Druid or cleric?

[MeeposFire]

Hello I normally play warrior types and I am willing to go slightly outside of my norm and play something new to me in this edition (I have played both in other editions just not this one).

I want to have a decent at will option and I think the cleric is better at that end (I am thinking tempest, death, or arcane) but I have a feeling that long term land druid spells might be more useful/fun (maybe hard to say). I was planning in every case of getting booming blade one way or the other so I was wondering what everybody thinks works well for each particularly in terms of spells and at will options.

[Vogonjeltz]

Hello I normally play warrior types and I am willing to go slightly outside of my norm and play something new to me in this edition (I have played both in other editions just not this one).

I want to have a decent at will option and I think the cleric is better at that end (I am thinking tempest, death, or arcane) but I have a feeling that long term land druid spells might be more useful/fun (maybe hard to say). I was planning in every case of getting booming blade one way or the other so I was wondering what everybody thinks works well for each particularly in terms of spells and at will options.

Wild Shape is ok, but it doesn't last forever and few options have a good AC.

[MasterMercury]

If you like warrior classes, Tempest or war cleric is the way to go. Full casters + martial weapons and nice damage buffs.

[JumboWheat01]

If you like warrior classes, Tempest or war cleric is the way to go. Full casters + martial weapons and nice damage buffs.

This is what I would recommend. You can "ease" yourself into a caster class this way. If you find out you like casting, you can start branching out later on in your character creating time to more spell-oriented characters, like Light or Arcana Clerics, which have more spell potential, but still have the heavier cleric goodies to fall back on.

[Draco4472]

If you like playing warriors, a dwarven war-domain cleric should be an easy transition. Full casting with martial training to fall back on makes for a good way to ease into the spellcasting classes. I'd also recommend Paladin or Bladesinger for this.

[MeeposFire]

So what about the spell lists though? I know high level cleric spells are ok but not great overall how do druid spells compare at all spell levels?

For at will I was thinking scimitar with high dex and booming blade for a druid or a martial weapon with booming blade as a cleric. I would think either way my at will would be ok though better as a cleric. Is it close enough that it does not matter or is cleric that much better that I would likely like it much better?

[Rysto]

Clerics get much better armour, so if you want to stay on the front lines, that's a better choice. Booming Blade is excellent for a Cleric, although for a War Cleric it has the minor downside that if you want to use your War Priest feature, you can't cast Booming Blade and instead have to make a normal attack.

[MeeposFire]

Clerics get much better armour, so if you want to stay on the front lines, that's a better choice. Booming Blade is excellent for a Cleric, although for a War Cleric it has the minor downside that if you want to use your War Priest feature, you can't cast Booming Blade and instead have to make a normal attack.

I was thinking either land druid to have "better" spells (if that is true of course) or tempest/arcana cleric for better at will attacks. I was not sure if the better spells are better or the better at will for me.

[Specter]

If you're thinking about using a weapon at all, go Cleric.

[MeeposFire]

If you're thinking about using a weapon at all, go Cleric.

Well that would certainly be a recommendation for cleric for sure.

[djreynolds]

Well that would certainly be a recommendation for cleric for sure.

And you get divine strike at 8th and 14th. But once a turn. But the war clerics is weapon damage, whereas the other clerics are elemental or radiant. But the war cleric does get divine favor, 1d4 radiant and no hunter's mark bonus action stuff.

But I find while playing a cleric, I used sacred flame in melee as it was save or suck and did not have disadvantage in melee. Shocking grasp is also good in melee, I think tempest gets it. So I focused more on my casting stat. Mountain dwarf and half orc will get a 16 in strength and it might be stuck there. The hill dwarf I played, I left his strength at 14.

But shillelagh, which is easily obtained does make a quarterstaff or club viable for melee. But sacred flame scales very well, though I see many clerics using shillelagh and booming blade/GFB, like an elf cleric who takes magic initiate, or a elf nature cleric, or a dip in druid for 1 level, etc. Its a good combo, but I preferred sacred flame.

I found I used spirit guardians a lot, cast a lot of death ward at the beginning of a day and the aid spell.

Druid is nice as you change into beast form and still concentrate on say moon beam.

And our land druid used animal shape, not in combat, but in creative ways. Like drawing a wagon, or scouting, or getting into places as a mouse. Useful things. And some very good spells at the end of the day.

