Cleric Domains

[TheOOB]

My group is just finishing up the Rise of Tiamat I'm running, and we're going to be starting the Princes of the Apocalypse soon(an adventure I know little about) as a party of 4 genasai, one of each type. This is actually my first time playing not running 5e, and I'm going Water Genasai Cleric of Eldath. I want to play the character to focus on buffs and battlefield control, and avoid direct attacking spells when possible, the character avoiding combat when possible(though I can still hit someone hard when needed). I'm torn between the Nature and Life domains. Life will provide lots of support and healing, and has some amazing abilities, but I feel like it has limited battlefield control and might get a little boring. Nature has some good battlefield control and lots of flavor(and shillelagh will make my character hit hard in melee when he needs it without needed to dump much into str), but many of its spells, and it's channel divinity are super super situational. I'm also pretty sure I'll be the only healer in a 4 person party(one of my team members might roll a paladin, but last I heard he was leaning monk). I have considered playing a land druid, which may fit the bill better(and I know our rogue would like some of the debuffs), but I'm not sure I can keep my entire party alive like that, someone with more druid experiance might know better.

Thought I'd ask your opinions on domains/classes and any advice or suggestions for an Eldath priest.

[Hyena]

Personal experiences of playing a life cleric:

1) Shilelagh is worthless garbage. You're not a paladin, you don't have extra attack, so you don't want to be in melee. Ever. Cantrips are better and allow you to stay in the back. Also, you need to have at least one hand free to cast somatic spells, unless you have Warcaster.
2) Your comrades don't really need healing, they will be fine by themselves. What do they need, however, is bless to help them beat enemies harder - so keep it prepared.
3) Spiritual guardians are your friends. Keep this spell prepared - though it conflicts with bless through being a concentration spells, it is an amazing source of damage. It does require you to be in melee range, though, so you might find a use to this shilelagh of yours.
4) Hold person and bestow curse are your friends. Keep them prepared. Hold person can be upgraded to SoS several enemies, bestow curse can be upgraded to stop requiring concentration.

[ChubbyRain]

Bless, Spirit Guardians, Hold Person, Bestow Curse, and keep Guiding Bolt/Inflict Wounds in reserves for just in case scenarios.

Command is a really fun spell and can keep you from being engaged by enemies.

Thorn Whip is a fantastic cantrip for a cleric that wants to help make sure enemies stay close to the bruisers or in position for your friend's next attack.

Also with heavy armor and a shield don't be afraid to wade into melee range and just use the Help Action. Help Action is golden for a cleric, think of it as if you were using a cantrip to simulate True Strike but better. Clerics are pretty much the poster child for the help action. You could totally RP this up in different ways.

[hymer]

Also, you need to have at least one hand free to cast somatic spells, unless you have Warcaster.

Just to be clear: This is correct. But you are, however, allowed to interact with one object as part of your action. So you could put your weapon down, sheathe it, or something like that, cast your spell with your free hand, and then rearm yourself. All for the cost of an action.

[ChubbyRain]

Just to be clear: This is correct. But you are, however, allowed to interact with one object as part of your action. So you could put your weapon down, sheathe it, or something like that, cast your spell with your free hand, and then rearm yourself. All for the cost of an action.

You have to wait till the next turn to draw your weapon if you sheathe it. You get one free "use an item action" on your turn.

[hymer]

You have to wait till the next turn to draw your weapon if you sheathe it. You get one free "use an item action" on your turn.

Not unless you want to draw a different weapon than the one you stowed. As long as you interact with a single object, you should be good.

[ChubbyRain]

Not unless you want to draw a different weapon than the one you stowed. As long as you interact with a single object, you should be good.

No.

Drawing and stowing any weapon is two uses of the "use an item action".

It doesn't matter if it is a single item or multiple items.

Under your interpretation a person could open a door, shut a door, and lock a door all with their use an item action. This isn't the case.

[hymer]

@ ChubbyRain: I really can't be bothered to explain it to you, sorry. It's on PHB p. 190. See for yourself.

