Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Dahil 03-24-04, 11:23 PM	Welcome all, I have been wondering about this topic for a while, and i decided it might be best to get the opinions and input of the collective group. I have heard people comparing the cleric to the wizard and giving their opinions (mostly on who is the most powerful). Based on the fact that both classes are primary spellcasters, i wanted to know what exactly what the differences, strengths and weaknesses of each were (which to me means their magic). That's were you come in. Ground Rules 1. Player's Handbook spells only please. 2. No flaming, insults, derogatory terms, et cetera. 3. We are discussing the spell lists, not the classes or class abilities. Please post accordingly. 4. I happen to use 3.0. You are free to discuss 3.5, but please mention which system you are using. This is especially important if you are making a comparison across the two systems. ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~ Now, in order to try and add a little bit of order to this, i made some categories. You're free and welcome to use any other system you like. I suggest this only because it makes sense to me. I'll mention one or two examples simply to help people understand what i mean. Now, if you would like, you are welcome to mention how metamagic or other feats can change things. Please though, keep in mind that (for the sake of this discussion) we are limited to the Player's Handbook. (No splatbooks please) Categories 1. Offensive[list=A] Direct Damage (Fireball, Magic Missile) Death (Finger of Death, Wail of the Banshee) Incapaciting (Hold Monster, Web) Ability/level Drain (Bestow Curse, Enervation) Summons (Summon Monster) Miscellaneous (Nightmare, Bigby's Grasping Hand) [/list=A] 2. Defensive[list=A] Buffing Spells (Bull's Strength) Specific Defenses (Spell Immunity, Protection from Elements) Miscellaneous Defenses (Guards and Wards, Wall of Force) [/list=A] 3. Movement[list=A] Interplanar (Astral Projection) Large Scale (Teleport) Combat Movement (Expeditious Retreat) [/list=A] 4. Curative[list=A] Hit Points (Cure Light Wounds) Death (Raise Dead) Ability Drain (Restoration) Status Ailments (Remove Poison, Remove Disease) Item fixes (Break Enchantment, Remove Curse) [/list=A] 5. Utility[list=A] Field of Combat Effects (Daylight, Darkness) In Town (Fabricate, Tongues) Item Protection (Sepia Snake Sigil, Explosive Runes) Miscellaneous (Read Magic, Create Food and Water) [/list=A] 6. Other No subcategories, just miscellaneous spells, or spells that can fit in too many categories (Drawmij's Instant Summons, Permanency, Control Weather, Prestidigitation, et cetera)
NorthSaber 03-24-04, 11:29 PM	My opinion is that the two spell lists are roughly equal, although different. Arcane casters get more versatile spells, including illusions and many transmutation spells unavailable to clerics. Beyond that they have earlier and more powerful offensive spells, such as Fireball. Divine casters have better combat buffs and "de-buffs", and the all-important heals. However, I still believe that clerics are more powerful as characters, due to the fact they can melee, cast their spells, and throw the occasional flame strike. Specifically the use of the stat buff spells, magic vestment and greater magic weapon reach fairly high levels of cheese, which gets only thicker with the spell that increases the cleric's size and base attack bonus (forget the name). Plus, a cleric can access many of the mages' most powerful spells through the domains, which further puts the mages behind. Really though, the true test of balance is seeing how many people choose to play mages and how many choose to play clerics. To me it seems the two are still equally popular, although many a munchkin has discovered the joy of playing a cleric. (Not sure I answered your question, but thought this might be relevant. ;) )
Raging Halfling 03-25-04, 02:07 AM	Clerics get better combat buffs. Namely Divine Favor, Divine Power, and Righteous Might. Which IIRC stack. That can be very disgusting to watch. Fun if you're the player, though. Clerics have good defensive spells which I believe are on par with the wizard's defensive spells. I'm currently debating this in another thread if you wish to look into it further. In every other way the cleric's spell list is weaker. Given your houserule on this thread about sticking strictly to spell lists, I shall...RESIST!...rant about...sheer brokenness!!! :D Edit: Oh, and obviously the cleric has an advantage in being able to heal.
beaver1024 03-25-04, 06:03 AM	Originally posted by Raging Halfling Clerics get better combat buffs. Namely Divine Favor, Divine Power, and Righteous Might. Which IIRC stack. That can be very disgusting to watch. Fun if you're the player, though. Clerics have good defensive spells which I believe are on par with the wizard's defensive spells. I'm currently debating this in another thread if you wish to look into it further. In every other way the cleric's spell list is weaker. Given your houserule on this thread about sticking strictly to spell lists, I shall...RESIST!...rant about...sheer brokenness!!! :D Edit: Oh, and obviously the cleric has an advantage in being able to heal. Is Flame Strike weaker than Cone of Cold? Is Destruction weaker than Finger of Death? Is Fire Storm weaker than Horrid Wilting? Many arcane spells are also cleric spells through domains.
