[5e]Why should a wisdom-based cleric wear a weapon?

[stenver]

The cleric can cast his sacred flame which does decent damage, if he has knowledge or light domain. It seems to me that an optimised cleric will just run around a shield in 1 hand and divine focus in another OR divine focus shield and free hand.

The reason is that if a spell doesnt have material components, but has somatic components, then he needs a free hand and divine focus wont help him as explained here: https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/rules-spellcasting One of those great spells with no material components, but somatic and verbal components is sacred flame itself.

Also, if the spell has material components that has cost, then he needs a free hand to draw the material component.

From what I understand, by RAW, unarmed strike can be used for opportunity attack, so no reason to hold a weapon because of that.

Im aware of the downsides of the sacred flame - it goes BOOM, so isn't good for stealth missions and it does radiant damage on DEX save so high dex/radiant resist creatures might not be affected from it.

So to sum this up, theres no reason to hold a weapon, because you might need a free hand for somatic components anyway, even if you have divine focus shield?

Are there any other drawbacks to just casting sacred flame?

Are there any other reasons to wield a weapon?

How can i encourage 1-handed weapon cleric with no shield?

[Giant2005]

How can i encourage 1-handed weapon cleric with no shield?

Throw away the Defensive Duelist feat and make it a default property of 1-handed weapons when there is nothing in the other hand.

[stenver]

Throw away the Defensive Duelist feat and make it a default property of 1-handed weapons when there is nothing in the other hand.

Its an interesting idea. I will think about it.

[Grek]

Because weapons are better, of course.

Sacred flame has a range of 60 feet and does 1d8 damage on a failed save. A mace, though only melee ranged, does 1d6+Strength making it the clear winner if you have a Strength of 12 or higher. A light crossbow has a range of 80/320 and does 1d8+Dex damage on a successful hit, so you're better off in both damage and range. And martial weapons are even better than that. For all levels where it is reasonable for a cleric to be worried about their ability to kill people with cantrips, having a weapon is just better than using sacred flame against most enemies.

[stenver]

Because weapons are better, of course.

Sacred flame has a range of 60 feet and does 1d8 damage on a failed save. A mace, though only melee ranged, does 1d6+Strength making it the clear winner if you have a Strength of 12 or higher. A light crossbow has a range of 80/320 and does 1d8+Dex damage on a successful hit, so you're better off in both damage and range. And martial weapons are even better than that. For all levels where it is reasonable for a cleric to be worried about their ability to kill people with cantrips, having a weapon is just better than using sacred flame against most enemies.

Sacred flame with knowledge/light domain does 1d8+WIS damage(and i was referring to wis based cleric) AND it scales with level, going to 2d8 at 5, 3d8 at 11 etc.

[Rhaegar14]

Sacred flame with knowledge/light domain does 1d8+WIS damage(and i was referring to wis based cleric) AND it scales with level, going to 2d8 at 5, 3d8 at 11 etc.

Sacred Flame gets +Wis to damage at 8th level, by which time a Cleric is only flinging cantrips or attacking with a weapon if he doesn't want to waste actual spell slots. Also, by 8th level, any weapon-based Cleric is going to have Warcaster, after which the divine focus shield solves the somatic component problem just fine. Even a Wis-based Cleric probably still has a decent Strength score to wear heavier armor without penalty or a decent Dex score to increase their AC.

Also, Light and Knowledge domain get Potent Spellcasting because they're supposed to favor Sacred Flame (or another attack cantrip they may get in later supplements) over weapons.

[stenver]

Sacred Flame gets +Wis to damage at 8th level, by which time a Cleric is only flinging cantrips or attacking with a weapon if he doesn't want to waste actual spell slots. Also, by 8th level, any weapon-based Cleric is going to have Warcaster, after which the divine focus shield solves the somatic component problem just fine. Even a Wis-based Cleric probably still has a decent Strength score to wear heavier armor without penalty or a decent Dex score to increase their AC.

Also, Light and Knowledge domain get Potent Spellcasting because they're supposed to favor Sacred Flame (or another attack cantrip they may get in later supplements) over weapons.

