Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Roland Falantyr 10-08-04, 04:10 AM	ive been playing dnd for about 8 years and one thing has always baffled me. Why do clerics have a spell list that expands with every expansion with no cost to them, d8 hit points, and buff spells that make fighters unfit to even lick their boots? Any thoughts on this? its always been one of my favorite classes but ive just always noticed they seemed overpowered. Wizards and sorcerors have to suffer with d4 hit die and crappy saves to pay for their amazing spells. Wheres the payment for heal, harm, divine power, destruction, implosion, and righteous might? is this just one of those sacred cows or what?
RaspK FOG 10-08-04, 05:45 AM	is this just one of those sacred cows or what? :D "Made my day." kind of mental image: "Can you please Truly Ressurect my dead fellow, Oh Sacred Cow?" Yup, clerics were visualised as the war machines they are under 2e; now, with open access to all weapons, no weapon speed, and the vast spell lists they have with up to 9th-level spells instead of up to 7th-level ones, well, you see were this leads...
Seeker95 10-08-04, 09:40 AM	For the same reason wizard spell lists expand with every edition and supplement. New book = new creativity = new spells. Where is the cost? The cleric is a pawn of a deity. The DM should be limiting the cleric with a certain level of deity-desires. For example, in my campaign, clerics of war deities are not permitted to heal an ally until combat is over. Healing is to recover from the effects of a victory gained in battle. No victory? No healing. :D That the cleric list does not include every spell is what baffles me. What could some hyper-geek potion mixer do that a deity can't?
meabolex 10-08-04, 09:50 AM	For the same reason wizard spell lists expand with every edition and supplement. Right, but the wizard has to pay (at minimum) the cost of a scroll of spell X and the cost of scribing scroll X. Meaning, even if the wizard spell list expanded to infinity, the wizard would only use a small portion of his spell list. A cleric could prepare totally different spells every session from every official supplement. If you use all official supplements, the cleric spell list is much larger than the sorcerer/wizard spell list in the PH. Admittedly, you'd have to be crazy to do that. . . but if you purchased the books, why wouldn't you? My solution was the Unearthed Arcana spontaneous divine spells. It seems to be a quick fix and makes domain selection a lot more important. And, the healing domain is by far the best domain (:
Seeker95 10-08-04, 10:02 AM	If you use all official supplements, the cleric spell list is much larger than the sorcerer/wizard spell list in the PH.The cleric spell list may be larger, but your cleric spell list is not. The cleric cannot take spells of an alignment [tag] opposite their own. This removes a pretty sizable number of spells from all non-neutral clerics, and still a decent number from all non-True Neutral clerics. Then, as I said above, a DM is wise to further limit a cleric spell list based on deity personalities. I do this, and suggest that others do as well. Additionally, and here is the biggest cost in the cleric / divine magic approach: Players take a helluva lot more time selecting cleric spells than wizrd spells. Having more choices is not always a good thing.
Bloodtide_the_Red 10-08-04, 12:10 PM	.....................Right, but the wizard has to pay (at minimum) the cost of a scroll of spell X and the cost of scribing scroll X. Meaning, even if the wizard spell list expanded to infinity, the wizard would only use a small portion of his spell list................................ Well, wizards do get two free spells per level to add to thier spellbook. The wizard can also buy, steal and trade for other spells. And, naturaly, they can find them as treasure. Sure, clerics can get any spell on their list, and it's a huge list...but bigger is not always better. Ever watch someone sit down and try to pick from the endless list of spells? It takes forever. And the day-to-day does not work so well in game. The clerics player has to pick his spells and stick with them, with only say 10 minutes of game time to do so. I think most DM's ask for their players memorized spells that day list. The unwriten part about clerics and druids too, is the gods view. By-the-book, the cleric can take any old spell they feel like. In a bit more roleplaying game....the characters god sets the list of spells. BT
Votan 10-08-04, 02:24 PM	Where is the cost? The cleric is a pawn of a deity. The DM should be limiting the cleric with a certain level of deity-desires. For example, in my campaign, clerics of war deities are not permitted to heal an ally until combat is over. Healing is to recover from the effects of a victory gained in battle. No victory? No healing. How do you handle a True Neutral Dietyless cleric??? Clearly they are not the pawns of any diety and actually have more flexibility than most clerics of a specific diety.
