I'm trying to think of a simple way to simulate Clerics in robes instead of armor without it gimping them in some way but also without it being a strictly better choice than the standard armor rules.
How about something like this -
when not wearing armor, Clerics add +1 to their wisdom and charisma saves. Once per day they can add their Wisdom modifier to their AC as a reaction to being attacked before the damage is rolled.
I also can't decide whether to allow all clerics that option or have them pick one or the other at 1st level (I'd probaby slightly buff the above in that case).
If you want a cleric in robes, just puts robes on top of your chain mail. Even with your modification, I still think wearing armor will be better. And if I recal correctly, all clerics get medium armor as well, with certian domains getting heavy and shields on top of it. Clerics are fairly tough.
That's not the type of feedback I'm looking for. The issue is not that I am trying to buff clerics, it's that I want a feasible way to have non-armor wearing clerics that are not overtly suboptimal (without multiclassing).
edit - actually I think I'll just work on a full scale variant that does something like grant an additional domain at 1st level in exchange for all weapon and armor profs and d6 HD. I'll have to spend some time evaluating and making tweaks.
I'm trying to think if giving them the monk's unarmored defense would break anything(while also taking away their armor and shield proficiencies). Assuming a 16 wisdom score at level 1, you would have a 13, 14, or 15 AC value(depending on your dex score being at 10, 12, or 14), which is in line with scale mail.
It does make dex a more important stat for a cleric, though I suppose you can drop strength in favor of a dex build as I don't think anything for a cleric keys off of strength(though I may be overlooking something).
Edit:
I see I was ninja-ed while typing.
You even gave it a cool name!
I'd go with making a domain that includes mage armor as a domain spell, and then making some kind of magical priest robe that, like the robe of the archmage provides an AC.
...or I would encourage the player to see that having a bit lower AC by not wearing armor isn't actually that big of a deal in the grand scale of the game - just a reason to use more defensive spells like shield of faith.
http://annarchive.com/files/Drmg068.pdf
You could try the cloistered cleric.
What Aaron said plus the monk's Unarmored Defense is a good starting point.
Yeah the simplest way is to just use the monk's unarmored defense(and the OP asked for simple), but I do like the idea of a domain encouraging that style also. It gets away from simple, but would be a better impact.
Me, I'd look at the wizard. Rather than trying to make an unarmored cleric that is mechanically identical to an armored cleric, admit that your unarmored cleric is going to be less durable than his armored brethren (that's kinda the point, I imagine) and give him something else to compensate. Look at wizards for inspiration, as they're probably closest to unarmored clerics. Divine spell recovery, maybe?
DMG. p.287 wrote:
Kentus wrote:
CCS wrote:
powerroleplayer wrote:
bonethug0108 wrote:
Kalani wrote:
Einlanzer wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
Einlanzer wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Is reflavouring out of the question?
Mechanically, it's identical to a scale mail or whatever, but describe the robes as being crafted and blessed in such a way that it protects the person wearing it. Better robes (armour) are more intricate and have greater blessings.
Just a suggestion, of course. You should take your setting into consideration. What I wrote there fits pretty well in a high fantasy game, but could be out of place in a setting with less magic.
Einlanzer wrote:
Einlanzer wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Einlanzer wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
And yet, here you are. Posting in a public forum. Instead of your blog...
Einlanzer wrote:
A side point of having priest robes/vestements that add in AC in some way.
I would recomend if you do somenting like this the robes/vestements worn should be of the kind that clearly indentifies you as a cleric of your specific god., not just wearing any kind of robe.
edwin_su wrote:
edwin_su wrote:
But it doesn't sound like he wants a way to increase armor. He's looking to create a cleric that isn't in melee combat.
I'd go with d6 hit die, no armor proficiencies, weapon proficiencies = to wizard.
To compensate, you get access to two domains at level 1. The only thing that really suffers here is that the Divine Strike of most domains is useless to you. I'd let you apply that damage to spell damage instead of just weapon attacks. Knowledge and Light domains would be perfect for this character. There you go, now you have the Cloistered Cleric 
ChrisCarlson wrote:
propheticplatypus wrote:
Einlanzer wrote:
Einlanzer wrote:
Mage Armor = Thor's Armor
Bracers of Defense (or wtf it's called this edition) = Baubble to let Thor's Goat live another Meal
Adjective Thingie = Thor's thingie
Compound-Noun thingie = Shortened Compound-Noun Thingie of Thor
Bless me Thor for I have sinned, I haven't drunk enough Mead for breakfast today. I beseech thee as thy loyal and hope to be drunken servant.
Thor's thinks on it for an iota, decides today is a good day for drinking and pillaging those whiney Celts, and hands out an AC of 14.
No I'm not trained in Constitution saves silly! I believe in Thor, minus 1 for con saves be damned. I accept my fate is in his battle-drenched hands (despite myself wearing a Snuggie).
From what I'm reading, the options being discussed are (in order of amount of work & use of DMG/variant material):
- Do nothing, wear robes and live with having low AC or buff your DEX
- Add a Variant Class Ability that sets AC 10 + WIS + DEX, replacing Medium Armor Proficiency
- Add a Variant Class Ability that sets AC to 10 + PIETY (using DMG rules), replacing Medium Armor Proficiency
- Add a new Domain/Subclass feature that provides one of the above, along with any other features you'd like this archetype to have
- Create a new class (Friar?) with this in mind from the ground up.
Honestly, 2/3 seems easy enough to implement and doesn't seem like it'd have that much effect on balance (at least not without some pretty rigorous testing). As for the inane argument about whether this is "required" or not doesn't really matter and is dragging the topic down.
I haven't seen it yet in the book, but I'd houserule a level 1 spell called Magic Vestments that's identical to Mage Armour. Maybe give the cleric an extra level 1 spell per day as a result to compensate?
From the DMG:
"You can also change armor and weapon proficiencies to reflect certain aspects of your world. For example, you could decide that the clerics of a particular deity belong to an order that forbids the accumulation ofmaterial goods, other than magic items useful for their divine mission. Such clerics carry a staff, but they are forbidden from wearing armor or using weapons other than that staff. To reflect this, you could remove the armor and weapon proficiencies for clerics of this faith, making them proficient with the quarterstaff and nothing else. You could give them a benefit to make up for the loss of proficiencies- something like the monk's Unarmored Defense class feature , but presented as a divine blessing."
So remove armor proficiency, add Unarmored Defense (of some sort).
I started this same thread a couple months ago, and Kalani currently has one in the Player Help forum. It's still something I'd like to see "solved", and by that I mean:
1) For some/many of us re-fluffing is unsatisfying.
2) Simply saying "Take the lower AC if that's the character you want to play" is also unsatisfying. It's just throwing away 2-4 points of AC. Fluff and crunch.
3) Dipping a level into monk is currently the "best" option, although if you want to play a domain like Life now you're throwing away even more AC by ignoring a class benefit (martial weapons, heavy armor), and you'll always be a level behind in your main class.
(That said, my reading of this thread is that people suggested those options in good faith, and the OP lashed out at them for giving useless advice.)
But what occurs to me, thanks to some of the replies above, is that maybe finding a way to bring AC back to parity, e.g. through Uarmored Defense, is not the answer. Sure, give Mage Armor as a domain spell in case the cleric needs it in an emergency. But if your character is consciously eschewing armor it must be because defense is not his highest priority. He's giving up armor for something more important to his faith.
What that is, I don't know. Maybe spell recovery as somebody suggested.
Personally I think the answer is a new Domain, although what that is I'm not yet sure. I did look through the Deities at the back of the PHB and with the addition of the Death Domain all listed domains are now covered by official subclasses. Doesn't mean we can't make up a new one, though. Magic? The existing domains of Life and Knowledge would have been perfect for this; too bad they're already taken.
P.S. And, mechanically, one of the reasons I don't like the DMG's suggestion is that it makes the cleric more MAD than ever because staves are not finesse weapons. I really wish that was in the weapon's description and not limited to monks.
Elfcrusher wrote:
Replace a Clerics 1st level Domain ability with something like this?
Armor of Faith
At first level after picking your Domain you feel your Gods presense with you at all times filling you with confidence.and the belief that no harm shall befall you as long as you are following the tenets of your god.As long as your are wearing mo armor and are on good terms with your God you recive 2 points of Ac per Wisdom adjustment to a maximum of +10 AC
ie:Wisdom 16 gives you +6 to base AC.
However, because of your strong belief in your God you are less likely avoid physical attack and therefore you recieve no Dexterity adjustment bonuses towards AC
If one believes the ability is still too much perhaps half their Dex based Dc check adjustment
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Elfcrusher wrote:
DLfan wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
shpelley wrote:
cbwjm wrote:
Kalani wrote:
I make no assumptions about how the game should or should not be played. I interpreted your statement as a leading statement meant to invalidate the other person's pov, that was all. If such was not the case, I apologize for the misconception.
I personally think there are dozens of different ways the game can be played, and ultimately - each player needs to find what they like about the system, and - with the exception of Organized play - change the things they don't.
I am not a "one true wayist". Each person has the right to play the game they way they enjoy it most. Sometimes that involves compromise with your fellow gamers when two (or more) different playstyles appear at the same table however.
Even if I personally find a person's playstyle is not to my taste - I will do everything in my power to help them balance their proposed changes with the remainder of the ruleset, paying particular attention to how their proposed changes would affect other parts of the rules they may not have anticipated. It is not my place to tell them they are wrong for wanting to houserule something. I make houserules all the time myself, based on my own personal preferences and the needs of any particular campaign. It would be hypocritical for me to say that someone else should not houserule - especially if it increases their enjoyment of the game.
Furthermore...
My argument never restricted this "priest" character from having access to an AC of 15 or higher. The character is choosing not t take advantage of his armor proficiencies. That is no different from any other example you cited.
Otherwise, what would you tell the player of wizard who takes neither mage armor or shield? Do you call them stupid and laugh at them?
Just because someone could potentially take advantage of something, but chooses not to, does not invalidate their character concept.
A player who invisions their character as a "soft" priest who eshews combat and focuses on being a kind, holy example to the world, should not care to max their AC.
@ChrisCarlson: Please don't police how someone plays the game, or tell them they are wrong for playing the game differently than yourself. Just because you think its perfectly ok for them to have a lower AC when wearing cloth instead of armor - does not mean everyone else must agree with you, or that they are playing the game wrong because they choose a different option.
Ultimately, when people ask for help - we have one of two choices.
- We can either listen to their request and attempt to help them find a solution they are happy with or:
- We can hinder their efforts.
The OP has requested help in creating an unarmored cleric that still has a respectable AC (15+ seems reasonable).
Those are the perameters of this thread. Choosing to ignore those perameters only hinders the goal of finding a solution they can be satisfied with.
Telling them they are wrong for wanting to have a high AC while still wearing cloth is simply you believing their efforts to be bad, wrong fun. Don't be a jerk and spoil someone else's game simply because you think it is bad wrong fun.
mellored wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Thanks for the thoughts everyone. I'm starting to feel like the best solution isn't the simplest one - it's to leave the existing cleric as-is and make a variant - a d6 HD cleric with no weapon/armor profs featuring an expanded spell list and some updated features, such as Divine Strike working with spells.
I'm the one being a onetruewayist? Laughable. I love how you "detractors" steadfastly avoid the questions I asked while simultaneously strawmanning the point I was actually making in a blatant effort to puff yourselves up. One last try:
What do you tell a player who plays a wizard and chooses not to take the mage armor or shield spells? What do you tell the player of a bard who would rather just wear fancy clothes than bother with armor?
(Hint: It's going to be the same thing you'd tell a cleric player who chooses not to wear armor, because they want to portray a cloistered priest and not a templar...)
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Einlanzer wrote:
DLfan wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Einlanzer wrote:
Einlanzer wrote:
Karnos wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Einlanzer wrote:
Einlanzer wrote:
Only the Sith deal in absolutes...
Karnos wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Lol. Why are you still in here talking to these two Einlanzer. You are just fueling the fire. Ignore them.
Istbor wrote:
Einlanzer wrote:
To the helpful people in this thread:
I'm considering the possibility of merging the cleric and druid spell lists into a single variant priest class. Do you think the combined spell l ist would be potent enough to justify a d6 hd without armor proficiencies, assuming I made some light feature adjustments to account for the lack of melee viability?
Einlanzer wrote:
Einlanzer wrote:
Einlanzer wrote:
a
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Einlanzer wrote:
Einlanzer wrote:
I don't understand how this became such a controversial topic. If a player wanted to play a cloistered, unarmoured cleric, my first suggestion would be to reskin the monk and/or pump your Dex. If those don't fit their concept, then let's talk about trading armour profs for unarmoured defense. Not hard to implement and doesn't seem like it'll have a huge impact on the game. Want to play a 4e unarmoured Avenger paladin? Ok, let's talk about trading armour and shields for unarmoured defense. It seems simple to me, it's suggested in the DMG, doesn't seem like it'll change the way the game works and it keeps everyone happy. If you don't want it at your table, then don't do it. If you do, then go ahead. ("You" isn't referring to anyone in particular.)
EDIT: Y'all have presented good and completely valid suggestions on both sides of the issue. There's no need to convince the other side that any option is the right one. The OP wanted help and he's gotten a ton of suggestions. Nobody's right or wrong here.