[Pathfinder] Clerics

[mucco]

So, people say Clerics are roughly as good in PF as they are in 3.5. Tier 1 and stuff. But, I feel that in PF, the severe lack of splat breaks the class horribly. I'm going to explain. A Cleric, as a T1, is supposed to do these things in various order: dominate properly CRed encounters through efficient use of her spells; be able to respond adequately and powerfully to almost any adverse situation; be able to break the game in various ways if left unchecked.

Let's look at the main tricks the Cleric has in 3.5, to achieve these things.
1) DMM. Whether it's Quicken of Persist, you're trading an otherwise useless class feature for Action Economy. And it's really strong!
2) Broken good spells - Divine Power, Righteous Might, Righteous Wrath of the Faithful, Greater Visage of the Deity to name a few.
3) Summon Monster.
4) Undead creating.

Let's see what changed in PF:
1) No.
2) Some spells have been nerfed, and no more Spell Compendium.
3) No more splatbooks.
4) Undead hit a bit more and are more squishy. The ones made with Create Undead are better, to compensate.

So, how exactly does a Cleric "win the game" in PF? Especially at low levels, it seems like you're the poor guy that uses Bless and CLW and the occasional summon for an ape. The most important problem is the lack of any kind of Action Economy outside of summons, that is the factor that wins fights. TO quote the Cleric Handbook, "A cleric without Divine Metamagic is like a druid without Natural Spell". Arcanists still have battlefield control spells and no-save stuff that allows them to make the enemy lose more actions than they are spending. Clerics don't get any of that. I think. I hope I'm right!

Please make me a T1 Cleric build at levels 2, 5, 8, 12. High levels I'd agree but they're 10% of the total game time, probably less.

P.S. try to stay away from stuff that isn't available to all clerics - it's not a valid argument to say that Undead make the Cleric T1 because then the Good Cleric isn't. Same goes for domains. Also, try to stay away from magic items. 3.5 Cleric needs no Nightsticks or Karma Beads to break the game. They help, but they're not the trigger. I want a spells-and-feats chassis.

[Novawurmson]

At level 2, it's a bit more fair. Once you hit level 5+, you've got at least 3rd level spells. You can now heal the sick, walk on water, and create food and water. You are mostly Jesus.

At level 8, you've got fourth level spells. You can raise the dead, control the weather, discern lies, escape crowds and summon angels (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFuMpYTyRjw). You are now Jesus.

Meanwhile, the level 8 Fighter gets...a bonus feat!

Don't get me wrong, I love Pathfinder, but tier 1's are still tier 1's, even if some of their shiniest toys are missing.

Edited for silliness.

[nyarlathotep]

1) DMM is nice but not needed to be T1. It simply means that you can keep your buffs up all day instead of one or two encounters.
2) Most of the larger nerfs were to non-cleric spells. The biggest nerf for clerics was to divine power (it doesn't stack with divine favor and doesn't give BAB boosts), righteous might the other main cleric buff spell was actually bad better between 3.5 and pathfinder.
3)The majority of good summoned monsters are in core and the bestiary 2 & 3 more than made up for the loss of the later MMs because of their heavy outsider focus.
4) Undead are not less squishy. Going down from d12 hitdice to d8 hitdice is an average drop of 2 hitpoints per hitdie, but they get to add their charisma modifier to hp meaning that charisma 14 breaks even and anything higher is stronger. The only undead that are creatable that have less than 14 charisma are the festrog, draugur, phantom armors, and the templates if you drop them on something with low charisma. So 3 out of 31 creatable undead, 5 out of 31 if you are intentionally animating creatures that make squishy undead. The rest are either on par with 3.5 undead or substantially less squishy.

[Crossblade]

Tier 1 and stuff. But, I feel that in PF, the severe lack of splat breaks the class horribly. I'm going to explain. A Cleric, as a T1, is supposed to do these things in various order: .... be able to break the game in various ways if left unchecked.


I think you missed the memo. Tiers are a bad thing that shows how a game is unbalanced and unfair against other classes of lower tiers.
You're not supposed to break a game, you're supposed to play a game.
With others.
So everyone has fun.
Everyone as in: yourself, party members and your DM.

[Circle of Life]

I think you missed the memo. Tiers are a bad thing that shows how a game is unbalanced and unfair against other classes of lower tiers.

I think you either intentionally misread any of the various tier guides, or are purposefully misrepresenting their intent for an unknown reason.

Alternately, you never read them at all and are pulling this explanation out of thin air, which is sadly the most plausible explanation I can think of.

On topic: Clerics still have their tricks, and what little was taken away does not reduce the built in versatility to the Cleric class sufficiently to take away their Tier 1 status. Tier 1 is capable of doing almost anything, and PF Clerics can still do that.

[Novawurmson]

I think you either intentionally misread any of the various tier guides, or are purposefully misrepresenting their intent for an unknown reason.

Alternately, you never read them at all and are pulling this explanation out of thin air, which is sadly the most plausible explanation I can think of.

The point of most tier guides is that the game is unbalanced and that DMs should be aware of differences in class power when helping their players create characters. If DMs are fine with players being demigods, then a party of tier 1s and 2s is fine. If the DM wants the players to be epic heroes, then tiers 3 and 4 usually work well. If the DM wants the players to be struggling underdogs, tiers 5 and 6 are usually best.

However, many of the guides do point out that mixing classes of vastly different tiers (a Cleric and a Fighter, for example) means that either the tier 1 needs to play below his potential to accommodate the tier 5, or the tier 5 is going to be left in the dust.

So yes, tier guides do point out how unbalanced the classes are, in the hopes of being able to consciously build balanced parties.

[Circle of Life]

So yes, tier guides do point out how unbalanced the classes are, in the hopes of being able to consciously build balanced parties.

This is true.