meabolex 10-08-04, 02:47 PM	.....................Right, but the wizard has to pay (at minimum) the cost of a scroll of spell X and the cost of scribing scroll X. Meaning, even if the wizard spell list expanded to infinity, the wizard would only use a small portion of his spell list................................ Well, wizards do get two free spells per level to add to thier spellbook. The wizard can also buy, steal and trade for other spells. And, naturaly, they can find them as treasure. Yes, but that's many times more effort than what a cleric does to get his spells. I'm not saying the wizard is weak or greatly hindered by this, but it is a limitation that will prevent him from learning ALL spells until the very latest levels. It is possible for him to learn all 9th level spells. It's just that each spell costs 4,725 gp just to learn and he'll have to burn wealth accordingly. Sure, clerics can get any spell on their list, and it's a huge list...but bigger is not always better. Ever watch someone sit down and try to pick from the endless list of spells? It takes forever. Heh, this is a great argument. You're saying that having too many options is a problem because of the amount of time needed to select an option. Come on, we know that's part of the fun, not work! (: And the day-to-day does not work so well in game. The clerics player has to pick his spells and stick with them, with only say 10 minutes of game time to do so. I think most DM's ask for their players memorized spells that day list. I come to sessions with a spell list prepared. I also have notes about which spells I'll substitute in different situations. For instance, I'll can have a melee spell build, a vs. caster spell build, a knowledge spell build, a support spell build, or a ranged attacker spell build, depending on the character of course. But I'll throw anything into the mix if I notice I need something or I'm seeing a pattern. The unwriten part about clerics and druids too, is the gods view. By-the-book, the cleric can take any old spell they feel like. In a bit more roleplaying game....the characters god sets the list of spells. Most clerics I've seen are neutral with portfolios that are extremely open-ended. I've had to work with the characters individually to establish any kind of mechanical reason to prepare or not prepare spells. It would be great if I didn't have to waste a bunch of time telling players what they can and can't do for every deity from every supplement with every domain. . . Oh wait, I play with core rules, except I assign a spirit to each domain (the spirits must be compatible with each other), allow the characters to make up the spirits (which I roleplay), and use spontaneous divine casting from the Unearthed Arcana -- so I don't have any of these problems (:
Luminous Crayon 10-08-04, 02:58 PM	Personally, I suspect the cleric's nice stats are a bit of a bribe. People love having a cleric around to patch them up during a fight, and often, that's all a cleric gets to do during some particularly nasty battles: heal the allies every turn, so that they don't die. I think the cleric got the abilities assigned to it the way it did so that people would want to play them more often, despite the fact that most of the time, they're going to be bandaids.
Krelios 10-08-04, 03:15 PM	How do you handle a True Neutral Dietyless cleric??? Clearly they are not the pawns of any diety and actually have more flexibility than most clerics of a specific diety.I ignore the ludicrous idea that clerics can get spells without a deity--a cleric's deity is a balancing factor and making it optional has the same problems as allowing CN Paladins... As much as it pains me to quote a movie in this instance, it fits: "With Great Power comes Great Responsibility."
Votan 10-08-04, 03:31 PM	I ignore the ludicrous idea that clerics can get spells without a deity--a cleric's deity is a balancing factor and making it optional has the same problems as allowing CN Paladins... As much as it pains me to quote a movie in this instance, it fits: "With Great Power comes Great Responsibility." Yes, but it is a core rule that is in the PHB. Okay, it is probably the most widely axed core rule around but it points ot the central problem in that the game was not balanced around roleplaying restictions on clerics. In manys ettings there are so many diety choices that one can can be found that will work for nearly anything.
meabolex 10-08-04, 03:31 PM	. . .despite the fact that most of the time, they're going to be bandaids. Honestly, that's a worse-case scenario. When I find myself spontaneously casting cure spells in standard games, I know that our party is either in trouble or at least heavily worn down. Most of the time, I can get out on the front lines and deal considerable amounts of destruction (even the spell destruction) with ease. My saves rarely take me out of a fight. My hp is substantial, my AC very high, and my chance of being disabled in combat really low. So, I'm usually the tank. . . anything that gets in my path will be mowed down. Of course, that changes from character to character -- but if I've got a lot of armor, some touch-ranged attack spells, and a melee weapon, I basically convert into a tank.
DM Zoc 10-08-04, 03:45 PM	I agree with the bribery approach, which is the same thing they did for dwarves (and humans). Do you really think so many people would play a dwarf if they weren't so powerful? As an alternate explanation, it is the case that it is a great tragedy if the cleric is taken out. If the wizard dies, the cleric can bring him back; the opposite is not true. That being said, I dislike clerics intensely because it's impossible to choose the correct spells for any given day. Actually, that's also why I dislike wizards in favor of sorcerers.