Alright, so i guess the answer is no, theres no reason to draw a weapon :(

The party in question has a level 9 cleric with knowledge domain, so thats exactly what he is doing - just said whatever, i will never draw a weapon again, since the damage is so small. He doesnt have Warcaster feat though.

[Giant2005]

Also, by 8th level, any weapon-based Cleric is going to have Warcaster, after which the divine focus shield solves the somatic component problem just fine.

The problem with Warcaster is it might give them the ability to hold both a shield and a weapon just fine but it also gives them even less reason to want to. Reactions are the only reason to have a weapon drawn for a dedicated caster and the Warcaster feat takes away that solitary motivation.

[Grek]

Ah. In that case, no, if your strength and dexterity are both bad you should definitely stick to cantrips for your low cost damage needs. There's basically no reason to have a weapon if you can't use it well.

[stenver]

The problem with Warcaster is it might give them the ability to hold both a shield and a weapon just fine but it also gives them even less reason to want to. Reactions are the only reason to have a weapon drawn for a dedicated caster and the Warcaster feat takes away that solitary motivation.

Thats true. The player suggested house-ruling that he could grab the weapon with his shield hand for the duration of spell casting and then swap it back at the end. Im having my doubts however, if thats a good idea.

[hymer]

Thats true. The player suggested house-ruling that he could grab the weapon with his shield hand for the duration of spell casting and then swap it back at the end. Im having my doubts however, if thats a good idea.

By RAW he can do just that. As part of his action (casting a spell) he can interact with an object - his weapon. So he can dispose of his weapon, cast his spell, and then ready his weapon again. Only if he goes to two object does he need to Use An Object as an action.

Maybe you could tell us why it's important to you that clerics (or anyone) use one-handed weapons without a shield?

[stenver]

By RAW he can do just that. As part of his action (casting a spell) he can interact with an object - his weapon. So he can dispose of his weapon, cast his spell, and then ready his weapon again. Only if he goes to two object does he need to Use An Object as an action.

Maybe you could tell us why it's important to you that clerics (or anyone) use one-handed weapons without a shield?

Thats actually true. I always thought that 1 interaction - sheathe a weapon. 2nd interaction - draw a weapon. Thanks

[Submortimer]

Because weapons are better, of course.

Sacred flame has a range of 60 feet and does 1d8 damage on a failed save.


This is all the reason you need right here. As you go up in levels, it will almost always be easier to hit someone's AC that it will be to make them fail a saving throw. Having a Bard in our party who's best ranged option is Vicious Mockery, the amount of times he's done NO damage in a round due to enemies making their saves is astronomical. the same would be true of a Cleric using Sacred Flame.

Now, I totally think that there should be a standard cantrip, 1d10 radiant damge with the normal progression, ranged spell attack, called lance of faith. THEN the cleric doesn't need a weapon anymore.

[Mandragola]

Hill dwarf life cleric wins. Proficiency with heavy armour and some martial weapons, good hp and concentration. You could start with 17 con and get resilient con at level 12 if you wanted, then war caster at 16 (after maxing wis, and in whatever order you wanted).

Only downside is that the spells aren't amazing. The other class features are all great.

[Ralanr]

Sacred flame also doesn't do damage with a successful save, which me and my friends found frustrating. Packing a on handed weapon (versatile if you can use it) and blasting with your free hand is a good combo in my opinion. Just tie your holy symbol around your wrist.

Though you do lose shield AC.

[burninatortrog]

The Light and Knowledge domains strongly encourage the use of cantrips because of the Potent Spellcasting feature. All the other domains, Life, Nature, Tempest, Trickery, and War, strongly encourage the use of weapons because of the Divine Strike feature.

If there's a Light or Knowledge domain cleric in the party, you won't see them use weapons too much because those domains are geared towards cantrips. Any other domain, however, and you'll see the weapons come out.

[DireSickFish]

Being frustrated on a succeed save seems weird to me when if you auto attack and miss then you still do no damage.

Rihgt now I'm playing a level 6 light cleric and I only picked up a dagger last session because I want to make sure I can cut ropes. Otherwise I'm pew pewing with my cantrip all day. Wisdom is my highest stat, why shouldn't you use it to make your at will damage?