Sir Ferdinand 03-25-04, 07:41 AM	I did something very similar long time ago, on the old message boards. But that is long lost I think. The results weren't very surprising. Clerics are better at defensive/buffing spells on medium to high levels, but not on low levels. Wizards are better at direct damage spells at every level, but at undirect damage spells, Clerics won on some levels. Mainly on medium levels. That's the results in short.
Seeker95 03-25-04, 11:43 AM	Over the course of 20 levels, the spell lists are even. At any given level, one class or the other appears to have an offensive advantage. At any given level, one class or the other appears to have a defensive advantage. At any given level, one class or the other appears to have a utility advantage. In reading through the back and forth arguments, I find that: -- half the people who prefer clerics think the cleric has the advantage (braggarts) -- half the people who prefer clerics think the wizard has the advantage (whiners) -- half the people who prefer wizards think the wizard has the advanatage (braggarts) -- half the people who prefer wizards think the cleric has the advantage (whiners) And there is a rather large-but-relatively-silent group who think the whiners and the braggarts need to worry about more important things. :D
Dahil 03-25-04, 12:23 PM	Northsaber, Thanks for the post. I appreciate your opinion. Raging Halfling, (Great name by the way) I would love to see the other thread you mentioned. Could you post the link, or send me a PM? I also reconsidered the whole "limited to PH" thing. Let's just consider it a preference, not a restriction. I'd rather have discussion off topic than to have no discussion at all. Beaver, You have a very good point. The only thing i'd add is that it's important to remember the restrictions on domains. Only two, and they have to match up with your deity. Great point though. Sir Ferdinand, Thank you for the recap of the old boards. It's great, it really is. I'd love more detail, more explaination though. If you can remember anything else, please post. I'm actually kind of hoping to recreate your old board, since i've never seen it. Seeker, I value your opinion. I can see that your conclusion is perfectly reasonable. What i'd like is to see more of the reasoning and logic behind your conclusion. That's what i'm really interested in. Oh, and the braggart/whiner part was funny. Thanks.
Raging Halfling 03-25-04, 12:51 PM	Raging Halfling, (Great name by the way) I would love to see the other thread you mentioned. Could you post the link, or send me a PM? I also reconsidered the whole "limited to PH" thing. Let's just consider it a preference, not a restriction. I'd rather have discussion off topic than to have no discussion at all. Thank you. I actually wasn't referring to non-PhB spells, I was resisting the urge to speak about the comparison between the classes as a whole. It is my belief that it is kind of pointless to talk about the spell lists without taking into account the structure of the class that is using them. Here's the link I mentioned: http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=207311 We focused mainly on Spell Resistance vs. wizard defensive spells, but Spell Immunity fits into the discussion also. Back on topic, I see you are using 3.0. Basically that means that all spellcasters are more powerful than a 3.5 equivalent. However, before the nerfing of Harm, it may have been the single best attack spell in the game. Certainly it was powerful. And as Beaver mentioned earlier, Flame Strike is superior to Cone of Cold. That's more a matter of Cone of Cold sucking really bad though. IMO there is a bit of a mid-level drought for wizard direct-damage spells. The 4th-5th level wizard spells have little in that department. The other spells Beaver mentioned, namely Destruction vs. Finger of Death and Fire Storm vs. Horrid Wilting are clearly in favor of the wizard, though admittedly not by much. Destruction and Finger of Death are precisely equivalent except that Destruction requires the cleric to spend more money on their holy symbol and does slightly more damage on a failed save. Horrid Wilting is clearly better, but only because elemental resistance/immunity cannot be used to reduce damage.
Kyuketsukiouji 03-25-04, 01:02 PM	On the whole: Clerics are better at buffing themselves for physical combat. Clerics are better at using magic at close range. Clerics are better at healing hp damage. Clerics are better at healing status effects. Clerics are better at dealing irrisisble damage. Clerics are better at defending against status effects. Mages are better at inflicting damage at range. Mages are better at transportation and accomodation. Mages are better at miscelaneous tasks. Mages are better at adapting to enemies' defenses. Mages are better at neutralising enemies' magic. Mages are better at defending against physical combat. Make of it what you want as to balance.