[LordVonDerp]

1) Shilelagh is worthless garbage. You're not a paladin, you don't have extra attack, so you don't want to be in melee. Ever. Cantrips are better and allow you to stay in the back.

Also, you need to have at least one hand free to cast somatic spells, unless you have Warcaster..

Actually you can have a hand holding a holy symbol and still cast. So just get a holy symbol made of wood and your fine.

[ChubbyRain]

@ ChubbyRain: I really can't be bothered to explain it to you, sorry. It's on PHB p. 190. See for yourself.

Other Activity on Your Turn

Your turn can include a variety of flourishes that require neither your action nor your move. You can communicate however you are able, through brief utterances and gestures, as you take your turn. You can also interact with one object or feature of the environment for free, during either your move or your action. For example, you could open a door during your move as you stride toward a foe, or you could draw your weapon as part of the same action you use to attack. If you want to interact with a second object, you need to use your action. Some magic items and other special objects always require an action to use, as stated in their descriptions. The DM might require you to use an action for any of these activities when it needs special care or when it presents an unusual obstacle. For instance, the DM could reasonably expect you to use an action to open a stuck door or turn a crank to lower a drawbridge.

Bolded for emphasis. Taken from the free online basic rules.

Sheathe a weapon = use item action
Draw your weapon = action

Edit: the table below this part says "Sheathe or draw your weapon" not both is a single use of "use an item action".

Edit 2

Can you be bothered to explain it to me now?:smallannoyed:

[Kryx]

Can't be bothered to explain? Lol..... So wrong and so rude.

[ChubbyRain]

Can't be bothered to explain? Lol..... So wrong and so rude.

Yeah... I was going to let it drop but that burned my butt too much.

OP: Another fun spell is Sanctuary. This can be used with no concentration to either protect yourself or protect a down ally.

Really handy for running away.

[hymer]

You can also interact with one object or feature of the environment for free, during either your move or your action. For example, you could open a door during your move as you stride toward a foe, or you could draw your weapon as part of the same action you use to attack. If you want to interact with a second object, you need to use your action.

Writing that out is what I couldn't be bothered to do. I apologize for the rudeness, it was unintentional for what it's worth.

You can handle one object freely as part of a different action. This is what I've been saying, and you've been saying no. Correct me if I'm wrong. It's only if you go to two objects you have to start using actions to draw or sheathe weapons.

In your example with the door, you can do it. Your action is Use an Object (the door), and as part of that action you handle a different object, the key. Why wouldn't that be possible? Where do we disagree, I just can't see it, except that you make it very obvious you disagree.


Can't be bothered to explain? Lol..... So wrong and so rude.

Maybe you can help, then? Why does Chubby and I read the same words and yet disagree so much?

Edit: Emphasis in the initial quote.

[CantigThimble]

Well, if you are spending your action to interact then you aren't using it to cast a spell, which was the point of this whole debate.

[hymer]

Well, if you are spending your action to interact then you aren't using it to cast a spell, which was the point of this whole debate.

I must be having a stroke.

Here's what I think: You cast a spell as an action. As part of taking an action, you are allowed to do various other things, but they must be confined to one object. You could open a door to cast through it, sheathe a weapon to have a free hand, pick up your dropped holy symbol from the ground; whichever you want to do, you can do it as part of the action it took to cast a spell.

Am I wrong?

Edit: Checked, no signs of a stroke. Maybe just a brain fart. Tell me if I'm wrong, please.

[Kryx]

You can handle one object freely as part of a different action. This is what I've been saying, and you've been saying no. Correct me if I'm wrong. It's only if you go to two objects you have to start using actions to draw or sheathe weapons.
You get one object interaction per turn. Meaning you can't freely open and close the door 100 times. Nor can you draw and sheathe the same weapon. Page 190 has a list of the exact things you can do. Notice it says draw or sheathe.

[PoeticDwarf]

I'd go for life, better for roleplaying and for what you want, I think.

[hymer]

You get one object interaction per turn. Meaning you can't freely open and close the door 100 times. Nor can you draw and sheathe the same weapon. Page 190 has a list of the exact things you can do. Notice it says draw or sheathe.