Saying that tiers are a bad thing made to showcase the badwrong of lower tier classes: not true.

That's like saying "the sky is blue only because only the shorter wavelengths are best absorbed" is calling the sky bad because it considers blue best. What?

Tier listings are an approximate ranking of class potential, and nothing else. There's no inherent wrongness to that.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

PF lacks Persistent Spell? Now there's a new Persistent Spell (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/metamagic-feats/persistent-spell-metamagic), powerful in a different way. 3.5 splatbook spells weren't ported, you say? How about a new level 1 spell (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/m/murderous-command) combined with more new metamagic (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/metamagic-feats/bouncing-spell-metamagic) for confusion-lite at level 3?

You are correct when you note PF clerics (and casters in general) have fewer ways to break the game than in 3.5, but this is a function of overall content, and they still do have some ways. PF's goal was to make sure the fighter keeps his little grunt niche, not to prevent high level casters from making RAW-abiding DMs weep.

[Mystify]

Its not bad to classify classes into tiers. Its bad that they can be classified.

[mucco]

I think you missed the memo. Tiers are a bad thing that shows how a game is unbalanced and unfair against other classes of lower tiers.
You're not supposed to break a game, you're supposed to play a game.
With others.
So everyone has fun.
Everyone as in: yourself, party members and your DM.

I'm not looking for ways to break the game, I'm just missing the potential of a Cleric in PF, and I want to know it.

Novawurmson: your comparison with Jesus sorta falls into a Stormwind. By fluff, yeah. The caster is a caster and the fighter swings a sword. But look at the relative power. The Cleric is able to do all of that nifty stuff but he won't have it prepared, because most of it is useless in combat. Like, totally useless. The only ok combat spell you mentioned is SM. Let's look at the "angels" this guy can summon. Hound Archon. Attacking for +9/+4/+3, for 19 total average damage if it hits everything. Or a Rhino, slightly better, charges at +10 for 26 dmg. Problem being that at this point, any fighter worth his salt is doing +15/+15/+10 for about 20 damage each hit. Before feats, and he can spend 9. There isn't even a comparison. You are summoning angelic kitties and he's a machinegun of death.

So, where is this power? Self buff spells aren't nearly as good now, and I believe they're a very bad choice. Divine Power -> Righteous Might -> charge for 1 attack -> combat is over because the fighter already did 200 damage or so. I could see buffing others, but it suffers from the same problem. One Freedom of Movement will be useful in certain situation, I can see that. Still, it's not a win button, like wizards have from level 1 or so. It's a "not lose" button.

If you tell me that T1 means endless OoC utility the next day (because of prepared spells), alright. But then tiers aren't a measure of a character's "strength" anymore. They now measure the broadth of random annoyances that a character can do something about and that have nothing to do with combat.

GoodbyeSoberDay: thanks for the contribution. That is a nice spell, and those are two interesting metamagic feats. Persistent is bad, though. -2 to the DC because I'm casting a 3rd level spell in a 5th level slot, to have the target roll twice? I'm quite sure the math works out similar. For a feat, well, Spell Focus would have probably been better. Bouncing Spell does mostly the same thing for a +1, cute. Still not Confusion because it only still effects a single creature, but we're doing something!

[Ancano]

By far the best way to play a cleric in pathfinder is to...well...play them like a druid.

The animal domain is pretty much mandatory. As is being a human. Take the boon companion feat to make your tiger pet (or bear if you're < level 7) as strong as a druid's, and take the eye for talent racial variant to give your pet a +2 bonus to strength (put all of the other stat increases into strength as well). Your tiger will be quite powerful especially with pounce and a high CMB for grapples. The best part is you can cast personal buff spells like righteous might and divine power on your pet and have it attack that same round. This is the definition of action economy.

Lots of people aren't aware of this build but I'm convinced it's easily the strongest way to build a cleric.

EDIT: i just noticed you mentioned not to focus on specific domains. Unfortunately most of the domains are trash. Animal in particular is head and shoulders above all the rest. clerics without it are substantially weaker and probably don't deserve that tier 1 designation.

[mucco]

Well, I said that because then one could argue that Psions are T1 because of the StP Erudite. Unless one can show me several consistent different ways to bring it to T1 power, a domain/aligned power/something restriced isn't going to be relevant.

Haven't built that one cleric build, but it does seem promising.

[Benly]

If you tell me that T1 means endless OoC utility the next day (because of prepared spells), alright. But then tiers aren't a measure of a character's "strength" anymore. They now measure the broadth of random annoyances that a character can do something about and that have nothing to do with combat.

Just a quick thing: that is, in part, what T1 means. A sorcerer specialized for combat is more powerful in a fight than a wizard unless the particular fight is one with an unusual weakness the wizard can exploit. However, the wizard can shift his focus day-to-day to solve any other sort of situation, while the sorcerer can't. This is why the wizard is T1 and the sorcerer is T2.

edit: Assuming this is on an even-numbered level so that they both have access to the same level of spells, of course. Even if they got spell levels at the same rate, sorcerers would be T2 to wizards' T1 for this reason.

edit 2: Edited because I'm lazy to add: obviously versatility alone isn't enough; versatility without the T1/T2 level of power makes you T3. However, the versatility you describe is what distinguishes T1 from T2; the top two tiers are at the same level of "raw power".

[Ancano]

Well, I said that because then one could argue that Psions are T1 because of the StP Erudite. Unless one can show me several consistent different ways to bring it to T1 power, a domain/aligned power/something restriced isn't going to be relevant.

Haven't built that one cleric build, but it does seem promising.

In a sense, it's functionally more of a dip than a complete build. All you're really giving up are 2 feats (1 of which is your human bonus feat), 1 of your 2 domains, and your choice of race (but humans are pretty much optimal clerics anyway). You can build the cleric however you want otherwise. It's kind of like natural spell. A relatively small investment for a big boost in power and flexibility.