Dalaeck 03-25-04, 02:50 PM	I could almost write book on this topic. I'm busy for a couple of days but I'll provide some analysis after that!
halfdrow 03-25-04, 03:32 PM	Spells like harm(3.0 or 3.5) make a cleric so strong in a battle agains the "boss" of adventure.....dragons,demons,etc(not even talking about the poor mage with his weak fortitude save)... make 150 hit points of damage(more than a maximized meterorm swarm)with a touch attack(with a medium base attack bonus) is so nice..... but I like so much the wizard... and in the Eldritch prestige class it could be as versatile as the cleric... Really, like DM I had some problems with clerics that have not interest in roleplay and makes they joices of domains before the choice of gods...
Lina_Inverse 03-25-04, 03:34 PM	mmmm yummy,lets see offensive:the big combat thing for wizards,often overlooked is that clerics are at least as good here.save or dies are about equally placed and generally those are the most importent but lets look at the more often loved nukes. low levels although the wizard has fireball(i wish they had a spell thing like they do for magic cards BAH!)clerics cant really nuke yet. advantege wizard mid levels cone of cold vs. flamestrike,both do the same damage but CoC has the nasty habit of hurting your allys and has incredibly short range advantege CLERIC high levels meteo vs. firestorm?bah meteo does a measly 4d6 more if used right and is higher level advantege CLERIC CLERIC CLERIC ok NOW we do save or dies low level the wizard wins no contest,the cleric dosent get save or dies till hold person advantege wizard mid-high level the advantege of the wizard here is gone,slay living vs. baleful polymorph is the first example,any ray spells favor the cleric for the BAB and any normal saves favor neither since they will have the same casting stat(18+lvl/4+magic) advantege:ill say neither ^^ 9th level spells wail of the banshee rains supreme.weird is bad,but wail?this is the reason wizards dont use nukes at high level,this is the reason to play a necromancer,this is the king of save or dies. advantege:wizard! summons:since both have the same spells its a tie. onto the rest,this area is much more clear cut. defense&healing belong to the cleric no one can doubt this,wizard dont even GET healing and there defensive spells arent nearly as good. utlity and transport are the wizards friends,only be touched upon by wind walk and the all mighty magic domain.expection being divination. so pretty much,id say equal spell lists depending on how the game is played the problem lies in the fact clerics are strictly better outside of spell casting AND get domains.
Kyuketsukiouji 03-25-04, 03:38 PM	Lina_Inverse. Can't really agree with your assesments here, I'm afraid. Wail of the Banshee, for instance, is a decent spell, but immunity to death magic makes it moot. Interestingly enough, it's still mages that have the best save or Die spell out there: Flesh to Stone, a spell against which there's very little protection. Unless you're a cleric.
Lina_Inverse 03-25-04, 03:42 PM	immunity to save or dies often means one of two things.constructs or undead.both of which a wizard is so horribly inferior to the cleric at dealing with its moot.wail is the best save or die because it hits the BBEG and his minions and they WILL die. stone to flesh is hard to prevent noted,but it dosent cost the target a level on failure.
beaver1024 03-25-04, 07:08 PM	Originally posted by Kyuketsukiouji On the whole: Mages are better at inflicting damage at range. Mages are better at transportation and accomodation. Mages are better at miscelaneous tasks. Mages are better at adapting to enemies' defenses. Mages are better at neutralising enemies' magic. Mages are better at defending against physical combat. Make of it what you want as to balance. For damaging at range clerics get Spiritual Weapon, Searing Light, Flame Strike, Firestorm also not to mention domain spells that give them Burning Hands, Chain Lightning etc. Clerics have the best non dimensional transport spell in the game, Wind Walk. Nothing the wizard has even comes close. Clerics also get Teleport via the Travel domain and Miracle. Miscellaneous task is too vague a category but because of Miracle clerics can outdo mages at misc task. Adapting to enemies' defences and neutralising enemy magic? Who gets Spell Resistance? Spell Immunity (Greater)? Who gets True Seeing faster and who is the only class that can negate negative status effects easily? Cleric. Defending against physical combat? Anti-life shell? Sanctuary? HEAL? Clerics again.
beaver1024 03-25-04, 07:22 PM	Originally posted by Raging Halfling The other spells Beaver mentioned, namely Destruction vs. Finger of Death and Fire Storm vs. Horrid Wilting are clearly in favor of the wizard, though admittedly not by much. Destruction and Finger of Death are precisely equivalent except that Destruction requires the cleric to spend more money on their holy symbol and does slightly more damage on a failed save. Horrid Wilting is clearly better, but only because elemental resistance/immunity cannot be used to reduce damage. At 13th level avg damage for a successful saving throw on Destruction is 35 pts. Avg damage on a successful saving throw on Finger of Death is 23.5. Destruction clearly comes out superior. The wizard can't really equal the cleric on failed damage until about 23rd level. On a successful save, Finger of Death can be countered by a Resurrection but Destruction needs a True Resurrection or a Miracle. Destruction is better than Finger of Death in every way and Destruction is a cleric spell. Horrid Wilting vs Firestorm. Do you realise that Horrid Wilting is a Fort save for half? There are more much monsters with good fort saves than fire resistance/immunity. More often than not you would be doing less damage with Horrid Wilting than you'd be with Firestorm. Would you rather do 10-15 pts less damage off your 20d6 with fire resistance or do half damage with your 20d6 Horrid Wilting because monsters have good fort saves. Destruction vs Finger of Death and Horrid Wilting vs Firestorm pretty shows that clerics are as good as dealing save or die spells or area effect damage spells as the wizard.