[Flashy]

Now, I totally think that there should be a standard cantrip, 1d10 radiant damge with the normal progression, ranged spell attack, called lance of faith. THEN the cleric doesn't need a weapon anymore.

This would actually solve a mild inconsistency in the Spell Sniper feat too. It allows you to choose a single ranged attack cantrip from a spell list and then specifically calls out Cleric as one of the options. Of course Clerics don't have a cantrip that makes a ranged attack roll, so that makes no sense.

[Person_Man]

Opportunity Attacks.
Magic Weapons.
Not everyone takes a Domain with Powerful Cantrip.

[Ralanr]

Being frustrated on a succeed save seems weird to me when if you auto attack and miss then you still do no damage.

Rihgt now I'm playing a level 6 light cleric and I only picked up a dagger last session because I want to make sure I can cut ropes. Otherwise I'm pew pewing with my cantrip all day. Wisdom is my highest stat, why shouldn't you use it to make your at will damage?

Usually weapon hitting classes have multiple attacks. Though I was playing a tempus cleric at level one with 10 health, I'm used to barbarian resistance that I fear losing hit points normally, so I used range as back up.

Honestly it depends on how you want to play. Melee, ranged, either works in their own way.

[Orbis Orboros]

Magic initiate for shillelagh and one druid cantrip + first level spell of your choice provides a magical d8+WIS melee weapon.

[GWJ_DanyBoy]

Magic initiate for shillelagh and one druid cantrip + first level spell of your choice provides a magical d8+WIS melee weapon.

Hill dwarf Nature Cleric: have 8 STR and full plate with no penalties beyond a low carry capacity.

[Orbis Orboros]

Hill dwarf Nature Cleric: have 8 STR and full plate with no penalties beyond a low carry capacity.

True, Nature Cleric provides a nice cheap way to acquire Shillelagh, but not everyone wants to go Nature, and some (like OP's friend) have already leveled to far.

As for penalties, don't forget that your speed would also be reduced by 10 feet due to lack of str with the heavy armor (and disadvantage on stealth checks of course).

[JNAProductions]

Dwarves don't suffer from that penalty.

[Orbis Orboros]

Dwarves don't suffer from that penalty.

Oh... And I had just read their entry to be sure, too. I guess I expected it to be under its own category instead of hidden with the speed.

[Finieous]

My tempest cleric has Str 14 and a +1 cutlass. I'll try to make a weapon attack against light armor, high-Dex opponents, and sacred flame against armored up, low-Dex opponents. The formula will change a little at 8th level when I get divine strike. It's cool to have little tactical choices like that without adding a lot of complexity to the rules.

[eastmabl]

It's much easier to look threatening to the goblins or evil cultist whilst holding a mace or morningstar. Otherwise, you just look unarmed.

[CantigThimble]

It's much easier to look threatening to the goblins or evil cultist whilst holding a mace or morningstar. Otherwise, you just look unarmed.

They may revise their opinion once they start bursting into flame.

[ChubbyRain]

Allow the weapon (of X god) to work just like the cantrip.

Clerics of X faith gain a cantrip when using specific weapons chosen by the faith (1 handed weapons).

Name: Sacred Blade
Material Components: Weapon
Somatic Components

As you wield your faith's weapon of choice it is wrapped in in divine flames. You may target a creature within range of your weapon (5' normally, 10' w/reach). That creature must pass a Dex saving throw or be doused in radiant damage as you swing your weapon in the target's direction (as if you were making a melee weapon attack). On a failed save the target takes 1d8 radiant damage. At levels XYZ this damage increases by d8 damage.

If the target fails their saving throw you may use a bonus action with a free hand to attempt to grapple the target.

Note; Encourages the PC to use a weapon, allows them to do something cool, and has a rider effect. I'm tempted to allow the grapple check to be a Athletics (Wisdom) check but that might be too much...

[DireSickFish]

Allow the weapon (of X god) to work just like the cantrip.

Clerics of X faith gain a cantrip when using specific weapons chosen by the faith (1 handed weapons).