[mucco]

Just a quick thing: that is, in part, what T1 means. A sorcerer specialized for combat is more powerful in a fight than a wizard unless the particular fight is one with an unusual weakness the wizard can exploit. However, the wizard can shift his focus day-to-day to solve any other sort of situation, while the sorcerer can't. This is why the wizard is T1 and the sorcerer is T2.

edit: Assuming this is on an even-numbered level so that they both have access to the same level of spells, of course. Even if they got spell levels at the same rate, sorcerers would be T2 to wizards' T1 for this reason.

edit 2: Edited because I'm lazy to add: obviously versatility alone isn't enough; versatility without the T1/T2 level of power makes you T3. However, the versatility you describe is what distinguishes T1 from T2; the top two tiers are at the same level of "raw power".

Yes, I fully agree. It seems to me that PF Clerics are T3, in fact.

[Benly]

Yes, I fully agree. It seems to me that PF Clerics are T3, in fact.

I'm not sure about that. Their spell list got hit a bit harder than the wizard's did by the loss of sourcebook material, but they still have gamebreaking options at the higher levels (Miracle, the Planar Ally line, the Holy Word group) and versatility to go with that power. Tier 1 in general got knocked down a bit by the spell list changes in PF, but I would still say that clerics are in PF's T1.

[MukkTB]

Well the druid still feels Tier 1. The wizard's spell list keeps it in tier 1 even after the nerfs. The same for the sorcerer.

So the cleric is now a middling mediocre combatant with medium armor. But he is still a full spellcaster. So it comes down to a close examination of that list. Powerful things at the end aren't a factor if they don't see play much. I think the tier system is intended to best fit levels 7 to 14.

The list looks OK. Check it out for yourself.

And of course the evil Cleric gets undead. Its still pretty nice to have them.


So my conclusion is that the Cleric is the weakest tier 1. Like the PF wizard and sorcerer he doesn't come online for the first few levels. Without DMM he is a competent combatant + possible pets + full prepared spellcaster. Full prepared spellcaster is almost always a pass into the tier 1 lounge.

[Benly]

Full prepared spellcaster is almost always a pass into the tier 1 lounge.

This wasn't always true in 3.5; the constant stream of new spells for the Big Three meant that even full prepared-casting classes would get left behind if they didn't use those lists. The wu jen is the classic case - because the wu jen list never got expanded while the big three bloated beyond the riduculous, it ended up being frequently placed in T2. Like the sorcerer, it had some gamebreaking tricks, but couldn't change them out; in the wu jen's case, it was because they're not on its spell list instead of because of limited spells known, but the ultimate result is the same.

With Pathfinder it's not quite as drastic, partially because they don't crank out new spells at anything like the rate Wizards did and partially because they've done a better (though not perfect) job keeping the witch caught up than WotC ever did with its "extra" casting classes.

[mucco]

Big spells in high levels have never made a T1. Also, I maintain that a T1 must be so at most levels. Compare the Beguiler, probably the archetype of the T3 caster: Ethereal Jaunt, Greater Arcane Sight, True Seeing, Mind Blank, Moment of Prescience, Discern Location, Time Stop, Dominate Monster, Power Word: Stun. One free spell of 7th and 9th level, extra. This list competes with the 3.5 Cleric. And yet the Beguiler is T3. Why? Because of versatility. Well, I can't see much of that list that a PF Cleric can do. It has some tricks but the Beguiler here has better ones. For one, the Beguiler has much better minions than any Cleric, also because they're free of charge (Dominate).

Let's take the three archetypical situations used to determine a tier. JaronK gives his view on the Beguiler, showing that the Beguiler is competent but not easy-mode.

Situation 1: A Black Dragon has been plaguing an area, and he lives in a trap filled cave. Deal with him.
A Cleric can use spells to detect traps but not disable them I think, he can mostly negate the dragon's breath weapon, and he must stay far from him because a dragon would rip him to shreds - like it would the Beguiler. The Cleric is probably a tad more useful here.

Situation 2: You have been tasked by a nearby country with making contact with the leader of the underground slave resistance of an evil tyranical city state, and get him to trust you.
A Cleric has an aura that shows where he stands, and has multiple spells to show he's trustable. Diplomacy is an option just as it is for the Beguiler. In a social setting, the Beguiler still ends up ahead.

Situation 3: A huge army of Orcs is approaching the city, and should be here in a week or so. Help the city prepare for war.
A Cleric can use the city money to fund a small army of extraplanars which will prove invaluable. He has no access to illusions, though. He can't do sneaky missions on generals: "Invisibility, Silence, (Greater Dispel on Mind Blank Ring plus) Silent Dominate Person". Yeah. Holy Word is still going to kill many orcs. I'd call it even.

So, yeah. Sounds about even to me. Compare to a Wizard.

[MukkTB]

That's a pretty solid argument. Now I'm not so sure. Need JaronK to hand down wisdom from on high or something.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

GoodbyeSoberDay: thanks for the contribution. That is a nice spell, and those are two interesting metamagic feats. Persistent is bad, though. -2 to the DC because I'm casting a 3rd level spell in a 5th level slot, to have the target roll twice? I'm quite sure the math works out similar. For a feat, well, Spell Focus would have probably been better. Bouncing Spell does mostly the same thing for a +1, cute. Still not Confusion because it only still effects a single creature, but we're doing something!I said confusion-lite because it's quite likely to affect at least one person and it's lower level. Anyway, here are the statistics on Persistent Spell compared to Heighten +2, where DC Discrepancy is the Save DC minus the saving throw bonus and Fail % is the chance that the target fails the save given the discrepancy:

{table=head]DC Discrepancy|Normal Fail %|Persistent Fail %|Heighten +2 Fail %
1|0.05|0.0975|0.1
2|0.05|0.0975|0.15
3|0.1|0.19|0.2
4|0.15|0.2775|0.25
5|0.2|0.36|0.3
6|0.25|0.4375|0.35
7|0.3|0.51|0.4
8|0.35|0.5775|0.45
9|0.4|0.64|0.5
10|0.45|0.6975|0.55
11|0.5|0.75|0.6
12|0.55|0.7975|0.65
13|0.6|0.84|0.7
14|0.65|0.8775|0.75
15|0.7|0.91|0.8
16|0.75|0.9375|0.85
17|0.8|0.96|0.9
18|0.85|0.9775|0.95
19|0.9|0.99|0.95
20|0.95|0.9975|0.95[/table]

The middle of the chart is arguably where most casters operate, and that's where Persistent Spell makes the most difference. Note that you can consider Heighten +2 to just be a higher level spell if you wish. Also, Magical Lineage (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/traits/magic-traits/magical-lineage) makes Persistent Spell much better, though admittedly it makes most metamagic better. Extend Spell works wonders with Murderous Command as well.

Edit: Can has chart 4 u http://i44.tinypic.com/etd06o.jpg

[mikau013]

Persistent isn't always better than heighten and if it is, usually only barely so.
Problem is though, that heighten +2 is almost never worth it. You'd rather cast a spell of the higher level and you're actually paying a feat for heighten. (if we're only talking about normal use and not meeting requirements etc.).

[CTrees]

By far the best way to play a cleric in pathfinder is to...well...play them like a druid.

The animal domain is pretty much mandatory. As is being a human. Take the boon companion feat to make your tiger pet (or bear if you're < level 7) as strong as a druid's, and take the eye for talent racial variant to give your pet a +2 bonus to strength (put all of the other stat increases into strength as well). Your tiger will be quite powerful especially with pounce and a high CMB for grapples. The best part is you can cast personal buff spells like righteous might and divine power on your pet and have it attack that same round. This is the definition of action economy.

Lots of people aren't aware of this build but I'm convinced it's easily the strongest way to build a cleric.

EDIT: i just noticed you mentioned not to focus on specific domains. Unfortunately most of the domains are trash. Animal in particular is head and shoulders above all the rest. clerics without it are substantially weaker and probably don't deserve that tier 1 designation.

I was actually unaware of Boon Companion, almost entirely because it's buried in one of those random suppliments with, like, three new options for PCs. Paizo is fond of those... Regardless, Boon Companion is really nice in the right build-good find. Still strange that they print Horse Master AFTER Boon Companion, and they haven't (to the best of my knowledge) printed anything mirroring Practiced Spellcaster. I don't always understand Paizo...

More directly on topic, I don't know about teir three for clerics... they've still got a lot of tricks, not the least of which is the Planar Ally line. They're good combatants (though they'll have a hard time matching the dedicated melee types), they still have a goodly amount of debuffs and crowd control... I'd put them at the weakest teir 1, just for the sheer power of anything they put their minds to (remember, we're not comparing them to 3.5 T3's like the beguiler, we're comparing them to PF's T3).

[jmelesky]

I was actually unaware of Boon Companion, almost entirely because it's buried in one of those random suppliments with, like, three new options for PCs. Paizo is fond of those...

I think it's the nature of getting most of their income from content books, not rulebooks. At least they're all OGL and end up on the SRD site.


Still strange that they print Horse Master AFTER Boon Companion, and they haven't (to the best of my knowledge) printed anything mirroring Practiced Spellcaster.

If i remember Practiced Spellcaster correctly, there's a trait from the APG that mimics it (with a lower bonus):



Magical Knack

Benefit: Pick a class when you gain this trait—your caster level in that class gains a +2 trait bonus as long as this bonus doesn’t increase your caster level higher than your current Hit Dice.


Hope that helps.

[Gullintanni]

Yes, I fully agree. It seems to me that PF Clerics are T3, in fact.

The difference between Tier 1 and Tier 3 is in RAW power.

Tier 3 = Versatile + Competent
Tier 1 = Versatile + Can Break the Game

A Tier 3 class, that is, a Beguiler, for example, has lots of shiny tricks that allow it to meaningfully contribute in a variety of circumstances.

A Tier 1 class, that is, a Cleric, has lots of shiny tricks that it can use to, among other things, overwhelm the action economy by creating//commanding swarms of undead, Planar Ally some frickin' Angels, request Miracles, and cast Gate. It is also competent in melee and can distribute buffs for fun and profit!

The Cleric has multiple available methods to break the game at varied levels of play. It is the definition of Tier 1. Plus it can still cast Gate. It bears mentioning twice.

Domains offer you versatility in the form of off-list spells, a lot of which are exceptional, plus Domain powers, which are icing on an already deliciously rich cake.

[mucco]

Read PF Gate. The HD cap for the single creature is now limited to your CL, although you can call two monsters. And, the list of available monsters is much much smaller. And, it is level 17+. And, it costs 10k per cast.

Planar Ally costs too, see my description of the Situation 3 above for an example of how the cleric might use them. IT still doesn't put him ahead of a T3, or make him broken.

A big reason Clerics are T1 in 3.5 is the fact those two spells, as well as other summoning stuff, is broken.

[Gullintanni]

Read PF Gate. The HD cap for the single creature is now limited to your CL, although you can call two monsters. And, the list of available monsters is much much smaller. And, it is level 17+. And, it costs 10k per cast.

Planar Ally costs too, see my description of the Situation 3 above for an example of how the cleric might use them. IT still doesn't put him ahead of a T3, or make him broken.

A big reason Clerics are T1 in 3.5 is the fact those two spells, as well as other summoning stuff, is broken.