Vix Damnul 03-25-04, 07:27 PM	If you're going to bring domain spells into the comparison, you also have to use the nearest wizard equivalent- specialization. With spec, the wizard equals clerics in spells per day, but unlike the cleric, loses out on 2 schools entirely, and ONLY gets an extra spell per day, and i think a small bonus on learning spells of that school. While clerics aren't supposed to be able to cast spells with a different alignment descriptor, that doesn't seem to impact them anywhere near as much as a wizard losing out on 2 entire schools.
Raging Halfling 03-25-04, 08:19 PM	Horrid Wilting vs Firestorm. Do you realise that Horrid Wilting is a Fort save for half? There are more much monsters with good fort saves than fire resistance/immunity. More often than not you would be doing less damage with Horrid Wilting than you'd be with Firestorm. Would you rather do 10-15 pts less damage off your 20d6 with fire resistance or do half damage with your 20d6 Horrid Wilting because monsters have good fort saves. Horrid Wilting has three things over Fire Storm: 1) longer range, 2) only takes 1 action to cast, as opposed to 1 round and 3) fire resistance or fire immunity is just as common as a high fort save at these levels. Actually, let me add 4) You get to specify individual targets and can exclude allies. Destruction vs. Finger of Death is actually not the best comparison. Try Destruction vs. Disintegrate. Disintegrate is no longer nullified by immunity to death magic. It now deals damage, massive amounts of it. It can also be used as a utility spell for destroying walls and the like, as well as nullifying force effects. Disintegrate gets much better milage, and it is one level lower. The real problem is that Finger of Death is underpowered.
beaver1024 03-26-04, 01:32 AM	Originally posted by Raging Halfling Horrid Wilting has three things over Fire Storm: 1) longer range, 2) only takes 1 action to cast, as opposed to 1 round and 3) fire resistance or fire immunity is just as common as a high fort save at these levels. Actually, let me add 4) You get to specify individual targets and can exclude allies. Destruction vs. Finger of Death is actually not the best comparison. Try Destruction vs. Disintegrate. Disintegrate is no longer nullified by immunity to death magic. It now deals damage, massive amounts of it. It can also be used as a utility spell for destroying walls and the like, as well as nullifying force effects. Disintegrate gets much better milage, and it is one level lower. The real problem is that Finger of Death is underpowered. Fire Storm vs Horrid Wilting. I rather use Fire Storm still against a fire resistant monster rather than Horrid Wilting against a high fort save monster. I ask again would you rather have 10 - 15 points off your 20d6 Fire Storm damage or half your 20d6 Horrid Wilting damage. Undead and construct monsters, both of which are immune to Horrid Wilting, are far more common than fire immune monsters. Fire Storm is also shapable which nulifies Horrid Wilting selective targetting capability. At worst Fire Storm is at least as good as Horrid Wilting but it is a cleric spell. This means that clerics are at least as good as wiz/sorcs in dealing mass area effect damage. Additionally Water domain grants clerics Horrid Wilting as an 8th level spell. There is no comparison between Destruction and Disintegrate. In 3.0 there might be but now even on a failed save, Disintegrate may not even kill the target whilst Destruction will. Disintegrate also has the added disadvantage of needing a range touch attack and on a successful save does half of Destruction's damage. Consider this at 13th level, on a failed save Disintegrate deals an average of 91 pts of damage (26d6). A huge earth elemental (CR 7) has 156 hitpoints . A Bebility (CR 10) has 150 hitpoints. There is no way even on a failed save a Disintegrate will kill those creatures outright. That is if those creature fails their save at all. Destruction however will kill them outright on a failed save. Disintegrate (or Finger of Death) vs Destruction comparison shows that clerics are at least as good as, I'd definately say better than, wiz/sorc at save or die spells. If cleric spells are as good as wiz/sorc spells in 2 of the areas wiz/sorc spells are supposed good in, how can divine spells be weaker than arcane spells?
