Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Thamior Magus Rex 02-21-05, 10:51 AM	A friend recently raised the issue of Arcane Spell Failure. According to the rules an arcane spell-caster suffers this chance of having the spell disrupted while casting a spell while wearing armour. The official explanation is that the weight of the armour and it's design disrupts the delicate motions neccessary for the Somatic component-which makes sense. On top of the fact that Wizards are not proficient with any sort of armour or shield and bards are only proficient with light armour. The way I view it the Wizard is drawing the highly complex runes in the air as he is chanting them, so on top of not knowing how to wear armour effectively (hence the increased Armour Check penalty) they are forced to compensate for the weight of the armour. However if Wizards and Priests (bards and druids included) must fulfill the same basic requirements (speak clearly, be able to move their arms, have the components at hand) why shouldn't Clerics suffer the same problems? They are trained in the wearing of armour and the use of shields but the other problems are the same, unless you want to make the argument that displaying the holt symbol is the somatic gesture. Thoughts?
SD 02-21-05, 10:57 AM	Sort of. I've had this discussion before, and the conclusion to which we came was that the somatic component for divine casters was something simple, used for more channelling than casting. A Christian cleric would use the sign of the cross as a somatic component, to use a modern example. The use of the holy symbol isn't required per se, but something easy is, something not so fine and delicate as tracing runes in the air.
Tenier 02-21-05, 12:00 PM	In earlier versions of D&D, Clerics & Druids couldn't even begin to compete with Wizards in pure spellpower, and this was balanced by giving them Turn Undead, higher HD, and (at least for Clerics), the possibility to cast spells in full plate armor. Personally, I feel that both the power of, and the possibilities with divine magic is on par with arcane, and that they too should have problems channeling their spells in armor; effectively removing arcane spell failure chance, and replacing it with a universal spell failure chance. Also, Psions should have som sort of chance of failure while manifesting in armor, as their damage-potential is even greater than that of the Wizard.
Karl of Mystra 02-21-05, 02:20 PM	And what happen with the paladins? Will go take them out there with only a T-shirt? :D Or maybe they are more skilled casters than the clerics, and so can cast spells with armor? :confused:
Tenier 02-21-05, 03:20 PM	Let the Paladin cast his spells in full plate. At least, it is more logical that a Paladin has received training in spellcasting and fighting in full plate than a Cleric. As is Bards have the ability to cast without failure in light armor, I would hardly call it unbalancing to let the Paladin play with his little spell-selection in full plate. (Because there is a difference between the Paladins 4th-level spells, the Bard's 6th-level spells, and the Cleric's 9th-level ones..) :)
okpokalypse 02-21-05, 05:42 PM	Psions should have som sort of chance of failure while manifesting in armor, as their damage-potential is even greater than that of the Wizard. I disagree 100%. Psionic Powers are manifested via the mind of the psion. There is a display associated with the power - but it is a by-product of the manifestation, not a necessary element for the manifestation to take place. That's what balances Psionics in all honesty. Incidentally, how do you figure that Psionics is more offensively powerful that Arcana Magic of the same level? The vast majority of Psionic powers that deal area damage are d4-based damage. Those that target a single entity are most often d6-based. There are of course some exceptions - but most of the d6 area damages of worth are such that only a psyrokineticist can acheive. When a Mage gets a fireball at 5th level, he starts off at 5d6 damage. When a Psion gets energy burst at 5th level he starts off at 5d6 damage. At 7th level the Mage now has a 3rd level spell (Fireball) that does 7d6 damage. At 7th level the Psion now has a 3rd level power (Energy Burst) which does 5d6 Damage and can be augmented to 7d6 (max) for an additional 2 PSP (Thus making it cost that of a 4th level power!) Umm, If I had to just take this close view and say who was better, I'd say the Mage who's spell level is grandfathered in and his damage increases without needing to increase his spell level to benefit from the increased damage as the Psion does. Most of the Psion's powers function this way. In order for their damages to scale, they must expend significantly more PSPs. Also remember that a Psion cannot spend more PSPs in an action than he has Manifester Levels. So you're invariably maxxed out in how much you can "pump" a spell up. Personally, I like Psion's better because they've got a lot of freedom of choice since they have a Power Point pool as well as channel on the fly. Wizards are forced to be much more rigid in their art - but I feel their powers are inevitably greater than that of the Psions.
Tenier 02-21-05, 06:16 PM	The point is only that I find it unfair that Psions that is pretty similar to Wizards has so much easier / cheaper access to a good armor class than the latter. As regard to Wizards vs. Psion power-levels, I do not complain about the Psion beeing overall more powerfull. But in some cases, ie a Psion using a power like energy burst, with it's 40' radius burst (with energy type of Psion's choosing), overchanneled and triggered in the middle of lots of minions tend to do a lot more damage than anything similar that my Wizard can conjure..
okpokalypse 02-21-05, 08:02 PM	The point is only that I find it unfair that Psions that is pretty similar to Wizards has so much easier / cheaper access to a good armor class than the latter. As regard to Wizards vs. Psion power-levels, I do not complain about the Psion beeing overall more powerfull. But in some cases, ie a Psion using a power like energy burst, with it's 40' radius burst (with energy type of Psion's choosing), overchanneled and triggered in the middle of lots of minions tend to do a lot more damage than anything similar that my Wizard can conjure.. Heh. Better hope you've got none of your allies in that burst, and that you're either killing everything or have a quick way out afterward, cause the Psion's HP is so light he'll drop in a good shot of two. Hmm, if he provokes an AOO in getting in range, he could die before he ever casts the spell. I'd always rather take a 10d6 fireball (costing a 3rd level spell) that I can cast 100+ ft away from my and have it cover a 20'r than a pumpable effect that costs more like a 5th-6th level spell to do the same damage and put me right in the middle of the fray and requires that I have no friendly protection around me. Call me crazy :).
Karl of Mystra 02-22-05, 04:35 AM	Let the Paladin cast his spells in full plate. At least, it is more logical that a Paladin has received training in spellcasting and fighting in full plate than a Cleric. :confused: Well, for me it doesn't. The basic ideas for those clases are: Cleric => Armor & Divine spellcasting + Some fighting Paladin => Armor & Fighting + Some Divine spellcasting Then, obviously, (and using your way of thinking) the cleric should not suffer failure for the armor, but the paladin should, because he/she/it is not as well trained in both at the same time.
Tenier 02-22-05, 05:40 AM	Why do Clerics need to cast in full plate? Paladins are based on holy crusaders, strutting about in their shiny plates / chainmails, doing their god's bidding. Anyway, my point is that I feel that the Cleric has waaay to many benefits for his own good. There is no reason why a Cleric need to compete with both fighters and wizards (or even surpass them in their own areas of expertise). As the Clerics get more and more powerful spells (not to mention all their cheesy domains effectively replicating the Wizards spell list), they should forego their armored casting. Or maybe they could do something like with Rangers, make the Cleric choose which path to take. Armored casting, but with limitation on 7-level spells like before, or just plain caster, more powerful spells, but lower HD and armor proficiencies. And to those Cleric-lovers out there that I provoke, remember that this is just how I feel. :)
Vatras 02-23-05, 10:01 AM	The original reason for armor/no armor is as described above: arcane casters had the real spell power and clerics were second-rate casters. They kept the distinction in 3.0 and 3.5, except that they introduced arcane failure instead totally forbidding armor. If an arcane spell thrower feels like it, he can now wear armor, if he accepts the failure chance (which can be reduced too).
Veomyr 02-23-05, 11:08 AM	Maybe clerics and paladins should not suffer spell failure while wearing light/medium armor. If they want the heavy armor, then their spell casting suffers.
Nodles 02-23-05, 01:35 PM	Maybe clerics and paladins should not suffer spell failure while wearing light/medium armor. If they want the heavy armor, then their spell casting suffers. That is a good idea... Debuffing clerics seem to be a consensus among most DMs. I suggest clerics proeficient only on light and medium armor and shields, and they dont suffer spell failure chance for those armors Also, changing War domain to give heavy armor proeficiency and allow the cleric to wear heavy armor and cast spells with no chance of failure would make up for those clerics who still want to be tanks.
Karl of Mystra 02-23-05, 01:57 PM	Paladins are based on holy crusaders, strutting about in their shiny plates / chainmails, doing their god's bidding. Actually, it is the clerics who are based on templar - holy crusader. The paladins are based on Lancelot, almost exclusivelly. ( I don't remember any other examples of historical/fictional characters:You can review the AD&D 2nd edition Player's Handbook description of both clerics and paladins if you want, it's in the start each character class description.) At higher levels, they are supposed to be like Moses (or even JC) or someone like that: They MUST be unstoppable when they are following their deity's guidelines. (And I want to give even more stress in that last part, I am really tired of all those clerics-players that only choose a deity for their domains, and never care about what how a cleric should behave. ) As far as I can tell, the basic idea of the cleric is and has always been "carrying heavy armor" (at least in D&D). There is no point in getting rid of it (it has been there since the very first edition), and for the first time in D&D the divine and the arcane magic is balanced (the arcane had always been far superior). I don't think that it is a very good idea to remove anything from the divine casters just because some people, who most often than not never liked the clerics in any edition, want to nerf them.
Dimeron 02-23-05, 02:20 PM	As far as I can tell, the basic idea of the cleric is and has always been "carrying heavy armor" (at least in D&D). There is no point in getting rid of it (it has been there since the very first edition), and for the first time in D&D the divine and the arcane magic is balanced (the arcane had always been far superior). I don't think that it is a very good idea to remove anything from the divine casters just because some people, who most often than not never liked the clerics in any edition, want to nerf them. Help me out here. If divine magic and arcane magic is balanced, as in, one is no longer superior to the other, and cleric is superior to arcane casters in almost all other aspect besides spell casting, where exactly dose it put cleric when compared with arcane casters?
okpokalypse 02-23-05, 02:47 PM	Anyway, my point is that I feel that the Cleric has waaay to many benefits for his own good. There is no reason why a Cleric need to compete with both fighters and wizards (or even surpass them in their own areas of expertise). I can understand some people's feelings that Clerics are over-powered. Truth be told, in the campaign I currently play, I'm often told my Cleric is somewhat overpowered via the good AC, good HP, and Spiritual Weapon Spells. Some fighters in the group feel it's wrong that I can, at 8th level, have 5 Spiritual Weapons in the air on 1 big target, getting 10 total attacks, in addition to me using Divine Power to replicate a Fighter's BAB rate (not to mention +6 Str) and Briar's Webs to severely hamper my opponents movement. As an 8th level character, I soloed a CR10 CryoHydra - and in retrospect, that was kinda cheesy. Of course, the drawback to many power-using classes is this: I'm only good for one combat if I go all out. It so happened we had a 2nd encounter before I got spells back and I was useless. I only had 2 1st level and 1 3rd spell left. I never got right up in combat because all I'm doing is d6+1 Damage normally, so there wasn't a big reason for me to be there. So I give my last 3rd level spell - a protection from Energy: Fire - onto the groups Barbarian and he runs hellbent into their midst. Then it was the PyroKin who owned all with a pair of 8d6+8 Energy (Fire) Blasts thrown against an enemy party tryingto overwhelm the Barbarian. Of course, now we have both our caster-types empty. Good thing we didn't have another encounter before we rested properly. :) As the Clerics get more and more powerful spells (not to mention all their cheesy domains effectively replicating the Wizards spell list), they should forego their armored casting. Or maybe they could do something like with Rangers, make the Cleric choose which path to take. Armored casting, but with limitation on 7-level spells like before, or just plain caster, more powerful spells, but lower HD and armor proficiencies. And to those Cleric-lovers out there that I provoke, remember that this is just how I feel. :) I don't blame ya for how you feel, but remember a Cleric only gets two domains. Some prestige classes allow a 3rd - but those come much later on most often... Also keep in mind that an Arcane caster can ALSO get Domains so long as they follow a God. They can also get Spontaneous Healing. Clerics get NO extra feats. None. They get 1 ability in Turning, and unless there are undead in the campaign, this is a very limited ability. Mage's get Scribe Scroll and 4 Extra Feats! Those extra feats are huge, especially when two of them can be Arcane Disciple and Spontaneous Healer. :) If you want to emulate a Cleric with a Mage, it's quite simple. A Human Mage at 1st level can take the two aforementioned Feats, and from that point on be a healer with all the Mage spell repoitore behind them. As well, they can get a Spectral Hand - which allows them to heal at a huge range, something the Cleric can never hope to really do.
okpokalypse 02-23-05, 06:13 PM	They are trained in the wearing of armour and the use of shields but the other problems are the same, unless you want to make the argument that displaying the holy symbol is the somatic gesture. Thoughts? Well, in many cases for Clerics, Somatic gestures are the touch itself that needs to trigger the spell. All curing spells, from what I've understood, are praying/channeling divine power and focusing it into the target with a touch (the somatic component). I think the best argument here is whether or not a touch requires a free hand.
