at doing that, but I'm more looking at Magic for the crafting utility.
JamesMaissen 04-22-07, 04:06 AM	At the point in time where the Fighter is affording a +2 Amulet and +2 Gauntlets, that happens to cost 8K. 8K also happens to be the cost of crafting a +4 Amulet. . Are you talking about your wood elf cleric vs an average human fighter? If so we're looking at woodelf cleric at (5+1+2) 8hps/level (counting d8 hps + nat 12 Con + amulet). And we're comparing that to a human fighter at (6+2+1) 9hps/level (counting d10 hps + nat 14 Con + smaller amulet). So I'm seeing the human fighter having the better hps. Now if you compare to the same race then you are correct that you balance out by crafting bigger and better. Secondly, you are not twohanding a weapon so the difference the 18 Str gives over the 16 Str is +1 to hit and +1 to damage, so at most +3 damage (assuming that you have an extra BAB to comparitively convert into Power Attack). I don't see that swaying the field. If 20 points is solid, then 17-19 doesn't seem that far off to me. I certainly don't think it's worth loosing the hps over later in your career. Now perhaps in the short run you are thinking that 18 Str and 14 Con are decent goals by 8th. But why not look towards 18 Str and 16 Con as a goal, or 16 Str and 18 Con? (These are all without stat boosters or buffs.. so just for comparison purposes). In general, if you are looking to augment a stat before all others and also looking to throw level bumps at it, chances are you are best suited by not taking a racial penalty to that stat in the first place. What is outweighing all of this? 1. You are looking at heavy armor, so the movement of 20 is not a problem. 2. You are not looking at turning in any shape I can see so a 6 Cha vs an 8 Cha is not much of a loss (1 horrible turn attempt vs 2 horrible ones). 3. Statswise you are washing some of your bonuses to augment penalties (4 points in Int and Dex to get 10s in each doesn't depend on racial choice after removing halforc as an option). So, what is wrong about Dwarf? You trade 2 points of Str for 4 points of Con. That brings you from 1hp/level below a standard fighter to 1hp/level above one. Since the build is focused on tanking, durability should be key here over a little damage (otherwise the focus would be on a twohanded weapon). Even comparing it to a Human. You value skills. Is 2/level sufficient for your specific needs, or would 3/level allow that much more? I'm sure you could find a use for another feat, right? What am I missing here? -James
_metz_ 04-22-07, 04:10 AM	What am I missing here? -James Mommy wants to play an elf/not dwarf. I think the character will be two handed swinging when on the offensive. I just see optimal tank cleric as a dwarf. BUT its not always about that.
Mommy was an Orc 04-22-07, 09:00 AM	If so we're looking at woodelf cleric at (5+1+2) 8hps/level (counting d8 hps + nat 12 Con + amulet). And we're comparing that to a human fighter at (6+2+1) 9hps/level (counting d10 hps + nat 14 Con + smaller amulet). Toss in Divine Power and the Wood Elf has 9 hps/level. Toss in Stalwart Pact, and he has 11.5 hps/level(and some other benefits that kick in when he drops to half hit points). Hmm - as it just so happens, a Barbarian 1/Fighter 9 in a rage with a 14 Con and +2 Amulet happens to have 116 hp. I have 118 with a +4 Amulet once Stalwart kicks in. Gold isn't a problem for me as I'll have both CWI and CA&A by 6th. Burning 750 gp at APL 10+ just means I only have slightly more gold than the Fighter after crafting. Yes, the Fighter could have Stalwart Pact cast on him for 250 gp a shot. I'm just not the one doing it for him. So, what is wrong about Dwarf? What am I missing here? -James What you're missing here is that you don't typically know who is at a particular table. People who have unusual builds get more of a pass during the table because the rest of the table wants to see what it does before rendering comment. What they'll see is a tank that typically self-buffs for a round and does around iconic to tweaked Barbarian once he does. Who also isn't constantly bugging the party casters for 10 minute/1 hour buffs and provides healing for the party after fights. i.e. he's going to make the casters have more options in combat because he doesn't need as much support. He'll be significantly more team-oriented than the typical BDF - he just won't be as team-oriented as a typical cleric. There's no reason the Dwarf builds can't do that just as well, if not better than my build will - I just think it will be a lot more pressure to 'do the right thing' at a table 'because you're the party cleric'
Mommy was an Orc 04-22-07, 09:53 AM	Here's my current build idea, just so people don't get confused: Cleric 8/Seeker of the Misty Isle 4/Ruathar 3, all bumps to Wisdom - Cleric 15 if I don't get access. Str 18, Dex 10, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 15, Cha 8 1: Cleric of Ye'Cind(Magic, Travel) Power Attack 3: CWI 6: CA&A 9: Quicken Spell 12: Domain Spontaneity: Travel 15: ? Lirr would be slightly better than Ye'Cind for this - if I find both Ruathar and Seeker access, I could retrain the Travel domain into one of the other Lirr domains.
bhale187 04-22-07, 02:45 PM	I like this build alot better than the first. I think the CA&A, and travel spontaneity will be more useful than the extra smite and divine justice. Here's my current build idea, just so people don't get confused: Cleric 8/Seeker of the Misty Isle 4/Ruathar 3, all bumps to Wisdom - Cleric 15 if I don't get access. Str 18, Dex 10, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 15, Cha 8 1: Cleric of Ye'Cind(Magic, Travel) Power Attack 3: CWI 6: CA&A 9: Quicken Spell 12: Domain Spontaneity: Travel 15: ? Lirr would be slightly better than Ye'Cind for this - if I find both Ruathar and Seeker access, I could retrain the Travel domain into one of the other Lirr domains.
cycloptic_squirrel 04-22-07, 03:19 PM	The dwarf Mommy, the dwarf! At level 10+ I think you might value 2 hp/level much more than +1 hit/damage. You can even craft your gauntlets of ogre power at level 3! Then you've got your 18 Str. The magic domain doesn't impress me much for crafting since most of what you want you can already craft. That's more of a personal opinion though. As for your current build, I'd be very careful with the retraining, because I don't think it's legal unless you do it just right. Just to avoid judge skepticism, I'd just go with Corellon Larethian with Magic and Liberation, pray for Ruthar access, then hit Seeker after the survival ranks from that. And as far as questioning a battle cleric's team attitude, consider what would the difference be if the battle cleric brought a fighter instead. In most cases, the combats work out about the same, but the cleric has a little more versatility if he chooses to use it. Consider how you would feel if someone told your shock trouper barbarian that it would be more effective for him to suit up in full plate with a tower shield and protect the squishies. Sure, he could; but that not the way he's built or played.
Dr.Cornelius 04-22-07, 04:49 PM	and reasonably easy to get into Seeker of the Misty Isle for the martial weapon proficiency/lots of extra skill points if I find access.Seeker of the Misty Isle is open access in LGCS 597, all you have to do to meet the requirement is play a mod with a PC willing to invite you into the club.
Mommy was an Orc 04-22-07, 05:08 PM	As for your current build, I'd be very careful with the retraining, because I don't think it's legal unless you do it just right. Just to avoid judge skepticism, I'd just go with Corellon Larethian with Magic and Liberation, pray for Ruthar access, then hit Seeker after the survival ranks from that. The retraining isn't that difficult: I gain access to Ruathar and Seeker: Enter Ruathar, retrain 4 ranks of something to Survival, then level Survival. Enter Seeker, retrain Travel Domain. I just gain access to Ruathar: Nothing happens. I just gain access to Seeker: Retrain 4 ranks of something to Survival, level it with my cleric levels, then enter Seeker. Can't retrain the Travel Domain. ------- Travel Domain is very useful - don't want to risk it on the assumption that I get both the PrCs I want. Magic Domain is specifically quite good for the Goggles, Boots, and Gloves slots - Goggles of Night, Boots of Speed, Gloves of Arrow Snatching or Dexterity
clik_ml 04-22-07, 05:15 PM	If you really want to show that your intent is to do damage, 18 strength and a large morningstar will seem fairly pointed. Enlarged you'll be doing 3d6+7 damage at level 1. You don't have to use that weapon all the time, just for the low AC critters or when you get slightly higher level and have a better attack bonus. If I ever play again, my next character is likely to be a half-orc cleric (either Zuoken-Celerity/Strength, or Llerg-Competition/Str) 18/12/14/6/15/6 Skill: either Diplomacy or Concentration Feats: 1)Imp Unarm 3)Imp Grapple 6)Pow Atk 9)CraftWonder 12)Quicken Spell I mostly wanted a grappling-capable cleric, and if I moved away from that fetish then it would free up a couple feats for all sorts of mischief. I have the same worries that mommy was an orc has, about being a melee cleric and tables expecting him to be something other than I intend.
cycloptic_squirrel 04-22-07, 05:27 PM	The retraining isn't that difficult: I gain access to Ruathar and Seeker: Enter Ruathar, retrain 4 ranks of something to Survival, then level Survival. Enter Seeker, retrain Travel Domain. I just gain access to Ruathar: Nothing happens. I just gain access to Seeker: Retrain 4 ranks of something to Survival, level it with my cleric levels, then enter Seeker. Can't retrain the Travel Domain. Looks good to me. Retraining can lead to some sticky questions, but this plan looks solid. Travel Domain is very useful - don't want to risk it on the assumption that I get both the PrCs I want. Magic Domain is specifically quite good for the Goggles, Boots, and Gloves slots - Goggles of Night, Boots of Speed, Gloves of Arrow Snatching or Dexterity Travel Domain - agreed Items - meh. The Goggles of Night don't impress me, you're saving only around 1500 gp with the Boots of Speed, and while you make a good point with the Gloves of Dexterity, I don't see it worth a domain choice. There are other items that can/would pop up that could prove worthwhile, but I'm thinking a combat oriented domain would be more useful. That's a personal preference though, and I can see how the Magic Domain would be useful, I just wouldn't do it with a clerical tank.
