PDA

View Full Version : [4e] Cleric Re-Do



sournote103
2011-04-29, 05:19 PM
I play 4e, but a few weeks ago, I tried out 3.5e. I didn't really like the gameplay as much, but one thing I did like better was the CLERIC. In 4e, the Cleric hardly get any healing at all, instead becoming some sort of psychotic crusader who goes around saying "My god can beat you up." The 3.5e Cleric, on the other hand, can heal his/her allies, and can take a good hit or two. And the HEAVY ARMOR. And the HEALING. Mostly the healing.
So, I'm trying to re-write the 4e Cleric to bring back what was good about the 3.5e Cleric.
I don't have the powers all finished yet (I'll post some when I have them written through level 5 or so) but I still have ideas.
First of all, most of the healing spells will be Encounter powers with a clause saying that they can be used X number of times per encounter (Probably Wisdom modifier).
Most of the At-Will powers will be small buffs to AC, attack rolls, and the like.
Daily powers will be bigger buffs, bigger healing, and things like the 3.5e spell Sanctuary.
As far as the class itself goes, I'm thinking 14 + Constitution Hp at 1st level, +5 each level, and 10 + Constitution Modifier surges/day; +2 will, Skills as normal Cleric.
Thoughts?

KillianHawkeye
2011-04-29, 05:23 PM
The 4E Cleric was designed the way it was because people didn't like just having to heal all the time. Now the Cleric can heal or buff while also attacking the enemies. I don't see the point in going backwards here. :smallconfused:

sournote103
2011-04-29, 08:42 PM
In my experience, the 4e Cleric really doesn't get to heal people at all. Personally, I prefer being a full-on healer, rather than the halfhearted attempt at it they made in 4e.
In any case, I am going to write the class, and I'm really looking for input on balance and ideas and such.

vasharanpaladin
2011-04-29, 08:43 PM
They released a new build awhile ago that does exactly what you're talking about. It's in Divine Power, called the Shielding Cleric. And guess what? Nobody likes it, because buffing and healing is all it can ever do.

sournote103
2011-04-29, 08:47 PM
Ah. I don't have that book (I really only buy books if they present genuinely new classes and races and such) but that really sounds like the kind of Cleric I would want to play. If I want to heal AND hit things, I'll play a paladin. If I want to hit things, I'll play a Ranger (Or theoretically Fighter, but in my experience, Rangers beat fighters hands-down). When I play a Cleric, I expect my main focus to be on healing, with attacks being secondary, or even tertiary. I suppose it really just boils down to whether or not one likes to have a set role in the party.

vasharanpaladin
2011-04-29, 08:56 PM
Technically, you still have to hit things; you're never going to be a complete healbot in 4e. It's just that the powers introduced for the Shielding Cleric don't directly hurt the thing you're hitting; they're more like "no, you're not going to hurt people!"

It's a lot of indirect buffing by weakening, really. :smalltongue:

Wyntonian
2011-04-29, 11:32 PM
Just throwing this out there, but you suggested a 14+CON health at starting, abut a Barbarian gets only 12+CON, and they don't get heavy armor either. The regular 3.5e cleric gets a d8 hit die, not a d14 (do those even exist?)

sournote103
2011-04-29, 11:56 PM
Yes, however characters get far less HP at first level in 3.5e. A 4e character with very low HP might have 20 (12 from class, 8 score) or so. My perception of clerics is primary healers and secondary tanks, thus the 14 HP, though I see how that might be a bit excessive.

vasharanpaladin
2011-04-30, 12:10 AM
Just throwing this out there, but you suggested a 14+CON health at starting, abut a Barbarian gets only 12+CON, and they don't get heavy armor either. The regular 3.5e cleric gets a d8 hit die, not a d14 (do those even exist?)

Barbarian gets 15+Con. There's still no rhyme or reason to reinventing the wheel; sournote's ideal cleric already exists in 4e, he just didn't look hard enough. :smalltongue:

And on that note, I'll probably end up eating my foot if you insist on this project, so I won't interfere further. Good luck! :smallwink:

sournote103
2011-04-30, 12:10 AM
I did some reading on the Shielding Cleric build, and, while I did not find specifics on its powers, I noticed some key differences.
First of all, the Shielding Cleric is a Cleric build, while I'm writing a new class (Albeit with a few shared class features and a few borrowed powers). Secondly, the Shielding Cleric is a pacifist build. While my class will not get many powers that directly do damage, many of their skills will also be de-buffs or otherwise detrimental to enemies.
Thirdly, the Shielding Cleric seems designed to hide behind their allies while shielding them. My class is designed to be a secondary tank, so it should be able to go toe-to-toe with most enemies and some out fine, despite the lack of combat-based powers.

vasharanpaladin
2011-04-30, 12:14 AM
I did some reading on the Shielding Cleric build, and, while I did not find specifics on its powers, I noticed some key differences.
First of all, the Shielding Cleric is a Cleric build, while I'm writing a new class (Albeit with a few shared class features and a few borrowed powers). Secondly, the Shielding Cleric is a pacifist build. While my class will not get many powers that directly do damage, many of their skills will also be de-buffs or otherwise detrimental to enemies.
Thirdly, the Shielding Cleric seems designed to hide behind their allies while shielding them. My class is designed to be a secondary tank, so it should be able to go toe-to-toe with most enemies and some out fine, despite the lack of combat-based powers.