Name: Sacred Blade
Material Components: Weapon
Somatic Components

As you wield your faith's weapon of choice it is wrapped in in divine flames. You may target a creature within range of your weapon (5' normally, 10' w/reach). That creature must pass a Dex saving throw or be doused in radiant damage as you swing your weapon in the target's direction (as if you were making a melee weapon attack). On a failed save the target takes 1d8 radiant damage. At levels XYZ this damage increases by d8 damage.

If the target fails their saving throw you may use a bonus action with a free hand to attempt to grapple the target.

Note; Encourages the PC to use a weapon, allows them to do something cool, and has a rider effect. I'm tempted to allow the grapple check to be a Athletics (Wisdom) check but that might be too much...

Why are we making this cantrip? and why the grapple effect? Seems out of place.

[ChubbyRain]

Why are we making this cantrip? and why the grapple effect? Seems out of place.

Cantrip because you are turning your weapon into an instrument of your GOD.

Grapple because the radiance of your GOD distracted them long enough for you to grab and of the enemy of the church. Once in your hold the enemy of your GOD you may continue to strike down with your radiant weapon without much fear of the target escaping.

(All cap words for dramatic effect)

You could take away the grapple rider and place a rider of no teleportation, but that might a bit too strong.

[Easy_Lee]

Can't a player just move the weapon to his shield hand when he needs to cast, then move the weapon back to his other hand when he's done? I know that the WotC tweeters don't have a problem with a two-handed user taking one hand off of the weapon to cast, so it doesn't seem unreasonable to just hold the weapon in the shield hand for a moment.

Even if you have to use your free object interaction to do so, you could just use it again the next round to move the weapon back into your main hand.

[ChubbyRain]

Can't a player just move the weapon to his shield hand when he needs to cast, then move the weapon back to his other hand when he's done? I know that the WotC tweeters don't have a problem with a two-handed user taking one hand off of the weapon to cast, so it doesn't seem unreasonable to just hold the weapon in the shield hand for a moment.

Even if you have to use your free object interaction to do so, you could just use it again the next round to move the weapon back into your main hand.

I believe the devs have said that you can not use your shield hand for such a thing (silly I know) and from what I remember one of them mentioned so.ething along the same lines when dealing with two handed weapons... Yeah...

It may have not been official but I remember thinking that someine may have been smoking more than just the typical stuff when they responded.

[Easy_Lee]

I believe the devs have said that you can not use your shield hand for such a thing (silly I know) and from what I remember one of them mentioned so.ething along the same lines when dealing with two handed weapons... Yeah...

It may have not been official but I remember thinking that someine may have been smoking more than just the typical stuff when they responded.

Well, every table has their own rules, so I guess the best thing would be to just talk to one's DM about it.

[ChubbyRain]

Well, every table has their own rules, so I guess the best thing would be to just talk to one's DM about it.

Well yeah, but that is the answer to everything. Also for all the people playing AL just asking the DM doesn't always work as they may feel like they don't want to rule a specific way due to accidently doing something wrong. If you have Crawford backing you then you have some ground to stand on and you don't seem like you are given an inch and you are taking a mile.

[Easy_Lee]

Well yeah, but that is the answer to everything. Also for all the people playing AL just asking the DM doesn't always work as they may feel like they don't want to rule a specific way due to accidently doing something wrong. If you have Crawford backing you then you have some ground to stand on and you don't seem like you are given an inch and you are taking a mile.

That's definitely a valid point. With that in mind, I do have one idea for something a Cleric might do.

If one takes his first level in fighter, one gains a fighting style and some other usefuls, without losing feats or slowing progression by too much. We can take the new mariner fighting style and use a medium armor build for 18 AC, extra maneuverability, and the ability to keep the offhand free for casting. That should work on any caster who wants to use a weapon.

On a Cleric with shilelagh, that would allow a fully melee-capable build for the cost of just 14 Dexterity. Not bad at all.

[Flashy]

Allow the weapon (of X god) to work just like the cantrip.

Clerics of X faith gain a cantrip when using specific weapons chosen by the faith (1 handed weapons).

Name: Sacred Blade
Material Components: Weapon
Somatic Components

As you wield your faith's weapon of choice it is wrapped in in divine flames. You may target a creature within range of your weapon (5' normally, 10' w/reach). That creature must pass a Dex saving throw or be doused in radiant damage as you swing your weapon in the target's direction (as if you were making a melee weapon attack). On a failed save the target takes 1d8 radiant damage. At levels XYZ this damage increases by d8 damage.