Gate's still broken, you just have to be more creative about it. It means you have to boost your CL a bit, or Gate in uncontrolled Solars while you're fighting Balors in the Abyss. Chances are good that they'll do what you wanted them to do :smallwink:

Also, Shapechange. The Animal Domain grants Clerics an Animal Companion and Shapechange. And they still have Miracle. They can still cast anything ever. Planar Ally costs, yes. But you can Planar Ally Efreetis and wish for stat increases, saving you a fortune in Tomes.

No, the spells in question aren't as broken, but they're still broken. And with reasonable Domain choices, Clerics can be unbelievably strong. They can pick up Summon Monster//Summon Nature's Ally spells.

Just because you can't reach the same highs as in 3.5, doesn't mean you can't reach well beyond Tier 3. PF Clerics are still Tier 1, they're just not as close to Tier 0 as they were in 3.5

[mikau013]

Read PF Gate. The HD cap for the single creature is now limited to your CL, although you can call two monsters. And, the list of available monsters is much much smaller. And, it is level 17+. And, it costs 10k per cast.


That is why you use caster lvl boost items or candle of invocation. Since candle of invocation is for some reason actually cheaper than preparing and casting the spell yourself :smallsigh:

[DrDeth]

Well, yes, the old CoDZilla isn’t much there anymore in PF. So Cleric is no longer super-powered. Of course, I never saw a self-buffing DMMing with a score of Nightsticks CoDZilla (well, yes, I did see a druid or two go CoDZilla, but never a cleric in real play). So yeah, the dreaded - but almost never actually played- CoDZilla was nerfed. And, it was about time.


True, DMM is gone, which in 3.5 “traded an otherwise useless class feature for Action Economy”, but in PF Channel Energy is great and used all the time.

Cleric has full spellcasting and access to 9th level spells. Pretty much by definition that makes it at least a Tier 2.

[Gullintanni]

Well, yes, the old CoDZilla isn’t much there anymore in PF. So Cleric is no longer super-powered. Of course, I never saw a self-buffing DMMing with a score of Nightsticks CoDZilla (well, yes, I did see a druid or two go CoDZilla, but never a cleric in real play). So yeah, the dreaded - but almost never actually played- CoDZilla was nerfed. And, it was about time.

True, DMM is gone, which in 3.5 “traded an otherwise useless class feature for Action Economy”, but in PF Channel Energy is great and used all the time.

Cleric has full spellcasting and access to 9th level spells. Pretty much by definition that makes it at least a Tier 2.

Hehe...Turning isn't useless in 3.5. With about 30,000 gold worth of items, it's possible to increase your effective Cleric level by 20. This is even better on evil Clerics when used to command undead. With minimal investment of WBL, you can obviate an entire class of monster.

As for Tier 1 vs. Tier 2, the difference is not in Power. Tier 1 and Tier 2 are equally powerful. But Tier 2 is specialized where as Tier 1 enjoys versatility. At peak power, both Tier 1 and Tier 2 are game breakingly powerful. Clerics do this in a lot of ways.

They break melee by being able to summon things that are better than fighters, by animating the dead to fight for them establishing HP buffers, Shapechanging, and by having an Animal Companion who's also better than the party fighter.

They break WBL by virtue of being able to create wish-loops, though they're much more limited in this capacity than before. Using GMW and some caster level boosts, it's also possible to create +14 Weapons and Armor for well below cost, albeit temporarily.

They have some fantastic spells including the Dispel line. Wind Wall pretty much breaks archers. With Resurrection magic, they render death obsolete. True Seeing counters pretty much an entire school of magic. Divinations grant them scry-and-die capabilities, especially when combined with a Domain that grants access to teleportation magic. I haven't even begun to analyze Summons and SLA's you can bring into the game via that route.

...as I said, Clerics might be slightly less powerful in PF than they are in 3.5, especially given limited splat material, but they're still an easy entry into Tier 1.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Persistent isn't always better than heighten and if it is, usually only barely so.
Problem is though, that heighten +2 is almost never worth it. You'd rather cast a spell of the higher level and you're actually paying a feat for heighten. (if we're only talking about normal use and not meeting requirements etc.).Let's once again take a look at the table. If your Nth level Save-or-X spell normally has a 50% chance of affecting the target, your N+2th level Save-or-X spell (targeting the same save) has a 60% chance of affecting the target, and a Persistent Nth level Save-or-X has a 75% chance of affecting the target. Now, you're right that higher level spells generally have nastier effects, but (1) sometimes low level spells also have nasty effects, like Murderous Command, and (2) a 15% difference isn't just "barely" better.

[DrDeth]

Hehe...Turning isn't useless in 3.5. With about 30,000 gold worth of items, it's possible to increase your effective Cleric level by 20. This is even better on evil Clerics when used to command undead. With minimal investment of WBL, you can obviate an entire class of monster..

Right, and I wasn't saying turning was useless (it has saved many parties in the low to mid levels around here), but IF you consider that a given, then it does not apply to PF.

[Gullintanni]

Right, and I wasn't saying turning was useless (it has saved many parties in the low to mid levels around here), but IF you consider that a given, then it does not apply to PF.

Aye, true enough. Channeling is a step down from turning, though it does have some interesting uses in its own right.

[Gnaeus]

Aye, true enough. Channeling is a step down from turning, though it does have some interesting uses in its own right.

It is a step down from turning...If 3.5 materials are not included, or if it is ruled to not power domain feats or DMM, and if you were using it for those things in 3.5. It is a step UP from turning otherwise. Especially at low levels, the cleric can fight in combat, using his weapon or going all out with spells, then use his channeling to heal the group instead of spells. Or he can take a feat to make it a move action, so that he can heal and cast, instead of wasting a round playing healbot.



1) No.