Shatteredtower 02-24-05, 06:29 AM	The paladins are based on Lancelot, almost exclusivelly. The Twelve Peers of Charlemagne, who you will find listed in many dictionaries as part of the definition of the word "paladin." The class is practically identical in power and abilities to the paladin (and Peer of Charlemagne) protagonist of Poul Anderson's Three Hearts and Three Lions. I don't have a problem with their being a difference between the somatic requirements of a divine spell and those of an arcane spell. The issue of having the clerical or druidic spell and non-spell options exceed those of the arcane casters is another story. Unfortunately, balance is always going to be problematic so long as it's easier to pull teeth than get many people to play a cleric. The class has long been dependent on an RP balance, a mechanism for balancing that many abhor, which is why it is no longer the factor it was before 3rd Ed. Even with that change, however, many players still see themselves as subject to DMly whim for spell preparation and the like. This makes some leery of playing a class that can suddenly wind up as a warrior with weaker BAB and less proficiency with weapons but better Will saves.
q'afuu 02-24-05, 06:39 AM	Help me out here. If divine magic and arcane magic is balanced, as in, one is no longer superior to the other, and cleric is superior to arcane casters in almost all other aspect besides spell casting, where exactly dose it put cleric when compared with arcane casters? Perhaps you should focus on clearing up any doubts about that if before tackling issues hingeing on it. IMO, clerical spellcasting is not on a par with wizardly spellcasting (I'm limiting my statement to those two classes to keep things easy and because they seem to be the core issue here) in 3E D&D.
Karl of Mystra 02-24-05, 02:01 PM	Help me out here. If divine magic and arcane magic is balanced, as in, one is no longer superior to the other, and cleric is superior to arcane casters in almost all other aspect besides spell casting, where exactly dose it put cleric when compared with arcane casters? The difference is the same than the one between a fighter who is a member of an army and a fighter who is "independent". The first is part of a hierarchy and a team: that supposes a series of advantages (better equipment, reinforcements, a salary, healing.....) and disvantages (He must follow orders, maybe behave in a certain way in public, he can be severely punished if failing or not achieving in his duty...). The independent one, on the other side, has not access to such options, but can do whatever he wants. The diference between an arcane caster and a divine caster is pretty the same: If you are a cleric, you must follow the orders of your superiors in the church, the guidelines of your deity, the ones of your alignment, and more often than not you must keep a close watch on your companions too (both for making them walk "the righteous way" and for keeping them alive and healthy, both physically and mentally) (the bold part is for de development team of the game : Why the clerics doesn't have Sense Motive as a class skill?? They should be the first ones to get it! Who else cares for the personal problems and attitudes of the people? Errr, I mean the clerics in D&D, not in the real world.... :D ). If a cleric fails to keep his responsabilities, he can surely expect some kind of punishment too (Ranging from admonishing, unability to use divine magic, or even more!) I am not saying that the clerics should be losing their magical abilities one time every two sesions, but that the first thing that a cleric player should had in mind is how can his character be a better servant of his/her deity. And usually, casting spells "to fight better than the party's fighter" is not the right way. On the other side, wizards have more magical power IMO, clerical spellcasting is not on a par with wizardly spellcasting (I'm limiting my statement to those two classes to keep things easy and because they seem to be the core issue here) in 3E D&D. , absolutely true, but he usually cannot heal (Well, some of them can), but on the other side they doesn't have to follow the guidelines of anyone but himself, and doesn't have to worry about losing his powers by the interference of a third person (his God). My conclusion is that the problem is not that the clerics are overpowered, but that the people (both players and DMs) usually care nothing about the ROLE of a cleric in the world in which he lives. Everybody speaks about what a cleric CAN do but no one cares about what a cleric MUST do. I can understand some people's feelings that Clerics are over-powered. Truth be told, in the campaign I currently play, I'm often told my Cleric is somewhat overpowered via the good AC, good HP, and Spiritual Weapon Spells. Some fighters in the group feel it's wrong that I can, at 8th level, have 5 Spiritual Weapons in the air on 1 big target, getting 10 total attacks, in addition to me using Divine Power to replicate a Fighter's BAB rate (not to mention +6 Str) and Briar's Webs to severely hamper my opponents movement. As an 8th level character, I soloed a CR10 CryoHydra - and in retrospect, that was kinda cheesy. Those are 7 rounds of spellcasting in front of your 9-headed CryoHydra (and those are 63 bites +13 melee (1d10+5) with 10' reach). Was it standing still or what?? Anyhow, any 8th level fighter can do serious damage in that time against its AC 19.