beaver1024 03-26-04, 02:07 AM	edit: deleted offtopic post
Kyuketsukiouji 03-26-04, 08:01 AM	Originally posted by beaver1024 For damaging at range clerics get Spiritual Weapon, Searing Light, Flame Strike, Firestorm also not to mention domain spells that give them Burning Hands, Chain Lightning etc. Clerics have the best non dimensional transport spell in the game, Wind Walk. Nothing the wizard has even comes close. Clerics also get Teleport via the Travel domain and Miracle. Miscellaneous task is too vague a category but because of Miracle clerics can outdo mages at misc task. Adapting to enemies' defences and neutralising enemy magic? Who gets Spell Resistance? Spell Immunity (Greater)? Who gets True Seeing faster and who is the only class that can negate negative status effects easily? Cleric. Defending against physical combat? Anti-life shell? Sanctuary? HEAL? Clerics again. First, domain spells, being limited to the specific cleric, are not part of this particular discussion. A cleric devoted to Happiness and Healing won't be doing much beyond healing with his domain spells, so let's ignore those. Damaging at range: Well, nice. You've named 4 Cleric spells that do that. How about we count the mage spells that do the same thing and see if we don't get around 20-40 of them, of all levels, elements and types. Mage wins in quantity and variety. Transportation: Wind Walk is nice, but Phantom Steed is about the same. Not to mention Feather Fall, Levitation, Fly, Overland Flight, Dimension Door, Teleportation, Teleport Circle, Astral Projection and a few others. Again, the mage is better at it. He can do more, at different levels and more often. Miscelaneous Tasts: Well, yeah. Miracle *can* do pretty much anything. And you're thinking anyone will be convinced that Clerics are better that Mages at things like opening doors and making stuff out of thin air because they can use a level 9 spell to duplicate a level 2 or 3 Mage spell? Uh, no. Don't buy it. Adaptring to enemie's defences: Take a look at all the damaging spells a cleric has. Note a trend? All the spells are practically of the same element. Fire. A few use either acid or electricity, but that's it. Can you name a single non-domain spell Clerics have that uses cold, for instance? So what does the cleric do the day he runs into a red dragon? The mage starts tossing his other elemental spells around just fine. Plenty of selection for him. Neutralising enemy magic: Mages get all the dispells, and disjunction. Clerics don't get disjunction. So at high levels, the mage is indeed better at taking out other people's magic. Defending against physical combat: Heal isn't a defensive spell. Sanctuary is cute, but Mirror Image works just as fine. Anti-life shell isn't that great for a class with so many touch spells, but mages can get repulsion, which does the same thing (albeit with a save). Clerics don't get project image, Fire Shield, Iron Body, or some other spells that make a fighter's job harder. Let's not even bring Prismatic Shell into the discussion.
Heron_Marked_Blade 03-26-04, 09:02 AM	It's obvious that the mage has a broader selection of utility spells, as well as elemental damage spells. I would argue that the cleric has more essential spells. How many damage spells do you need, after all? Sorcerers do very well with a limited number of arcane spells. In a standard party, the cleric contributes more toward group success with his cure spells, group buff spells, utility spells, anti-evil/good spells, summon, and damage spells than a wizard does with his utility, summon, and damage spells. A cleric has access to ALL the spells of each level upon leveling up; a wizard has to locate, purchase and/or research his spells, and in the vast majority of cases won't ever have all the spells on his spell list. For pure damage output, you're not going to beat a fully-loaded Wizard. For pure survivability, you're not going to beat a Cleric (hp buffs, AC buffs, melee buffs, cure spells). Which class is more powerful than the other is going to depend entirely on the situation, your personal preference, and your definition of "power". And that's the bottom line. :teach:
beaver1024 03-26-04, 09:10 AM	Originally posted by Kyuketsukiouji First, domain spells, being limited to the specific cleric, are not part of this particular discussion. A cleric devoted to Happiness and Healing won't be doing much beyond healing with his domain spells, so let's ignore those. If you're going to remove domain abilities then you can't assume that wizards will get everything that you mentioned since wizards have to find and learn spells. Therefore just as some clerics don't get Mage's Disjunction because they don't have the Magic domain so then some wizards don't get the same spell because either they can't find it or they can't afford it, or they can't cast it because of specialisation. Similary with sorcerers some sorcerers don't have enough spell known slots to cover all the areas that they are suppose to have advantage in. They can't know every damaging spells of every element type. At most they can only concentrate on 1 or 2 or else they become too straightjacketed (if they're not already). If you look at wizards with approximately 4 - 5 spells per spell level and sorcerer's even worse progression, the cleric's spell list comes out way better than either the wiz or the sorc. In the end cleric spells are equal to and/or better than arcane spells in the very thing that arcane spell do best simply because the cleric can know more spells per level than the wiz or the sorc can. Incidently in the core rules, wiz/sorcs do not have 20-40 damaging spells of every element type per spell level. Even if they did they couldn't learn them all. With regards to Wind Walk, I challenge you to find a better non dimensional transport spell than Wind Walk (core only). Phantom Steed can only fly at caster level 14. Wind Walk already allows area effect fly for hours at the time at level 11. Wind Walk allows the recipient to fly at 600 whilst Phantom Steed's max speed is only 240. There is no equivalent in the wiz/sorc core spell list.