Mommy was an Orc 04-22-07, 08:14 PM	Travel Domain - agreed Items - meh. The Goggles of Night don't impress me, you're saving only around 1500 gp with the Boots of Speed, and while you make a good point with the Gloves of Dexterity, I don't see it worth a domain choice. There are other items that can/would pop up that could prove worthwhile, but I'm thinking a combat oriented domain would be more useful. That's a personal preference though, and I can see how the Magic Domain would be useful, I just wouldn't do it with a clerical tank. I'm generally a fan of being able to do things I wouldn't normally be able to do. In terms of Clerics, that means picking domains that give me spells or abilities I wouldn't normally have. The best domains are(given Travel) Magic - lots of access with wands/scrolls, especially Enlarge Person. Plant - Barkskin. That's about it. Trickery as a domain choice. Luck - nice special + mislead. Not half bad secondary domain(celerity) if I get the access - haste as a spell known. Ridiculously spelled deity name. War - weapon proficiency(greatsword) - annoying deity, if I get the good access, then all I get out of it is the WF. Not to mention, there are times I'd rather use other weapons, particularly a Longspear or Guisarme. Luck is probably the strongest. But at 15 gp per charge, Magic does a decent job with Enlarge Person when you bust through an obvious door. If I got the access, it would be Luck. But that's the question.
_metz_ 04-22-07, 10:32 PM	If you really want to show that your intent is to do damage, 18 strength and a large morningstar will seem fairly pointed. Enlarged you'll be doing 3d6+7 damage at level 1. You don't have to use that weapon all the time, just for the low AC critters or when you get slightly higher level and have a better attack bonus. If I ever play again, my next character is likely to be a half-orc cleric (either Zuoken-Celerity/Strength, or Llerg-Competition/Str) 18/12/14/6/15/6 Skill: either Diplomacy or Concentration Feats: 1)Imp Unarm 3)Imp Grapple 6)Pow Atk 9)CraftWonder 12)Quicken Spell I mostly wanted a grappling-capable cleric, and if I moved away from that fetish then it would free up a couple feats for all sorts of mischief. I have the same worries that mommy was an orc has, about being a melee cleric and tables expecting him to be something other than I intend. You should build a sacred fist if you want a grapple cleric. Have a look at the PrC. You still need to take improved grapple as a feat, but you get a bunch of others for free. Furthermore, Take Craft wondrous item EARLY - by level 6, at level 3 if you can. I would suggest: Cleric: Improved Grapple Cleric: - Cleric: Craft Wondrous Item Monk: (Wisdom boost?) Stunning Fist Monk: Combat Relexes Cleric: Combat Casting Sacred Fist: etc etc At level 7 you will be as good at grappling as you would be in you build, but now you are much better at the whole unarmed thing. Also fits with celerity. The caster progression is pretty good too. Depends what exactly you want, but a sacred fist fits more with the idea I think you are going for, you just have to sacrifice some caster progression.
Dr.Cornelius 04-23-07, 12:34 AM	If you go for the Grapple Monkey, Strength and Competition are the two key domains. Strength for Enlarge Person and Competition for +1 on all opposed checks (i.e. Grapple). Dieties with Strength and Courage: Kord Llerg Clangeddin Silverbeard (Dwarf)
Eric Anondson 04-23-07, 01:04 AM	Speaking of grapplers, if you are up for the challenge of successfully getting a special mission to feat access from some triad, Trithereon might not be a bad choice. Trithereon offers the Strength domain. Dungeon magazine #104 has some paladin feats. These feats are LG legal, you just need access. Trithereon's feat is Mantle of Freedom. Mantle of Freedom Patron: Trithereon Prerequisite: Iron Will Benefit: You add your Charisma bonus to all grapple checks, Escape Artist checks, and Strength checks made to break bonds. You gain a +2 sacred bonus to saving throws against paralysis, petrification, and any effect that hinders movement (such as slow). Strength domain plus Mantle of Freedom can add up to a heck of a grappler. Just need that precious access.
clik_ml 04-23-07, 01:28 AM	You should build a sacred fist if you want a grapple cleric. Have a look at the PrC. You still need to take improved grapple as a feat, but you get a bunch of others for free. ... Depends what exactly you want, but a sacred fist fits more with the idea I think you are going for, you just have to sacrifice some caster progression. Oh, I'm quite familiar with the Sacred Fist, that's why I don't consider it an option that I would want to bother with. The character progression you suggest Metz is a little illegal since it starts with Improved Grapple and no pre-req feat of Improved Unarmed Strike, however so is mine since Imp Grapple requires 13 dex. I had 14 dex/14 wisdom as the stats in a previous iteration of the build and didn't notice the pre-req when I changed it. I want grappling as another trick in my bag, not my *only* trick in the bag. I hate sacred fists because they require a monk level, they kick you in the nuts in casting, and they won't let you use nice things (like the large morningstar which has grown on me). I certainly have no desire to taste table variation on whether gauntlets are weapons also. If I were to forsake grappling then certainly the crafting feats would be taken sooner, but if not, then they have to wait. I grew used to waiting til higher levels to have the caster level to make items anyway, and I can tolerate waiting until 9th level to start pumping out stat booster items since I supply my own buffs in the interim. That Tritheron feat would be quite nice for a charisma capable grappler. It's rare for a grappler to have a decent charisma however, in my experience, but that feat would change things if it was in general circulation methinks.
copper_wyrmling 04-23-07, 02:10 AM	And as far as questioning a battle cleric's team attitude, consider what would the difference be if the battle cleric brought a fighter instead. In most cases, the combats work out about the same, but the cleric has a little more versatility if he chooses to use it. Consider how you would feel if someone told your shock trouper barbarian that it would be more effective for him to suit up in full plate with a tower shield and protect the squishies. Sure, he could; but that not the way he's built or played. You're absolutely right, of course. Unfortunately, so is MwaO :weep: - a lot of people don't see it that way, and will accuse anyone playing a cleric of being "selfish" (or worse things) if they take actions other than healing and casting buff spells. That can make tables extremely unpleasant. I think it's sad that MwaO feels he needs to max Strength just so that people won't see the build as a standard cleric and expect him to drop everything to heal their BDFs, but I'm not going to say he's wrong, based on my own experiences. Mommy, I really do hope this works for you. Every bit of your argument re team-orientedness and being resource neutral rather than a resource sink makes sense to me, but logic has never seemed to be a particular feature of some people's attitudes towards battle clerics :( ('Cause yeah, it's "selfish" to play a self-buffing cleric who fights like a fighter and only heals out of combat, but it's not selfish to play a fighter who relies on others for buffs and doesn't heal at all...) -Tracy (who will never again play a cleric, healer, or any other class that people see as primarily support-oriented in Living Greyhawk, after her L15 cleric retires. I was going to say more, but should probably avoid bitter rants typed late at night on public messageboards ;) )
jstorrie 04-23-07, 03:44 AM	MWaO, is there a specific reason (other than aethetics) you're going Wood Elf instead of Half-Orc? Half-Orcs have just as much of that 'I'll heal you when we're done fighting, thanks' look to them, and the stats are slightly better since you're not investing in Dex. It also 'opens up' all of the human deities that would be a little odd for a Wood Elf.
Mommy was an Orc 04-23-07, 11:07 AM	You're absolutely right, of course. Unfortunately, so is MwaO :weep: - a lot of people don't see it that way, and will accuse anyone playing a cleric of being "selfish" (or worse things) if they take actions other than healing and casting buff spells. That can make tables extremely unpleasant. I think it's sad that MwaO feels he needs to max Strength just so that people won't see the build as a standard cleric and expect him to drop everything to heal their BDFs, but I'm not going to say he's wrong, based on my own experiences. Mommy, I really do hope this works for you. Every bit of your argument re team-orientedness and being resource neutral rather than a resource sink makes sense to me, but logic has never seemed to be a particular feature of some people's attitudes towards battle clerics :( ('Cause yeah, it's "selfish" to play a self-buffing cleric who fights like a fighter and only heals out of combat, but it's not selfish to play a fighter who relies on others for buffs and doesn't heal at all...) -Tracy (who will never again play a cleric, healer, or any other class that people see as primarily support-oriented in Living Greyhawk, after her L15 cleric retires. I was going to say more, but should probably avoid bitter rants typed late at night on public messageboards ;) ) :) Yeah, I'm trying to make as functional a build as possible, yet at the same time have it appear odd enough that it confuses the Overly Helpful Gamer and his close cousin the Overly Aggressive Helpful Gamer. One of the things I've found very strong in stopping those two is the following: Get 'em a little confused. Then when they start saying otherwise, talk about math. As an example, I'll say Bards are really powerful mechanically when someone makes a comment of 'oh no, not a bard...' - most people are not expecting that. When they come back asking me what on Oerth I'm talking about, I start breaking down what a plus 1 to hit means. They usually go 'okayyy', but they won't bug me during the table. And when they realize just how often I'm responsible for hits(I'm ruthless about reminding people to include the to-hit bonus and they're often the people forgetting to add them in), they usually come away with a changed opinion. I plan to do something similar with the cleric. But I think the Bard's a lot easier to do as it doesn't rely on me rolling well - that's why I want to add the confusing Wood Elf element - with a Dwarf or Half-Orc, it doesn't look enough like I'm experimenting with something. I think solbergb is playing a grey elf Paladin for a similar reason. This might not work as well for you, particularly with a cleric due to the girlfriend effect. i.e. the girlfriend who was at the table and handed a cleric to play. Maybe that was you and no one told you that you were supposed to only buff and heal. :rolleyes: (for the potentially sarcasm impaired, I'm well aware that Tracy knows what's she's doing)
Mommy was an Orc 04-23-07, 11:15 AM	MWaO, is there a specific reason (other than aethetics) you're going Wood Elf instead of Half-Orc? Half-Orcs have just as much of that 'I'll heal you when we're done fighting, thanks' look to them, and the stats are slightly better since you're not investing in Dex. It also 'opens up' all of the human deities that would be a little odd for a Wood Elf. I'd rather have the slight bonus to initiative/AC over the 14 con and potential access to Seeker of the Misty Isle - a cleric 8/ruathar 3/seeker 4 has base saves of 11/9/10 instead of a Cleric 15's 9/5/9 or a Cleric 12/Ruathar 3's 9/7/11. With the eventual +5 Vest of Resistance, the +6 Con Amulet, the likely +4 Gloves of Dex, (18 Con/14 Dex/18 Wis), that makes my saves before extras of 20/18/19. Perfectly respectable across the board.
_metz_ 04-23-07, 11:44 AM	I like Ruathar. best dip ever. EVER. probably shouldn't be allowed really...
Timlagor 04-23-07, 11:53 AM	As someone who almost* certainly fits into the "Overly Helpful Gamer" category (at least some of the time), I recommend this sentence: "DON'T TELL ME HOW TO PLAY MY CHARACTER!" -this will work well on the "overly enthusiastic" sub-category but may backfire if you meet the genuine "overly aggressive" species. [* only because you might not mean what I think you mean; I think I'm getting better though] In defence of the "Overly Helpful Gamer": some people do actually want that much help (however much it may be). Lead up to it with some more gentle comments/requests but some of us are pretty dense :-/ Talking about Maths is liable to just provoke me into being more helpful :P On Tank-Clerics. * I wholly support the cleric's right to do their own thing in general. * I would not expect such a cleric (assuming they'd made their intentions clear in advance) to drop eveything to save a stupid fighter. * If the party is in trouble in a combat then I would hope that you would do whatever seemed the most effective thing for our side -which might be healing. * I would probably give you hassle about it IC if I thought you 'let the side down' ..but then I give lots of people hassle about lots of things IC ;)
Mommy was an Orc 04-23-07, 01:44 PM	As someone who almost* certainly fits into the "Overly Helpful Gamer" category (at least some of the time), I recommend this sentence: "DON'T TELL ME HOW TO PLAY MY CHARACTER!" -this will work well on the "overly enthusiastic" sub-category but may backfire if you meet the genuine "overly aggressive" species. [* only because you might not mean what I think you mean; I think I'm getting better though] In defence of the "Overly Helpful Gamer": some people do actually want that much help (however much it may be). It is more about the timing. During a mod, I don't want to get into discussions about what my character or someone else's character ought to do unless it is something previously agreed upon. The reason I'll usually interject is that someone is doing actions, relative to their party role, designed to get the party killed. Before and after are okay, as they both have natural end points - before, the mod is going to start and after, well, there's the next slot at the convention, and if someone really objects to how I'm playing my cleric, they're not going to want to sit at my table again. The advantage of doing something unusual is that it makes it more likely for the Overly Helpful Gamer to back off and observe what happens during the mod. And that's all I want to ensure.
cycloptic_squirrel 04-23-07, 08:03 PM	-Tracy (who will never again play a cleric, healer, or any other class that people see as primarily support-oriented in Living Greyhawk, after her L15 cleric retires. I was going to say more, but should probably avoid bitter rants typed late at night on public messageboards ;) ) :help: What's wrong with playing support characters? My primary's a support and my secondary is in the midst of a few levels where buffing is pretty much the most effective thing he can do. So far I'm still enjoying them both. :) The few problems I've seen arise when people expect support (justified or not) and then none is forthcoming. If support character avoidance is a personal play preference, that's cool, but if there are some deeper issues I'd love to be forewarned of them. PM me if my request results in a rant that you'd rather not post. :incog:
Gallaway 04-23-07, 08:14 PM	I like Ruathar. best dip ever. EVER. probably shouldn't be allowed really... that is probably the stupidest statement i have ever heard a one level dip in Ruathar means you lose a BAB and in return get low light vision (wow thats overpowered) a rangers skills and a spell level in an existing class. How on earth is that the "best dip ever" ?
cycloptic_squirrel 04-23-07, 08:27 PM	that is probably the stupidest statement i have ever heard a one level dip in Ruathar means you lose a BAB and in return get low light vision (wow thats overpowered) a rangers skills and a spell level in an existing class. How on earth is that the "best dip ever" ? For specific classes. Wizards and sorcerers in particular. Clerics don't fare too badly either, depending on what you want. Consider ridiculously easy prereqs, a d6 hit die, 4 skills per level, an amazing array of class skills, free proficiency in a weapon, and a +2 bump to reflex and will, all while continuing your spellcasting progression. Maybe not overpowered yet, but now consider that many cool PrCs require obscure skills not found on your original class list; skills that you would normally have to multiclass out for. If you were limited to one prestige class, it'd be fine; with all the others, this is one class that should be rare in the campaign.
Eric Anondson 04-23-07, 08:38 PM	that is probably the stupidest statement i have ever heard a one level dip in Ruathar means you lose a BAB and in return get low light vision (wow thats overpowered) a rangers skills and a spell level in an existing class. How on earth is that the "best dip ever" ?You may want to recheck your Ruathar. For a character who is going primary spellcaster, practically a no brainer. No prime spellcaster is ever a full BAB, so losing a BAB with a single level is no worry. The BAB progression is at moderate (like cleric) instead of poor (like wizard or sorcerer)... nice for a prime spellcasting class. Plus, the class gives low-light vision at 2nd level, not 1st like you said. First level Ruathar gives 1d6 HD, 4+Int skill points, two good saves (Ref and Will), +1 existing spellcasting class, and a magic item... among other minimal things. The skills include all Knowledge skills, plus Listen, Spot, Search, and Sense Motive (among others)... all of which are helpful for adventurers. Very very nice.
_metz_ 04-23-07, 08:51 PM	that is probably the stupidest statement i have ever heard a one level dip in Ruathar means you lose a BAB and in return get low light vision (wow thats overpowered) a rangers skills and a spell level in an existing class. How on earth is that the "best dip ever" ? I think others have answered this for me ;) Read through the class and think about it as a way to qualify for other classes, rather than a prestige class in its own.
Mommy was an Orc 04-23-07, 09:00 PM	that is probably the stupidest statement i have ever heard a one level dip in Ruathar means you lose a BAB and in return get low light vision (wow thats overpowered) a rangers skills and a spell level in an existing class. How on earth is that the "best dip ever" ? It isn't just Ranger skills - it is essentially the Ranger/Paladin list with all knowledge skills thrown in - it bypasses an enormous number of prereqs for PrCs - Seeker of the Misty Isle was specifically designed around the idea that if a Cleric wanted the Travel Domain for free, they'd not only have to get access to it, but they'd also have to take a level of Ranger or Scout somewhere. Instead, Ruathar bypasses that, making Seeker of the Misty Isle a no-brainer for someone with access. Same thing goes for Sorcerer - design-wise, you're not supposed to easily get into a PrC if you're a Sorcerer, as there's almost no benefit to staying in Sorcerer. Ruathar changes the entire balance of the Sorcerer class. Now you can argue Sorcerer is underpowered and changes ought to be made, but you don't passive-aggressively change the mechanics of the core classes with a PrC - you change the mechanics of the core class. Ruathar isn't broken by itself - it is broken because of how it bypasses the well-intentioned intent of all the other designers.
