Post/Author/DateTime	Post
KoreKore 01-26-06, 06:58 PM	ok so there has been a lot of contraversy on the classes board over the overpowered divine classes against the arcane classes. take the wizard vs cleric, d4 vs. d8, no armor and spell failure if donning it vs. no spell failure and full armor proficencies, 1/2 bab vs. 2/3 bab ect. So my question to you is are the arcane spells that much better than the divine to warrent this?
Lord shadow35 01-26-06, 07:01 PM	Yes............. I just love wizards and arcane spellcasters. Wizards have alot more versatility. And also i alot more chocies for spells. But in the end are fairly even.
Seeker95 01-26-06, 07:37 PM	are the arcane spells that much better than the divine to warrent this?Wizard players outnumber cleric players in just about every poll. Most folks acknowledge that they have to twist arms to get someone to play a cleric. Whether the spells are better or not doesn't matter. The cleric gets less play and less respect than the wizard.
Krevon 01-27-06, 12:14 AM	Man I take a cleric any day over a wizard. the only reason why i am playing a cleric now is that there was already one in the group so i became the spell slinger
smrtgmp 01-27-06, 12:56 AM	I'd say divine casters have more potential for power, as they get more than just their spellcasting. I think giving the cleric 3/4 BAB, good armor, and good saves is over the top when combined with full spellcasting progression. As such, I have devided the cleric into two seperate classes. The priest is very similar to the cloistered cleric in UA, with a few variations. The templar is similar to the current cleric except that it has bard-like spell progression. I must say that I find seeker's observation to be fairly accurate. Regardless of any disparity in power level, the cleric seems to be less popular than the wizard. I certainly prefer the latter to the former.
Seeker95 01-27-06, 10:26 AM	I like smrtgmp's approach. I'm not a big fan of changing the Core Rules in major ways, but his approach sounds cool. Heading to PM to request a write-up. :D
Lomiat 01-27-06, 11:17 AM	I've seen more clerics than wizards, honestly. I don't know if I just live in an area dominated by power-gamers or if the LG environment tends to breed them in the Shield Lands, but clerics run around everywhere. Wizards and Sorcerors are less common. I'd say the classes are fairly evenly balanced, but the cleric damage spells are currently too powerful (given that the DMG explains how wizard spells should stay one HD ahead of cleric damage spells in progression), especially when one considers Divine Spell Power.
Darken 01-27-06, 12:11 PM	It's obvious that Divine spellcasters are more powerful as a whole. D&D is a party game, and powers are mainly decided by the overall contribution to the party in reaching its goal and overcoming challenges; the Divine spellcaster clearly wins. Even the designers themselves stated openly that they purposely made Clerics more powerful than everything else to encourage players to play it as it is viewed as a "vital role" in a party, yet its concept sometimes deter people from wanting to play one. But as for Druids, I have no idea why they were beefed up in 3.5... they were good enough as they are and people play them already.
tarkin 01-27-06, 02:04 PM	I think that 1) Because our hero myths do not portray active clerics/preists most people less people desire to emulate them and play clerics/preists. 2) The game designers gave clerics small but obvious power advantages over wizards. The knowledge of all cleric spells without having to learn them, plus the Domain spells basically make Clerics superior to wizards.
elven warriorXX 01-27-06, 03:49 PM	Wizards are much more powerful then Clerics. But Clerics are at the same time more powerful then wizards (hehehe confused yet?). The cleric has obvious power while the wizard doesn’t. but the wizard can kill a cleric with the right spells. WOTC make Divine classes more powerful then Arcane ones because they are basing the balance on Popularity. They think that by giving the Cleric more power more people will play them. I am playing a Cleric now just for the fun of it. Players should NOT worry about if a class can overpower one or the other, The player should find a fun class, make up a interesting concept and Role-play with it. D&D is not a War game (even though it is starting to become one) it is a RP game. Players should pick a class they want to role play, not a class to beat up badies. I am working right now to balance the classes the best I can so that my players can just worry about RP. That is my 2 coppers :twocents:
GreyGriffin 01-27-06, 05:16 PM	As an avid wizard-a-holic, I have to say that Clerics get the easy road. With no spell failure, access to all spells, Armor and Shield proficiency, Simple Weapon proficiency, Domains and Domain abilities, more spell slots, Spontaneous Curing/Inflicting, 3/4 BAB, and a spell list that is better than the wizard's in all but a very few key areas and a very few specific spells, the cleric is hands-down the winner. Another minor point... with the cleric's high BAB, self-buffing spells, armor proficiency, and lack of spell failure, multiclassing with a Cleric becomes a possibility, if you're willing not to be a full-on primary caster. Multiclassing with a Wizard/Sorc, however, is a losing proposition, because your low level spells become less and less useful as you advance. Clerics will always have a use for Bless, but Wizards and Sorcs will eventually find Magic Missile and Mage Armor wanting.