beaver1024 03-26-04, 09:14 AM	double post
Stirgar 03-26-04, 09:22 AM	One spell : Shapechange. :P I know I'm starting some nasty stuff here as I personally think it's too powerful even with the errata. Though there are times I feel it's spell like shapechange that balance wizards and clerics. I don't know. Now, as far as the whole discussion goes, I prefer a wizards spell list because it is so versatile. There are a lot of hidden gems in the wizard spell list that allows some crafty players tweak into advantages. Things like animate rope, most illusions spells. Also as many pointed out, wizards *usually* have the advantage at long range. There also is the matter of energy type. Wizards have greater choice as to what type of energy they use for damage where the clerics is kinda like the druid where he's more limites in his options. Nice thread everyone...
Raging Halfling 03-26-04, 10:35 AM	There is no comparison between Destruction and Disintegrate. In 3.0 there might be but now even on a failed save, Disintegrate may not even kill the target whilst Destruction will. Disintegrate also has the added disadvantage of needing a range touch attack and on a successful save does half of Destruction's damage. Consider this at 13th level, on a failed save Disintegrate deals an average of 91 pts of damage (26d6). A huge earth elemental (CR 7) has 156 hitpoints . A Bebility (CR 10) has 150 hitpoints. There is no way even on a failed save a Disintegrate will kill those creatures outright. That is if those creature fails their save at all. Destruction however will kill them outright on a failed save. Disintegrate (or Finger of Death) vs Destruction comparison shows that clerics are at least as good as, I'd definately say better than, wiz/sorc at save or die spells. Most of what you've mentioned are advantages. Here's my prime counterexample: a CR 13 Mummy Lord has 95 hp. You can use Destruction on it if you really want to, but it won't do anything. With the 3.5 Disintegrate, you have a decent chance of destroying it. All because it isn't a death spell anymore. Massive, nonelemental damage to a single target is way cooler than a save-or-die if you ask me. Also, you specifically picked out creatures who don't have appropriate hit points for their CR. A Huge Earth Elemental is undervalued. It has twice the hit dice plus more specials over a Large elemental, but the CR was only increased by two. Besides which, you can use Destruction against the elemental if you like, but I'm switching to a better attack spell, like my 3rd-level Fireball or something similar. Good luck getting the elemental with its +15 Fort save. My point is, there aren't a lot of good cleric attack spells. True, there are a couple of them which are arguably just as good as a wizard spell of the same level, but the spells are few and far between. In fact, I can list them off: Destruction, Harm (broken in 3.0), Fire Storm, Flame Strike, Slay Living, and Energy Drain. Anything else the cleric has for attack spells either suck or they're domain spells. Of course, the fact that even this many exist is a blatant disregard of their own rules by WotC. The DMG lists guidelines regarding divine vs. arcane spells, and it specifically states that wizards/sorcerers are supposed to have better attack spells than clerics and druids. The fact that this rule was ignored by its writers is just wrong. Transportation: Wind Walk is nice, but Phantom Steed is about the same. Not to mention Feather Fall, Levitation, Fly, Overland Flight, Dimension Door, Teleportation, Teleport Circle, Astral Projection and a few others. Again, the mage is better at it. He can do more, at different levels and more often. Ummm...how is Phantom Steed about the same as Wind Walk? Phantom Steed summons one mount (as opposed to affecting 4 when the cleric gets the spell) for one person and doesn't fly at 600 ft/round. The wizard is thankfully still better at teleporting. Miscelaneous Tasts: Well, yeah. Miracle *can* do pretty much anything. And you're thinking anyone will be convinced that Clerics are better that Mages at things like opening doors and making stuff out of thin air because they can use a level 9 spell to duplicate a level 2 or 3 Mage spell? Uh, no. Don't buy it. This is funny. I can just picture the deity saying to himself: "He wants what?!? You're calling on me to open a :censored: door? Get a locksmith or a wizard." *Slams door on request.* Honestly, what self-respecting deity would stoop to letting you waste a Miracle on stupid little utility purposes?