Seeker95 10-08-04, 05:52 PM	How do you handle a True Neutral Dietyless cleric???I don't allow them. At least not "technically". :devil: In my campaign, there are clerics who believe they are deityless. They get their spells normally (and with practically no restrictions) but they are serving the most powerful deity of all --> Entropy. And upon reaching a certain level (it varies upon my mood and the campaign), the cleric learns of his or her allegiance. Those who do not [i]immediately[/]i embrace it are stripped of all spellcasting ability -- no second chance. You should have seen the look on the face of the first player who refused to grant Entropy service. Basically, he became a 12th level, d8-having, no spell having, few Feat having fighter. No deity? No divine spells.
Dimeron 10-08-04, 08:17 PM	For the same reason wizard spell lists expand with every edition and supplement. New book = new creativity = new spells. Where is the cost? The cleric is a pawn of a deity. The DM should be limiting the cleric with a certain level of deity-desires. For example, in my campaign, clerics of war deities are not permitted to heal an ally until combat is over. Healing is to recover from the effects of a victory gained in battle. No victory? No healing. :D That the cleric list does not include every spell is what baffles me. What could some hyper-geek potion mixer do that a deity can't? As the saying goes, role playing restriction should never be used to balance mechanical rules. A hyper-geek potion mixer dosn't need worshippers to keep him self alive. And while not all the spells, but if you get all the domain spells together from all the books and those do include a huge chunk of the spells.
Seeker95 10-08-04, 09:49 PM	A hyper-geek potion mixer doesn't need worshipers to keep himself alive.True. He needs a cleric and a fighter and a rogue to keep him alive for the first year or two of adventuring. And in the Realms, he needs a deity to make magic avaialble to him in the first place. :P
ronyon 10-08-04, 11:52 PM	Well, as some one who has loved playing clerics since AD&D, I love them even more now. Back then we would homebrew a god to fit our role playing choices, and then stick with them even when our moral leanings diverged. Example, I played a nuetral cleric of a nuetral death/nature god. A stoic,circle of life sorta thing. I carried a bag of grave mold, and as part of my flavortext, ate a worm from the bag every midnight, to renew my powers. My spells were generic, and my weapons drab, but even as a walking band aid I had fun( the other PCs never trusted me,as they were killcrazed "chaotic good") Now things are much better.Clerics get free feats with most Domains.The spells can really rock, and outside of core, the flexibility shoots up lke crazy. I love the deitylessness most of all! The only thing better than crafting a god to fight what you want to RP, is not knowtowing to agod at all. The freedom that represents is all so why i am usually nuetral. A nuetral pilosopher of undeath and glory could ride off into lichdom on the back of his undead mount, and spend his eturnity of un life righting wrongs an dsuch. I will agree that they are wonderously underpowered, lacking ony in skill, and the cloistered cleric does alot to address that. Also, limiting the scope of spells and making them spontaneous makes more sense than locked-and- loaded spells. I mean shouldn't the preist of nature god be able to talk to animals easier than healing mens bones? What about the Pliosopher of Fate? For him to have invisibility to undead available to him makes little sense.Why can he even turn undead? Of course there is the sorcer, with his innated powers and limited spontaineous spell list, but how can one justifiy nerfing themselfs that badly? For some reason, those who learn magic by just being, are as fragile as those who spend years secluded in study. More fragil if you count the d6 of a cloistered cleric. Yeah, the cleric is just too good, and that is why I love 'em. All that extra sloppy goodness lets me persue all most any path i want, with no worries about staying competative and useful.