Mommy was an Orc 04-23-07, 09:02 PM	:help: What's wrong with playing support characters? When you're not playing a support character, but everyone thinks you are.
copper_wyrmling 04-23-07, 10:22 PM	A well-built, buffed, Cleric tank will never be as good as a well-built, buffed, straight Fighter/Barb. build. Insisting on only buffing yourself instead of buffing others (including yourself), especially when one (or more) of them is better at front-lining then you is not a good move for the party. Just a note... the second sentence here does not follow logically from the first, since self-buffs tend to be a lot more powerful than mass buffs ;) The buffed cleric may be less powerful than the buffed BDF, but since the BDF can't self-buff, you're comparing one PC's actions to two PCs' actions. The correct comparison is buffed BDF + buffing (non-melee) cleric vs self-buffing cleric + unbuffed BDF, and in a lot of situations, the latter case provides the party with more hitting power (especially if the party has some other support PC). :) Yeah, I'm trying to make as functional a build as possible, yet at the same time have it appear odd enough that it confuses the Overly Helpful Gamer and his close cousin the Overly Aggressive Helpful Gamer. One of the things I've found very strong in stopping those two is the following: Get 'em a little confused. Then when they start saying otherwise, talk about math. Works better when you're not a girl dealing with males who already suffer from an inferiority complex regarding women who are better at math than they are :rolleyes: I'll keep it in mind, though ;) This might not work as well for you, particularly with a cleric due to the girlfriend effect. i.e. the girlfriend who was at the table and handed a cleric to play. Maybe that was you and no one told you that you were supposed to only buff and heal. :rolleyes: Heh. In truth, the reason my first PC was a cleric was a slight modification of the girlfriend effect: a male friend (not my boyfriend) invited me along to my first LG gamesday and asked me to play a cleric so his wizard would have healing. Not knowing anything about the campaign (my previous experience with D&D had been restricted to 2nd-ed-based computer games), I had no problem with playing a healer while trying it out. My second PC was actually the character I wanted to play: I'm much more attached to her than I am to Yolande ;) (for the potentially sarcasm impaired, I'm well aware that Tracy knows what's she's doing) :) Much appreciated, especially given the number of rules arguments we've had recently over the wording of various feats / abilities / rules descriptions ;) As someone who almost* certainly fits into the "Overly Helpful Gamer" category (at least some of the time), I recommend this sentence: "DON'T TELL ME HOW TO PLAY MY CHARACTER!" -this will work well on the "overly enthusiastic" sub-category but may backfire if you meet the genuine "overly aggressive" species. I don't mind the helpful types, they're generally amenable to reason (i.e. explaining why you're using the tactics you're using). The aggressive types can be somewhat scary, especially when they have your email address because that's how the game was organized. (And that's all I'm saying on that topic, at least on a public list.) :help: What's wrong with playing support characters? My primary's a support and my secondary is in the midst of a few levels where buffing is pretty much the most effective thing he can do. So far I'm still enjoying them both. :) The few problems I've seen arise when people expect support (justified or not) and then none is forthcoming. If support character avoidance is a personal play preference, that's cool, but if there are some deeper issues I'd love to be forewarned of them. PM me if my request results in a rant that you'd rather not post. :incog: When you're not playing a support character, but everyone thinks you are. Essentially, yes, although sometimes it's a matter of refusing to accept the way you're playing your character, rather than ignorance of what you're trying to do ;) I've PM'ed Cycloptic.
bhale187 04-23-07, 10:35 PM	When you're not playing a support character, but everyone thinks you are. We're all aware that many (maybe even most) players will expect a cleric to be a support PC. However, if you make it clear as soon as you all sit down that you are not that kind of cleric, than fellow gamers will have no legitemate complaints when you step into melee rather than stepping behind the fighter and buffing/healing him mid-combat.
Eric Anondson 04-23-07, 11:00 PM	However, if you make it clear as soon as you all sit down that you are not that kind of cleric, than fellow gamers will have no legitemate complaints when you step into melee rather than stepping behind the fighter and buffing/healing him mid-combat.I introduce my melee pounding cleric as a "holy warrior". Many times other folks insist on parsing this down, wanting to know what that means. "She's a spellcasting barbarian". What kind of spellcasting? "Cleric of Joramy levels". So you can be a party healer then. "Like a ranger with a happy stick. She's neutral and channels negative energy". What do you think you're doing? "She's a holy warrior." The divine power/rage/smite/Divine Might/Power Attack with armbands of might with a +1 flaming burst goliath greathammer gets nods of appreciation.
Dempster 04-23-07, 11:11 PM	rod of defiance, lyre of the restful soul, sacred armor), Where are these items from?
copper_wyrmling 04-23-07, 11:16 PM	Where are these items from? Rod of Defiance and Lyre of the Restful Soul are both from Libris Mortis, both effectively reduce undead HD by 4 for the purpose of turning them (the lyre takes an action and a Perform check to activate, and is much cheaper). Sacred as an armor enhancement gives you a bonus on your effective cleric level and is from the Arms and Equipment Guide iirc (maybe some other sources, but that's the one I know about).
copper_wyrmling 04-23-07, 11:17 PM	I introduce my melee pounding cleric as a "holy warrior". Many times other folks insist on parsing this down, wanting to know what that means. "She's a spellcasting barbarian". What kind of spellcasting? "Cleric of Joramy levels". So you can be a party healer then. "Like a ranger with a happy stick. She's neutral and channels negative energy". What do you think you're doing? "She's a holy warrior." The divine power/rage/smite/Divine Might/Power Attack with armbands of might with a +1 flaming burst goliath greathammer gets nods of appreciation. Yeah, taking a negative energy channeller does cut through a lot of the arguments ;)
_metz_ 04-23-07, 11:47 PM	Sigh, I just tell off people who expect me to do exactly waht they say. I do buff, I ask people what spells they like, but I can't stand it when someone gets angry at clerics for not doing what they want exacty when they want - clerics aren't cohorts who do exactly what you wish on thier turn. Admittedly I expect casters to have some leeway, as the characters who are versatile, doing what is for the party's interest is always helpful, nonethless, play your character how it should be ROLE not ROLLplayed. In any case, If its annoying and unhelpful the other PCs won't adventure with it anymore. Prove it useful and they will be silent. ;) (I have seen this happen to someone's character, got to the point where people refused to play with it) I do get angry when characters deliberately do petty things, like a player is angry at thier brother for annoying him, and refuses to heal him and as a result there is a near TPK. basically it's roleplaying by people, and due to the nature of LG you are oft adventuring with someone who isn't necessarily your friend, and as such may clash with them. My opinion is get used to it, if you want to play at Cons, and play LG adn travel, get used tothe odd annoying player, and if you are said annoying player, get used to people not wanting to play with you! (I can honestly say I have some very annoying PCs and have adventured with some very annoying PCs!!!) - the trick is to realise its a game, and not take it too seriously, I know people who have LG as thier entire life, and as such react radically to small changes and 'slights' upon thier character, and its all about them. As the only cleric for a while in my area I know what its like...
dark_poet 04-24-07, 09:40 AM	Its so much easier playing an evil cleric in XE Cabal of Shadows ;) Its hard to get people to believe you are the healer. "Don't ever touch me!" :D Luckily in LG, my regular group is quite cool with everyone doing their own thing.
Mommy was an Orc 04-24-07, 09:42 AM	We're all aware that many (maybe even most) players will expect a cleric to be a support PC. However, if you make it clear as soon as you all sit down that you are not that kind of cleric, than fellow gamers will have no legitemate complaints when you step into melee rather than stepping behind the fighter and buffing/healing him mid-combat. Oh, I totally agree with that - but that's not what I've generally heard happening. LG seems to have a major problem in that regard - the best way to encourage people to play clerics is to not pigeonhole them into the healer role. Works better when you're not a girl dealing with males who already suffer from an inferiority complex regarding women who are better at math than they are :rolleyes: I'll keep it in mind, though ;) Yeah, I figured as much. One of the things that I also do is explain that it isn't their fault for thinking that bards are underpowered - the bard class seems to be a magnet for the player who doesn't understand how to play D&D. The girlfriend thing might be used to similar effect and very powerfully too - just say something along the lines of, "Oh, my boyfriend <insert name here> didn't hand me this character. I wrote it up myself to do X." Kills two birds with one stone. I'd bet that would stop some of the aggressive types on multiple levels. :) Much appreciated, especially given the number of rules arguments we've had recently over the wording of various feats / abilities / rules descriptions ;) I don't have those kinds of debates with people who don't know what they doing. We just have different ways of looking at the rules - I think that in general, the designer wasn't intending that RAW would be the way people would look at the rules - they figure most people would try to use intent and then parse the RAW when intent wasn't clear. You look more at the RAW first. Neither of those positions are unusual on the Char Op board and that's where most of the fights start. 98% of the time, we probably have the exact same ruling on any given topic. I do think my viewpoint is generally a lot easier at the table - when my character does something broken, it usually is with the full backing of the rules on my side. The aggressive types can be somewhat scary, especially when they have your email address because that's how the game was organized. (And that's all I'm saying on that topic, at least on a public list.) I'm curious...PM me about that? I introduce my melee pounding cleric as a "holy warrior". Many times other folks insist on parsing this down, wanting to know what that means. "She's a spellcasting barbarian". What kind of spellcasting? "Cleric of Joramy levels". So you can be a party healer then. "Like a ranger with a happy stick. She's neutral and channels negative energy". What do you think you're doing? "She's a holy warrior." Yeah, that's a much easier road - you generally can't heal in combat period. But that has two problems for me: I think I'm more effective long-term being a full caster. I'd like the option of healing in combat - just because I intend to not heal in combat, there will be times when I would do that - the primary example being someone about to bleed out because they're at -9 hp and no one else in the party being able to heal them. My opinion is get used to it, if you want to play at Cons, and play LG adn travel, get used tothe odd annoying player, and if you are said annoying player, get used to people not wanting to play with you! The thing is, despite my moniker, I'm really not that half-orcish at the table. I'm there to have a good time, enjoy a mod, crack the occasional joke. I don't want to be the person who gets the entire table into a fight about what I'm doing. That doesn't mean I won't stand up for myself - it just means I'd like the build to forestall as many of those fights as I possibly can, without sacrificing elements I consider essential.
bitznarf 04-24-07, 11:29 AM	You know, I think this is a build I like. I've never played a cleric yet due to the 'stand back and buff/heal' syndrome. I like to be in the thick of things, but I don't like to only have one option in combat, you know a BDF 'me hits it' type character. Methinks I will go back and re-read this whole thread...