Moon druid and cleric can both man the front lines, have good ritual spells. You may be able to place barding on a druid's beast form, DM dependent, otherwise you AC is stuck at 16 at the most with bark skin.

Solid perception scores for both, 20 in wisdom by 8th level.

But I felt obligated as a moon druid to fight in melee, and you might feel your spells are then wasted. And druid gets great spells.

[Spore]

In my personal experience deviating slightly from your favorite archetype is a twofold experience. On one hand you can't do much wrong. You love a big part of your character. On the other hand you might subconsciously compare a War Cleric with a Fighter. This is why I would recommend playing something entirely different, like a Bladelock. But alas, the thread isn't about that.

As cleric is accounted for in the thread I want to advocate for Moon Druids personally, if you want to drop your Booming Blade idea. It has tanking capability. Crossclassing it with Barbarian makes you even beefier (Rage plus Bear Form plus extra HP from spell slots). Land Druids are fine but honestly they fill more of a spell caster role with utility shapeshifting at first and acceptable combat shapes at second.

[hymer]

So what about the spell lists though? I know high level cleric spells are ok but not great overall how do druid spells compare at all spell levels?

I'd take druid casting over cleric casting for fun and efficiency. The druid spell list is broader in scope.
But as much as I love druids, I wouldn't suggest you play one on your first foray into casting. Druid players need to acquaint themselves with the spell list, like cleric players, but then also need to master an awful lot of beast stats for wildshape and conjuration, and a bunch of fey and elementals for conjuration.
There's a lot of flexibility there, but also a lot of bookkeeping. If you don't feel up to that, I'd suggest going with the cleric. Or even easing into it with a caster where you don't have the whole spell list at your disposal. You can get some very nice gish going with bard, sorcerer, warlock and wizard as the casting part.

[tieren]

If you're thinking about using a weapon at all, go Cleric.

QFT

If you want to stay in the front and hit things with a weapon you want to be a cleric.

Druids (Land Druids) are battlefield controllers and summoners. Their spell list is awesome, even more so with the land circle spells, but they aren't going to be up front (as casters, moon druid wouldn't give you much chance for casting). You can take the shillelagh cantrip and get to whack stuff with your stick sometimes using your casting stat instead of a physical stat, but you risk losing concentration on your control or summon spell.

[Mandragola]

If you're thinking about using a weapon at all, go Cleric.

This is correct. Front-liners need AC and druids do not have it. Land druids cannot survive in melee. Moon druids can, but since you’re talking about a character casting spells in combat that’s not really relevant.

A tempest or war cleric has heavy armour, a shield and a martial weapon in his hand. He’ll play quite a lot like a fighter from the start. But then that will change, because clerics are not fighters – they are full casters. As you level up you’ll be bashing people with your warhammer less and less often, but melting their faces with holy fire more and more.

I’d personally forget about BB/GFB regardless of your build. These do sort of ok damage, though nothing spectacular. But that’s not your job as a cleric or druid. You exist to keep the party on its feet, by either preventing damage from happening or healing it when it does. Causing mediocre damage is what you do in your time off from your actual job, and you shouldn’t expend resources like levels or ASIs on stuff that doesn’t make you better at your job.

Sometimes the best way to prevent damage to the party is to play a light cleric and fireball the bad guys. Other times it’s being a life cleric and casting heals. Sometimes it’s by casting spirit guardians and then dodging for the rest of the encounter, while screaming angels tear the baddies to bits and your spiritual mace boshes them on the head. Actually hitting people is what fighters and paladins (and various others) are for – not clerics.

This support/leader/healer/controller.wa combat role is the biggest change from playing a fighter. It’s a change of mindset. Each turn you look at what the party needs, not at how to kill a particular monster. It can be quite a lot of fun. Luckily the cleric role has come a long way from the 3.X guy who took a 5-foot step and cast a heal every turn.

So the decision on whether to raise your wisdom or your strength actually isn’t a decision; Strength matters less and less the higher you level up. The decision on whether to take war caster or magic initiate for booming blade isn’t a decision; you need to keep concentration running on spirit guardians and you are spending your action most turns on dodge. Put that thing away!

A good cleric build to start with would be a variant human. Take resilient constitution and start out with 16s in your Strength, constitution and wisdom. War or tempest domain. It’s not a subtle character, at all, but it will get the job done.

Land druids are different. In genera they perform the same role as clerics, but not in the same way. They tend to have spells that physically hamper the monsters (entangling them, putting them in blinding for), rather than blowing them up or messing with their heads. And rather than stand on the front rank themselves they tend to summon bears to do it. A vast proportion of their spells seem to require concentration, which is another incentive to be nowhere near the front rank. Some of their spells, like call lightning, take your action every turn to activate but get loads of efficiency from a single spell slot – if you can maintain concentration.

Hope this is helpful.

[D.U.P.A.]

Land druids are first and foremost support, not good at directly attacking opponents. Their attack cantrips are rather mediocre, choice of attacking spells is rather small. They focus more on debilitating enemies and buffing your party by giving them advantage, slowing opponents and so on. They have the best rituals after the Wizard too. So if you want attacking, Cleric is much better bet. Druid role is almost like Bard's.

[SillyPopeNachos]

From the transition of front-line martial classes, my suggestion is Cleric. Tempest and War both offer good melee options and AC with spellcasting. Druids don't have a sustainable way to be on the front lines until level 20, and their casting focuses more on battlefield control.

[Saggo]

I’d personally forget about BB/GFB regardless of your build. These do sort of ok damage, though nothing spectacular. But that’s not your job as a cleric or druid. You exist to keep the party on its feet, by either preventing damage from happening or healing it when it does. Causing mediocre damage is what you do in your time off from your actual job, and you shouldn’t expend resources like levels or ASIs on stuff that doesn’t make you better at your job.

Sometimes the best way to prevent damage to the party is to play a light cleric and fireball the bad guys. Other times it’s being a life cleric and casting heals. Sometimes it’s by casting spirit guardians and then dodging for the rest of the encounter, while screaming angels tear the baddies to bits and your spiritual mace boshes them on the head. Actually hitting people is what fighters and paladins (and various others) are for – not clerics.

This support/leader/healer/controller.wa combat role is the biggest change from playing a fighter. It’s a change of mindset. Each turn you look at what the party needs, not at how to kill a particular monster. It can be quite a lot of fun. Luckily the cleric role has come a long way from the 3.X guy who took a 5-foot step and cast a heal every turn.

So the decision on whether to raise your wisdom or your strength actually isn’t a decision; Strength matters less and less the higher you level up. The decision on whether to take war caster or magic initiate for booming blade isn’t a decision; you need to keep concentration running on spirit guardians and you are spending your action most turns on dodge. Put that thing away!
A War or Tempest strength build works just fine. Neither require perfect 20s in Strength or Wisdom (although a 20/18, 18/20, or even 20/20 is easy to get depending on feat and race selection), as Clerics in generally rely the least on a 20 in their casting stat and War has Guided Strike and Tempest is just fishing for Booming Blade Destructive Wrath.

The damage is fine when you combo BB or GFB with Divine Strike. Level 1 is a wash and at Levels 8 and 14 you'll actually see a weapon damage bump higher than a Fighter's. While a Champion is fishing for crits, Battlemaster has Superiority Dice, and Eldritch Knight has some tricks with War Magic, you're still casting Spiritual Weapon/Guardians.

Just one of Resilient (Con) or War Caster is enough to mitigate Concentration checks and getting hit is also less of an issue for Tempest Clerics since you have Wrath of the Storm for more damage and (to discourage future attacks). And if you absolutely cannot lose concentration, you're still a full-caster Cleric and can do a full-caster Cleric routine.

Basically, a Strength War or Tempest is a perfectly legitimate alternate build. (I stress alternate because it's not a build to invalidate a support Cleric.) A Dexterity Tempest could even do the same thing with a Rapier.

[JumboWheat01]

In Saggo's vein, I'd recommend Warcaster over Resilient (Con) for Clerics, because they seem to best do with something in both their hands, whether it's a big weapon or a shield and a weapon, and being able to cast spells, especially spells that don't have material costs, while keeping your weapon and shield on hand is really handy.

[Mandragola]

Yeah, warcaster and resilient: con are both good. My reasoning for starting with resilient is that it also gives you +1 constitution, which allows you to start with a 16 there. Of course it's a very min-maxed build so that's not ideal.

It's definitely true that warcaster's other benefit of casting spells with something in each hand is a big help. Worth noting that it's irrelevant to people wielding two-handers, who are free to take a hand off their greatsword and cast a spell at any time. But I'd tend to recommend sword and board for clerics anyway, since with only one attack the AC is worth more than a little more damage - most of the time.

It's also true that you can make a melee cleric who does quite a lot of damage. I'd dispute just how much damage you can expect to get out of the SCAG cantrips in practice, since both require situational stuff to actually do their daamage and you can't rely (at all) on that happening. I haven't used either in practice but this seems to be pretty clearly the case.

However, my point remains that it's not a cleric's job to do this and it's a poor use of resources. I'd want to put ASIs into wisdom, constitution and feats like warcaster, not stuff that gave a marginal benefit to my at-will abilities.

Also for what it's worth I don't agree that clerics don't need wisdom all that much. If you're bashing stuff a lot then you do want strength and constitution, but actually cleric casting relies a lot on wisdom, even compared to most other casters. A wizard or sorceror has a ton of buffing and control abilities (walls and so on) that don't particularly rely on a high casting stat. By contrast a cleric's wisdom determines how much their spells heal, the DCs for spells and channel divinity (for most domains) and a bunch of seriously important skills - notably perception. It also keeps you in the fight vs a lot of save or suck abilities.

Wisdom is awesome and it's a nice bonus to play a class that relies on probably the second most useful stat in the game, second only to dex and maybe even better than it.

[Saggo]

It's also true that you can make a melee cleric who does quite a lot of damage. I'd dispute just how much damage you can expect to get out of the SCAG cantrips in practice, since both require situational stuff to actually do their daamage and you can't rely (at all) on that happening. I haven't used either in practice but this seems to be pretty clearly the case.
Even ignoring the situational damage, a Cleric with BB/GFB will do consistent and reasonable damage. Given both a d8 weapon and +4 Str/Dex for equal grounds, level 5:

Fighter: 11.50 DPR ((4.5+4)*2)*65%+(4.5*5%)
Cleric: 8.90 DPR (4.5*2+4)*65%+(4.5*2*5%)
For a difference of 2.6 DPR, reasonable by most accounts. At level 8 with +5 Str/Dex:

Fighter: 12.80 DPR ((4.5+5)*2)*65%+(4.5*10%)
Cleric: 12.70 DPR (4.5*3+5)*65%+(4.5*3*5%)
So a Cleric is doing as much DPR as a Fighter with thier Action, without rider damage. Now if we give both a 2d6 weapon, which favors the Fighter far more than the Cleric, at level 8:

Fighter: 16.30 DPR ((7.0+5)*2)*65%+(7.0*5%)
Cleric: 14.45 DPR (7.0+4.5*2+5)*65%+((7.0+4.5*2)*5%)
So even favoring Extra Attack, it's only a difference of 1.85 DPR, again reasonable by most accounts. Once you include rider damage and Spiritual Weapon/Guardians, your DPR is fine.

Edit: Includes 5% critical chance. Fixed some crit inaccuracies.


However, my point remains that it's not a cleric's job to do this and it's a poor use of resources. I'd want to put ASIs into wisdom, constitution and feats like warcaster, not stuff that gave a marginal benefit to my at-will abilities.
This isn't a video game, your role can be whatever you want it to be and whatever your table accepts. A Cleric is an excellent full-caster, as you and many others have pointed out, so that's an effective and valid recommendation. A melee Cleric has consistent and reasonable DPR, the cost is not different from any other MAD melee-hybrid balancing an attack mod, casting mod, Con, and feats (Paladin, Ranger, Monk, etc), and the risks can be mitigated (you only need one of Resilient or Warcaster to mitigate Concentration), all while having good full-casting, so that's an effective and valid recommendation as well.


Also for what it's worth I don't agree that clerics don't need wisdom all that much. If you're bashing stuff a lot then you do want strength and constitution, but actually cleric casting relies a lot on wisdom, even compared to most other casters. A wizard or sorceror has a ton of buffing and control abilities (walls and so on) that don't particularly rely on a high casting stat. By contrast a cleric's wisdom determines how much their spells heal, the DCs for spells and channel divinity (for most domains) and a bunch of seriously important skills - notably perception. It also keeps you in the fight vs a lot of save or suck abilities.