Horseshoe_Hermit 01-27-06, 11:59 PM	I would like to say the Wizard has more versatility, since... a) His abilities depend on Intelligence, simply, *the best* ability score to put points in. b) He has such cool spells and can potentially craft any spell or any item his mind can conceive c) He doesn't have to worship a god. However, The Cleric really does have some abilities which simply outshine the Wizard. For starters, yes, a Cleric does kick a lot of ass in combat. Given a bit of cover to cast spells every other while, a Cleric can match most other warrior classes using combat enchancing spells on himself. Second, healing can turn out to be a way cooler option than any other spell effect. If your goal is to win a fight, a Wizard with fireballs may be nice, but he'll run out of them way before a Cleric does with the strength of allies and himself. Third, a Cleric actually can gain the same spells as a Wizard, sometimes, at a MORE effective level. What really ticks me off is how easy it is for Clerics to get Divinations. I wanted to be a Diviner, so I took Wizard. Every time I look through the Handbook, I think I made the wrong choice. A spell that creates an augury with extraplanar entities at fourth level is pretty sweet. I just get Scrying. How a Cleric does this is by picking the right domains. Did you know Cleric's can STOP TIME???? It's the ninth level spell for the Trickery Domain. I CAN'T STAND IT. Stopping time is supposed to be left to the bold and brilliant!!!! (and insane!!!) The only reason people wouldn't play Cleric is because they don't want to have to worship that god. It's a shame, but it's true.
AvaronGansdell 01-28-06, 02:00 PM	Intellegence is a good score to pump up then again clerics can have a pretty nice Int too given they can dump dex and dont need a great con to have decent HP. also clerics can invent spells just as well as wizards plus every time a new book comes out for D&D a cleric instantly gets a bunch of new spells availible to them which means that rarely useful spells like protection from dragons and other odd effects get used more by clerics than wizards who have to track down and pay good earned gold to learn a spell they may cast once or twice in there lives. and worshiping a god varies with setting in some worlds its ok to worship an Ideal or philospy. and in other worlds like the Forgotten realms everyone needs to worship a god..well unless you dont mind not being able to be rezzed. all in all in the last 5 or so years I have seen a steady decrease in the power and effectiveness of the arcane spellcasters in all games from D&D to world of warcraft to NERO all have had there mages get weaker in the last 5 or so years.
Lomiat 01-28-06, 10:14 PM	I disagree with the current mindset that clerics are hands-down the most powerful class. The reason is simple: Which, as a member of a party would you rather fight *against*? If you're fighting a cleric of your CR, you're generally safer than you are against a wizard (up until the point of Divine Spell Power Blasphemy). This is because the DMG places the arcane spell damage die-type 1-step ahead of the divine spell damage die-type. Furthermore, the wizard encounter really ought to involve pre-cast Invisibility or Greater Invisibility, Fly, and some contingency planning (either a real Contingency or a memorized Dimension Door or Mirror Image, etc.). Yes, the cleric is harder to hit, tougher, has better saves, and so on. However, the wizard is more likely to drop a party immediately into the danger zone for hitpoints. Plus, if your DM roleplays anything appropriately, the wizard's high INT score ought to suggest the encounter (including any potential allies) ought to proceed with great tactical discretion. Clerics are wise, but, according to roleplaying, *generally* ought to approach the encounter according to the strictures of their deities. Clerics make more versatile, and often more useful party members, certainly, but they are by no means "hands-down" more powerful. Their "power," as we acknowledge it, is primarily a measure of PC-class power, not necessarily of raw, class power. Of course, one of the limiting factors in any discussion of "power" is the amount of time a DM or adventure allows a character to prepare for combat, either PC or NPC. Because the wizard can't wear the armor, etc., he simply needs more prep time. Given limitless prep time (a practical impossibility, sure), I think the balance actually skews back slightly in favor of the wizard, whose primary limitations at that point become merely: caster level and imagination.
Dragonteuthis 01-28-06, 10:47 PM	Personally, I think we should remove Divine Spell Power from the equation when considering the balance between the "Mages" and Clerics. Even if you don't think it's overpowered. It certainly doesn't seem fair.
AvaronGansdell 01-29-06, 03:25 PM	first off direct damage is a poor way to fight a party summoned monsters and curses and such are a better way to hamper them. plus in the party vs cleric or wizard the cleric is alot harder to kill with one lucky spell. reflex saves the clerics one bad save are saves for half damage usualy and the cleric has better HD than the wizard and healing spells to fix themslevs. even a high level wizard with minons is vulnerable to a lucky crit from a range tough spell that drops them in the first round where a cleric is alot harder to do that too. as bad guys clerics get faster access to undead creation can lead there armys from closer to the front and have more group buffs that can increase the deadly nature of the encounter.
metamind 01-29-06, 03:41 PM	Here is what I think: wizard: beated up by party until on level 4, then respected. cleric: beaten up until level 20, respected so he/she will heal party, beaten up right after that :D
AvaronGansdell 01-29-06, 09:08 PM	respected and powerful are diffrent things.
psetzer 01-30-06, 02:26 PM	Clerics are as powerful or more powerful than Wizards under most combat circumstances until you start powergaming. Wizards often get spells earlier, but that doesn't always mean that it's better. Clerical damage spells often have bonuses that make up for their relative weaknesses and later levels. Flame Strike has a higher damage cap and deals half of its damage as divine damage. Firestorm is shapeable and affects a pretty solid area. Blade Barrier deals force damage, and in pretty hefty quantities. Holy Word can kill multiple weaker opponents without even a saving throw. Storm of Vengance is capable of routing an entire army, and with Divine Metamagic (Widen), can rout a massive army. Clerics don't even need to affect the enemy to be powerful, since they've got enough buffs to keep them busy for any number of fights. Righteous Might, Disrupting Weapon, Holy Aura, Entropic Shield, Divine Power (stacks with Righteous Might), Spell Immunity, Spell Resistance, Aid, Prayer, Protection from Evil, Bless, Divine Favor, Shield of Faith, Magic Vestments, Bear's Strength, and of course the spells in CD. Domains can also pick up the slack as well, with Magic giving MDJ and assorted benefits, Animal giving Shapechange, and Trickery giving Time Stop. These spells (plus Gate, another Cleric spell) are consistently considered some of the best 9th level spells. Clerics are, if not equal to Arcane casters, very close to them in power.
Darken 01-30-06, 02:52 PM	Again, we are not talking about power directly in damage of your opponent (like a party fighting against a Cleric or a Wizard) or about how a Cleric fight against a Wizard in duel or something. When we are talking about power, we have to bear in mind that D&D is a party game; when we say a class is "strong" or "weak" we are referring to the class's contribution to the party. Another way to look at it is that rather than saying Clerics are powerful in so many different aspects, you can see it from the point that they have "a lack of fatal weakness." Almost every other class (except for Druid) have at least one, if not several, fatal weaknesses that others may exploit; but Clerics (and Druids) do not.
AvaronGansdell 01-30-06, 03:16 PM	thats actualy part of the problem if a cleric had great weaknesses to exploit and had spells to help make up for those weaknesses then they would balance with a wizard who is in the same situation. but they dont. its like compareing marvels professor xavier and super man. professor X is amazeingly powerful and as long as the situation isent totaly against him he is almost unbeatable but should someone arive who has immunity to his mental powers or who gets close to him without him knowing about it he will be in a great deal of trouble. and then there is super man who's weakneses are so small and so hard to come up with not to mention he slowly becomes immune to even kryptonite that its amazeing anyone else ever has to save the world. on there owen they are both great heros but if you put them in a group with spider man and the hulk. you would see just how over powered super man is when he choose to go all out.
Lord shadow35 01-30-06, 03:50 PM	I have to say that other than spells, cleric's are more powerful than wizards. but i can't say that cleric's are more powerful. Out of all the classes wizards and fighters are the most powerful. i sat down with one of my friends and we mapped out the most powerful classes mine and his were different, Mine Wizard Fighter Barb Cleric sorcerer druid Ranger monk His Fighter wizard Barb Cleric Druid Sorcerer Ranger Monk You may disagree with what we think but, this is just how we look at the game. He is obviously the fighter.
kraegor 01-30-06, 06:29 PM	With my Dwarven Cleric in Full Plate with a Dwarven Battle Axe he is pretty much only a little less powerful than a fighter. Add in spells like Divine Favor, Bulls Strength, Rightous Might, Visage of the Diety etc.. Cleric woops a fighters ass on all levels. Oh, and the fact in the middle of the battle he can cast "heal" on himself. Now the reason wizards are technically more powerful than clerics are because they have options. They can create spells and devices that push them over the top. A level 12 wizard? Eh.. kinda scary. A wizard with a staff of power at level 12? Really scary. Plus wizards can create all sorts of uberness spells at level 17 when clerics while they CAN make new spells, are usually really restricted by DM's calls on what thier God would wan't them calling down.
AvaronGansdell 01-31-06, 12:26 AM	a wizards virsitility is vastly over rated yes most DMs are more lienient with wizards createing new spells as opposed to clerics but then again because of the hassle and difficulty balanceing new spells many DMs are mostly against it anyways. but on the other hand virtualy ever month there are new spells in Dragon and new sorcebooks comeing out that have new spells both arcane and divine in them and if a wizard wants a new spell from the spell compendium he will have to hunt down a copy of it probebly pay someone rather well for this rare and hard to find spell and then spend a few days and more money copying it into his spellbook. where as the cleric automaticly has access to every spell in that book the moment they open the covers all they have to do is pray and bamb its there. most of the random scrolls you find will be of common usefull spells from the PHB yet those are the same spells most wizards already have so they generaly have to go talk to the DM and go searching for new spells that the druid and cleric just get because there cool like that. plus story wise its just as viable for a cleric to make magic items as a wizard. "and low and behold this is the blade marlakar forged by the wizard orion to strike down his foes" or "and low and behild this is the blade marlakar forged by the cleric orion of pelor to battle the foes of his god"
Broken vacuum 01-31-06, 08:10 AM	a wizards virsitility is vastly over rated yes most DMs are more lienient with wizards createing new spells as opposed to clerics but then again because of the hassle and difficulty balanceing new spells many DMs are mostly against it anyways. but on the other hand virtualy ever month there are new spells in Dragon and new sorcebooks comeing out that have new spells both arcane and divine in them and if a wizard wants a new spell from the spell compendium he will have to hunt down a copy of it probebly pay someone rather well for this rare and hard to find spell and then spend a few days and more money copying it into his spellbook. where as the cleric automaticly has access to every spell in that book the moment they open the covers all they have to do is pray and bamb its there. That is a truth with heavy modifications. Optional material is just that, optional. And even if the DM decides that some optional divine spells are appropriate, he does not have to give them to divine casters for free. There are rules for independent research of divine spells, too. How new spells are introduced in a campaign is up to the DM and if you have a problem with how it is done, take it up with him. Aside from that, it is not the number of spells available, but the range of abilities they provide that counts. I certainly cannot claim to know all optional sources of spells, but from what I have seen there a a number of areas wherein divine casters still are decidedly inferior to arcane casters. This is of course just my personal opinion, but for an example, just pick up the spell compendium and compare the first level spells for clerics and wizards.
AvaronGansdell 01-31-06, 08:33 AM	yes in a few odd utility areas such as teleportation the cleric dose have a bit harder time but those areas are rare and often easly overlooked. clerics have powerful attacks, buffs, curses, divinations, defenses, and healing. add to this a cleric getting more spells per day and not haveing to prepare spells to defend themselvs in physical combat and even whail healing the party they can still dish out very good damage.
elven warriorXX 01-31-06, 09:33 AM	What I can't figure out is why the heck does the Cleric have Planeshift sooner then Wizards? Planar travel is a wizardish thing not a Clerical thing.
Lomiat 01-31-06, 10:18 AM	Again, we are not talking about power directly in damage of your opponent (like a party fighting against a Cleric or a Wizard) or about how a Cleric fight against a Wizard in duel or something. When we are talking about power, we have to bear in mind that D&D is a party game; when we say a class is "strong" or "weak" we are referring to the class's contribution to the party. Ah, but we CAN talk about power in this way, and that was my point. D&D is a party game, but not every OPPONENT cares to function as a team player. An opponent's power varies according to how much of a threat that opponent poses. Now, someone mentioned that the Wizard is more likely to fail a save or take a big hit and die, but that assumes some mentally unstable wizard chooses to enter combat without a number of pre-cast defenses such as: Fly, Greater Invisibility, Mirror Image, and/or Greater Blink. Yes, clerics can replicate some of those spells, depending on their domains, but more often they rely upon AC and hit points--which every party knows don't hold out too long. It's easy enough for a party to deal with such things. However, it *can* be rather more difficult to locate the wizard flying 500 feet away, invisible, hurling Fireballs and swooping in with Evard's Black Tentacles, etc. The principle distinction between the POWER of wizard and cleric is that the 3rd Ed wizard was designed primarily to be more powerful against masses of opponents, whereas a cleric is more effective against a single opponent. This is why, if your D&D campaign generally has your party pitted against a number of opponents equal or lesser than your party members, players are going to think the cleric is more powerful. However, as soon as your party starts to battle against groups of 10+ opponents, your party's really going to want the wizard's ability to do battlefield control: Haste, Slow, Evard's, Glitterdust, etc. And as far as damage, why would anyone say that the cleric gets a higher damage die? Flamestrike is a 5th level spell, 1d6 per level, up to a max of 15d6 (half of which is fire, half divine), 20 ft. radius (I believe). Wizards at that level have various options: Cone of Cold, d6 per caster level, up to 15d6, 60 FT CONE; Arc of Lightning (no SR), line, d6 per level, up to 15d6 electric. The issue isn't that the cleric gets a better damage die. Rather it's that with Flamestrike, the cleric suddenly has *the same* damage die, which breaks the mold.
Broken vacuum 01-31-06, 11:04 AM	yes in a few odd utility areas such as teleportation the cleric dose have a bit harder time but those areas are rare and often easly overlooked. clerics have powerful attacks, buffs, curses, divinations, defenses, and healing. Minus the healing, so do wizards. And then some. Furthermore I have a hard time seeing polymorphing or invisibility as wholly contained in some easily overlooked utility area. And that is just two commonly discussed things on these boards. Even if you just look at combat, arcane magic contains a pretty big set of illusions, battlefield control spells and ways to mess with your opponents magic that is quite hard for a cleric to copy. How you translates this to power is of course your problem and very dependent on personal playing style and campaign, but you will have to do quite a bit of convincing to manage to convince me that arcane magic is not more versatile than divine.
Vanigo 01-31-06, 02:07 PM	I play wizards, myself, but only because I like the flavor much better. In terms of power, the cleric wins hands down. If instead of clerics and wizards, if it were white and black mages, I'd never even touch a black mage unless I felt like a challenge. Cleric nukes are almost as good, their buffs are better, their divinations are better if you don't mind spending some XP, their defenses are at least as good, and they can heal, plus they have none of the wizard's glaring physical weakness. Only things the wizard has (other than the admittedly important invisibilty, teleport, and polymorph) are debuffs and battlefield control. Oh, and skill points from their high int. Playing a wizard effectively takes some serious finesse; you have to leverage your debuffs and battlefield control into a decisive tactical advantage for the rest of your party if you want to do something a cleric can't do better. Of course, a wizard's situation isn't as bad as a fighter's, who cannot under any but the most extreme circumstances do anything a properly-built cleric can't do better.
AvaronGansdell 01-31-06, 02:58 PM	yes a wizard who spends 4 or 5 round buffing is harder to kill than a cleric who dosent buff at all. thats true but then again a cleric withy 4 or 5 rounds to prepare can be just as hard to kill and in an ambush the cleric is doing alot better than the wizard. it should also be noted that a cleric gets the same summon monster access as the wizard allowing them to use minions to accomplish much of a wizards abilitys. and the cleric gets more spells per day. and useing just 3ed level spells a water walking wind wall protected cleric can be nearly as hard to deal with as the invisible flying wizard plus by the time you can improved invisiblity the cleric can invisiblity purge.
Darken 01-31-06, 03:05 PM	When I get home today, I'll try to dig out an article I wrote some time ago on why Cleric is overpowered. Bottomline, given the same amount of powergaming, be it none, casual, insane, or what-have-you, Clerics AS A WHOLE can contribute to the party much better than any other class in existence. It's not about they are good at some fields, or not bad enough in other fields, but rather they are good at so many things. Just think, as an adventure (yes *gasp* roleplay thinking!), do you want to hire someone who is very good at task A, so-so at task B, and horrible at task C-Z, or do you want someone who's very good at task A, decent at task B-Y, and bad at task Z? I will take a party of Clerics with no other classes anyday over a "diversified and balanced" party if I were to consider power and only power.
metamind 01-31-06, 03:30 PM	respected and powerful are diffrent things. Well, for many PCs, bieng powerful is what makes you be respected.
Broken vacuum 01-31-06, 04:58 PM	yes a wizard who spends 4 or 5 round buffing is harder to kill than a cleric who dosent buff at all. thats true but then again a cleric withy 4 or 5 rounds to prepare can be just as hard to kill and in an ambush the cleric is doing alot better than the wizard. So essentially you are not arguing about the versatility of arcane and divine spells any more, or do I understand you incorrectly? And a wizard should probably spend those rounds buffing the party fighter instead. Wizards get mean party buffs and it is a game of teamwork. and useing just 3ed level spells a water walking wind wall protected cleric can be nearly as hard to deal with as the invisible flying wizard That requires you to have a handy body of liquid in the vicinity and it does not really help you stay unnoticed. The real problem with invisibility is noticing the thing that is invisible. plus by the time you can improved invisiblity the cleric can invisiblity purge. Which has a radius of 5 ft/level. Not exactly great when you do not know where your opponents are. I, however, find it quite pointless to argue measures and countermeasures for any length of time as D&D has quite a lot of rock, paper, scissors in it. The point I was trying to make is that arcane magic is more versatile than divine in terms of range of effects it can produce. Invisibility is just one of the tools in the arcane magic tool box that really does not exist in the divine tool box. What you manage to make of and with that tool is however up to you and the campaigns you are in. Same goes for the perceived power that comes from the flexibility afforded by any tool.
AvaronGansdell 01-31-06, 10:52 PM	I admit a wizard has impressive versitility but it all comes from the same place there spells. if they choose the wrong ones for the situation they are in a great deal of trouble. a cleric on the other hand already has a good melee and possibly even ranged combat covered so they have less weaknesses to cover useing spells. this thread was about clerics haveing more power than wizards. a cleric may not have as diverse spells but they do have all the strongest ones when it comes to combat situations. and given D&Ds rules have all largely been desinged to determin what happens in a fight that gives them a great deal of power.
Broken vacuum 02-01-06, 07:11 AM	I admit a wizard has impressive versitility but it all comes from the same place there spells. if they choose the wrong ones for the situation they are in a great deal of trouble. a cleric on the other hand already has a good melee and possibly even ranged combat covered so they have less weaknesses to cover useing spells. this thread was about clerics haveing more power than wizards. a cleric may not have as diverse spells but they do have all the strongest ones when it comes to combat situations. and given D&Ds rules have all largely been desinged to determin what happens in a fight that gives them a great deal of power. Well, the OP questioned if arcane magic was so much better than divine that it warranted the extras clerics get. As a part of this discussion you said that the versatility of wizards is vastly overrated. That was what I responded to, as that is something I disagree with. As I have pointed out, the translation of this versatility to power is another matter that is heavily dependent on personal playing style and the campaign you are in. I cannot really say how it affects your play in your game. In my opinion and experience a group with a wizard and a cleric generally does better than a team with two of the same sort. This, among other things, leads me to conclude that there is no big power gap between the classes. This is however relevant to my experience playing characters in my games and so you might have a very different opinion. There is not really anything that can be said to be correct in the absolute sense in this question.
The WarOverlord 02-06-06, 04:35 AM	Another way to look at it is that rather than saying Clerics are powerful in so many different aspects, you can see it from the point that they have "a lack of fatal weakness." Almost every other class (except for Druid) have at least one, if not several, fatal weaknesses that others may exploit; but Clerics (and Druids) do not. Their "weakness" is in thier brainwashing of serving a particular Diety and if you can get them to doubt their godling's power, doubt their worthiness in serving their godling, or are able to shove a godslyaying weapon through their godling's heart right in front of their eyes, then they are screwed :evillaugh Getting a Paladin to doubt their worthiness is really devastating cause it almost immediately busts them down to mere "Fighter" without all the benifits given to regular Fighters. :evillaugh As for Druids switch out thier supplies of "Weed and Feed" with Boric Acid and they'll start to think they have a Brown Thumb and doubt their Druidhooh when all the plants in their gaurded lands die :evillaugh
Chaos116882 02-06-06, 04:47 AM	When I get home today, I'll try to dig out an article I wrote some time ago on why Cleric is overpowered. Bottomline, given the same amount of powergaming, be it none, casual, insane, or what-have-you, Clerics AS A WHOLE can contribute to the party much better than any other class in existence. It's not about they are good at some fields, or not bad enough in other fields, but rather they are good at so many things. Just think, as an adventure (yes *gasp* roleplay thinking!), do you want to hire someone who is very good at task A, so-so at task B, and horrible at task C-Z, or do you want someone who's very good at task A, decent at task B-Y, and bad at task Z? I will take a party of Clerics with no other classes anyday over a "diversified and balanced" party if I were to consider power and only power. artificer still trumps cleric
The WarOverlord 02-06-06, 07:33 AM	artificer still trumps cleric So do Invokers who tend to make pacts and court with things way more ancient and powerful then the godlings the Clerics serve....some "things" that even scare the godlings themselves in the Dark Reaches of exitence or even in the "nightmare dimension" that few godlings or even extremely Powerful Demonlings or Devilings dare tred or Survive for that matter as even godlings and Demons and Devils that are stupid enough to venture there are "edible" with their Immortal Essence a desired morsel to feed on for all eternity. A really skilled Artifist/Artifister can enchant an item with captured Divine Magic and , bam, now the Artifist/Artifister can use a divine spell via the device, so yeah, Artifists/Artificers rule. (Artifists dabble with Chemestry, Alchemy,Tech stuff and also are Sages in enginerring,tech,and artifacts/relics so it isn't only a spelling difference it's a more General Class then a Artifister....sort of like a Fighter v.s. a Paladin or a Mage v.s. a Specialist or a Original D&D Bard v.s the stripped down modern 3rd Ed Bard)
AvaronGansdell 02-07-06, 01:21 AM	#1 clerics dont need gods. #2 many gods are compleatly unkillable even by god slaying objects #3 roleplay resticions and weaknesses mean nothing when balanceing a class this thread was about the strenghts and weaknesses of clerics vs arcane spellcasters not a debate about who can act all cool and in game on a OOG message board.
The WarOverlord 02-07-06, 07:31 AM	#1 clerics dont need gods. #2 many gods are compleatly unkillable even by god slaying objects #3 roleplay resticions and weaknesses mean nothing when balanceing a class this thread was about the strenghts and weaknesses of clerics vs arcane spellcasters not a debate about who can act all cool and in game on a OOG message board. 1) Unless they are "Mystics" (able to tap into thier own "divine spark" that the soul is) the Clerics need godlings (or their flunkies) to grant them spells above Second Level 2) Their are worst fates then being "killed"/obliterated from esistance...such as being fed on for eternity or being used as a "binder" for some magical boots. 3) Clerics weakness is being reliant on a godling to or a flunkie of the godling to grant a spell beyond 2nd level (unless a "Mystic") and having to mindlessly follow a imposed dogma (and spred the mindless Babble like a disease) while a Wizards weakness is being basically a meat paperweight if there is no time/way to study a spell and/or rest....Sorcereres are likewise a doorstop without a chance to rest.