DMM Persist was not a cleric class feature. It was a feat tree involving 3 feats, which, if nightstick abuse wasn't allowed, wasn't necessarily worth the cost. If you are comparing a PF cleric without magic items to a 3.5 DMM cleric without magic items, the PF cleric does JUST FINE. Because that DMM guy spent 3 feats to persist maybe 1 spell per day.


2) Some spells have been nerfed, and no more Spell Compendium.
3) No more splatbooks.

You know they are coming out with more splatbooks regularly, and they have new spells in them.



Novawurmson: your comparison with Jesus sorta falls into a Stormwind. By fluff, yeah. The caster is a caster and the fighter swings a sword. But look at the relative power. The Cleric is able to do all of that nifty stuff but he won't have it prepared, because most of it is useless in combat. Like, totally useless. The only ok combat spell you mentioned is SM. Let's look at the "angels" this guy can summon. Hound Archon. Attacking for +9/+4/+3, for 19 total average damage if it hits everything. Or a Rhino, slightly better, charges at +10 for 26 dmg. Problem being that at this point, any fighter worth his salt is doing +15/+15/+10 for about 20 damage each hit. Before feats, and he can spend 9. There isn't even a comparison. You are summoning angelic kitties and he's a machinegun of death.

You are comparing apples to oranges.
1. The fighter can full attack as you mention. If an enemy is standing next to him. That isn't automatic.
2. The cleric can summon one of those things PER ROUND or at higher levels, more than one. OK, so it isn't stronger than the fighter. But several of them are.
3. Summon Monster isn't a damage spell. It is a utility spell that can do damage. The hound archon that you malign comes with a free magic circle vs. evil, good for warding off enemy magics. Each Mephit comes with a second or third level spell that it can cast, and some of those (like stinking cloud or wind wall) can be virtual fight winners by themselves in the right circumstances. Gotta fly over an obstacle? summon some dire bats. Need a pre combat buff? Archons have Aid as an at will, so you can give +1 to hit and +8 hp to everyone in the party for a 3rd level slot (not as good as haste, but lasts longer). Want to lock an opponent down? Summon a couple crocodiles and wait for the grapple love.

Summon monster is less of a power spell, than it is a spell that has applications in almost any fight. There are lots of spells that can outdo it in pain-on-the-enemies value, but very few that are as universally helpful.

[navar100]

Channeling works well. As much as cleric players shouldn't necessarily be auto-roled into healbot, it is a decent healing effect. You get to heal at a range and affect more than one person at a time. That saves up on not needing to use as many spells for curing wounds and wand charges. If the campaign is heavy undead, it's useful. If undead just appear in the "normal" amount of a generic campaign, you aren't losing use of a class feature because of it.

In 3E, Turning Undead was useless against BBEG undead because of HD. Channeling allows you some use. If the Pathfinder campaign has enough undead to warrant taking the feat Turn Undead, that can work on even BBEG undead because it's not limited by HD. The BBEG I'm sure will have a good save for it, but it's still possible to affect it, at least more so than the nil in 3E.

I like what my DM did. We have an ally Neutral cleric who sometimes travels with us. He uses negative energy Channeling. He has Selective Channeling feat so he can damage our enemies while leaving the party unharmed. Useless when we fight undead, of course, but quite handy in our other combats. There's a cool factor to it.

[Gullintanni]

In 3E, Turning Undead was useless against BBEG undead because of HD. Channeling allows you some use. If the Pathfinder campaign has enough undead to warrant taking the feat Turn Undead, that can work on even BBEG undead because it's not limited by HD. The BBEG I'm sure will have a good save for it, but it's still possible to affect it, at least more so than the nil in 3E.


This isn't true at all. A 20th level Cleric with a Rod of Defiance, a Lyre of the Restful Soul, a Scepter of the Netherworld, Improved Turning (the Feat), and a Phylactery of Undead Turning turned undead as a Level 44 Cleric. In all but the rarest instances, this is enough to outright Destroy any undead creature you come across. In the rest of cases, it is still an automatic success.

Channeling, absent 3.5 content, lacks the benefit of all of those items, 75% of which come out of Libris Mortiis.

That said, you're spot on with the rest of your analysis. Channeling is still pretty strong, it's just not 3.5 Strong. Of course, as Gnaeus pointed out, PF + 3.5 splats + Channeling > 3.5 Turning on its own.

And I do particularly like that Negative Energy Channeling is a negative energy weapon against the living.

[Benly]

Channeling, absent 3.5 content, lacks the benefit of all of those items, 75% of which come out of Libris Mortiis.


So does turning absent Libris Mortis. :smallwink: The extended sourcebook support doesn't really reflect on channeling vs. turning as mechanics at their root so much as it reflects on how much Wizards was willing to power up core classes with a constant stream of sourcebook material that was rarely released with any consideration of what other non-core sourcebook material it might interact with.

[Gullintanni]

So does turning absent Libris Mortis. :smallwink: The extended sourcebook support doesn't really reflect on channeling vs. turning as mechanics at their root so much as it reflects on how much Wizards was willing to power up core classes with a constant stream of sourcebook material that was rarely released with any consideration of what other non-core sourcebook material it might interact with.

If you're going to start ruling out sourcebooks, then, in the context of this debate, the discussion is essentially meaningless. PF core vs. 3.5 core, Clerics don't really gain or lose anything on each other.

Regardless, there are plenty of methods for boosting turning checks and damage outside of LM. Phylactery of Undead Turning + Improved Turning has you turning as a 25th level Cleric. Add in a Circlet of Persuasion for a +3 competence bonus on Charisma based checks, and a Cloak of Charisma +6 and your turning gets pretty powerful, and that's all just in core.

Either way, debating core vs. core in this context is kind of pointless, because one of the primary arguments cited for Clerics losing so much power in the transition from 3.5 to PF is a lack of splat support.