Wisdom is awesome and it's a nice bonus to play a class that relies on probably the second most useful stat in the game, second only to dex and maybe even better than it.
I'm not advocating low Wisdom, I'm advocating keeping Wisdom below 20 as an option. There are enough spells and buffs that don't key off Wisdom and upscaling heals has far more effect than increasing the modifier, but ultimately having an 18 Wisdom will get you through most encounters just fine (or even as low as 16 depending on campaign and party). Maybe Clerics don't rely on a casting stat the least, I'm not particularly beholden to that idea, but as a main point you'll be missing the forest for the trees as an 18 in a stat good and a 20/18 split between either stat is not particularly difficult to do.

[Gwiz]

If you wanna try something different and always play the warrior class, go with the druid? It's a really cool and fun class in many contexts. It's d&d (roleplay) after all and the fighting style of your class should not be the sole reason for picking a class.

[Mandragola]

Lots of reasonable stuff

Fair enough then. To be honest I'm not sure I'm happy that these new cantrips allow full casters to do equal melee damage to martials. I thought it was good design in the phb to have the full casters have at-will damage somewhat behind that of the classes that don't have anything else to fall back on. Adding these cantrips does something quite fundamental to the balance between the classes, and I don't think it's a good thing.

One of the effects of this is to make eldritch knights and arcane tricksters do more damage than any other kind of fighter or rogue. That doesn't seem right at all. At least there's an opportunity cost for clerics, in that they have to get the cantrip somehow.

As for your other points, then sure. You don't absolutely need to max out your wisdom right away. You don't need both war caster and resilient, though if you're near the bad guys it doesn't do any harm. When would you recommend picking up magic initiate, or would you MC for the cantrips? I guess a vuman arcane cleric could be one way to accomplish this - though actually wielding a shortsword wouldn't be too impressive.


If you wanna try something different and always play the warrior class, go with the druid? It's a really cool and fun class in many contexts. It's d&d (roleplay) after all and the fighting style of your class should not be the sole reason for picking a class.

This I definitely agree with. It's a question of how far you want to go from what you're used to. If you want a really big difference then druid (or maybe bard, wizard or sorceror) could be the way to go. If you want to play it safe, then go with the cleric.

[Saggo]

Fair enough then. To be honest I'm not sure I'm happy that these new cantrips allow full casters to do equal melee damage to martials. I thought it was good design in the phb to have the full casters have at-will damage somewhat behind that of the classes that don't have anything else to fall back on. Adding these cantrips does something quite fundamental to the balance between the classes, and I don't think it's a good thing.
Bear in mind the numbers all include Divine Strike. Clerics without Divine Strike and other full-casters will fall even further behind.

These kind of builds are mostly useful for letting you do the same DPR as the lower end of the spectrum of martials while giving you access to full-casting. Martials will always be able to optimize for that higher end of the spectrum.


One of the effects of this is to make eldritch knights and arcane tricksters do more damage than any other kind of fighter or rogue. That doesn't seem right at all. At least there's an opportunity cost for clerics, in that they have to get the cantrip somehow.
Eldritch Knight is similar to Cleric, in that Extra Attack is better some levels and BB/GFB+War Magic is better some levels, depending on when you get the next Extra Attack and the next d8 or War Magic. Champion, however, has the double to triple crit range and Battlemaster has Trip and Precision Attack, both archetypes making far better use of Great Weapon Master.

Arcane Trickster is interesting early on, my guesstimate is that eventually you have enough Sneak Attack dice that the higher chance of landing Sneak Attack with TWF will be better.


As for your other points, then sure. You don't absolutely need to max out your wisdom right away. You don't need both war caster and resilient, though if you're near the bad guys it doesn't do any harm. When would you recommend picking up magic initiate, or would you MC for the cantrips? I guess a vuman arcane cleric could be one way to accomplish this - though actually wielding a shortsword wouldn't be too impressive.
The two most applicable ways would be a Variant Human with Mage Initiate and 2 16s with point buy or a Sorcerer dip with Con proficiency and spells like Shield and any relevant race. Otherwise, a High Elf build would be good for a Dex based Cleric with the free cantrip. A Variant Half-Elf with the High Elf option gives a free cantrip and and can start with 2 16s in relevant stats. Depending on your rolls, you could afford to pick Mage Initiate at 4. Some tables give players a free starting feat, too.