Eric Anondson 04-24-07, 01:47 PM	Yeah, that's a much easier road - you generally can't heal in combat period. But that has two problems for me: I think I'm more effective long-term being a full caster. I'd like the option of healing in combat - just because I intend to not heal in combat, there will be times when I would do that - the primary example being someone about to bleed out because they're at -9 hp and no one else in the party being able to heal them.Well, something I noticed going up through levels was that I frequently never cast all of my 1st and 2nd level spells. So now I do reserve one 1st or 2nd level spell exclusively for healing. She came upon access to close wounds and has that reserved to be cast all the time right now. Plus, lesser vigor with multiple pearls of power 1 still allows after combat healing. Of course, she has her wands of cure, and potions of cure. When she needs to be the healing (when there is an overload of melee in the party), she has always been able to function as healer because I just go old school and prepare the healing spells outright. :) As I play in the Shield Lands most regularly, I've been blessed with being able to play at tables with an abundance of healing... meaning I rarely have had to step up as party healing.
Drezden 04-24-07, 04:03 PM	Well there are a lot of ways to do comparisons. I was mainly thinking of a Cleric Tank casting Righteous Wrath of the Faithful that would help every melee based character v. just casting Divine Power to only help himself. I will admit that perhaps my comparison just shows how good Righteous Wrath of the Faithful is. :) One more point about resource users v. resource-neutral. The most effective way to win at high level combats is to buff a few BDFs. Many things have SR, energy immunity (resistances), really high hit points, etc. 2 handed-power attacking BDFs kill things faster and more reliably than anything else. The fact that they consume spells/resources is just part of high level play. It is not a negative at all. Especially considering that high level casters have many, many more spells/resources than they can ever hope to use. Daren Just a note... the second sentence here does not follow logically from the first, since self-buffs tend to be a lot more powerful than mass buffs ;) The buffed cleric may be less powerful than the buffed BDF, but since the BDF can't self-buff, you're comparing one PC's actions to two PCs' actions. The correct comparison is buffed BDF + buffing (non-melee) cleric vs self-buffing cleric + unbuffed BDF, and in a lot of situations, the latter case provides the party with more hitting power (especially if the party has some other support PC).
bitznarf 04-24-07, 04:44 PM	Well there are a lot of ways to do comparisons. I was mainly thinking of a Cleric Tank casting Righteous Wrath of the Faithful that would help every melee based character v. just casting Divine Power to only help himself. I will admit that perhaps my comparison just shows how good Righteous Wrath of the Faithful is. :) One more point about resource users v. resource-neutral. The most effective way to win at high level combats is to buff a few BDFs. Many things have SR, energy immunity (resistances), really high hit points, etc. 2 handed-power attacking BDFs kill things faster and more reliably than anything else. The fact that they consume spells/resources is just part of high level play. It is not a negative at all. Especially considering that high level casters have many, many more spells/resources than they can ever hope to use. Daren Wait.. so you're saying that.. a BDF.. does a better job of killing things.. than a high level caster. Just for a moment here I will assume that premise is true. Okay then, whats wrong with a different character concept that achieves the same end without requiring extra help from the other party members?
Drezden 04-24-07, 06:42 PM	Nothing is wrong with that concept; all I am saying is that a buffed BDF will do it better. Daren Wait.. so you're saying that.. a BDF.. does a better job of killing things.. than a high level caster. Just for a moment here I will assume that premise is true. Okay then, whats wrong with a different character concept that achieves the same end without requiring extra help from the other party members?
bitznarf 04-24-07, 06:52 PM	Nothing is wrong with that concept; all I am saying is that a buffed BDF will do it better. Daren Which would you rather have? A melee cleric (such as the one in this thread) and a support cleric or a BDF and a support cleric? Personally I would probably prefer the double cleric, although either will work. Then you can just get an uber buffed cleric :D
Drezden 04-24-07, 07:13 PM	No question - a support Cleric and a BDF. Very high level BDFs (particularly Barbarian-based) can just churn out ridiculous amounts of damage (300+ HPs at APL14-16) when buffed properly. Basically almost any enemy that stands next to one is dead after a full attack. Often times, depending on reach, enemy placement, etc., multiple enemies can die a single round. Daren Which would you rather have? A melee cleric (such as the one in this thread) and a support cleric or a BDF and a support cleric? Personally I would probably prefer the double cleric, although either will work. Then you can just get an uber buffed cleric :D
copper_wyrmling 04-24-07, 07:15 PM	Ah, just one thing I thought of - there is some table variation on the action to switch from a one-handed to two-handed grip on a weapon. This can be tricky if you're casting a lot of quickened spells (i.e. you'd like to cast a quickened spell and then full attack, but you need a hand free for the quickened spell). The source of the variation (iirc) is that the FAQ says that moving a weapon from one hand to the other hand is a "draw a weapon" action: opinion varies on whether going from one-handed to two-handed falls into the same category. The Somatic Weaponry feat (I think it's from Complete Mage, I can't find my copy at the moment) would fix this problem, if you have a spare feat slot and are at all worried about it - looking at your current build, probably not worth it though, unless you get very unlucky with arms and armor access (I wouldn't bother upgrading with the Open enhancements: Magic Vestment and GMW last hours / level).
Mommy was an Orc 04-24-07, 07:54 PM	Well there are a lot of ways to do comparisons. I was mainly thinking of a Cleric Tank casting Righteous Wrath of the Faithful that would help every melee based character v. just casting Divine Power to only help himself. I will admit that perhaps my comparison just shows how good Righteous Wrath of the Faithful is. :) Righteous Wrath of the Faithful is a lousy spell for me to cast. Assuming that the BDFs convert it into Power Attack, it basically represents an upgrade of +7 damage per swing. That's only 21-35 hp of damage per round per BDF I manage to affect. I don't even think it would be worth casting it in a party of 5 BDFs and myself unless they didn't have Boots of Speed. And if they're that high APL and don't have Boots of Speed, they're probably not worth boosting in the first place. One more point about resource users v. resource-neutral. The most effective way to win at high level combats is to buff a few BDFs. Many things have SR, energy immunity (resistances), really high hit points, etc. 2 handed-power attacking BDFs kill things faster and more reliably than anything else. The fact that they consume spells/resources is just part of high level play. It is not a negative at all. Especially considering that high level casters have many, many more spells/resources than they can ever hope to use. Daren Except at high level, I can actually do just as much damage as a buffed BDF. I craft my own weapons/armor - in an LG game, this basically gives me an eventual advantage of +3 to +4 on my weapon just taking money spent on weapons and armor into account and ignoring the advantage I'll get from CWI...
Mommy was an Orc 04-24-07, 08:10 PM	Very high level BDFs (particularly Barbarian-based) can just churn out ridiculous amounts of damage (300+ HPs at APL14-16) when buffed properly. Which my Cleric BDF will do when buffed to a similar extent.
Sieylianna 04-24-07, 09:38 PM	No question - a support Cleric and a BDF. Very high level BDFs (particularly Barbarian-based) can just churn out ridiculous amounts of damage (300+ HPs at APL14-16) when buffed properly. Once again, why people don't play clerics in LG. Or if they do, why they take an 18 Str and pretend to be a fighter. Arcane types have the same issues to a lesser extent, since they have buffing, but not healing potential. I have one pure support cleric PC, but it looks like he'll be spending the year in RHoD. Ed
bhale187 04-24-07, 09:50 PM	I would agree that for a best case senario I would rather have a support cleric and BDF over a support cleric and melee cleric. A well built raging fighter mutt will do more damage than a well built full CL melee cleric. The rage will put the mutt over the top on damage capabilities plus the added trick feats like shock trooper, quick draw, Imp crit, or many others depending on the path you are following. Particularly since the cleric will have to burn a round to just catch up, and a round at higher APLs is into the hundreds of damage dealt. Of course the CWI and CA&A will put the cleric's equipment at a huge advantage, but I still don't think it is a significant enough difference to place the cleric on par with a full BAB raging mutt (pre buffing spells of course). HOWEVER, that is not the question or purpose of the post. The melee cleric build MwaO posted is designed as a way to play a more interesting cleric (from his perspective)and still have the basic out of combat support of a cleric.