...Okay, gonna address this before bowing out for reals. There is functionally no difference between buffing an ally's attack and debuffing an enemy's defense. This is how the Shielding Cleric works; buffing his allies indirectly by debuffing their enemies.

And, I'll point out, you probably won't find much serious help balancing what you're after; 4e kinda assumes that even a primary healer will be doing something to the enemy on his turn. That said, I've given all the copper pieces I can without turning really nasty (at least, I hope I haven't been spewing real vitriol here...), so I'm gonna bow out before I have a chance to say something we might both regret. :smallredface:

Dust
2011-04-30, 04:51 AM
I feel Vasharan said most everything that needs to be said, and you seem determined to carry out this idea. My rule of thumb in such matters is to wish you good luck and godspeed. Since you're not asking our opinion on whether or not this is a bad idea, but rather how to improve upon it, I'll try and touch on a few points regarding that.


Personally, I prefer being a full-on healer, rather than the halfhearted attempt at it they made in 4e.

While my class will not get many powers that directly do damage, many of their skills will also be de-buffs or otherwise detrimental to enemies.
Thirdly, the Shielding Cleric seems designed to hide behind their allies while shielding them. My class is designed to be a secondary tank, so it should be able to go toe-to-toe with most enemies and some out fine, despite the lack of combat-based powers.
This is a point that requires some discussion, I think. Clearly your class would be a Leader, as the focal point revolves around ally support. But I feel that unless you have some extremely elegant method, you're trying to cover too many bases with this class and ultimately fall into a powergaming trap with it. When you say 'designed to be a secondary tank,' are you planning on using a mark mechanic? Because if not, then you can simply allow for heavy armor usage and call it a day, because being a TOUGH defender is what you're really going for here.


First of all, the Shielding Cleric is a Cleric build, while I'm writing a new class (Albeit with a few shared class features and a few borrowed powers).
I think your project would have an increased liklihood to succeed if you sat down and read up on various other class builds, realizing that sharing class features, a few borrowed powers, and the same trained skills and whatnot is the very definition of a build.

HalfDragonCube
2011-04-30, 08:12 AM
...Okay, gonna address this before bowing out for reals. There is functionally no difference between buffing an ally's attack and debuffing an enemy's defense. This is how the Shielding Cleric works; buffing his allies indirectly by debuffing their enemies.

Umm, I'm not that familiar with 4e but maybe if you had one fighter against a horde of cannon fodder then you would want to buff the fighter. If you had a party against a BBEG then you might want to debuff the BBEG.

Anyway, yup, don't bother reinventing it, do something more useful with your time. If you are making a dedicated healer then it might be a little underpowered.

tcrudisi
2011-04-30, 08:56 AM
Anyway, yup, don't bother reinventing it, do something more useful with your time. If you are making a dedicated healer then it might be a little underpowered.

I keep reading what you are saying and I really want to bring up a few points.

The pacifist healer is everything you have said you wanted. It gets insanely good healing and doesn't go around beating people up.

Further, you want to increase the amount of heals a Cleric gets per encounter? I want to forewarn you: the Cleric gets plenty enough as-is. Seriously. Two an encounter (three at level 16) is all you'll likely ever need. BUT -- if you really want more, take Healer's Mercy at level 1 (allows you to heal ALL bloodied allies), Astral Seal at-will (does no damage but the first ally who hits the target regains hit points), and the level 6 utility Bastion of Health. There's also the level 3 encounter power Resurgent Sun where even on a miss you or an ally gets to spend a healing surge.

At level 1, this gives you 3 encounter power heals. By level 2, you can have 4. By level 3, you can have 5 encounter power heals. By level 6, this will be 6 encounter power heals. I'm not even including the Healing Strike encounter power at level 1 (Str-based) and I'm not going above level 6 (except to say that you automatically get another healing word at level 16).

The cleric already has plenty of healing. I can't imagine EVER needing 6 encounter power heals at level 6. That's just .... crazy.

Also, I gave +1 at level 2 because of the following feats: Spirit Talker (multiclass Shaman) into Mending Spirit (1/enc Shaman heal).

If that's not enough healing by level 6, I'd like to point out that I ignored daily spells. Yes, there are some of those that heal too (or increase the potency of your heals).

Mando Knight
2011-04-30, 01:32 PM
The cleric already has plenty of healing. I can't imagine EVER needing 6 encounter power heals at level 6. That's just .... crazy.

Indeed. You'd have to be playing against MM3/Vault monsters and having your characters stab themselves to deal enough damage to consistently need that much healing.

Seerow
2011-04-30, 02:13 PM
Indeed. You'd have to be playing against MM3/Vault monsters and having your characters stab themselves to deal enough damage to consistently need that much healing.

Or be involved in a particularly prolonged encounter, a couple of levels above that of your party.

I've been involved in battles in 4e on both sides of the DM screen where the party burned through at least that many healing powers in the heroic tier. Of course in at least one case it was a tactical error (battle standard of healing + dead ally = lots of hilarity as they constantly bounce back up with 1 hit point, just to get knocked down again)

sournote103
2011-04-30, 02:30 PM
In my group, encounters DO tend to be brutal. We rotate DMing a lot, and everyone (Except me) is a REALLY sadistic DM. (I'm just OCD about the rules) So, yes. That level of healing can be necessary. (For me, anyways)

Dust
2011-04-30, 02:39 PM
Again, godspeed, make sure you post up the final result.