Bloodtide_the_Red 10-09-04, 12:26 AM	............I come to sessions with a spell list prepared. I also have notes about which spells I'll substitute in different situations. For instance, I'll can have a melee spell build, a vs. caster spell build, a knowledge spell build, a support spell build, or a ranged attacker spell build, depending on the character of course. But I'll throw anything into the mix if I notice I need something or I'm seeing a pattern................ ----------Only if most players were so ready to game. I think it's safe to say your in the minority here. .........Most clerics I've seen are neutral with portfolios that are extremely open-ended......... ---I don't see it that way. Most portfolios limit gods spell list in my view. 3E has just about any cleric using any spell any time. The clerics of the god of Peace, War, Death, Trade, Shadows, Theives, the Sun, and farming can all cast Righteous might. Somehow the idea of the cleric of peace or shadows bluking up to fight in melee just does not sit well with me. Elemental sides are even worse. The god of the sea or ocean can blast away with a whole list of fire spells. Same way the fire cleric can create water. But that's just me..... .........role playing restriction should never be used to balance mechanical rules............ ---Don't quite get that. Only rules can balance rules? No role-playing? BT
Shatteredtower 10-09-04, 01:15 AM	As much as it pains me to quote a movie in this instance, it fits: "With Great Power comes Great Responsibility." Then it should make you feel better to know that you're not quoting a movie any more than you'd be quoting Gilligan's Island with the words, "Never a borrower nor a lender be." ;) It's a comic book quote, not a movie quote. Some respect for the original source, please. ;) And on the subject of clerics, yes, a lot has changed. Oddly enough, I'm still finding campaigns where no one wants to play a cleric at all. I think they're either going to let them do anything they want whenever they want or they're going to have to severely scale them down in power and insist that this is a much-needed upgrade from now until 6.25. :P
IceFractal 10-09-04, 01:58 AM	It seems like the problem with Clerics is that they were designed to please a player that didn't really want to be one: Imaginary DM: Maybe you should play a Cleric, since the party doesn't have one. Imaginary Player: Aw, they stink! DM: That's not true, come on, play one. Player: They have to use all their spells on healing. DM: Ok, I'll make them have more spell slots than the Wizard so that they can do a full day's worth of healing and combat spells. Player: And they're wussy. DM: Ok, they can wear heavy armor with spell failure and have pretty good combat ability, plus buff spells that really pump them up! Player: Well, ok, I guess. Really, Clerics should either get: Fairly good combat ability but spellcasting significantly inferior to the Wizard/Sorcerer, I mean, they're much better at combat than a Bard, plus they get turning and domain powers. or Spellcasting as good as, although different than, a Wizard (which they pretty much already have), but no combat ability (d4 HD, poor BAB, either everyone gets Spell Failure in armor or noone does) And finally, while a Cleric's power does come from a god, that doesn't mean that they should be as powerful as one, remember, the god does not personally intervene when the Cleric casts a spell (except Miracle, and to a lesser extent ones like Commune). Instead, the God simply gives the Cleric knowledge of how to use magic, just like a Wizard gets knowledge of it from study. Also, there's a much better reason: game balance. I could make a class based around knowing the secret of everything and getting unlimited spells, and it might fit perfectly from a flavor standpoint, but if it overpowers everything else the game won't be much fun for most people.
Craque 10-09-04, 02:47 AM	I think the problem originates with the sacred cow of "only clerics can heal". Originally, to balance that out, clerics had to be pretty crappy at other things since healing magic is VERY potent. But that crappiness led to people not wanting to play them since all they were good for was being the first aid kit. So in response, clerics had to have various elements added to them/increased to "bribe" players to play them. But to be sufficient, the "bribe" had to be pretty substantial. Unfortunately, substantial to the point that, powerwise, the cleric comes out ahead compared to most other classes. Ironic as it is, I think that's how our problem evolved. They killed the "arcane casters should have the more powerful spells" sacred cow and the "fighting classes should be the best fighters" sacred cow to keep the "only clerics can heal" sacred cow alive. Also, some of the unbalance is probably a result of overcompensating. 2nd Edition favored arcane casters too much, so 3rd edition is trying to find the balance but moved things a bit too far in the "divine" direction.
Lina_Inverse 10-09-04, 02:51 AM	Where is the cost? The cleric is a pawn of a deity. The DM should be limiting the cleric with a certain level of deity-desires. For example, in my campaign, clerics of war deities are not permitted to heal an ally until combat is over. Healing is to recover from the effects of a victory gained in battle. No victory? No healing. :D ill quote the rules.divine magic is born of faith.even worshiping a deity isnt going to interfere in the caimpaign,it is at worst a few adventure hooks once your up past 15 or so(before that,why call on you?the deity has clerics much stronger).and some rp restrictions you know perfectly well and already included into your charecter concept,BUT i cant see that as a drawback just a workfree piece of my charecters personality.