At least I see now where the disagreement is. Thank you!

But how else should they have put it? Would it have been clearer with 'draw and sheathe'? Sounds silly. You end up where you started. Or draw and/or sheathe? Sounds like you might be allowed to sheathe one weapon and draw another. They'd have had to write it out specifically, which they wouldn't do on a list like that. It's what the text is for, where the criterion is the number of objects interacted with.
I can see how the DM may rule it either way, since you're obviously thinking the other way from me. But I wouldn't agree with that DM call. It would mean that your weapon (or whatever) for rules purposes in this case counts as two objects.

And no, I don't advocate someone being allowed to open and close a door a hundred times as an offhand thing (unless you're playing something Looney Tunes inspired). But I think opening an average door to see what's on the other side, then closing it and locking it, is all something you can reasonably be expected to be able to do in six seconds if you have steady hands. Something not possible as far as I can tell in your interpretation.

[Kryx]

Based on your logic there is no limit to the amount of times an object can be interacted with. Why is 100x not valid? How about 5x? Where is the line?

We don't have to address those concerns because you interact with it once and then you are done interacting with it. You don't interact with it, attack with it, and then continue to interact with it.

Notice all the examples are one interaction, not a continuous interaction.

[hymer]

Based on your logic there is no limit to the amount of times an object can be interacted with. Why is 100x not valid? How about 5x? Where is the line?

We don't have to address those concerns because you interact with it once and then you are done interacting with it. You don't interact with it, attack with it, and then continue to interact with it.

100x is not valid because the DM would say no. For one thing, you know full well there are plenty of times when the rules need to be reined in by the DM. For another, it doesn't accomplish anything rules-wise. The door can be open or closed and its state only change as you like on your own turn. Any wearing the door until it breaks or causing wind is entirely up to the DM to adjudicate.


Notice all the examples are one interaction, not a continuous interaction.

Not nearly as clear-cut as you make it out to be. Tapping the floor with a pole, is that once, or is it as you move along? Does taking a bauble from a table imply you slipped it in your pocket?

[TheOOB]

Wouldn't putting a holy symbol on one's shield bypass all of this anyways?

[hymer]

Wouldn't putting a holy symbol on one's shield bypass all of this anyways?

I believe there are tweets to support that. It goes along with the idea that holding a holy symbol is keeping that hand free for casting purposes, and if that happens to be your shield hand, then that's fine.
Just how RAW it is I'm less sure. You can get holy symbols on your shield, of course, but I don't see how that in itself bypasses the need for a free hand for somatic components.

Sorry to be taking up your thread like this, come to think of it. Just say the word and I'll cut it out.

[ChubbyRain]

Wouldn't putting a holy symbol on one's shield bypass all of this anyways?
http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/rules-spellcasting
Important section below


WHAT’S THE AMOUNT OF INTERACTION NEEDED TO USE A SPELLCASTING FOCUS? DOES IT HAVE TO BE INCLUDED IN THE SOMATIC COMPONENT?
If a spell has a material component, you need to handle that component when you cast the spell (see page 203 in the Player’s Handbook). The same rule applies if you’re using a spellcasting focus as the material component.

If a spell has a somatic component, you can use the hand that performs the somatic component to also handle the material component. For example, a wizard who uses an orb as a spellcasting focus could hold a quarterstaff in one hand and the orb in the other, and he could cast lightning bolt by using the orb as the spell’s material component and the orb hand to perform the spell’s somatic component.

Another example: a cleric’s holy symbol is emblazoned on her shield. She likes to wade into melee combat with a mace in one hand and a shield in the other. She uses the holy symbol as her spellcasting focus, so she needs to have the shield in hand when she casts a cleric spell that has a material component. If the spell, such as aid, also has a somatic component, she can perform that component with the shield hand and keep holding the mace in the other.

If the same cleric casts cure wounds, she needs to put the mace or the shield away, because that spell doesn’t have a material component but does have a somatic component. She’s going to need a free hand to make the spell’s gestures. If she had the War Caster feat, she could ignore this restriction.