I think Arcane Clerics come with Potent Spellcasting, so they wouldn't be as good. The weapon attack deals the extra 1-3d8, so it's difficult to say if your DM would let you add Wisdom to that damage (I would argue it doesn't), but the additional effects would get it.

[MeeposFire]

I think I may have given some misconceptions here for which I apologize.

I have played spell casters before just not in 5e.

I am not looking to play a war cleric as I do not really care for the features (though I admit I can see why people would suggest it so thank you for your thoughts on this). It was either a arcane cleric (better high level spells and free access to wizard cantrips) or a tempest cleric (for free heavy armor and cooler martial weapons and fun features). One way or another I am going to have booming blade if I go cleric.

If I go druid (for the very cool spells) I will have high dex (and will improve it) using a scimitar and thus have, at least in the end, only 1 AC less than the heavy armor user and I will be using a shield and will get booming blade.

I do think that most of the votes are for cleric and I think it is fair as it is clearly better than a druid in melee (well a land druid anyway which is what I would play in this case). It does not seem that many people think the "better" druid spell list is worth the loss of 1 AC and an average of 9 damage per round.

Thank you for your comments thus far they have been helpful.

[Mandragola]

Cool. Well tempest clerics are good and booming blade makes sense for them thematically. You'll need to take a feat or multiclass to get it. My recommendation would be either a variant human with magic initiate or half-high elf, as Saggo suggests.

My instinct with casters is always to try and keep them single-class, for the spell progression. A sorceror level would give you no more spell slots than if you carried on as a cleric, but would hold up getting your later spells. And you'd need a decent charisma score. Better to get BB through magic initiate, I think.

[Ashrym]

Why not variant human lore bard?

Picking up medium armor and shield proficiency from first level gives the AC a druid investing in DEX would have without the need to invest in DEX so much. Pick up booming blade and shillelagh via extra secrets at 6th level so that there's at least been the opportunity for the cantrip damage to have increased. This prevents MAD while giving spell DC's the druid misses out on having needed his or her ASI's for DEX instead of casting stat. Cool high level spells from the druid list will still be available via magical secrets in addition to shared spells that already exist.

Other than that, arcane cleric is probably the way to go if spell access is more important. The spells are better and booming blade is a cantrip so it should add on WIS mod to damage from potent spell casting. This isn't as much damage as the bonus weapon damage from more martially focused clerics with divine strike but it does give access to the cantrip at no additional cost plus the high level wizard spells.

Tempest cleric is probably the way to go if melee capability is more important. Starting with martial weapons and heavy armor is a bonus for defense and offense, booming blade requires a melee attack as part of the cantrip which should trigger divine strike damage on top of it, and there's some synergy with destructive wrath. This issue here is that the cantrip needs to be added somehow and that means multi-classing or feat.

The additional challenge for tempest or arcane cleric is the MAD given the desire for melee and spell casting. That means a physical attack stat (STR or DEX) and spell casting attack stat (WIS) and likely CON for hp and concentration saves are pulling in too many directions. This is the same issue you have with druid and DEX because DEX is there for attacking and defense so that takes away from WIS investment.

If you want to play a cleric you might want to consider a human variant nature cleric instead of any of the mentioned options. That grants some druid flavor in the spells and abilities but more importantly, it allows for adding shillelagh via acolyte of nature and heavy armor proficiency. That gets rid of needing DEX or STR so the character can focus on WIS and CON primarily with some STR to cover the weight. The bonus feat for human variant is there to add booming blade and also adds divine strike triggered off of the melee attack. No more MAD issues so a person can afford resilient CON or war caster.

My advice would be to decide whether a person wants the cool high level spells (and go lore bard) or whether a person wants better combat (and go nature cleric) over the other listed options. If a person wants to really stick with the presented options then the same choice is made but it's between arcane cleric (some cool high level spells and free cantrip) or tempest cleric (better combat), and make due with balancing feats and ability scores. I wouldn't recommend the druid for the style questioned.