AvaronGansdell 02-07-06, 02:49 PM	#1 wrong your quoteing out date rules from early 2ed eddition in 3e/3.5 a cleric dose not need a god to cast any spells they can just as easily follow a belife system such as the jedi do with the force or many mystic thurges who worship magic itself not the gods of magic. #2 yes there are horrible things that can be done but it has no relevance to this post. #3 even those who follow a god do not have to do so blindly and many have there owen views on the relationships between gods. you must really hate spellcasters and should find another post to troll. but this dose bring up another of divine magics strenghts a cleric choose a time of day to prepare spells and is not required to have 8 hours rest before doing so a wizard needs atleast 8 hours sleep to get there spells back often tough to do with random encounters and such.
jonnyrue2u 02-07-06, 03:42 PM	IMHO, I would not have the Wizard and the Cleric be pitted against eachother, unless it is just PHB. But if it is not PHB, I would have the Cleric and the Warmage pitted, and the Wizard and Archivist pitted. Because espically with the differences of how they use their spells, the variables are too spratic that it is too hard to tell, by my outlook anyways. Anyways, with Cleric vs. Wizard, I would say that it is the type of build that is taken, and if the opposing build can counter it or not. Just my view, though.
Merlion 02-07-06, 06:13 PM	1) Unless they are "Mystics" (able to tap into thier own "divine spark" that the soul is) the Clerics need godlings (or their flunkies) to grant them spells above Second Level 2) Their are worst fates then being "killed"/obliterated from esistance...such as being fed on for eternity or being used as a "binder" for some magical boots. 3) Clerics weakness is being reliant on a godling to or a flunkie of the godling to grant a spell beyond 2nd level (unless a "Mystic") and having to mindlessly follow a imposed dogma (and spred the mindless Babble like a disease) while a Wizards weakness is being basically a meat paperweight if there is no time/way to study a spell and/or rest....Sorcereres are likewise a doorstop without a chance to rest. None of what your saying has any basis in current D&D rules. Back to the actual topic, to answer the original question: No, "mage" spells are not suffciently superior to Cleric spells to warrant their other differences in abilities. The same is true to a slightly lesser extent when speaking of Mages versus Druids spells. As far as the versatility issue...yea, the Wiz/Sor spell list does have a somewhat greater range of individual types of effects possible. But only somewhat. However, this not so huge advantage is more than made up for in terms of actual spellcasting versatility due to Clerics (and Druids) free auto access to their entire spell list, and having slightly more spell slots per day to cast them with, and their limited spontaneous casting options. Certainlly in terms of overal party contribution the Cleric outdoes all the other classes. The designers long said that they had beefed up the Cleric to encourage people to play the class...and in a reccent article here on the sight, they went ahead and admited that yes, Cleric is the most powerful class in the PH. This is, as others have mentioned, due in main to their almost total lack of weaknesses, coupled with average or better offensive/combat/challenge-overcoming cababilities. My first reqest for a new edition when it comes is to do away with Arcane/Divine, and have spellcasters be balanced with one another.
Beckett 02-19-06, 02:37 AM	The big difference in why people want to play Arcane casters and don't want to play non Druid Divine casters is pretty subtle. Clerics, although they get d8's two good saves, and okay armor, is also specifically intended to make sure that every other class is okay, not to be a power of their own. Strap on the idea that nearly every campaign setting requires their Clerics to do this or that, usually to be universal to all other Clerics in that world, makes them a weak weak class. The only way to really fix that requires way to much work for WotC to be interested, involving guidlines of a Cleric recieving specific weapon and armor proficiencies, class skills, bonus feats, and spells based on their individual deity or faith. Wizards and sorcerers on the other hand are very versatile, not only in their spellcasting, but also in that it is very hard to play a generic wizard or sorcerer. It is easy to imagine, but there really is no such thing. People want to play an Arcane caster, but they just want a healer in their group so they can be okay AFTER the big fights.