[TheOOB]

I believe there are tweets to support that. It goes along with the idea that holding a holy symbol is keeping that hand free for casting purposes, and if that happens to be your shield hand, then that's fine.
Just how RAW it is I'm less sure. You can get holy symbols on your shield, of course, but I don't see how that in itself bypasses the need for a free hand for somatic components.

Sorry to be taking up your thread like this, come to think of it. Just say the word and I'll cut it out.

Nah, debate over rules is fine.

Cleric divine foci can be put on shields, that's established in the PHB, and the PHB says that if a spell has material components you can substitute a focus for them and use it to perform the somatic components of a spell. I do remember a tweet which stated that you can use a focus for somatic components on spells that don't have material components as well.

Also there was a tweet mentioning that you can sheath a weapon, draw a different weapon, and attack IIRC. My reading of the rules implies to me that you can't do that, but really whatever your DM allows.

[Kryx]

100x is not valid because the DM would say no. For one thing, you know full well there are plenty of times when the rules need to be reined in by the DM.
So what is the limit? 1? 2? 3? 5? 10? That's the whole point - it doesn't need to be DM discretion because each object interaction is one interaction, not a continuous interaction.


Not nearly as clear-cut as you make it out to be. Tapping the floor with a pole, is that once, or is it as you move along? Does taking a bauble from a table imply you slipped it in your pocket?
Tapping the floor is indeed 1 object interaction or action. Again this brings up the question: how many taps do you get as essentially free actions? 5? 10? 20? 100? The limit is 1 free one.

Taking a bauble is just that - taking. If you're then trying to sleight of hand hide that item then that is a different action.



there was a tweet mentioning that you can sheath a weapon, draw a different weapon, and attack IIRC.
If you can find that I'd love to see it. I haven't seen any tweets saying so.

[LordVonDerp]

http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/rules-spellcasting
Important section below


WHAT’S THE AMOUNT OF INTERACTION NEEDED TO USE A SPELLCASTING FOCUS? DOES IT HAVE TO BE INCLUDED IN THE SOMATIC COMPONENT?
If a spell has a material component, you need to handle that component when you cast the spell (see page 203 in the Player’s Handbook). The same rule applies if you’re using a spellcasting focus as the material component.

If a spell has a somatic component, you can use the hand that performs the somatic component to also handle the material component. For example, a wizard who uses an orb as a spellcasting focus could hold a quarterstaff in one hand and the orb in the other, and he could cast lightning bolt by using the orb as the spell’s material component and the orb hand to perform the spell’s somatic component.

Another example: a cleric’s holy symbol is emblazoned on her shield. She likes to wade into melee combat with a mace in one hand and a shield in the other. She uses the holy symbol as her spellcasting focus, so she needs to have the shield in hand when she casts a cleric spell that has a material component. If the spell, such as aid, also has a somatic component, she can perform that component with the shield hand and keep holding the mace in the other.

If the same cleric casts cure wounds, she needs to put the mace or the shield away, because that spell doesn’t have a material component but does have a somatic component. She’s going to need a free hand to make the spell’s gestures. If she had the War Caster feat, she could ignore this restriction.

Just use the shield hand for somatic components.

[ChubbyRain]

Just use the shield hand for somatic components.

That doesn't work unless the spell has a material tagline. If it is just somatic then the shield gets in the way. If the cleric is already using the shield as a material component (focus) then moving the shield works as the somatic components.

Shields take up your hand. Yes, even bucklers because reasons.

"Another example: a cleric’s holy symbol is emblazoned on her shield. She likes to wade into melee combat with a mace in one hand and a shield in the other. She uses the holy symbol as her spellcasting focus, so she needs to have the shield in hand when she casts a cleric spell that has a material component. If the spell, such as aid, also has a somatic component, she can perform that component with the shield hand and keep holding the mace in the other.

If the same cleric casts cure wounds, she needs to put the mace or the shield away, because that spell doesn't have a material component but does have a somatic component. She’s going to need a free hand to make the spell’s gestures. If she had the War Caster feat, she could ignore this restriction."

Bolded by me.