If the target fails their saving throw you may use a bonus action with a free hand to attempt to grapple the target.

Note; Encourages the PC to use a weapon, allows them to do something cool, and has a rider effect. I'm tempted to allow the grapple check to be a Athletics (Wisdom) check but that might be too much...

The idea behind this is already almost exactly the 8th level ability for every cleric domain that isn't knowledge or light.

[Mandragola]

As has already been pointed out, the difference between adding your wis bonus to sacred flame or a D8 to weapon damage once a turn only kicks in quite late, at level 8. For these reasons, it's a seriously non-important difference:

You spend most of your turns casting proper spells by now. Most of the time you don't you don't actually use the bonus - except when everything is under control and by definition it doesn't matter.
An extra 5 damage on a CR8 monster isn't much help.
For perhaps a majority of the character's career, from 1-7 (say the whole hotdq campaign) it doesn't apply.

So it's really not the case that a wisdom-based cleric should always pick knowledge or light domains to maximise cantrip damage. It's not irrelevant, but it's not really a big deal. All your real spells are equally good regardless of your domain, so thinking about your channel divinity, bonus spells and other tricks should all be considered - not just your cantrips.

[Malifice]

I limit cantrips to 3+spellcasting mod per short rest.

Warlocks exempt once they pick up Agonizing blast.

Everyone packs a backup weapon. Even wizards.

http://images1.fanpop.com/images/quiz/719_1209445863903_360_247.jpg

[KorvinStarmast]

What kind of cleric is it that isn't wisdom based?

It's the prime requisite for the class, and the heart of all cleric spell casting abilities.

[Person_Man]

What kind of cleric is it that isn't wisdom based?

It's the prime requisite for the class, and the heart of all cleric spell casting abilities.

Clerics that focus on certain buff and utility spells don't need Wisdom. Though its noteworthy that Spiritual Weapon does require Wisdom, so you'd need to find another source of damage that didn't rely on your casting stat, or you could just play a character who doesn't care about damage output.

[Easy_Lee]

Clerics that focus on certain buff and utility spells don't need Wisdom. Though its noteworthy that Spiritual Weapon does require Wisdom, so you'd need to find another source of damage that didn't rely on your casting stat, or you could just play a character who doesn't care about damage output.

I agree with this. Unusual though they may be, certain trickery clerics may fit the bill, just as an example. If we count multiclass, one could also build a rogue / trickery cleric multiclass who would not need high wisdom.

[1Forge]

Couldnt you just have a one handed weapon with a holy symbol in it? or they could have a necklace then you always have a backup weapon. Also spellcasting at point blank allows people with mage slayer to beat the pulp out of you.

[Demonic Spoon]

OP is seriously overthinking the free hand for spellcasting.

In the unlikely scenario where you or your DM are micromanaging which spells have material components vs not, then you just put your weapon away when you need to cast a spell. In most games this is only going to happen if the player is trying to do something silly/abusive or the character is in a place where he doesn't have ready access to some components e.g. he's restrained or lacks material components.

In the far more likely scenario, you probably aren't even checking what kind of component your spell requires, let alone choosing your class or weapon style based on it. In the case that this starts mattering, put your weapon away and cast. Then pull it out if you want it next turn. Easy.


Can't a player just move the weapon to his shield hand when he needs to cast, then move the weapon back to his other hand when he's done? I know that the WotC tweeters don't have a problem with a two-handed user taking one hand off of the weapon to cast, so it doesn't seem unreasonable to just hold the weapon in the shield hand for a moment.

Even if you have to use your free object interaction to do so, you could just use it again the next round to move the weapon back into your main hand.


Or that. Even easier.

[KorvinStarmast]

I agree with this. Unusual though they may be, certain trickery clerics may fit the bill, just as an example. If we count multiclass, one could also build a rogue / trickery cleric multiclass who would not need high wisdom.
For you and Person Man: thank you both! Had not given much time to the Trickery Domain. Food for thought. :smallsmile: