Healing Surges.
It came up in my gaming group, where one of us always plays a healertype. In 3,5e, him and me both were cleric and druid. We had to be able to fight a bit (especially me as a druid) and had to keep the group alive.
Now in 4e, my friend is yet again a cleric, whilst i'm a warden - and he loves being a healing supportclass. Was always one when him and me played DAoC (Dark Age of Camelot), but he doesn't feel that he is needed as much? He loved that he in 3,5 was speccing towards a loremaster. No matter what we stumbled apon, he was smarter than us all combined - and kept the group alive. When it came to damage dealing, he was a schmuck, but with decent AC and good healing, he was imo one of the best supportclasses a group could want.
Now he's got only a few heals and sees 4e as a MMO, rather than D&D. Yes, we're having tons of fun - it's more a thought that arose in our session.
Personally i've been looking at a shaman and thinking weather or not, that class would suit him more because the spirit companion can buff and heal (especially me as a sole defender), whilst the shaman himself can fight from a distance.
Is it really just us who think that the cleric has gone from being... clericy (heals up the arse and every undeads worst nightmare) to being alot less... usable. Hardly any heals (group heals it selv via surges) and only has turn undead as an encounter power (i belive).
If so, i'll shut up
EDIT: I'm not comparing 4E with MMO because of heals - just so you know
. Kinda tiresom to give the same answer again and again, so if you only plan on commenting that, don't. D&D is still fantasy and has alot more to offer. If you want the reason for me saying that it's a bit more MMO than 3,5 - read the thread please Now he's got only a few heals and sees 4e as a MMO, rather than D&D.
Whoa, there. How does "it's a Massively Multiplayer Online" follow from less heals? Or did you just throw that in there for no reason?
And the Cleric can give great bonuses to attacks and good debuffs to enemies.
As for being more like an MMO? I don't really think so, maybe MMOs have gotten more like D&D?
I'm partial to the warlord and bard. If he likes a ranged leader (other than the cleric), I'd suggest bard. If he likes melee, try the warlord. On the warlord path, you can go four different ways:
1. Tactical- Int secondary (great AC in light Armor), gives a lot of attack bonus' and extra attacks and movement. Goes great with the Eladrin for telaporty goodness.
2. Inspiring- Hands down best healer of the warlord builds. Plenty of buffing available also (if playing with martial power).
3. Resourceful- Int and Cha secondarys. Balanced... Has fun being a tiefling, alot of his powers give a bonus from a good Int and Cha (rider effects often allow the usage of both options a power would give to the other builds).
4. Bravura- a different kind of leader all together... Jumps right in the middle of combat. When you hit him, he says "Thank you sir, may I have another?". High risk high reward.
Also, I wouldn't decide to change before looking at divine power, which comes out next week. Good luck.
I think the fact that "4e is like an MMO" is severely over rated. Ever edition has been compared to video games, or whatever. It is an old and tiresome argument. Let us just move past that point.
Otherwise I kind of agree, I felt somewhat more like a buffer than a healer when I played a 4e game as a cleric. sure they get heals, just didn't feel like I was the group healer.
Just my opinion though.
So yeah; they scrapped the 'dedicated healbot' position from the adventurer roster these days. Clerics still heal better then potions, and even better then Warlords (because they get their Wis added to all healing effects)
Also, with stuff like Healing Strike and Beacon of Hope, you can get out a lot of healing quickly.
But if you want to be able to heal only... well... those classes no longer exist, sorry
It was a design choice, so it's not likely someone is going to change it.I'm just curious as to know, what the argument for this change is.
Is it really just us who think that the cleric has gone from being... clericy (heals up the arse and every undeads worst nightmare) to being alot less... usable. Hardly any heals (group heals it selv via surges) and only has turn undead as an encounter power (i belive).
If so, i'll shut up
The point is unfortunately diametrically opposed to you and your friend's thinking, because for a lot of groups prior to 4E getting someone to play a purely support role was an exercise in frustration. Instead of making the leader role purely support they've designed it so you can simultaneously support the group but also think offensively as well. The fact that the rest of the party has some limited means to heal themselves reinforces this.
As for clerics, you can't judge the class at level one. A healer-focused build at later levels can dominate the battlefield. My wife's cleric with Consecrated Ground, Mass Cure Light Wounds, Bastion of Health, Exalted Armor, etc etc has singlehandedly turned more than one encounter from a TPK or retreat to a party win.
And by the way, the notion of a dedicated "healbot" support character is far, far more MMO-ish than the design concept of limited self-healing for every character.
Excuse me?
Whoa, there. How does "it's a Massively Multiplayer Online" follow from less heals? Or did you just throw that in there for no reason?
No, that comes from alot more than just this
. Our group thinks that it's alot more combat oriented now than before . I'm not out to slam anyone or anything. It's like I said, something we started to discuss.I know that they simplified the game a gazillion times, which can be nice in battles, but alot of spells/powers from before are now... well, gone. I remember having "stone to mud" as a druid. We had to get a ring out of somewhere. Instead of using alot of time on it and figuring out how - i simply turned the whole area to mud and voila - magic ring for us :D.
Clerics are the closest thing to a healbot in 4e. I'm not a fan of them though since they don't have very many buffs and almost all of their healing utilities are daily and/or standard actions (the good ones at least). If he wants something that buffs and heals (not as much heal as a cleric), you can go with just about any other leader. Bards have melee and ranged capability and have a lot of interesting options to say the least. Warlords are melee and each of the builds can be played very differently (they seem to me to be almost different classes). Shamans (not much experience with them) are a little more complicated and seem to need the party to cooperate and stay close to the spirit companion to have the optimal effect. Artificers... no idea, sorry.
I'm partial to the warlord and bard. If he likes a ranged leader (other than the cleric), I'd suggest bard. If he likes melee, try the warlord. On the warlord path, you can go four different ways:
1. Tactical- Int secondary (great AC in light Armor), gives a lot of attack bonus' and extra attacks and movement. Goes great with the Eladrin for telaporty goodness.
2. Inspiring- Hands down best healer of the warlord builds. Plenty of buffing available also (if playing with martial power).
3. Resourceful- Int and Cha secondarys. Balanced... Has fun being a tiefling, alot of his powers give a bonus from a good Int and Cha (rider effects often allow the usage of both options a power would give to the other builds).
4. Bravura- a different kind of leader all together... Jumps right in the middle of combat. When you hit him, he says "Thank you sir, may I have another?". High risk high reward.
Also, I wouldn't decide to change before looking at divine power, which comes out next week. Good luck.
Thanks for the options. I'll let him know and see if he's got any interest in it
. I know he loves knowledge skills and I know why. I mean, cmon how cool is it to be the one and only in the group who knows why the burrialground we're next to, is in the middle of a halfmoon-shaped area of trees (instead of being the dumb barbarian who just digged up the magic axe and got later found out, the burialground was that of a legendary orc barbarian who wanted his axe back and rose from the grave to do so :D)Divine Power is bringing a new cleric build to the game, the shielding cleric. From listening to the latest podcast, this is the most healing dedicated of the builds. So it might give your friend just what he's looking for.
Hmm - we'll see when it comes. Our DM is highly doubtfull about new books and usually only sticks to the core books (we use PH1, PH2, adventures vault, FR book and monsters manual 1+2 - no dragon magazine stuff... yet anyways)
The point is unfortunately diametrically opposed to you and your friend's thinking, because for a lot of groups prior to 4E getting someone to play a purely support role was an exercise in frustration. Instead of making the leader role purely support they've designed it so you can simultaneously support the group but also think offensively as well. The fact that the rest of the party has some limited means to heal themselves reinforces this.
As for clerics, you can't judge the class at level one. A healer-focused build at later levels can dominate the battlefield. My wife's cleric with Consecrated Ground, Mass Cure Light Wounds, Bastion of Health, Exalted Armor, etc etc has singlehandedly turned more than one encounter from a TPK or retreat to a party win.
And by the way, the notion of a dedicated "healbot" support character is far, far more MMO-ish than the design concept of limited self-healing for every character.
Yeah, not alot of people like being the support role. But he loves it (as did I when I played MMO games). The fact that you alone can turn the tide of battle by keeping people alive is kinda cool. The warriors are all hot n' heavy, but with no heals - they drop like flies (well, taking down alot with them, but you get my point
).We've just dinged lvl 6 - so we still got some levels of gaming to do. He might start to like his class better later on. My thoughts are based on lvl 1 through 5
But he doesn't only like the healing - he loved the skills and especially the knowledge skills (Loremaster was the class he specced into... and played very well)
So... let me get this straight. Your friend is... annoyed that he can't just stand around and not play the game, and absentmindedly hit his healing macro every time it recharges... and that makes you think that the change away from that makes 4E an MMO-like game?
Excuse me?
No - like i'm saying to the others. He misses his heals, but also we find 4e alot more combat oriented. Ofcourse D&D can easily be heavy roleplaying, but alot of abilities (most, if not all, as far as we can se are combat oriented). Stuff like Bardic Knowledge, Bounty Hunter class, Loremaster and other RP classes seemed to have vanished.
Again, i'm sorry if I offend anyone. All our experience is based on lvl 1 through 5 and no, we don't like D&D less. A good evening of orc bashing and solving puzzles is always fun
Rituals where specifically added so that anyone can have the roleplaying flavor that you desire (it takes just 1 feat and you can use any ritual you want)
Plus they are pretty easy to add since because of their casting time they are a lot less likely to break anything and become un-fun. So just create your own rituals; even if you are a fighter, just pick up the Ritual Caster feat and ask your DM if you can add a few personal rituals that fit him perfectly.
So... let me get this straight. Your friend is... annoyed that he can't just stand around and not play the game, and absentmindedly hit his healing macro every time it recharges... and that makes you think that the change away from that makes 4E an MMO-like game?
Hey!
First off, let the MMO thing drop. It's silly when people bring it up in the first place, but it's already been argued to death too many times as to likely be worth repeating. I say point people who make such comments in the direction of the threads were those arguments have occurred and leave it at that (link)*.
[indent]*There are probably better links, but MMO and WoW are both too short to search, and after manually checking 26+ pages that was the best I could find. Can any avengers help out? I should hope at least a few of you kept some handy bookmarks.[/indent]
Second and more importantly, I once played a healer, a little known 3.5 class, that mostly only had healing magic, a very limited number of buffs, and absolutely no viable offense capabilities (except against undead). That was one of my favorite characters, and one of the more memorable PCs from that particular campaign. True, I had next to no tactical options in combat and spent most of my time hiding behind a meatshield (excluding providing the occasional flanking partner), but I could literally take an ally from near death to almost full HP with a single spell. Beyond my formidable healing skills I also contributed greatly to social challenges, notably those involving diplomacy. I resent being accused "just stand[ing] around and not play[ing] the game"; I certainly played the game, I had a blast doing so, and I miss no longer being able to play that kind of specialized character!
Now back to the OP.
Is it really just us who think that the cleric has gone from being... clericy (heals up the arse and every undeads worst nightmare) to being alot less... usable. Hardly any heals (group heals it selv via surges) and only has turn undead as an encounter power (i belive).
If so, i'll shut up
Others have already addressed the "hardly any heals" factor, and even though I don't think it was your main point, I'd like to address "undeads' worst nightmare". While the cleric can indeed only turn undead once per encounter, the cleric also has access to one of, if not the, widest variety of powers that inflict radiant damage. As most undead are vulnerable to radiant damage, the cleric is indeed still a nightmare for most undead'.
Use more rituals. Stuff like 'Stone to mud' is definately a ritual. It might even be in one of the books somewhere and otherwise; just add it.
Rituals where specifically added so that anyone can have the roleplaying flavor that you desire (it takes just 1 feat and you can use any ritual you want)
Plus they are pretty easy to add since because of their casting time they are a lot less likely to break anything and become un-fun. So just create your own rituals; even if you are a fighter, just pick up the Ritual Caster feat and ask your DM if you can add a few personal rituals that fit him perfectly.
Ok, i'll try to look into those. Haven't given them a chance yet, since they take - as far as I know - around 10 min to cast. Could be fun to have as a Warden I think
Hey!
First off, let the MMO thing drop. It's silly when people bring it up in the first place, but it's already been argued to death too many times as to likely be worth repeating. I say point people who make such comments in the direction of the threads were those arguments have occurred and leave it at that (link)*.
[indent]*There are probably better links, but MMO and WoW are both too short to search, and after manually checking 26+ pages that was the best I could find. Can any avengers help out? I should hope at least a few of you kept some handy bookmarks.[/indent]
Second and more importantly, I once played a healer, a little known 3.5 class, that mostly only had healing magic, a very limited number of buffs, and absolutely no viable offense capabilities (except against undead). That was one of my favorite characters, and one of the more memorable PCs from that particular campaign. True, I had next to no tactical options in combat and spent most of my time hiding behind a meatshield (excluding providing the occasional flanking partner), but I could literally take an ally from near death to almost full HP with a single spell. Beyond my formidable healing skills I also contributed greatly to social challenges, notably those involving diplomacy. I resent being accused "just stand[ing] around and not play[ing] the game"; I certainly played the game, I had a blast doing so, and I miss no longer being able to play that kind of specialized character!
Now back to the OP.
Others have already addressed the "hardly any heals" factor, and even though I don't think it was your main point, I'd like to address "undeads' worst nightmare". While the cleric can indeed only turn undead once per encounter, the cleric also has access to one of, if not the, widest variety of powers that inflict radiant damage. As most undead are vulnerable to radiant damage, the cleric is indeed still a nightmare for most undead'.
Well, i'm not really interested in a big MMO discussion
. I play D&D because it's a fun game. Some things I like and some I don't . I just recall being alot happier with the 2e switch to 3e (especially 3,5e) than I was with the 3,5e to 4e.2ndly, my buddy has the exact same feeling as you do (with the healing). Same did I in online games. There is no greater feeling than seeing you meatshield fighting off 3 others, slaying them 1 by 1 only because you're behind a wall healing his bajingas off
.On the final topic, I just feal that 1 time pr. encounter might be a bit short. I'm refering to this, because our DM was so kind as to put us in the middle of a town being overrun by undead... and even though I can take a beating as a warden... a couple of dozen of zombies, zombie hulks, flying zombies, shooting zombies, "insert-ability-and-they-had-it" zombies felt like a bit too much. So the TU ability really came in handy... that one time... and then we ran again... to the amusement of our DM (we run so rarly, that he enjoys when we finally do :D... he's sadistic... but somehow, we enjoy it
)There is no greater feeling than seeing you meatshield fighting off 3 others, slaying them 1 by 1 only because you're behind a wall healing his bajingas off
The majority of players disagree with you. They'd rather a) keep the party alive AND b)kick some ass by themselves.
As for D&D and MMOs, I am rather sick of hearing it. Let's not forget that MMOs grew OUT OF D&D. Much like LARPing, they are just a mutated offspring of what started a long time ago.
Second and more importantly, I once played a healer, a little known 3.5 class, that mostly only had healing magic, a very limited number of buffs, and absolutely no viable offense capabilities (except against undead). That was one of my favorite characters, and one of the more memorable PCs from that particular campaign. True, I had next to no tactical options in combat and spent most of my time hiding behind a meatshield (excluding providing the occasional flanking partner)...
Tangent:
I've been playing around with hybrids, trying to find combinations that allow a player to contribute in combat while the character maintains a sort of narrative "hands off" approach. The right mix of shaman (for the spirit companion), ranger (for the beast companion), and warlord (for commander's strike), while not what the CO boards would call optimal, can nonetheless give a character a lot of battlefield influence without direct contact.
I find this thread amusing because the "cleric as nothing but a healer" paradigm is primarily an MMO thing these days. Back in 2e, if you were a cleric, you were a healing, mainly because you had to actually memorize your heals, if I remember correctly. In 3e, you could swap heals in, meaning you could, theoretically, have an entirely different cleric build, but still have healing power. 4e took that a step further. Cleric is now primarily a support class that has some ability to heal. This is about as far away from an MMO cleric as you can get.
As i have stated later on, the healing is not the main reason for D&D vs MMO, but more the fact that spells/abilites are more and more combat oriented
. Sorry for the misunderstanding The majority of players disagree with you. They'd rather a) keep the party alive AND b)kick some ass by themselves.
Stogoe, see this is what I don't get. You actually hit the nail on the head. I know that D&D takes you to another world where you're a hero, but let's face it. If you singlehandedly can fight of everything, because you can beat a balrog in melee, whilst shooting fireballs at the onstorming elementals, in addition to uttering heals for your self, then the game is not fun.
Sometimes you just draw the "crap card" and have to be the minor part of victory. If we all choose the glorious tank up front, who carves through dragons like a butter through hot butter, then who's gonna heal the fighter and keep him alive when he finally gets backstabed?
Or even better. All are fighters and you stumble apon a sphinx...
I really don't see the downside in being the guy who keeps all alive. It's a whole different challenge in it self. A battle isn't only about how many guys you can lay waist to, it's about playing as a team. And yes, sometimes the healers get alot of critisism for not doing what they do best (heals/buffs), but in essence, they are the most important guy out there. They make sure that all the others keep breething
.Frankly, if I DM a game and no one play support classes, then they end up getting what's comming their way. You can't be the best at everything, all the time. Sorry, that's just not fun.
Really, clerics were always a support role that could fight a touch better than their robed wizardly counterparts. They just elaborated on this in the new edition. They can still heal (and oh how nice is the ability to get healed IN COMBAT for a quarter of your hit points, and get a little kicker of extra hp with it?), but many of their powers do what they always did: bolster their allies. Sure, the Laser Cleric is out there for those who would prefer a bit angrier, more combat-oriented build.
As for D&D and MMOs, I am rather sick of hearing it. Let's not forget that MMOs grew OUT OF D&D. Much like LARPing, they are just a mutated offspring of what started a long time ago.
The MMO thing I already covered, i'll edit the thread so you guys don't have to read through it to catch my drift
.Anywho, yes they support - but as stated before, I just see a cleric as a healer and buffer. Not so much anymore though.
But maybe i've just had a wrong impression of him
4E general forum: At least one repeat of the very same "How 4E compare to 3.x in my opinion" every week, or your money back, guaranteed!
But wait, there's more! Subscribe now to receive regular comparisons to MMOs for free!
But wait, there's more! Subscribe now to receive regular comparisons to MMOs for free!
Read EDIT in thread beginning...
4E general forum: At least one repeat of the very same "How 4E compare to 3.x in my opinion" every week, or your money back, guaranteed!
Sigh...
point of the thread is not to compare to 3,5 but instead rather asking if Cleric isn't falling out of his role.
3,5 and 4 are two different styles of play.
There - are we done with the sarcasm now?
In 4e:
You've got your Healing Word twice per encounter. It heals 2d6+Wis; if you're focusing on healing, that's probably at least +3 at level 6, for 10 extra points, plus maybe 12 points for the surge. 4 encounters per day, you've got 176 extra points of healing there.
Healing Strike at level 1. That's another 15 per use. Figure it will hit half the time, so an extra 30 per day.
Beacon of Hope. We'll say you can get at least three party members in a burst for +15 healing. Oh, wait, you're healing will then work better, probably an extra 10 in the encounter. That's 25 from Beacon of hope.
Cure light wounds, another 15 points.
Consecrated Ground at level 5 can be healing a few bloodied allies 7 per turn. Be sure to have people stand in it after the battle is over, so you're bringing everyone at least up to bloodied. Should be able to heal each character at least twice, if the fight was nasty enough. That's 70 points of healing.
Cure serious wounds at level 6; there's another 27 healing.
If you want to be a healer, its hard to beat Melora's Tide for a channel divinity feat; use it to bring someone up to their bloodied score after a fight. We'll say someone will probably hit half bloodied, so maybe 12 healing there - that's another 48 in the day.
We're up to 391 points of healing per day.
A 3rd edition cleric can heal:
5 points a day for Cure Minor wounds x5.
47.5 a day for Cure light wounds x5.
75 points a day for Cure moderate wounds x5.
76 points a day for Cure Serious wounds x4.
203 points of healing a day.
I've assumed a 6th level 4e character has 48 HP. About average for a cleric type. In 3.x, that character would have maybe 30 HP. So healing in 3e is roughly 1.6x as effective as in 4e, so we'll boost that 3.x number to 325 for a fair comparison.
4e healing: 391
3.x healing: 325
Meanwhile, if you want that 'loremaster' part, you've presumably put 4 feats into extra skills, for an extra, we'll say 16 (2 skill trainings and 2 skill focuses) skill points past what the other characters have. That's a pretty big improvement.
Or you might have spent one on a multiclass inspiring word, still getting a skill, and healing an extra 15 a day.
So where's this healing that the cleric doesn't have?
(We probably should be giving the cleric at least 2 sets of 6 temp HP from Sacred Flame each encounter as well, for another 48 HP per day, but its not technically "healing" so I'll ignore that).
1) MMOs are based on D&D.
2) Healing surges exist in order to limit healing meaningfully. In 3.x, your healing was limited by how much money you could spend on Wands of Cure Light Wounds. In 4th edition, it doesn't matter how many healing potions you buy, you're limited in how much you can heal by your healing surges. It has the side benefit of allowing clerics and other leaders to heal characters every encounter.
3) Healing is much better in 4th edition because it is a minor action, which means that a leader doesn't "waste" their turn fulfilling their role and gets to fight the monsters as well. In 3.x, the best thing to do was not to heal at all during combat, and simply thrash the monsters then heal up afterwards.
On the final topic, I just feal that 1 time pr. encounter might be a bit short. I'm refering to this, because our DM was so kind as to put us in the middle of a town being overrun by undead... and even though I can take a beating as a warden... a couple of dozen of zombies, zombie hulks, flying zombies, shooting zombies, "insert-ability-and-they-had-it" zombies felt like a bit too much. So the TU ability really came in handy... that one time... and then we ran again... to the amusement of our DM (we run so rarly, that he enjoys when we finally do :D... he's sadistic... but somehow, we enjoy it
- Cascade of Light
- Divine Glow
- Guardian of Faith
- Healing Strike
- Lance of Faith
- Sacred Flame
All of those are powers that a level 1 cleric could have in adition to turning that will put holy fear into most undead.
Tangent:
I've been playing around with hybrids, trying to find combinations that allow a player to contribute in combat while the character maintains a sort of narrative "hands off" approach. The right mix of shaman (for the spirit companion), ranger (for the beast companion), and warlord (for commander's strike), while not what the CO boards would call optimal, can nonetheless give a character a lot of battlefield influence without direct contact.
Not too shabby. I had mostly given up on a true non-direct build since round about the start of the year (decided to wait to see what tools Divine Power might offer). I'll probably fiddle around with it my self to see what I can make of it. Thanks.
3,5 and 4 are two different styles of play.
There - are we done with the sarcasm now?
Only if you make them different styles of play. You can use plenty of Powers outside of combat, you know. Icy Terrain much? ;)
Now, I could go on and just get combative about every point I think is hilariously silly, but the conversation in that direction is generally worthless and subjective, so I'll skip on it, and suggest you guys don't focus on Combat so much. There are Skill Challenges, the same Skills available, Rituals, Items, and all kinds of things that don't have to be or aren't meant to be used in Combat. You guys should probably put some effort into finding them, and maybe incorporating the ones you like, okay?
As for the Cleric...Healing Word isn't good enough?? Minor Action, best Healing Spell available; what's not to love? If your friend wants to concentrate even more on Healing, he should get a hold of some items in the next few levels that boost his Healing Powers or allow him to Heal more. Again, I think you guys just need to dig through some of the material outside of the Core 3 if you want to fit a specific Character Concept into the game. :D
As i have stated later on, the healing is not the main reason for D&D vs MMO, but more the fact that spells/abilites are more and more combat oriented
No worries. I didn't read the rest of the thread (sorry, was in a rush to get to work this morning, didn't have time to read it all). I just thought the contradiction in that players perceptions of 4e was interesting. Basically saying that 4e seemed too much like an MMO, but also complaining that his favorite class didn't heal enough (wanting to be more like an MMO cleric).
As for the Cleric...Healing Word isn't good enough?? Minor Action, best Healing Spell available; what's not to love? If your friend wants to concentrate even more on Healing, he should get a hold of some items in the next few levels that boost his Healing Powers or allow him to Heal more. Again, I think you guys just need to dig through some of the material outside of the Core 3 if you want to fit a specific Character Concept into the game. :D
I just built a healing heavy level 6 cleric for a player in a campaign I'm running. It's actually quite easy to do. Healing word is absolutely amazing. Then you have things like Healing Strike, Beacon of Hope, Cure Light Wounds, Consecrated Ground, Cure Serious Wounds (Bloodied to near full health in one shot, at level 6!!!), and that's just at level 6. Throw in some magic items to give you some additional healing ability, such as Healers Brooch (the +2 version is nice at level 6, especially when used with Beacon of Hope), and medic's weapon, and you have more healing than you'll probably ever need. I realize most of the powers I listed are dailies (with the exception of Healing Strike), but they are also very strong healing abilities, and in most cases, especially in conjunction with other things such as the healers brooch, healing word is going to do everything you need it to. The Cure Wounds line is great for those "Oh Crap" moments, and really gives you that feel of "...seeing your meatshield fighting off 3 others, slaying them 1 by 1 only because you're behind a wall healing [your] bajingas off."
It's very easy to look at the cleric and think, "Wow, they aren't much of healers anymore." But when you actually look at what they have, it's very easy to build a healing-centric cleric, while still having the ability to do other useful things.
Now, I could go on and just get combative about every point I think is hilariously silly, but the conversation in that direction is generally worthless and subjective, so I'll skip on it, and suggest you guys don't focus on Combat so much. There are Skill Challenges, the same Skills available, Rituals, Items, and all kinds of things that don't have to be or aren't meant to be used in Combat. You guys should probably put some effort into finding them, and maybe incorporating the ones you like, okay?
This.
There are TONS of things to do in a game that are NOT combat. That any group does not do them does not mean they are not there. That group has just chosen to ignore their existence.
The rest comes down to selecting and using powers.
Gear can also make a significant difference: a nice holy symbol and heal-boosting item, for example.
3,5 and 4 are two different styles of play.
There - are we done with the sarcasm now?
No we're not. You don't just throw out '4e is a MMO' out there casually and expect people around here to ignore it! It was a stupid mistake to type those words and foolish of you to think it would have no consequence!
Them fighting words! Don't you know that?!
Anyway wait for the Shielding Cleric if you want more focus and if your DM doesn't let you add stuff from Divine Power he's very narrow minded because EVERYTHING IS CORE.
Don't knock the Temp HP given by Sacred Flame (AT WILL!), they're VERY VERY useful in mitigating damage. The ability to grant a free saving throw is also extremely useful.
The point of 4E is now that the healer doesn't have to just heal, they can do other things, provide support via buffs or just damage. Non-Leader classes are sometimes able to provide a little healing (far inferior to leaders) to themselves once per day, and more rare per encounter. But the Non-Leader classes only have this so that if you were playing a party without a Leader that they wouldn't be completely out of luck.
Skills in D&D were an afterthought tacked on with baling wire and bubblegum and have always been mechanically awkward. With the exception of the very simple and abstract rules for thieves picking pockets, disarming traps and picking locks it was designed with no skill rolls.
It's great that you have a DM that knows how to make the non-combat portion of D&D interesting. You have an exceptional group to play with there in Copenhagen
I'm just curious as to know, what the argument for this change is.
Healing Surges.
It came up in my gaming group, where one of us always plays a healertype. In 3,5e, him and me both were cleric and druid. We had to be able to fight a bit (especially me as a druid) and had to keep the group alive.
In 3.5, it was difficult to keep the group alive with no healer. In 4E is is much easier. In the two groups that I have seen was able to keep the group alive in ways other than by healing. The striker heavy party kept the group alive by taking out the more dangerous adversaries quickly. Ironically, the character in that group that needed healing more often than anyone was the warlord. The defender heavy group (with no healer at all), kept the group alive by being hard targets and prevented the soft targets from taking as many hit.
Now he's got only a few heals and sees 4e as a MMO, rather than D&D. Yes, we're having tons of fun - it's more a thought that arose in our session.
I'm glad you are having tons of fun. 4E combat has changed in that in combat healing is available to all characters via second wind. Out of combat healing is available to all characters as well. Also, in combat healing is not as critical for various reasons. First of all, hit points are greater. Also, there are a number of other effects that indirectly lead to a lesser need for in combat healing. One of them are buffs. The cleric and other leaders have them. They either protect the party members or make it easier to defeat the enemy and thus taking less damage. Also, there are abilities that provide temporary hit points to allies. Clerics and other leaders have many of these abilities that indirectly leads to a lesser requirement for in combat healing.
All classes have ways to damage enemies more and/or protect allies more. These abilities enable all classes to contribute and requires all classes to contribute in combat situations. You no longer have a character who just does nothing until the party takes significant damage. Many effects are proactive and encourages all classes to participate right away in all situations. You also no loner have effects that can only be dealt with by a single class. There are very few situations where the party is screwed without class X because only class X can handle a certain situation with any hope of success.
Is it really just us who think that the cleric has gone from being... clericy (heals up the arse and every undeads worst nightmare) to being alot less... usable. Hardly any heals (group heals it selv via surges) and only has turn undead as an encounter power (i belive).
Clerics no longer have massive healing anymore. Clerics no longer need to have massive healing anymore. Parties are no longer screwed when they are dealt massive damage and no cleric. Parties are no longer screwed if they do not have all roles covered. Players are no longer compelled to nominate a player to be a healer when no one wants to. Clerics no longer have to wait until the party takes massive damage to feel they are useful. You seem to be having tons of fun which indicates to me that the lack of massive healing available to the cleric is not a big issue.
Hmm.. most MMO's I've seen the healer is just a healbot. (I've played them in FFXI, and I've watched people do them in WoW) So I think your real problem is that 4E isn't enough like an MMO for your tastes.
This is quite true. I've been playing MMOs since 2000. In Everquest, DAoC, SWG, FFXI, WoW, etc, the healer is basically a healbot. Heck, for years in EQ, I had played two characters, my ranger and his cleric healbot. This was easy to do because I only ever needed to cast one of two spells during combat (fast, small heal and slow, big heal). Everything else I could do out of combat. I hated playing my cleric by himself because it was so boring casting the same 2 heals and 2 buffs for hours on end.
No, that comes from alot more than just this
I know that they simplified the game a gazillion times, which can be nice in battles, but alot of spells/powers from before are now... well, gone. I remember having "stone to mud" as a druid. We had to get a ring out of somewhere. Instead of using alot of time on it and figuring out how - i simply turned the whole area to mud and voila - magic ring for us :D.
Thanks for the options. I'll let him know and see if he's got any interest in it
Hmm - we'll see when it comes. Our DM is highly doubtfull about new books and usually only sticks to the core books (we use PH1, PH2, adventures vault, FR book and monsters manual 1+2 - no dragon magazine stuff... yet anyways)
Yeah, not alot of people like being the support role. But he loves it (as did I when I played MMO games). The fact that you alone can turn the tide of battle by keeping people alive is kinda cool. The warriors are all hot n' heavy, but with no heals - they drop like flies (well, taking down alot with them, but you get my point
We've just dinged lvl 6 - so we still got some levels of gaming to do. He might start to like his class better later on. My thoughts are based on lvl 1 through 5
But he doesn't only like the healing - he loved the skills and especially the knowledge skills (Loremaster was the class he specced into... and played very well)
No - like i'm saying to the others. He misses his heals, but also we find 4e alot more combat oriented. Ofcourse D&D can easily be heavy roleplaying, but alot of abilities (most, if not all, as far as we can se are combat oriented). Stuff like Bardic Knowledge, Bounty Hunter class, Loremaster and other RP classes seemed to have vanished.
Again, i'm sorry if I offend anyone. All our experience is based on lvl 1 through 5 and no, we don't like D&D less. A good evening of orc bashing and solving puzzles is always fun
The rules are more combat oriented because combat is the only part where you need to be told what to do.
You don't need a class or rules to role play.
4E or any games for that matter are as focused on combat as you want them to be, the rules are simply there to tell you how to resolve combat and avoid disputes.
Well its an invalid and really bad opinion. Its also one guaranteed to rile people up. Personally any post that mentions 4e and wow is flame bait.
I didn't realize folks were so sensitive. Paven didn't use it in any derogative fashion. It was an observation. His posts have been very mature. Personally, I feel those who have taken Paven to task are over-knee-jerk-reacting
I didn't realize folks were so sensitive. Paven didn't use it in any derogative fashion. It was an observation. His posts have been very mature. Personally, I feel those who have taken Paven to task are over-knee-jerk-reacting
uh no his post failed to be reasonable the minute he compared 4e to wow. The only people who do that are trolls. No serious person could possibly believe that comparison.
Despite the OPs last paragraph requesting you not to focus upon this opinion his friend holds....
... You mean the last paragraph he edited in some time after people started discussing his friend's opinion? :D
uh no his post failed to be reasonable the minute he compared 4e to wow. The only people who do that are trolls. No serious person could possibly believe that comparison.
No, a lot of people who do that are trolls. Some, like Paven, have posted pretty reasonably. And despite people not wanting to acknowledge it, 4e does have MMO influence. That doesn't mean I agree with his statement that 4e is more MMO than D&D (especially since MMOs borrowed heavily from D&D, but that's another discussion entirely).
However, you not agreeing with his opinion does not make him a troll. I don't agree that people should avoid houserules and only play by RAW, that doesn't mean I call everyone that plays RAW only a troll.
Seriously, he's already state that this was not intended to be the focus of this thread, so let it go and get to the discussion at hand.
To the OP: your friend is in the minority. Most people do not enjoy sitting back and pressing the heal button over and over. In most of my games, no one wanted to play a cleric. They just weren't fun to them. Now they don't have to. This may not be right for your friend, but it was made to support what WotC felt the majority of the players wanted.
As others have pointed out, there is still plenty a cleric can do to help the party. I see the cleric class as being better suited to its role now than it ever was in the past. Its role is not just to heal allies, but to buff them as well, or help them recover from status effects, and it does all three of those tasks quite well while still dealing damage to enemies.
Now he's got only a few heals and sees 4e as a MMO, rather than D&D.
...here we go again.
Let me translate what I just heard you say. "Mommy! He just said 4E is like WoW! And that it's like MMO! He's a meanie!
I couldn't have said it better myself.
for you sir.Yep, that set me back forty years, but damn the evil smirk it left on my face feels good
Sometimes it's entirely worth it.
Seriously, he's already state that this was not intended to be the focus of this thread, so let it go and get to the discussion at hand.
Usually, when I don't want something to be the topic of discussion, I don't talk about it. By posting the comparison of an MMO and 4e, he opened the floodgates, and in his mind, he now has the ability to make sure everyone hears his opinion on a topic, without having to hear the opinion of anyone else. This whole notion of, "Oh, he said he didn't want that to be the topic of discussion!" reminds me of a scene from Talladega Nights.
Mr. Dennit: Ricky, your little obscene gesture is going to cost you 100 points. Do you know how much that costs us in sponsorship dollars?
Ricky: With all due respect, Mr. Dennit, I had no idea you'd gotten experimental surgery to have your [male genitalia] removed.
Mr. Dennit: What did you just say to me?
Ricky: What? I said it with all due respect!
Mr. Dennit: Just because you say that doesn't mean you get to say whatever you want to say to me!
Ricky: It sure as hell does!
Mr. Dennit: No, it doesn't--
Ricky: It's in the Geneva Conventions, look it up!
Just because the OP said he didn't want to talk about that topic doesn't mean he can give his opinion (or his players opinion, whatever) without rebuttal. That would be akin to me posting this a few years ago.
In 3.5, Katana's are the most over-powered weapon in the game, and should be removed. Their mechanics are broken. But I don't want this to be the topic of discussion.
Everyone who was here during the Katana wars would know that this thread would have 3 pages of people yelling at each other in under 10 minutes, then it would be deleted.
By the way, making an off-topic comment like that, then saying you don't want to discuss it is actually a pretty successful trolling tactic because it gives the troll plausible deniability. I don't think the OP is a troll, but he shouldn't complain when people comment about his controversial remark.
(I don't care about the katana topic, I just wanted to use an old controversial discussion to make an illustration here.)
IMHO this whole discussion is based on the fact that the OP's friend didn't push his build as far in that direction as he could have. Maybe it was his first time building a cleric and he didn't quite realize just how much healing he could stack up. I imagine he'll figure it out ;)
In terms of the whole knowledge build thing that can similarly be accomplished (on the same character for sure). He can crank on Dungeoneering, Heal, Insight, Nature, and Perception just using wisdom. If he wants to sink some points into INT (kind of not the optimum build, but it certainly won't wreck his character) he can also crank on History, Religion, and Arcana. That's pretty much every knowledge skill there is... He could certainly start out at 1st level with a good roll in History, Religion, and Arcana. If he wants to expend his feat slot on Nature or Dungeoneering he's basically going to be a monster encyclopedia at the very least. It is worth commenting though that the 4e skill system design pretty much encourages splitting up this kind of expertise between at least the cleric and the wizard though.
I think the "problem" is that the rest of the party doesn't need the healer like most people need their lungs.
Another oddity in this comparison is that combat healing is vastly superior in 4th ED to 3rd, but a lot of people never realized that due to GMs in 3rd playing with kids gloves. (For a very good reason.)
Is it really just us who think that the cleric has gone from being... clericy (heals up the arse and every undeads worst nightmare) to being alot less... usable. Hardly any heals (group heals it selv via surges) and only has turn undead as an encounter power (i belive).
If so, i'll shut up
The cleric being less 'clericy' is a good thing in my mind. The class isn't so much the 'walking band-aid' of the group anymore. Clerics have a different role. They were combat medics (back-ups) before, and it was obvious; now, they're combat leaders, and it's obvious (a good thing, I think ;)).
Hmm.. most MMO's I've seen the healer is just a healbot. (I've played them in FFXI, and I've watched people do them in WoW) So I think your real problem is that 4E isn't enough like an MMO for your tastes.
Speaking of MMOs ... and 3.5 ... and Clerics ...
Dungeons & Dragons Online does exist.
Just sayin.
;)
(I'm only quoting you to use your words aobut MMO's as a transition. So not really directing my post at you per se Nightwalker)
WOW. That didn't take long.
Despite the OPs last paragraph requesting you not to focus upon this opinion his friend holds....
In my defense, it wasn't there when I posted.
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
From level 1 a cleric of any build can restore 1/4 of an ally's hitpoints plus 1d6 plus his wisdom. That is a huge amount compared to, say, cure light wounds in 3.5 edition. And your cleric can do it TWICE in each encounter, no matter how many encounters you get into in a given day. Given enough time a single cleric can, with a 5 minute rest between every two uses, heal an entire army in a day. And this is all without using any other power.
In contrast, the healing surge can only be used once per encounter by each player, and only restores 1/4 of his hitpoints. Once he uses that one second wind to spend a healing surge, he is done healing without some extra power from his class or a very inefficient (for most classes) use of a healing potion for 10hp per surge. Not only does a cleric allow a character to spend more than 1 healing surge per encounter, but he makes them more efficient by an order of magnitude.
Aside from that, the cleric gets some very nice buffs, debuffs, protection spells, and other healing powers all while still being useful in combat and able to hold his own on the front lines.
I really don't understand the complaint. As someone who played a strength-based cleric as the party healer and did a damn good job of both bashing heads and restoring hitpoints, I think the cleric is just fine in 4e.
On rituals: The time necessary to perform a ritual isn't necessarily 10 minutes, it is just a guideline for basic balancing. If you allow the use of rituals in combat, you can ask the player(s) performing the ritual to expend Powers, Surges, turns, or other resources in order to do it. All it requires is DM rulings and balancing on the fly, and taking enemy actions into account. With playing this game, being able to roll with the punches is invaluable for player and master.
True, though the DM should be pretty careful about that. Rituals weren't balanced with use in combat in mind. You could do some rather funky things with a few of them. However as long as it doesn't turn into a way to make things into a cakewalk there's no real reason for the DM to say "absolutely no". The whole "hold them off for 5 rounds until I finish the ritual!" thing is perfectly cool too.
A few obvious issues.
1) MMOs are based on D&D.
Correction: MMORPGs are based on RPG systems, but because of fundamental differences in how computers work versus humans, and [b]in effort to appeal to audiences larger than the traditional D&D player, largely by acknowledging complaints that it was "hard" or "too much thinking"[b], most RP elements are removed in an MMORPG except those defined by only the players and the prime fiction, and they are far more about combat and statistics tracking.
Edit: You may recall there was a D&D MMORPG. It flopped because of complaints that it was too hard because of facing and spell lists.
2) Healing surges exist in order to limit healing meaningfully. In 3.x, your healing was limited by how much money you could spend on Wands of Cure Light Wounds. In 4th edition, it doesn't matter how many healing potions you buy, you're limited in how much you can heal by your healing surges. It has the side benefit of allowing clerics and other leaders to heal characters every encounter.
This is EXTREMELY WoW-ish. I'm not knocking WoW itself; as a computer game, it's great, and I currently LAN a private server for it at home. That said, WoW is swarming with combat NPCs that would annihilate someone using D&D rules because of their sheer frequency. It's simply not an issue in pen-and-paper. Healing Surges are just another way WotC is reaching out to the faint-of-heart or those wanting a more game-like experience instead of an RP one. Well-played 3.5e, sometimes you'd go an entire combat without a player getting injured, other times you'd have everyone an inch from TPK-land and healing up. Clerics used spontaneous casting in a pinch; you had to make choices and sacrifices on your daily spell list.
3) Healing is much better in 4th edition because it is a minor action, which means that a leader doesn't "waste" their turn fulfilling their role and gets to fight the monsters as well. In 3.x, the best thing to do was not to heal at all during combat, and simply thrash the monsters then heal up afterwards.
I'd hate for support roles to behave as...you know...support roles.
This is EXTREMELY WoW-ish.
Healing Surges are, in no way, shape, or form, WoW-ish.
Healing Surges allow each and every character, once per fight, to heal themselves - and, furthermore, limit the number of times in an adventuring day they can be healed.
WoW has no such limitations - potions are useable every ... 2 minutes ..., healing spells are limited only by the caster's mana, and several classes have no intrinsic method of healing at all.
Correction: MMORPGs are based on RPG systems, but because of fundamental differences in how computers work versus humans, and [b]in effort to appeal to audiences larger than the traditional D&D player, largely by acknowledging complaints that it was "hard" or "too much thinking"[b], most RP elements are removed in an MMORPG except those defined by only the players and the prime fiction, and they are far more about combat and statistics tracking.
Edit: You may recall there was a D&D MMORPG. It flopped because of complaints that it was too hard because of facing and spell lists.
This is EXTREMELY WoW-ish. I'm not knocking WoW itself; as a computer game, it's great, and I currently LAN a private server for it at home. That said, WoW is swarming with combat NPCs that would annihilate someone using D&D rules because of their sheer frequency. It's simply not an issue in pen-and-paper. Healing Surges are just another way WotC is reaching out to the faint-of-heart or those wanting a more game-like experience instead of an RP one. Well-played 3.5e, sometimes you'd go an entire combat without a player getting injured, other times you'd have everyone an inch from TPK-land and healing up. Clerics used spontaneous casting in a pinch; you had to make choices and sacrifices on your daily spell list.
I'd hate for support roles to behave as...you know...support roles.
The bolded parts interest me. Taken together, it's almost like you're saying, "Anyone stupid enough to play a healer deserves to spend half of combat sitting on the sidelines doing nothing."
I did expect some form of flaming. Forums on all topics have "noob-haters" which belive that most simple questions or the likes are started by trolls.
And to those who think that i'm a troll, i'm sorry that you do. I don't troll and i'm rather new to this forum. I've never really spoken with others about D&D outside my group (don't know other RL players) which is why it seems like a morodic question to some of you.
For future reference, if noob questions DO come up from my part, it's not to spite you or annoy you or to be a jackass - it's just a simple question.
Anywho - i'm actually happy that some of you wrote long replies, which I found more than usefull (ie the guy who gave an example of how much healing a lvl 6 cleric has - if he's healing spec
).To admins, if you belive that this thread should be locked, you may lock it now
. I've gotten my answers Thank you
Paven
The bolded parts interest me. Taken together, it's almost like you're saying, "Anyone stupid enough to play a healer deserves to spend half of combat sitting on the sidelines doing nothing."
Taken together, the Bible says judge and stone any non-virgin maiden to death, but forgive people and don't judge them.
Context is nearly everything.
Clerics can wear heavy armor and have weapon proficiencies for a reason. Favored souls are no slouches either. if your Cleric is a healy-bot only, then either there's no undead in your campaign or they're forgetting the massive number of spells that deal direct damage to opponents.
Taken together, the Bible says judge and stone any non-virgin maiden to death, but forgive people and don't judge them.
One of the many problems with that book, but lets not bring religious discussion into the thread.
The thing is, the Cleric shouldn't be a healy-bot at all; that's what Wands of Cure Light Wounds are for. The Cleric is for being more awesome than everyone else in the party.
if your Cleric is a healy-bot only, then either there's no undead in your campaign or they're forgetting the massive number of spells that deal direct damage to opponents.
I see. So when you said you wanted support roles to be more about support, you were using "support" as a euphemism for "blasting things, especially undead".
I see. So when you said you wanted support roles to be more about support, you were using "support" as a euphemism for "blasting things, especially undead".
Does it hurt to have such a narrow view of things?
I'm saying that the Cleric is multirole, but serves well as a support class. I was also saying that someone taking on the role of a cleric should be ready to provide that support to the party.
Does it hurt to have such a narrow view of things?
I'm saying that the Cleric is multirole, but serves well as a support class. I was also saying that someone taking on the role of a cleric should be ready to provide that support to the party.
So then you agree that the 4th ED cleric is the well designed cleric, since it plays best when aiding it's allies, but is still able to perform an active role? As opposed to 3rd ED Clerics who were best used as melee monsters or lockdown specialists who ignored the party, or MMO clerics who stand around and healbot?
Taken together, the Bible says judge and stone any non-virgin maiden to death, but forgive people and don't judge them.
Really you can't expect much better from a book of fiction written by a society dominated by bigotry, persecution, and bickering.
So then you agree that the 4th ED cleric is the well designed cleric, since it plays best when aiding it's allies, but is still able to perform an active role? As opposed to 3rd ED Clerics who were best used as melee monsters or lockdown specialists who ignored the party, or MMO clerics who stand around and healbot?
No. Actually I think that the 4e Cleric does too much work for the player, eliminating the need for the player to think and emphasizing the "bot" nature of the term, pidgeonholing the character into certain behaviors. Honestly, they're more like the WoW Clerics, especially with the 4e "healing surge" garbage.
I've never played in a party where a 3.5e Cleric functioned as you say, and I've been playing D&D for around 20 years. You must have played/played with some really lousy Clerics.
Honestly, they're more like the WoW Clerics, especially with the 4e "healing surge" garbage.
Wait, how is a healing surge anything like World of Warcraft? And I assume you mean either priests or paladins, there are no clerics in the game.
Wait, how is a healing surge anything like World of Warcraft? And I assume you mean either priests or paladins, there are no clerics in the game.
Just ignore him.
Just ignore him.
Sorry, its a personality quirk. When someone says something stupid I can't let it go. I's fairly obvious he just wants to hate the game, or is simply trying to push our buttons, but the least he could do is use arguments which make sense.
If 3.5 was so much better, why is he here anyway?
Wait, how is a healing surge anything like World of Warcraft? And I assume you mean either priests or paladins, there are no clerics in the game.
I was referring to Priests in particular. And if you were to "game out" the Healing Surge concept it is a blatant adaptation of the encounter-based stepping for character powers.
It's all in the design, man.
As for ignoring me, well, it's all the rage to ignore me with those who dislike thinking
. Your pick, brah.I was referring to Priests in particular. And if you were to "game out" the Healing Surge concept it is a blatant adaptation of the encounter-based stepping for character powers.
It's all in the design, man.
As for ignoring me, well, it's all the rage to ignore me with those who dislike thinking
Okay, explain to me how the healing surge helps the encounter-based stepping for character powers? If all they wanted was for powers to be encounter-based, they could have simply said 'healing word heals x 2/encounter' and left the surge business out.
To me, it seems to represent a character's 'inner strength' as characterized by the fact that they can be burned both for healing or to power magic items. Clerics use divine magic to 'encourage' a body to heal and recuperate but this physically drains the character and is represented by the loss of a healing surge.
It is also a resource which must be managed and is a useful judge for the DM of just how badly off the party is, and for the party to judge just how much farther they can push on without a rest. It is a mechanic which abstracts the general strain and fatigue incurred during a day in which several combat encounters take place.
Sorry, its a personality quirk. When someone says something stupid I can't let it go. I's fairly obvious he just wants to hate the game, or is simply trying to push our buttons, but the least he could do is use arguments which make sense.
If 3.5 was so much better, why is he here anyway?
Because 4e sucks, I hate people who don't think, and these aren't 4e forums. Those are located a bit further up.
I'm afraid I can't really dumb it down for you more than to point out the flaw in encounter-based resource balancing being built into the system itself; it turns off the brain and leans WAY too much on the game being the control method.
Is that really not clear? Is it not self-evident?
Because 4e sucks, I hate people who don't think, and these aren't 4e forums. Those are located a bit further up.
I'm afraid I can't really dumb it down for you more than to point out the flaw in encounter-based resource balancing being built into the system itself; it turns off the brain and leans WAY too much on the game being the control method.
Is that really not clear? Is it not self-evident?
No, it's really not. I'm not stupid, but whatever you're trying to get across I just don't understand. Maybe that's because I'm dense, maybe it's because you haven't explained clearly.
I've been playing dnd since 2e and am enjoying 4e quite a lot, but maybe that is because we have a very good DM. We understand that the rules of 4e are mostly there to adjudicate combat and keep the game's pacing and fun factor even, and he is open to just about anything we want to do. You say that the design of 4e 'turns off the brain' and does the thinking for you, but that only happens if you allow it to.
I'm playing a fairly complex character, a hybrid bard/warlock tiefling with grand illusions of resurrecting Bael Turath. The combination of buffs, heals, damaging and controlling powers I have require a lot of tactical forethought and planning. In addition I make liberal use of his amazing social skills in non-combat situations. I agree that there are some issues with 4e but I don't think healing surges are one of them. I think they do exactly what they're meant to do.
No. Actually I think that the 4e Cleric does too much work for the player, eliminating the need for the player to think and emphasizing the "bot" nature of the term, pidgeonholing the character into certain behaviors. Honestly, they're more like the WoW Clerics, especially with the 4e "healing surge" garbage.
So you've never actually played WoW have you?
In WoW, you've basically got two main kinds of priests (based on talent trees); Shadow Priests and Holy Priests. Shadow Priests rarely, if ever, heal, their heals are pathetic and usually a complete waste of time, however they're quite good at face-raping people into the ground.
Holy Priests in comparison are pretty useless on the offence; in fact speccing Holy while you're trying to level up is quite dumb as you're just making life hard for yourself.
All a Holy Priest ever does is buff and heal. That's it. If your Holy Priest (who's probably the Main Healer) ever attacks anything then something has gone horribly wrong and the entire raid\party is probably about to wipe.
In that respect; the 3.5 Cleric is far more like the WoW Priest; it focuses either on healing or on owning people, and if it's good at one it can't do the other.
In comparison, the 4e Cleric can heal people and beat up bad guys at the same time. Specialisation can make one or the other better, but the Cleric always has an option open, he never has to sit down and do nothing.
In comparison, the 4e Cleric can heal people and beat up bad guys at the same time. Specialisation can make one or the other better, but the Cleric always has an option open, he never has to sit down and do nothing.
I can verify this based on my own experience of running a warforged strength-based
So you've never actually played WoW have you?
Actually I've got my home wireless network running a WoW 3.1.3 private server with no outside access. My girlfriend, our....well for now we'll just say "girl", and even my son play on it. Before that, I used to be a paying customer, but having control of the DB is far more fun.
In that respect; the 3.5 Cleric is far more like the WoW Priest; it focuses either on healing or on owning people, and if it's good at one it can't do the other.
Again, I'm not sure where you got the idea that one leads to another. Granted, some of the prestige classes available to it are like that....but Complete Mage did some rounding out of that, too.
In comparison, the 4e Cleric can heal people and beat up bad guys at the same time. Specialisation can make one or the other better, but the Cleric always has an option open, he never has to sit down and do nothing.
So Multiclassing is now pointless? That's even worse! Did the whole idea that reaching max level in a class has nothing to do with the goal of the game get totally lost somewhere?
So Multiclassing is now pointless? That's even worse! Did the whole idea that reaching max level in a class has nothing to do with the goal of the game get totally lost somewhere?
So a cleric useful for more than just spamming heal spells makes multiclassing pointless? NO! It just makes the cleric more fun. Seriously, you may not have had this problem in 3.5 but in our group nobody wanted to play a cleric or any other support/healer type. It was boring.
In 4e they've made the leader role a lot of fun, my last two characters were full-blooded leaders (A cleric and then a warlord) and my current one is a hybrid of leader and striker.
Multiclassing still has it's place, and it's still very tempting for certain builds. Hybrid characters are even more interesting, as the possible mixes there bring up a great many unique possibilities. Multiclassing is no longer the munchkinesque cherry-picking bazaar that 3.5 was.
Yes, that's bad. Very, very bad.
SO less variety, more "it always works" combinations?
Yes, that's bad. Very, very bad.
I see it as less suck, more awesome, but I guess you can talk yourself into hating or liking anything. Really my point is... the cleric is now fun for anyone to play because you can play it your own way. In 3.5, there was only one or two ways to play a cleric and it was rare that someone went a full 20 levels into cleric anyway. One of my main beefs with 3.5 is that for most classes if you didn't multiclass or specialize you were behind the power curve. One could not play a 20 fighter or 20 rogue and be anywhere near as awesome as a 5 rogue/3 x/2 y/10 z
I see it as less suck, more awesome, but I guess you can talk yourself into hating or liking anything. Really my point is... the cleric is now fun for anyone to play because you can play it your own way. In 3.5, there was only one or two ways to play a cleric and it was rare that someone went a full 20 levels into cleric anyway. One of my main beefs with 3.5 is that for most classes if you didn't multiclass or specialize you were behind the power curve. One could not play a 20 fighter or 20 rogue and be anywhere near as awesome as a 5 rogue/3 x/2 y/10 z
Wow, you must have had some really unimaginative DMs. I pity you.
Yes, if 3.5 is played as a stright-through hack n' slash this happens.
Other than that, I've never seen this happen AT ALL in 3.5e. Maybe I've just been privileged to have DMs and players that all hated "build" behavior and focused on every aspect of D&D instead of making it combat-oriented.
Wow, you must have had some really unimaginative DMs. I pity you.
Yes, if 3.5 is played as a stright-through hack n' slash this happens.
Other than that, I've never seen this happen AT ALL in 3.5e. Maybe I've just been privileged to have DMs and players that all hated "build" behavior and focused on every aspect of D&D instead of making it combat-oriented.
So you agree with me... as I said a few posts ago, it's really all about the DM and your imagination. The rules are just there to give structure to the combat portions of the game, add some challenge, and help keep the pacing. The fun comes from your imagination and your DM's skill at storycraft.
As for your comment here, you must have made a lot of assumptions based on what I said. We didn't play 3.x as a hackfest, and I wasn't talking just about combat power. A well-built diplomancer could dominate a campaign in 3.5 without killing a single creature, and a I've seen a multiclassed erudite/wizard/planeshifter entirely dominate the battlefield. In either case, combat or noncombat, multiclassed characters were an order of magnitude more powerful and versatile than single-classed characters.
The fact that you and your group 'hated "build" behavior and focused on every aspect of D&D instead of making it combat-oriented' is laudable, but it makes me question exactly why you dislike 4e so much. They made an effort to add in even more non-combat play and challenges in 4e, inventing an entirely new (and very fun) mechanic for it in skill challenges. They provided page 42, which is a guide to doing anything and everything outside of the rules which the players may think of.
In fact the only major thing I dislike about 4e is the one thing we've tossed out in our group, which was the artificially restricted economy and loot system.
Actually I've got my home wireless network running a WoW 3.1.3 private server with no outside access. My girlfriend, our....well for now we'll just say "girl", and even my son play on it. Before that, I used to be a paying customer, but having control of the DB is far more fun.
So basically yes, you have not played WoW, or at least not seen late-game raiding which is the real meat of the game.
Again, I'm not sure where you got the idea that one leads to another. Granted, some of the prestige classes available to it are like that....but Complete Mage did some rounding out of that, too.
Actually you're sort of right; no self-respecting 3.5 cleric ever bothered to spec healing. You were far better off just being better at the game than all the other classes and whipping out a Wand of Cure Light Wounds at the end of the fight and healing everyoe up.
So Multiclassing is now pointless? That's even worse! Did the whole idea that reaching max level in a class has nothing to do with the goal of the game get totally lost somewhere?
I love how you leap to rediculous and unrelated conclusions. Also Multiclassing in 3.5 is even more overpowered than Wizards; cherry pick all the advantages and none of the disadvantages!
Multiclassing in 4e allows you to snag one or two useful features of another class, rather than allowing you to take all the strengths of another class and render all your weaknessess invalid.
SO less variety, more "it always works" combinations?
Yes, that's bad. Very, very bad.
I assure you, there are plenty of ways you can bone your character so that he's effectively useless; it's just that in order to do so you really need to work at it, if you pick the ovbious choices then odds are you won't end up with an ineffectual character by accident; in stark contrast to 3.5 where if you picked anything other than a Caster then you were going to be rendered ineffective very quickly. And even if you picked a Caster if you didn't know exactly what you were doing you would be rapidly overshadowed by everyone who did.
I would also like to say that WoW is probably more tactical than DnD is at the moment, especially with some of the latest raids. In DnD the party rarely exceeds 6 people, in a high-end WoW raid you're trying to coordinate 40 people.
After leading a few raids, DnD feels quite relaxing in comparison :P
After leading a few raids, DnD feels quite relaxing in comparison :P
I think that's because 40-man raiding in wow is like trying to herd cats using prods made of catnip. :D
I'm just curious as to know, what the argument for this change is.
Healing Surges.
It came up in my gaming group, where one of us always plays a healertype. In 3,5e, him and me both were cleric and druid. We had to be able to fight a bit (especially me as a druid) and had to keep the group alive.
Now in 4e, my friend is yet again a cleric, whilst i'm a warden - and he loves being a healing supportclass. Was always one when him and me played DAoC (Dark Age of Camelot), but he doesn't feel that he is needed as much? He loved that he in 3,5 was speccing towards a loremaster. No matter what we stumbled apon, he was smarter than us all combined - and kept the group alive. When it came to damage dealing, he was a schmuck, but with decent AC and good healing, he was imo one of the best supportclasses a group could want.
Now he's got only a few heals and sees 4e as a MMO, rather than D&D. Yes, we're having tons of fun - it's more a thought that arose in our session.
Personally i've been looking at a shaman and thinking weather or not, that class would suit him more because the spirit companion can buff and heal (especially me as a sole defender), whilst the shaman himself can fight from a distance.
Is it really just us who think that the cleric has gone from being... clericy (heals up the arse and every undeads worst nightmare) to being alot less... usable. Hardly any heals (group heals it selv via surges) and only has turn undead as an encounter power (i belive).
If so, i'll shut up
EDIT: I'm not comparing 4E with MMO because of heals - just so you know
I dont play 4th, but I have played it, and many of us 3.5er's did not want to be the cleric, when playing 3.5 because you never got to do anything besides heal, and the fact that you get to do something besides heal is seen as one of 4th's strong points by myself and many others. If you want to go back to the 3.5 way of doing things I guess you could house rule away many of the healing surges and put most of the healing back into the cleric's pot. I don't have any suggestions as how this can be done without upsetting balance however.
PS: I guess I should have read past the first post. Many of my points seem to have already been made. AFAIK making the cleric back into the healing bot is the only statement that has not been made yet.
I dont play 4th, but I have played it, and many of us 3.5er's did not want to be the cleric, when playing 3.5 because you never got to do anything besides heal, and the fact that you get to do something besides heal is seen as one of 4th's strong points by myself and many others. If you want to go back to the 3.5 way of doing things I guess you could house rule away many of the healing surges and put most of the healing back into the cleric's pot. I don't have any suggestions as how this can be done without upsetting balance however.
PS: I guess I should have read past the first post. Many of my points seem to have already been made. AFAIK making the cleric back into the healing bot is the only statement that has not been made yet.
But one thing that made the Cleric in 3,5 more versatile (imho) was that he could turn any and all his spells into heals - so he didn't have to memorise any heals. I played a druid and could switch all spells into summonings, but my friend (the cleric) had all sorts of stuff available for battle (he was buffed up the ying yang) and if he had to heal - he'd just morph a spell into a heal. No biggie.
Anywho, i'm kinda not gonna participate in this thread anymore. Alot of personal attacks on people and that's not what I wanted.
Anywho, thx for the reply
Much better to simply use some offencive save or die spells, or enlarge himself, give himself the Fighters BAB and 1shot the monster. Or any of the other myriad of ways the Cleric could destroy everything in sight.
Why would a Cleric want to waste his valuable spells on healing when Wands of Cure Light (or Cure Moderate, or Cure Serious if you had deep pockets) were available?
Much better to simply use some offencive save or die spells, or enlarge himself, give himself the Fighters BAB and 1shot the monster. Or any of the other myriad of ways the Cleric could destroy everything in sight.
Hehe, why even use a cleric when a rogue with a decent use magic item skill or a warlock with deceive item could reliably activate the wands? Our last party in the 3.5 game we converted over to 4.0 had no 'healer' just a warlock with a handy haversack and one of the pockets was stuffed with 10 wands of cure light wounds, 5 cure moderate wounds, and 2-3 cure serious wounds. This of course came about because nobody wanted to be a cleric, because they were boring.
This approach also led to marathon sessions where we would wipe out entire dungeons in a single adventuring day without pausing due to the virtually unlimited healing potential available.
Did I mention the warlock was a warforged who had a custom version of the cannith wand bracer which was embedded into his wrist and had a revolver-style spinner that held 10 wands and could ready any of them with a thought? (Priced as a wand bracer and bracelet of item storing or whatever that thing was called, the revolver part is just flavor text, and then price multiplied by 2 because it didn't take up a slot). So he had 3-4 healing wands on there and 6-7 offensive/tactical wands available to supplement his invocations.
nobody wanted to be a cleric, because they were boring.
I wish i could introduce them to my "Animate Objects Cleric", 'boring' is not the correct word. 'Rediculous' comes to mind.
I wish i could introduce them to my "Animate Objects Cleric", 'boring' is not the correct word. 'Rediculous' comes to mind.
sorry, I should have used 'quotes' around that boring to indicate I didn't agree. I actually liked the cleric class in 3.5 to a certain point, and a lot of very fun builds could come out of it. Straight cleric 20 was still a bit lackluster
Why would a Cleric want to waste his valuable spells on healing when Wands of Cure Light (or Cure Moderate, or Cure Serious if you had deep pockets) were available?
Much better to simply use some offencive save or die spells, or enlarge himself, give himself the Fighters BAB and 1shot the monster. Or any of the other myriad of ways the Cleric could destroy everything in sight.
Easy - our DM is so greedy when it comes to Magic Items. During alot of our campaigns (earlier on), we only got from lvl 1 to a maximum of lvl 3, before we restarted as a new lvl 1 with new awsome dreams (that never came true). We finally took this group and tried to go above and beyond. We ended up hitting lvl 21 and our DM had some trouble controlling the might of some of our spells (or finding good ways in which to attack us).
I myself had a Legendary monkey which had a greater magic fang running for the majority of the day, this monkey actually ended up being better than our fighter (which ended up being a dire tiger, because he found the monkey to powerful). In dungeons I usually had Foresight/Shapechange running. In the beginning I could change into anything (Hello Solars and Ancient Wyrm Gold Dragons), then he changed the spell so I only could shift into things i've seen (hello Planetars) and he kept on nerfing us and not giving us items suitable for our lvls (he wasn't used to DM high lvls).
In 4e now he's gotten better, but he's afraid that we'll run amok hehe :D (but it appears harder in 4e than in 3,5e to do so - I might be wrong though since I haven't had a highlvl 4e PC yet)
No-one was used to DMing at high levels in 3.5. High Level 3.5 play required an attitude to DMing i like to call "**** It". You just did whatever seemed like a fun idea at the time and damned the consequences.
Yeah, at one point I was running a level 22 psion/something/something crazy/planeshifter/something who legally had a caster level AND manifester level of 21. Our keep was under siege and my DM said we could see a conjured meteor storm incoming. Some small rocks had hit the ground already, and large ones were on the way... from the density and power of the spell he indicated that it may last weeks.
My response? "I used planar translocation to shift the keep into my personal plane and then activate our dimensional anchor keystone." So yeah we spent a month in a pocket paradise, in a well-stocked keep, in a world I could control on a whim. When we returned, the siege was still underway but the storm was over and my DM was annoyed. After that, he just started having fun with us and the whole game became rather abstract.
He did eventually manage to strip us of most of our resources and lock my character in some near-artifact level manacles which prevented my planar travel for a while... kept us focused long enough to do some actual story progression.