Drezden 04-24-07, 10:13 PM	No, you can't do as much damage. At high APLs GMW is ubiqutous - no advantage in enhancment bonus of the weapon. Now add in Rage, WF/W Spec., Melee Weapon Mastery, Uncanny Blow or Flurry of Strikes, Cleave, Combat Reflexes and/or other tactical feats and the difference is too wide to bridge. Not to say that you can't be effective or fun; but your damage dealing will be inferior to a well built BDF. Daren Except at high level, I can actually do just as much damage as a buffed BDF. I craft my own weapons/armor - in an LG game, this basically gives me an eventual advantage of +3 to +4 on my weapon just taking money spent on weapons and armor into account and ignoring the advantage I'll get from CWI...
cycloptic_squirrel 04-24-07, 11:21 PM	No, you can't do as much damage. At high APLs GMW is ubiqutous - no advantage in enhancment bonus of the weapon. Now add in Rage, WF/W Spec., Melee Weapon Mastery, Uncanny Blow or Flurry of Strikes, Cleave, Combat Reflexes and/or other tactical feats and the difference is too wide to bridge. Not to say that you can't be effective or fun; but your damage dealing will be inferior to a well built BDF. Daren You mean a well built BDF with a clerical buddy behind him? :rolleye2: Straight up one on one, no allies? My money's on the cleric, though not by much. :duel:
Drezden 04-25-07, 12:31 AM	No, I mean who does more damage in a "typical" high APL party. That would include an arcane and some sort of divine caster who primarily heal/buffs. Although interesting, one-on-one battles don't show much - since PCs don't go out and adventure by themselves; they are part of an adventuring party. Daren You mean a well built BDF with a clerical buddy behind him? :rolleye2: Straight up one on one, no allies? My money's on the cleric, though not by much. :duel:
cycloptic_squirrel 04-25-07, 01:06 AM	No, I mean who does more damage in a "typical" high APL party. That would include an arcane and some sort of divine caster who primarily heal/buffs. Although interesting, one-on-one battles don't show much - since PCs don't go out and adventure by themselves; they are part of an adventuring party. Daren Right, but you're assuming that there's a high level cleric around who's willing to buff you. You're essentially saying that one character combined with a good share of another character's actions/resources will outdamage another character on his own. Congratulations. You've shown that 1.5 characters > 1 character. At what point should I be impressed? If you could somehow guarantee (friend, cohort, etc.) that your BDF will always have a buff buddy backing him, you'd have a solid point. As it stands your comparisons assume that your team will do what you want them to and not necessarily what they want to do. Frequently these choices will coincide, but when they do not, you're left with an unbuffed fighter while the battle cleric is still doing their thing and kicking tail. Except at high level, I can actually do just as much damage as a buffed BDF. I craft my own weapons/armor - in an LG game, this basically gives me an eventual advantage of +3 to +4 on my weapon just taking money spent on weapons and armor into account and ignoring the advantage I'll get from CWI... On another note, I'm not sure if MwaO was referring to +3 to +4 worth of enhancements (corrosive, spellstoring, bane, holy, etc.), but it should still be noted that a arms crafter can usually pile on one or two more enhancements for the same cost as a non-crafter. I'd say that's not an insignificant advantage.
Mommy was an Orc 04-25-07, 01:19 AM	No, you can't do as much damage. At high APLs GMW is ubiqutous - no advantage in enhancment bonus of the weapon. Now add in Rage, WF/W Spec., Melee Weapon Mastery, Uncanny Blow or Flurry of Strikes, Cleave, Combat Reflexes and/or other tactical feats and the difference is too wide to bridge. Not to say that you can't be effective or fun; but your damage dealing will be inferior to a well built BDF. Daren Right...I wasn't talking about the enhancement bonus of the weapon, I was talking about the overall enchantment of the weapon. When your BDF is struggling to afford a +5 weapon is roughly the same time I'll have a +8 weapon. And Divine Favor makes up for WF/WS/MWM by itself. And that's not including tricks like Brilliant Blade, which is basically Wraithstrike that lasts rounds per level instead of being a swift action. It isn't hard for me to do over 300+ damage in a round like your APL 15 tanks. And that's before I get the good buffs from the party casters willing to buff me to the same extent that your APL 15 tanks get.
Drezden 04-25-07, 01:49 AM	Brilliant Blade requires a standard action to cast. If you cast that you can't cast one of your other buffs, like Divine Power (So no 2d iterative attack at 11th-14th level w/o Divine Power) - unless you want to spend the entire fight buffing yourself. Not to mention the spell just isn't that good - only negates armor bonus, doesn't work on undead and constucts, etc. And when you cast Divine Favor, you no longer benefit from the to hit bonus of Recitation (one of those nice buffs that APL 15 casters cast), while the BDF enjoys the full benefit and still has his feats. Daren Right...I wasn't talking about the enhancement bonus of the weapon, I was talking about the overall enchantment of the weapon. When your BDF is struggling to afford a +5 weapon is roughly the same time I'll have a +8 weapon. And Divine Favor makes up for WF/WS/MWM by itself. And that's not including tricks like Brilliant Blade, which is basically Wraithstrike that lasts rounds per level instead of being a swift action. It isn't hard for me to do over 300+ damage in a round like your APL 15 tanks. And that's before I get the good buffs from the party casters willing to buff me to the same extent that your APL 15 tanks get.
Drezden 04-25-07, 01:59 AM	First, the Battle Cleric still needs a round of buffing before he can attack with anything near the BDF's effectiveness. So he needs 1 standard action buff. I am assuming the BDF gets the same standard action buff - albeit from someone else. So it is not 1.5 > 1. It is BDF + Buff > Battle Cleric + Buff. Daren Right, but you're assuming that there's a high level cleric around who's willing to buff you. You're essentially saying that one character combined with a good share of another character's actions/resources will outdamage another character on his own. Congratulations. You've shown that 1.5 characters > 1 character. At what point should I be impressed?
dark_poet 04-25-07, 07:11 AM	How bout we turn it up to a full party. In all cases assume 2x Arcane, Skill Monkey Case 1: BDF, Support Cleric, Melee Cleric Case 2: 2x BDF, Support Cleric Case 3: BDF, 2x Support Cleric Case 4: 2x Melee Cleric, Support Cleric Case 5: 3x BDF Case 6: 3x Melee Cleric Case 7: 3x Support Cleric The purpose is not to show that a Melee Cleric is better than a BDF. Its to show that in LG you may not end up with your standard adventuring party composition. Which is why independent characters have value. Its arguable if Case 1, 2 or 3 is better. But I think most will agree that Case 5 and 7 fare worse off to Case 6. I for one like versitility and independence in my characters.
Mommy was an Orc 04-25-07, 08:04 AM	Brilliant Blade requires a standard action to cast. If you cast that you can't cast one of your other buffs, like Divine Power (So no 2d iterative attack at 11th-14th level w/o Divine Power) - unless you want to spend the entire fight buffing yourself. Not to mention the spell just isn't that good - only negates armor bonus, doesn't work on undead and constucts, etc. I'm obviously not casting the spell when I see a creature it won't affect. And at 15th, I've got Quickened Divine Power - which is the level we're talking about, right? And when you cast Divine Favor, you no longer benefit from the to hit bonus of Recitation (one of those nice buffs that APL 15 casters cast), while the BDF enjoys the full benefit and still has his feats. Oh, no. I lose a +2 to hit that the BDF gets or +4 damage per swing(what 12-20 hp a round when we're both doing 300+ hp of damage?) The party gains a Quickened 4th-6th level spell or an 8th level spell as a result. Great example of a BDF being a resource hog and thereby damaging the effectiveness of a party compared to my build, Daren.
Mommy was an Orc 04-25-07, 08:13 AM	First, the Battle Cleric still needs a round of buffing before he can attack with anything near the BDF's effectiveness. So he needs 1 standard action buff. I am assuming the BDF gets the same standard action buff - albeit from someone else. So it is not 1.5 > 1. It is BDF + Buff > Battle Cleric + Buff. It doesn't work like that. That's resource hog BDF in action. By almost definition, the Tank Cleric is casting a spell that can't be cast on the BDF(Divine Power, Divine Favor, Righteous Might). And in any case, the spell he's casting is one that the BDF likely couldn't cast period. If there's a cleric in the party willing to buff the tank, he's should be willing to buff the Tank Cleric, too. Or not - I don't need the party cleric to do 300+ damage a round after I buff myself. I'm happy if the party cleric has some fun casting spells he wants to cast.
Drezden 04-25-07, 08:19 AM	Hey Andy - This whole resource hog stuff is just nonsense. The BDF uses resources and then the BDF quickly dispatches the monsters. That is one very common way high level LG works. Maybe if you actually had a high level LG character and actually played LG at APL14 or 16, you would know that. I love how you think you have everything figured out when your highest level character is what, 9th? Just stop. Daren Oh, no. I lose a +2 to hit that the BDF gets or +4 damage per swing(what 12-20 hp a round when we're both doing 300+ hp of damage?) The party gains a Quickened 4th-6th level spell or an 8th level spell as a result. Great example of a BDF being a resource hog and thereby damaging the effectiveness of a party compared to my build, Daren.
TWG_Prometheus 04-25-07, 09:07 AM	Hey guys, let's not get into personal attacks here. Obviously there are some disagreements going on, but let's not take it too far. The fact of the matter is that Battle Clerics work. They have their ups and their downs, but that's what it boils down to. Due to the hightened efficiency of crafting feats in Living Greyhawk, Battle Clerics are one good step higher in power than they would otherwise be as well. A few other facts remain: * Depending on the nature of the encounter, a frontline Battle Cleric or Gish build has between zero and one rounds to buff themselves before they reach a desired level of combat effectiveness. If they can manage this task, they're a help to the party. If they can't, they're not. They might get more time than this, but that's the benchmark they have to be able to reach. A crafting gear advantage can go a long way toward ensuring that a Battle Cleric or Gish is combat capable (not as combat capable as they'd like, but meeting the bar) with no buffing rounds. At high levels, Quicken Spell helps a ton with this. * Being a resource hog is not a class dependent factor. It depends on the choices the player makes. If a Barbarian contributes his share of Pearls of Power and consumables to the party, no one anywhere has a right to snipe at him for not being able to cast spells himself. By a similar token, a Battle Cleric that uses every single resource they have for themselves is being selfish. No one that's read the thread to any significant extent should have any doubts that MwaO isn't planning on contributing to the party, and his crafting feats should allow him to do so more cheaply than most can. * Personally, I find it mildly disturbing that MwaO feels that they have to blow off bulid points on getting to 18 Strength just to prove their Cleric's right to play in the way they want to. The points could be better spent elsewhere, but the build will work in any case. As others pointed out early on, it's hard to mess up a full-progression Cleric.