Heron_Marked_Blade 02-24-05, 02:13 PM	IMO, clerical spellcasting is not on a par with wizardly spellcasting (I'm limiting my statement to those two classes to keep things easy and because they seem to be the core issue here) in 3E D&D. I agree wholeheartedly. I'm playing a Wizard 18 who has a Cleric 16 cohort. The difference between their spell lists, and the overwhelming versatility of the Wizard's spell list, has never been more clear to me. absolutely true, but he usually cannot heal (Well, some of them can) <snip>Ever since I found Limited Wish, it has been one of my Wizard's favorite spells. For 300XP (a paltry sum at most levels), he can cast Heal for 150 points of healing plus getting rid of adverse conditions. The spell is 5th-level for the Adept (NPC class in the DMG), and therefore falls under the "Duplicate any other spell of 5th level or lower, provided the spell is not of a school prohibited to you" ability of Limited Wish. Another reason for a Wizard never to take Conjuration as a prohibited school of magic. :D I strongly encourage Wizard-players to take advantage of the sheer usefulness of Limited Wish.
eRaz0r 02-24-05, 03:16 PM	I don't blame ya for how you feel, but remember a Cleric only gets two domains. Some prestige classes allow a 3rd - but those come much later on most often... Also keep in mind that an Arcane caster can ALSO get Domains so long as they follow a God. They can also get Spontaneous Healing. Clerics get NO extra feats. None. They get 1 ability in Turning, and unless there are undead in the campaign, this is a very limited ability. Mage's get Scribe Scroll and 4 Extra Feats! Those extra feats are huge, especially when two of them can be Arcane Disciple and Spontaneous Healer. :) If you want to emulate a Cleric with a Mage, it's quite simple. A Human Mage at 1st level can take the two aforementioned Feats, and from that point on be a healer with all the Mage spell repoitore behind them. As well, they can get a Spectral Hand - which allows them to heal at a huge range, something the Cleric can never hope to really do. Those 4 extra feats are for metamagic and item creation. You can't take Arcane Disciple or Spontaneous Healing with those feats. Furthermore, you have to spend either your limited free spells or go out and buy arcane scrolls of healing to scribe into your spellbook. The Cleric gets complete access to his whole spell list. The Wizard does not. The Wizards power is wasted on trying to get healing - turning him into a poor reflection of a cleric. He's better concentrating on the spells which differentiate him from the Cleric...fireball, evards black tentacles, etc. Finally, Turning is hardly a wasted ability with the addition to the game of Divine Feats, which are powered by turning.
okpokalypse 02-24-05, 09:15 PM	Those 4 extra feats are for metamagic and item creation. You can't take Arcane Disciple or Spontaneous Healing with those feats. Furthermore, you have to spend either your limited free spells or go out and buy arcane scrolls of healing to scribe into your spellbook. The Cleric gets complete access to his whole spell list. The Wizard does not. The Wizards power is wasted on trying to get healing - turning him into a poor reflection of a cleric. He's better concentrating on the spells which differentiate him from the Cleric...fireball, evards black tentacles, etc. Finally, Turning is hardly a wasted ability with the addition to the game of Divine Feats, which are powered by turning. I'm sorry - you are correct in that you cannot take those two feats with your Bonus Feats. However, a human mage could take them both at 1st level with skill points in the right place. And you actually DON'T have to have the spells in a book when you take the pair of them. The whole point is that those Heal spells become spontaneous, so you don't need to have them memorized. You can just cast them.
eRaz0r 03-01-05, 06:51 PM	Well I don't have the feats in front of me, but I'm pretty sure that Arcane Disciple allows you to *learn* these spells. It doesn't automatically add them to your spellbook. If they're not in your spell book, you don't 'know' them, and if you don't know them, you can't cast them spontaneously. Spontaneous caster allows you to sacrifice a spell you've memorized for one you know, yes ? Maybe if I go read the feats again, I'll get a different impression, but that's they way I read them.
Heron_Marked_Blade 03-01-05, 06:57 PM	Maybe if I go read the feats again, I'll get a different impression, but that's they way I read them. You're correct (if you're saying what I think you're saying). ;) Here's the writeup: Arcane Disciple [General] Choose a deity, and then select a domain available to clerics of that deity. You can learn to cast the spells associated with that domain as arcane spells. Prerequisites: Knowledge (religion) 4 ranks, Spellcraft 4 ranks, able to cast arcane spells, alignment matches your deity's alignment. Benefit: Add the chosen domain's spells to your class list of arcane spells. If you have arcane spellcasting ability from more than one class, you must pick which arcane spellcasting ability this feat applies to. Once chosen, this decision cannot be changed for that feat. You may learn these spells as normal for your class; however, you use Wisdom (rather than the normal ability for your spellcasting) when determining the save DC for the spell. In addition, you must have a Wisdom score equal to 10 + the spell's level in order to prepare or cast a spell gained from this feat. Each day, you may prepare (or cast, if you cast spells without preparation) a maximum of one of these domains spells of each level. Special: You can take this feat more than once. Each time, you must select a different domain available to the same deity you chose the first time you selected the feat. For example, a character who chose Heironeous and the Good domain with his first selection could choose Law or War with successive selections of the same feat. He couldn't choose Protection, since that domain isn't available to clerics of Heironeous.