Dimeron 10-09-04, 08:40 PM	It seems like the problem with Clerics is that they were designed to please a player that didn't really want to be one: Imaginary DM: Maybe you should play a Cleric, since the party doesn't have one. Imaginary Player: Aw, they stink! DM: That's not true, come on, play one. Player: They have to use all their spells on healing. DM: Ok, I'll make them have more spell slots than the Wizard so that they can do a full day's worth of healing and combat spells. Player: And they're wussy. DM: Ok, they can wear heavy armor with spell failure and have pretty good combat ability, plus buff spells that really pump them up! Player: Well, ok, I guess. That pretty much hit the mark IMO. I see a similar situation with druid and dwarves. Everyone wants to be fighter ripping with muscle, or a sneaky back-stabbing thief, or a blow them up mage, but very few people like to play as some super duper extra-planer’s servant, hence the buff up. That, and they got to do all the healing. So my radical solution, give healing to all casters. But have divine doing it better. That way, Divine casters wouldn't be stuck doing all the healing of the group, and that might actually make them more fun to play without overpowering them severally.
Dimeron 10-09-04, 08:43 PM	And in the Realms, he needs a deity to make magic avaialble to him in the first place. :P And in the realm, gods are nothing more than glorified middle-management for AO. :D
Seeker95 10-09-04, 09:22 PM	And in the realm, gods are nothing more than glorified middle-management for AO. :DToo true. Making, in my world, the Forgotten Realms quite forgotten. Greyhawk, Purdue Boilermakers and Carolina Panthers Rule!
DarkTom 10-09-04, 10:28 PM	How do you handle a True Neutral Dietyless cleric???According to the PHB "a cleric may not be neutral unless his deity's alignment is also neutral". Therefore a cleric without a deity can never be true neutral (since he has no neutral deity).
RaspK FOG 10-09-04, 10:52 PM	According to the PHB "a cleric may not be neutral unless his deity's alignment is also neutral". Therefore a cleric without a deity can never be true neutral (since he has no neutral deity).Sorry, your conclusion is not well-grounded: the books go on under the assumption that the cleric serves a deity and give specific information under that premise, but throw in two additions - that a cleric can be the servant of something other than a deity (a philosophy, concept, idealistic notion, or something like that) and that if he does so he can choose any two domains as his own; it also states that default alignment domain restrictions regarding the CLERIC'S ALIGNMENT apply. This means that your statement is, in RAW and RAI, mistaken.
diaboli 10-09-04, 11:16 PM	I've had the same misgivings about the cleric as most of those mentioned. Granted I've home-brewed a number of things IMC, the cleric being one of where I felt some adjustment was needed. for example; * All PCs MUST choose a diety, not an option IMC. * Cleric deity choice is restricted by their PC's alignment. (my deitiy list specifies priest alignments allowed, rather than the 1-step rule) * Each deity grants specifc powers to its clergy, the player does not gain granted powers based on domain selection. * Clerics don't automatically get spontaneous healing, but can sacrifice a domain AND a granted power to gain the ability. * Clerics carry around a prayer book, similar to a wizards spellbook. The power that fuels their spells may be divine in origin, but they need to know what spells to pray for, which lines of litany to recite, proper inflection, etc. * Spell selection is restricted to PHB. Spells from other sources must first pass DM approval, then the PC has to research for it. is this just one of those sacred cows or what? IMO, yep. Cleric: "Oh Sacred Cow here your humble servant's plea. Does our principal foe reside behind these large iron doors with mystical, yet obviously evil,carvings upon them?" Deity: "Moo." Cleric: "Huh?" Deity: "Moo." Cleric: "Um. Do you think you could be more specific, oh mighty and sacred one?" Deity: "Moo!"
Seeker95 10-09-04, 11:29 PM	This means that your statement is, in RAW and RAI, mistaken.Not true. The statement in the PHB is "A cleric may not be neutral unless his deity's alignment is neutral." This is under Alignment in the generic cleric requirements section, and applies to all clerics. The baseline is that a cleric may not be neutral unless his deity is neutral. Period. I would allow a cleric who worships / follows the principle of neutrality to be neutral, but would then have a lot of fun with denying spells every time said cleric decided to be definitively not neutral in his actions. Of course, to do that, I would also have to allow godless clerics, which I don't -- see above.