Mommy was an Orc 04-25-07, 10:15 AM	Hey Andy - This whole resource hog stuff is just nonsense. The BDF uses resources and then the BDF quickly dispatches the monsters. That is one very common way high level LG works. Maybe if you actually had a high level LG character and actually played LG at APL14 or 16, you would know that. I love how you think you have everything figured out when your highest level character is what, 9th? Just stop. Daren Yes, it is a common way that LG works. LG is not the fount of all D&D knowledge, Daren. I've played high level D&D for nearly 3 decades now. If a typical Cleric 15 can't figure out a better use of an 8th level spell slot or a 4th-6th level spell slot with a Rod of Quicken Spell than to give his BDFs +4 damage per swing, he ought to take up shuffleboard. No matter what you say about how things work at APL 14 or 16, the fact remains is that there is a shortage of clerics in LG - in over 140 mods, I've rarely seen a table with 2 divine casters - based solely on mechanics, the vast majority of tables should have 2, if not occasionally 3. Everyone complains that there aren't enough clerics around. This despite Cleric being considered one of the most powerful classes if not the most powerful class in 3.5. That makes absolutely no mechanical sense whatsoever unless: Players don't want to have powerful characters. Okay... LG players don't know how to make Clerics powerful. I'll leave that one alone. Players are being convinced that they won't have fun playing one. I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of LG players refusing to play clerics would agree that the 3rd point is the reason. It isn't any big secret that people don't want to play the buffer/healer - and the person requiring that the most is the BDF. That's the effect of a resource hog - he convinces people not to play the classes he most needs.
Mommy was an Orc 04-25-07, 10:19 AM	By a similar token, a Battle Cleric that uses every single resource they have for themselves is being selfish. No one that's read the thread to any significant extent should have any doubts that MwaO isn't planning on contributing to the party, and his crafting feats should allow him to do so more cheaply than most can. i.e. a BDF that uses every single resource they have for themselves(contributing Pearls to casters to cast spells on the BDF) is not selfish, but a Tank Cleric who casts Heroes Feast and heals outside of combat is selfish? If you've read the thread, I've already stated my intent to do just that. And you wonder why I'm taking an 18 Strength, why there's a shortage of clerics in LG, or why Tracy won't play one in LG?
Drezden 04-25-07, 12:10 PM	I don't think there is a campaign wide shortage of Clerics. Certaintly, certain geographical areas can run short of particular classes within certain APL ranges - when my first character (wizard) was low level there were no BDFs (resource hogs :) )around. However, I have not found a shortage of any particular core class campaign wide. If pressed, I would say Rogues come the closest - but, on the other hand, some regions (Dyvers) are teeming with them. I also don't think high level tables need or run better with 2 divine casters. Certaintly 2 can be useful; but really only 1 is required. The extra 2 people (assuming the basic 4) can be almost any class and be useful. The best mix I have found/seen is normally 1 divine buffer/healer, 1 arcane, and 4 direct action PCs (can be BDFs, archers, rogues, etc.) (1 of whom hopefully has trapfinding capabilities). Multiple arcanes can often work very well together too - as long as someone can stand up front to block enemies. Many people don't like playing support or healing PCs, but many others do. Some play both. I haven't seen a shortage of them. I don't think "resource hogs" or other players in general convince people what characters to play - that is something people determine largely on their own. Daren [snip] No matter what you say about how things work at APL 14 or 16, the fact remains is that there is a shortage of clerics in LG - in over 140 mods, I've rarely seen a table with 2 divine casters - based solely on mechanics, the vast majority of tables should have 2, if not occasionally 3. Everyone complains that there aren't enough clerics around. This despite Cleric being considered one of the most powerful classes if not the most powerful class in 3.5. That makes absolutely no mechanical sense whatsoever unless: Players don't want to have powerful characters. Okay... LG players don't know how to make Clerics powerful. I'll leave that one alone. Players are being convinced that they won't have fun playing one. I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of LG players refusing to play clerics would agree that the 3rd point is the reason. It isn't any big secret that people don't want to play the buffer/healer - and the person requiring that the most is the BDF. That's the effect of a resource hog - he convinces people not to play the classes he most needs.
Sieylianna 04-25-07, 12:29 PM	I don't think there is a campaign wide shortage of Clerics. Certaintly, certain geographical areas can run short of particular classes within certain APL ranges - when my first character (wizard) was low level there were no BDFs (resource hogs :) )around. However, I have not found a shortage of any particular core class campaign wide. If pressed, I would say Rogues come the closest - but, on the other hand, some regions (Dyvers) are teeming with them. Veluna is a theocracy and it's always had a lack of clerics. My retired PC may have had a cleric at the table 20% of her modules. Most of the time her tables relied on bards, druids and rangers with wands for healing. The number of clerics did increase when radiant servant of pelor became LG legal, but they are still uncommon. Rogues are more common than clerics in my experience, but a big chunk of those are mutts with 1 or 2 rogue levels. Ed
bitznarf 04-25-07, 12:35 PM	I don't think there is a campaign wide shortage of Clerics. Certaintly, certain geographical areas can run short of particular classes within certain APL ranges - when my first character (wizard) was low level there were no BDFs (resource hogs :) )around. However, I have not found a shortage of any particular core class campaign wide. If pressed, I would say Rogues come the closest - but, on the other hand, some regions (Dyvers) are teeming with them. I just want to touch on this point briefly, the rest of the post doesn't interest me all that much as it just comes down to play style more than anything else I think. I know that some regions, such as the Pale are heavier on clerics then my own region, Zeif. I don't really know the reason for this, but the trend seems to have changed somewhat when we split off from the Duchy of Urnst. I wasn't playing LG when we were still part of the Duchy so I don't know why there is a suspicious lack of clerics above 7th level. I just know that the imbalance is there. My first LG character is a rogue, so I never really experienced a lack thereof. When I was at a con held in Vegas (Crossing Paths) I heard comments of 'cool, we have a rogue' in much the same was as I would say 'cool, we have a cleric' up here. Okay, so that wasn't so brief, but I wanted to say it. And it doesn't have much to do with the making or viability of a tank cleric. I would just love to have one at my table, and would take such a PC over your average BDF in most circumstances, were the decision entirely in my hands, which it will never be, and rightly so. Play what you want to play, we'll work it out.
Mommy was an Orc 04-25-07, 01:40 PM	I also don't think high level tables need or run better with 2 divine casters. Certaintly 2 can be useful; but really only 1 is required. Clerics are a very powerful class - assuming that some people are interested in making powerful characters, you'd expect to see lots of clerics. They make very effective tanks, archers, blasters, summoners and of course healers - especially with the right domain/feat choices. Roughly the same thing goes for Druids. Clerics are also one of the four major iconic roles in D&D. The question isn't whether or not 2 is useful, the question is why don't we often see that number of divine casters at any given table(or worse, have a complete shortage such as Ed has). And two tend to be very useful when both players are good at optimizing - both can then devote half the resources they normally would towards healing/buffs and put the other half towards their speciality.
Eric Anondson 04-25-07, 01:58 PM	It certainly must be a matter of personaly perception. As I mantioned earlier, in my playing in my region (Shield Lands), I have had many tables with 2 clerics at a table, and occassionally 3.
TWG_Prometheus 04-25-07, 04:23 PM	i.e. a BDF that uses every single resource they have for themselves(contributing Pearls to casters to cast spells on the BDF) is not selfish, but a Tank Cleric who casts Heroes Feast and heals outside of combat is selfish? If you've read the thread, I've already stated my intent to do just that. And you wonder why I'm taking an 18 Strength, why there's a shortage of clerics in LG, or why Tracy won't play one in LG? MwaO, we don't always agree, but please don't misquote me...especially not this badly. If you need to, go reread the post of mine you responded to. I didn't say the theoretical Barbarian was giving his Pearls to someone so that he could be buffed. I said he was giving Pearls and consumables to the party. I didn't say that the theoretical greedy Cleric was greedy even though he was casting Heroes' Feast and doing out of combat healing. I was specific on this one. I said 'every single resource for himself'. That is selfish, but it's not often seen because Clerics support their party so cheaply that few go to that extreme. I didn't even suggest that you were designing your Cleric in a greedy way. In the remarks you quoted yourself, my statement says that: "No one that's read the thread to any significant extent should have any doubts that MwaO isn't planning on contributing to the party, and his crafting feats should allow him to do so more cheaply than most can." If you actually read that instead of just reacting to it, you'll see that I was expressing confidence that you'd be helping your party as a Battle Cleric and not hoarding up all your resources for yourself. Maybe you've just had a much different play experience than I have. When I have Pearls of Power, I state who I'm giving them to at the beginning of the module and trust that person to use them well. Frequently I'm not even sure what they were used for afterward or if they were used at all. I buy them because Pearls help to free up casting resources for the party, and that's a good thing. The only exception I can think of for this is with my weird-ish Monk character who feeds off Mage Armor from a local gnomish Wizard, (using mostly my scrolls) but that whole relationship started when I got in front of an Ogre that otherwise would have charged him while he was sleeping before the Wizard ever got to act---a near 100% kill scenario. He's really liked seeing me in Mage Armor since, and we've worked well together. If anything, your reactions only prove my point. Being a resource hog is about how you handle yourself as a player, not about what classes you select for your character. I'd guess that you're fairly giving as a player but have encountered too many people that build their whole character around the assumption of specific support from other players. I get how that would be annoying. Your comments are coming across, however, as biased against classes and, by extension, the people who play such classes rather than against the player attitudes that are the thing you're really annoyed at. Playing a BDF doesn't make you a resource hog. A BDF can contribute just as much to the party's well-being as anyone else. There may be players out there that make people feel like they don't want to make a Cleric, but don't portray me as one by misquoting my remarks. I can't abide that.
TWG_Prometheus 04-25-07, 04:29 PM	Edited out for a double post.
Mommy was an Orc 04-25-07, 04:50 PM	MwaO, we don't always agree, but please don't misquote me...especially not this badly. If you need to, go reread the post of mine you responded to. By a similar token, a Battle Cleric that uses every single resource they have for themselves is being selfish. No one that's read the thread to any significant extent should have any doubts that MwaO isn't planning on contributing to the party, and his crafting feats should allow him to do so more cheaply than most can. I didn't misquote you - you used the wrong word - you meant is, you used isn't. Try taking a second look at that paragraph again in that light. :)
TWG_Prometheus 04-25-07, 04:58 PM	I'll admit that it's an oddly worded sentence, but context still makes it a misquote.
Mommy was an Orc 04-25-07, 05:14 PM	I'll admit that it's an oddly worded sentence, but context still makes it a misquote. (You don't appear to have PM turned on, which this would be ideal for...) Your paragraph's context changes completely based on which word is used. It can very easily be read as: Battle Clerics who don't share are selfish. Anyone who has read the thread can be certain that MwaO is not planning to contribute to his party. This in spite of him having the craft feats necessary to easily contribute. And in the context of the entire post, you could be admonishing me to contribute more than what I'm planning to contribute, while saying my build is viable - I've already been told that my plans represent me being 'anti-team' in this case.
copper_wyrmling 04-25-07, 05:20 PM	*laughs at MwaO and TWG* TWG posted something that could be easily misinterpreted, MwaO interpreted it in a way opposite to what TWG had intended. You're agreeing with each other. Stop arguing about it ;)
bhale187 04-25-07, 05:22 PM	In Verbobonc the cleric is in short supply, which is a HUGE advantage for me at cons. I play clerics the vast majority of the time (although I do have a dragon discipline mutt I like also), and I am ALWAYS welcome at any table within APL range wether I am playing up or down. The welcome has nothing to do with my exceedingly high Charisma ;) , nor my exceptional game play :P , but everything to do with few clerics in high demand. I know that almost eveyone I have LG gamed with, except my usual home game group, expects ALOT out of a cleric. They just assume you are going to prepare and cast the spells they like. I think that is a mjaor factor in the rarity of clerics.
Drezden 04-25-07, 05:58 PM	[snip] [A] BDF that uses every single resource they have for themselves(contributing Pearls to casters to cast spells on the BDF) is not selfish, but a Tank Cleric who casts Heroes Feast and heals outside of combat is selfish ... [snip] I am glad we finally agree. :) Daren [Yes, I took MwaO quote out of context - and selectively edited it - just for the fun of it. And, no I am not serious.]
LeeShort 04-25-07, 06:54 PM	Depending on table variation, I'll also be able to Quicken Enlarge Person with my domain slot. Why would this be subject to table variation? Mallock, my Bbn1/Clr6 (Kord) has been using Rapid Spell (Enlarge) in his domain slot for a few levels now, and I've never been questioned on the matter. It's so useful that I sometimes fill my 3rd level domain slot with it, too. As Eric said, here in the Shield Lands, we often have 2 or more clerics at the table. Last year at the BK/Dyvers dual-regional, I played at a table where 5 of 6 PCs had cleric levels (and we all got Close Wounds and Conviction, to boot!). What we're lacking up here are rogues (and arcanes in the middle levels).
Mommy was an Orc 04-25-07, 07:08 PM	Why would this be subject to table variation? Mallock, my Bbn1/Clr6 (Kord) has been using Rapid Spell (Enlarge) in his domain slot for a few levels now, and I've never been questioned on the matter. It's so useful that I sometimes fill my 3rd level domain slot with it, too. That's not the table variation. The variation is on Quicken Spell. The two positions are: if you want to Quicken Enlarge Person, you need to make it Rapid, too. The Special of Rapid says a spell can be made rapid and quickened only if its original casting time was 1 full round. There's also the belief that a one round spell is longer than a full round action as you can complete a full round action in your initiative sequence, but not a one round action spell. If you want to Quicken Enlarge Person, you don't need to make it Rapid. Quicken Spell says it applies to any spell with a full round action or less casting time. In PHB, it defines any one round spell as taking a full round action to cast. If there is a spell which takes longer than a standard action to cast, but takes less time than one round, Rapid Spell fails to define what it would do to the spell - i.e. there are no spells that take that amount of time to cast, making the Special just simply saying that you can't make a 3 round spell rapid(now just taking 1 round) quickened. Tends to get very religious. Maybe Rules Compendium will solve it.
Japangirl 04-25-07, 07:30 PM	Hey Andy - This whole resource hog stuff is just nonsense. The BDF uses resources and then the BDF quickly dispatches the monsters. That is one very common way high level LG works. Maybe if you actually had a high level LG character and actually played LG at APL14 or 16, you would know that. I love how you think you have everything figured out when your highest level character is what, 9th? Just stop. Daren I play at APL 14/16 and if I see a BDF who insists that s/he needs buffs, I get suspicious right away. The tank, archer, and myself don't need buffs, we are self-sufficient and do just fine, and we all consider it a build flaw to require someone else's buffs to be effective. Sure, buffs are great . . . we won't turn them down. But saying that "BDF uses resources then dispatches monster" is the way things *should* work is being extremely selfish and takes away a lot of actions that could benefit everyone or do damage to the monster or something else useful. The needing-buffs fighter isn't a bad build, and building a party around around it can work. It is not the only way, however; there are lots of other ways to build high level tables too. But there are definitely situations where the buffed fighter party has problems: monsters with Dispel Magic at will (oh it does happen), a Dominate Person that a fighter fails, or situations where the monster goes first and does 300 points of damage to the poor fighter and drops him. If the whole party is powerful in their own right, however, and doesn't rely on buffs to be effective, then losing a person or the buffs doesn't hose them nearly as much.
Drezden 04-25-07, 10:10 PM	It is not a matter of the BDF "needing buffs to be effective." A 30+ Strength Raging BDF can do plenty of damage with no buffs. No, it is matter of what is most effective for the party. Generally that is making the BDF(s) even better and letting them do what they do best - massive amounts of damage. For example, my primary PC is a 15th level Wizard. It wasn't hard for me to realize that I should prep a few GMW+4s (Ring of Arcane Might); or use Pearl 1s and Extend Rods to keep my party's BDFs Enlarged; or to cast a Stoneskin; or to always have a Mass Fly prepped; or to blow spell slots, pearls and metamagic rods on (Empowered or Maximized) Sonic Weapon spells. In addition, most BDFs I play with also have Pearls for favorite buffs. These actions allow the party to be much more effective. Believe me, I am all about the whole party being effective - having 4 or 5 PCs who can deal damage can do wonders for ending combats. But having 1 buffer amplify this damage - and having other casters use resources/spells outside of combat to amplify it some more - just works. Daren I play at APL 14/16 and if I see a BDF who insists that s/he needs buffs, I get suspicious right away. The tank, archer, and myself don't need buffs, we are self-sufficient and do just fine, and we all consider it a build flaw to require someone else's buffs to be effective. Sure, buffs are great . . . we won't turn them down. But saying that "BDF uses resources then dispatches monster" is the way things *should* work is being extremely selfish and takes away a lot of actions that could benefit everyone or do damage to the monster or something else useful. The needing-buffs fighter isn't a bad build, and building a party around around it can work. It is not the only way, however; there are lots of other ways to build high level tables too. But there are definitely situations where the buffed fighter party has problems: monsters with Dispel Magic at will (oh it does happen), a Dominate Person that a fighter fails, or situations where the monster goes first and does 300 points of damage to the poor fighter and drops him. If the whole party is powerful in their own right, however, and doesn't rely on buffs to be effective, then losing a person or the buffs doesn't hose them nearly as much.
frupton 04-26-07, 04:07 AM	Great thread. I've just recently started a Cleric of Heironeous, mostly out of a sense of moral obligation that everyone should have a Cleric, or they have no right to complain when they sit down at a table without one. I don't have any experience with high level play. The discussion of the battle cleric at high levels is helpful in planning possible feats and equipment. It is also looking like the character will be more fun to play than I had perhaps expected, if I can manage expectations from the BDFs at the table. :)