Kyuketsukiouji 03-26-04, 10:59 AM	Re: Phantom Steed. You get it earlier, you can Extend it much more easily and you can use it for things other than walking on air, like, say, carrying large bags full of gold. After all, nothing says you have to ride that horse. Or ride it alone. [edit] Scratch that, I just reread the spell description, and yes, only the designated rider can ride it. I guess it's up to your DM to decide if it can bear more weight than just you.
Lina_Inverse 03-26-04, 11:51 AM	Originally posted by Kyuketsukiouji Adaptring to enemie's defences: Take a look at all the damaging spells a cleric has. Note a trend? All the spells are practically of the same element. Fire. A few use either acid or electricity, but that's it. Can you name a single non-domain spell Clerics have that uses cold, for instance? So what does the cleric do the day he runs into a red dragon? The mage starts tossing his other elemental spells around just fine. Plenty of selection for him. non-issue any cleric in his right mind will research ice,lit and acid strike soon enough.there variations on core spells and a dm would have to be a tyrant to deny them in all seriousness. in addition what mage can kill a golem?none?thats right but a cleric has the tried and true buff and smash. mass non-elemental damage may seem cool,but is nat useless unless it killed them in the first place,if they fails there save...dag nabit why didnt you kill them:tantrum: as for undead,non-issue clerics can turn it and that is also worth full exp. here let me end this arguement. no one can say wizard spells are more nessasary than cleric spells.therefore since the cleric spell list is nessasary but the wizards is NOT the cleric list wins by default.
Kyuketsukiouji 03-26-04, 11:59 AM	Originally posted by Lina_Inverse non-issue any cleric in his right mind will research ice,lit and acid strike soon enough.there variations on core spells and a dm would have to be a tyrant to deny them in all seriousness. Go back to the top of the page. Read the first post. Pay particular attention to what we're taking about here. Reread the line that says "1. Player's Handbook spells only please." multiple times. This discussion is about the spell list as it currently stands. It's not about researching new spells, DM intervention or anything noncore. Your argument is quite valid. Unfortunately, it doesn't apply the the discussion at hand.
Lina_Inverse 03-26-04, 12:05 PM	woops DOH!:embarrass: well it still is mostly core right?:bigeyes: well ok so theres no that... but still the fact that the system flatly requires every party to have a cleric,and the cleric list is generally full of yummy nessasary goodness.cleric list wins hands down because you MUST have a cleric in your party.
Sheer_FALACY 03-26-04, 12:18 PM	A first level party of all clerics is going to have great survivability, but almost no ability to deal damage. No attack spells, 4-5 useful stats each, and no good weapons. At 5th level, it isn't even a contest. Fireball vs searing light. At 11th level, the wizard is engaging in combat from 800' away, while the cleric is going in for touch. Even a d8 hit die can't beat being outside of a shortbows maximum range. At 17th level, the DM is houseruling Miracle.
Raging Halfling 03-26-04, 02:32 PM	but still the fact that the system flatly requires every party to have a cleric,and the cleric list is generally full of yummy nessasary goodness.cleric list wins hands down because you MUST have a cleric in your party. Not necessarily. A party is nearly handicapped without healing, but you can get that from druids and bards. In fact, even a ranger or paladin can heal, though not as well. The only truly unique ability in terms of spell use is their ability to deal with status effects. A druid can replicate some of these, and a high level paladin can get most of them. But neither can cast Restoration or Greater Restoration. These are almost strictly non-combat spells though. Seen that way, the cleric's list is pretty much replicated by any number of other classes. One might also contest the combat buffs the cleric gets as being unique to them. That is technically true, since nobody else gets the spells Righteous Might, Divine Power,etc. if memory serves. But that is far from being a unique type of ability brought to the table. Wizards, paladins, rangers, and druids also get combat buffs, though they are for the most part not as powerful. Conclusion: The cleric is not "necessary" to a party of adventurers. Though they are a very strong character class with a versatile, powerful spell list, they are in nearly all respects replicable by other classes.
Lina_Inverse 03-26-04, 06:21 PM	Originally posted by Raging Halfling Not necessarily. A party is nearly handicapped without healing, but you can get that from druids and bards. In fact, even a ranger or paladin can heal, though not as well. The only truly unique ability in terms of spell use is their ability to deal with status effects. A druid can replicate some of these, and a high level paladin can get most of them. But neither can cast Restoration or Greater Restoration. These are almost strictly non-combat spells though. Seen that way, the cleric's list is pretty much replicated by any number of other classes. One might also contest the combat buffs the cleric gets as being unique to them. That is technically true, since nobody else gets the spells Righteous Might, Divine Power,etc. if memory serves. But that is far from being a unique type of ability brought to the table. Wizards, paladins, rangers, and druids also get combat buffs, though they are for the most part not as powerful. Conclusion: The cleric is not "necessary" to a party of adventurers. Though they are a very strong character class with a versatile, powerful spell list, they are in nearly all respects replicable by other classes. paladins,bards and ranger cant heal effectivly enough.and druids cant bring the most importent attribute.(well all druid partys can if they all have wild spell....) raise dead,every session from lvl9 onwards is the chance of a pc dieing instantly at full hp.raise dead is the most nessasary spell in the game followed only by heal and mass heal.