RaspK FOG 10-11-04, 06:02 AM	Ah, but here comes the funny part: unless most TN deities in your setting disallow some alignments, TN deities can have NG, LN, TN, CN, and NE clerics... That's 5 alignments worth of clerics versus the 3 alignments worth of clerics for non-TN deities, which means even more clerics for them! :confused: I love Birthright: each deity can have any cleric with an alignment that is the same in any one element, which grants, say, Haelyn (the main LG deity of the setting) clerics of LG, NG, CG, LN, and LE alignments... Both more realistic and more appropriate rules-wise! Under my campaign, deities are uber-powers serving higher ideals: they are their very embodiments, and thus some mortals may take such a place (a couple or more have, actually). This is a secret revealed to their clerics when they reach their 16th effective cleric or paladin level (based on their relative ability to cast spells). Finally, the restriction posed by the books is that they do not choose an alignment DOMAIN that contradicts their own; if a DM allows godless clerics, he MUST allow TN clerics, as they have the most proper godless concept. As for the "neutrality" comment, what about a TN godless cleric with the Protection and Destruction domain? (Call it the Concept of Entropy.)
darczero 10-11-04, 07:31 AM	hoi... The solution to this "problem" Two words: Antimagic! (okay, in D&D, that's only one word) Cleric in Antimagic Field: Weaker than Fighter (only exception to this rule are Initiate of Mystra clerics; look up the feat) Fighter in Antimagic Field: Lacking a few extra points here and there, still fairly nice Barbarian in Antimagic Field: Laughs at it, then rages and kills everything anyway
Sacrusha 10-11-04, 08:22 AM	That's why fighters can cast Antimagic Field, is it? There are some effective counters against AMF, altough they involve high level spells. Even if none of these counters are active, you have to get close to the caster, cast the AMF and then prevent that the caster gets away, all in the same round. A fighter can only do this alone with a quickened AMF(epic, for the ighter) and grapple, or by using a few more high level spells. And if the attempt fails, the fighter is trapped in an antimagic field, no magic weapons, no haste, no flight, no nothing. AMF is an all or nothing tactic.
Seeker95 10-11-04, 10:22 AM	And if the attempt fails, the fighter is trapped in an antimagic field, no magic weapons, no haste, no flight, no nothing.Well, nothing except... His high hit points. His high BAB. His weapon. His multiple attacks. His armor. His strength bonus. His ability to walk out of the AMF. Strip all the classes of magic, and the fighter (and barbarian) is the superior. He is the least dependent upon magic. The rogue comes in a close second, but his best tactic (sneak attack) requires assistance (flanking). The spellcasters tend to rely on their spells to the detriment of their other abilities. Not discounting your post entirely, but reigning it in a bit on the hyperbole. As far as hyperbole on the boards goes, this is quite mild. More "overstatement" than hyperbole. :D
Naeron 10-11-04, 10:46 AM	Yes, but that's many times more effort than what a cleric does to get his spells. I'm not saying the wizard is weak or greatly hindered by this, but it is a limitation that will prevent him from learning ALL spells until the very latest levels. It is possible for him to learn all 9th level spells. It's just that each spell costs 4,725 gp just to learn and he'll have to burn wealth accordingly. <snip> This restriction on the Wizard is often untrue, especially at high level where a huge spell repertoire is important. Unless you interpret "Prepare a spell from a borrowed spellbook (wizard only). One try per day. No extra time required." as meaning you can only try and prepare 1 spell in total from a borrowed spellbook each day (rather than 1 try for each slot you prepare) then a 15th level wizard with 18 INT and max ranks in spellcraft should be able to make the DC15+spell level check automatically and prepare any of their spells from captured spellbooks (a 12th level Wizard with 20 INT can prepare any spell they can cast from a capture spellbook).
Ludliffes 10-11-04, 11:44 AM	Everybody talk about the cleric, and forget about the druid, which is IMO at least as powerful. I agree with most of you, however: the cleric is powerful to make the class appealing. Few people want to play the mobile medikit. I already have problems finding people to play a cleric now, let alone if the class was underpowered. I disagree, however, that role playing limitations are not important. After all, alignment and deities ARE part of the rules. If my cleric doesn't strictly follow her alignment, she knows that she could lose all her powers. And for the "cleric don't need a deity" part, asking a Miracle to a deity is not any different than letting a solar or other Power to grant the spell to the cleric. In any case, if the cleric use her powers unwisely, someone gets angry. I should also mention that a cleric really relies on her spells to be effective. With only 2 skill points/level (and few reasons to boost intelligence, unlike wizards), no bonus feat, no special ability, no familiar, no animal companion, it is a really boring class to level up with. Lower a cleric casting power too much, and you quickly get an underpowered class.