[navar100]

This isn't true at all. A 20th level Cleric with a Rod of Defiance, a Lyre of the Restful Soul, a Scepter of the Netherworld, Improved Turning (the Feat), and a Phylactery of Undead Turning turned undead as a Level 44 Cleric. In all but the rarest instances, this is enough to outright Destroy any undead creature you come across. In the rest of cases, it is still an automatic success.

Channeling, absent 3.5 content, lacks the benefit of all of those items, 75% of which come out of Libris Mortiis.

That said, you're spot on with the rest of your analysis. Channeling is still pretty strong, it's just not 3.5 Strong. Of course, as Gnaeus pointed out, PF + 3.5 splats + Channeling > 3.5 Turning on its own.

And I do particularly like that Negative Energy Channeling is a negative energy weapon against the living.

How likely are you to be a 20th level cleric with a rod of defiance and a lyre of restful soul and a sceptor of the netherworld and improved turning feat and a phylactery of undead turning?

You are presuming a whole lot. The only item with any reasonable chance of having is the improved turning feat, and that's if the campaign is heavy undead enough to warrant a cleric player wanting to take it. 20th level is only 5% of your pre-epic career. What are you doing before hand?

Edit: Actually the phylactery is more likely than the feat. The phylactery could easily appear as a treasure hoard item because the DM knows the party will face lots of undead soon. Even if there won't be lots of undead, it's a bone (pun intended) for the cleric. It gives the DM excuse to use lots of undead mooks for some future campaign arc.

[Gullintanni]

How likely are you to be a 20th level cleric with a rod of defiance and a lyre of restful soul and a sceptor of the netherworld and improved turning feat and a phylactery of undead turning?

You are presuming a whole lot. The only item with any reasonable chance of having is the improved turning feat, and that's if the campaign is heavy undead enough to warrant a cleric player wanting to take it. 20th level is only 5% of your pre-epic career. What are you doing before hand?

Edit: Actually the phylactery is more likely than the feat. The phylactery could easily appear as a treasure hoard item because the DM knows the party will face lots of undead soon. Even if there won't be lots of undead, it's a bone (pun intended) for the cleric. It gives the DM excuse to use lots of undead mooks for some future campaign arc.

All four of those items together cost under 50,000 gold. If you're going to be focusing on turning at all there's literally no reason not get all of these items. Just the Lyre and the Rod of Defiance increase your Cleric level by 16. I'm approximating as I'm AFB, but that's 25-28,000 gold well spent for just about any Cleric.

Every Cleric I have ever made has purchased or made 2-3 of these items, because the investment required to win at Undead forever is so, so minimal.

[DrDeth]

How likely are you to be a 20th level cleric with a rod of defiance and a lyre of restful soul and a sceptor of the netherworld and improved turning feat and a phylactery of undead turning?.

A lot more likely that a cleric with a golf-bag full of nightsticks, and also having a DM who will let you use multiple nightsticks

[CTrees]

Channel Energy definitely has its uses. I sent my party through a standard "kill a necromancer and clear his dungeon" adventure to get everyone in the swing of things. They very quickly realized that channeling goes through walls. Using this to whittle down a load of undead was a surprisingly workable tactic. Also, the "swarm of zombies" style encounter, with loads of individually weak undead, is trivialized by the lack of HD cap on the channelling damage (unless you use an ACTUAL zombie swarm).

Also, most of the variant channelling is terrible (and is further harmed by duration in many, though not all, cases), but some are neat. Ale/Wine, allowing nausea to be inflicted (or the Pain variant, for that matter)? Battle/Wrath variant used on a large block of archers. Death can very easily completely negate fast healing or regeneration. Destruction used to harm will, I believe, ignore hardness, which means you can completely destroy a room with one shot, which is at least amusing. The harm use of Envy is hilarious, considering it's a thirty foot radius - use in the middle of the town market and watch the chaos. Madness can just be straight up awesome. Self-Perfection is a one round Iron Heart Surge (force cage? my entire party will walk right through it now, thanks). Sun can blind many creatures for one minute per use. These mostly aren't fantastic, but they're at least fun, and can be fairly powerful in the right circumstances.

Also, I think I need to reiterate - using Destruction channelling to harm while leaning against the wall of a shop, or while at a banquet, or while meeting the king, or from outside the alchemist's laboratory, etc. is all really funny to me.

[navar100]

All four of those items together cost under 50,000 gold. If you're going to be focusing on turning at all there's literally no reason not get all of these items. Just the Lyre and the Rod of Defiance increase your Cleric level by 16. I'm approximating as I'm AFB, but that's 25-28,000 gold well spent for just about any Cleric.

Every Cleric I have ever made has purchased or made 2-3 of these items, because the investment required to win at Undead forever is so, so minimal.

Not everyone is you and not every game plays like yours. You cannot assume that any cleric anywhere for any 3E game will definitely have such items. The items might not be available for purchase, for whatever reason. They might not exist in the game world, for whatever reason.

I see this argument all the time when it comes to characters for lots of topics, and it's a false argument. You can't assume that any particular magic item will definitely exist for a character. For a matter of discussion of what is possible, fine. You have demonstrated how a 20th level cleric can turn a 44HD undead creature. Wonderful. However, "can" is not "definite". You are requiring specific items and feats. Not most clerics will have such things. That you need those specific things actually proves the overall point that generally clerics can't turn BBEG undead. Rather, it is unexpected if you insist on viewing "can't" as to mean absolutely impossible.

[Novawurmson]

The caster is a caster and the fighter swings a sword. But look at the relative power. The Cleric is able to do all of that nifty stuff but he won't have it prepared, because most of it is useless in combat.

::deep breath::

People have done a pretty good job providing a rebuttal, but I'd like to add to it.

Taken from the "Tier System for Classes" page:


Q: So what exactly is this system measuring? Raw Power? Then why is the Barbarian lower than the Duskblade, when the Barbarian clearly does more damage?