Gyrofthewastes 03-26-04, 06:21 PM	Regarding some cleric evocations: Please note that flamestrike has a radius of only 10 feet. This is a SERIOUS disadvantage when compared to fireball, especially if using a combat map. A 10 foot radius simply does not amount to many targets. While Cone of Cold has a shorter total range, it has a much better area of effect. On Firestorm: In 3.5, this has the ability to be shaped/sculpted. While this is good, it ALSO has a casting time of 1 full round...making it pretty inefficient (and vulnerable...since it gives enemies a good chance to interrupt) when compared to faster spells like horrid wilting. On cleric buffs: While the cleric definitely has some nice buffs, the arcane caster actually comes out ahead IMO. Divine Favor, Divine Power, and Righteous might are certainly all very strong, but they can ONLY be used on the cleric. In contrast, the wizard/sorc gets Haste (multi-target in 3.5), Displacement, Enlarge person (3.5), Shrink Person. More versatile and, IMO, more effective in many circumstances.
Lina_Inverse 03-26-04, 06:25 PM	flamestrike is still a better spell than cone of cold,and has a higher save than fireball by then(though its 2 levels till its better)also note that famestrike does DIVINE damage which nothing resists. you realize haste now sucks donkey dont you?wow one extra ATTACK,no sorry no sorc or wiz will ever learn it.and most of these buffs are useless on the wizard but the cleric can buff and go. and btw nothing beats divine power,tensors trans is a poor substitute.
Raging Halfling 03-26-04, 06:44 PM	Originally posted by Lina_Inverse flamestrike is still a better spell than cone of cold,and has a higher save than fireball by then(though its 2 levels till its better)also note that famestrike does DIVINE damage which nothing resists. you realize haste now sucks donkey dont you?wow one extra ATTACK,no sorry no sorc or wiz will ever learn it.and most of these buffs are useless on the wizard but the cleric can buff and go. and btw nothing beats divine power,tensors trans is a poor substitute. Correction, a selfish wizard/sorcerer will never learn Haste. It is now a party buff. Cast it once for the entire party and you're all instantly faster, even if the extra attack doesn't interest anyone. Although that would be very odd, since that implies you don't have any full BAB classes in your party.
Gyrofthewastes 03-26-04, 07:13 PM	flamestrike is still a better spell than cone of cold,and has a higher save than fireball by then(though its 2 levels till its better)also note that famestrike does DIVINE damage which nothing resists. Having a comparable spell at a lower spell level is in all ways better. The difference between a third and fifth (fireball = 3rd, flamestrike = 5th for the cleric) level spell is a considerable number of castings per day, an empowerment (so now we've got a fireball doing half again as much damage) or, if save DC is the end-all be-all, a simple heighten. While unresistable damage is nice, a caster is still better off using a different spell entirely on a creature that resists flame than a flamestrike.
Timewilltell 03-26-04, 07:33 PM	meteo vs. firestorm?bah meteo does a measly 4d6 more if used right and is higher level Wait just one minute...:D Meteor Swarm got a major buff up in 3.5, and is unquestionably the best damage spell in the game. First, all of those meteor's together do 32d6 points of damage, a full 12d6 points above fire storm. However, the really good part about meteor swarm is, even though it reuqires you to make a ranged touch attack (Come on, by level 17 that can't be too hard), the target gets no save against the meteors. That means your likely to pound someone for 32D6 with no save. Even if you miss, they have to save against each meteor. Not a bad spell at all. Firestorm, however, always gives a save.
Heron_Marked_Blade 03-26-04, 07:57 PM	I find these discussions of "cleric damage spell" vs. "wizard damage spell" to be useless; of course the wizard will come out ahead. That's the wizard's strength. On the flip side, of course the cleric will come out ahead when you compare "cleric hp-restoration spell" vs. "wizard hp-restoration spell". The flip side is that clerics get damage spells (however damaging they might be), whereas wizards DON'T get healing spells (I know, kreynolds, they get negative energy "healing" spells :D ). The question is, does the wizard's access to massive-damage spells make his spell list more powerful than the cleric's access to moderate-damage spells AND healing spells? Comparing Meteor Storm to Flame Strike is like comparing True Resurrection to Raise Dead (which wizards have access to through Wish) -- there's really no comparison.