A: The Tier System is not specifically ranking Power or Versitility (though those are what ends up being the big factors). It's ranking the ability of a class to achieve what you want in any given situation. Highly versitile classes will be more likely to efficiently apply what power they have to the situation, while very powerful classes will be able to REALLY help in specific situations. Classes that are both versitile and powerful will very easily get what they want by being very likely to have a very powerful solution to the current problem. This is what matters most for balance.

The post goes on to explain what a representative class from each of the tiers would be able to contribute in three common RPG scenarios


Situation 1: A Black Dragon has been plaguing an area, and he lives in a trap filled cave. Deal with him.

Situation 2: You have been tasked by a nearby country with making contact with the leader of the underground slave resistance of an evil tyranical city state, and get him to trust you.

Situation 3: A huge army of Orcs is approaching the city, and should be here in a week or so. Help the city prepare for war.

So let's start with the first one. What would a Pathfinder Cleric do about a dragon in a trap filled cave? Well, he can still give himself trap sense (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/f/find-traps) and negate the traps like a Rogue - or just walk on air (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/a/air-walk) and ignore all the pressure plates. He can buff the party. He can debuff the dragon. He can summon extraplanar creatures immune to the dragon's breath weapon - or give the party immunity. If someone in the party dies, he can bring them back from the dead. The best part is that if he has even one night to think on it, he can prepare the perfect set of spells to combat the dragon.

As per situation two, spells like Calm Emotions can help if the opening negotiations go south, while a simple Eagle's Splendor gives a bonus on Diplomacy checks if nothing else. Undetectable Alignment will probably help if the bad guys can sense whether or not you're a good person to be thrown into reeducation camps. Don't share a language with the resistance? Tongues. Members of the resistance hiding behind illusions? True Seeing. Plus, your divination spells might just be able to tell you exactly where and who the leader of the resistance is to meet up with them - nevermind the implications of magical mind control like Geas for getting them to cooperate when you do find them.

Situation three is just begging for a Cleric. Who else can keep a whole platoon healed and buffed, defending a critical point? Beyond that, a week means they definitely have time to spend some quality divination time finding out information about the enemies and their leaders - or making an army of undead - or soliciting the help of powerful outsiders - or, or, or, or. Once the enemy gets there, drop an AoE, summon monsters to take hits, drop crowd control spells, dispel enemy buffs, etc., etc.

Thinking beyond those specific examples, think about common quests in RPGs.

NPC: ""My wife is dying! Please, go find this rare herb so we can cure her of her illness!"
PC: "...or I could just cast Remove Disease on her."
NPC: "..."

Evil Guy: "I don't know anything about what you're talking about!"
PC: "Zone of Truth. Now, who killed the king?"
Evil Guy: "..."

NPC: "Well, the secret Amulet of MacGuffin is somewhere in the throne room, but I don't know - "
PC: "Locate Object."
DM: "..."

Now, think about the definition of a tier 1 class.


Tier 1: Capable of doing absolutely everything, often better than classes that specialize in that thing. Often capable of solving encounters with a single mechanical ability and little thought from the player. Has world changing powers at high levels. These guys, if played well, can break a campaign and can be very hard to challenge without extreme DM fiat, especially if Tier 3s and below are in the party.

Now, sure, the DM can say "Oh, Remove Disease doesn't work on this," "the Evil Guy makes his Will Save," or "Locate Object fails", but that means that DM fiat, not the inherent mechanical abilities of the class, are what makes it "balanced."

The fact is that Clerics, even in Pathfinder, have full access to their spell list, much of which can end encounters. A Sorcerer can end encounter if he happens to have all the right tools for the job selected; a Cleric can basically sleep on any problem and come back with the divine inspiration to break any encounter.

TL;DR Clerics are not as good at melee damage in Pathfinder, but that hardly means that they don't have game-breaking power deserving of the title "tier 1."

[Gullintanni]

Not everyone is you and not every game plays like yours. You cannot assume that any cleric anywhere for any 3E game will definitely have such items. The items might not be available for purchase, for whatever reason. They might not exist in the game world, for whatever reason.

I see this argument all the time when it comes to characters for lots of topics, and it's a false argument. You can't assume that any particular magic item will definitely exist for a character. For a matter of discussion of what is possible, fine. You have demonstrated how a 20th level cleric can turn a 44HD undead creature. Wonderful. However, "can" is not "definite". You are requiring specific items and feats. Not most clerics will have such things. That you need those specific things actually proves the overall point that generally clerics can't turn BBEG undead. Rather, it is unexpected if you insist on viewing "can't" as to mean absolutely impossible.

This is almost a correct analysis of a game being played at the table, except that the debate is not about how a Cleric plays at the table, but rather about whether or not a Cleric is Tier 1, and about the potency of Undead Turning in 3.5 vs. Pathfinder. Moreover; a 3.5 Cleric can optimize for +Win Turning using only core material, in which case, it can be reasonably assumed that the Cleric in question has access to all relevant material. If you're banning niche core options, then you probably don't represent the average table.

Regardless, we are discussing power thresholds. Channel Energy vs. Undead Turning without any feats or item enhancement is a debate that harbors no merit under the current D&D paradigm, because the current D&D paradigm assumes Feats and WBL are in play. In that context, a 3.5 Cleric with even limited optimization of a core class feature comes out ahead of a PF Cleric because the 3.5 Cleric will spend far less resources across all optimization levels, and will enjoy a much greater increase in undead turning power.

The point is that a 3.5 Cleric has to spend a small percentage of his accumulated career WBL to gain +Win to undead turning, in both core 3.5 and when accounting for splatbook content. A PF Cleric can not achieve the same results, much less without a significant investment of Feats, as Channel Energy is primarily enhanced by Feats in PF, which come at a premium.