Cleric's spell list for combat is mediocre without Spirit Guardians [Analysis]

[Merudo]

I studied the Cleric's spell list and it seems to me that the only combat spell that really stands out is Spirit Guardians. It's not even that good - as an indication, Bards typically don't get it as a Magical Secret. Without Spirit Guardians, the Cleric is just a really bad version of a Bard or Wizard for combat.

The only exception is the Life Cleric, who is pretty much the only class that can make Healing someone who isn't down a worthwhile action. Level 1 Cleric spells are also really good - but that's a small consolation for a mid/high level Cleric.

Let's look at the Cleric combat spells that are notable:

Level 1 cleric spells:

- Healing Word: Amazing spell, but available to the Bard as well
- Bless: Great for early levels, but usually Spirit Guardians is a better use of concentration. Unpopular pick for Magical Secrets, which indicates that Bard have usually better choices for Concentration anyway.
- Guiding Bolt: Excellent spell, almost always better than Chromatic Orb.
- Sanctuary: Occasionally helpful spell, but much weaker than Shield or Absorb Element

Compare to Wizard/Bard spells: Grease, Sleep, Magic Missile, Shield, Absorb Elements, Tasha's Hideous Laughter, Thunderwave, Dissonant Whispers, Faerie Fire

Verdict: Pretty good spells, although Guiding Bolt & Bless don't scale up well. At higher level you'll only use Healing Words, while the Wizard will keep making good use of Grease, Shield, Absorb Elements, and the Bard will use Healing Word plus Dissonant Whispers and Faerie Fire.

Level 2 cleric spells:

- Aid: Small buff to HP with good duration and no concentration, probably one of the best buff a Cleric can provide
- Spiritual Weapon: ~8-9 damage on a hit, alright use of a bonus action but it's small potatoes. Scales pretty badly.
- Hold Person: Powerful but situational, but available to Bards & Wizards as well...

Compare to Wizard/Bard spells: Flaming Sphere, Misty Step, Shatter, Web, Mirror Image, Pyrotechnics, Phantasmal Force, Heat Metal

Verdict: Already the Cleric's list is starting to look weaker. The Cleric will usually case Aid once or twice a day then use the level 2 slots for Spiritual Weapon, which does negligible damage after a few levels. Meanwhile the Wizard/Bard already have access to spells that can trivialize an encounter such as Web, Heat Metal, and Phantasmal Force.

Level 3 cleric spells:

- Animate Dead: Powerful in some campaigns, but available to the Wizard as well. Many deities oppose this. Can make you unpopular among the other players and DM if it slows the game too much
- Mass Healing Word: Only occasionally better than Healing Word
- Revivify: Very rarely useful
- Spirit Guardians: Amazing spell; probably the best reason to keep investing in Cleric instead of just taking a dip.

Compare to Wizard/Bard spells: Fireball, Counterspell, Fear, Hypnotic Pattern, Slow, Stinking Cloud

Verdict: Spirit Guardians is really powerful, and almost always the best use of a Cleric's concentration. However, the CC spells of the Wizard & Bard can often totally trivialize an encounter, although Spirit Guardians is more reliable. Wizards also get the game changing Counterspell, which Lore Bards almost always pick as well.

Level 4 cleric spells:

- Banishment: Amazing spell, but also available to Wizards
- Freedom of Movement: Ok buff that may or may not matter, also available to Bards
- Death Ward: Cast a level 4 spell ahead of time to maybe save yourself an extra action on Healing word...

Compare to Bard/Wizard spells: Watery sphere, Evard's Black Tentacles, Greater Invisibility, Polymorph, Otiluke's Resilient Sphere, Compulsion, Confusion

Verdict: First brutal spell level for clerics. They essentially get access to 2 buffs that may or may not do anything, and the Banishment spell that Wizards also get. Meanwhile the Wizard and Bard get access to a whole arsenal of crowd control spells, as well as the best buff in the game (Greater Invisibility).

Level 5 cleric spells:

- Flame Strike: A much, much weaker Fireball
- Planar Binding: Very hard to pull off, available to Bards & Wizards too
- Holy Weapon: Ok buff and AoE damage, probably best used as a AoE blind effect

Compare to Bard/Wizard spells: Hold Monster, Dominate Person, Bigby's Hand, Wall of Force, Animate Objects, Synaptic Static

Verdict: The Wizard gets the absolutely insane Wall of Force spell, and the versatile Bigby's Hand. Both the Bard and the Wizard get the Hold Monster / Dominate Person save or suck spells, and the very damaging Animate Object. The Bards can also pick Magical Secrets at level 10, meaning they can also pick Wall of Force or anything else they want. Meanwhile the Cleric gets a worse Fireball and a pretty mediocre buff. Awful.

Level 6 cleric spells:

- Harm: 14d8 damage to a single target. Meanwhile an upcast Fireball does 11d8 against a huge crowd...
- Heal: Wizard level 6 spells can end an encounter. This makes your tank last a bit longer.
- Create Undead: Slightly better than Animate Dead, but same problems & accessible to Wizards too

Compare to Bard/Wizard spells:
- Globe of Invulnerability, Otto's Irresistible Dance, Chain Lightning, Sunbeam, Eyebite, Magic Jar, Mass Suggestion

Verdict: Clerics get access to Harm/Heal. Harm is especially lackluster, doing about the same damage as Fireball but at touch range and with 1 target. Meanwhile, the Wizard & Bard get access to spells that, while not clearly more powerful than level 5 spells, are still really good.

Level 7 cleric spells:

- Divine Word: Outside of a few monster types, requires a Charisma save and that the target has less than 40 hitpoints. A Wizard or Bard could outright kill such monsters without a save, for a lower level spell.
- Fire Storm: Interesting AoE but less powerful than Fireball.

Compare to Bard/Wizard spells: Forcecage, Simulacrum

Verdict: Forcecage is borderline broken and far more useful than the weak spells the Cleric gets

Level 8 cleric spells:

- Holy Aura: Excellent buff to your team. Finally, you can consider not casting Spirit Guardians
- Antimagic Field: Can be absolutely brutal against spellcasters

Compare to Bard/Wizard spells: Mindblank, Maze, Dominate Monster, Feeblemind, Clone, Power Word Stun

Amazing spells for the Wizards, although the Bard has far less options. The Cleric is probably in-between the two, effectiveness-wise.

Level 9 cleric spells:

- Mass Heal: Finally, some powerful healing for non-life clerics

Compare to Bard/Wizard spells: Prismatic Wall, Wish, Foresight, Meteor Swarm, Time Stop, True Polymorph, Mass Polymorph, Power Word Heal, Psychic Scream

Verdict: Cleric get 1 useful spell, while the Wizard gets absolutely insane options including an amazing buff (Foresight), CC spell (Prismatic Wall), damage (Meteor Swarm), and utility (Wish), etc. The bard gets great stuff as well, plus at level 18 he gets to pick 2 more spells from the Wizard's list. Again, the Cleric is just left in the dust.

EDIT: Domain Spells

Arcana Domain:
- 2 Wizard cantrips (best pick: Green-Flame Blade and maybe Booming Blade)
- Magic Missile
- Magic Weapon

Ironically, Arcana Clerics can be the most powerful Clerics at melee, outshining the Tempest and War Clerics. Not only can Arcana Clerics get the SCAG cantrips for free (other Clerics need to spend a feat, multiclass, or be a High Elf), but a Arcana Cleric's Green-Flame Blade scale off Wisdom instead of intelligence. Even better, the bonus from potent spellcasting applies to *both* foes hit by Green-Flame Blade.

As for Magic Missile, it is reliable damage when you really need it. For a level 1 slot, Magic Missile does 75% of the damage of Guiding Bolt, & doesn't give advantage. However, against most enemies Guiding Bolt will miss 25% of the time or more, so MM will be doing superior damage on average. It's pretty niche in that the Arcana Clerics has far more impactful actions, but can be very helpful to reliably finish an wounded enemy off.

Magic Weapon is mostly to enhance someone's non-magical weapon if fighting a creature with resistance to non-magical damage. Otherwise, it's a waste of your concentration.

Verdict: The Arcana Cleric therefore can get 2 very powerful melee cantrip and 2 okay niche spells.


Death Domain:
- False Life
- Ray of Sickness
- Ray of Enfeeblement
- Vampiric Touch
- Blight
- Antilife Shell
- Cloudkill

False Life is niche. At level 2+, Aid is much more efficient (it targets 3 people & let them regain HP through short rest). Cure Would also gives more HP, and they don't go away. So False Life is mainly useful if you are at full health and expect a hard battle next so you can give yourself a bit more HP, and you already casted Aid.

Ray of Sickness is ok - less damage than Guiding Bolt, and gives a Con save for the Poisoned condition. Maybe useful for creatures with strong physical attacks but low Con.

Ray of Enfeeblement is pretty much trash. The concentration requirement pretty much kills the spell, and high strength creatures will tend to have high constitution anyway. Doesn't scale either. Blindness is almost always better to prepare, and Blindness is sort of bad anyway.

Vampiric Touch is also terrible. A mere 3d6 damage for a level 3 spell, and pitiful among of healing.

Blight is a single target blast that barely does more damage than a fireball. Although terrible for a Wizard, it's sort of okay for a Cleric given the very low quality of their damage spells.

Antilife Shell doesn't protect your allies, unless you can block a corridor or something with it. Good if you have a ranged-centric party / have many undead minions and are exploring tights corridors; if not, it feels extremely weak.

Cloudkill can be combined with Hero's Feast for a somehow okay combo. It does the same damage as Spirit Guardians, but with a wider AoE and with heavily obscuration for all instead of reduced movements for enemies. The main problem is that the Cloud keeps moving away, so in a few rounds it will won't bother anyone unless you can keep it still. If you don't combine it with Hero's Feast or contain it, it's really bad.

Verdict: The Death domain gives access to 7 new spells, but all are niche, weak, or both. Only standout is Antilife Shell if you have the party for it.

Forge Domain:
- Searing Smite
- Heat Metal
- Magic Weapon
- Elemental Weapon
- Wall of Fire
- Animate Objects

Searing Smite is awful - you have much better use of your concentration than doing 1d6 a turn on a failed save.

Magic Weapon is mostly to enhance someone's non-magical weapon if fighting a creature with resistance to non-magical damage. Otherwise, it's a waste of your concentration.

Elemental Weapon requires a slot 1 level higher than Magic Weapon for the same to hit / damage bonus, but also does some d4 of extra damage. Upcasted to level 5, it's comparable to Holy Weapon, with a +2 to hit but a -2 to damage.

Wall of Fire is similar to a less powerful Fireball that gives your opponents the opportunity to avoid the damage outright if they don't want to bother passing through it. Spirit Guardians is almost always a better use of your concentration, since upscaled it does about the same damage but can be moved as needed.

Heat Metal is situational but amazing against enemies in armor, as it can provide disadvantage on attack rolls without a save.

Animate Objects is amazing. Animate 10 tiny objects, and you can do 10d4 + 40 damage, round after round. Spirit Guardians can do more damage overall if multiple foes are around, but typically you'd prefer to focus fire on one creature - this let you shred them one at a time. You'd probably want to switch back to Spirit Guardians when the enemy can do AoE damage, though.

Verdict: Animate Objects is an amazing, game altering spell. Heat Metal is extremely powerful but can rarely be applied. Searing Smite is terrible, and the rest is nice but niche.



Grave Domain:
- False Life
- Ray of Enfeeblement
- Vampiric Touch
- Blight
- Antilife Shell

False Life is niche. At level 2+, Aid is much more efficient (it targets 3 people & let them regain HP through short rest). Cure Would also gives more HP, and they don't go away. So False Life is mainly useful if you are at full health and expect a hard battle next so you can give yourself a bit more HP, and you already casted Aid.

Ray of Enfeeblement is pretty much trash. The concentration requirement pretty much kills the spell, and high strength creatures will tend to have high constitution anyway. Doesn't scale either. Blindness is almost always better to prepare, and Blindness is sort of bad anyway.

Vampiric Touch is also terrible. A mere 3d6 damage for a level 3 spell, and pitiful among of healing.

Blight is a single target blast that barely does more damage than a fireball. Although terrible for a Wizard, it's sort of okay for a Cleric given the very low quality of their damage spells.

Antilife Shell doesn't protect your allies, unless you can block a corridor or something with it. Good if you have a ranged-centric party / have many undead minions and are exploring tights corridors; if not, it feels extremely weak.

Verdict: The Grave domain gives access to 5 new spells, but all are niche, weak, or both. Only standout is Antilife Shell if you have the party for it.

Knowledge Domain:
- Suggestion
- Confusion

Suggestion depends heavily on what your DM think is a "reasonable" suggestion. If your DM is generous and/or you are creative, it could potentially replicate the effects of "Banishment" (by suggesting a tough monster to sit out of the fight) or even "Dominate Monster" (by suggestion the creature attack someone else it has a grievance against). At the very least, you can probably suggest a creature flees the fight if their side isn't winning. Excellent spell, and can be used in social encounters as well.

Confusion is a worse Fear or Hypnotic Pattern, so it's a bad Wizard spell. For the Knowledge Cleric, however, it's a good spell which finally gives some AoE control options.

Verdict: One excellent one target control spell (Suggestion) and one good AoE control spell. Great if you'd like to expend the Cleric's control options.



Light Domain:
- Burning Hands
- Faerie Fire
- Flaming Sphere
- Scorching Ray
- Fireball
- Wall of Fire

Burning Hands is a bad Wizard spell mostly because of the restrictive range, but Clerics are fine with the spell because they don't mind being in melee.

Faerie Fire is an excellent source of advantage on attack rolls, and cancels invisibility as well. Really good debuff spell not available to Wizards.

Flaming Sphere is alright at low levels, but chances are you'll quickly switch to the much superior Spirit Guardians.

Scorching Ray is inferior to an upcasted level 2 Guiding Bolt - Guiding Bolt does only 1d6 less damage, but also provide advantage on the next attack. Scorching Ray scales well (2d6 per spell level), but Fireball will do more damage unless you use a level 6+ spell slot.

Fireball is amazing. There is simply no substitute. Huge AoE, 8d6 damage, it's better than the level 5 Cleric spell Flame Strike. This is what makes the Light Cleric a credible blaster.

Wall of Fire is similar to a less powerful Fireball that gives your opponents the opportunity to avoid the damage outright if they don't want to bother passing through it. Spirit Guardians is almost always a better use of your concentration, since upscaled it does about the same damage but can be moved as needed.

Verdict: Fireball is an absolutely amazing spell, Faerie Fire is a strong debuff, the rest are okay blasting spells. Overall, the list makes the Light Cleric a credible blaster, although Fire resistant enemies will limit your effectiveness considerably.

The main issue with the Light cleric is that he peaks early, at level 5 (when he gets Fireball). He doesn't even get a special spell at level 9.


Nature Domain:
- 1 Druid cantrip (probably Shillelagh)
- Barkskin
- Spike Growth
- Plant Growth
- Wind Wall
- Dominate Beast
- Grasping Vine
- Tree Stride

Barkskin is useless on basically everything but a Druid, who already has access to it. The Cleric has no need for it.

Spike Growth is an excellent control spell in tight corridors - walking through it can cause up to 16d4 damage, no saves! Can be made as a trap too - but enemies will quickly notice the damage after walking through it 5 feet. At higher level, enemies will just shrug and walk through it - but early on, it's really powerful.

Plant Growth, when outdoor, is absolutely amazing. No concentration, no saving throw, massive AoE, permanent duration, quadruply difficult terrain. Almost broken, can stop armies in their tracks.

Wind Wall is nice protection against archers. Note that you can spawn the wall in an odd shape, potentially hitting multiple enemies for 3d8 while avoiding your own party and still provide protection. Neat.

Dominate Beast is alright when you actually fight beasts, but it's better used before combat.

Grasping Vine is a pretty bad use of concentration, and requires a bonus action to reuse. If there is a hazard nearby however, it becomes very good. Can be combine with Plant Growth or with an AoE spell from another caster.

Tree Stride let you run away and reposition yourself anywhere in a forest. The rest of your party can't follow you easily, though. Most helpful for hit-and-runs / guerrila warefare, especially if it involves an upcast Bestow Curse. It's hard to justify as a level 5 spell, though.

Verdict: At early levels, Spike Growth (indoor) is pretty good spell, but it doesn't scale. Plant Growth (outdoor) is an amazing battlefield spells to have, especially if your party has strong ranged attacks. Wind Wall, Dominate Beast, and Grasping Vine are niche but powerful spells. Tree Stride needs a lot of thought to be made useful, and Barkskin is essentially worthless.



Tempest Domain:
- Fog Cloud
- Thunderwave
- Gust of Wind
- Shatter
- Call Lightning
- Sleet Storm
- Control Water
- Ice Storm
- Destructive Wave

Fog Cloud is a wonky spell. Make sure your DM and you are on the same page regarding its effects - according to RAW, it doesn't provide disadvantage but instead negates advantage and disadvantage.

Thunderwave does good damage in a decent AoE, and can be maximized with Channel Divinity. The pushback effect can help your allies retreat. Just beware the loud boom.

Shatter is essentially Thunderwave, but at range and without the pushback. Maximized, it is stronger than Fireball, but has a much smaller area. Good blasting spell, but not as usefull as Fireball.

Call Lightning is pretty much a trap spell for the Tempest cleric. Spirit Guardians has the same duration, does about the same damage, has a much better area of effect (circle of radius 15' instead of radius 5'), removes half movement, and doesn't take an action to activate on following turns.

Sleet Storm is an good battle control spell. Similar to Plant Growth in use, but requires concentration and allow saves. Especially good if your part has strong ranged attacks.

Ice Storm does about 75% of the damage of Fireball, with the same AoE and making the ground difficult terrain. Decent blasting spell, but not as good as Fireball.

Destructive Wave is absolutely amazing. Excellent party-friendly AoE in a 30' radius that can knock enemies prone. Can be partially maximized for even more outrageous damage. The only other class that gets it is the Paladin at level 17.

Verdict: 1 amazing blasting spell (Destructive Wave), 2 alright spells that become good when maximized (Shatter, Thunderwave), 1 good blaster spell (Ice Storm) and 1 good battlefield control spell (Sleet Storm).



Trickery Domain:
- Mirror Image
- Blink
- Dimension Door
- Polymorph
- Dominate Person

Mirror Image is one of the best defensive spell not taking concentration. Outstanding.

Blink is a potentially powerful defensive spell that doesn't require concentration. Enemies can ready actions to hit you once you reappear, though. Probably best used against spellcasters (readying a spell takes concentration) and creatures with extra attacks (it's only possible to ready a single attack).

Dimension Door can let you and a buddy escape for a fatal fight. Other party members are screwed, though.

Polymorph can be an excellent buff at level 8 (be a T-Rex for one hour, with full HP!) but that's the best it will ever be. Can also be used as a sort of banishment spell targeting a WIS save. Pretty good when you get it, but doesn't scale.

Dominate Person is best used right before combat, otherwise the target gets advantage on the saving throw. It only works on humanoids, so that's restrictive. It takes concentration too, so you'll probably want to cast it on something powerful to make worthwhile. However if the stars align and you face a very strong humanoid opponent with low WIS that you're not fighting yet, it can be powerful.

Verdict: Mirror Image, Blink and Dimension Door are three rather nice defensive spells. Polymorph can work as a buff or as a save or suck spell, but doesn't scale. Dominate Person is rarely helpful, but can have a huge impact on a fight.



War Domain:
- Divine Favor
- Magic Weapon
- Crusader's Mantle
- Stoneskin
- Hold Monster

Divine Favor is a weak buff. Bless is much better.

Magic Weapon is mostly to enhance someone's non-magical weapon if fighting a creature with resistance to non-magical damage. Otherwise, it's a waste of your concentration.

Crusader's Mantle is usually not that powerful in a 4 people party - you are almost always better off using Bless or Spirit Guardians. However, if you have a large party with many weapon attacks, it's powerful. It can be outright broken when combined Druid summons, Animate Objects, or Undead minions.

Stoneskin has a 100 GP cost - in many campaigns, you get more gold than you can spend, but sometimes that's an issue. Still, it's typically not worth a level 4 slot - the concentration requirement is really crippling.

Verdict: Magic Weapon & Stoneskin are pretty niche buff that require your valuable concentration. Crusader's Mantle is typically mediocre, but can be outright broken if you have the right party for it.


Let's summarize what domains add to the Cleric's spell list.

Death & Grave add a bunch of weak spells, many of which are borderline unusable. Antilife Shell could be helpful for some specific parties, but even then the spell isn't even that impressive.

Arcana gives access to the very powerful SCAG cantrips, but not much else of note really.

Knowledge gives 2 good control spells, but nothing comparable to Fear, Hypnotic Pattern, or Wall of Force.

Light & Tempest actually let the Cleric fill the blasting role effectively. Light has a huge power spike with Fireball, while the Tempest's power curve is more even, with the powerful Destructive Wave at the end.

Forge has one highlight: the Animate Objects spell, which can provide amazing damage.

Nature has good battle field control spells - however, all of them are situational. The effectiveness of the spell list depends highly on the campaign setting & the composition of the party.

Trickery is mostly defensive. Polymorph is a standout, but doesn't scale well.

War is all about Crusader's Mantle - if you can get the party for it, it can be absolutely overpowered. If not, the spell list is pretty bad, with only Hold Monster being decent.

Of these, I'd say only Light & Tempest add substantial versatility and power to the Cleric's spell list. Nature might too, if the setting & party are appropriate.

[BB944]

I have to agree on your analyses... Cleric spells vs bards... not so good, and now more so after reading this.

But If I may point out a few things that makes the cleric able to overcome the spell shortfall (combat-wise)....

Wizards are more limited to just their spells. A wizard out of spells loses a lot of combat effectiveness. Clerics don't (as much) Bards lose more than Clerics, but not as much as Wizards.
Action economy. Clerics can utilize a lot of different effects while joining in on the fray.
Medium armor
Divine intervention is a wish spell... they don't need a spell to compare to wish. Beside the fact that they 'technically' (although extremely unlikely) have it much sooner.
Don't forget Channel Divinity and all the other domain abilities....

I have not had the chance to play at all frankly, I have been doing nothing but DM'ing, so I can't say which is more fun, but I can say that when my players played a cleric vs a wizard, I always saw the Barbarian and Paladin in the fight to be most combat effective, while the Wizard and the Cleric were useful all the time... not just in combat. Never really saw one as more effective than the other...


just my two cents.

btw... that list was painful read if you are a cleric lol

[Unoriginal]

Verdict: Cleric get 1 useful spell, while the Wizard gets absolutely insane options including an amazing buff (Foresight), CC spell (Prismatic Wall), damage (Meteor Swarm), and utility (Wish), etc. The bard gets great stuff as well, plus at level 18 he gets to pick 2 more spells from the Wizard's list. Again, the Cleric is just left in the dust.


https://youtu.be/USqR_-pcXAw

The Cleric is working as intended.

[MrStabby]

I am not sure this is a true reflection of the game. A few things to throw in:

1) Cleric spells can be more specialist. Clerics know all their spells and can prepare each day more than any other class. No one spell has to be the best, but it is the best of a wide pool of variable spells that makes the difference.

2) You elide over the domain spells. Each cleric domain gets a decent number of spells from outside the cleric list - indeed many of them are spells you call out here as being more powerful.

3) Clerics can field better armour than most other casters. A lore bard preferring spirit guardians over fireball or whatever does not mean it is bad for the tempest cleric. A class/archetype with at best average HP and no armour would not want to be that close to an enemy. Boost up the armour class by supporting heavy armour, provide a bonus to being in combat through martial weapons and the spell gets a big chunk better

4) Related to 3: armour matters. Banishment on a cleric is arguably better than on a wizard as the cleric is likely to be hit less and so the concentration effect is likely to last longer.

All in all I agree clerics power comes less from their spells than it does for a wizard, but so what? One class has to be top and with the armour, channel divinity, more HP, more proficiency and so on the cleric is fine.

[MaxWilson]

- Freedom of Movement: Ok buff that may or may not matter, also available to Bards
- Death Ward: Cast a level 4 spell ahead of time to maybe save yourself an extra action on Healing word...


I mostly agree with your take (clerics are kind of weak, and Spirit Guardians isn't half as good as its reputation, in part because of range/reach issues and in part because it encourages Fireball Formation for PCs to take advantage of it). But I think you are underestimating Death Ward, which can boost your effective action economy by letting you go further out on a limb (when the wizard is down to 17 HP against an Ancient Red Dragon, he doesn't have to Teleport away for fear of the dragon vaporizing him with its breath weapon and Counterspelling his attempt to Absorb Elements--because Death Ward prevents it--so the wizard gets to cast another Feeblemind instead).

I think you may also be underestimating Freedom of Movement, which can be a pretty nifty spell in combination with other spells like Web. The fact that it's no-concentration and long-duration makes it better than mediocre.

Death Ward is the one I've seen taken as a Magical Secret, though I suppose that's not a fair comparison since Freedom of Movement is already on the bard list already.

P.S. Bards are also better healers, due to Aura of Vitality and/or Healing Spirit.

[Pex]

What difference does it make another class has the spell on its spell list? If I'm playing a cleric I'd be happy if the wizard has Banishment. He casts it on one creature. I cast it on another. It's not a competition.

Spiritual Weapon is not to be dismissed. It's an efficient way to conserve spells. Spiritual Weapon with Sacred Flame does its job. Spiritual Weapon to damage then do Toll The Dead for the d12s.

Bless is always useful for the saving throw bonus, especially for the non-proficient. Choose your battle between it and Spirit Guardians. The attack bonus remains relevant too, especially for Great Weapon Master/Sharpshooter.

If you don't see value in a 300 gp life insurance policy with Revivify Insurance Company Inc., then I can't help you.

As for healing, the best healing comes Healer Feat. I had it playing a cleric. I cast Cure Wounds once, 1st level 1st adventure 1st day. I had never cast a healing spell since even when reaching 8th level.

[Blood of Gaea]

I mean, if you hate the list so much play an Arcana Cleric.

[MaxWilson]

I mean, if you hate the list so much play an Arcana Cleric.

So you can get access to wizard spells at 17th level? That's pretty late.

[DarkKnightJin]

Spiritual Weapon is not to be dismissed. It's an efficient way to conserve spells. Spiritual Weapon with Sacred Flame does its job. Spiritual Weapon to damage then do Toll The Dead for the d12s.


I had not yet considered using my Spiritual Weapon as a knock-off version of EK's War Magic ability.
Thank you for putting it in my head!

I also agree that Bless is a Spell that any Cleric or Paladin wants to have with them every day.
Especially when the player knows that a party member has Sharpshooter or GWM and likes using the -5/+10 on those things.

[Tanarii]

Without Spirit Guardians, the Cleric is just a really bad version of a Bard or Wizard for combat.Bards are pretty much universally regarded as having it the worst of all full casters when it comes to offensive damage spells. So that's a bold statement.

[Blood of Gaea]

Bards are pretty much universally regarded as having it the worst of all full casters when it comes to offensive damage spells. So that's a bold statement.
Meh, all Bards get secrets.

[AvvyR]

Meh, all Bards get secrets.

Precisely. Bards get plenty of the spells that end encounters without having to deal any damage at all. And if a Bard was particularly concerned about doing direct damage with spells, they'll be College of Lore and just grab Fireball or whatever at level 6, only one after the Wizard. Concerned about your cantrip damage? Take a level or Warlock or Magic Initiate: Warlock and grab EB+Hex. You could even do 2 for Agonizing Blast if you really wanted.

In my experience though, once Bards find the Animate Object + Sack of Ball Bearings combination, they stop being concerned about not dealing damage.

[Tanarii]

Meh, all Bards get secrets.
Sure. At level 10. That's end-game at most tables. Assuming they even stay together long enough to get that far.

[AvvyR]

Sure. At level 10. That's end-game at most tables. Assuming they even stay together long enough to get that far.

6 for Lore Bards, and most who are planning to be heavily reliant on casting will be.

[Chugger]

This has gotta be one of the silliest attacks on a class I've ever seen!

My Light Cleric gets Burning Hands, Faerie Fire (which he's used to devastating effect), Scorching Ray, Flaming Sphere, FIREBALL, Daylight, Wall of Fire, and Guardian of Faith - and for whatever reason the lvl 5 ones are Flame Strike and Scrying (which still have their uses).

And he gets to zap things in the eye to give them disad on attacks, which is meh except when it stops a crit from even happening - I've done that - for myself and for others in trouble in my party. It's not at all a bad ability.

And then there's Radiance of the Dawn - which needs to scale better but is still damn useful and can hit hard (esp on things vuln to radiant) - I've put some serious hurt on many creatures with RotD where I'd rolled poorly on initiative and they'd swarmed us - no way I could fireball - but I had this - then bonus action cast Spiritual Weapon and wail on whatever survived the light burst.

Plus I can heal, Raise Dead, Cure all sorts of conditions - remove curse - and so on.

And I can turn/destroy undead. How many times in Chult that just ended a fight cold - over half the zombies taking off zooming away back into the jungle - it was encounter-ending, the ability was so good. And it works on things a lot meaner than zombies. I was in a mod while a friend played his cleric - a substantial number of wraiths showed up - he turned all but 3, which we destroyed quickly, so only the low lvl rogue took a drain. Had those things put their nasty drain on several of us, I'm not sure we could have finished that mod - no way to do a rest - cleric saved our butts.

If you can get a wand of lighting bolts to a Tempest Cleric - watch out - by lvl 8, 4 times a day he can shoot a maxed out lightning bolt. If he doesn't upcast that's 48 damage. He can do that 4 times a long rest.

Guardian of Faith is a weird spell - requires no concentration iirc - you just have to keep the monster close to the guardian - it doesn't move far from where you summon it. It swats things til it's done what - 60 pts of damage or something. So you can have that spell going, AND spirit guardians, AND spiritual weapon, AND then you can toll the dead, do that lvl one touch spell w/ heavy necro damage (you can upcast that) - or guiding bolt or if you're a light cleric fireball or scorching ray - or if you're a war cleric and you have GWM do a two hander attack with +10 damage almost guaranteed to hit - 4 times a short rest. You have banishment - and heaven forbid you get decent prayer beads with the Holy Hotline (Planar Ally) and that one that lets you and the party turn into gas form and fly at insanely fast speed for something like 8 hours.

I'm not even gonna get into the other domains, some of which have some crazy good stuff too. As someone else pointed out clerics get a chance at divine intervention - tend to have quite good AC - and have quite good utility spells. And reviv or raise dead.

Oh no, Clerics suck - cuz they only get stuck with "one good spell" - what a maroon! /facepalm

CLERICS ARE AWESOME!

[Merudo]

But I think you are underestimating Death Ward, which can boost your effective action economy by letting you go further out on a limb (when the wizard is down to 17 HP against an Ancient Red Dragon, he doesn't have to Teleport away for fear of the dragon vaporizing him with its breath weapon and Counterspelling his attempt to Absorb Elements--because Death Ward prevents it--so the wizard gets to cast another Feeblemind instead).


Ancient Red Dragons from the DMG can't counterspell, and are CR 22. Not exactly something most parties will encounter.

In any case, Instant Deaths become extremely rare past the early levels (Death Ward becomes available at level 7). Someone in the team can probably administer a healing potion to the Wizard before he dies outright, so there isn't any significant danger here. Again, it's a level 4 spell that may or may not save an action, which is a pretty bad use of a level 4 spell (at least until high levels).

Also, anyone able to counterspell the Wizard's Absorb the Elements / Shield can probably cast Dispel Magic, which neutralizes Death Ward.



I think you may also be underestimating Freedom of Movement, which can be a pretty nifty spell in combination with other spells like Web. The fact that it's no-concentration and long-duration makes it better than mediocre.


I agree the Web + Freedom of Movement combo is pretty good. However, if you don't do the combo, Freedom of Movement is lackluster.


Bards are pretty much universally regarded as having it the worst of all full casters when it comes to offensive damage spells. So that's a bold statement.

Part of the problem is that the Wizard depends heavily on Fireball to do its blasting. So Lore Bards (the best college for Bards) are usually going to pick up Fireball (among Counterspell).

Even then, as the Wizard levels up, he's going to rely on disabling spells such as Hypnotic Patterns far more than blasting spells. Blasting spells don't scale well (they do less and less as monsters get more hitpoints), while disabling spells remain very effective through an entire Wizard's career. Check Treantmonk's theory of Wizards as Gods for more details.




My Light Cleric gets Burning Hands, Faerie Fire (which he's used to devastating effect), Scorching Ray, Flaming Sphere, FIREBALL, Daylight, Wall of Fire, and Guardian of Faith - and for whatever reason the lvl 5 ones are Flame Strike and Scrying (which still have their uses).


Light Cleric is actually one of the strongest cleric domains (with Life Cleric cleric), in that it allows you to cast Fireball, the most important blasting spell of a Wizard, as well as Faerie Fire, an excellent controller spell that even the Wizard doesn't have access too. However, other domains don't quite hold up - I'll try to make an analysis of the domains later.



If you can get a wand of lighting bolts to a Tempest Cleric - watch out - by lvl 8, 4 times a day he can shoot a maxed out lightning bolt. If he doesn't upcast that's 48 damage. He can do that 4 times a long rest.


Wand of Lighting Bolts are unfortunately not usually found in a campaign.



Guardian of Faith is a weird spell - requires no concentration iirc - you just have to keep the monster close to the guardian - it doesn't move far from where you summon it.


I don't think you are playing the spell correctly - Guardian of Faith only damages when a creature "moves to a space within 10 feet of the guardian for the first time on a turn".

So as long as the creature stays still while close to the Guardian of Faith, that creature won't get hit.

[EvilAnagram]

Light Cleric is actually one of the strongest cleric domains (with Life Cleric cleric), in that it allows you to cast Fireball, the most important blasting spell of a Wizard, as well as Faerie Fire, an excellent controller spell that even the Wizard doesn't have access too. However, other domains don't quite hold up - I'll try to make an analysis of the domains later.
My tempest domain cleric turned an ambush by six vampire spawns armed with magic weapons into a route at level 6. Call Lightning by itself, with maximised damage and the ability to push enemies, is fantastic. On top of all that, I could do it while rocking 20 AC and a warhammer. The ol' Guiding Bolt, Spiritual Weapon one-two is ridiculously potent when you upcast, and even when creatures landed a hit on me they ended up taking more damage than I did.

Mass Cure Wounds, by the way, can turn a TPK into a victory, life cleric or no.

Go beyond spell lists, Nature builds are the stickiest tanks in the game, and War Clerics are phenomenal buffers at any level.



I don't think you are playing the spell correctly - Guardian of Faith only damages when a creature "moves to a space within 10 feet of the guardian for the first time on a turn".

So as long as the creature stays still while close to the Guardian of Faith, that creature won't get hit.
Are you saying that effectively freezing a character in their tracks is bad?

[MaxWilson]

This has gotta be one of the silliest attacks on a class I've ever seen!

My Light Cleric gets Burning Hands, Faerie Fire (which he's used to devastating effect), Scorching Ray, Flaming Sphere, FIREBALL, Daylight, Wall of Fire, and Guardian of Faith - and for whatever reason the lvl 5 ones are Flame Strike and Scrying (which still have their uses).

And he gets to zap things in the eye to give them disad on attacks, which is meh except when it stops a crit from even happening - I've done that - for myself and for others in trouble in my party. It's not at all a bad ability.

And then there's Radiance of the Dawn - which needs to scale better but is still damn useful and can hit hard (esp on things vuln to radiant) - I've put some serious hurt on many creatures with RotD where I'd rolled poorly on initiative and they'd swarmed us - no way I could fireball - but I had this - then bonus action cast Spiritual Weapon and wail on whatever survived the light burst.

Plus I can heal, Raise Dead, Cure all sorts of conditions - remove curse - and so on.

And I can turn/destroy undead. How many times in Chult that just ended a fight cold - over half the zombies taking off zooming away back into the jungle - it was encounter-ending, the ability was so good. And it works on things a lot meaner than zombies. I was in a mod while a friend played his cleric - a substantial number of wraiths showed up - he turned all but 3, which we destroyed quickly, so only the low lvl rogue took a drain. Had those things put their nasty drain on several of us, I'm not sure we could have finished that mod - no way to do a rest - cleric saved our butts.

If you can get a wand of lighting bolts to a Tempest Cleric - watch out - by lvl 8, 4 times a day he can shoot a maxed out lightning bolt. If he doesn't upcast that's 48 damage. He can do that 4 times a long rest.

Guardian of Faith is a weird spell - requires no concentration iirc - you just have to keep the monster close to the guardian - it doesn't move far from where you summon it. It swats things til it's done what - 60 pts of damage or something. So you can have that spell going, AND spirit guardians, AND spiritual weapon, AND then you can toll the dead, do that lvl one touch spell w/ heavy necro damage (you can upcast that) - or guiding bolt or if you're a light cleric fireball or scorching ray - or if you're a war cleric and you have GWM do a two hander attack with +10 damage almost guaranteed to hit - 4 times a short rest. You have banishment - and heaven forbid you get decent prayer beads with the Holy Hotline (Planar Ally) and that one that lets you and the party turn into gas form and fly at insanely fast speed for something like 8 hours.

I'm not even gonna get into the other domains, some of which have some crazy good stuff too. As someone else pointed out clerics get a chance at divine intervention - tend to have quite good AC - and have quite good utility spells. And reviv or raise dead.

Oh no, Clerics suck - cuz they only get stuck with "one good spell" - what a maroon! /facepalm

CLERICS ARE AWESOME!

Chugger, I just want to call your attention to the fact that, out of all the nice things you found to say about clerics, only about three lines were actually in praise of anything on the cleric spell list. IMO that's telling.

[Merudo]

Are you saying that effectively freezing a character in their tracks is bad?

If a monster willingly enter the Guardian of Faith zone, it's probably highly motivate to attack someone there. So yeah, the monster will be more than happy to stay and keep attacking the target.

Sure, the target could move away, but that's going to trigger an attack of opportunity. That attack will end up doing far more damage than the paltry 10-20 damage from Guardian of Faith.

Even if the monster is hit twice by Guardian of Faith, that's at most 40 damage from a level 4 spell, and it probably required some work to position it right. In comparison, Fireball, a level 4 spell, does about 40 damage to a huge crowd without any finicky movement...


My tempest domain cleric turned an ambush by six vampire spawns armed with magic weapons into a route at level 6.

With Turn Undead? It's a highly situational ability.



Call Lightning by itself, with maximised damage and the ability to push enemies, is fantastic.


Call Lightning is pretty much a trap spell for the Tempest cleric. Spirit Guardians has the same duration, does about the same damage, has a much better area of effect (circle of radius 15' instead of radius 5'), removes half movement, and doesn't take an action to activate on following turns.



The ol' Guiding Bolt, Spiritual Weapon one-two is ridiculously potent when you upcast


Guiding Bolt is much better used to help melee classes land a hit. The ~9 damage of Spiritual Weapon is very lackluster.

Level 3 Guiding bolt + Spiritual Weapon is about 30 damage to a single enemy. Meanwhile, Fireball does 36 damage to a huge crowd...

[ZorroGames]

From the first publishing of D&D the theme was teamwork of the classes. Fighting men hit things, clerics helped hit things and healed (downside was the “healbot” syndrome today though Clerics have evolved like all the core classes,) and Wizards cast magic. Later Supplements (along with Strategic Review articles) introduced many of today’s classes such as ranger, thief, Druid (originally best as a NPC,) monk, and turned the Dwarf, Hobbitt, and Elf classes (not yet races) into something worthwhile.

Despite the recent article from a woman about women in TSR deriding the war game element it was that combat teamwork that was a significant element of the game and still is. Even in the OD&D three book era my cleric did more than heal and a cleric was an essential element of any successful adventuring team.

Yes today others can heal but clerics or druids are essential support members of adventuring teams. Though all the Druids I seem to see today at our tables are be combat oriented Moonies or Shillelagh wielders that doesn’t mean Druids are only combat beasts (pun intended) as measuring clerics as spell casters while ignoring other abilities is valid. Guidance, light, resistance, sacred flame, spare the dying, command, inflict wounds, and shield of faith are all useful spells at first level. As is a warhammer in my Mountain Dwarf cleric.

Yes, you want destruction on steroids in aoe spells, you want powerful control spells, you want more spell selection (at high levels) you certainly want a Wizard or Warlock in you team.

Bards are powerful in their role but all classes can be built in a myriad of ways to provide useful skills.

[Tetrasodium]

I think that the bigger problem with how the cleric's spell list feels offensively for a wis focused+powerful cantrip build on par with wizard/sorcerer/warlock is the lack of options. up until xge, thcleric offensive spells were sacred flame (dex save) compared to the wizard shocking grasp(melee spell attack), ray of frost(ranged spell attack w/no save debuff), fire bolt (ranged spell attack w/ long range), chill touch (ranged spell attack w/ debuff), acid splash (dex save), poison spray (con save). xge adds create bonfire (dex save), frostbite (con save), gust (str save or blown away), infestation (con save), toll the dead (wis save), & thunderclap (pbaoe con save) to the wizard list giving them con saves, dex saves, wis saves, & melee/ranged spell attacks for offensive cantrips. Clerics add the same toll the dead (wis save), & word of radiance (pbaoe con save), but clerics completely lack a ranged/melee spell attack cantrip on the cleric spell list leaving combat very much in the realm of "uhh.. that guy needs to make $save... do I get to do anything this round GM?".

the leveled spells between offense, protection, & group multiplier type stuff are pretty good combined with the d8 hit die & medium (sometimes heavy) armor+shield. I've seen entire sessions go where the cleric kept casting sacred flame (saved, save, save etc) or healed someone every turn they got. It was so bad that the group was begging him to attack with his mace or whatever starting weapon he had.

[Tanarii]

6 for Lore Bards, and most who are planning to be heavily reliant on casting will be.


Part of the problem is that the Wizard depends heavily on Fireball to do its blasting. So Lore Bards (the best college for Bards) are usually going to pick up Fireball (among Counterspell).
Lore bards are not all bards. Lore bards are not the best college bards. Magical secrets for lore bards is 2 spells.

The arguments being made against clerics in this thread rapidly crossed the line from bold statements to bad logic.

For starters, the cleric class and the bard class and wizard class are not their spell lists. They access them differently Prepare daily from entire list vs known spells changed only at leveling up vs prepared daily from a sub-list in the spellbook. They have entirely different class and sub-class features. They get different armor, weapons and HD. You're trying to compare apples and oranges because they're both a part of the fruit group.

[stoutstien]

Why are we comparing clerics which spell list are buff with a little damge to wizards who are almost always more potent as cc casters? I think I've cast a single fireball it that was to destroy a ships sails.ive swiched it out for erupting earth once xan came out due to the difficult Terrain.

[EvilAnagram]

If a monster willingly enter the Guardian of Faith zone, it's probably highly motivate to attack someone there. So yeah, the monster will be more than happy to stay and keep attacking the target.

Sure, the target could move away, but that's going to trigger an attack of opportunity. That attack will end up doing far more damage than the paltry 10-20 damage from Guardian of Faith.
You seem to be imagining oddly specific scenarios. You can affect multiple monsters, you can disengage to avoid an op attack, you can force creatures through choke points. Its 60 damage from a single spell, and if you're halfway clever it's difficult not to get the most out of it.



Even if the monster is hit twice by Guardian of Faith, that's at most 40 damage from a level 4 spell, and it probably required some work to position it right. In comparison, Fireball, a level 4 spell, does about 40 damage to a huge crowd without any finicky movement...
Fireball is unfriendly and deals an average of 28 points of damage. If your goal is to harm and place a degree of control on a single enemy, GoF is superior both in damage and ancillary benefits. Also, fire is much more frequently resisted.



With Turn Undead? It's a highly situational ability.
No, with Spirit Guardians and Thunderwave. Honestly, I could have done it with Call Lightning, since that would have been able to push them into a river just as effectively.



Call Lightning is pretty much a trap spell for the Tempest cleric. Spirit Guardians has the same duration, does about the same damage, has a much better area of effect (circle of radius 15' instead of radius 5'), removes half movement, and doesn't take an action to activate on following turns.
Counterpoint: enhanced range, more damage, and the ability to maximize damage and exercise control effects thanks to tempest domain features is better in many situations than Spirit Guardians.



Guiding Bolt is much better used to help melee classes land a hit. The ~9 damage of Spiritual Weapon is very lackluster.



Level 3 Guiding bolt + Spiritual Weapon is about 30 damage to a single enemy. Meanwhile, Fireball does 36 damage to a huge crowd...
More like level 1 Guiding Boly and Level 3+ Spiritual Weapon. ~14-18 force damage is great on a bonus action. Sure, if there's a rogue, leave it for him, but otherwise have your fun.

[Galadhrim]

It has been pointed out but to review the cleric list without considering domain spells is unfair to the class. Through level 9, that is 10 additional spells that are always prepared (almost as many as bard or Wizard will have total). The domain spells are designed to be a core part of each clerics power, so it would make sense that their base list is behind other classes. Most domains have a channel divinity that either adds to their spell power or allows spell like effects without the use of a spell slot.

In addition, of the classes you are comparing (Wizard, bard) only cleric has access to all of the spells available. You point out all the level 3 or 4 spells bard and wizard have access to but in reality they will only have a few of those because they just don't know that many spells (of course depending on dm, wizards could know them all, that has not been the case in my games). There is major opportunity cost there that is being ignored. A bard has to be very specialized. A cleric can be your diviner one day and your blaster the next, then go tank for a while.

[Waazraath]

Sorry, but this is maybe the worst analysis I've seen so far in 5e. I appreciate the effort, but there are so many flaws in logic and painfully wrong assessments, that it is hard to consider where to start. Nevertheless, I'm gonna try.


- The most painful mistake (probably) is that only the spell list is taken into account. And that's a really bad idea, cause therefore, all the synergies that are there are missed. And the cleric class has a lot of synergy between it's class features (chassis with d8 and medium / heavy armor + shield, extra spells, channel divinity options) and its spells. Ignoring those, you can't adequately assess the spells.

- Especially the lack of meniotioning the extra spells is a flaw. The extra spells a Bard gets through magical secrets are used as an arument That The Bard Can Do This As Well (incorrectly, more on that later), while the Cleric has a large number of extra spells known that are ignored. That is either favorism (anti-favorism?), or a total lack of comprehension on how good those spells are. Which would be weird, cause it are great spells, many you name for other casters on the plus side (Greater invisibility, Fireball, but think also about Polymorph and Elemental Weapon).

- Example: the Tempest Cleric. The combination of channel divinity, the extra spells, and martial weapon and havy armor proficiencies make this subclass a beast. With channel divinity and an (upcast) shatter, the Tempest Cleric can do more damage than a Wizard's Fireball (though in a smaller radius - not always a disadvantage). With it's other class features, it can be great secondary, or even primary, melee fighter. With it's class features (reaction damage), high AC, extra melee damage later on, Spiritual Weapon and Spirit Guardians going, it's a monster. Grab Booming Blade for flavor, lolz and extra damage for even more fun.

- the problem is: you suggest that you did look at subclasses and synergies, since you mention the Life Cleric in that regard. If that means you missed all the other ways the different subclasses interact with the main chasis and Cleric spels... eh, that's not good.

- One other example on synergies: heavy or medium armor and shield proficiencies make concentration spells much better on the Cleric than on a Bard or Wizard. The chance that the Cleric is hit is much smaller, so also the chance to loose a spell on concentration. Especially for a spell like Spirit Guardians, that requires you to be in melee range. A lore bard doesn't want to be there, and isn't as fit for this spell as a Cleric.

- The idea that somehow a spell is of less value if other classes have 'em on their spell list as well is ridiculous. Who cares? A good spell is a good spell. To make it worse, a lot of the argument in the OP hangs on the fact that "the Bard can get all those spells as well with magical secrets". Yeah, and by definition those are spells that are on other class lists. The Bard has hardly any good combat spells that are not on other classes spell lists, but somehow, that doesn't make it 'mediocre'.

- As for the Bard: it's absurd that the OP, and others, make claims about "how Bards can get all those spells with magical secrets. No, they can't. There's one (1) subclass that gets 2 of them by level 6. All the other four subclasses only get two spells at level 10. Generously, that's halfway the game, in practice, many games will never get that far.

- This leads to unfair and weird assessments on the level of inididual spells. Bless, for example, I quote "Unpopular pick for Magical Secrets, which indicates that Bard have usually better choices for Concentration anyway." This is bollocks. A Bard that can pick level 5 spells with magical secrets. Or for one subclass, level 3 spells. Of course no player willl ever pick a level 1 spell, unless needed for a specific build. This argument boils down to "nobody thinks this level 1 spell is better than a level 5 spell, so the level 1 spell must suck". Bless is a great spell. And also a used a lot in play during the later levels, cause also at (lets say) level 6, there are combats where you don't need a level 3 spell, you want to save it, or already have spend them all. To have a great level 1 concentration backup is, well, great. Few, if none level 1 Bard or Wizard spells are as strong in combat.

- another interessting spell assesment: Shield is listed as one of those great, scaling, level 1 wizard spells. Eh, yeah, it's good. But in this comparision, you really should note that te Wizard needs Shield to get the AC that most Clerics have by default, walking around in a (half) plate with a shield. Here it is obvious why a comparision without other class features is flawed. A level 1 spell is good for the wizard cause it will let him touch the Cleric baseline AC... for 1 round.

- Let's do another one: Spiritual Weapon. Increadible how you fail to see its potential. Bonus action casting. Bonus action to use. No concentration. Scales. This is a ranged, bonus action, attack, that you can do besides any other thing you are doing, every round the combat lasts. If you call this 'negligible damage', you must be playing the game differently. Even if you do nothing except for hitting people with a weapon or cantrip (depending on the cleric), you can get a decent damage output, comparible with martials. It is one of the best level 2 spells, because of the action economy. And definitely worth casting in higher level slots.

- And I can go on, and on, and on; Flaming Sphere better than Spiritual Weapon (disregarding that the latter is no concentration?!?); describing Hold Person as 'situational' but Heat Metal as 'trivalizing encounters'; not understanding (or ignoring) the power of long duration, no concentration buffs like Aid and Death Ward; not mentioning Lesser and Great Restoration, the easiest and some times only way to remove nasty status effects that are very easy to get in combat; etc. etc.

Conclusion: a truly terrible white room analysis of the Cleric spells, without looking at synergies, with uncorrect and unfair assessment of cleric spells, made by the looks of it by someone who played a lot of Bards and never played a Cleric (or seen one played, for that matter). Sorry, can't make anything else out of this. Or maybe a very elaborate trolling attempt (in that case, I tip my hat for the effort).

[Merudo]

Why are we comparing clerics which spell list are buff with a little damge to wizards who are almost always more potent as cc casters?

Most buffs take concentration in 5e, so their impact is limited. The cleric might have access to more of them, but that point is moot since the Cleric can only concentrate on one at a time.

Beside, Wizards get the best buff in the game (Greater Invisibility).

[KillingTime]

Beside, Wizards get the best buff in the game (Greater Invisibility).

Highly debatable...
Greater invisibilty affects one target.

Bless upcast to the same level would affect 6 characters. And while +d4 is technically weaker than advantage, it is also applied to saving throws, which is a massive benefit.

[Merudo]

It has been pointed out but to review the cleric list without considering domain spells is unfair to the class. Through level 9, that is 10 additional spells that are always prepared (almost as many as bard or Wizard will have total). The domain spells are designed to be a core part of each clerics power, so it would make sense that their base list is behind other classes.

Sadly, most domain spells are either junk, extremely situational to the point you'll be happy if you can cast them a single time in the campaign, or already on the cleric spell list.

Let's look at the usable combat spells not on the cleric's list for the different domain:

- Arcana: Magic Missile
- Death: Ray of Sickness, Blight, Antilife Shell, Cloudkill
- Forge: Heat Metal, Wall of Fire, Animate Objects
- Grave: Blight, Antilife Shell
- Knowledge: Suggestion, Confusion
- Life: none
- Light: Burning Hands, Faerie Fire, Scorching Ray, Fireball, Wall of Fire
- Nature: Spike Growth, Plant Growth, Dominate Beast
- Tempest: Thunderwave, Shatter, Destructive Wave
- Trickery: Mirror Image, Blink, Dimension Door, Polymorph Dominate Person
- War: Hold Monster

Of these, I'd say only Ray of Sickness, Antilife Shell, Heat Metal, Animate Objects, Faerie Fire, Fireball, Plant Growth, Destructive Wave, Mirror Image, Polymorph, Dominate Person, and Hold Monster are actually powerful.

Most clerics domains have at most 1-2 powerful combat spells (exception: Light and Trickery clerics), which are almost always on the Wizard spell list in the first place. It's nice, but the Bard also picks 2 spells (from any spell list!), and the Wizard has amazing spell options at any level.

[stoutstien]

Up casted bless is vastly more powerful than greater invisibly(with summons, Undead, or hirings which with bounded accuracy can be deadly)

I do think a few of the domains should have updated spell list with Xan spells taken into consideration but that's for flavor reasons not for power balance be sides for a few of the weaker domains such as trickery.

I know at most tables healing as seen as a waste of time but we play a fairly deadly style where mobs tend to try to Coup de Grace players that are down so staying at more than 1 or 2 hp is more important. ( Being low hp shows as visibly wounded and winded so a magnet for attacks.)

[Blood of Gaea]

I'm sorry, but calling any buff the "best buff in the game" when not talking about Foresight is silly.

The strength of a Cleric is that they can do a whole bunch of different things well, often at the same time. Sure, a dedicated Evocation Wizard can blast the pants off of a Cleric more often than not, but a Light or Tempest Cleric can still hold their own, along with strong buffs, heals, weapon attacks, etc.

[Biggstick]

I'm sorry, but calling any buff the "best buff in that game" when not talking about Foresight is silly.

The strength of a Cleric is that they can do a whole bunch of different things well, often at the same time. Sure, a dedicated Evocation Wizard can blast the pants off of a Cleric more often than not, but a Light or Tempest Cleric can still hold their own, along with strong buffs, heals, weapon attacks, etc.

Agreed on Foresight.

A Light Cleric and a Mountain Dwarf Abjuration Wizard make a pretty spectacular pairing of casters in any party.

The OP is ignoring opportunity cost in regards to choices the Bard has to make in choosing a spell to put on their spells known list. A Cleric can change out spells on the daily, while still having access to a powerful spell list from their domain. Another choice that seems strange to me is the under-valuing of the Bless spell. If you played a Cleric from levels 1-20 and only ever used Bless as your concentration spell, your party wouldn't get mad at you. It's that powerful of a spell, that's useful in way more combat situations then Spirit Guardians is, and scales well enough for the entirety of the game. Another powerful spell not listed is the Command spell. This spell isn't on the Wizard spell list nor on the Bard spell list. It's a first level spell that doesn't require concentration and can completely remove a big bad's Action on it's next turn (or used as a Reaction if one has the Warcaster feat). This is incredibly powerful, in all portions of the game, as it's a first level spell that can shut down some of the most powerful effects big bads can utilize (their Action) with a single first level spell that doesn't take up concentration. This is a spell that a DM should be burning Legendary Resists on if the save is failed. If not, the creature is going to get obliterated. How many first level spells that don't take concentration can do that on the Bard or Wizard spell list?

[Merudo]

I'm sorry, but calling any buff the "best buff in the game" when not talking about Foresight is silly.


I meant buffs using concentration. But then True Polymorph beats Greater Invisibility too.


The strength of a Cleric is that they can do a whole bunch of different things well, often at the same time. Sure, a dedicated Evocation Wizard can blast the pants off of a Cleric more often than not, but a Light or Tempest Cleric can still hold their own, along with strong buffs, heals, weapon attacks, etc.

Light cleric is not any better than a Wizard at weapon attacks. In fact, the Wizard is much better because he got access to Green-Flame Blade and Booming Blade. The Wizard also probably beats the Tempest Cleric at melee, since the Tempest does 1d8/2d8 extra from Divine Strike, while the Wizard does 2d8+int modifier, then 4d8+int, and finally 6d8+int.

Wizard can also buff better than Clerics, with Haste, Greater Invisibility, Foresight, and others.

Wizards can't heal, but healing in combat is usually a waste of an action.

[Tetrasodium]

Why are we comparing clerics which spell list are buff with a little damge to wizards who are almost always more potent as cc casters? I think I've cast a single fireball it that was to destroy a ships sails.ive swiched it out for erupting earth once xan came out due to the difficult Terrain.

While I agree that the two classes have different spell lists with very different strengths, I think the "problem" that left the OP thinking what he was thinking is more a result of the fact that all of the cleric's offensive cantrips are save for none with no spell attack options. Knowledge, light, & grave domains(3/9? domains) all get potent spellcastting (add wis mod to cleric cantrips) at level 8, so there are certainly a reasonable claim for a caster centric cleric that does not rely on str/dex based weapons like the wiz/sorc/warlock/etc. Both sorcerer & warlock have archtypes that grant cure wounds,so it's not unreasonable for clerics to have some other cantrip options to avoid feeling useless if the opponent has good saves or is immune to radiant/necrotic damage.

[Blood of Gaea]

it's not unreasonable for clerics to have some other cantrip options to avoid feeling useless if the opponent has good saves or is immune to radiant/necrotic damage.
Arcana Cleric does that.

[Tetrasodium]

Arcana Cleric does that.

While somewhat true, it doesn't change the fact that there are a bunch of primary caster cleric archtypes with a poor set of options for situations that don't require spell slot expenditures. sorcerer & warlock already have archtypes that can heal (and the warlock has one of the best damage cantrips in the game plus multiattack & the ability to use their primary caster stat with melee weapons via invocations) There are plenty of deities of war/treachery/etc that justify giving clerics ranged/melee spell attack b/p/s type cantrips fir example without treading on what makes wizards a wizard.

[EvilAnagram]

While somewhat true, it doesn't change the fact that there are a bunch of primary caster cleric archtypes with a poor set of options for situations that don't require spell slot expenditures. sorcerer & warlock already have archtypes that can heal (and the warlock has one of the best damage cantrips in the game plus multiattack & the ability to use their primary caster stat with melee weapons via invocations) There are plenty of deities of war/treachery/etc that justify giving clerics ranged/melee spell attack b/p/s type cantrips fir example without treading on what makes wizards a wizard.
Most clerics have either a secondary cantrip or a decent enough attack that this is not necessary, especially with the extra d8 of melee damage they get each round.

[Specter]

You're wrong on so many levels.

- Damage is hardly ever the most important thing in combat. Protecting against damage and denying opportunities to the enemy are usually king.
- At level 8, Clerics gain a good means of damage even while concentrating on another spell. Is it amazing? No. But having decent at-will damage while being a caster? Sweet.
- Spiritual Weapon gives you the option of attacking and casting in the same turn. With that and Spirit Guardians, you can destroy mobs and single targets alike. The Cleric in my campaign ruined one orc encounter (30 enemies) with this combo, almost single-handedly.
- You're not even considering domain spells in your analysis. War gets massive buffs, Light gets good AoE, etc. Clerics can't be measured without their domain.

[Biggstick]

While somewhat true, it doesn't change the fact that there are a bunch of primary caster cleric archtypes with a poor set of options for situations that don't require spell slot expenditures. sorcerer & warlock already have archtypes that can heal (and the warlock has one of the best damage cantrips in the game plus multiattack & the ability to use their primary caster stat with melee weapons via invocations) There are plenty of deities of war/treachery/etc that justify giving clerics ranged/melee spell attack b/p/s type cantrips fir example without treading on what makes wizards a wizard.

Warlock is a class that's built around Eldritch Blast. And I'm pretty sure there are less monsters in the game immune to both radiant and necrotic versus fire/cold/necrotic/whatever else damage type you're suggesting of classes that have different cantrip damage types. Another point I'd make is that if a creature is immune to both Radiant and Necrotic damage, you probably shouldn't be attacking it. Another point is that if you're fighting against something immune to both Radiant and Necrotic, most full casters won't be using their Action on casting cantrips, but will be using their Action on casting leveled spells (as it's probably a higher level encounter) or taking the Dodge/Disengage/Dash Action.

Cleric cantrips are a bit meh because they require a save. There is a benefit to this though, in that offensive Cleric cantrips are just as useful when you're completely surrounded by enemies as if you're at maximum range, as you won't suffer disadvantage on your ranged attack roll as you don't have an attack roll to make. Being able to deal both radiant and necrotic damage with my Cleric cantrips makes me confident in the damage types I have available to me as well.

And in response to EvilAnagram, Clerics don't have to use a melee weapon to trigger this bonus damage. They can use a Light Crossbow (if not proficient with martial weapons) or a Longbow (if proficient with martial weapons) to pop off ok damage with the Divine Strike from range.

[EvilAnagram]

Warlock is a class that's built around Eldritch Blast. And I'm pretty sure there are less monsters in the game immune to both radiant and necrotic versus fire/cold/necrotic/whatever else damage type you're suggesting of classes that have different cantrip damage types. Another point I'd make is that if a creature is immune to both Radiant and Necrotic damage, you probably shouldn't be attacking it. Another point is that if you're fighting against something immune to both Radiant and Necrotic, most full casters won't be using their Action on casting cantrips, but will be using their Action on casting leveled spells (as it's probably a higher level encounter) or taking the Dodge/Disengage/Dash Action.

Cleric cantrips are a bit meh because they require a save. There is a benefit to this though, in that offensive Cleric cantrips are just as useful when you're completely surrounded by enemies as if you're at maximum range, as you won't suffer disadvantage on your ranged attack roll as you don't have an attack roll to make. Being able to deal both radiant and necrotic damage with my Cleric cantrips makes me confident in the damage types I have available to me as well.

And in response to EvilAnagram, Clerics don't have to use a melee weapon to trigger this bonus damage. They can use a Light Crossbow (if not proficient with martial weapons) or a Longbow (if proficient with martial weapons) to pop off ok damage with the Divine Strike from range.

Good points all around.

[CantigThimble]

Wizards get most of their power from their core spell list and very little from their subclass, clerics get a lot more from their subclass. But cleric domains are not all combat focused, so some are going to just be using bless in combat, others are going to be throwing out destruction.

If you want to compare blasting power specifically, compare Light and Tempest clerics to wizard while factoring in Channel Divinity and the improved AC and HP they get.

Another thing to factor in is that a lot of wizard spells will be very weak or useless against certain monsters. Firebolt and Fireball suddenly look a lot worse when you run into a Salamander. On the other hand, cleric combat spells just don't have that problem. Sacred Flame, Bless, Spiritual Weapon and Spirit Guardians are pretty much never resisted, so they can be used against any enemy with consistent effectiveness.

Also, don't count out spiritual weapon. After 3 rounds (out of up to 10) it's better than scorching ray, it's non-concentration and clerics typically don't have anything else to do with their bonus action regardless.

P.S. Make sure you're comparing a cleric to specifically either a bard or a wizard at one time, not a gestalt of both. Clerics will typically out-support wizards and out-damage bards but they're not going to out-damage wizards or out-support bards.

[Citan]

I studied the Cleric's spell list and it seems to me that the only combat spell that really stands out is Spirit Guardians. It's not even that good - as an indication, Bards typically don't get it as a Magical Secret. Without Spirit Guardians, the Cleric is just a really bad version of a Bard or Wizard for combat.

The only exception is the Life Cleric, who is pretty much the only class that can make Healing someone who isn't down a worthwhile action. Level 1 Cleric spells are also really good - but that's a small consolation for a mid/high level Cleric.

Let's look at the Cleric combat spells that are notable:

Level 1 cleric spells:

- Healing Word: Amazing spell, but available to the Bard as well
- Bless: Great for early levels, but usually Spirit Guardians is a better use of concentration. Unpopular pick for Magical Secrets, which indicates that Bard have usually better choices for Concentration anyway.
- Guiding Bolt: Excellent spell, almost always better than Chromatic Orb.
- Sanctuary: Occasionally helpful spell, but much weaker than Shield or Absorb Element

Compare to Wizard/Bard spells: Grease, Sleep, Magic Missile, Shield, Absorb Elements, Tasha's Hideous Laughter, Thunderwave, Dissonant Whispers, Faerie Fire

Verdict: Pretty good spells, although Guiding Bolt & Bless don't scale up well. At higher level you'll only use Healing Words, while the Wizard will keep making good use of Grease, Shield, Absorb Elements, and the Bard will use Healing Word plus Dissonant Whispers and Faerie Fire.

Level 2 cleric spells:

- Aid: Small buff to HP with good duration and no concentration, probably one of the best buff a Cleric can provide
- Spiritual Weapon: ~8-9 damage on a hit, alright use of a bonus action but it's small potatoes. Scales pretty badly.
- Hold Person: Powerful but situational, but available to Bards & Wizards as well...

Compare to Wizard/Bard spells: Flaming Sphere, Misty Step, Shatter, Web, Mirror Image, Pyrotechnics, Phantasmal Force, Heat Metal

Verdict: Already the Cleric's list is starting to look weaker. The Cleric will usually case Aid once or twice a day then use the level 2 slots for Spiritual Weapon, which does negligible damage after a few levels. Meanwhile the Wizard/Bard already have access to spells that can trivialize an encounter such as Web, Heat Metal, and Phantasmal Force.

Level 3 cleric spells:

- Animate Dead: Powerful in some campaigns, but available to the Wizard as well. Many deities oppose this. Can make you unpopular among the other players and DM if it slows the game too much
- Mass Healing Word: Only occasionally better than Healing Word
- Revivify: Very rarely useful
- Spirit Guardians: Amazing spell; probably the best reason to keep investing in Cleric instead of just taking a dip.

Compare to Wizard/Bard spells: Fireball, Counterspell, Fear, Hypnotic Pattern, Slow, Stinking Cloud

Verdict: Spirit Guardians is really powerful, and almost always the best use of a Cleric's concentration. However, the CC spells of the Wizard & Bard can often totally trivialize an encounter, although Spirit Guardians is more reliable. Wizards also get the game changing Counterspell, which Lore Bards almost always pick as well.

Level 4 cleric spells:

- Banishment: Amazing spell, but also available to Wizards
- Freedom of Movement: Ok buff that may or may not matter, also available to Bards
- Death Ward: Cast a level 4 spell ahead of time to maybe save yourself an extra action on Healing word...

Compare to Bard/Wizard spells: Watery sphere, Evard's Black Tentacles, Greater Invisibility, Polymorph, Otiluke's Resilient Sphere, Compulsion, Confusion

Verdict: First brutal spell level for clerics. They essentially get access to 2 buffs that may or may not do anything, and the Banishment spell that Wizards also get. Meanwhile the Wizard and Bard get access to a whole arsenal of crowd control spells, as well as the best buff in the game (Greater Invisibility).

Level 5 cleric spells:

- Flame Strike: A much, much weaker Fireball
- Planar Binding: Very hard to pull off, available to Bards & Wizards too
- Holy Weapon: Ok buff and AoE damage, probably best used as a AoE blind effect

Compare to Bard/Wizard spells: Hold Monster, Dominate Person, Bigby's Hand, Wall of Force, Animate Objects, Synaptic Static

Verdict: The Wizard gets the absolutely insane Wall of Force spell, and the versatile Bigby's Hand. Both the Bard and the Wizard get the Hold Monster / Dominate Person save or suck spells, and the very damaging Animate Object. The Bards can also pick Magical Secrets at level 10, meaning they can also pick Wall of Force or anything else they want. Meanwhile the Cleric gets a worse Fireball and a pretty mediocre buff. Awful.

Level 6 cleric spells:

- Harm: 14d8 damage to a single target. Meanwhile an upcast Fireball does 11d8 against a huge crowd...
- Heal: Wizard level 6 spells can end an encounter. This makes your tank last a bit longer.
- Create Undead: Slightly better than Animate Dead, but same problems & accessible to Wizards too

Compare to Bard/Wizard spells:
- Globe of Invulnerability, Otto's Irresistible Dance, Chain Lightning, Sunbeam, Eyebite, Magic Jar, Mass Suggestion

Verdict: Clerics get access to Harm/Heal. Harm is especially lackluster, doing about the same damage as Fireball but at touch range and with 1 target. Meanwhile, the Wizard & Bard get access to spells that, while not clearly more powerful than level 5 spells, are still really good.

Level 7 cleric spells:

- Divine Word: Outside of a few monster types, requires a Charisma save and that the target has less than 40 hitpoints. A Wizard or Bard could outright kill such monsters without a save, for a lower level spell.
- Fire Storm: Interesting AoE but less powerful than Fireball.

Compare to Bard/Wizard spells: Forcecage, Simulacrum

Verdict: Forcecage is borderline broken and far more useful than the weak spells the Cleric gets

Level 8 cleric spells:

- Holy Aura: Excellent buff to your team. Finally, you can consider not casting Spirit Guardians

Compare to Bard/Wizard spells: Mindblank, Maze, Dominate Monster, Feeblemind, Clone, Power Word Stun

Amazing spells for the Wizards, although the Bard has far less options. The Cleric is probably in-between the two, effectiveness-wise.

Level 9 cleric spells:

- Mass Heal: Finally, some powerful healing for non-life clerics

Compare to Bard/Wizard spells: Prismatic Wall, Wish, Foresight, Meteor Swarm, Time Stop, True Polymorph, Mass Polymorph, Power Word Heal, Psychic Scream

Verdict: Cleric get 1 useful spell, while the Wizard gets absolutely insane options including an amazing buff (Foresight), CC spell (Prismatic Wall), damage (Meteor Swarm), and utility (Wish), etc. The bard gets great stuff as well, plus at level 18 he gets to pick 2 more spells from the Wizard's list. Again, the Cleric is just left in the dust.
Hi.

Ok, so, as much as I thought I'd agree with you first, at least partially...
I have to say that sadly more than half of it is just completely baseless.

I'll put aside the extra spells of Cleric for now, although they also put a significant weight on the analysis.

Overall, it seems to me you are, like some others I encountered in the past, confusing "mediocre in combat" and "mediocre in dealing damage oneself".

First, let's address some heavy misrepresentations on some spells...
Lvl 1 spells
"Bless: great for early levels, but usually Spirit Guardians is a better use of a concentration".
You're off to a very bad start immediately.
Bless is in the top 10 best buffs, concentration and non-concentration alike. Some could easily argue in the best 5 in fact, if you take into account the fact it's easily accessible.

First, it scales extremely well castin-wise: you get one more ally covered with each level. How often are you in parties that have more than 4, or even 5 members?
From what I've seen in those forums at least, and in my own experience, the majority of games are made of ~4 player characters. For easy reasons too: the more the players, the more the merrier, but also the more difficulty to set up sessions regularly, the more difficult making decisions as a group and making the world live as a DM.

Second, it scales extremely well level-wise. Contrarily to Spirit Guardians which is easily averted with slightly intelligent enemies (restraining you / hindering your mobility, staying at range, focus firing on you since you're necessarily exposed if you want to be any use), Bless is set-and-forget and scales with both allies and enemies.

When you face creatures that can unleash 40+ damage on all party in a single attack, that average +2 on saves can make a life or death difference.
When your Paladin reaches the stage at which he can blow several 4th level smites, or your Rogue rolls 6d6 on a single attack, or your Fighter pal wants to use Sharpshooter/GWM on a high AC target, or you just face several enemies that are sturdy, that average +10% chance to hit will pay off very quickly.

Conversely, it's exactly the same with Guiding Bolt: the mightiest your next ally's attack is, the better value your spell has.

Sure, you are not dealing damage *yourself* and that seems to be a big deal for you. Then, no worries, Cleric is just not for you.

Oh, by the way, the reason why Bless is unpopular as Magic Secrets is just that it's very easy to access through other means. If it was a 3rd level spell, you'd see more Lore Bards picking it up, because the opportunity cost of acquiring it through a dip would be much more.

As for the other spells: Shield is just making do as an emergency armor, but unless you're making specific Wizard builds it's actually worse than being a plain Cleric with armor and shield.

Sanctuary is situational because it prevents using attacks, but just pairing it with SPirit Guardians makes it much worthwhile. And when you just want to increase the survivability of someone that has to retreat anyways, it's golden.

Level 2
Spiritual Weapon is also much better than you sell it.
It's indeed a (semi-)waste of a spell if you expect an encounter to last 3 rounds top or you just know you'll spam Healing Words or the like every round.
Otherwise, it's a great way to deal some good damage without endangering yourself and while still letting you free to cast a spell with your action.

Aid is indeed a buff, but not only: it's a Mass Healing Words before the hour.

Hold Person: so what if other casters can learn it? Even if they did, since like you stress yourself they also have other interesting spells to use, they'll be veerry glad you can cast it too. And it's a great scaling spell in the first place.

And you forgot about Blindness (non-concentration, makes most people useless -including casters-), Enhance Ability (help anyone break free from restrain, allow an ally to track a pesky evasive invisible creature, make your Shield Master pal reliable in shoving enemies prone etc), Silence (help your Rogue pal kill silently, have a Barbarian grapple enemy Wizard inside etc).
Or a plain Warding Bond on your Rogue (make him a tank) or Monk (allow him to spear through lines to Stun enemies).

Again, you're not dealing damage directly, but you're a frigging great helper, so you're directly contributing to overall party damage, by severely reducing the amount of threat it faces or increasing the amount of hurt it can sustain.

lvl 3
Revivify: YMMV: I'm sure you'll find people here to tell you legendary stories of saving a fellow PC. In spite of everyone's effort, death can happen at this level and later.

Oh, by the way, Slow apart, all the spells you are talking about are indeed great but 1) are not friendly at all 2) are cast by people who are much easier to hurt than a Cleric, thus easier to break from concentration.

Also you forget about Glyph of Warding and Magic Circle (again, who cares about others having them? You're talking about "Cleric's spell list for combat": besides the previous point, not everybody will have a Wizard or Bard in his party) and Bestow Curse (one of the best 10 debuffs, in addition to being potentially non-concentration, it's the only one to make all the great debuffs that allow save every round -meaning most of them- stick reliably over rounds).

I won't pursue every level because it's frankly boring.
I'll just note you seem not familiar with Raise Dead (even Revivify is not always enough, and being one character less can end in TPK when you don't have time to go back and buy help), Blade Barrier (extremely large range, damage, difficult terrain and cover, like a mix between Plant Growth and Spike Growth), Conjure Celestial (one more member o/), Symbol (versatile and deadly, of course you have to succeed in making an ambush).

As for other points of comparison...
1. Cantrips: a single dip in Druid provides you pretty decent attack cantrips. If you really fancy weapon cantrips, nothing that a simple Magic Initiate feat can't resolve.

2. Bonus spells and channel divinities: make the maths, a Tempest Cleric using maximized Shatter will deal as much as a Wizard using Fireball. A Death Cleric will trump a Wizard any day in sustained damage over rounds thanks to the built-in "twin cantrip" effect.
A Light Cleric will get more from a Flaming Sphere because he has better AC to less hits risking concentration. Etc etc...

3. Best buffs: Foresight: non-concentration, party-wide... But a 9th level spell. You want lower? Circle of Power: advantage on all saves and resistance for all party within 30 feet. You will never make better than that really. And only Bard can access it early. ;)

4. Role: of course overall the Wizard has better, and more various, spell selection than a Cleric. You could say that of any class in fact, Cleric being the most focused on a few specific areas (and if you want to go that way, Druid is better than Wizard: you have all spells available, no investment nor luck required). But that's exactly his strength: Bard's debuff could end early or don't stick in the first place, Druid or Warlock could fail the positioning of a spell and annoy his friends, Wizard could have concentration broken early because of low AC and HP...
Cleric's spells are 100% ally-friendly, predictable and generally reliable.

In summary, you're complaining that...
1) "Cleric is not like a Wizard". Duh! Congrats genius, century discovery here! XD
2) "Cleric is shoe-horned to 3-4 spells in combat for most of career": sorry mate, the reality is something else, something harsh: you just don't know how to play the class. Especially when there is so much synergy between several Cleric spells and their Domain features/bonus spells.
No big deal though, it's probably just because it's not your kind of thing, and you have 11 others that you may enjoy instead.
3) "Cleric is far too much heal/protection oriented, and it's useless in combat": sorry again, reality is different, and it's harsher: your tactical awareness is severely lacking.
To put it simply, whenever a heal ensures the target can use his next turn being on the offensive, then it was a very valuable action. Especially when, as you stress yourself, those allies often have a much higher potential in direct damage than the Cleric.
Same whenever that heal equals avoiding a definitive death, which makes everything following magnitudes more harder (in addition to putting a great psychological pressure).
Whenever you use a buff that makes allies be more reliable in what they do, or allowing them to do it for a longer time, it was a very valuable use of a slot.

That Cleric deals most of its damage by procuration is not a problem. Except for one's taste, but that is in essence a YMMV thing. ;)

[Tetrasodium]

Now don't get, me wrong. I think the OP's post is off base in a lot of areas and over/undervalues other stuff, but that doesn't mean that I don'tr think there is a reason the OP felt like there was a problem with the cleric spell list. I think that problem is because of what happens when a cleric faces things with good saves that are resistant or immune to necrotic damage (ie a lot of intelligent undead that can make up much of a campaign). If they happen to shift evil so spirit guardians does necrotic it gets doubly painful


Most clerics have either a secondary cantrip or a decent enough attack that this is not necessary, especially with the extra d8 of melee damage they get each round.

"secondary cantrip"... would that be sacred flame (dex save), toll the dead (wis save), or word of radiance (pbaoe con save)? The fact that you made that stunning suggestion to using a different cleric cantrip (which are all save for none) when faced with good saves during fights that don't justify expending a spell slot then followed it up by suggesting that a wis build caster cleric make melee attacks or perhaps burn a spell slot not justified in order to help out in a situation that doesn't justify a spell slot is especially telling



Warlock is a class that's built around Eldritch Blast. And I'm pretty sure there are less monsters in the game immune to both radiant and necrotic versus fire/cold/necrotic/whatever else damage type you're suggesting of classes that have different cantrip damage types. Another point I'd make is that if a creature is immune to both Radiant and Necrotic damage, you probably shouldn't be attacking it. Another point is that if you're fighting against something immune to both Radiant and Necrotic, most full casters won't be using their Action on casting cantrips, but will be using their Action on casting leveled spells (as it's probably a higher level encounter) or taking the Dodge/Disengage/Dash Action.

Cleric cantrips are a bit meh because they require a save. There is a benefit to this though, in that offensive Cleric cantrips are just as useful when you're completely surrounded by enemies as if you're at maximum range, as you won't suffer disadvantage on your ranged attack roll as you don't have an attack roll to make. Being able to deal both radiant and necrotic damage with my Cleric cantrips makes me confident in the damage types I have available to me as well.

And in response to EvilAnagram, Clerics don't have to use a melee weapon to trigger this bonus damage. They can use a Light Crossbow (if not proficient with martial weapons) or a Longbow (if proficient with martial weapons) to pop off ok damage with the Divine Strike from range.

I'm sure there are more monsters immune to any of those 5 or so damage types than immune to both necrotic and radiant, but there are an awful lot immune to one of those & many of them have reasonably decent saves against the saves of their other cantrips. warlocks being built around eldritch blast is true, & I don't dispute it... merely point out that they have EB, chill touch, poison spray, create bonfire, frostbite, infestation, magic stone, thunderclap to give them range spell attack along with multiple saves & a good selection of damage types (practically nothing is force immune too).

Since people have suggested the arcana cleric (one of 10 cleric archtypes with potent spellcasting for +wis mod to cleric cantrips) as the option for a pure wis focused caster cleric... it becopmes relevant to point out that the celestial warlock/divine soul both get cure wounds & a few very nice cleric spells among other stuff while the hexblade can take thirsting blade & hex warrior to use charisma with 1 handed martial weapons plus extra attack ... so it's not like giving clerics a nonsave cantrip would upset anything.

[JNAProductions]

Just gonna say, I've played Clerics. I've never felt like I was outshone by other party members. In addition, there's a cleric in my current IRL party. He feels likewise.

[stoutstien]

I do believe there needs to be a cleric only attack cantrip that does radiant damage maybe a booming blade clone

[Blood of Gaea]

I do believe there needs to be a cleric only attack cantrip that does radiant damage maybe a booming blade clone
While I don't disagree that it could be cool, I feel that part of the balance of having a blade cantrip on a Cleric is that you need to invest something to get it.

That said, here's a rough homebrew of what a Cleric blade cantrip might look like.

Holy Rebuke
Evocation cantrip

Casting time: 1 action
Range: 5 feet
Components: V, M (a weapon)
Duration: 1 round

As part of the action used to cast this spell, you must make a melee attack with a weapon against one creature within the spell's range, otherwise the spell fails. On a hit, the target suffers the attack's normal effects, and the wound glows with divine energy until the start of your next turn. If the target hits with an attack it immediately takes 1d6 divine damage, and the spell ends.
This spell's damage increases when you reach higher levels. At 5th level, the melee attack deals an extra 1d6 divine damage to the target, and the damage the target takes for on a successful attack increases to 2d6. Both damage rolls increases by 1d6 at 11th and 17th level.

[Unoriginal]

Did people watch Crawford's video?

[sithlordnergal]

You forgot about Inflict Wounds on the cleric's 1st level spell list. 3d10 is pretty good for a 1st level spell, it is an attack roll so you can crit, and it is necrotic damage which is rarely resisted.

Sure the scaling isn't amazing at just 1d10 per spell level, but it isn't anything to laugh at.

[Tetrasodium]

You forgot about Inflict Wounds on the cleric's 1st level spell list. 3d10 is pretty good for a 1st level spell, it is an attack roll so you can crit, and it is necrotic damage which is rarely resisted.

Sure the scaling isn't amazing at just 1d10 per spell level, but it isn't anything to laugh at.

the fact that the OP forgot to mention spells like that, guiding bolt, etc is why I think the root cause for him thinking there is a problem is because there is no cleric cantrips that have a spell attack roll as opposed to a save.

[MeeposFire]

While I don't disagree that it could be cool, I feel that part of the balance of having a blade cantrip on a Cleric is that you need to invest something to get it.

That said, here's a rough homebrew of what a Cleric blade cantrip might look like.

Holy Rebuke
Evocation cantrip

Casting time: 1 action
Range: 5 feet
Components: V, M (a weapon)
Duration: 1 round

As part of the action used to cast this spell, you must make a melee attack with a weapon against one creature within the spell's range, otherwise the spell fails. On a hit, the target suffers the attack's normal effects, and the wound glows with divine energy until the start of your next turn. If the target hits with an attack it immediately takes 1d6 divine damage, and the spell ends.
This spell's damage increases when you reach higher levels. At 5th level, the melee attack deals an extra 1d6 divine damage to the target, and the damage the target takes for on a successful attack increases to 2d6. Both damage rolls increases by 1d6 at 11th and 17th level.

Personally the way I see it is that the difference between cleric and wizard is that cleric magic tended to cure and I think that is the way to go. Have a weapon attack cantrip that deals the standard extra damage dice with radiant damage and have a secondary effect that gives some value of THP to allies or something similar.

Right idea though I would say that your idea is in many ways stronger than booming blade since booming blade is harder to trigger and is much less likely on many targets to ruin their turn considering that most enemies use attack roles but many enemies do not need to move to attack if the target is already in melee range in many cases.

[Blood of Gaea]

Personally the way I see it is that the difference between cleric and wizard is that cleric magic tended to cure and I think that is the way to go. Have a weapon attack cantrip that deals the standard extra damage dice with radiant damage and have a secondary effect that gives some value of THP to allies or something similar.

Right idea though I would say that your idea is in many ways stronger than booming blade since booming blade is harder to trigger and is much less likely on many targets to ruin their turn considering that most enemies use attack roles but many enemies do not need to move to attack if the target is already in melee range in many cases.
The biggest thing is that the idea was just tossed together quickly without too much thought. I lowered the damage die by one to attempt to make up for the higher chance of it proccing. Perhaps it might be better if the rider damage was dropped to d4 dice, but I really didn't want to mess with the spell too much.

Another possibility for a blade cantrip that gives THP as you suggested:


Aegis Blade
Abjuration cantrip

Casting time: 1 action
Range: 5 feet
Components: V, M (a weapon)
Duration: 1 round

As part of the action used to cast this spell, you must make a melee attack with a weapon against one creature within the spell's range, otherwise, the spell fails. On a hit, an ally within 5 feet of you gains 1d6 temporary hit points, any remaining temporary hitpoints from this spell are lost at the end of your next turn.
The temporary hitpoints gained increase when you reach higher levels. At 5th level gain 1d8, at 11th level gain 1d10, and at 17th gain 1d12.

[MaxWilson]

Another possibility for a blade cantrip that gives THP as you suggested:*snip* On a hit, an ally within 5 feet of you gains 1d6 temporary hit points, any remaining temporary hitpoints from this spell are lost at the end of your next turn.

The flavor of this spell is incredibly strange. Can you tell me, in non-game jargon terms, what this spell is actually physically doing in the game world?

[Blood of Gaea]

The flavor of this spell is incredibly strange. Can you tell me, in non-game jargon terms, what this spell is actually physically doing in the game world?
You're making an attack and giving a short-lived "aegis" shield, which mechanically is given as THP.

I suppose I could have added in a short sentence for the visual along the lines of "While the target has these temporary hit points, they glow faintly with divine light and provide dim light in a 5-foot radius.".

[strangebloke]

Tl;dr: clerics are crap at being wizards.

No duh.

They get support oriented spells, medium armor, a bucket of subclass features, and they have a niche no one else fills as well: Resurrection.

An average cleric will have much more AC and more HP than the wizard, even if he rolls worse stats. Their unique spells are incredibly efficient and they know a ton of spells. Their subclasses grant things like expertise, heavy armor proficiency, etc etc.

Their power lies mostly in their spells, but unlike wizards they can actually take a hit if they have to, and even if they're out of spells they still have a few tricks.

[Merudo]

You forgot about Inflict Wounds on the cleric's 1st level spell list. 3d10 is pretty good for a 1st level spell, it is an attack roll so you can crit, and it is necrotic damage which is rarely resisted.

Sure the scaling isn't amazing at just 1d10 per spell level, but it isn't anything to laugh at.

3d10 is 16.5 damage on average, and melee. Guided Bolt is 14, long range, and inflict disadvantage on the next attack roll against the target. Guided Bolt is a better choice.


the fact that the OP forgot to mention spells like that, guiding bolt, etc

I did mention Guiding bolt...


Tl;dr: clerics are crap at being wizards.

No duh.

They get support oriented spells,



People keep saying that, but Wizards get as many support oriented spells. Mage Armor, Darkvision, Magic Weapon, Haste, Greater Invisibility, Foresight, etc. The Wizard is as support oriented as the Cleric is, if not more.



An average cleric will have much more AC [...] than the wizard


With the shield spell, a Wizard can get excellent AC.

[MaxWilson]

You're making an attack and giving a short-lived "aegis" shield, which mechanically is given as THP.

So it's like a shield that also attacks? Why does it have to hit in order to act as a shield? Is THP really the best representation for a shield? (It offers no protection to a warlock with Armor of Agathys, for instance, or to a battlerager.)


An average cleric will have much more AC and more HP than the wizard, even if he rolls worse stats. Their unique spells are incredibly efficient and they know a ton of spells. Their subclasses grant things like expertise, heavy armor proficiency, etc etc.

People on this thread talk like wizards are fragile, but in 5E it's trivial to make sure a multiclassed wizard has AC 21 (+5 from shield) because armor proficiency is such a front-loaded class feature. Wizards have a lot of great defensive spells too (Blur, Mirror Image, Blink, Greater Invisibility) but they're mostly superfluous for personal defense--it's generally better to focus on crowd control spells like Evard's Black Tentacles that help the whole party and not just the wizard. A Fighter 1/Wizard X or anything like it (Cleric 1/Wizard X, Rogue 2/Bladesinger X) is one of the best tanks in the game.

[Ninevehn]

With the shield spell, a Wizard can get excellent AC.

If they have a reaction and either a spell slot or one of their two free cast spells at higher levels. With investment of resources and opportunity cost, Wizards can achieve most of what a Cleric gets for free. Even with Shield, the Cleric gets the use of their reaction, better ability to take advantage of magic shields and magic armor and they have the ability to buff their AC with spell slots as well. And Shield is vulnerable to Counter Magic, Dispel Magic and Anti-magic Field, as well as anything that prevents reactions.

The average Cleric will have much higher AC than the average wizard, and his AC is more reliable to boot.

[CantigThimble]

People keep saying that, but Wizards get as many support oriented spells. Mage Armor, Darkvision, Magic Weapon, Haste, Greater Invisibility, Foresight, etc. The Wizard is as support oriented as the Cleric is, if not more.

Out of that list, only haste really holds a candle to Bless in terms of pure spell slot efficiency and there's just no substitute for healing. Healing word is the most powerful buff spell in the game. (Or rather, it removes the second worst status ailment in the game)




With the shield spell, a Wizard can get excellent AC.

For one round, yes. But a cleric can have 5 higher AC all the time without spending spell slots. It's the difference between needing to rely on your frontliners to stay alive and being the frontliner that keeps everyone else alive.

Seriously, try playing a cleric sometime. They're actually really good at what they do. It's just that what they do is pretty different from being a wizard or a lore bard.

[Blood of Gaea]

So it's like a shield that also attacks? Why does it have to hit in order to act as a shield? Is THP really the best representation for a shield? (It offers no protection to a warlock with Armor of Agathys, for instance, or to a battlerager.)
Becuase it's a blade cantrip that grants THP, as the comment that caused me to make the spell suggested.

[Ninevehn]

It's worth keeping in mind that while a Wizard can close the AC gap by multiclassing Fighter, the spell gap lessens considerably when the Cleric spends nearly half the campaign up a spell level, and generally with an extra spell slot as well.

If you go Cleric to maintain spell progression, you don't get AC 21. At that point, might as well let the Cleric dip Wizard for Shield, Grease and Find Familiar, etc.

[stoutstien]

I feel Toll the dead really should cleric only

[Blood of Gaea]

I feel Toll the dead really should cleric only
Why? Wizards definitely do necromancy stuff.

I guess you could make an argument for Warlocks not getting it, but Eldritch Blast is still better for them anyways.

[stoutstien]

No real reason just felt more cleric-ish. Clerics did get kinda short changed in xant. Giving them the earth spells would be in line. Earth tremor, erupting earth, bones of earth too much?

[Chugger]

Chugger, I just want to call your attention to the fact that, out of all the nice things you found to say about clerics, only about three lines were actually in praise of anything on the cleric spell list. IMO that's telling.

This thought is silly to me. Isolating the "cleric only" spell list and ignoring their COMPLETE domain by domain spell list ... okay, then - if you wanna play that way. Fine. Do it. I'm not joining you because ... yeah, it's silly. Gotta look at the whole package. Cleric spell list plus the domain spells plus abilities and channels - it all adds up to something pretty good. Gawd amighty - the absurdity of some of these posts...(and sure if you wanna block out all the other stuff and just look at a limited block of spells, you can judge all you want - and I will not care).

[Citan]

People keep saying that, but Wizards get as many support oriented spells. Mage Armor, Darkvision, Magic Weapon, Haste, Greater Invisibility, Foresight, etc. The Wizard is as support oriented as the Cleric is, if not more.

With the shield spell, a Wizard can get excellent AC.
Well...
- Mage Armor: great to help a fellow Monk at low level, or maybe a Bard with decent Dex, but use-cases as a party buff is usually limited. It's indeed good for self though: so 1 spell known, 1 spell prepared, and 1*1st slot used at least for Wizard himself.
- Darkvision: same idea, mainly because only few races don't get darkvision built-in. But you're right, it's great when it happens. so 1 spell known, 1 spell prepared, 1*2nd level slot used.
- Magic Weapon/Haste/Greater Invisibility: all use concentration, confer the point about Wizards having overall crappy concentration unless/until/while they get the related Resilient feat or spend slots on buffing their defense (unless you're using Greater Invisibility on yourself). I'll agree that Haste and Greater Invisibility are great spells to have in mostly any situation though, so many players would choose to learn and keep them prepared in case of. Magic Weapon is nice to have, but more niche imo.
So 3 spell known, 2 spell prepared.

- Shield is as great as your base AC is: for a standard Wizard, you can expect a 15 or 16 AC depending on whether you put a second 16 in DEX or CON. So AC 20 or 21 while Shield lasts, which is a round.
Unless you went full tank for some reason, or just failed to position properly, you should usually sustain no more than 1 or 2 attacks in any given round. So you're spending a 1st level slot for much higher chance, but no certitude, to avoid one or two attacks. Is it great? Sure. Is it worth having 19-20 AC without any investment (armor and shield)? Certainly not.
Still, it's indeed in the basic set of spells to have for most Wizards.
1 spell known, 1 spell prepared, at the very least 2*1st level slots used.

Same with Mirror Image: it's a decent boost to your AC, far more worthy than Shield for the relative cost, but still no more than safeguard against unanticipated attack, it will never make you a tank unless you build around it specifically. And it burns a turn to create.
Still, it's good to keep for toughest fights.
1 spell known, 1 spell prepared.

Same with Absorb Elements: great way to reduce a potentially deadly AOE/effect in a manageable "bad surprise". Which is a big win by any account: a Wizard is much more useful alive than dead after all.
1 spell known, 1 spell prepared.

So.
We were talking about a lvl 7 Wizard apparently, since Greater Invisibility.
Such a Wizard has learned 6+2*6 spells naturally, so he knows 18 spells.
Of these 18 spells, 2 (Mage Armor, Shield) just allow him to reach Cleric's AC level a few rounds per day.

Because you also have quite less HP overall, you'll have to rely on Absorb Elements and Mirror Image to survive the toughest fights. That's 2 more.
So on the 18 spell known, you already have 4 basically engraved into stone (known and prepared) just to help the Wizard to not become a liability that has to be shielded/healed back to life regularly.

If you happen to be in a party with humans (which happens fairly regularly), 1 more will be dedicated to helping them.

Also, Haste and Greater Invisibility are hard to pass as buffs if you want to take on that role and your party counts on it.
So your actual freedom to learn spells to git your taste is 18-7 = 11 spells.
And your actual freedom to prepare spells is (7+4) - (7) = 4.

Actually, if you REALLY want to be the party caretaker, freedom is close to 0: you'd have to count at the very least Rope Trick and Leomund's Tiny Hut which you need to have both learned and prepared too. And Phantasmal Force is too reliable of a single-target control spell to be forgotten either: congrats, you have 1 spell you can learn and prepare "freely".

Everything beyond is DM providing you extra spells -which he certainly should if he wants to be a decent DM, spells are for Wizard what magic equipment is for martial, the expected reward. But you have no guarantee he'll do it too, and even then he has no moral obligation to comply with your wish and give you the spells you're looking for: random loot tables are a thing.

Compare with Cleric: at level 7, he "knows" 62 spells from which he can prepare 11, and he also have 6 more spells always prepared.
He does not need anything himself specifically. Out of all his "buff/heals", the "mandatory" ones would probably be Bless, Guiding Bolt, Healing Words, Spiritual Weapon, Aid, Spirit Guardians. Possibly Revivify in harsh campaigns.

Hey, it means a Cleric that wants to shine at his buffer role has 7 "fixed spells" to prepare too.
So, same? Not exactly, or rather not all all...

1. Cleric has several times more spells to choose from to fit any adventuring day: there is no big opportunity cost in learning spells that will make the day sometimes, but are too niche otherwise (like Magic Circle or Protection spells or Locate spells). When you know they will be useful, prepare them, then swap out on the later day. Wizard can indeed prepare them, but he has to learn them: there lies the big problem: when you get lever 3, would you really learn Locate Object or even Levitate when you already have to choose between Web, Flaming Sphere, Dragon Breath, Dust Devil etc? Especially since you'll probably want Mirror Image.
When you get level 5, would you really consider Magic Circle or Major Image when there is already Counterspell to learn, and then tearing choices to make between Haste, Slow, Fly, Fireball, Fear, Hypnotic Pattern etc?
Same holds true every level.

2 Cleric has flat-out more options to choose from in any given fight, whether you include the "fixed spells" or not...
- partially in thanks to the bonus spells (often bringing spells that would be otherwise unavailable).
- mostly because all those are directly affecting and benefiting the party.

3. Cleric does not have to use resources just to stay alive (well, as much as a Wizard anyways), so 100% of his resources are available to the party every day...
With that said, to the defense of Wizard, they get Arcane Recovery so at higher levels it's really not a big deal anymore to spare some 1st and 2nd level slots on self-defense, it evens out. And for those lucky guys that manage to get lvl 18, Wizard finally gets even or better AC if he chooses Shield as the free 1st level spell.

4. And let's not forget that, contrarily to Wizard which archetypes mostly enhance a category of spells (barring Abjurer with self-ward, Bladesinger for melee and AC and Diviner which works with any spell), Cleric have benefits that are completely different and independants from spells, mainly (but not only) in the form of Channel Divinities, some of which are largely worth named spells.

[Merudo]

So.
We were talking about a lvl 7 Wizard apparently, since Greater Invisibility.
Such a Wizard has learned 6+2*6 spells naturally, so he knows 18 spells.

That's completely insane. A Wizard is going to know tons of spells at that level, *far* more than the 18 listed.

As an example, I quickly looked through the Curse of Strahd campaign, and I counted no less than 9 spellbooks potentially available to players, as well as a library contained every single spell in the PHB. That's on top of spell scrolls available through the campaign.

In the case where there are 2 Wizards in the party (not unreasonable given how powerful the class is), you'll bet they will coordinate and pick different spells each level, and share the spells between the two of them.

I think it's fair to assume the Wizard knows about 40ish spells at level 7, very close to the Cleric's 62.

In any case, to be effective in combat, the level 7 Wizard only need to know a dozen or so of spells. All other options can be utility, or occasionally helpful combat spells. A decent combat spelllist could be:

- Shield
- Absorb Elements
- Mage Armor
- Find Familiar
- Magic Missile
- Mirror Image
- Web
- Fireball
- Hypnotic Pattern or Fear
- Slow
- Haste
- Counterspell
- Greater Invisibility

Except for level 1 spells and arguably Spirit Guardians, none of the Cleric combat spells compare in raw power, versatility and ability to change the battlefield to what these Wizard spells provide.

[Citan]

T1. hat's completely insane. A Wizard is going to know tons of spells at that level, *far* more than the 18 listed.

As an example, I quickly looked through the Curse of Strahd module, and I counted no less than 9 spellbooks potentially available to players, as well as a library contained every single spell in the PHB. That's on top of spell scrolls available through the campaign.

2. In the case where there are 2 Wizards in the party (not unreasonable given how powerful the class is), you'll bet they will coordinate and pick different spells each level, and share the spells between the two of them.

3. In any case, to be effective in combat, the level 7 Wizard only need to know a dozen or so of spells. All other options can be utility, or occasionally helpful combat spells. A decent combat spelllist could be:

- Shield
- Absorb Elements
- Mage Armor
- Find Familiar
- Magic Missile
- Mirror Image
- Web
- Fireball
- Hypnotic Pattern or Fear
- Slow
- Haste
- Counterspell
- Greater Invisibility
1. This is a very audacious assumption you make here: not everyone follows official campaign, nor will everyone playing these actually get hands onto those spellbooks, unless they are really put in plain sight (don't know the campaigns so cannot tell how hard it actually is).

2. This is an even more audacious assumption you make here, that fails the reality check hard: it's very rare for parties to get more than 3 or 4 players, and in that kind of group each usually plays a distinct class for many various reasons: just to cover all bases skill-wise or role-wise, or avoiding any risk of tip-toe (even though this is actually hard to pull unless two players would pick same class, same archetype and for a caster same spells), or just for roleplay reasons, or just because that way all players can share a broader array of experiences (among other things, it may be a nice way for someone to "ghost-test" a class by seeing how it's played so he can assess if it's really a class (s)he could enjoy.
I'm very confident in this statement, you can organize a survey here if you want to check by yourself. ^^

3. Which falls back on what I stressed earlier: on that example list, you have already four that are dedicated to your own survival, one that is just, like, "who would ever not take it?" (Fireball), one that is extremely close to that previous statement (Counterspell). So you have only few more to choose among many great spells, but spells that can, you know, actually fail or be hard to pull off without collateral damage, or just compete over concentration. Which does not make them lesser though, I love those.

And I never said a Wizard (or anyone really) needed to have lots of options to be effective in combat, you yourself and alone did this with your "analysis" of Cleric.

But the point is: as a Wizard, you may have many kind of spells to choose from when you select what to learn, in actual play, once you take out the "basics", you have a fairly limited array of options until/unless you happen to be in a situation that provides good chance of learning extra spells...
Which helps with the "learning" problem but not the "preparing" problem.

It's not a problem either, except for you as it seems: many classes revolve around doing mostly the same handful of things every encounter and they are very powerful still (most martial archetypes, Sorcerer, Paladin, a good chunk of Moon Druids etc). This makes them predictable, which is in general good for party because it makes teamworking easier.

Wizard is just not at all the "know-it-all one-spell-for-all powerhouse" that you try to present it as. That is actually a card only Druid could pull off, and even that would be very reducive since there are quite a few great spells they never can get. :)

You just don't *like* Cleric because Cleric's awesomeness tend to be more subtle and indirect than for other classes. That's all there is to say.

[Unoriginal]

CoS having so many spellbooks and scrolls is pretty much an exception.

In ToA, you can get a decent bunch of different scrolls, but maybe ~4 spellbooks at best, if you really search for them. And they're not going to contain a lot of spells. There's only one that's explicitly available, in any case.

I don't think there is any notable ammount of scrolls or spellbooks in RoT or SKT, aside maybe for a couple belonging to bosses.

In OotA, you straight up have your own spellbook confiscated early on and could have to do most of the first part of the adventure without it, and replacing it is not easy.

So... Seems like you're pretty biased against Clerics for no reason.

[PhoenixPhyre]

So... Seems like you're pretty biased against Clerics for no reason.

Agreed. The whole premise of this thread is silly anyway--it's like using Attempts on Goal as your only metric in soccer and claiming that the goalie is worthless because he doesn't try to kick it into the goal.

There are a couple different "roles" (non-mutually-exclusive) that a character might play in combat:

* Melee Damage
* Ranged Damage
* Melee Control (grappling, "tanking", etc)
* Ranged control (debuffing enemies, difficult terrain, etc)
* Offensive support (buffing allies so they deal more damage)
* Defensive support (buffing allies so they take less damage or mitigating status effects)

Personal survival is a cross-cutting concern that everyone has to worry about.

Of these, wizards can (depending on spells known) excel at ranged damage (blasting), ranged control, and offensive support. Most of their defensive support capabilities are really only useful for themselves, and they have to put resources (spells known/prepared and spell slots) into their own survival. Versatility is constrained by outside factors (can't guarantee you'll get spell-books that have things you want in them).

Clerics are the kings of defensive support, with melee damage as a side-line for some domains and ranged damage a side-line for others. Most of their offensive abilities also provide some form of support (guiding bolt, spirit guardians). They tend to have to put resources (spells prepared, channel divinity) into dealing decent amount of damage but get survivability for free. Clerics are also versatile in a way that bards aren't.

Lore bards can be built in a bunch of different ways and can take on most of those roles. Their downside is that they can't switch hit in the same build. They also have issues with consistent damage unless they dip warlock or otherwise get access to something more reliable.

Druids are kings of control with a secondary in defensive support. They can deal damage, but aren't as good at it as others. They're also spotty at offensive support (with polymorph as their standout there). Versatile like clerics.

So each of those four classes does something useful but in a different way than the others.

[Aaron Underhand]

Well...
Actually, if you REALLY want to be the party caretaker, freedom is close to 0: you'd have to count at the very least Rope Trick and Leomund's Tiny Hut which you need to have both learned and prepared too.



Great analysis, but I have to take exception to this sentence

Leomund's Tiny Hut is fantastic, but it's also a ritual (as is Find Familiar mentioned later on in the thread). Forgetting that a wizard does not have to prepare rituals seriously undersells the wizard class - this feature in my mind easily balances channel divinity for the cleric.

[strangebloke]

Great analysis, but I have to take exception to this sentence

Leomund's Tiny Hut is fantastic, but it's also a ritual (as is Find Familiar mentioned later on in the thread). Forgetting that a wizard does not have to prepare rituals seriously undersells the wizard class - this feature in my mind easily balances channel divinity for the cleric.

You have to know and prepare a spell in order to cast it as a ritual

[PhoenixPhyre]

You have to know and prepare a spell in order to cast it as a ritual

Wizards just have to have it in the book (so know, not prepare). Clerics and druids have to prepare it.

[Citan]

Great analysis, but I have to take exception to this sentence

Leomund's Tiny Hut is fantastic, but it's also a ritual (as is Find Familiar mentioned later on in the thread). Forgetting that a wizard does not have to prepare rituals seriously undersells the wizard class - this feature in my mind easily balances channel divinity for the cleric.
Thanks for the correction, I wasn't sure if I was mixing with Druid. Should have double-checked. :)
So you "only" have to learn it, which is indeed much better (just always keep copies of your spellbook obviously, accidents can happen so easily XD)

[MaxWilson]

This thought is silly to me. Isolating the "cleric only" spell list and ignoring their COMPLETE domain by domain spell list ... okay, then - if you wanna play that way. Fine. Do it. I'm not joining you because ...

...Because it is literally the thread topic?

[PhoenixPhyre]

...Because it is literally the thread topic?

Doesn't mean it's not a silly topic. If you choose a biased metric, you'll get worthless results.

[JNAProductions]

...Because it is literally the thread topic?

But it doesn't make much sense as a judgement on the class as a whole. It's fine to say "The Cleric spell list is weaker in these areas than the other spell lists," but you cannot then say "This means the Cleric is weaker than those other classes," unless you judge the class as a whole.

[Tetrasodium]

So.
We were talking about a lvl 7 Wizard apparently, since Greater Invisibility.
Such a Wizard has learned 6+2*6 spells naturally, so he knows 18 spells.
Of these 18 spells, 2 (Mage Armor, Shield) just allow him to reach Cleric's AC level a few rounds per day.

Because you also have quite less HP overall, you'll have to rely on Absorb Elements and Mirror Image to survive the toughest fights. That's 2 more.
as others have pointed out, the 18 spells known at level 7 is pretty low if the wizard is making any attempt at all to buy/find scrolls spellbooks.
If you are playing in AL that indeed limits what you can find/buy, but AL explicitly allows a wizard player to copy the spellbook of another wizard player who is himself copying the other wizard's spellbook.

With that said, someone suggested arcana cleric earlier & other cleric archtypes have been noted at various points without people defending the class differences jumping all over it so.... bladesinger gets light armor & a melee weapon of choice along with the ability to spend a bonus action to gain the following for one minute at level 2
You gain a bonus to your AC equal to your Intelligence modifier (minimum of+1). studded leather is 12+dex, with even a modest dex it should have no trouble compating to medium or even heavy armors.
Your walking speed increases by 10 feet.
You have advantage on Dexterity (Acrobatics) checks .
You gain a bonus to any Constitution saving throw
you make to maintain your concentration on a spell. The bonus equals your Intelligence modifier
(minimum of +l).
abjuration wizard gets 2x int mod+wiz level temp hp when they cast an abjuration spell (like shield or absorb elements among others)
conjuration gets benign transportation at 6, echantment gets instinctive charm at 6.

Things start falling apart when you bring in sorcerer & warlock, both of which have access to cure wounds & the like via archtype, a excellent
selection of wizard spells, natural armor bonuses+extra hp, free mage armor casting/medium armor proficiency+use charisma for melee weapon attacks+extra attack.


There is really no reason for cleric to not have at least one spell attack cantrip for wis based clerics & I can see justification for the green flame/booming blade type melee attack type cantrip mentioned earlier for strength/dex based clerics.


Even though I think the OP is wrong in some areas, it's not a simple matter of cleric vrs wizard because you have sorcerers & the "charisma can anything" warlocks after xge

[Kenny Snoggins]

I stole Spiritual Weapon as one of my level 6 bard secrets, and Spirit Guardians as the other. They really jack up your action economy as a bard-- Spiritual Weapon not being concentration is really bonkers. I'm sure the only reason that it isn't is because it is essentially a class feature of Clerics, but with magical secrets and multiclassing, it can easily be abused.

Overall the cleric class stands out because it's quite easy for them to meaningfully affect the game with magic in every possible aspect of their turn.

Movement? Adjust who is getting hit with spirit guardians. Walking up to a new group is 3D8 for each guy under the bubble on a failed save.
Action? Obvious. Melee attack with Divine Strike, Cantrips, whatever you want.
Bonus Action? Spiritual Weapon, of course.
Reaction? Several sub-class features key off the reaction.

The channel divinities tend to make a big splash too. I play against tons of undead and the cleric can help prevent the DM from getting the crit factory going with his human wave attacks much more efficiently than I can with my 3 / SR cutting words.

I find they have some out of combat utility as well (well, I only play AL, so once every 10 sessions or so that there is a non-combat encounter). As a somewhat evil bard, I like having the cleric around more than the wizard in social encounters because it gives a veneer of respectability when otherwise clues about my alignment might give me a problem in a social encounter.

[MaxWilson]

But it doesn't make much sense as a judgement on the class as a whole. It's fine to say "The Cleric spell list is weaker in these areas than the other spell lists," but you cannot then say "This means the Cleric is weaker than those other classes," unless you judge the class as a whole.

As I understand it, this thread is about the part in bold and not the part that is underlined. I realize that the OP has a sentence or two passing judgment on the cleric as a whole, but the thread title and the bulk of the OP are all about the spell list. As such, it seems kind of silly for people to be coming to thread specifically to complain about other people overlooking other merits of the cleric class, whether it is heavy armor proficiency or divinations (not mentioned so far in this thread, AFAIK, but still one of the cleric's strengths) or domain spells stolen from other class lists or Channel Divinity uses...

Those things might mitigate the mediocrity of the cleric spell list, but I think the basic point still stands up to scrutiny: the cleric spell list is a pretty mediocre, unexciting list, especially when it comes to 6th-9th level spells. Wizards, druids, bards, and even warlocks have some fairly exciting high-level spells, but the cleric... Planar Ally and Mass Heal are about as good as it gets, and Mass Heal is fundamentally reactive, not proactive, and prone to wasting[1], while Planar Ally is basically just a limited form of Plane Shift, with all the heavy lifting being done in roleplayed negotiations.

It's not a horrible spell list, but IMO it is the weakest 6th-9th spell list in the PHB and the one I'd be most tempted to multiclass out of. Losing True Polymorph, Foresight, or Wish hurts. Losing Gate/Astral Projection/Mass Heal/True Resurrection? Not so painful.

[1] If the enemy focus-fires one PC down to near death, and you Mass Heal to bring him back up to full... you waste most of that 700 HP buffer, and now when a second PC gets brought down to near death you don't have another Mass Heal on hand. If you try to use Mass Heal after combat instead, so you can use it efficiently, it winds up in all probability not really being better than a 5th level Healing Spirit or a couple of Extended Auras of Vitality.

[PhoenixPhyre]

As I understand it, this thread is about the part in bold and not the part that is underlined.

But my complaint is that comparing one without comparing the other is like comparing the Attempts on Goal numbers for goalies to forwards in a soccer game. It's fundamentally flawed. You can do lots of different kinds of analysis. Some are useful, some are not. Calculating a number with units in kelvin^2 per light centimeter could be meaningful, but you're going to have to justify it. And no attempt has been made to justify it. This was (originally) all about damage spells, especially cantrips. But...that's pretty meaningless all by itself.

[MaxWilson]

But my complaint is that comparing one without comparing the other is like comparing the Attempts on Goal numbers for goalies to forwards in a soccer game. It's fundamentally flawed. You can do lots of different kinds of analysis. Some are useful, some are not. Calculating a number with units in kelvin^2 per light centimeter could be meaningful, but you're going to have to justify it. And no attempt has been made to justify it. This was (originally) all about damage spells, especially cantrips. But...that's pretty meaningless all by itself.

I think this thread is quite a silly place to voice that complaint. You're just thread-jacking.

[ZorroGames]

I think this thread is quite a silly place to voice that complaint. You're just thread-jacking.

My two centavos - ignore the OP.

[MaxWilson]

My two centavos - ignore the OP.

The fact that no one seems willing to speak up and defend the cleric spell list is an answer in and of itself. They just try to change the subject to other cleric features.

[EvilAnagram]

The fact that no one seems willing to speak up and defend the cleric spell list is an answer in and of itself. They just try to change the subject to other cleric features.

Multiple people have defended it, but you keep ignoring them.

[ZorroGames]

I repeat. Ignore OP who is obstinately trolling or refusing to accept the just criticism that he is cherry picking and expanding his statement in cherry picked data whether or not if that single datum has merit in and of itself.

[visitor]

As I understand it, this thread is about the part in bold and not the part that is underlined. I realize that the OP has a sentence or two passing judgment on the cleric as a whole, but the thread title and the bulk of the OP are all about the spell list. As such, it seems kind of silly for people to be coming to thread specifically to complain about other people overlooking other merits of the cleric class, whether it is heavy armor proficiency or divinations (not mentioned so far in this thread, AFAIK, but still one of the cleric's strengths) or domain spells stolen from other class lists or Channel Divinity uses...

Those things might mitigate the mediocrity of the cleric spell list, but I think the basic point still stands up to scrutiny: the cleric spell list is a pretty mediocre, unexciting list, especially when it comes to 6th-9th level spells. Wizards, druids, bards, and even warlocks have some fairly exciting high-level spells, but the cleric... Planar Ally and Mass Heal are about as good as it gets, and Mass Heal is fundamentally reactive, not proactive, and prone to wasting[1], while Planar Ally is basically just a limited form of Plane Shift, with all the heavy lifting being done in roleplayed negotiations.

It's not a horrible spell list, but IMO it is the weakest 6th-9th spell list in the PHB and the one I'd be most tempted to multiclass out of. Losing True Polymorph, Foresight, or Wish hurts. Losing Gate/Astral Projection/Mass Heal/True Resurrection? Not so painful.

[1] If the enemy focus-fires one PC down to near death, and you Mass Heal to bring him back up to full... you waste most of that 700 HP buffer, and now when a second PC gets brought down to near death you don't have another Mass Heal on hand. If you try to use Mass Heal after combat instead, so you can use it efficiently, it winds up in all probability not really being better than a 5th level Healing Spirit or a couple of Extended Auras of Vitality.

I agree with MaxWilson.

On the question of the cleric spell list alone, personally I don't find it all that exciting, especially at high levels.

The cleric class itself, though, has many other features and abilities that create a very good class. Unfortunately, this thread has taken on a very aggressive tone toward the OP and anyone who fails to disagree with him.

[MaxWilson]

Multiple people have defended it, but you keep ignoring them.

Maybe I've missed them--I've seen arguments over how great medium armor proficiency is, and how nice the Tempest cleric Channel divinity is, and whether wizards are more durable, and how many spells a 7th level wizard is likely to know, and maybe somewhere in the middle of that I missed someone singing the praises of Astral Projection/Mass Heal/Gate/True Resurrection.

Would anyone care to extol the virtues of the 6th-9th level spells on the cleric spell list, for example? Anyone who thinks the cleric list for 6th-9th is top-notch?

[Tetrasodium]

Maybe I've missed them--I've seen arguments over how great medium armor proficiency is, and how nice the Tempest cleric Channel divinity is, and whether wizards are more durable, and how many spells a 7th level wizard is likely to know, and maybe somewhere in the middle of that I missed someone singing the praises of Astral Projection/Mass Heal/Gate/True Resurrection.

Would anyone care to extol the virtues of the 6th-9th level spells on the cleric spell list, for example? Anyone who thinks the cleric list for 6th-9th is top-notch?
your points there are spot on & a lot of the dismissals in the thread are irrelevant because they keep pointing at cleric class features and/or specific archtypes to dismiss discussion about the spell list itself while the people making those points other caster classes also ignore that there are wizard/sorcerer/warlock archtypes that get all of those & more on top of a good selection of wizard(and sometimes cleric) spells.

I agree that the upper levels of cleric spells is very much lacking in wow factor, but I think part of the problem there is that in settings like forgotten realms/greyhawk/etc there is a very strong deity/cleric ball of lore & fluff that does not transfer over too well to settings that take a more player centric slant on the game & story (as opposed to the deity centric ones where pc's are set dressings for the plots of deities). Most likely we will need to wait for WotC to shift gears to thinking about settings like eberron where there is both a very different deity/cleric relationship (if one exists at all) and the deities themselves that are worshipped are wildly different. Darksun kinda falls in that too, but deities/clerics hare even more strongly different/nonexistent/etc there. Between the Silver Flame1 (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ebds/20041115a)2 (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ebds/20041122a), The Six (http://eberron.wikia.com/wiki/The_Dark_Six), & The Nine (http://eberron.wikia.com/wiki/The_Sovereign_Host) there exists a lot of room for different directions in the cleric spell list that are more interesting in settings where you don't have eliminster, mystara, drizzt, lolth, etc type superpowers with nothing better to do than guide you around by the nose for their plotting & scheming.

I don't know why people are so set on pointing at what clerics can do beyond casting spells while ignoring how much of it the int/cha based classes can do/match while having access to most of the wizard/parts of cleric spell lists atop some pf their own in order to dismiss the whole subject.

[Asmotherion]

Being a Prepared Caster who both gets a list of Domain spells that are always prepared Kinda like spells Known) and Prepares a lot of spells is the reason why one would rather go Cleric. That, and Domain Goodies. Oh, and let's not forget RP reasons ofcource.

If one wants a mix of the Arcane and Divine, the Divine Soul Sorcerer or 1 level Dip of a Cleric into an Arcane Caster can give a lot of benefits, the most notable of all being Shield.

A cleric can dedicate himself as a Buff/Debuffer, but can optimally be a Gish. If he gets his hands on Shillelagh from the Druid's Spell List (magic initiate), he can use Wisdom for his attacks, making him a very SaD Gish Full caster. He is then only 1 cantrip away (remember the 1 level Arcane Caster we talked about?) from grabbing Booming Blade, and potentially GFB too. With an ongoing Spirit Guardians, Spiritual Weapon and Booming Blade, you can pack a lot of ongoing Melee and AoE Damage.

Overall, if you optimise, you can do wonders in combat with a cleric. You just have to keep in mind that the class is not designed to help you being a blaster, but you can be as good at throwing Fireballs (if Sun Cleric) as the next non-Evocation Wizard/non-Sorcerer.

[Tanarii]

The fact that no one seems willing to speak up and defend the cleric spell list is an answer in and of itself. They just try to change the subject to other cleric features.
That's because it's comparing apples and oranges. You don't defend a comparison of an apple to an orange when someone is claiming it's not orange colored. You point out its not an orange.

[CantigThimble]

Would anyone care to extol the virtues of the 6th-9th level spells on the cleric spell list, for example? Anyone who thinks the cleric list for 6th-9th is top-notch?

I mean, my response to that is just that I have not and do not expect to ever play above level 10 (barring a one shot or something) and so that's just irrelevant. If I recall correctly, surveys show that my experience is pretty common. I don't engage in discussion about high level spells and I expect many others are the same way.

And this discussion is not specifically about the spell list. At the beginning of the OP he specifically mentions how life clerics are the only ones who are good at combat healing, so we're considering domain features and the influence they have on spell effectiveness too. Given that context, bringing up how tempest cleric's channel divinity affects blasting seems perfectly relevant to me.

[EvilAnagram]

Maybe I've missed them--I've seen arguments over how great medium armor proficiency is, and how nice the Tempest cleric Channel divinity is, and whether wizards are more durable, and how many spells a 7th level wizard is likely to know, and maybe somewhere in the middle of that I missed someone singing the praises of Astral Projection/Mass Heal/Gate/True Resurrection.
The point of the Tempest Channel Divinity (and other abilities) is that it improves the usefulness of spells on its list. Call Lightning is okay, but when you get to maximize it and use it to push enemies into hazards, it's awesome and slot efficient.

You're still skipping by the many people who have put forward that an extensive array of defensive and offensive buffs with some control and blasting besides is a valid approach to building a character, and the Cleric naturally aligns to this level of play. The Wizard list bends more towards blasting and control, with most of the buffs being self-buffs, and most of those only existing to make up for the class's shortcomings (shield, mage armor, blur, mirror image, blink). The wizard cannot compete with the cleric's ability to heal and buff allies. The very best a wizard can do for an ally before level 17 is haste.


Would anyone care to extol the virtues of the 6th-9th level spells on the cleric spell list, for example? Anyone who thinks the cleric list for 6th-9th is top-notch?
Sure. Heal can keep an ally surviving another two rounds of combat against an ancient dragon. Hero's Feast is the best preparatory buff in the game. Holy Aura is the best group buff in the game. Flame Strike is useful as a focused AoE. Plane Shift and Resurrection/True Resurrection are occasionally absolutely necessary. You can destroy a city or dungeon with Earthquake. Antimagic Field destroys high-level encounters. Mass Heal can turn a TPK into a victory. Gate enables you to turn a little research into a balor. I'm shocked you're so severely underestimating these spells.

[Jerrykhor]

I think Cleric is a good class, hitting the sweet spot balance-wise. It also manage to capture the fantasy of the holyman. However, I do agree that their spell list becomes underwhelming by 4th level. Each tier from there on has clear winners. Banishment is the clear winner in that tier, and in 5th level, Greater Restoration or Contagion (if played by RAW). 6th is Heroes' Feast, 7th Conjure Celestial or Divine Word, 8th Holy Aura and 9th True Rez.

Spirit Guardians is fine as it is, but its overrated by the OP too much. Cleric don't start out with CON saves, so to really get the best out of this spell, a Warcaster feat tax is required.

[Asmotherion]

Sure. Heal can keep an ally surviving another two rounds of combat against an ancient dragon. Hero's Feast is the best preparatory buff in the game. Holy Aura is the best group buff in the game. Flame Strike is useful as a focused AoE. Plane Shift and Resurrection/True Resurrection are occasionally absolutely necessary. You can destroy a city or dungeon with Earthquake. Antimagic Field destroys high-level encounters. Mass Heal can turn a TPK into a victory. Gate enables you to turn a little research into a balor. I'm shocked you're so severely underestimating these spells.

Can I just add how broken Forbiddance has the potential to be? I mean, cast it before you enter a Dungeon that you previously know will be populated with such creatures, and you take out a significant amount of the Undead/Fiend/Fey etc population. The casting time is only 10 minutes, and the area is 40000 square feet, up to 30 feet above ground. If you can manage to use it, it's deadly.

Anyway, it was how we ultimatelly won against a Lich, when I replicated the spell as a Single action via Wish with my Sorlock, and the ongoing damage wore him down, so that's more or less why I think it's so amazing. Destroying the Phylactery involved more Wishes and is an other story.

[Blood of Gaea]

Can I just add how broken Forbiddance has the potential to be? I mean, cast it before you enter a Dungeon that you previously know will be populated with such creatures, and you take out a significant amount of the Undead/Fiend/Fey etc population. The casting time is only 10 minutes, and the area is 40000 square feet, up to 30 feet above ground. If you can manage to use it, it's deadly.

Anyway, it was how we ultimatelly won against a Lich, when I replicated the spell as a Single action via Wish with my Sorlock, and the ongoing damage wore him down, so that's more or less why I think it's so amazing. Destroying the Phylactery involved more Wishes and is an other story.
I mean, you can also destroy a MM Lich with a good grappler and a casting of Silence.

[EdenIndustries]

In the case where there are 2 Wizards in the party (not unreasonable given how powerful the class is), you'll bet they will coordinate and pick different spells each level, and share the spells between the two of them.

I just wanted to pop in and say this definitely isn't my experience. I love playing Wizards, but in the current campaign I'm DM'ing there have been 11 players (all at various points) and no one has chosen a Wizard, let alone 2 Wizards. Granted that's a small sample size, but I'm going to agree with Citan here and say in an average party of 4 it doesn't seem like a given to even have 1 Wizard, let alone 2.

[Merudo]

You're still skipping by the many people who have put forward that an extensive array of defensive and offensive buffs with some control and blasting besides is a valid approach to building a character, and the Cleric naturally aligns to this level of play.


Problem is that the Cleric is much, much worse than the Wizard at both control and blasting, while the Wizard is about as good a buffer as the Cleric is.

It's not that the Cleric has a different style of play, it's that the Wizard can do almost everything a Cleric can, and much more.



The Wizard list bends more towards blasting and control, with most of the buffs being self-buffs, and most of those only existing to make up for the class's shortcomings (shield, mage armor, blur, mirror image, blink). The wizard cannot compete with the cleric's ability to heal and buff allies. The very best a wizard can do for an ally before level 17 is haste.


I strongly disagree. Greater Invisibility is much better than Haste: it provides a much stronger defensive boost, and a stronger overall attack boost (except against hordes).



Sure. Heal can keep an ally surviving another two rounds of combat against an ancient dragon. Hero's Feast is the best preparatory buff in the game. Holy Aura is the best group buff in the game. Flame Strike is useful as a focused AoE. Plane Shift and Resurrection/True Resurrection are occasionally absolutely necessary. You can destroy a city or dungeon with Earthquake. Antimagic Field destroys high-level encounters. Mass Heal can turn a TPK into a victory. Gate enables you to turn a little research into a balor. I'm shocked you're so severely underestimating these spells.

Let me put it another way. If you played a Wizard who had the option of exchanging one level of combat spells from the Wizard list for one level of spells from the Cleric list, would you do it? Which level(s) would you exchange?

Would you be willing to, say, lose the level 5 Wizard combat spell list (Wall of Force, Bigby's Hand, Hold Monster, Animate Object, etc) to get access to the Cleric level 5 list (Flame Strike, Holy Weapon, etc)?

My point is that except for level 1 spells and maybe level 2 spells, no self-respecting Wizard would give up a Wizard spell list for a Cleric spell list of equivalent level.

Meanwhile, I bet most Clerics would gladly throw away most of their combat Cleric spells if it meant getting access to Wizard spells.

Of course the Cleric has other advantages (+1 hitpoint per level, armor proficiency, some unique utility/divination spells, the occasional Channel Divinity) but the fact remains that the combat spell list for Clerics is pretty bad.

Also, contrarily to what other posters suggested, Domain spells don't change this analysis much. The only extra domain spells a Wizard would desire for combat are Destructive Wave (Tempest), Heat Metal (Forge), Faerie Fire (Light), and Plant Growth (Nature). Even then it doesn't amount to much - for example, a Tempest Cleric would be much better off trading his Destructive Wave for Wall of Force.

[Citan]

Those things might mitigate the mediocrity of the cleric spell list, but I think the basic point still stands up to scrutiny: the cleric spell list is a pretty mediocre, unexciting list, especially when it comes to 6th-9th level spells. Wizards, druids, bards, and even warlocks have some fairly exciting high-level spells, but the cleric... Planar Ally and Mass Heal are about as good as it gets, and Mass Heal is fundamentally reactive, not proactive, and prone to wasting[1], while Planar Ally is basically just a limited form of Plane Shift, with all the heavy lifting being done in roleplayed negotiations.

It's not a horrible spell list, but IMO it is the weakest 6th-9th spell list in the PHB and the one I'd be most tempted to multiclass out of. Losing True Polymorph, Foresight, or Wish hurts. Losing Gate/Astral Projection/Mass Heal/True Resurrection? Not so painful.

[1] If the enemy focus-fires one PC down to near death, and you Mass Heal to bring him back up to full... you waste most of that 700 HP buffer, and now when a second PC gets brought down to near death you don't have another Mass Heal on hand. If you try to use Mass Heal after combat instead, so you can use it efficiently, it winds up in all probability not really being better than a 5th level Healing Spirit or a couple of Extended Auras of Vitality.
1. NO.
Just no. You cannot say "the spell list is mediocre", because it's not. You're using a formulation that presents a judgement in an objective way, and in that regard, it's wrong. All those spells can be of great value.

You are, though, perfectly entitled to say "I find those spells uninteresting or unexciting / I don't like them" because that is expressing your personal preference, and that is perfectly legitimate.

And on that sentence I'll agree with you. I too, if someone asked me "in the void" whether I'd stick with Cleric all way, would be extremely hesitant to say "yes" because it's mainly the high-level archetype features that would motivate me, and that makes a very painful time to wait. Because I'm just not creative with divination like spells,

But I don't, and won't, say something as meaningless as qualifying of "mediocre" a spell list that includes...
- free, instantaneous party teleport through planes (yeah, Word of Recall by RAW does not limit interplanar travel -of course if your whole campaign is on the same plane it's just a Teleportation, except earlier and more restricted),
- potentially overpowered Planar Ally (people tend to say that wealth is not a problem anymore by that time in their games, so you can probably hire a creature for a day... And interestingly, the spell does not restrict the CR of the envoy so, provided the DM rewards roleplay implication and you were into it, you may get creatures that will trivialize an encounter).
- Heroes's Feast: more HP, immunity to frightened (and diseases), advantage on WIS saves , can be used around a short rest... I assume you won't pretend that this isn't useful, considering how bad some WIS effects can be on a party, whatever level it has?
- Heal: seems a waste of a slot? Well, when you face enemies that deal 40+ damage in a single turn (or if you want to act *now* to heal an ally whose turn will only come after several close enemies), Healing Words often won't cut it. Heal will.
- Conjure Celestial: it's funny that the spell says "CR 4 or lower" like you actually have choices, seeing that creatures fitting the requirement are basically 2: still, a Couatl is a more than worthy addition to a party: truesight, can take care of Bless, can act as a magic detector, can polymorph into flyers...
- Ethereal: free card to bypass a bootload of traps, obstacles, protections, enemy surveillance, etc for a whole 8 hours... Too bad it requires upcast to be a party-wide spell, but can trivialize challenges even better than the Druid's Wind Walk (or rather, different challenges, you can't beat Wind Walk as far as traveling fast goes). Of course it's not that hard for creatures to see you (just See Invisibility does the trick), but they can't interact anyways (also, I wonder how a DM would rule a group that casts mass-Invisibility *after* being transposed into Ethereal XD).
- Plane ****: well, paired with the previous one, now you can freely travel wherever you want.
- Fire Storm: very ally-friendly, also environment-friendly (most people won't care about it, but it's actually a significant benefit).
- Regenerate: now you can ensure that one ally will never need your help standing back up when downed by a creature, meaning that this ally will always get his turn running. Except if it's killed (not sure about RAW, but considering the description is "you boost natural healing" I'd rule that effect ends on death). One of the best spells to Twin as a Divine Soul Sorcerer.
- Resurrection: if you have access to high-level NPC that can take care of you, then it's redundant. In time-pressured campaigns in which Raise Dead won't cut it (like, someone kidnapped you finally find, but dead), it's golden. It can also be a nice way to surprise your DM by resurrecting NPC with key information or power.
- Symbol: Glyph of Warding, except more refined and larger area, what's not to like?
- Antimagic Field & Holy Aura: no need for explanations here I hope?

Only the 9th level spells I can't project myself into using at all, because it just caters to situations I never really encountered so I wouldn't know how to use them.

But the others? I don't fancy them very much because most of them are not all shinybranding and exuberant like some other high-level spells. And I basically never played games which included inter-planar twists (or maybe once? Cannot even remember XD -it wasn't 5e anyways-). But they are easy to understand, easy to use, and provide very solid benefits to the party.

And, please, don't pull out that pointless argument that "other casters have several of those spells": Cleric having them and being able to prepare them at-will means that Bard and Wizards can learn instead their exclusive spells with a light heart, because they know Cleric is here to cover for them. :)

(By the way, it's equally pointless to say that Mass Heal is usually weak because an upcast Healing Spirit or Extended Aura of Vitality would do the trick more efficiently: not everyone has a high level Druid or Bard in party, and the probability of having someone as specific as a Bard/Sorcerer multiclass is much, much lower).

[Unoriginal]

It's not that the Cleric has a different style of play, it's that the Wizard can do almost everything a Cleric can, and much more.



the fact remains that the combat spell list for Clerics is pretty bad.



the cleric spell list is a pretty mediocre, unexciting list, especially when it comes to 6th-9th level spells.

You have not demonstrated that those statements were true in an objective manner so far, so keeping affirming them without evidence isn't going to prove anything.

[EvilAnagram]

Problem is that the Cleric is much, much worse than the Wizard at both control and blasting, while the Wizard is about as good a buffer as the Cleric is.
Counterpoint: this isn't remotely true. Clerics have extensive control spells, and even many of their go-to damaging spells have ongoing control effects. With XGtE, the wizard can truly claim the mantle of control master thanks to some excellent multitarget spells, but without those spells the cleric has been able to compete easily. Moreover, a cleric built around blasting is much more effective than a wizard at the task because domain features tend to improve on the spells in use. Destructive Wave is terrifying already, but with the ability to maximize half its damage dice it's monstrous.

Furthermore, the wizard can't hold a candle to the cleric in buffing. While a wizard has to wait until fifth level to get its first reasonably good spell, the clerics have access to excellent defensive and offensive buffs from the start. Even the go-to blasting spell is an offensive buff. And while a wizard never gets the ability to meaningfully improve more than one ally, the cleric improves everyone. Hero's Feast, Aid, and Holy Aura cast on a party is a huge boost to its capabilities. Greater Invisibility is nice for that guy while concentration lasts.




Let me put it another way. If you played a Wizard who had the option of exchanging one level of combat spells from the Wizard list for one level of spells from the Cleric list, would you do it?
That's a meaningless point of comparison because the Wizard's only real strength is its expansive spell list, the longest in the game. That the Cleric list is less impressive than the list of the class defined by its huge list does not mean its list is poor.


Meanwhile, I bet most Clerics would gladly throw away most of their combat Cleric spells if it meant getting access to Wizard spells.
Not if they enjoy a support role.

[Willie the Duck]

That's completely insane. A Wizard is going to know tons of spells at that level, *far* more than the 18 listed.

I think this is where it became impossible for a reasonable person to get behind you. It has become increasingly clear that you feel free to declare your points made instead of providing arguments for them, yet to everyone's counterpoints, you are willing to deny them as not valid simply because you find them inconvenient. While the rest of us are trying to have a discussion, you seem to be trying to 'win' the conversation, and it is not working out very well for you.


The fact that no one seems willing to speak up and defend the cleric spell list is an answer in and of itself. They just try to change the subject to other cleric features.

Multiple people have defended it, but you keep ignoring them.

I repeat. Ignore OP who is obstinately trolling or refusing to accept the just criticism that he is cherry picking and expanding his statement in cherry picked data whether or not if that single datum has merit in and of itself.

I agree regarding the OP. Max (although he seems to have missed the many people defending the cleric spell list, perhaps because he notices the true fact that many accidentally let the discussion slide into defense of cleric-as-whole), otoh, does seem to be engaging in good faith.


And, please, don't pull out that pointless argument that "other casters have several of those spells": Cleric having them and being able to prepare them at-will means that Bard and Wizards can learn instead their exclusive spells with a light heart, because they know Cleric is here to cover for them. :)

(By the way, it's equally pointless to say that Mass Heal is usually weak because an upcast Healing Spirit or Extended Aura of Vitality would do the trick more efficiently: not everyone has a high level Druid or Bard in party, and the probability of having someone as specific as a Bard/Sorcerer multiclass is much, much lower).

Well, goose and gander. If we are examining the spell lists in isolation, than yes all the bard and all the wizard spells should be included... but--then the topic is genuinely pointless because it doesn't say anything about the actual game played. The bard in particular has to choose their spells known very carefully. Very very carefully. And the number one challenge I've found as a bard is being in the middle of a tough fight and having plenty of spell slots available, but none that are appropriate to the situation because the campaign drifted in style since I last leveled, etc.


You have not demonstrated that those statements were true in an objective manner so far, so keeping affirming them without evidence isn't going to prove anything.

This. So much this. If the rest of the thread has not recognized that you have sufficiently argued a point (regardless of whether or not you believe they ought to have), then you making the statement that it is so will not change any minds.

[MaxWilson]

Sure. Heal can keep an ally surviving another two rounds of combat against an ancient dragon. Hero's Feast is the best preparatory buff in the game. Holy Aura is the best group buff in the game. Flame Strike is useful as a focused AoE. Plane Shift and Resurrection/True Resurrection are occasionally absolutely necessary. You can destroy a city or dungeon with Earthquake. Antimagic Field destroys high-level encounters. Mass Heal can turn a TPK into a victory. Gate enables you to turn a little research into a balor. I'm shocked you're so severely underestimating these spells.

EvilAnagram, thanks to you and also to Citan for staking out some claims here. The spells you name are not complete trash, granted. You're claiming that they are top-notch. I'll think about your arguments for a little while before I respond (and I have to go to work), but in any case thanks to both of you for making the thread about ways to use the cleric spell list.

Edit: I think you're right about Holy Aura. I hadn't noticed before that it gives disadvantage to all enemy attack rolls against affected creatures, and that you don't need to stay within 30' of the caster to benefit. That's good enough to be competitive with Foresight (more targets and lower level but no advantage on attacks and shorter duration), to be a top pick for Magical Secrets, and to be seriously considered for Wishing. That makes it a top-tier spell.

[Tanarii]

Max (although he seems to have missed the many people defending the cleric spell list, perhaps because he notices the true fact that many accidentally let the discussion slide into defense of cleric-as-whole), otoh, does seem to be engaging in good faith.
but in any case thanks to both of you for making the thread about ways to use the cleric spell list.There are no reasonale arguments that can be made comparing spell lists between classes independent of comparing the entire classes as a whole. The basis is a bad premise, that spell lists can be independently compared.

[Blood of Gaea]

Let me put it another way. If you played a Wizard who had the option of exchanging one level of combat spells from the Wizard list for one level of spells from the Cleric list, would you do it? Which level(s) would you exchange?
5th level for Greater Restoration, Mass Cure Wounds, and Raise Dead could be nice, provided you were looking to cast those sorts of spell occasionally.

[strangebloke]

Cleric has a spell list with several inclusions that are nigh-indespensible, to the point that I'd rather play without a wizard than play without a cleric.

Like, lacking leomunds tiny hit means I have to set a watch. Lacking fireball means I need one of a dozen other aoe control or damage spells like fear or sprit guardians.

Lacking revivify when you need it is straight up character death.

A bard can take it by secrets, but he's going to pick something he wants to use more often.

[Willie the Duck]

There are no reasonale arguments that can be made comparing spell lists between classes independent of comparing the entire classes as a whole. The basis is a bad premise, that spell lists can be independently compared.

I am aware that a comparison of spell lists, in a vacuum, is a genuinely pointless endeavor. This is a topic chasing meaning. If we did not acknowledge that, it could be falsely confused with a critique of the cleric class. It is, however, legitimately to OP topic of discussion. Thread topics do drift, and petulant shouts of, 'stop it, that's not what the OP wanted to talk about!' would be laughable. I don't think we're there yet though. We are simply discussing an angel-on-needle's-head level pointless topic.


Cleric has a spell list with several inclusions that are nigh-indespensible, to the point that I'd rather play without a wizard than play without a cleric.

Like, lacking leomunds tiny hit means I have to set a watch. Lacking fireball means I need one of a dozen other aoe control or damage spells like fear or sprit guardians.

Lacking revivify when you need it is straight up character death.

I now have the desire to make a Light Cleric with Ritual Caster (wizard) as a feat. :smallbiggrin:

[MaxWilson]

I am aware that a comparison of spell lists, in a vacuum, is a genuinely pointless endeavor. This is a topic chasing meaning. If we did not acknowledge that, it could be falsely confused with a critique of the cleric class. It is, however, legitimately to OP topic of discussion. Thread topics do drift, and petulant shouts of, 'stop it, that's not what the OP wanted to talk about!' would be laughable. I don't think we're there yet though. We are simply discussing an angel-on-needle's-head level pointless topic.

The strength of the spell list is an important factor in evaluating the class as a whole. The weaker the spell list, the more extra abilities a class needs in order to be, well, aesthetically pleasing to a designer's eyes: what someone else might call "balanced."

I didn't realize until now how good Holy Aura was. That spell, all on its own, might justify advancing from Cleric 9 to Cleric 15. It's really quite impressive.

[Sol]

why is the comparative analysis in the OP ignoring the druid, which is the most similar full caster to the cleric?

That seems strange to me.

[Willie the Duck]

The strength of the spell list is an important factor in evaluating the class as a whole. The weaker the spell list, the more extra abilities a class needs in order to be, well, aesthetically pleasing to a designer's eyes: what someone else might call "balanced."

I didn't realize until now how good Holy Aura was. That spell, all on its own, might justify advancing from Cleric 9 to Cleric 15. It's really quite impressive.

Yes, the spell list is a factor in evaluating the class, not a means or an end to and of itself. And they do not exist in a vacuum. Shillelagh is a good example. It, to an (arguable) extent, makes combat stats relatively unimportant. However, getting it (in a stat that boosting would be preferable to boosting a combat stat) in a class that has multi-attack is a serious investment (or instead of multiattack, one can do BB/GFB, without that too being an outside investment), and thus is rarely considered overpowered (more niche, if anything). Same with Shatter and a Tempest Cleric. If we just look at the spells, completely divorced of their context, we can get false impressions of their value, and more importantly, of the value of those who have them.

[kardar233]

Counterpoint: this isn't remotely true. Clerics have extensive control spells,

Would you mind pointing out which those are? My scan points out Hold Person, Command, Banishment and a couple more like it, which are all single target. With the exception of Spirit Guardians, area control doesn’t seem to show up on the Cleric list until Blade Barrier at 6th.

[Tetrasodium]

I mean, my response to that is just that I have not and do not expect to ever play above level 10 (barring a one shot or something) and so that's just irrelevant. If I recall correctly, surveys show that my experience is pretty common. I don't engage in discussion about high level spells and I expect many others are the same way.

And this discussion is not specifically about the spell list. At the beginning of the OP he specifically mentions how life clerics are the only ones who are good at combat healing, so we're considering domain features and the influence they have on spell effectiveness too. Given that context, bringing up how tempest cleric's channel divinity affects blasting seems perfectly relevant to me.


You are overly simplifying things & in the process ognoring a big chunk of the problem imo. Just because you don't normally play characters at levels that are capable of casting those spells regularly doesn't mean there are not reasons for them to exist.


Just a few weeks ago I had a player in one of my games who is moving cross country after a death in the family. I told him that I'd allow him to spend years off his character's life to cast high level cleric spells & turn the tide of battle. At the end of the night I had intentionally given the players a situation what should havebeen lethal & was not holding back. What super flashy spell did he & I declare he could cast to mow down the 1.5:1 cr:pc level mooks into a tackleable challenge while describing how his character was aging himself by burning his own life force?... spirit guardians. By contrast in that same game I have a player with an aberrant mark who has (after being kinda pushed into) intentionally losing control over his dragonmark more than once by various situations . what are some of the spells that came out? wall of fire & incendiary cloud but there are still quite a few others that I've reserved for future situations.
in another game I have a player who recently agreed to become a vessel for a [urk="http://keith-baker.com/tag/overlords/"]demon overlord[/url]. The overlord is bound in khyber & can't manifest itself much, but I wanted to open some exciting spells to the player helping to influence The Prophecy (http://eberronunlimited.wikidot.com/the-prophecy) for his new patron... what spell list did it give the paladin in question access to(among other stuff)?... wizard...
I've more than once allowed players to sacrifice creatures (ie ritual sacrifice) for higher level soell slot access.... what class was every one of those players?.... wizard
start looking at the high cr demons/devils/celestials that can cast offensive and/or flashy spells in a fight. despite the fact that the MM bends over backwards trying to link them to being involved with/serving deities there are an awful lot casting wizard spells.
as a GM I need to raid the wizard/druid spell list for big powerful spells to give high power cleric npc's not involving buffing the players (something bbeg's rarely do to attacking armies & would be assaasins)

[Blood of Gaea]

Would you mind pointing out which those are? My scan points out Hold Person, Command, Banishment and a couple more like it, which are all single target. With the exception of Spirit Guardians, area control doesn’t seem to show up on the Cleric list until Blade Barrier at 6th.
Silence, Calm Emotions, Magic Circle, Glyph of Warding, Geas, Hallow, Planar Binding, Forbiddance, Temple of the Gods, Antimagic Field, Control Weather, and Earthquake can all be used for control purposes, but are definitely also situational.

[BoxANT]

19 AC (half plate & shield)
Spirit Guardians
Spiritual Weapon
Word of Radiance (with potent spellcasting)

yes, you have to be in melee range, but this can do amazing AOE damage every turn, and it scales.

at level 8
3d8 (13.5)
1d8+5 (9.5)
2d6+5 (12)

That is 35 against ONE target, but also 25.5 against everything within 5 feet, and 13.5 against everything within 15 feet.

You can even do similar damage starting at level 5, albeit without potent spellcasting.

[CantigThimble]

You are overly simplifying things & in the process ognoring a big chunk of the problem imo. Just because you don't normally play characters at levels that are capable of casting those spells regularly doesn't mean there are not reasons for them to exist.

I didn't say there was no reason for them to exist, I said there was no reason that most people would choose to talk about them or have any real experience to bring to bear if they did talk about them. If someone is wondering why people are spending lots of time talking about lower level spells and mid-tier class features then that's my explanation for that fact. The majority of players have very little experience or interest in high level class features.

Even theoretical analysis of high level spells is pretty nearly impossible because there just isn't a context to fit them into. Should we expect high level campaigns to have 6-8 encounter days (involving monsters very few people ever see in action) or will they be just down to political stuff and plot?

You give a bunch of examples of situations where high level spells came up in your games, but those are all really context dependent, there's a big difference in picking one spell you get to cast as a big ritual and having that spell on your list every day. By which metric should we be analyzing those spells? One-shot rituals or daily casting?

All I'm saying is, don't be surprised when people talk a LOT more about low level features than high level ones.

[EvilAnagram]

Would you mind pointing out which those are? My scan points out Hold Person, Command, Banishment and a couple more like it, which are all single target. With the exception of Spirit Guardians, area control doesn’t seem to show up on the Cleric list until Blade Barrier at 6th.

I was primarily thinking about those spells, but there is also the control many spells gain through imagined with other features (tempest pushing with lightning comes to mind), Sanctuary, Wall of Light, Silence, Antimagic Field, Bestow Curse, Earthquake, Divine Word, Dominate X, Guardian of Faith, etc. In domains, Wall of Fire, Antilife Shell, Destructive Wave, Wind Wall, Grasping Vines, Spike Growth...

Should I dig further?

[MaxWilson]

Even theoretical analysis of high level spells is pretty nearly impossible because there just isn't a context to fit them into. Should we expect high level campaigns to have 6-8 encounter days (involving monsters very few people ever see in action) or will they be just down to political stuff and plot?

Do you realize that it's 100% within 5E DMG recommendations to just have 1-3 big, deadly fights in an adventure instead of 6-8?


I was primarily thinking about those spells, but there is also the control many spells gain through imagined with other features (tempest pushing with lightning comes to mind), Sanctuary, Wall of Light, Silence, Antimagic Field, Bestow Curse, Earthquake, Divine Word, Dominate X, Guardian of Faith, etc. In domains, Wall of Fire, Antilife Shell, Destructive Wave, Wind Wall, Grasping Vines, Spike Growth...

Should I dig further?

Domain spells don't count, because we're not discussing Schrodinger's cleric. Any given cleric will never be all clerics simultaneously, any more than any given wizard will have all wizard spells prepared at the same time.

BTW, 5E clerics don't have any Dominate spells on their spell list. It's sad, because Mental Domination (from the sphere of Mind) was one of the coolest priest spells in AD&D.

[CantigThimble]

Do you realize that it's 100% within 5E DMG recommendations to just have 1-3 big, deadly fights in an adventure instead of 6-8.

Sure? I also don't care at all about what the DMG recommends one way or another. Why do you ask?

My point was that for lower level abilities people have lots of experience and context to draw on. People have an idea what adventures look like, how the enemies they deal with work and the scale of plots they're dealing with. With higher level games most people have little or none of that kind of context.

For example, I have some issues with verisimilitude in higher level games. If enough level appropriate challenges exist for a party to encounter several of them a day then how on earth do commoners survive in that world? There are lots of ways around that question, but they all involve a significant paradigm shift from lower levels.

[MaxWilson]

Sure? I also don't care at all about what the DMG recommends one way or another. Why do you ask?

Because I was puzzled by the false dichotomy you created: 6-8 encounter days, and "political stuff and plot". You seemed unaware of other possibilities for adventure design. This seems significant since you also have stated objections to 6-8 adventure days at high level, on a verisimilitude basis--running fewer but larger encounters is a solution to your issues that you seem unaware of. (It's obviously easier to justify four dragons, two ancient and two adult, as a high-level adventuring challenge with one Deadly conflict in it than it is to justify 8 encounters with seven dragons, four ancient and three adult, spread out over eight encounters.)

[Sigreid]

I dont understand this thread. The cleric can't do the wizard things as well as the wizard. Same as the wizard can't do the cleric things as well as the cleric. If the cleric could compete with the wizard in their wheelhouse, why would anyone play the wizard?

[EvilAnagram]

Domain spells don't count, because we're not discussing Schrodinger's cleric. Any given cleric will never be all clerics simultaneously, any more than any given wizard will have all wizard spells prepared at the same time.
Everyone else has been discussing the domain spells because if you discuss the cleric spell list while leaving off a third of the spells a cleric will have prepared you lose any chance of gaining insight into how the spell lists enable creative play in combat.


BTW, 5E clerics don't have any Dominate spells on their spell list. It's sad, because Mental Domination (from the sphere of Mind) was one of the coolest priest spells in AD&D.
Both Nature and Trockery do. It should have been with the domains.

[Tanarii]

For example, I have some issues with verisimilitude in higher level games. If enough level appropriate challenges exist for a party to encounter several of them a day then how on earth do commoners survive in that world? There are lots of ways around that question, but they all involve a significant paradigm shift from lower levels.They only exist in adventuring sites. And the assumption is adventurers do adventurers appropriate to their Tier, which means going to adventuring locations appropriate to their Tier. I mean, that applies to low level adventuring too. That's what "Dungeons" are. Level-band-specific zones / adventuring sites.

If you're expecting random wilderness encounters to confirm to level-band-specific zones, you certainly can do that. But yeah, you can rapidly end up wondering about verisimilitude in that case. Even more so if instead of doing level-band-specific zones, you do tailored encounters to the party: party-specific-level-appropriate "random" (but not really) wilderness encounters.

[MaxWilson]

Everyone else has been discussing the domain spells because if you discuss the cleric spell list while leaving off a third of the spells a cleric will have prepared you lose any chance of gaining insight into how the spell lists enable creative play in combat.

Both Nature and Trockery do. It should have been with the domains.

It's unsound to conflate domain powers and spells with the cleric spell list as a whole, because domain spells have a high opportunity cost. Trying to talk to someone who is lumping every single domain spell and power in with the clerical spell list is like talking to someone who says wizards are durable because of Arcane Ward and Bladesinging and Arcane Deflection, excel at battlefield control due to Illusory Reality + Mirage Arcane, and excel at minions due to Command Undead + Undead Thralls + Durable Summons.

Lumping all the features together with the base class obscures more than it clarifies. If, on the other hand, you discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the base class in isolation, it becomes straightforward to talk about ways in which the subclasses mitigate weaknesses of the base class. In the case of the cleric, once someone observes that the cleric spell list lacks e.g. area control spells, then is the appropriate time to say, "Nature clerics have Spike Growth" or "Tempest clerics can use Call Lightning as a form of quasi-control."

[CantigThimble]

Because I was puzzled by the false dichotomy you created: 6-8 encounter days, and "political stuff and plot". You seemed unaware of other possibilities for adventure design. This seems significant since you also have stated objections to 6-8 adventure days at high level, on a verisimilitude basis--running fewer but larger encounters is a solution to your issues that you seem unaware of. (It's obviously easier to justify four dragons, two ancient and two adult, as a high-level adventuring challenge with one Deadly conflict in it than it is to justify 8 encounters with seven dragons, four ancient and three adult, spread out over eight encounters.)

Ah, I wasn't trying to set up a dichotomy. I was giving two examples out of a long list of possibilities.

And I don't think that fewer, more dangerous encounters actually solves the problem. Either an adventuring party will depopulate anything dangerous enough to challenge them in a region within a week, or there are so many of those threats that they would have depopulated the region of anything weaker long ago. How many absolute apex predators can you really justify existing in a world where normal humans are still around? Either they're really rare, (in which case adventuring days don't work well) or if they're more common (in which case towns need significant numbers of mid-level defenders and the average level of people in the world increases significantly) or you have the party go to some environment that works significantly differently from normal (The underdark, planar travel etc.). Those are all totally reasonable solutions, but they also play significantly differently than most lower level campaigns do and from eachother.

[Sol]

It's unsound to conflate domain powers and spells with the cleric spell list as a whole, because domain spells have a high opportunity cost. Trying to talk to someone who is lumping every single domain spell and power in with the clerical spell list is like talking to someone who says wizards are durable because of Arcane Ward and Bladesinging and Arcane Deflection, excel at battlefield control due to Illusory Reality + Mirage Arcane, and excel at minions due to Command Undead + Undead Thralls + Durable Summons.

Lumping all the features together with the base class obscures more than it clarifies. If, on the other hand, you discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the base class in isolation, it becomes straightforward to talk about ways in which the subclasses mitigate weaknesses of the base class. In the case of the cleric, once someone observes that the cleric spell list lacks e.g. area control spells, then is the appropriate time to say, "Nature clerics have Spike Growth" or "Tempest clerics can use Call Lightning as a form of quasi-control."

I understand your argument, but I feel that it's even more unsound to only look at the baseline cleric spell list, because zero clerics are limited to just the baseline cleric spell list.

Are there issues? Sure. But I feel like you are pretending there are more issues than there are.

[EvilAnagram]

It's unsound to conflate domain powers and spells with the cleric spell list as a whole, because domain spells have a high opportunity cost.
Leaving aside your use of "unsound," this is nonsensical. It would be like saying no wizard has access to all the spells on the list, so acting like the wizard list gives them versatility is dishonest.

No one is saying that Clerics are great blasters and great controllers because a cleric can use fireball and grasping vine. However, the fact is that clerics have the option to pursue different paths that supplement their innate casting strengths.

Let's look at it objectively. Clerics have more buffs and heals than just about anyone else. Pretending that a cleric does not excel in this regard is ridiculous. In other areas, their standard spell list is not so strong; however, they have access to options that expand their spell lists in focused areas and provide them with features that increase the effectiveness of their spells. These options are integral to the class, and an examination of the cleric list that does not take them into account will leave the examiner with a false impression of the usefulness of the Cleric's spellcasting.

Thus, we must examine the options whilst acknowledging that picking one of these options necessarily excludes other options. A Cleric can be built to be a powerful controller OR socially manipulative OR very blasty.

That said, even the blastiest domains have powerful control spells, and the Tempest Domain has powerful blast spells that do double duty as control spells. Calling an area push with no save pseudo-control undersells it quite a bit.

[Tetrasodium]

Everyone else has been discussing the domain spells because if you discuss the cleric spell list while leaving off a third of the spells a cleric will have prepared you lose any chance of gaining insight into how the spell lists enable creative play in combat.


Both Nature and Trockery do. It should have been with the domains.

If you want to go there, then you rule out medium armor & AC. hexblades get medium armor, bladesingers get light armor andint mod to AC (among other things). both sorcerer & warlock have archtypes that grant access to parts of the cleric spell list on top of the usual sorcerer/warlock arcane spell list... so on & so forth. I pointwed out that kind of stuff earlier when people suggested "bb.b.but arcana cleric" when I brought up the lack of melee/ranged spell attack cantrips in the cleric spell list despite there being a significant number of clric archtypes with potent spellcasting (wismod to cleric cantrips) & brought up the problems that occur when good saves are encountered atop radiant or necrotic resist/immunity



I didn't say there was no reason for them to exist, I said there was no reason that most people would choose to talk about them or have any real experience to bring to bear if they did talk about them. If someone is wondering why people are spending lots of time talking about lower level spells and mid-tier class features then that's my explanation for that fact. The majority of players have very little experience or interest in high level class features.

Even theoretical analysis of high level spells is pretty nearly impossible because there just isn't a context to fit them into. Should we expect high level campaigns to have 6-8 encounter days (involving monsters very few people ever see in action) or will they be just down to political stuff and plot?

You give a bunch of examples of situations where high level spells came up in your games, but those are all really context dependent, there's a big difference in picking one spell you get to cast as a big ritual and having that spell on your list every day. By which metric should we be analyzing those spells? One-shot rituals or daily casting?

All I'm saying is, don't be surprised when people talk a LOT more about low level features than high level ones.

there was actually some attempts to talk about lower level spells (ie cantrips) earlier in the thread & the folks arguing that the cleric spell list is fine kept pointing at specific cleric archtypes & general cleric features unrelated to the spell list to dismiss the problems raised rather than talk about the merits there. When the same was pointed out in sorcerer/wizard/warlock, suddenly those same people had no interest in the topic of the cleric cantrips lacking ranged/melee spell attacks or non-radiant/non-necrotic any longer. As a result, the discussion eventually moved onto the high level spells when someone raised another problem that could be discussed

Going back to the cantrip problem... try breing a pure wis caster centric cleric who picks an archtype with gets potent spellcasting that shifts towards evil over the course of a game like curse of strahd (ie due to dark gifts or whatever). Lets say you have sacred flame (dex save radiant), toll the dead (wis save necrotic), & word of radiance (con save radiant). Your alignment shifted to/started at evil so spirit guardians does necrotic & you can expect to be running into a lot of creatures from this quick list in an undead heavy campaign

Vampire: Saving Throws Dex +9, Wis +7, Cha +9 resistant to necrotic. AC, a mere 16
Vampire spawn: Saving Throws Dex +6, Wis +3 resistant to necrotic ac a mere 15
Revenant: Saving Throws Str +7, Con +7, Wis +6, Cha +7 Resistant to necrotic AC a pathetic 13
Lich: Saving Throws Con +10, lnt +12, Wis +9, Dex +3 resistant to necrotic, ac 17...
Demilich Saving Throws Con +6, Int +11, Wis +9, Cha +11 Dex +5 AC20. Immune to necrotic
Death Knight : Saving Throws Dex +6, Wi s +9, Cha +10 Immune to necrotic
so on & so forth similar trends with things like wight, spectre, banshee, ghast, wraith, etc

[Tetrasodium]

Leaving aside your use of "unsound," this is nonsensical. It would be like saying no wizard has access to all the spells on the list, so acting like the wizard list gives them versatility is dishonest.

No one is saying that Clerics are great blasters and great controllers because a cleric can use fireball and grasping vine. However, the fact is that clerics have the option to pursue different paths that supplement their innate casting strengths.

Let's look at it objectively. Clerics have more buffs and heals than just about anyone else. Pretending that a cleric does not excel in this regard is ridiculous. In other areas, their standard spell list is not so strong; however, they have access to options that expand their spell lists in focused areas and provide them with features that increase the effectiveness of their spells. These options are integral to the class, and an examination of the cleric list that does not take them into account will leave the examiner with a false impression of the usefulness of the Cleric's spellcasting.

Thus, we must examine the options whilst acknowledging that picking one of these options necessarily excludes other options. A Cleric can be built to be a powerful controller OR socially manipulative OR very blasty.

That said, even the blastiest domains have powerful control spells, and the Tempest Domain has powerful blast spells that do double duty as control spells. Calling an area push with no save pseudo-control undersells it quite a bit.

you can't bring up cleric archtypes to make a point like that without bringing up wizard/sorcerer/warlock archtypes/class abilities that make up & match or exceed the very cleric strengths you bring up to dismissthings he raised about the cleric spell list

[Ovarwa]

And if we do ignore domain spells because we don't like Schrodinger, then we should do the same for the wizard:

The wizard won't find a single spell beyond his minimum, because, you know, Schrodinger. And we'll ignore multiclassing. And subclasses. Because Schrodinger.

So our cleric has much better AC than our wizard, with less of a stat investment. He knows more spells. Has more hp. Has a better casting stat. Has some nice class features.

I'll grant that the wizard spell list is sexier, but the cleric still has quite a few nice spells to prepare every day, and can utterly swap out the rest if needed, because he knows his entire list, which expands with each supplement. That's a different kind of flexibility, but it's useful nonetheless: Schrodinger spell list after a long rest! Our wizard? Stuck with ~2 spells per level.

[EvilAnagram]

If you want to go there, then you rule out medium armor & AC. hexblades get medium armor, bladesingers get light armor andint mod to AC (among other things). both sorcerer & warlock have archtypes that grant access to parts of the cleric spell list on top of the usual sorcerer/warlock arcane spell list... so on & so forth. I pointwed out that kind of stuff earlier when people suggested "bb.b.but arcana cleric" when I brought up the lack of melee/ranged spell attack cantrips in the cleric spell list despite there being a significant number of clric archtypes with potent spellcasting (wismod to cleric cantrips) & brought up the problems that occur when good saves are encountered atop radiant or necrotic resist/immunity


you can't bring up cleric archtypes to make a point like that without bringing up wizard/sorcerer/warlock archtypes/class abilities that make up & match or exceed the very cleric strengths you bring up to dismissthings he raised about the cleric spell list

You can't slam a book on your keyboard and expect people to take the resulting mess as an argument.

Edit: I want to be clear and say that I'm not trying to insult you, but nothing you wrote is remotely intelligible. I get the vague sense that you disagree with me, but beyond that I couldn't point to a specific point.

[Tetrasodium]

And if we do ignore domain spells because we don't like Schrodinger, then we should do the same for the wizard:

The wizard won't find a single spell beyond his minimum, because, you know, Schrodinger. And we'll ignore multiclassing. And subclasses. Because Schrodinger.

So our cleric has much better AC than our wizard, with less of a stat investment. He knows more spells. Has more hp. Has a better casting stat. Has some nice class features.

I'll grant that the wizard spell list is sexier, but the cleric still has quite a few nice spells to prepare every day, and can utterly swap out the rest if needed, because he knows his entire list, which expands with each supplement. That's a different kind of flexibility, but it's useful nonetheless: Schrodinger spell list after a long rest! Our wizard? Stuck with ~2 spells per level.

Who are you even trying to reply to? This is important because people have pointed ouut that bringing up specific cleric archtypes is irrelevant to the core problem(s) for multiple reasons. Some of those reasons are because others have done things like tried to dismiss the lack of a ranged or melee spell attack/non-radiant/non-necrotic cantrip by saying "but arcana cleric solves plus armor" while ignoring that there are other coleric archtypes with potent cantrip and the fact that there are sorcerer/wizard/warlock archtypes that have both and more. Others have pointed out the irrelevancy of archtypes to problems in the higher level spell list because others have tried to say "but $archtype fixes pluds armor and so on & so forth" type stuff while ignoring the fact that there are wizard/sorcerer/warlock archtypes that do both. I'm sure there are other reasons cleric archtypes have been pointed out as irrelivant too.
Oddly, the people who keep bringing up cleric archtypes tp dismiss specific problems with the cleric spell list when the strengths they raised are pointed out to exist in a wizard/sorcerer/warlock archtype along with a lack of the problem they were using the cleric archtype to dismiss in the cleric's spell list

[B]
You can't slam a book on your keyboard and expect people to take the resulting mess as an argument.

Edit: I want to be clear and say that I'm not trying to insult you, but nothing you wrote is remotely intelligible. I get the vague sense that you disagree with me, but beyond that I couldn't point to a specific point.

Oh I'm sorry that you could not keep up with the discussion & had trouble understanding that the two quoted bits of text were in reply to the posts I quoted directly above those statements. Perhaps following along with the discussion would help you in the future good sir.

[visitor]

Leaving aside your use of "unsound," this is nonsensical. It would be like saying no wizard has access to all the spells on the list, so acting like the wizard list gives them versatility is dishonest.

No one is saying that Clerics are great blasters and great controllers because a cleric can use fireball and grasping vine. However, the fact is that clerics have the option to pursue different paths that supplement their innate casting strengths.

Let's look at it objectively. Clerics have more buffs and heals than just about anyone else. Pretending that a cleric does not excel in this regard is ridiculous. In other areas, their standard spell list is not so strong; however, they have access to options that expand their spell lists in focused areas and provide them with features that increase the effectiveness of their spells. These options are integral to the class, and an examination of the cleric list that does not take them into account will leave the examiner with a false impression of the usefulness of the Cleric's spellcasting.

Thus, we must examine the options whilst acknowledging that picking one of these options necessarily excludes other options. A Cleric can be built to be a powerful controller OR socially manipulative OR very blasty.

That said, even the blastiest domains have powerful control spells, and the Tempest Domain has powerful blast spells that do double duty as control spells. Calling an area push with no save pseudo-control undersells it quite a bit.


I think that the OP has wandered into arguing the cleric is not a great spellcaster because of his spell list. Which I think everyone is in disagreement.

However, I think others are arguing at each other about things there is no disagreement about. I don't see the problem with looking at spell lists in isolation. You may be new to the game, open up the PHB, and look at the spell lists. You see one list has many effective, flavorful and interesting spells. Another list only has a few such spells. That's it. Yet, as many point out, that is not the totality of a class' spellcasting.

If I said a Barbarian uses d12 for hitpoints and the rogue only uses d8, and 12 >8, that would be true. But it also wouldn't reflect the effectiveness of one class over the other.

[Unoriginal]

you can't bring up cleric archtypes to make a point like that without bringing up wizard/sorcerer/warlock archtypes/class abilities that make up & match or exceed the very cleric strengths you bring up

I'm curious about those Wizard archetypes/class abilities that make up & match or exceed the Cleric's strengths.

Which ones are you talking about?

[EvilAnagram]

Oh I'm sorry that you could not keep up with the discussion & had trouble understanding that the two quoted bits of text were in reply to the posts I quoted directly above those statements. Perhaps following along with the discussion would help you in the future good sir.

I understand that you feel the need to lash out, but this is much better. Your previous posts did not even attempt to approximate a reasonable sentence structure or, at the most basic level, fully spell out a startling percentage of the words. I prefer not to comment on grammar and spelling most of the time, but those posts were less legible than my handwriting, a harsh condemnation, I assure you.

[CantigThimble]

Going back to the cantrip problem... try breing a pure wis caster centric cleric who picks an archtype with gets potent spellcasting that shifts towards evil over the course of a game like curse of strahd (ie due to dark gifts or whatever). Lets say you have sacred flame (dex save radiant), toll the dead (wis save necrotic), & word of radiance (con save radiant). Your alignment shifted to/started at evil so spirit guardians does necrotic & you can expect to be running into a lot of creatures from this quick list in an undead heavy campaign

Vampire: Saving Throws Dex +9, Wis +7, Cha +9 resistant to necrotic. AC, a mere 16
Vampire spawn: Saving Throws Dex +6, Wis +3 resistant to necrotic ac a mere 15
Revenant: Saving Throws Str +7, Con +7, Wis +6, Cha +7 Resistant to necrotic AC a pathetic 13
Lich: Saving Throws Con +10, lnt +12, Wis +9, Dex +3 resistant to necrotic, ac 17...
Demilich Saving Throws Con +6, Int +11, Wis +9, Cha +11 Dex +5 AC20. Immune to necrotic
Death Knight : Saving Throws Dex +6, Wi s +9, Cha +10 Immune to necrotic
so on & so forth similar trends with things like wight, spectre, banshee, ghast, wraith, etc

So... you're saying that an evil cleric in an undead heavy campaign who relies on cantrips will have a hard time dealing very much damage? (Besides guiding bolt and spiritual weapon)

I don't think that warrants rebuttal. I am fine conceding that in that specific scenario the cleric will have a tough time.


you can't bring up cleric archtypes to make a point like that without bringing up wizard/sorcerer/warlock archtypes/class abilities that make up & match or exceed the very cleric strengths you bring up to dismissthings he raised about the cleric spell list

That's fair, but I would make the point that not all classes have equally powerful subclass and I think clerics are a class that invests a lot more power into the subclass while wizards are a class that invests more power into the base chassis. Asa result, a wizard without an subclass will probably outshine a cleric without an subclass, but the competition will be much closer when they both have subclasses.

Wizards get 4 very useful useful, if often somewhat situational abilities and augmentations to their spellcasting capabilities.

Clerics get bonus proficiencies, nearly double their number of prepared spells, expand their spell list, and also get some new abilities to augment their role in the party.

[MaxWilson]

Ah, I wasn't trying to set up a dichotomy. I was giving two examples out of a long list of possibilities.

Ah, I see. Sorry for misunderstanding your point.


And I don't think that fewer, more dangerous encounters actually solves the problem. Either an adventuring party will depopulate anything dangerous enough to challenge them in a region within a week, or there are so many of those threats that they would have depopulated the region of anything weaker long ago. How many absolute apex predators can you really justify existing in a world where normal humans are still around? Either they're really rare, (in which case adventuring days don't work well) or if they're more common (in which case towns need significant numbers of mid-level defenders and the average level of people in the world increases significantly) or you have the party go to some environment that works significantly differently from normal (The underdark, planar travel etc.). Those are all totally reasonable solutions, but they also play significantly differently than most lower level campaigns do and from eachother.

I see now where you're coming from, especially the part in bold. I believe at this point we're not talking about clerics at all and are simply talking about why high-level D&D tends to break down, yes?

Granted that planar adventures are likely to play out quite differently than low-level adventures simply due to the alien environment. And PCs will have more options for jumping off the rails, so a DM who relied on rails early on may find high-level play frustrating.

With that in mind, fewer more dangerous encounters does solve an important part of the problem: why would intelligent creatures deliberately invite defeat in detail? It's totally believable and appropriate to have a high-level adventure feature e.g. the incursion of a hobgoblin horde consisting of thousands of hobgoblin troops and Captains, perhaps a dozen Devastators, a dozen or so Iron Shadows, and a Warlord. Toss in an orthogonal element like a vampire who's converting hobgoblins into vampire spawns for his own use, and you've got yourself a challenging adventure and fun due to bounded accuracy. An "adventuring day" in this context is a portion of the time the PCs spend engaged with the hobgoblins and/or vampires. A DM might break the challenge up into "adventuring day"-sized pieces for you, placing a supply depot with a battalion of hobgoblins guarding it here, with a map to a research lab full of Devastators and their bodyguards there, with the discovery of your vampire rivals somewhere in the middle.

Sure, hobgoblin invasions may be rare, but that's also what makes PCs famous--because they're in the right place at the right time to deal with the disaster no one else could deal with.

It isn't any more implausible than a low-level adventure; it's just on a different scale. (But trying to keep to the 6-8 encounter "day" within this context would be a nightmare, because you'd have to arrange the hobgoblins to act implausibly every single day, inviting defeat in detail at every scale from squad-level on up.)

Similarly, it would be very simple to make a Slaad infestation play out in a way that would be recognizable to low-level adventures. A town vanishes off the map; someone is sent to investigate; it turns out that a dozen Blue Slaads have hatched, eaten most of the townsfolks and turned others into Red Slaads, and are moving steadily toward a major population center, leaving a trail of Chaos Phage-infected humanoids behind them who will hatch into Red Slaads shortly. PCs need to organize the populace so they can be protected, need to engage the Blue Slaads in time to put a halt to the Chaos Phage plague, and to deal with the Chaos Phage victims one way or another. It probably needs a little something extra in order to make the adventure really fun, so this outbreak happens at the worst possible time, just as the rash crown province was visiting the population center, and now he wants to face down the Slaad threat and prove himself a hero while you keep this 3rd level princeling alive, either by protecting him during combat or by sneaking around behind his back to murder all the Slaads before he can find them. By abandoning the "6-8 encounters per day" meme you buy yourself a lot of room to make a good story. Maybe there will be 6-8 encounters in a given day, maybe there won't--it all depends on what kind of decisions the PCs make for how they interact with the Slaads and the princeling, and yet this story is completely plausible for a fantasy world.

Arguably this Slaad infestation implies that towns "need" lots of mid-level defenders, but that doesn't guarantee that they will have them. When they need protection and don't have it, that's where the PCs come in. That's why they matter. If the PCs don't do the job, the town perishes. Enough failures and the campaign ends in disaster, the kingdom-wide equivalent of a TPK.

This style of play can start at low level and go on all the way to high-level. Maybe at high-level the PCs will even figure out what is really causing all of these serial disasters and take steps to address it once and for all. It's XCOM: UFO Defense in 5E.

[Yes, yes, it's obvious that this is exactly the uberplot of my 5E CRPG. That's why it's on my mind.]

[Ninevehn]

I think that including domain spells for Clerics is a natural and reasonable step considering the OP analysis includes more than four Bardic Secrets spell picks, and includes things like finding spell books, finding scrolls and copying off other Wizards in the party. If one class is restricted to their base spell list and picks while the other two get blanket access to extra picks, the playing ground is nowhere near level.

Of course, it would be better to discuss specific builds, since there are no Clerics without a domain list, and few Bards who do not get at least one round of Bardic Secrets eventually. Better yet would be to also include scenario assumptions, which can aid the Wizard.

[MaxWilson]

I understand your argument, but I feel that it's even more unsound to only look at the baseline cleric spell list, because zero clerics are limited to just the baseline cleric spell list.

Are there issues? Sure. But I feel like you are pretending there are more issues than there are.

Let me be clear about my agenda for this thread: I'm hoping people will point out cool stuff on the cleric list that I've heretofore overlooked. Holy Aura is one such spell. Maybe there are others.

I'm not here to "pretend there are issues". What good would that do me? If it turns out that the high-level cleric list really is as bad as I always thought (except for Holy Aura), well, you either enjoy clerics for their other powers or you ignore clerics and run a bard instead. In either case there's not really anything to talk about--just move on.

But I'm hoping for something more than that.


I think that including domain spells for Clerics is a natural and reasonable step considering the OP analysis includes more than four Bardic Secrets spell picks, and includes things like finding spell books, finding scrolls and copying off other Wizards in the party.

I didn't see anything about copying off other wizards in the OP.

Bardic Secrets are relevant to assessing the strength of spells. "Would a bard pick this spell as a Bardic Secret?" is not a perfect metric, but I thought it was a pretty clever, fresh take.


Of course, it would be better to discuss specific builds, since there are no Clerics without a domain list, and few Bards who do not get at least one round of Bardic Secrets eventually. Better yet would be to also include scenario assumptions, which can aid the Wizard.

Trying to discuss all subclasses of Bard/Cleric/Druid/Wizard and all multiclass permutations thereof (Fighter 1/Diviner X, etc.) makes the discussion intractably complex. That's why I, for one, am more interesting in insights into the cleric list specifically. It's a big enough topic to be applicable to lots of builds, and simple enough that we can actually have a meaningful discussion, assuming that there's anything to talk about.

[Ninevehn]

Original Poster, not Original Post. I think which way the abbreviation is read is a forum culture thing, I dunno.

[Tetrasodium]

I'm curious about those Wizard archetypes/class abilities that make up & match or exceed the Cleric's strengths.

Which ones are you talking about?

People have brought up arcana, nature, tempest, light, & likely other cleric archtypes. More than one post has talked about cleric AC, hit dice, the ability to heal others, & so forth. If archtypes that solve specific problems with the cleric spell list (lack of ranged/melee spell attack cantrips & lack of non-necrotic/non-radiant damage cantrips or a lackluster high level soell list for example), then bringing uparchtypes of classes that do not have the cantrip problems/high level spell optionsproblems in their base spell lists. Since every oneof those cleric strengths can be matched by one or more warlock/sorcerer/wizard archtypes they are both irrelevant to the discussion about the spell list itself. I mentioned a few earlier (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=22961599&postcount=77)

Hexblade gets medium armor, shields, & martial weapons along with the ability to be extreme SAD by being able to use charisma for the tohitrolls with arctype level 1 hex warrior ability & later damage rolls at 2 with the lifedrinker invocation. at level 5 they even get an extra attack option with the lifedrinker invocation. That's on top of all the other warlock features & spell list options
The celestial warlock gets a whole bunch of healing ability on top of the usual warlock spell list & base class abilities.
Among other things, the Divine soul (sorcerer) can explicitly "Your link to the divine allows you to learn spells from
the cleric class. When your Spellcasting feature lets youm learn or replace a sorcerer cantrip or a sorcerer spell of 1st level or higher, you can choose the new spell from the cleric spell list or the sorcerer spell list. You must otherwise obey all the restrictions for selecting the spell, and it becomes a sorcerer spell for you." on top of the base sorcerer...
The war mage gives (among other things) "When you are hit by an attack or you fail a saving throw, you can use your reaction to gain a +2 bonus to your AC against that attack or a +4 bonus to that saving throw." on top of the wizard... you know... studded leather+2 is on par with a breastplate for ac without a dex cap.
A blade singer gets (among other things), light armor & one type of one handed melee weapon along with the ability to spend a bonus action to gain for 1 min (10 rounds) int mod added to ac, +10'speed, advantage on acrobatics, int mod to con saves. That can be done 2x/long or short rest. even modest stats should have no trouble using that to bring AC up to medium+shield or even heavy armor levels on top of the other abilities the archtype gets... of course there is the base wizard spell list & class features.
The draconic sorcerer gets ac ac of 13+dex, Hit Points at Higher Levels: 1d6+1 (or 5) + your Constitution modifier per sorcerer level after 1st & 7+con at first putting them one hit point shy of the cleric getting Hit Points at Higher Levels: 1d8 (or 5) + your Constitution modifier per cleric level after 1st & 8+con at first, an elemental resistance on top of the base sorcerer class abilities & spell list & other draconic sorcerer perks
conjuration, abjuration, & enchantment wizard archtypes getvarious defensive abilitiers like forcing attackers to make a save, the ability to transpose themselves with someone with a misty step-like ability, temp hitpoints, etc on top of the wizard spell list/archtype benefits & the benefits of the base wizard class itself


The point is that the spell list needs to be discussed in isolation without pointing at individual archtypes that themselves sometimes solve a problem with the spell list or bringing up the other strengths of a class. It needs to be that way because just about any individual strength of one full caster base class (cleric/wizard/sorcerer/warlock) can be held up to a specific archtype from the other full caster classes. Now if somebody implies that going full wisdom on a cleric is "obviously intended" as a viable option because of how many archtypes have potent spellcaster (wis mod to cleric cantrips) but thoseclerics making that valid choice are often situationaly hamstrung because they have no cantrips that are spell attack rolls & the attack cantrips they have are all radiant or necrotic damage; but you disagree that clerics should have access to non-necrotic/non-radiant offensive cantrips or spell attack cantrips you would be justified in making that argument. If your argument begins & ends with "but $archtype" or "but $base class strength", then you have failed entirely because every other class including sorcerer/wizard/warlock/druid have archtypes of their own that make any reasonable discission too complicated to even begin discussing & your point dusmissing the problem ignores those other archtypes.

[KorvinStarmast]

OP: have you ever actually played a cleric? From the OP, and your glaring omission of the cleric domain spells (See Yorrin's guide for a very nice treatment of that (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?374604-The-Devout-and-the-Dead-a-guide-to-Clerics)) it would appear that you have not.

Edit: oh dear, the thread has turned into a mess, hadn't noted the additional pages ... so I won't contribute further, other than to say that I am not keen on someone making assertions and judgments about a class without actually knowing how they play.

[CantigThimble]

Warlocks have far and away the best damage cantrip in the game, no contest. But the rest of the class is balanced around that fact. Bards have arguably the worst, but again, the rest of the class is balanced around that.

This is why people keep on trying to bring up other parts of the class. If you use specific enough metrics then you can prove almost anything about a class, no one likes it when people do that so they're pushing back.

Is sacred flame the best cantrip? No, but it's also far from the worst, especially if its the only one you get. Radiant competes with force for being the best damage type in the game, it ignores cover and it can be cast in melee as well as at range. Save spells aren't the best, but they really aren't all that bad. Its a mediocre, but very consistent option and its mediocrity certainly doesn't hamstring the class overall.

[Tetrasodium]

Warlocks have far and away the best damage cantrip in the game, no contest. But the rest of the class is balanced around that fact. Bards have arguably the worst, but again, the rest of the class is balanced around that.

This is why people keep on trying to bring up other parts of the class. If you use specific enough metrics then you can prove almost anything about a class, no one likes it when people do that so they're pushing back.

Is sacred flame the best cantrip? No, but it's also far from the worst, especially if its the only one you get. Radiant competes with force for being the best damage type in the game, it ignores cover and it can be cast in melee as well as at range. Save spells aren't the best, but they really aren't all that bad. Its a mediocre, but very consistent option and its mediocrity certainly doesn't hamstring the class overall.

You are bringing up points mentioned when the lack of spell attack cantrip was first introduced to the discussion. note the bits I bolded.

I think that the bigger problem with how the cleric's spell list feels offensively for a wis focused+powerful cantrip build on par with wizard/sorcerer/warlock is the lack of options. up until xge, thcleric offensive ( spells were sacred flame (dex save) compared to the wizard shocking grasp(melee spell attack), ray of frost(ranged spell attack w/no save debuff), fire bolt (ranged spell attack w/ long range), chill touch (ranged spell attack w/ debuff), acid splash (dex save), poison spray (con save). xge adds create bonfire (dex save), frostbite (con save), gust (str save or blown away), infestation (con save), toll the dead (wis save), & thunderclap (pbaoe con save) to the wizard list giving them con saves, dex saves, wis saves, & melee/ranged spell attacks for offensive cantrips. Clerics add the same toll the dead (wis save), & word of radiance (pbaoe con save), but clerics completely lack a ranged/melee spell attack cantrip on the cleric spell list leaving combat very much in the realm of "uhh.. that guy needs to make $save... do I get to do anything this round GM?".

the leveled spells between offense, protection, & group multiplier type stuff are pretty good combined with the d8 hit die & medium (sometimes heavy) armor+shield. I've seen entire sessions go where the cleric kept casting sacred flame (saved, save, save etc) or healed someone every turn they got. It was so bad that the group was begging him to attack with his mace or whatever starting weapon he had.




While I agree that the two classes have different spell lists with very different strengths, I think the "problem" that left the OP thinking what he was thinking is more a result of the fact that all of the cleric's offensive cantrips are save for none with no spell attack options. Knowledge, light, & grave domains(3/9? domains) all get potent spellcastting (add wis mod to cleric cantrips) at level 8, so there are certainly a reasonable claim for a caster centric cleric that does not rely on str/dex based weapons like the wiz/sorc/warlock/etc. Both sorcerer & warlock have archtypes that grant cure wounds,so it's not unreasonable for clerics to have some other cantrip options to avoid feeling useless if the opponent has good saves or is immune to radiant/necrotic damage.

arcana cleric from scag brings that to 4/10. Any dismissal about the ranged/melee spell attack problem that I stated is what Ithink is the reason for the OP feeling the way he feels that does not apply to all four of those is irrelevant by virtue of not addressing it for clerics in general or the non-nature/non-arcana potent spellcaster archtypes. People have no interest in discussing that, it's easier to just say "pick arcana/nature cleric choose a spell attack cantrip". If that statement goes on to talk about the d8 hit die & medium armor+shield, then the whole statement is even worse because there are sorcerer/warlock/wizard archtypes that cover that ground and have a mix of spell attack/save cantrips to choose from.

[CantigThimble]

Well, how a class feels is not a matter of its balance, it's a matter of personal preference. As long as there are subclasses that resolve the issue with how it feels I don't think that a change to the overall class is the correct solution.

For example, a while ago someone posted a thread about how maneuvers really capture the feel of the fighter and so they should be a universal class feature, most people disagreed, and thought that it was reasonable to limit them to the battlemaster.

I think the same applies here, some people think that attack roll cantrips are an essential part of a spellcaster's feel. For those people, there are options. I don't think that's a reason to change the entire class.

[Tetrasodium]

Well, how a class feels is not a matter of its balance, it's a matter of personal preference. As long as there are subclasses that resolve the issue with how it feels I don't think that a change to the overall class is the correct solution.

For example, a while ago someone posted a thread about how maneuvers really capture the feel of the fighter and so they should be a universal class feature, most people disagreed, and thought that it was reasonable to limit them to the battlemaster.

I think the same applies here, some people think that attack roll cantrips are an essential part of a spellcaster's feel. For those people, there are options. I don't think that's a reason to change the entire class.

By that logic, most of the spells added to scag & xge should never have been added. Also you are changing the no spell attack cantrip & no non-radiant/non-necrotic offensive cleric cantrips from they are kinda without a paddle if faced with high saves or radiant/necrotic restist/immune opponents to if a spell attack cantrip is "an essential part of a spellcaster's feel".... It's almost as if you accept & agree that high saves and/or radiant/necrotic resist or immune can really leave a cleric feeling like an anchor to the group that asks the gm "do I accomplish anything this round?" & would rather talk about if a caster focused cleric should be any of the potent spellcasting cleric archtypes other than a nature or arcana cleric or something along those lines.

I'm not sure why you bring up if champion/EK & the like should have battlemaster maneuvers as if giving them that feature was the same as adding cantrips to the game (something WotC has done regularly & will almost certainly do repeatedly) as if it were a comparable change to the core class. They also add magic items & such.

Obviously WotC felt there was at least some justification for a broader pool of cleric options for offensive cleric cantrips given that Xge bumped it from dex save for none to add wis & con saves with one of those additions being necrotic. The question now is effectively "should clerics ever get one or more cantrips" and if so "should those cantrips also include new damage types and/or spell attack options?". I think it is likely that we will see one or more of those things in one or more future publications from WotC, I'm just confused why people are arguing against all of them as if it's a gigantic change like updating 5e to include touch attacks, ASF, & DR or something would be.

[strangebloke]

Max is right, guys. His argument is narrowly defined, but it is technically correct.

In combat, the cleric spell list is low power at high levels, with a few notable exceptions.

At low level, cleric combat spells are great.

Out of combat, cleric spells are indispensable.

Clerics know their whole list and have the largest number of spells prepared at any given time, and they have to spend almost no spells making themselves durable.

Clerics have class features that give them more spells, including some clear winners.

Cleric class features make their casting of certain spells much better.

Overall, clerics are a serious contender for strongest class in the game.

But their list, viewed separately from everything else, is weaker than the wizards.

Yippe-ki-yi-yay

[Pex]

Max is right, guys. His argument is narrowly defined, but it is technically correct.

In combat, the cleric spell list is low power at high levels, with a few notable exceptions.

At low level, cleric combat spells are great.

Out of combat, cleric spells are indispensable.

Clerics know their whole list and have the largest number of spells prepared at any given time, and they have to spend almost no spells making themselves durable.

Clerics have class features that give them more spells, including some clear winners.

Cleric class features make their casting of certain spells much better.

Overall, clerics are a serious contender for strongest class in the game.

But their list, viewed separately from everything else, is weaker than the wizards.

Yippe-ki-yi-yay

Even accepting weaker than wizards doesn't make it "mediocre".

[CantigThimble]

By that logic, most of the spells added to scag & xge should never have been added. Also you are changing the no spell attack cantrip & no non-radiant/non-necrotic offensive cleric cantrips from they are kinda without a paddle if faced with high saves or radiant/necrotic restist/immune opponents to if a spell attack cantrip is "an essential part of a spellcaster's feel".... It's almost as if you accept & agree that high saves and/or radiant/necrotic resist or immune can really leave a cleric feeling like an anchor to the group that asks the gm "do I accomplish anything this round?" & would rather talk about if a caster focused cleric should be any of the potent spellcasting cleric archtypes other than a nature or arcana cleric or something along those lines.

I'm not sure why you bring up if champion/EK & the like should have battlemaster maneuvers as if giving them that feature was the same as adding cantrips to the game (something WotC has done regularly & will almost certainly do repeatedly) as if it were a comparable change to the core class. They also add magic items & such.

Obviously WotC felt there was at least some justification for a broader pool of cleric options for offensive cleric cantrips given that Xge bumped it from dex save for none to add wis & con saves with one of those additions being necrotic. The question now is effectively "should clerics ever get one or more cantrips" and if so "should those cantrips also include new damage types and/or spell attack options?". I think it is likely that we will see one or more of those things in one or more future publications from WotC, I'm just confused why people are arguing against all of them as if it's a gigantic change like updating 5e to include touch attacks, ASF, & DR or something would be.

First off, radiant resistant enemies are just not a thing. Literally the only enemies with any kind of resistance to radiant damage are angels and couatls. This is a BIG part of why I think cleric having limited combat spells is fine, the ones they do have deal the best type of damage in the entire game. The only type that could possibly be considered equal is force, but there's more vulnerbility to radiant than there is resistance to it and a bunch of undead have bonuses that are cancelled by taking radiant damage.

I think that adding cantrips can be pretty comperable to a major change to a core class. Booming blade and green-flame blade completely changed the way gishes work. Adding a combat cantrip that is significantly different from the other options can seriously shift how a class plays overall.

Personally, I don't see how the fact that WotC added new options can be used as an argument that those new options were necessary. If I was in charge of WotC, a lot of things would be different.

Also, lots of people have suggested cleric attack roll cantrips before. You can probably find a dozen at least in the homebrew section. Typically they have positive comments and productive feedback. People don't have a problem with the attitude of "Hey guys what if we added this new thing to the game." What people take issue with is "This class has a huge flaw, we should make this change to make the class functional." If you're saying that you would be happier if clerics had an attack roll cantrip thats one thing, if you're saying that it is necessary for clerics to have an attack roll cantrip that is an antirely different discussion.

[MaxWilson]

Max is right, guys. His argument is narrowly defined, but it is technically correct.

In combat, the cleric spell list is low power at high levels, with a few notable exceptions.

At low level, cleric combat spells are great.

Out of combat, cleric spells are indispensable.

Clerics know their whole list and have the largest number of spells prepared at any given time, and they have to spend almost no spells making themselves durable.

Clerics have class features that give them more spells, including some clear winners.

Cleric class features make their casting of certain spells much better.

Overall, clerics are a serious contender for strongest class in the game.

But their list, viewed separately from everything else, is weaker than the wizards.

Yippe-ki-yi-yay

Suppose that everything you say here is true. Without good high-level spells, there's more benefit to multiclassing into sorcerer, druid, wizard, or maybe even monk than continuing in cleric after level 9. Those high-level spells are essential to keeping you in the class long term.

(Most of a cleric's good out of combat spells are fifth level or lower too, so the "noncombat" restriction isn't really important for this calculation.)

[PhoenixPhyre]

Suppose that everything you say here is true. Without good high-level spells, there's more benefit to multiclassing into sorcerer, druid, wizard, or maybe even monk than continuing in cleric after level 9. Those high-level spells are essential to keeping you in the class long term.

(Most of a cleric's good out of combat spells are fifth level or lower too, so the "noncombat" restriction isn't really important for this calculation.)

If high level spells are necessary, then multiclassing out at 9 gets you exactly none of them, instead of getting the cleric's "less powerful" ones. You'd be stuck at best with 5th cleric and 6th X.

[strangebloke]

Even accepting weaker than wizards doesn't make it "mediocre".

I mean, within the constraints listed, I'd say (without thinking too deeply) that

Wizard>sorcerer>bard=cleric>druid>warlock

So mediocre is sorta appropriate?

[Tetrasodium]

First off, radiant resistant enemies are just not a thing. Literally the only enemies with any kind of resistance to radiant damage are angels and couatls. This is a BIG part of why I think cleric having limited combat spells is fine, the ones they do have deal the best type of damage in the entire game. The only type that could possibly be considered equal is force, but there's more vulnerbility to radiant than there is resistance to it and a bunch of undead have bonuses that are cancelled by taking radiant damage.

I think that adding cantrips can be pretty comperable to a major change to a core class. Booming blade and green-flame blade completely changed the way gishes work. Adding a combat cantrip that is significantly different from the other options can seriously shift how a class plays overall.

Personally, I don't see how the fact that WotC added new options can be used as an argument that those new options were necessary. If I was in charge of WotC, a lot of things would be different.

Also, lots of people have suggested cleric attack roll cantrips before. You can probably find a dozen at least in the homebrew section. Typically they have positive comments and productive feedback. People don't have a problem with the attitude of "Hey guys what if we added this new thing to the game." What people take issue with is "This class has a huge flaw, we should make this change to make the class functional." If you're saying that you would be happier if clerics had an attack roll cantrip thats one thing, if you're saying that it is necessary for clerics to have an attack roll cantrip that is an antirely different discussion.

ooooh.... I see your problem. You are engaging in a debate about spell attacks without knowing what a spell attack is. Both of those spells you mention are attack rolls (as in strength or dex with a weapon).
These cantrips are ranged spell attacks: Chilltouch, eldritch blast, firebolt, produce flame, Ray of frost
These cantrips are melee spell attacks: Shocking grasp, Thorn whip, Primal savagery
These cantrips require a save of some form in order to deal damage: Acid splash, create bonfire, frostbite, infestation, lightning lure, poison spray, sacred flame, sword burst, Thunderclap, toll the dead, vicious mockery, Word of radiance

A spell attack is made by rollind 1d20, then adding your proficiency bonus & spellcasting ability modifier for the class that gave you the spell (ie int, wis, or charisma). The difference between a ranged & melee spell attack is much like the difference between a melee & a ranged attack. A ranged spell attack is made at disadvantage if you are within 5' of a hostile opponent while a melee spell attack is not affected by that condition any more than an attack with a greatsword.

While you are correct that pretty much only celestials are immune or resistant to randiant damage & there are very few of them in the mm/volos, there will almost certainly be some in MToF. While celestials tend to be good, or at least neutral... not every setting has the same absolute morality & lore inderpinnings as forgotten realms... In ravenloft, they often go insane & start becoming corrupted like the deva in curseof strahd. In darksun, hell if I know... In Eberron, they may sometimes be bound to eberron after being kicked out of whatever plane they came from.. this tends to result in questionable goodness. Also in eberron, Celestials are going to have their concerns adjusted based on the plane they are from & your petty concerns may or may not be worth not killing you if doing so is more conducive to whatever their concerns are. Those eberron bits are before you even consider that the good/evil spectrum of alignment in general in eberron is treated very different than in a setting like forgotten realms, greyhawk, or ravenloft. Given that radiant & necrotic are pretty much what used to be negative & positive energy there is every reason to expect that deathless (http://eberronunlimited.wikidot.com/deathless) will have immune/resist that is the inverse of undead once more.

Finally... It is important because just as an evil aligned cleric is screwed when faced with good saves & necrotic resist/immune heavy campaigns, a good aligned cleric who needs to go up against celestials frequently is in similarly dire straits as the evil cleric frequently facing
quality undead.

[MaxWilson]

If high level spells are necessary, then multiclassing out at 9 gets you exactly none of them, instead of getting the cleric's "less powerful" ones. You'd be stuck at best with 5th cleric and 6th X.

That's... what I just said. If clerics had no good high level spells, this is exactly what you'd do to get access to e.g. metamagic, a new spell list, wildshape, Portent, invocations, or whatever. That's the opportunity cost that high level cleric spells (and a handful of other cleric abilities) have to compete with.

[CantigThimble]

What? No. I know exactly what a spell attack cantrip is. I wasn't talking about booming and green flame because they were spell attack cantrips I was talking about them because they are the best examples of how adding a new cantrip can SERIOUSLY change how a class plays, which relates to the point I was making earlier with the reference to the battlemaster thread. Adding a cantrip that works significantly differently from all the other options isn't just 'one more spell', it can easily be a significant shift in how the class plays.

Two points:
1) 'Radiant damage might be worse at some point in the future in some campaign settings' is an argument I just can't be bothered with right now. Let me know when it actually comes to pass and then it might be worth consideration. I could just as easily say that theoretically, new cantrips that solve that problem will be rolled out alongside the source of the problem so there's no reason to be concerned about it.

2) Nothing actually stops good clerics from using the necrotic options and evil clerics from using the radiant ones. (besides spirit guardians) Even in the highly unlikely scenarios of a good cleric fighting mostly celestials and an evil cleric fighting mostly high power undead they can just use the damage type that works.

[Merudo]

Counterpoint: this isn't remotely true. Clerics have extensive control spells


Would you mind pointing out which those are? My scan points out Hold Person, Command, Banishment and a couple more like it, which are all single target. With the exception of Spirit Guardians, area control doesn’t seem to show up on the Cleric list until Blade Barrier at 6th.


I was primarily thinking about those spells, but there is also the control many spells gain through imagined with other features (tempest pushing with lightning comes to mind), Sanctuary, Wall of Light, Silence, Antimagic Field, Bestow Curse, Earthquake, Divine Word, Dominate X, Guardian of Faith, etc. In domains, Wall of Fire, Antilife Shell, Destructive Wave, Wind Wall, Grasping Vines, Spike Growth...


Wall of Light is not on any Cleric spell list.

Hold Person is pretty terrible (ranked red on Treantmonk’s Wizard Guide, decent on Yorrin’s Cleric Guide), Command is ok for a Cleric spell (ranked decent by Yorrin). Command only negates a single action, Hold Person gives multiple saves, is limited to humanoid, and require concentration. Both can only effect a single target per spell level.

Banishment is excellent. The best control spell of the Cleric, but single target. Also available to the Wizard.

Wall of Fire is ranked “average” by Treantmonk, and monsters can just walk right through it if they really want to. Not really control.

Blade Barrier is a 6d10 Wall of Fire for a level 6 slot, and only ranked decent by Yorrin.

Guardian of Faith is also not a control spell, and is only rated “decent” by Yorrin.

Sanctuary is more of a defensive buff than a control spell.

Silence is actually a really good control spell against spellcasters. Rarely useful and requires some serious teamwork to keep the target in the area, but can totally shut down casters.

Bestow Curse is really bad (ranked red by Treantmonk). The effects are just too weak.

Dominate Person is only available in the Trickery domain, and is also quite bad (ranked red by Treantmonk). Too many downsides and only works on humanoids.

Dominate Beast is only available in the Nature domain, and hymer’s druid guide describe it as a surprisingly weak spell.

Antimagic Field & Earthquake are both rather disappointing for level 8 spells, Yorrin rates both as decent.

Divine Word is great against celestials/elementals/fey/fiends, but the hp limit severely limits the usability of the spell.

So here’s the summary of control spells for Clerics: 1 excellent single-target spell (Banishment), 2 good but very situational spells (Silence, Divine Word), 1 decent single-target spell (command), 2 decent but very situational spells (Antimagic Field, Earthquake), and the rest is pretty much junk or not control...

Compare this to the Wizard's spell list, limiting ourselves to spells ranked "good" or "excellent" by Treantmonk: Fog Cloud, Grease, Sleep, Tasha's Hideous Laughter, Web, Sleet Storm, Fear, Hypnotic Pattern, Slow, Counterspell, Banishment, Evard's Black Tentacles, Watery sphere, Otiluke's Resilient Sphere, Bigby's Hand, Wall of Force, Wall of Stone, Globe of Invulnerability, Mass Suggestion, Eyebite, Magic Jar, Forcecage, Maze, Prismatic Wall, Wish

Face it, the Cleric's control spell list does not come remotely close to the Wizard's.



Should I dig further?

Please do!

[JNAProductions]

So, you're going solely off what other people say?

[Tetrasodium]

What? No. I know exactly what a spell attack cantrip is. I wasn't talking about booming and green flame because they were spell attack cantrips I was talking about them because they are the best examples of how adding a new cantrip can SERIOUSLY change how a class plays, which relates to the point I was making earlier with the reference to the battlemaster thread. Adding a cantrip that works significantly differently from all the other options isn't just 'one more spell', it can easily be a significant shift in how the class plays.

Two points:
1) 'Radiant damage might be worse at some point in the future in some campaign settings' is an argument I just can't be bothered with right now. Let me know when it actually comes to pass and then it might be worth consideration. I could just as easily say that theoretically, new cantrips that solve that problem will be rolled out alongside the source of the problem so there's no reason to be concerned about it.

2) Nothing actually stops good clerics from using the necrotic options and evil clerics from using the radiant ones. (besides spirit guardians) Even in the highly unlikely scenarios of a good cleric fighting mostly celestials and an evil cleric fighting mostly high power undead they can just use the damage type that works.

You might wanna check the spells you are talking about man. For everyone that is AFB but following along...



BOOMING BLADE
Evocation cantrip
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 5 feet
Components: V, M (a weapon)
Duration: 1 round As part of the action used to cast this spell, you must make a melee attack with a weapon against one creature within the spell's range, otherwise the spell fails. On a hit, the target suffers the attack's normal effects,and it becomes sheathed in booming energy until the start of your next turn. If the target willingly moves before then, it immediately takes 1d8 thunder damage, and
the spell ends.



GREEN-FLAME BLADE
Evocation cantrip
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 5 feet
Components: V, M (a weapon)
Duration: Instantaneous
As part of the action used to cast this spell, you must make a melee attack with a weapon against one creature within the spell's range, otherwise the spell fails. On a hit, the target suffers the attack's normal effects, and green fire leaps from the target to a different creature of your choice that you can see within 5 feet of it. The second creature takes fire damage equal to your spellcasting ability modifier.

A spell attack is different in that it includes the words "spell attack" & looks more like this


Ray of Frost
Evocation cantrip
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 60 feet
Components: V, S
Duration: Instantaneous
A frigid beam o f blue-white light streaks toward a creature within range. Make a ranged spell attack against the target. On a hit, it takes 1d8 cold damage, and its speed is reduced by 10 feet until the start of your next turn.

If a spell does not include the words "spell attack", it is not a "spell attack" which is why PHB206 has this blurb about attack rolls to set it apart from the earlier blurbs about them with melee, ranged, heavy, versatile,2 handed, finesse, reach, special, & loading weapons

Some spells require the caster to make an attack roll
to determine whether the spell effect hits the intended target. Your attack bonus with a spell attack equals your spellcasting ability modifier + your proficiency bonus.Most spells that require attack rolls involve ranged attacks. Remember that you have disadvantage on a ranged attack roll if you are within 5 feet of a hostile creature that can see you and that isn’t incapacitated (see chapter 9).
The difference is that booming blade or green flame blade with a hypothetical +5 holy avenger gets to use the +5 in addition to everything the holy avenger does beyond the weapon's damage dice and the effects of booming blade or green flame blade. Thorn whip or ray of frost with warcaster and that +5 holy avenger does not include the +5. the holy avenger's damage dice, or the holy avenger's magical effects... it would only be thornwhip or ray of frost.

Bringing up spells that are so wildly different from what is being discussed as a way of suggesting the thing being discussed (one or more cleric cantrips that use a ranged or melee spell attack)s a a bad idea is even more absurd if you know the difference than it would have been if you didn't know the difference.

[Merudo]

Max is right, guys. His argument is narrowly defined, but it is technically correct.

In combat, the cleric spell list is low power at high levels, with a few notable exceptions.

At low level, cleric combat spells are great.

Out of combat, cleric spells are indispensable.

Clerics know their whole list and have the largest number of spells prepared at any given time, and they have to spend almost no spells making themselves durable.

Clerics have class features that give them more spells, including some clear winners.

Cleric class features make their casting of certain spells much better.

Overall, clerics are a serious contender for strongest class in the game.

But their list, viewed separately from everything else, is weaker than the wizards.

Yippe-ki-yi-yay

I agree with most of it, except the "clerics are a serious contender for strongest class in the game" part.

That might be true for level 1-5, but after that, the Cleric's power and utility plummets.

At level 7+, the Wizard and Bard are already ahead of the Cleric. The Wizard defensive spells (Mage Armor, Mirror Image, etc) are not longer such a resource drain, and the superior control spells of the Wizard & Bard start to really pay off.

By level 9-10, the Cleric is noticeably weaker, with a really bad level 10 capstone, and being stuck with Spirit Guardians and Banishment while the Wizard and Bard have access to top notch control spells.

By level 11+ the Cleric is falling farther and farther behind, with mostly mediocre high level spells and no domain spells.

I would personally rank the Lore Bard as the best class in the game, followed by Abjuration/Divination Wizards.

[EvilAnagram]

Wall of Light is not on any Cleric spell list.


Hold Person is pretty terrible (ranked red on Treantmonk’s Wizard Guide, decent on Yorrin’s Cleric Guide), Command is ok for a Cleric spell (ranked decent by Yorrin). Command only negates a single action, Hold Person gives multiple saves, is limited to humanoid, and require concentration. Both can only effect a single target per spell level.
Command's usefulness depends on party positioning and makeup, but clever usage can give your entire frontline a turn of advantage or op attacks whilst denying an action. Anyone deriding Hold Person has not faught sufficiently powerful humanoids. Paralysis grants auto-crits in addition to advantage, and even a single round spent taking advantage of it is worthwhile.


Banishment is excellent.
Yes.


The best control spell of the Cleric
No...


Wall of Fire is ranked “average” by Treantmonk, and monsters can just walk right through it if they really want to. Not really control.

Blade Barrier is a 6d10 Wall of Fire for a level 6 slot, and only ranked decent by Yorrin.

Guardian of Faith is also not a control spell, and is only rated “decent” by Yorrin.
First, learn to think for yourself, girlfriend. What does Merudo think.

Second, forcing creatures to choose between taking damage or staying back is absolutely control.


Sanctuary is more of a defensive buff than a control spell.
Disagree. It forces creatures to change their behavior in a way favorable to you.


Bestow Curse is really bad (ranked red by Treantmonk). The effects are just too weak.
It's ranked quite highly by me because one of the effects is, "Whatever you can think of." I mean, it's obviously worse for unimaginative people who can only regurgitate what they've seen from others, but I've gotten great use out of it.


Dominate Person is only available in the Trickery domain, and is also quite bad (ranked red by Treantmonk). Too many downsides and only works on humanoids.

Dominate Beast is only available in the Nature domain, and hymer’s druid guide describe it as a surprisingly weak spell.
You'd have to be pretty silly not to see the benefits of controlling the actions of a spellcaster or enemy leader. Yes, there are drawbacks, but a single round of completely disrupting the enemy is usually worth it.


Antimagic Field & Earthquake are both rather disappointing for level 8 spells, Yorrin rates both as decent.
I disagree with his assessment.


Divine Word is great against celestials/elementals/fey/fiends, but the hp limit severely limits the usability of the spell.
True.

Here's my summary for your knowledge of control spells: you don't fully understand what a control spell is, and you dont actually take the time to form your own opinions or test things in play.

If you want more, Fog Cloud, Blindness/Deafness, Calm Emotions, Gust of Wind, Wind Wall, Grasping Vine, Spike Growth, Sleet Storm, Confusion, Ice Storm, Destructive Wave, Contagion, Hold Monster, and more.

[JNAProductions]

Mm, Fog Cloud. So many spells need LoS, and Fog Cloud just "Nopes!" that.

[EvilAnagram]

I agree with most of it, except the "clerics are a serious contender for strongest class in the game" part.
The one cleric I ran went toe-to-toe with Strahd, possessing no magical items other than a pair of spiderwalk slippers, and crushed him. I mean, absolutely wrecked him. The sorcadin started trampolining into unconsciousness in a single turn, the wizard, rogue, and monk were hiding and getting wrecked by AoEs, and I was sending Strahd running away from me because I was dangerous to hit, dangerous to be near, and continuously kept my allies from biting it.


That might be true for level 1-5, but after that, the Cleric's power and utility plummets.

At level 7+, the Wizard and Bard are already ahead of the Cleric. The Wizard defensive spells (Mage Armor, Mirror Image, etc) are not longer such a resource drain, and the superior control spells of the Wizard & Bard start to really pay off.
This is just nonsense, man. Cleric buffs consistently get better, as do their healing and control. Be serious. Heal, Mass Cure Wounds, and Hero's Feast are awesome enough to disprove you, but the low-level spells remain consistently useful in a way Ice Knife or Heat Metal just doesn't.

[strangebloke]

That's... what I just said. If clerics had no good high level spells, this is exactly what you'd do to get access to e.g. metamagic, a new spell list, wildshape, Portent, invocations, or whatever. That's the opportunity cost that high level cleric spells (and a handful of other cleric abilities) have to compete with.

See, the problem is, at this point you're not comparing spell lists to spell lists.

You're comparing class features at high level to class features at low level. That's a very wonky comparison.

"Is it better to be able to cast heroes feast, or turn into a bear?" Heck if I know. Going to be DM and campaign dependent.

Everything that's true about low-level clerics (that they get their whole spell list, and have more spells prepared than anyone) continues to be true at higher levels. so even if you don't much care for any specific spell they get at 13th level, you gotta love having a whole boatload of options.

Cleric is more multiclass-friendly that wizard, but it isn't nearly as bad as warlock. Meh.

[Merudo]

First, learn to think for yourself, girlfriend. What does Merudo think.

[...]

Here's my summary for your knowledge of control spells: you don't fully understand what a control spell is, and you dont actually take the time to form your own opinions or test things in play.


Pretty insulting. I went spell level by spell level in the opening post, showing how bad the Cleric options are.

Instead of confronting my analysis, people keep repeating and repeating wild, substantiated claims, like the weird notion that Clerics are as good controllers/blasters as Wizards are, or that Wizards somehow can't buff well, without any demonstrating any of it.

When I point out that most of the Cleric control spells are viewed as mediocre by the community, suddenly I'm the one who can't think for himself - even though my original analysis apparently goes right against conventional wisdom!



If you want more, Fog Cloud, Blindness/Deafness, Calm Emotions, Gust of Wind, Wind Wall, Grasping Vine, Spike Growth, Sleet Storm, Confusion, Ice Storm, Destructive Wave, Contagion, Hold Monster, and more.

Please show how these spells are any good.

At this point I suspect you are just trolling me, wasting my time by naming a bunch of weak, ineffective control spells (or non-control spells) without explaining how they help the Cleric's control game.

I already know most of these spells are either mediocre, have limited control uses, and/or are thinly spread across the 11 domains.

[Merudo]

The one cleric I ran went toe-to-toe with Strahd, possessing no magical items other than a pair of spiderwalk slippers, and crushed him. I mean, absolutely wrecked him. The sorcadin started trampolining into unconsciousness in a single turn, the wizard, rogue, and monk were hiding and getting wrecked by AoEs, and I was sending Strahd running away from me because I was dangerous to hit, dangerous to be near, and continuously kept my allies from biting it.


First off, Curse of Strahd is probably the best campaign choice for a Cleric, if only for the effect of radiant damage on vampires & the Turn Undead ability. Your experience in CoS cannot be generalized to most settings.

As for the fight, I'm not sure why the Wizard, Rogue & Monk were getting wrecked by AoEs but not you. Strahd himself only has access to Sleep & Fireball as far as AoEs go. A cleric is not any better at resisting these AoEs than other classes.

I'm also confused as to why you were dangerous to hit. Are you alluding to the Tempest Cleric "Wrath of the Storm" ability? It's only 2d8 damage, and Strahd's +9 dex saving throw means he will make the save more often than not.

My guess is, you just happened to roll well while your allies made questionable decisions. If anything, the Monk should have been the star of that fight - Stunning Strike alone will completely wreck Strahd (he's really bad at CON saves, and the Monk can force 4 of them in a single turn).

[Asmotherion]

I mean, you can also destroy a MM Lich with a good grappler and a casting of Silence.

Wouldn't be that much fun or thematic for a caster now, would it? I don't know about your Sorcerers or Clerics, but I personally would rather destroy a Lich AND his Army of Undead and/or Fiends, using "my most powerful spell" than "grapple him till he submits". Just a matter of personal taste.

Narrative value of things gets underrated this days... :(

[CantigThimble]

Bringing up spells that are so wildly different from what is being discussed as a way of suggesting the thing being discussed (one or more cleric cantrips that use a ranged or melee spell attack)s a a bad idea is even more absurd if you know the difference than it would have been if you didn't know the difference.

I'm not sure how much more clearly I can put this.
FIREBOLT is a spell attack cantrip.
GREEN-FLAME BLADE is NOT a spell attack cantrip.
I know that, I have never, EVER been under the slightest impression otherwise. Get your condescending assumptions and explanations out of here and try to understand the point I'm actually trying to make.

My point:
Adding a cantrip that is significantly different than the ones currently available to a class can have a very large impact in how that class plays. Because cantrips can be used an unlimited number of times by any subclass, adding new ones that work significantly differently to the other cantrips avaiiable to the class can be a very significant change to the core class. The reason I was trying to make this point was because you said this:


I'm not sure why you bring up if champion/EK & the like should have battlemaster maneuvers as if giving them that feature was the same as adding cantrips to the game (something WotC has done regularly & will almost certainly do repeatedly) as if it were a comparable change to the core class.

Here you're saying that adding new cantrips isn't a big change to the core class. I think it definitely can be. Thus my point above. To illustrate that point I used the best evidence which exists, which is the two weapon attack cantrips. They are examples of how doing something seemling small, like adding one more cantrip, can have a very large impact on the game.

Sigh. This was just a side point and now it's been blown completely out of proportion.

And how about when you don't understand why I would bring something up you ask me why I brought it up instead of jumping straight to the conclusion that I clearly have no idea what I'm talking about? Sorry, but I'm honestly quite frustrated by this.

[Unoriginal]

Pretty insulting. I went spell level by spell level in the opening post, showing how bad the Cleric options are.

No, you didn't.


You've SAID that the Cleric options are bad. You have not shown it, nor demonstrated it, and even less proved it.



Instead of confronting my analysis, people keep repeating and repeating wild, substantiated claims, like the weird notion that Clerics are as good controllers/blasters as Wizards are, or that Wizards somehow can't buff well, without any demonstrating any of it.

You started this thread with wild, undemonstrated claims.



When I point out that most of the Cleric control spells are viewed as mediocre by the community, suddenly I'm the one who can't think for himself - even though my original analysis apparently goes right against conventional wisdom!

You're not making any sense. If your analysis apparently follow the community's view (a dubious claim in itself), how is it going against conventional wisdom?



I already know most of these spells are either mediocre, have limited control uses, and/or are thinly spread across the 11 domains.

Prove it, if you already know it.


First off, Curse of Strahd is probably the best campaign choice for a Cleric, if only for the effect of radiant damage on vampires & the Turn Undead ability. Your experience in CoS cannot be generalized to most settings.

You're the one who used Curse of Strahd as an example of how many spellbooks and scrolls a wizard would likely find in an adventure, despite it being an exceptional amount.

Is Curse of Strahd probably the best campaign choice for a Wizard, too?

[EvilAnagram]

Pretty insulting. I went spell level by spell level in the opening post, showing how bad the Cleric options are.
And your efforts were universally derided by the community. You don't seem to have a solid grasp of how basic features interact, you lack understanding of what battlefield control is, and you parrot the ideas of others without bothering to look critically at them for yourself, and yet you project a condescending tone as you misunderstand basic concepts. You may feel insulted, but that doesn't make me less right.


Instead of confronting my analysis, people keep repeating and repeating wild, substantiated claims
I love that you actually call the claims substantiated because people have consistently provided the textual evidence for these claims, which you ignore.


like the weird notion that Clerics are as good controllers/blasters as Wizards are, or that Wizards somehow can't buff well, without any demonstrating any of it.
I've brought up two dozen control spells and pointed out that the wizard has one good buff to pass around at level 5, and another at level 7. A cleric has over a dozen by that point.


When I point out that most of the Cleric control spells are viewed as mediocre by the community, suddenly I'm the one who can't think for himself - even though my original analysis apparently goes right against conventional wisdom!
Parroting selected ideas without bothering to understand the class is definitely evidence that you're not thinking for yourself. Different guides rate those spells differently, and I would disregard the opinion of anyone who thinks "effective" (the black rating) means "mediocre."



Please show how these spells are any good.

At this point I suspect you are just trolling me, wasting my time by naming a bunch of weak, ineffective control spells (or non-control spells) without explaining how they help the Cleric's control game.
If you don't understand how spells like Confusion, Blindness/Deafness, and Hold Monster can help exercise control, then I don't think you have much business wading into discussions yet. Lurking is an important part of the forum experience, and it helps you to learn.



I already know most of these spells are either mediocre, have limited control uses, and/or are thinly spread across the 11 domains.
Do you? Because you don't seem to understand what they are.

[EvilAnagram]

First off, Curse of Strahd is probably the best campaign choice for a Cleric, if only for the effect of radiant damage on vampires & the Turn Undead ability. Your experience in CoS cannot be generalized to most settings.
Sorcadin already had the sun sword, so we had the requisite damage to stop his regeneration. My anti-undead abilities did not come into play.


As for the fight, I'm not sure why the Wizard, Rogue & Monk were getting wrecked by AoEs but not you. Strahd himself only has access to Sleep & Fireball as far as AoEs go. A cleric is not any better at resisting these AoEs than other classes.
My DM had boosted his spell selection and gave him a nasty magic sword. He had Reverse Gravity and Cloudkill when we faced him. And as unoriginal pointed out, you emphasized the 9 spellbook the module has for a wizard, even though that's far from usual. At least try to be consistent.


I'm also confused as to why you were dangerous to hit. Are you alluding to the Tempest Cleric "Wrath of the Storm" ability? It's only 2d8 damage, and Strahd's +9 dex saving throw means he will make the save more often than not.
I had Spirit Guardians up, and someone had dropped a Cloud of Daggers, so getting close to me hurt, and taking any lightning damage (even saved) meant flying into the daggers.


My guess is, you just happened to roll well while your allies made questionable decisions. If anything, the Monk should have been the star of that fight - Stunning Strike alone will completely wreck Strahd (he's really bad at CON saves, and the Monk can force 4 of them in a single turn).
Guess all you want. I barely rolled attacks against him. I simply exercised soft control that kept weakening him and giving him bad options. His failed saves were more instrumental than my attacks.

[GorogIrongut]

I'm surprised people are still responding to this thread. The OP obviously has an axe to grind against clerics and picked the most narrow criteria to start a bash fest. While I applaud Max Wilson for trying to get something beneficial out of this train wreck of a thread, I'm afraid it's doomed to failure.

[Citan]

Sorcadin already had the sun sword, so we had the requisite damage to stop his regeneration. My anti-undead abilities did not come into play.


My DM had boosted his spell selection and gave him a nasty magic sword. He had Reverse Gravity and Cloudkill when we faced him. And as unoriginal pointed out, you emphasized the 9 spellbook the module has for a wizard, even though that's far from usual. At least try to be consistent.


I had Spirit Guardians up, and someone had dropped a Cloud of Daggers, so getting close to me hurt, and taking any lightning damage (even saved) meant flying into the daggers.


Guess all you want. I barely rolled attacks against him. I simply exercised soft control that kept weakening him and giving him bad options. His failed saves were more instrumental than my attacks.
You're making me remembering my epic 4E Fight where a Rogue (who knew little about using his Sneak Attack XD), a DMPC Barbarian (who was too stupid to speak or do anything else other than rushing up to an enemy) and me (frigging munchkined Gestalt character that was a Wizard/Bard hybrid with a talent stolen from "Paladin") totally gang-banged a youg White Dragon thanks to smart flanking from pals and my own Vicious Mockery cast from a safe range...
Just after we got nearly TPK by just a group of goblins...:smallbiggrin:

Just two great sessions of epic proportions both in failures (many failed rolls on my spells and others's attacks against goblins) and success (cornering the dragon and slaying in a very anti-climactic manner -the fact that DM misunderstood opportunity attacks and didn't dare move the Dragon IS the real, or rather only, reason we won, but still...).

Since you are talking about Spirit Guardians, although it's probably obvious to most people here, I'd like to point out how efficient it is to pair it with one "forced movement" character (Monk -especially 4E-, Repelling Blaster) and/or one sturdy martial (like a Barbarian with Sentinel or an EK with Protection).

[EvilAnagram]

You're making me remembering my epic 4E Fight where a Rogue (who knew little about using his Sneak Attack XD), a DMPC Barbarian (who was too stupid to speak or do anything else other than rushing up to an enemy) and me (frigging munchkined Gestalt character that was a Wizard/Bard hybrid with a talent stolen from "Paladin") totally gang-banged a youg White Dragon thanks to smart flanking from pals and my own Vicious Mockery cast from a safe range...
Just after we got nearly TPK by just a group of goblins...:smallbiggrin:

Just two great sessions of epic proportions both in failures (many failed rolls on my spells and others's attacks against goblins) and success (cornering the dragon and slaying in a very anti-climactic manner -the fact that DM misunderstood opportunity attacks and didn't dare move the Dragon IS the real, or rather only, reason we won, but still...).

Since you are talking about Spirit Guardians, although it's probably obvious to most people here, I'd like to point out how efficient it is to pair it with one "forced movement" character (Monk -especially 4E-, Repelling Blaster) and/or one sturdy martial (like a Barbarian with Sentinel or an EK with Protection).

Ha! That story reminds me of the time we were nearly TPK'd by newborn goats, then crushed a deadly encounter that day.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Ha! That story reminds me of the time we were nearly TPK'd by newborn goats, then crushed a deadly encounter that day.

One of the more dangerous fights I ran was in a tunnel with 2 swarms of poisonous snakes and a bone naga.

The naga wasn't the problem--they crushed it post haste. The swarms chewed people up pretty good though.

That's the same group that (much later) stunlocked a beholder into oblivion--it never got a turn before they nuked it and its minions.

[EvilAnagram]

One of the more dangerous fights I ran was in a tunnel with 2 swarms of poisonous snakes and a bone naga.

The naga wasn't the problem--they crushed it post haste. The swarms chewed people up pretty good though.

That's the same group that (much later) stunlocked a beholder into oblivion--it never got a turn before they nuked it and its minions.
Swarms are the best for messing with a low-level party. One of my groups is terrified of them after meeting a kobold inventor.

[KorvinStarmast]

That might be true for level 1-5, but after that, the Cleric's power and utility plummets.
Nope. versatility is an underappreciated feature.

At level 7+, the Wizard and Bard are already ahed of the Cleric.
What does that even mean, and why are you asserting a competition between classes? Each fills a slightly different role, and that's by design.

By level 9-10, the Cleric is noticeably weaker, with a really bad level 10 capstone,
1. Weaker at what? 2. Capstones happen at 20.

I would personally rank the Lore Bard as the best class in the game, followed by Abjuration/Divination Wizards. The nice thing about a Lore Bard is that a combination of skills excellence and spell choice (one still needs to exercise a bit of care in spell selection for your point to come true) is that they can be tailored to fit a lot of roles and cherry pick some very good spells.
How many Lore Bards choose Raise Dead or Resurrection, I wonder ... :smallcool:

About Channel Divinity:
It's a feature that requires interaction with the DM, and for that I find that some of the Min Maxer crowd who assess classes yell "Leper! Unclean" because they assume a hostile relationship between Player and DM.
Capstone, 20th level Channel Divinity, is a free 9th level (or any other level) spell on call. Not a bad feature at all.

I agree with one point. After 5th level spells, no more domain spells. (Which I think is a pity).

[Willie the Duck]

I would personally rank the Lore Bard as the best class in the game, followed by Abjuration/Divination Wizards.

A blanket statement like that is, well, a blanket statement, devoid of context (and I think context is important). There is (by design) no class that can do everything well. I find that a lore bard makes the best possible fifth member of most parties, and a purpose-designed (such as with the right magic secrets) lore bard can replace 1-2 party members (particularly if the party is otherwise imbalanced, like the party being the lore bard and then 3 melee-martials or the like). Even with well thought out spells selected, a bard is going to run into situations where none of the spells they have are appropriate to the situation (or the one they do have is a higher level slot than the current encounter warrants), yet their cantrips are not particularly helpful. I'm not saying this to imply that Lore bards aren't awesome, just that every class I've seen in play thus far has significant limitations.

[PhoenixPhyre]

A blanket statement like that is, well, a blanket statement, devoid of context (and I think context is important). There is (by design) no class that can do everything well. I find that a lore bard makes the best possible fifth member of most parties, and a purpose-designed (such as with the right magic secrets) lore bard can replace 1-2 party members (particularly if the party is otherwise imbalanced, like the party being the lore bard and then 3 melee-martials or the like). Even with well thought out spells selected, a bard is going to run into situations where none of the spells they have are appropriate to the situation (or the one they do have is a higher level slot than the current encounter warrants), yet their cantrips are not particularly helpful. I'm not saying this to imply that Lore bards aren't awesome, just that every class I've seen in play thus far has significant limitations.

Lore Bards are versatile in build, but much more limited in play. Without a dip or a feat, they strongly lack at-will damage (something that the OP dinged Clerics for, even though Clerics are light-years ahead of lore bards on that front). They get to steal 4 spells. That's it. Being locked into their spells for a whole level (and most of them come from one of the more specialized lists) is a hard thing--if you don't choose the right ones you're plinking for scratch damage.

I strongly echo the bold part. No class strongly overshadows another and no class is so weak as to be out of place in a mixed party. Everyone has their strengths and weaknesses.

[Merudo]

My DM had boosted his spell selection and gave him a nasty magic sword. He had Reverse Gravity and Cloudkill when we faced him.

Seems like you rolled well against these AoE, because there is no reason the Cleric should have any advantage against them.



I had Spirit Guardians up, and someone had dropped a Cloud of Daggers, so getting close to me hurt, and taking any lightning damage (even saved) meant flying into the daggers.

Where you in a 5' wide corridor? Why wasn't Strahd attacking you from another angle, so he wouldn't bounce back into the Cloud of Daggers? CoD only affects a 5 feet square.

By the way, I just love how my thread started with how Spirit Guardians is the only reliably great spell on the Cleric's list, while the Wizard has tons of awesome options. And your great, "epic" combat example only involves a single Cleric spell (Spirit Guardians), while 3 Wizard spells played a key role (Reverse Gravity, Cloudkill, Cloud of Daggers).

Kind of telling, no?

[Tetrasodium]

I'm not sure how much more clearly I can put this.
FIREBOLT is a spell attack cantrip.
GREEN-FLAME BLADE is NOT a spell attack cantrip.
I know that, I have never, EVER been under the slightest impression otherwise. Get your condescending assumptions and explanations out of here and try to understand the point I'm actually trying to make.

My point:
Adding a cantrip that is significantly different than the ones currently available to a class can have a very large impact in how that class plays. Because cantrips can be used an unlimited number of times by any subclass, adding new ones that work significantly differently to the other cantrips avaiiable to the class can be a very significant change to the core class. The reason I was trying to make this point was because you said this:



Here you're saying that adding new cantrips isn't a big change to the core class. I think it definitely can be. Thus my point above. To illustrate that point I used the best evidence which exists, which is the two weapon attack cantrips. They are examples of how doing something seemling small, like adding one more cantrip, can have a very large impact on the game.

Sigh. This was just a side point and now it's been blown completely out of proportion.

And how about when you don't understand why I would bring something up you ask me why I brought it up instead of jumping straight to the conclusion that I clearly have no idea what I'm talking about? Sorry, but I'm honestly quite frustrated by this.

pointing out just how different a cantrip based smite is from a cantrip with a ranged or melee spell attack is important because in reply to what basically amounted to "I think that the OP feels as he does because of what happens if there are good saves and spirit guardians is wounded by virtue of the situation not justifying spell slots of a resustance/immunity to it & by extension the cleric's cantrips themselves" you jumped in talking about how wildly different another cantrip based smite would be & brought up giving non-battlemaster fighter archtypes battlemaster maneuvers. If only one casting class had spell attack cantrips you might have a point, but sorcerer, wizard, & warlock all have more than one spell attack cantrip & more than 1 save for none cantrip. If there were no spells on the cleric spell list itself that were spell attacks or those spells were among the most useless on the lists you might have a point... but a lot of the cleric's good leveled spells have a ranged or melee spell attack.

You think adding new cantrips to a class can be a big deal, which you will get no argument about, but rather than talk about the antrips suggested (spell attack and/or non-radiant/non-necrotic damage), you bring up a wildly unrelated set of smite cantrips to make your point rather than discussing if there is merit to the idea that the OP might fee as he does because of the cantrip universal save for none across all cantrips available & very limited damage type selection on most of the spell from cantrip up. If you are going to go with wildly irrelivant, you might as well talk about how stupidly dangerous Chlorine Triflouride (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAhiqGZCwNQ) is because it's only slightly more irrelevant.

[Willie the Duck]

By the way, I just love how my thread started with how Spirit Guardians is the only reliably great spell on the Cleric's list, while the Wizard has tons of awesome options. And your great, "epic" combat example only involves a single Cleric spell (Spirit Guardians), while 3 Wizard spells played a key role (Reverse Gravity, Cloudkill, Cloud of Daggers).

Kind of telling, no?

Again, no. This one specific group's adventure, plus the spells which ended up in effect are a mere anecdote for evidence for both sides of this discussion. Both of your focusing on it is not just missing the forest for the trees, it is missing the forest for a single specific tree on a given afternoon.

[EvilAnagram]

Seems like you rolled well against these AoE, because there is no reason the Cleric should have any advantage against them.
I was a dwarf with spider climb.



Where you in a 5' wide corridor? Why wasn't Strahd attacking you from another angle, so he wouldn't bounce back into the Cloud of Daggers? CoD only affects a 5 feet square.
I'm not going to give you a play by play. I was careful in my positioning and reckless in providing him with a target when it was convenient for me. Eventually, Strahd just tried to avoid me.


By the way, I just love how my thread started with how Spirit Guardians is the only reliably great spell on the Cleric's list, while the Wizard has tons of awesome options. And your great, "epic" combat example only involves a single Cleric spell (Spirit Guardians), while 3 Wizard spells played a key role (Reverse Gravity, Cloudkill, Cloud of Daggers).

Kind of telling, no?
That's not actually true. I believe I mentioned the Sorcadin trampolining in and out of consciousness? That was thanks to my healing. In fact, a well-placed heal kept the monk standing more than once. Furthermore, I had cast Aid before combat, and Destructive Wave, Guiding Bolt, and Spiritual Weapon all made appearances.


Again, no. This one specific group's adventure, plus the spells which ended up in effect are a mere anecdote for evidence for both sides of this discussion. Both of your focusing on it is not just missing the forest for the trees, it is missing the forest for a single specific tree on a given afternoon.
I disagree. I think examples of play are effective in analyzing the benefits of given features. His assertion is that Clerics are underpowered and ineffective, while my example demonstrates how a cleric can be the lynchpin of a party's tactics.

[JNAProductions]

Merudo, quick question:

Do you think the Cleric class itself is worse than the Wizard? Obviously I (and many others) disagree with you on the spell thoughts, but, when taken as a whole, do you consider Cleric to be worse than Wizard? And, if so, by what degree? A small amount, unnoticable in play? A medium amount, where you might notice it, but probably won't be bothered? A large amount, where you WILL notice it and will almost certainly be bothered by it?

[Unoriginal]

And your great, "epic" combat example only involves a single Cleric spell (Spirit Guardians), while 3 Wizard spells played a key role (Reverse Gravity, Cloudkill, Cloud of Daggers).

Kind of telling, no?

What's telling is that you're trying to both a) argue that those spells played a key role in the fight when said spells failed to do anything notable to the Cleric and b) claim that the spells of the *module's Big Bad* playing a key role in the fight against this Big Bad would somehow an argument in favor of your hypothesis.

[CantigThimble]

Snip

Like I said, it was a side point and it was never really that important to my argument. This whole tangent has been a mountain out of a molehill. If you don't see how I think it relates to the main argument, then ignore it. All my other arguments still stand.

[Merudo]

Merudo, quick question:

Do you think the Cleric class itself is worse than the Wizard?

Your question is distinct from my original statement that the Cleric's' combat spelllist is lackluster beyond level 1 spells and Spirit Guardians.

However, I'll answer your question.

At lower levels (1-5), the Cleric is very strong. That's unsurprising, given how frontloaded the Cleric class is, and how good a dip it makes.

However, after the initial levels, the Cleric doesn't really get much. Spell levels 4-9 typically have only one spell of note, if that. Clerics lack universally powerful spells like Wall of Force or Forcecage in their higher level repertoire. Clerics also stop learning domain spells after level 9, and beside their class capstone at level 17, they get only 2 bad abilities (Divine Intervention, Destroy Undead 2-4).

In my experience, characters spend the bulk of their adventurer career at level 5-13, and that's why I consider the Cleric weaker than the Wizard overall.

[JNAProductions]

Your question is distinct from my original statement that the Cleric's' combat spelllist is lackluster beyond level 1 spells and Spirit Guardians.

However, I'll answer your question.

At lower levels (1-5), the Cleric is very strong. That's unsurprising, given how frontloaded the Cleric class is, and how good a dip it makes.

However, after the initial levels, the Cleric doesn't really get much. Spell levels 4-9 typically have only one spell of note, if that. Clerics lack universally powerful spells like Wall of Force or Forcecage in their higher level repertoire. Clerics also stop learning domain spells after level 9, and beside their class capstone at level 17, they get only 2 bad abilities (Divine Intervention, Destroy Undead 2-4).

In my experience, characters spend the bulk of their adventurer career at level 5-13, and that's why I consider the Cleric weaker than the Wizard overall.

And by how much? Is it noticeable? Would it impact someone's fun?

[Merudo]

What's telling is that you're trying to both a) argue that those spells played a key role in the fight when said spells failed to do anything notable to the Cleric

The spells crippled the rest of the party. The only reasons it didn't affect the Cleric is because he was a dwarf with spiderclimb, not because he was a Cleric.

By the way, Strahd was obviously roleplayed poorly in the campaign - he's a 20 intelligence character with access to scrying, so he should have been much better prepared to face the group. These is no way a 20 intelligence character would use spells for which a party member is essentially immune to.

[JNAProductions]

And by how much? Is it noticeable? Would it impact someone's fun?

Think you missed this, Merudo.

[Merudo]

And by how much? Is it noticeable? Would it impact someone's fun?

Definitely noticeable, and it certainly impacts the Cleric's fun.

It's most noticeable at level up, when everyone else in the party will be full of glee and excited about their new abilities. Meanwhile the Cleric will be stuck getting Divine Intervention or underwhelming spells like Flame Strike...

[JNAProductions]

Definitely noticeable, and it certainly impacts the Cleric's fun.

It's most noticeable at level up, when everyone else in the party will be full of glee and excited about their new abilities. Meanwhile the Cleric will be stuck getting Divine Intervention or underwhelming spells like Flamestrike...

Alright. And that's where we're going to disagree, quite heavily. The Cleric continues to be fun to play throughout the game-I'm in a game right now with a level 10 Forge Cleric, and he's never felt overshadowed or that he's lacking fun. They certainly have DIFFERENT strengths than a Wizard, but that doesn't make them less fun or less powerful.

Follow-up question: Have you ever played a Cleric? Or is this just theorycrafting?

[Tetrasodium]

Like I said, it was a side point and it was never really that important to my argument. This whole tangent has been a mountain out of a molehill. If you don't see how I think it relates to the main argument, then ignore it. All my other arguments still stand.

without the spells you used making that point, I'm not even sure what your "main argument" is

[BeefGood]

I don't have an opinion on the larger questions here but two particular things about cleric spell list puzzle me:
Flame Strike, 5th level spell, is such poorer value than Fireball, 3rd level spell, that I just don't get it. It's as if the plan was to give the cleric a blasting spell, but keep it way inferior to the wizard equivalent. Sounds silly but I can't think of another explanation. Are there other pairs of spells like this (I'm away from book)? Like, just making this up, say druid spell list contains Grow Rainforest as a 3rd level spell, while wizard spell list contains Grow Daffodil as 5th level spell.
Counterspell. I don't understand why Counterspell is not on cleric list. It seems like such an obviously useful thing that it should be on every spell list, and wouldn't violate any thematic concerns.

[CantigThimble]

Your question is distinct from my original statement that the Cleric's' combat spelllist is lackluster beyond level 1 spells and Spirit Guardians.

However, I'll answer your question.

At lower levels (1-5), the Cleric is very strong. That's unsurprising, given how frontloaded the Cleric class is, and how good a dip it makes.

However, after the initial levels, the Cleric doesn't really get much. Spell levels 4-9 typically have only one spell of note, if that. Clerics lack universally powerful spells like Wall of Force or Forcecage in their higher level repertoire. Clerics also stop learning domain spells after level 9, and beside their class capstone at level 17, they get only 2 bad abilities (Divine Intervention, Destroy Undead 2-4).

In my experience, characters spend the bulk of their adventurer career at level 5-13, and that's why I consider the Cleric weaker than the Wizard overall.

I completely agree with you that the base cleric spell list is pretty lukewarm after 3rd level spells. (though I think you severely underestimate spiritual weapon) I played a cleric from 1st to 11th level (knowledge domain with heavy armor proficiency feat from Vhuman) and after 5th level my new spells didn't make a huge impact on how I played. Mostly I used domain spells and upcast lower level spells in combat. Regardless, the character was fun through that whole period and was the cornerstone of the party's combat ability for that entire period. The spirit guardians, spiritual weapon combo just doesn't fall off in power as we leveled up, if anything it got better and that character was almost always on the front line dealing more damage and taking more enemy attacks than anyone else in the party.

In addition, while his combat spells didn't change much from 5th-11th level he got a huge amount of utility over that segment and I always felt I had good reasons to take another level in cleric rather than multiclass.

[Merudo]

Follow-up question: Have you ever played a Cleric? Or is this just theorycrafting?

I just did actually. I played a Curse of Strahd campaign as an evil Cleric.

As an evil Cleric, my Spirit Guardians spell dealt necrotic damage, which is heavily resisted through the campaign, and has none of the advantage of radiant damage against undead.

Moreover, because Spirit Guardians would expose my evil alignment to the rest of the party through the necrotic damage, I avoided the spell outright for most of the campaign.

My experience as a Cleric directly led me to the conclusion that without a full strength Spirit Guardians, a Cleric is not that effective in combat.

What about you? Have you ever played a Cleric for which Spirit Guardians is made significantly weaker, or had to be avoided for RP reasons?

[JNAProductions]

So, because you played as a necrotic-main Cleric, in an undead heavy campaign, you concluded that Clerics are weak?

That's... I mean, sure, just like a 3.5 Rogue sucks against Constructs, Undeads, and Oozes. You did indeed get shafted that campaign, but that doesn't mean Clerics are weak, that means that your specific build was weak for that campaign.

[Merudo]

So, because you played as a necrotic-main Cleric, in an undead heavy campaign, you concluded that Clerics are weak?

That's... I mean, sure, just like a 3.5 Rogue sucks against Constructs, Undeads, and Oozes. You did indeed get shafted that campaign, but that doesn't mean Clerics are weak, that means that your specific build was weak for that campaign.

I concluded that Cleric have a weak combat spell list without Spirit Guardians (check title of the thread). Spirit Guardians is the only Cleric spell affected by being evil.

After my alignment became a non-issue and when facing non-necrotic resistant creatures, my experience mirrored CantigThimble's. I did alright by upcasting Spirit Guardians / Spiritual Weapon, but still didn't come close to the Wizard's effects on the battlefield.

But you haven't answered my question. Have you, or for that matter anyone who posted in this thread, ever played a Cleric for which Spirit Guardians is made significantly weaker, or had to be avoided for RP reasons?

[Unoriginal]

It's as if the plan was to give the cleric a blasting spell, but keep it way inferior to the wizard equivalent. Sounds silly but I can't think of another explanation.

That's literally the explanation.

I guess no one watched the video of Crawford explaining why the Wizard and the Cleric have spell lists that differ in such ways.


I did alright by upcasting Spirit Guardians / Spiritual Weapon, but still didn't come close to the Wizard's effects on the battlefield.

So you're saying that by using the Cleric mainly as a damage-dealer, you couldn't match the Wizard?

[JNAProductions]

I concluded that Cleric have a weak combat spell list without Spirit Guardians (check title of the thread). Spirit Guardians is the only Cleric spell affected by being evil.

After my alignment became a non-issue and when facing non-necrotic resistance creatures, my experience mirrored CantigThimble's. I did alright by upcasting Spirit Guardians / Spiritual Weapon, but still didn't come close to the Wizard's effects on the battlefield.

So what did you do? Did you try using Bless, one of the best buffs in the game? Did you fully use your abilities, or did you just try to be a Wizard while playing a Cleric?

[Willie the Duck]

Now I see why there has been so much focus on damage type in this discussion.

This would not be the first edition where evil clerics kinda get hosed. Particularly against undead (minus being able to control them or heal them).

[Unoriginal]

This would not be the first edition where evil clerics kinda get hosed. Particularly against undead (minus being able to control them or heal them).

The most common Undead aren't especially resistant to necrotic damages, though. And to my knowledge, alignment doesn't affect your Channel Divinity ability.

[Merudo]

The most common Undead aren't especially resistant to necrotic damages, though. And to my knowledge, alignment doesn't affect your Channel Divinity ability.

Vampires, Vampire Spawns, Liches, Ghasts, Ghosts, Shadows, Specters, Wights, Will-o'-Wisps, Revenants, Phantom Warriors, Flameskulls, etc are all resistant to necrotic damage. All feature in CoS.

[KorvinStarmast]

The most common Undead aren't especially resistant to necrotic damages, though. And to my knowledge, alignment doesn't affect your Channel Divinity ability. correct. But that won't stop the OP from complaining that a cleric isn't a wizard, apparently.

[Merudo]

So what did you do? Did you try using Bless, one of the best buffs in the game? Did you fully use your abilities, or did you just try to be a Wizard while playing a Cleric?

I used Bless all the time, but since our party was caster heavy, it had limited impact.

Not sure what you mean by "try to be a Wizard while playing a Cleric". Do you mean try to use blasting spells & control spells? EvilAnagram keeps claiming Clerics are about as good as Wizards at control & blasting, so unless he is wrong, "trying to be a Wizard while playing a Cleric" should work really well.

For the record, beyond the Spirit Guardians / Spiritual Weapon combo that I started using once my alignment had been revealed, I mostly used Banishment, Blindness, and Command, with an occasional Sanctuary when the turn order favored it. We didn't have a grappler to make Silence work, and my Cleric was usually better off whacking enemies with his Flametongue than casting damage spells. I tended to reserve Channel Divinity for undeads.

[CantigThimble]

without the spells you used making that point, I'm not even sure what your "main argument" is

Clerics don't really need a spell attack cantrip added to the base chassis. The base chassis has entirely adequate options for at will damage. People who have a very strong preference for attack rolls over saving throws have several subclass options that will satisfy that particular preference.

And on the main thread topic:
I think that the OP's point is pretty reasonable in some ways.

Clerics rely on about 3 main combat spells, besides healing: Bless, Spiritual Weapon and Spirit Guardians. These spells are all very good and are useful against pretty much every enemy. They allow the cleric to be one of the best combat characters in the party on their merits alone, even through the midgame. They don't get higher level combat spells that are anywhere near as good, but in my experience they also don't really need them.

However, because that list of excellent combat spells is short, if you remove one (or in the OP's case 2 since bless was also very weak for his party) it impacts his combat effectiveness much more than say, taking fireball away from the wizard; because the wizard can still learn lightning bolt.

However, I would also say that there are ways around this. Domains vary wildly in what they add to the class and if you expect that you won't be able to use spirit guardians/bless then you can take a domain that offers good combat spells for those levels, such as Tempest or Light.

Rather than call this a flaw in the cleric's design, I would say that this is an issue that people should be aware of when building a character for a campaign.

[Tetrasodium]

I don't have an opinion on the larger questions here but two particular things about cleric spell list puzzle me:
Flame Strike, 5th level spell, is such poorer value than Fireball, 3rd level spell, that I just don't get it. It's as if the plan was to give the cleric a blasting spell, but keep it way inferior to the wizard equivalent. Sounds silly but I can't think of another explanation. Are there other pairs of spells like this (I'm away from book)? Like, just making this up, say druid spell list contains Grow Rainforest as a 3rd level spell, while wizard spell list contains Grow Daffodil as 5th level spell.
Counterspell. I don't understand why Counterspell is not on cleric list. It seems like such an obviously useful thing that it should be on every spell list, and wouldn't violate any thematic concerns.

I believe that the flamestrike/fireball disparity is because originally fireball could destroy items & a failed save meant you needed to roll a save for all of your items or they get destroyed while flamestrike did not. 3.5 did away with the item destruction from fireball but 3.5 had the CoDzilla for other reasons & nobody wanted to bring back the item destruction so it was a nonissue. with 5e they cleared up a lot of the caster:martial disparity & CoDzilla problems so legacy cruft like that is more noticeable.

[Willie the Duck]

The most common Undead aren't especially resistant to necrotic damages, though. And to my knowledge, alignment doesn't affect your Channel Divinity ability.

No, but my statement was meant broadly over all editions. 5e some undead are resistant to necrotic damage (something only evil clerics have to worry about). In 3e, evil clerics could channel cause wound spells instead of cures (rarely worthwhile except to heal undead allies, and a real blow except for the proliferation of CLW wands in most games), and could command undead, so their only real positive interactions with undead was taking them over. In TSR-era games, the evil cleric often only had access to the reversed/harmful forms of certain spells, which was a real hindrance during dungeon crawls when fixing your own party member was much more in the cleric's wheelhouse than employing curses and diseases and the like upon others.

Regardless, the general appearance is that the OP was soured on Clerics due to building a necrotic-centric cleric in the specific adventure where that was most hamstrung. Or at least that is a contributing factor. I understand the reasoning. My tomelock really felt useless in the castle of the Helmed Horrors (that my DM admitted was a poorly thought take-that at him and a fellow player's magic missile reliance).


I believe that the flamestrike/fireball disparity is because originally fireball could destroy items & a failed save meant you needed to roll a save for all of your items or they get destroyed while flamestrike did not. 3.5 did away with the item destruction from fireball but 3.5 had the CoDzilla for other reasons & nobody wanted to bring back the item destruction so it was a nonissue. with 5e they cleared up a lot of the caster:martial disparity & CoDzilla problems so legacy cruft like that is more noticeable.

I'll have to check my oD&D books when I get home, but 1e doesn't have that distinction between fireballs and flamestrikes (at least not in the spells, I'll have to check the item destruction rules). I think the difference is merely that yes, cleric blasting spells were supposed to be weaker in TSR-era, because they were also healers and warriors, so of course the wizards needed to be better at some things (blasting and problem solving, mostly).


I used Bless all the time, but since our party was caster heavy, it had limited impact.

The fact that a spell which boosts to-hit is poorly suited to a party of characters which rarely use the hit mechanic is not evidence that the spell is weak, but that it is poorly suited to the party. This is right along the line of necrotic damage being of poor value in CoS--yes, it's true, but it tells us as much about class power as using fireballs in the halls of the salamanders.

[Unoriginal]

Vampires, Vampire Spawns, Liches, Ghasts, Ghosts, Phantom Warriors, Flameskulls, etc are all resistant to necrotic damage. All feature in CoS.

Yes. Your point? Not every adventure is CoS, which take place in a land filled with powerful Undead that are not the "most Common Undead" I was talking about.

Also, I'm confused: earlier you claimed that CoS was probably the best module for Clerics, then that you couldn't play your Cleric well in Cos.

You also said that CoS had plenty of spellbooks and scrolls to empower the Wizards. After a brief examination, it turns out that that quantity of spellbooks and scrolls is pretty unusual.

So, maybe I'm just crazy, but could it just be that you played a character that was disadvantaged in this particular module while the Wizard was greatly advantaged?

[Tetrasodium]

Clerics don't really need a spell attack cantrip added to the base chassis. The base chassis has entirely adequate options for at will damage. People who have a very strong preference for attack rolls over saving throws have several subclass options that will satisfy that particular preference.

and you are supporting this claim of it not being needed with what reasons?.....
Remember that 4/10 cleric archtypes have potent spellcaster (wis mod to cantrip damage at 8) & only 2 of those can choose a spell attack cantrip (nature/arcana) leaving 8/10 cleric archtypes as having no spell attack options even though a pure wis caster centric type build is clearly intended to be a reasonablre option for any of those 10 archtypes.

If you say "but $archtype", you need to consider that the base spell lists for sorcerer, wizard, & warlock all have a mix of save/spell attack cantrips in base spell lists & all have an archtype that has both the cantrip options as well as pretty much any of the strengths of a cleric you want to point at.... end result is that it's a pretty meaningless bit of support to your point as occurred earlier.

[Merudo]

Regardless, the general appearance is that the OP was soured on Clerics due to building a necrotic-centric cleric in the specific adventure where that was most hamstrung

Just an extra detail. I did not build a "necrotic-centric cleric", I built an evil cleric that happened to have his Spirit Guardians spell deal necrotic damage & reveal his alignment.

When I rolled the character, I thought the Cleric spell list was good enough that I would do alright without Spirit Guardians. I found that to be untrue.

[MaxWilson]

Alright. And that's where we're going to disagree, quite heavily. The Cleric continues to be fun to play throughout the game-I'm in a game right now with a level 10 Forge Cleric, and he's never felt overshadowed or that he's lacking fun. They certainly have DIFFERENT strengths than a Wizard, but that doesn't make them less fun or less powerful.

Follow-up question: Have you ever played a Cleric? Or is this just theorycrafting?

I don't usually play clerics because (1) I hate the RP flavor (though I'd totally play an Athasian templar), and (2) they don't interest me mechanically from levels 10-20.

Despite my dislike for clerical RP, my powergamer instincts are always tempted by a one-level cleric dip on a several chassis (especially Cleric 1/Wizard X, with cleric level taken at either first or second level) because it's mechanically powerful. I can imagine being tempted to go as high as cleric 9, though again for RP reasons I'd be way more tempted to play a corrupt prelate like Cardinal Woolsey than a seriously devout cleric (because I just can't take D&D religious beliefs seriously), and even then I'd probably want to mix in some Warlock for RP reasons, invocations, and at-will damage. But before this thread came along, I was not at all tempted to go higher, and even now I think this thread has mostly just persuaded me that Bards should always seriously consider Holy Aura as an 18th level Magical Secret.

I still owe Citan and EvilAnagram a response on the cleric spells they praised (Heal, Earthquake (blech), Holy Aura, Etherealness, Divine Word, Word of Recall, several others). But I need to think it over a bit more first, because so far I'm still not seeing much attraction to them, and I'm unsure how much of my distaste is just emotional and/or confirmation bias. After all, all it takes is a handful of good spells to make a class good--wizard spells at 8th level are mostly unexciting, for example, but upcast Mass Suggestion VIII, Maze, Clone, Antipathy/Sympathy, Antimagic Field, Feeblemind, Demiplane, and maybe Dominate Monster are all pretty decent and suffice to make 8th level still exciting. I want to be fair to clerics, so I'm squinting as hard as I can to see awesomeness in the spells named.

E.g. Divine Word is a bonus action cast Save-or-Banishment effect against a limited selection of targets in an area. Bonus action cast doesn't do much unless you have a good alternate use for your action, which single-classed clerics aside from Arcana Clerics really don't (can't cast another spell, aren't really good at making physical attacks), so Divine Word's niche is either (1) disabling hordes of weak melee creatures (who could just as easily be wiped out by a Fireball), or (2) moderate-to-large numbers of tough melee demons/etc. with no legendary saves and relatively poor Wisdom saves, like a bunch of Chasmes. That makes it basically the same niche as Hypnotic Pattern or Fear, with the twofold advantage of not needing concentration and being a bonus action cast and the disadvantage of working only on celestials/elementals/fey/fiends. Is that enough to make it good to prepare as opposed to merely best-available/might-as-well-since-I'm-a-cleric? I'm still squinting and trying to see the value in it because I want to be fair.

Ditto for stuff like Word of Recall, Heal and Earthquake.

Planar Ally is a particularly weak spell IMO since all it provides is transportation. If you can hire high-level monsters for gold via Planar Ally, you can hire them for gold via Sending + Teleportation Circle or Transport Via Plants or Plane Shift just as easily. The heavy lifting there is being done by the roleplaying, not the spell. And bounded accuracy being what it is, hiring a largish number of low-level monsters like Githyanki will probably be cheaper and more effective.

[Unoriginal]

Just an extra detail. I did not build a "necrotic-centric cleric", I built an evil cleric that happened to have his Spirit Guardians spell deal necrotic damage & reveal his alignment.

I thought the Cleric spell list was good enough that I would do alright without Spirit Guardians. I found that to be untrue.

What was your Domain?

[CantigThimble]

and you are supporting this claim of it not being needed with what reasons?.....

Thank you for asking.


Warlocks have far and away the best damage cantrip in the game, no contest. But the rest of the class is balanced around that fact. Bards have arguably the worst, but again, the rest of the class is balanced around that.

Not all cantrip selections are, or should be created equal. The fact that one class has spell attack cantrips on their base list does not mean that all classes should have spell attack cantrips on their base list. You need to consider the broader context of the class to determine what cantrips are or are not appropriate for them to have on their base list.


First off, radiant resistant enemies are just not a thing. Literally the only enemies with any kind of resistance to radiant damage are angels and couatls. This is a BIG part of why I think cleric having limited combat spells is fine, the ones they do have deal the best type of damage in the entire game. The only type that could possibly be considered equal is force, but there's more vulnerbility to radiant than there is resistance to it and a bunch of undead have bonuses that are cancelled by taking radiant damage.

Limiting clerics to only having a cantrip that deals radiant damage is not actually a problem. It's a feature. They have the only cantrip that deals radiant damage because it is the best damage type. It isn't the most highly damaging cantrip because it has the best damage type.

[Pex]

I mean, within the constraints listed, I'd say (without thinking too deeply) that

Wizard>sorcerer>bard=cleric>druid>warlock

So mediocre is sorta appropriate?

You're using "mediocre" to mean the cleric spell list is in the middle of the pack in terms of coolness among the classes. The OP is using "mediocre" to mean except for Spirit Guardians cleric spells suck so the class sucks.

World of difference.

[MaxWilson]

I don't have an opinion on the larger questions here but two particular things about cleric spell list puzzle me:
Flame Strike, 5th level spell, is such poorer value than Fireball, 3rd level spell, that I just don't get it. It's as if the plan was to give the cleric a blasting spell, but keep it way inferior to the wizard equivalent. Sounds silly but I can't think of another explanation. Are there other pairs of spells like this (I'm away from book)?

Yes, there are. Clerics have Cure Wounds I/II/III/IV, but Paladins have the far superior Aura of Vitality, and now rangers and druids likewise have the far superior Healing Spirit. Healing Spirit is 2nd level but heals 35 HP (technically could be 70 HP per PC in the party, but that requires gamisms/turn manipulation that most DMs including me would alter the spell to prevent), whereas Cure Wounds III heals 3d8 + WIS (about 17 HP) to a single PC, at touch range and at the cost of an action instead of a bonus action. And Healing Spirit also scales far better with high-level spell slots, adding 10d6 (or 20d6 per character using gimmicks) per spell level, as opposed to d8 per spell level.

Healing Spirit is good enough to arguably obsolete Heal as well. Heal doesn't take concentration, but it only heals 70 HP (and ends blindness/deafness/disease, which is typically irrelevant) whereas Healing Spirit VI heals 5d6 (17.5) HP per round for ten rounds, including bouncing creatures up from 0 HP (at the beginning of their turns, similar to Regenerate) every single turn. It doesn't make your allies unkillable, but it makes them unkillable against the same things Regenerate would make them unkillable against, and it can heal the whole party after combat is done instead of just a single PC.

It's a ridiculous spell.


You're using "mediocre" to mean the cleric spell list is in the middle of the pack in terms of coolness among the classes. The OP is using "mediocre" to mean except for Spirit Guardians cleric spells suck so the class sucks.

World of difference.

He's also severely underestimating warlocks and especially druids. Move them up to their proper place and the cleric is at the bottom. Although the sorcerer should move down too. (Not as far as it would have moved pre-Xanathar's though. Sorcerers got a lot of good spells in that book.)

[CantigThimble]

Yes, there are. Clerics have Cure Wounds I/II/III/IV, but Paladins have the far superior Aura of Vitality, and now rangers and druids likewise have the far superior Healing Spirit. Healing Spirit is 2nd level but heals 35 HP (technically could be 70 HP per PC in the party, but that requires gamisms/turn manipulation that most DMs including me would alter the spell to prevent), whereas Cure Wounds III heals 3d8 + WIS (about 17 HP) to a single PC, at touch range and at the cost of an action instead of a bonus action. And Healing Spirit also scales far better with high-level spell slots, adding 10d6 (or 20d6 per character using gimmicks) per spell level, as opposed to d8 per spell level.

Healing Spirit is good enough to arguably obsolete Heal as well. Heal doesn't take concentration, but it only heals 70 HP (and ends blindness/deafness/disease, which is typically irrelevant) whereas Healing Spirit VI heals 5d6 (17.5) HP per round for ten rounds, including bouncing creatures up from 0 HP (at the beginning of their turns, similar to Regenerate) every single turn. It doesn't make your allies unkillable, but it makes them unkillable against the same things Regenerate would make them unkillable against, and it can heal the whole party after combat is done instead of just a single PC.

It's a ridiculous spell.

I would mention that Prayer of Healing WAS the most spell-slot efficient healing spell in the game before healing spirit came along.

I should mention, for the sake of avoiding a repeat of the discussion in the healing spirit thread that when I brought this up before a lot of other people have said that out of combat healing was never a problem for their parties and thus prayer of healing was never used. Though, then I would say that if out of combat healing isn't a problem for your party then you shouldn't be concerned with how much healing per spell slot you're getting, just how much you can heal on one turn of combat.

[Merudo]

Yes, there are. Clerics have Cure Wounds I/II/III/IV, but Paladins have the far superior Aura of Vitality, and now rangers and druids likewise have the far superior Healing Spirit. Healing Spirit is 2nd level but heals 35 HP (technically could be 70 HP per PC in the party, but that requires gamisms/turn manipulation that most DMs including me would alter the spell to prevent), whereas Cure Wounds III heals 3d8 + WIS (about 17 HP) to a single PC, at touch range and at the cost of an action instead of a bonus action. And Healing Spirit also scales far better with high-level spell slots, adding 10d6 (or 20d6 per character using gimmicks) per spell level, as opposed to d8 per spell level.

Healing Spirit is good enough to arguably obsolete Heal as well. Heal doesn't take concentration, but it only heals 70 HP (and ends blindness/deafness/disease, which is typically irrelevant) whereas Healing Spirit VI heals 5d6 (17.5) HP per round for ten rounds, including bouncing creatures up from 0 HP (at the beginning of their turns, similar to Regenerate) every single turn. It doesn't make your allies unkillable, but it makes them unkillable against the same things Regenerate would make them unkillable against, and it can heal the whole party after combat is done instead of just a single PC.

It's a ridiculous spell.

He's also severely underestimating warlocks and especially druids. Move them up to their proper place and the cleric is at the bottom. Although the sorcerer should move down too. (Not as far as it would have moved pre-Xanathar's though. Sorcerers got a lot of good spells in that book.)

I agree with everything you wrote here.

Also, I'm not as familiar with the Warlock & Druid as I am with the Cleric/Wizard/Bard, which is why I never mentioned them. As for the Sorcerer, I actually think he's the worst full spellcaster in the game (especially with the nerf to Careful Spell), although again, it's not an opinion I'd feel confident defending.

[EvilAnagram]

The spells crippled the rest of the party. The only reasons it didn't affect the Cleric is because he was a dwarf with spiderclimb, not because he was a Cleric.

By the way, Strahd was obviously roleplayed poorly in the campaign - he's a 20 intelligence character with access to scrying, so he should have been much better prepared to face the group. These is no way a 20 intelligence character would use spells for which a party member is essentially immune to.
I like how you admit that the spells crippled the majority of the party, then claim that it was ridiculous and stupid of Strahd to use them.

I don't expect more from you at this point. I think it's simply quite illustrative of your approach to debate.

[Pex]

Lore Bards are versatile in build, but much more limited in play. Without a dip or a feat, they strongly lack at-will damage (something that the OP dinged Clerics for, even though Clerics are light-years ahead of lore bards on that front). They get to steal 4 spells. That's it. Being locked into their spells for a whole level (and most of them come from one of the more specialized lists) is a hard thing--if you don't choose the right ones you're plinking for scratch damage.

I strongly echo the bold part. No class strongly overshadows another and no class is so weak as to be out of place in a mixed party. Everyone has their strengths and weaknesses.

Depending on taste, it isn't a bad idea for a Lore Bard to choose an attack cantrip as one of his spells at 6th level. Eldritch Blast is likely. It is aesthetically not an efficient idea because he could have had a 3rd level spell instead. However, if the player is one who likes to conserve his spells and Pew Pew a lot, it's a fine choice when Vicious Mockery is not enough/sufficient despite the rider.

[Sigreid]

Depending on taste, it isn't a bad idea for a Lore Bard to choose an attack cantrip as one of his spells at 6th level. Eldritch Blast is likely. It is aesthetically not an efficient idea because he could have had a 3rd level spell instead. However, if the player is one who likes to conserve his spells and Pew Pew a lot, it's a fine choice when Vicious Mockery is not enough/sufficient despite the rider.

Would probably be more efficient to burn a feat on spell sniper. Assuming feats are a thing at the table.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Depending on taste, it isn't a bad idea for a Lore Bard to choose an attack cantrip as one of his spells at 6th level. Eldritch Blast is likely. It is aesthetically not an efficient idea because he could have had a 3rd level spell instead. However, if the player is one who likes to conserve his spells and Pew Pew a lot, it's a fine choice when Vicious Mockery is not enough/sufficient despite the rider.

I've never played one at those levels, but I'd think that you'd be needing cantrips less by those levels--the place where leveled spells are rare is in T1 and the bottom of T2. But yes, you can do that.

I'm currently playing a Celestial Warlock 2, going Lore bard next. That gives me decent at-wills, some non-slot healing, and a couple short-rest slots, in exchange for delayed spell levels.

[Pex]

Would probably be more efficient to burn a feat on spell sniper. Assuming feats are a thing at the table.

AFB, how many range spell attacks does a bard have? Is it enough (subjective) to warrant spending a feat on it? If there aren't enough spells I'd be more inclined to take Magic Initiate. If I were to take either feat I would likely only do it at 1st level as a Variant Human, which I have done for Magic Initiate in the past. Even at 4th level I'm looking for either a stat boost or a feat I need more. By 8th level it's too late a cost for either of those feats. But that's just me for my particular taste.

[Citan]

By the way, I just love how my thread started with how Spirit Guardians is the only reliably great spell on the Cleric's list, while the Wizard has tons of awesome options. And your great, "epic" combat example only involves a single Cleric spell (Spirit Guardians), while 3 Wizard spells played a key role (Reverse Gravity, Cloudkill, Cloud of Daggers).

Kind of telling, no?
So, because someone shares a random story involving Spirit Guardians because *you* are adamant in arguing it's the only good spell basically*, you consider it as a support for your ridiculous opinion?

Opinion which is, by the way, extremely and totally wrong from start to finish as many people kindly tried to explain to you in various ways...

Impressive. You're making me feel like you're a ghost account for someone else I trifled with recently which was as illogical and narrow-minded as you make yourself appear in this particular thread, which I hope is an exception.

But hey, if all you want is keeping a thread alive for the sake of it, go for it. Good thing on forums is, even when someone acts in a non-constructive way (and I reckon I sometimes tread dangerously towards the dark side myself ;)), others can still support an interesting discussion.:smallsmile:
Well, I stand corrected, you finally engaged in more argumented discussion.

Wall of Light is not on any Cleric spell list.

Hold Person is pretty terrible (ranked red on Treantmonk’s Wizard Guide, decent on Yorrin’s Cleric Guide), Command is ok for a Cleric spell (ranked decent by Yorrin). Command only negates a single action, Hold Person gives multiple saves, is limited to humanoid, and require concentration. Both can only effect a single target per spell level.

Banishment is excellent. The best control spell of the Cleric, but single target. Also available to the Wizard.

Wall of Fire is ranked “average” by Treantmonk, and monsters can just walk right through it if they really want to. Not really control.

Blade Barrier is a 6d10 Wall of Fire for a level 6 slot, and only ranked decent by Yorrin.

Guardian of Faith is also not a control spell, and is only rated “decent” by Yorrin.

Sanctuary is more of a defensive buff than a control spell.

Silence is actually a really good control spell against spellcasters. Rarely useful and requires some serious teamwork to keep the target in the area, but can totally shut down casters.

Bestow Curse is really bad (ranked red by Treantmonk). The effects are just too weak.

Dominate Person is only available in the Trickery domain, and is also quite bad (ranked red by Treantmonk). Too many downsides and only works on humanoids.

Dominate Beast is only available in the Nature domain, and hymer’s druid guide describe it as a surprisingly weak spell.

Antimagic Field & Earthquake are both rather disappointing for level 8 spells, Yorrin rates both as decent.

Divine Word is great against celestials/elementals/fey/fiends, but the hp limit severely limits the usability of the spell.

So here’s the summary of control spells for Clerics: 1 excellent single-target spell (Banishment), 2 good but very situational spells (Silence, Divine Word), 1 decent single-target spell (command), 2 decent but very situational spells (Antimagic Field, Earthquake), and the rest is pretty much junk or not control...

Compare this to the Wizard's spell list, limiting ourselves to spells ranked "good" or "excellent" by Treantmonk: Fog Cloud, Grease, Sleep, Tasha's Hideous Laughter, Web, Sleet Storm, Fear, Hypnotic Pattern, Slow, Counterspell, Banishment, Evard's Black Tentacles, Watery sphere, Otiluke's Resilient Sphere, Bigby's Hand, Wall of Force, Wall of Stone, Globe of Invulnerability, Mass Suggestion, Eyebite, Magic Jar, Forcecage, Maze, Prismatic Wall, Wish

Face it, the Cleric's control spell list does not come remotely close to the Wizard's.

Please do!
So, nice you gave a bit more detail. Now for the next step, providing actual facts and analysis, so you can go from "opinion" to "argument".

Hold Person: WIS save (uncommon), upcastable, imposes paralyzed condition which is kinda the 2nd or 3rd best you could hope for (1st being obviously dead XD). So, what's the problem with it being limited to humanoids? OF COURSE it's limited to humanoids, it's a frigging 2nd level spell!
Now for an honest, open question to everyone here: how often do you fight "humanoids"? IMX, it's somewhere between 30% and 60% depending on the campaign/settings, but it's true that I never played on Elemental Planes or other exotic things like that. Neither did I play often higher level, I have no trouble agreeing that both factors change things much.
Still, it's a spell that can be worth cast even just on one round: on one target, you deprive of movement and action, and make any melee weapon hit a critical. This means a great boost in both offense and defense of your meleers.
Of course, if you have nobody as a frontliner, this may not be the best spell... But then I'd argue your party has a structural problem in the first place. XD

Banishment: no argue there, except that you also cannot affect the enemy that is banished, so it's actually not always the best choice. :)

Wall of Fire: another "ranking" that makes me wonder how far that TreantMonk actually thought about. Beyond the fact that "monsters can just walk right through it if they really want to" is a very weird way to put it, since they would take at the very least 4d8 damage if not upcast, *without save*, it's also a great way to shut down all archers and most casters: *opaque wall* it is after all.
And of course, whenever you have someone in party that can push people away (not too hard to find: any martial with high enough Athletics check, Repelling Blast, Manoeuvers, even a 4E Monk or a third-caster with Gust/Gust of Wind), you can multiply the actual output.


Blade Barrier: presenting it as a "6d10 Wall of Fire for a level 6 slot" makes me wonder if you actually bothered to read the description. Also I don't know that Yorrin, but my guess is it's "decent" because it's not what he likes best as a way to play Cleric? Because Blade Barrier is much rather an earlier version of Wall of Thorns: although it "only" provides 3-4 cover instead of opaque (which may actually be better in some situations though), it is also a difficult terrain that deals minimum damage.
It's like an inamovible version of Spirit Guardians. So, bad spell?
Well, it's a great way to completely cut off a lone, dangerous enemy from his reinforcments, including ranged attackers -no creature has Sharpshooter/Spell Sniper feat by design AFAIK, so they will suffer the full brunt of that cover, while any decent archer/blaster on your party will have those. And you can still launch spells too (of course, enemy casters too ;)).

Conversely, on a Nature Cleric, it means that you can completely shut off a whole large area and killing a bunch of enemies without lifting another finger, by combining it with Plant Growth. Of course that is an expensive combination, so best used with "herders" allies (Monks, people with high movement effects like Dissonant Whispers or Repelling Blast, or Sympathy).


Bestow Curse: this one seals the deal: that Treatmonk either does not know his stuff, or he specifically rated it in the context of Wizard, for which this ranking can be understood, simply because you have so many other good spells you probably want to learn as a priority.
Yet, this is one of the best spells you could use against really dangerous targets, as a "helper" spell, although Bards or Diviner Wizards are really the best at that: when that Bestow Curse works, it makes even spells that target decent saves attemptable, and spells that target weak saves sure to stick the whole time when they allow saves every turn (which is the majority). So when your pal attempts a Hold or Dominate on a creature with lowish WIS, you're basically giving a strong insurance to him/her this won't be a wasted slot. When your Monk would like to perma-stun a creature with Stunning Strike, this will give him a much higher chance to succeed, even if statistically many creatures have a decent or strong save.
Etc etc...
And you can upcast it to make it non-concentration too, so you can resume your usual tactics afterwhile.
Conversely, a Trickery Cleric can use it without much risk to himself thanks to his Channel Divinity.


Antimagic Field: I wonder how someone could ever end with such a conclusion as "only decent". I'll be nice and say I missed something here, although I doubt it. It is of course a YMMV kind of spell considering its totally designed against magical effects and has little area, but still... Magical effects are kinda a common thing in high level from the little I know, and brutal too...

[BeefGood]

That's literally the explanation.
I guess no one watched the video of Crawford explaining why the Wizard and the Cleric have spell lists that differ in such ways.

I watched the video. My takeaway was that divine and arcane magic are different and the divine-magic-based classes and arcane-magic-based classes are intended to be different thematically. So, "different." But the fireball-flame strike relationship seems not so much "different" as "better-worse."

[Unoriginal]

I watched the video. My takeaway was that divine and arcane magic are different and the divine-magic-based classes and arcane-magic-based classes are intended to be different thematically. So, "different." But the fireball-flame strike relationship seems not so much "different" as "better-worse."

No offense, but have you missed the part where he says that the Cleric didn't have the same destructive potential than the Wizard for those thematic reasons?

[DivisibleByZero]

I watched the video. My takeaway was that divine and arcane magic are different and the divine-magic-based classes and arcane-magic-based classes are intended to be different thematically. So, "different." But the fireball-flame strike relationship seems not so much "different" as "better-worse."

That's exactly right. And thematically, pure destructive power (ie: blasting) is the purview of Arcane magic, as per the words that came out of his mouth.
So a destructive/blasting spell on the divine side being higher level and smaller radius makes sense, thematically. So if a Cleric gets a blasting spell on his base list, it will be less effective than a similar spell on the Wizard list.

[Sigreid]

AFB, how many range spell attacks does a bard have? Is it enough (subjective) to warrant spending a feat on it? If there aren't enough spells I'd be more inclined to take Magic Initiate. If I were to take either feat I would likely only do it at 1st level as a Variant Human, which I have done for Magic Initiate in the past. Even at 4th level I'm looking for either a stat boost or a feat I need more. By 8th level it's too late a cost for either of those feats. But that's just me for my particular taste.

It would get you eb with longer range and no cover penalties for partial and half. In my opinion that's a good deal for a bard.

[BeefGood]

No offense
None taken.


So a destructive/blasting spell on the divine side being higher level and smaller radius makes sense, thematically. So if a Cleric gets a blasting spell on his base list, it will be less effective than a similar spell on the Wizard list.

"Higher level"--that's it! That's what is weird, it's not that the wizard is a more effective blaster, it's that one naively expects (I should speak for myself, I naively expect) that spells of the same level will be roughly the same power, where it's possible to compare them. And that higher-level spells will be more powerful than lower level spells. But the third-level spell fireball is at least as powerful as, and arguably more powerful than, the fifth-level spell flame strike.

So it's the execution of the concept that is weird, in this case. How else could it have been done? Maybe...both cleric and wizard get MiniFireball, a first-level spell, while only the wizard gets Fireball. You'd also have to prohibit, or limit the benefit of, upcasting MiniFireball.

[JNAProductions]

None taken.

"Higher level"--that's it! That's what is weird, it's not that the wizard is a more effective blaster, it's that one naively expects (I should speak for myself, I naively expect) that spells of the same level will be roughly the same power, where it's possible to compare them. And that higher-level spells will be more powerful than lower level spells. But the third-level spell fireball is at least as powerful as, and arguably more powerful than, the fifth-level spell flame strike.

So it's the execution of the concept that is weird, in this case. How else could it have been done? Maybe...both cleric and wizard get MiniFireball, a first-level spell, while only the wizard gets Fireball. You'd also have to prohibit, or limit the benefit of, upcasting MiniFireball.

I'll agree with that. A 5th level spell should be roughly on par with every other 5th level spell.

[Willie the Duck]

I'll agree with that. A 5th level spell should be roughly on par with every other 5th level spell.

I don't feel that any spell ever exists outside of context. So spells do not exist in vacuums. If a class is meant to be a less-good blaster, what is wrong with their xth-level blasting spells being sub-par to a more-good blaster class's xth (or X-minus-twoth)-level blasting spell? Previous editions even had single individual spells being level 2 for one class and level 1 for another. Aside from odd combinations (like the level 10 bard never taking Flame Strike instead of Fireball), exactly what design principle does it break or what problem does it cause?

[JNAProductions]

I don't feel that any spell ever exists outside of context. So spells do not exist in vacuums. If a class is meant to be a less-good blaster, what is wrong with their xth-level blasting spells being sub-par to a more-good blaster class's xth (or X-minus-twoth)-level blasting spell? Previous editions even had single individual spells being level 2 for one class and level 1 for another. Aside from odd combinations (like the level 10 bard never taking Flame Strike instead of Fireball), exactly what design principle does it break or what problem does it cause?

Eh... I guess you have a point. Feels a bit off, but then again, you've got especially POWERFUL 3rd level Paladin and Ranger spells, since they're half-caster exclusives.

[Willie the Duck]

Eh... I guess you have a point. Feels a bit off, but then again, you've got especially POWERFUL 3rd level Paladin and Ranger spells, since they're half-caster exclusives.

And those half-caster exclusives have to be managed, such that in the hands of a 6th level Lore bard they don't become abusive (I think in 3e, the Archivist got access to any divine spells and abused the heck out of paladin and ranger lower 'level' versions of cleric spells). However, the idea that 5th level spells are suppose to have a proscribed power level is a design principle that I don't think is actually a thing, as intuitive as it sounds at first blush.

[Unoriginal]

That's exactly right. And thematically, pure destructive power (ie: blasting) is the purview of Arcane magic, as per the words that came out of his mouth.
So a destructive/blasting spell on the divine side being higher level and smaller radius makes sense, thematically. So if a Cleric gets a blasting spell on his base list, it will be less effective than a similar spell on the Wizard list.

Excellently put.


Also, one should note that Fire is purposely stronger than what the guidelines suggest for a spell of its level.

[MeeposFire]

Fireball and lightning bolt deal more damage than most other 3rd level wizard spells essentially because they are iconic. Flamestrike gets less because it lacks the idea of being as iconic as damage spells.

[Raif]

I remember reading that Fireball was intentionally made over powered for it's spell slot due to it being iconic.

[DivisibleByZero]

So it's the execution of the concept that is weird, in this case. How else could it have been done? Maybe...both cleric and wizard get MiniFireball, a first-level spell, while only the wizard gets Fireball. You'd also have to prohibit, or limit the benefit of, upcasting MiniFireball.
I'll agree with that. A 5th level spell should be roughly on par with every other 5th level spell.

See below.


Also, one should note that Fire is purposely stronger than what the guidelines suggest for a spell of its level.


Fireball and lightning bolt deal more damage than most other 3rd level wizard spells essentially because they are iconic. Flamestrike gets less because it lacks the idea of being as iconic as damage spells.


I remember reading that Fireball was intentionally made over powered for it's spell slot due to it being iconic.

You can't compare the spells power against fireball. Fireball is intentionally OP for it's level.
But if you look at Flame Strike against the guidelines in the DMG, it's about right.

[Waazraath]

I don't usually play clerics because (1) I hate the RP flavor (though I'd totally play an Athasian templar), and (2) they don't interest me mechanically from levels 10-20.

Despite my dislike for clerical RP, my powergamer instincts are always tempted by a one-level cleric dip on a several chassis (especially Cleric 1/Wizard X, with cleric level taken at either first or second level) because it's mechanically powerful. I can imagine being tempted to go as high as cleric 9, though again for RP reasons I'd be way more tempted to play a corrupt prelate like Cardinal Woolsey than a seriously devout cleric (because I just can't take D&D religious beliefs seriously), and even then I'd probably want to mix in some Warlock for RP reasons, invocations, and at-will damage. But before this thread came along, I was not at all tempted to go higher, and even now I think this thread has mostly just persuaded me that Bards should always seriously consider Holy Aura as an 18th level Magical Secret.

I still owe Citan and EvilAnagram a response on the cleric spells they praised (Heal, Earthquake (blech), Holy Aura, Etherealness, Divine Word, Word of Recall, several others). But I need to think it over a bit more first, because so far I'm still not seeing much attraction to them, and I'm unsure how much of my distaste is just emotional and/or confirmation bias. After all, all it takes is a handful of good spells to make a class good--wizard spells at 8th level are mostly unexciting, for example, but upcast Mass Suggestion VIII, Maze, Clone, Antipathy/Sympathy, Antimagic Field, Feeblemind, Demiplane, and maybe Dominate Monster are all pretty decent and suffice to make 8th level still exciting. I want to be fair to clerics, so I'm squinting as hard as I can to see awesomeness in the spells named.

E.g. Divine Word is a bonus action cast Save-or-Banishment effect against a limited selection of targets in an area. Bonus action cast doesn't do much unless you have a good alternate use for your action, which single-classed clerics aside from Arcana Clerics really don't (can't cast another spell, aren't really good at making physical attacks), so Divine Word's niche is either (1) disabling hordes of weak melee creatures (who could just as easily be wiped out by a Fireball), or (2) moderate-to-large numbers of tough melee demons/etc. with no legendary saves and relatively poor Wisdom saves, like a bunch of Chasmes. That makes it basically the same niche as Hypnotic Pattern or Fear, with the twofold advantage of not needing concentration and being a bonus action cast and the disadvantage of working only on celestials/elementals/fey/fiends. Is that enough to make it good to prepare as opposed to merely best-available/might-as-well-since-I'm-a-cleric? I'm still squinting and trying to see the value in it because I want to be fair.

Ditto for stuff like Word of Recall, Heal and Earthquake.

Planar Ally is a particularly weak spell IMO since all it provides is transportation. If you can hire high-level monsters for gold via Planar Ally, you can hire them for gold via Sending + Teleportation Circle or Transport Via Plants or Plane Shift just as easily. The heavy lifting there is being done by the roleplaying, not the spell. And bounded accuracy being what it is, hiring a largish number of low-level monsters like Githyanki will probably be cheaper and more effective.

This one puzzels me! The first bolded part: do you mean that you think it, from a powergamers perspective, a good idea to leave the class at 9? Cause I really wouldn't get that. I followed the discussion on the relative weakness of Cleric spells, and so far, it's the only place in the discussion where I see some merit. Even if we consider, lets say, Heal, Heroes Feast and Blade Barrier sub par (ignoring all the strong cases people made for them so far, imo) - better to add those to your list, than Sleep, Shield and Jump, right? From a powergamer perspective. Advancing 2 levels of fighter, for action surge, sure, and maybe another full caster so you can upcast Spiritual Weapon, Aid, and Spirit Guardians... I see some options. But would that really be better than Divine Word, and Holy Aura, and Mass Heal?

As for the second bolded part: nooo! Clerics do have a great alternative to spend their action on when casting a bonus spell: hit somebody in the face! That part of the Cleric got pretty little attention, but a cleric is definitely capable to take a secondary melee role. Some are especially equipped for that role: heavy armor, martial weapons, and stronger martial attacks (at level 8 and 14). If you optimize this, you'll always get one of the melee cantrips, since they are basicly a free damage upgrade. Lets take the Tempest Cleric. At level 14, damage (when using a shield, disregarding magic items) is 1d8 + 2d8 (Divine Strike) + 2d8 (let's say Booming Blade, for flavor), + (lets say 4 from an ability score). That's 26,5 damage, not impressive, but not neglible. And wait: the moment the enemy you hit retalliates, you have a reaction (2d8 lightning from wrath of the storm), and push the enemy back 10 ft; at which point he must deceide to waste the rest of his attacks, or move back, and take the rest of booming blade's damage (3d8). That's suddenly 49 damage in total. Not half bad, given that you also cast a level 7 spell. And even without that level 7 spell: using this tactic, plus (possibly upcast) Spirit Guardians and Spiritual weapons, generates an impressive amount of damage. Part of which can be maximized with Channel Divinity.

I used the Tempest Cleric example because I played one, but I'm sure you can do (more or less) the same with other variants; at least picking up an melee cantrip, and using those +2d8 extra weapon damage.

[Citan]

I don't usually play clerics because (1) I hate the RP flavor (though I'd totally play an Athasian templar), and (2) they don't interest me mechanically from levels 10-20.

Despite my dislike for clerical RP, my powergamer instincts are always tempted by a one-level cleric dip on a several chassis (especially Cleric 1/Wizard X, with cleric level taken at either first or second level) because it's mechanically powerful. I can imagine being tempted to go as high as cleric 9, though again for RP reasons I'd be way more tempted to play a corrupt prelate like Cardinal Woolsey than a seriously devout cleric (because I just can't take D&D religious beliefs seriously), and even then I'd probably want to mix in some Warlock for RP reasons, invocations, and at-will damage. But before this thread came along, I was not at all tempted to go higher, and even now I think this thread has mostly just persuaded me that Bards should always seriously consider Holy Aura as an 18th level Magical Secret.

I still owe Citan and EvilAnagram a response on the cleric spells they praised (Heal, Earthquake (blech), Holy Aura, Etherealness, Divine Word, Word of Recall, several others). But I need to think it over a bit more first, because so far I'm still not seeing much attraction to them, and I'm unsure how much of my distaste is just emotional and/or confirmation bias. After all, all it takes is a handful of good spells to make a class good--wizard spells at 8th level are mostly unexciting, for example, but upcast Mass Suggestion VIII, Maze, Clone, Antipathy/Sympathy, Antimagic Field, Feeblemind, Demiplane, and maybe Dominate Monster are all pretty decent and suffice to make 8th level still exciting. I want to be fair to clerics, so I'm squinting as hard as I can to see awesomeness in the spells named.

E.g. Divine Word is a bonus action cast Save-or-Banishment effect against a limited selection of targets in an area. Bonus action cast doesn't do much unless you have a good alternate use for your action, which single-classed clerics aside from Arcana Clerics really don't (can't cast another spell, aren't really good at making physical attacks), so Divine Word's niche is either (1) disabling hordes of weak melee creatures (who could just as easily be wiped out by a Fireball), or (2) moderate-to-large numbers of tough melee demons/etc. with no legendary saves and relatively poor Wisdom saves, like a bunch of Chasmes. That makes it basically the same niche as Hypnotic Pattern or Fear, with the twofold advantage of not needing concentration and being a bonus action cast and the disadvantage of working only on celestials/elementals/fey/fiends. Is that enough to make it good to prepare as opposed to merely best-available/might-as-well-since-I'm-a-cleric? I'm still squinting and trying to see the value in it because I want to be fair.

Ditto for stuff like Word of Recall, Heal and Earthquake.

Planar Ally is a particularly weak spell IMO since all it provides is transportation. If you can hire high-level monsters for gold via Planar Ally, you can hire them for gold via Sending + Teleportation Circle or Transport Via Plants or Plane Shift just as easily. The heavy lifting there is being done by the roleplaying, not the spell. And bounded accuracy being what it is, hiring a largish number of low-level monsters like Githyanki will probably be cheaper and more effective.


That's exactly right. And thematically, pure destructive power (ie: blasting) is the purview of Arcane magic, as per the words that came out of his mouth.
So a destructive/blasting spell on the divine side being higher level and smaller radius makes sense, thematically. So if a Cleric gets a blasting spell on his base list, it will be less effective than a similar spell on the Wizard list.
Indeed. In fact, I'm kinda puzzled that people would need to watch a video to grasp this, seems kinda intuitive to me...

Clerics are proxy's for divinities. Divinities, at least a good part of them, *care* about how they affect the world. Even putting aside the bunch of gods that supposedly defend and protect life, even "evil" gods will usually prefer people *alive* rather than dead.

Either through coercion, fear or love, all they want is to increase their influence and pursue their unimaginable goals.

SO, it's extremely logic that a Cleric would not get spells blatantly destructive such as a Fireball or Lightning Chain... But instead get...

1. Spells that could be made pass off as natural catastrophes, such as Earthquake or Control Weather: not *every* god wants to make oneself known to the material world by making a fiery equivalent of giant pointed up major with a Meteor Swarm (although technically a Cleric *could* cast it through Divine Intervention: PHB says using a cleric spell is *appropriate*, not *mandatory*)... Those spells could be used either in a "subtle" way to undermine an enemy faction for example, or quite the opposite in a flashy way to demonstrate to the world that a) you are indeed the rightful voice of a superior entity and b) that superior entity is indeed capable enough to kick ass to be at least heard out.

2. Spells that allow you to impose some mass control, without necessarily killing: perfect example of this is Divine Word, which seems to me a "metagame" spell like Storm of Vengeance, better suited to harness big crowds of low level NPC rather than directly used in fight, notably because I'm not sure about how a player is supposed to know about the HP of creatures before casting without metagaming.
But even Forbiddance could be used for mass control without killing: nobody forbids you (*heh*) to designate a kind of creature which you know is not inside the area, so no killing. It does not change the fact you can trap or ward a potentially awfully high number of creatures in an area that you could potentially keep up indefinitely since it's a ritual (although it's 24-hours anyways): of course you don't block normal travel, so it's not enough by itself for "offensive" uses like putting a city under siege. But the scale, magnitude and duration clearly demonstrate the divine nature of this spell, and it could be, much much more than any Wizard spell, a lifesaver when you need to guard/storm a place against specific creatures.
Missions and "Meta-goals" uses are numerous. :)

3. Or spells that more directly transmit the existence (and wrath) of gods, whilst still being sufficiently restricted in effect and damage to a) avoid as much collateral as possible and b) not being as harmful as arcanic spells of comparable levels, like Fire Storm which can for example clean up a village without the nearby plants even feeling heat.
The aforementioned Forbiddance is another great example of that: you could wipe out entire species from a place through wreathing flames while other creatures drink coffee 10 feet away like nothing is happening.

In short: Clerics *care* (about the world). Wizards usually don't (especially since they spend most of their time studying in their own secured place, which obviously does not help in developing empathy XD).
So obviously they won't get the same kind of spells, even when going on the offensive (or rather, especially as far as directly harmful spells are considered.
Also, as said, Fireball and Chain Lightning were given special treatment because iconic ones. :)



Yes, there are. Clerics have Cure Wounds I/II/III/IV, but Paladins have the far superior Aura of Vitality, and now rangers and druids likewise have the far superior Healing Spirit. Healing Spirit is 2nd level but heals 35 HP (technically could be 70 HP per PC in the party, but that requires gamisms/turn manipulation that most DMs including me would alter the spell to prevent), whereas Cure Wounds III heals 3d8 + WIS (about 17 HP) to a single PC, at touch range and at the cost of an action instead of a bonus action. And Healing Spirit also scales far better with high-level spell slots, adding 10d6 (or 20d6 per character using gimmicks) per spell level, as opposed to d8 per spell level.

Healing Spirit is good enough to arguably obsolete Heal as well. Heal doesn't take concentration, but it only heals 70 HP (and ends blindness/deafness/disease, which is typically irrelevant) whereas Healing Spirit VI heals 5d6 (17.5) HP per round for ten rounds, including bouncing creatures up from 0 HP (at the beginning of their turns, similar to Regenerate) every single turn. It doesn't make your allies unkillable, but it makes them unkillable against the same things Regenerate would make them unkillable against, and it can heal the whole party after combat is done instead of just a single PC.

It's a ridiculous spell.


I agree that Healing Spirit is a miss from WoTC, who thought that using the same formulation in reverse would be fine, although it would obviously NOT be. Wonder how they missed that really.

With that said, you're overselling things here.
Paladin gets Aura of Vitality only at 9th level spells, and it's using one of its precious slots.
Only a little chunk of Lore Bards would get it, and mainly because they are the only healer of party. Otherwise, you have more "good in any situation" spells to pick first.

Same with Healing Spirit.
Conversely, not every party has a Ranger (for who it's one precious spell learned and nearly as precious slot) or a Druid (who has so many better things to use concentration on during fights) are in parties.

And outside fights, between the new Catnap, the classic Rope Trick, the indemodable Leomund's Tiny Hut, you should get enough ways to get a short rest, or at very least several minutes to quaff potions, use class features or feats such as Healer. Of course you cannot keep hundreds of potion on you (apart from having a Bag of Holding ^^) but each party member should at least be able to carry an amount more or less equaling 6 or 7 Cure Wounds...

So, while I agree that Healing Spirit is awesome and Aura of Vitality very good, it's not like they are mandatory either.

By the way, it's pointless imo to compare Healing Spirit to Heal: the first will heal somewhere around a dozen HP, maybe two dozen if upcast strong... BUT:
- It won't make any difference at high level when your objective is just to make sure a pal gets his next turn whatever happens: creatures easily hit for 25+ damage per turn (or per hit ^^). So unless you're lucky enough to get your turn just before your pal's it will just ensure the death throw counts starts again. Not bad, but not enough.
- It require your concentration, so besides the inherent problem (keeping concentration to make it worth in the run), seriously, I'd like you to point out in which kind of situations a) you weren't concentrating on a fight-shaping spell (Spirit Guardians, Blade Barrier, Bestow Curse, Banishment, Hold Person for Cleric to quote a few, Heat Metal, Fog Cloud, Conjure Animals, Wall of Fire, Sleet Storm for Druid to quote a few others) and b) you consider you still have no better spell to concentrate on for the remaining of the fight.
Those situations certainly exist, I don't doubt of that. What I doubt of is them being frequent. :)

Conversely...

I would mention that Prayer of Healing WAS the most spell-slot efficient healing spell in the game before healing spirit came along.

I should mention, for the sake of avoiding a repeat of the discussion in the healing spirit thread that when I brought this up before a lot of other people have said that out of combat healing was never a problem for their parties and thus prayer of healing was never used. Though, then I would say that if out of combat healing isn't a problem for your party then you shouldn't be concerned with how much healing per spell slot you're getting, just how much you can heal on one turn of combat.
I disagree on this, very strongly: its a spell basically unusable in combat.
And outside of combat, the best was (is still?) Beacon of Hope, because it maximized ANY source of healing: so potions, Healer feat, Bard's Song of Rest, Fighter's Second Wind, Celestial Warlock's pool of heal, Dreams Druid's pool, and of course those aforementioned spells (Aura of Vitality, Healing Spirit) AND most importantly the oneselves's hit dice are all automatically maximized.

At low level, Healing Spirit is probably a better use for a slot when you have it and/or don't have time to take a short rest. But the higher the level, the more benefit Beacon of Hope provides: like many Cleric spells, it naturally gets better because it is built on other people's own strengths... :)
Even compared to Aura of Vitality, Beacon of Hope is probably plain better unless you really have nobody with healing features. ^^




I concluded that Cleric have a weak combat spell list without Spirit Guardians (check title of the thread). Spirit Guardians is the only Cleric spell affected by being evil.

After my alignment became a non-issue and when facing non-necrotic resistant creatures, my experience mirrored CantigThimble's. I did alright by upcasting Spirit Guardians / Spiritual Weapon, but still didn't come close to the Wizard's effects on the battlefield.

But you haven't answered my question. Have you, or for that matter anyone who posted in this thread, ever played a Cleric for which Spirit Guardians is made significantly weaker, or had to be avoided for RP reasons?
So basically...
1) You clearly prefer directly dealing damage, if possible in a flashy way.
2) You don't consider things that "just" influence decision-making good enough.
3) You played an *evil* Cleric in a *evil-themed* campaign.

Meaning that...
- You couldn't profit the most "cast&forget" spells of the Cleric.
- You didn't try to use all the other good spells Cleric has because you didn't seem them worth the try.
Well, it's just a problem of casting then. :)
You didn't think you signed up for a hard mismatch between character concept and campaign, so you were slapped in the face. It happens.
It's perfectly legitimate to feel frustrated. But it's really stupid to put this frustration on the class design, when it's a mix of worst setting for the class and lack of insight from its player.

It's like a Paladin complaining he feels worthless when a party is just chaining plain/mountains encounters with traps, obstacles and flyers... Well, of course you'll suck there, unless maybe if you happen to be a 9+ Vengeance Paladin (Haste) or a DEX-based Devotion paladin (Sacred Longbow).

My advice? Shut off your brain for a few seconds and let it restart fresh so you just melt down all those meaningless preconceptions based on one *single* play of a class...
Forget it and enjoy other characters, until you are close to starting a game with people you like and know to play with, then ask the DM if/what Cleric would fit best and try it.

[MaxWilson]

I would mention that Prayer of Healing WAS the most spell-slot efficient healing spell in the game before healing spirit came along.

Extended Aura of Vitality has always been better. Even regular Aura of Vitality was better in normal scenarios.


I should mention, for the sake of avoiding a repeat of the discussion in the healing spirit thread that when I brought this up before a lot of other people have said that out of combat healing was never a problem for their parties and thus prayer of healing was never used. Though, then I would say that if out of combat healing isn't a problem for your party then you shouldn't be concerned with how much healing per spell slot you're getting, just how much you can heal on one turn of combat.

Those people don't understand the issues. Prayer of healing wasn't used because it's not particularly good: it takes a long time to cast, you don't get to distribute healing efficiently, and it has no use in combat. Aura of Vitality and now Healing Spirit are far superior, and are capable of completely breaking DMG adventuring day XP budgets even for a party that isn't using sophisticated tactics. (Not that I believe you have to stick to DMG adventuring day budgets, but it cannot be denied that resource management is deeply embedded in the game, and most class abilities are fundamentally just ways to eke out your HP a bit further.)

=====================================


I agree with everything you wrote here.

Also, I'm not as familiar with the Warlock & Druid as I am with the Cleric/Wizard/Bard, which is why I never mentioned them. As for the Sorcerer, I actually think he's the worst full spellcaster in the game (especially with the nerf to Careful Spell), although again, it's not an opinion I'd feel confident defending.

Fortunately the nerf to Careful spell exists only in Jeremy Crawford's mind and not in the rulebooks. Ignore it.

=====================================


Depending on taste, it isn't a bad idea for a Lore Bard to choose an attack cantrip as one of his spells at 6th level. Eldritch Blast is likely. It is aesthetically not an efficient idea because he could have had a 3rd level spell instead. However, if the player is one who likes to conserve his spells and Pew Pew a lot, it's a fine choice when Vicious Mockery is not enough/sufficient despite the rider.

A pretty decent configuration for a Valor Bard, IMO, is to take a Warlock level early on (e.g. Hexblade 1 at first level if you like Wisdom saves, and select Booming Blade as one of your cantrips), then Valor Bard 1-10 [Eldritch Blast as one magical secret], then Warlock 2 at 12th level. You're SAD from early on, can use weapons for d8+CHA for most levels, and Booming Blade will get you over the humps at levels 5, 6, and 11 where you have fewer attacks than warriors of similar level. Agonizing Repelling Eldritch Blast doesn't get seriously interesting until tier 3 anyway, because that's the point where weapon damage for non-fighters falls behind.

And because you're a Valor Bard with Extra Attack, you get to play the Strongest Man in the World game (grapple/prone an opponent in a single action, possibly while Enlarged for advantage and ability to grapple/prone Huge creatures like adult dragons) AND since Agonizing Repelling Eldritch Blast is now a bard spell for you, you can use Battle Magic for a bonus action attack whenever you cast it. And you still get all the bardic goodness of Raise Dead access, Symbol, True Polymorph, Magical Secrets (Wish), and thanks to this thread, Magical Secrets (Holy Aura) if you want it.

IMO this would be more fun than a Lore Bard despite coming online a little bit later.

[Kane0]

Yo Merudo imma let you finish but Bless is the greatest spell of all time.

[CantigThimble]

I disagree that either aura of vitality or beacon of hope are more slot efficient than prayer of healing.

First off, they're both 3rd level spells. 3rd level spell slots are worth exponentially more than second level spell slots are. The entire reason I started using prayer of healing in the first place is that I had extra second level spell slots I just wasn't finding it necessary to use and meanwhile I was fighting to save every 3rd+ level slot I could. (Spirit Guardians, Dispel Magic, desperately trying to keep a Revivify ready at all times)

Secondly, beacon of hope only does anything if you have a significant number of other healing abilities ready to go. It might be okay if your DM allows you to use it with hit dice but that seems a bit unlikely to me. Hit dice are spent over the course of resting for an hour and the spell lasts for one minute. Unless you consider all the recovery to happen in the last 6 seconds of that hour, and have the cleric start his rest a minute before everyone else so he can finish resting and cast the spell without interrupting his own rest... All that just seems really gamist and I don't see my DMs (or myself) allowing that.

But sure, I'll concede that it might be better than prayer of healing at higher levels, (at least 7-8 before it becomes worth it I would think) when you can afford to sink a 3rd level slot into it and your DM allows it to work with hit dice.

As for Aura of Vitality, that's a paladin spell. So either you're at 9th level and you've sunk one of his 2 3rd levels lots into it or you're a lore bard and you've spent one of your two magical secrets on it. And if you're extending it that's a 3 level sorcerer dip.

I can't help but feel like those are much less efficient than one of any kind of cleric spending a couple 2nd level spell slots.

And besides that prayer of healing does an average of 12-14 per person. In a 5 man party that's 60-70 total (assuming everyone has taken at least one or two hits or an AOE, which is pretty common in my experience) Aura of vitality heals an average of 70 total. Unless one person has taken a massive amount of damage and the rest of the party has taken almost nothing then prayer isn't that far behind. With a second level cleric slot compared with a 3rd level paladin one.

As far as usage goes, it's about as difficult to use as it is to take a short rest. Meaning you can't use it whenever you want, but you should have a few opportunities throughout the day. I consider the strategy of healing as a cleric to be trying to figure out how the party can use prayer of healing as often as possible and cure wounds as infrequently as possible. Because cure wounds is about as efficient as lighting your spell slots on fire just to watch them burn.

[MaxWilson]

This one puzzels me! The first bolded part: do you mean that you think it, from a powergamers perspective, a good idea to leave the class at 9? Cause I really wouldn't get that. I followed the discussion on the relative weakness of Cleric spells, and so far, it's the only place in the discussion where I see some merit. Even if we consider, lets say, Heal, Heroes Feast and Blade Barrier sub par (ignoring all the strong cases people made for them so far, imo) - better to add those to your list, than Sleep, Shield and Jump, right? From a powergamer perspective. Advancing 2 levels of fighter, for action surge, sure, and maybe another full caster so you can upcast Spiritual Weapon, Aid, and Spirit Guardians... I see some options. But would that really be better than Divine Word, and Holy Aura, and Mass Heal?

Okay, let me unpack this from a powergamer perspective. Ignoring RP considerations, I see two ways to use cleric. The first way is as a one-level dip for heavy armor proficiency without losing spell slot progression, e.g. Forge Cleric 1/Illusionist X who loves to tank on the front lines with Shield and AC 21 while casting wizard spells like Fear and Booming Blade, plus the occasional Bless spell in ranged fights where party Sharpshooters need help and tanks are irrelevant, and the occasional Healing Word as needed to stabilize a fellow PC and get him back on his feet (useful especially at lower levels). This is the one my powergamer instincts are in love with despite my distaste for the cleric's RP. You know you're a powergamer when you're tempted to rationalize your way into doing things you hate the flavor of, just because they're powerful.

The second way to use a cleric, maybe, is to go all the way up to cleric 9. Mostly I wouldn't do this, because bards and bardlocks will do it better, but I can imagine a rare scenario when you're joining a fairly weak and conventional group of PCs, and you've rolled up lowish-stats (say, 12, 11, 14, 9, 7, 10) and so need something that can contribute in a fairly SAD way, and you want someone in the party to have early access to Bless/Healing Word/Augury/Revivify/Death Ward/Raise Dead because it looks like other PCs are going to die a lot. Because of your low stat rolls, Divine Soul sorlock isn't really attractive, and a bard wouldn't get access to Bless/Revivify as early as you want them. Even in this scenario where cleric is probably the best choice, there's not that much attraction to going full cleric all the way--I'd be strongly tempted to go Cleric 1-5 (Bless/Augury/Revivify), Shepherd Druid 1-6 (combat multipliers and Conjure Animals V), Cleric 6-9 (Death Ward/Raise Dead, crossing my fingers that Revivify would be enough in the meantime, especially with all my extra spell slots), and then whatever after that. Probably Shepherd Druid 7-11 honestly for that Conjure Fey + Planar Binding goodness, e.g. binding covens of Annis Hags for both melee thugging AND spellcasting (including Counterspelling!). Compared to a straight cleric I'd lose out on the ability to wear metal armor, high-level cleric spells that I'm mostly still unexcited about (except Holy Aura), and some kind of domain power like perma-flight or taking half damage from nonmagical weapons. I'd gain crazy-strong spells like Healing Spirit and Conjure Animals that function as if they have magic weapons, Shepherd druid Bear/Hawk/Unicorn totem spirits or whatever they're called, wildshape capabilities (extra HP, extra movement modes like flight although not with spellcasting, roleplaying options), Planar-Bound T-Rexes that also behave like they have magical weapons, some halfway decent melee cantrips...

To me that looks way better than Divine Word and Mass Heal. Holy Aura, as I've said before, is giving me some pause. At level 15 I could be an extremely proactive Life Cleric 9/Shepherd Druid 6 with great healing, massive summoning capabilities and plenty of spell slots for that role, or I could be a Life Cleric 15 with mediocre healing, Holy Aura once per day and a bunch of okay-ish non-concentration spells that are not very spell slot-efficient. It's not like I couldn't do proactive things as a cleric (I'd still have Planar Binding VIII access for example, and that makes up for a lot), but do I really want to give up so much just for Holy Aura? And would I have fun playing the PC at levels 6-15 anyway, or would I get bored and retire the PC? I know I'd enjoy the Cleric/Druid the whole time, but the cleric...?

Anyway, that's my powergamer answer to your question. Hope it was illuminating.


As for the second bolded part: nooo! Clerics do have a great alternative to spend their action on when casting a bonus spell: hit somebody in the face! That part of the Cleric got pretty little attention, but a cleric is definitely capable to take a secondary melee role.

It is very much secondary unless you invest in making it otherwise. 3d8+3ish on a hit, if you're a cleric type that gets weapon damage boosts. That's worse than cantrip damage at that level. When I said clerics didn't have anything great to do with their action after Divine Word, 3d8+3 is the "nothing great" I was thinking of. Spending a 7th level slot instead of a 3rd level slot in order to impose crowd control at the same time you do 3d8+3ish damage (call it 8-10 points of expected damage after accounting for to-hit)... is not a lot of return on investment for the extra 4 levels. So you have to figure that you're getting your RoI in some other way, such as not requiring concentration, but then what are you concentrating on that's so important anyway? It's not like you've got the ability to cast Wall of Force. Maybe you're concentrating on Banishment, I guess, and that's not horrible, and between Divine Word + Banishment (on separate rounds) you're fairly good at defeating hordes of mid-level fiends like Chasmes and Horned Devils, I guess. Is that niche something I'm excited about? So far not really.

Yes, you can go Spell Sniper and pick up Booming Blade from the wizard or warlock list, and that makes it better. Booming Blade makes anything pretty good in melee, and the extra 2d8 that a cleric can have on top of Booming Blade isn't highly significant but it also isn't trash.


Some are especially equipped for that role: heavy armor, martial weapons, and stronger martial attacks (at level 8 and 14). If you optimize this, you'll always get one of the melee cantrips, since they are basicly a free damage upgrade. Lets take the Tempest Cleric. At level 14, damage (when using a shield, disregarding magic items) is 1d8 + 2d8 (Divine Strike) + 2d8 (let's say Booming Blade, for flavor), + (lets say 4 from an ability score). That's 26,5 damage, not impressive, but not neglible. And wait: the moment the enemy you hit retalliates, you have a reaction (2d8 lightning from wrath of the storm), and push the enemy back 10 ft; at which point he must deceide to waste the rest of his attacks, or move back, and take the rest of booming blade's damage (3d8). That's suddenly 49 damage in total. Not half bad, given that you also cast a level 7 spell. And even without that level 7 spell: using this tactic, plus (possibly upcast) Spirit Guardians and Spiritual weapons, generates an impressive amount of damage. Part of which can be maximized with Channel Divinity.

You've used a round, a 7th level spell, a feat, a Wrath of the Storm usage (max: 5/long rest) and taken perhaps 20 HP of damage in order to deal 49 damage to an enemy and maybe mess up a bunch of low-HP enemies or fiends via Divine Word. (20 HP damage is a rough guess at how much damage you took when the enemy hit you with the attack that triggered Wrath of the Storm.) That's not awful but unless you were facing a whole lot of fey/fiends it's not a game-changer either, from where I'm standing. It's nothing like the RoI you get from wrapping the chief vampire in a Wall of Force while you deal with all of his Vampire Spawns (5th level spell slot), or the RoI from conjuring up 24 velociraptors with inherent magical weapons and buffing them all to ~30 HP apiece (7th level spell slot + Bear totem) while also giving PCs and minions advantage on their grappling/shoving Strength checks. It's sort of on par with the RoI you get from spending a bonus action to cast Magic Weapon and then an action surge to knock an enemy prone and then whale on him with five GWM attacks at advantage: it's nice, it's sometimes numerically impressive, but it's not going to win you any fights you weren't about to win anyway.


I used the Tempest Cleric example because I played one, but I'm sure you can do (more or less) the same with other variants; at least picking up an melee cantrip, and using those +2d8 extra weapon damage.

Yeah, Booming Blade is great--SCAG changed the game significantly. Clerics other than Arcana clerics need to spend a feat to get it though, which is a pity, and they tend not to have maxed Dex or Strength either, and that offsets the benefit they get from their extra 2d8 class feature.

[MaxWilson]

As for Aura of Vitality, that's a paladin spell. So either you're at 9th level and you've sunk one of his 2 3rd levels lots into it or you're a lore bard and you've spent one of your two magical secrets on it. And if you're extending it that's a 3 level sorcerer dip.

I can't help but feel like those are much less efficient than one of any kind of cleric spending a couple 2nd level spell slots.

Likely more than a couple of 2nd level spell slots. Damage doesn't tend to be distributed evenly over a party. If one PC has taken 70 points of damage and another has taken 22 and the others have taken zero, you can patch all that up with one Extended Aura of Vitality (from e.g. the Paladin 9/Divine Soul 3) or two regular Auras of Vitality (from, say, a Bardlock), or you can patch most of it up with one Aura of Vitality and leave the other damage unhealed for now.

But what you can't do is patch all of it up with a couple of second-level cleric spells.

[CantigThimble]

Likely more than a couple of 2nd level spell slots. Damage doesn't tend to be distributed evenly over a party. If one PC has taken 70 points of damage and another has taken 22 and the others have taken zero, you can patch all that up with one Extended Aura of Vitality (from e.g. the Paladin 9/Divine Soul 3) or two regular Auras of Vitality (from, say, a Bardlock), or you can patch most of it up with one Aura of Vitality and leave the other damage unhealed for now.

But what you can't do is patch all of it up with a couple of second-level cleric spells.

I think we're probably evaluating spells differently due to playing at different levels. I'm basing my claims on adventures that went from 5th to 10th level, you're starting at 12th. By my metrics if you're using extended or even regular aura of vitality that means you've chosen that as your capstone feature for the campaign.

[MaxWilson]

I think we're probably evaluating spells differently due to playing at different levels. I'm basing my claims on adventures that went from 5th to 10th level, you're starting at 12th. By my metrics if you're using extended or even regular aura of vitality that means you've chosen that as your capstone feature for the campaign.

I've most commonly seen it on Lore Bards or Bardlocks around 6th-8th level, and on Paladins around 10th level. By your standards that means it shows up about midway through a campaign for Lore Bards, and as a Paladin capstone.

That doesn't change the fact that it's more slot-efficient, but it does agree with the fact that my campaigns apparently see more rapid level advancement than yours do, unless I deliberately slow them down by e.g. requiring 10x PHB XP to advance each level. Still, 12th level is somewhat high-ish level by my standards as well; that example wasn't chosen for being common. It was chosen for being notable, since the question was about "which is more slot-efficient" and not "which is more accessible." Prayer of Healing is trivially more accessible than Aura of Vitality.

[kardar233]

With regard to Healing Spirit, I think that its in-combat utility varies greatly based on a single DM quirk: does the DM hit characters when they’re down? When a PC drops to 0, do monsters continue to attack them or move on?

If the DM attacks downed PCs, Healing Spirit is useful out of combat and occasionally in it. However, if the DM doesn’t hit downed PCs, it becomes a discount Aura of Life. Healing Spirit heals a character who starts their turn in the spirit at the start of their turn, so if your Fighter is at low health against a big nasty and you want to ensure he gets his next turn, you can just put the Healing Spirit on top of him. It’s not a perfect solution; it means the enemy is free to move on if it dropped him (not usually an issue without Sentinel), and if they have a push or swallow effect then he may be pulled out of the spirit, but I can make a reasonable comparison between the proposed use of Heal and of Healing Spirit in this case. Healing Spirit also lasts all combat and is cheap action-wise.

[Citan]

Okay, let me unpack this from a powergamer perspective. Ignoring RP considerations, I see two ways to use cleric. The first way is as a one-level dip for heavy armor proficiency without losing spell slot progression, e.g. Forge Cleric 1/Illusionist X who loves to tank on the front lines with Shield and AC 21 while casting wizard spells like Fear and Booming Blade, plus the occasional Bless spell in ranged fights where party Sharpshooters need help and tanks are irrelevant, and the occasional Healing Word as needed to stabilize a fellow PC and get him back on his feet (useful especially at lower levels). This is the one my powergamer instincts are in love with despite my distaste for the cleric's RP. You know you're a powergamer when you're tempted to rationalize your way into doing things you hate the flavor of, just because they're powerful.

The second way to use a cleric, maybe, is to go all the way up to cleric 9. Mostly I wouldn't do this, because bards and bardlocks will do it better, but I can imagine a rare scenario when you're joining a fairly weak and conventional group of PCs, and you've rolled up lowish-stats (say, 12, 11, 14, 9, 7, 10) and so need something that can contribute in a fairly SAD way, and you want someone in the party to have early access to Bless/Healing Word/Augury/Revivify/Death Ward/Raise Dead because it looks like other PCs are going to die a lot. Because of your low stat rolls, Divine Soul sorlock isn't really attractive, and a bard wouldn't get access to Bless/Revivify as early as you want them. Even in this scenario where cleric is probably the best choice, there's not that much attraction to going full cleric all the way--I'd be strongly tempted to go Cleric 1-5 (Bless/Augury/Revivify), Shepherd Druid 1-6 (combat multipliers and Conjure Animals V), Cleric 6-9 (Death Ward/Raise Dead, crossing my fingers that Revivify would be enough in the meantime, especially with all my extra spell slots), and then whatever after that. Probably Shepherd Druid 7-11 honestly for that Conjure Fey + Planar Binding goodness, e.g. binding covens of Annis Hags for both melee thugging AND spellcasting (including Counterspelling!). Compared to a straight cleric I'd lose out on the ability to wear metal armor, high-level cleric spells that I'm mostly still unexcited about (except Holy Aura), and some kind of domain power like perma-flight or taking half damage from nonmagical weapons. I'd gain crazy-strong spells like Healing Spirit and Conjure Animals that function as if they have magic weapons, Shepherd druid Bear/Hawk/Unicorn totem spirits or whatever they're called, wildshape capabilities (extra HP, extra movement modes like flight although not with spellcasting, roleplaying options), Planar-Bound T-Rexes that also behave like they have magical weapons, some halfway decent melee cantrips...

To me that looks way better than Divine Word and Mass Heal. Holy Aura, as I've said before, is giving me some pause. At level 15 I could be an extremely proactive Life Cleric 9/Shepherd Druid 6 with great healing, massive summoning capabilities and plenty of spell slots for that role, or I could be a Life Cleric 15 with mediocre healing, Holy Aura once per day and a bunch of okay-ish non-concentration spells that are not very spell slot-efficient. It's not like I couldn't do proactive things as a cleric (I'd still have Planar Binding VIII access for example, and that makes up for a lot), but do I really want to give up so much just for Holy Aura? And would I have fun playing the PC at levels 6-15 anyway, or would I get bored and retire the PC? I know I'd enjoy the Cleric/Druid the whole time, but the cleric...?

Anyway, that's my powergamer answer to your question. Hope it was illuminating.

(I know that I weren't the primary recipient of this message, but I also was interested in the answer so...).

Honestly, I mostly follow you on what you say, although I would go different ways (grabbing some Monk or Barbarian on a Nature Cleric, a Draconic Sorcerer or Evoker Wizard on a Tempest one, etc)...

Because lvl 11/15 are indeed levels in which you "just" get new spells and ASIs, and while I'll always defend their intrinsical value, I usually play in groups decent enough to make do without, and I indeed love (or rather, ahem, *loooOOOOOOOOve*) having many options as most of you that have beared with me for some time probably guessed already. I also have particular affection for gishes, so that's another incentive to fork away.
So what is true for Cleric (always tempted to fork after lvl ~10) would actually, in my case, hold true for most classes, casters and martials alike. ;)

BUT (you were kinda expecting that, weren't you? ;)) I would pursue the same kind of leveling as you only when some (many?) expectations met more or less warranties of happening.
1. Feats and multiclassing are allowed (obviously, but still, seemed useful to me to recall that it's common but not certain).
2. I'm sure to get (well, at least as far as campaign story is planned to go) up to char level between 13 and 16 included.
3. I'm also sure to get there fast enough.
4. Finally, I have strong reasons to think that none of the unique spells Cleric can get would be especially powerful...
- For example Forbiddance, either because its a campaign with little downtime long-goal pushing, or it's a campaign in which time is of the essence.
- For another example, Heroes Feast, because we happen to also have a Druid (can prepare it too) or a Wizard (Leomund's Magnificent Mansion, while not exactly the same, at least provides safe shelter).
- For yet another example, Word of Recall, because we happen to have a caster that learned Teleportation Circle -and just spams safe circles whenever we go- and plan on learning Teleport later, and I'm pretty sure someone can cover inter-planar traveling one way or another.
- For a last example, Holy Aura, because we happen to have a smart Bard that learned the best slot-to-benefit ratio spell, namely Circle of Power.

So, why all those requirements?
a) Because multiclassing is still hurting in several aspects, whatever way you go with multiclass.
b) Because imo once you managed to get as far as level 16 and can still expect going up to 20, the opportunity cost of dropping Cleric is nearly exponentially higher: while I don't fancy that much those 9th level spells (except True Resurrection), most (all?) Domain "capstones" are extremely impressive and/or interesting to use. You then get another use per short rest of your Channel Divinity (absolutely marvelous on Life -allies will never die again- , Tempest -you now get "Thunderballs" several times per short rest and Death -great nova damage-).
Then at level 20 you get autosuccess on Divine Intervention.

Which brings me to that particular feature.
I understand people may overlook it: it's atrociously swingy for most of your life (1d100, no way that I can find to influence the roll) and it's subject to DM appreciation.
But you know what? Even with those potentially harsh limitations, it's still probably one of the best 3 features one could get at that level.

Reminder: main (only) hint for resolution are...
a) "Describe the assistance you seek, and roll percentile dice. "
b) "The DM chooses the nature of the intervention; the effect of any cleric spell or cleric domain spell would be appropriate."
c) "If your deity [does not] intervene, you can use it again after a long rest."

Otherwise said, there is absolutely no RAW restriction on what you can ask and what your DM can make happen.
Barring roleplay-specific interventions to make happen things that couldn't be otherwise done with spells...
1. You or the DM have no hard obligation to restrict yourselves to Cleric spells.
2. Nor have either of you ANY obligation to restrict yourselves to spells of a level you could ask.
Additionally, there is no restriction on how often you can formulate the potentially exact same request until your wish is answered.
Give those informations a few dozen seconds to pour into your head.
...
...
You're good? Good!

So, even considering the worst of worst case, being a situation that cumulates the facts that...
a) Neither you or the DM are particularly creative ones,
b) Your DM tends to be conservative rules-wise so would restrict intervention as "Cleric spells" only "mimics".
c) You just suck so hard luck-wise that you usually rate on the bad end of probability curves, so you'd "always" need at least a nearly dozen tries before your wish comes true...

At level 10, or rather, *as soon as level 10*, you could...
- Completely save a fellow character from any ailment that troubled him, even cut limbs (Regenerate) or complex death that makes Raise Dead improper (more than 10 days, beheaded) or at least very impractical (severed limbs for example).
- Get a "timed buff" for your next big fight, because nothing forces you to ask for something to happen right now ("Oh Lord, plz have mercy on your humble servants and shield us from magic when we will fight that vile offender that tries to undermine you, the infamous EnterBadGuyName > Holy Aura or AntiMagic Field, even if DM would reasonably decide it "works" only for whatever that particular guy casts and not his minions, would still be a great buff).
- Save a whole region from famine due to unlucky climate, thus getting positive influence on locals (Control Weather: rain and tempered).
- Associate with a warring lord to help him vanquish foes in exchange of him converting or otherwise helping/rewarding you by ruining enemy's armies or holds with the like of EarthQuake, Forbiddance, Control Weather -especially great against maritime armies- ... You don't really care that it would take you whether 1 day or 15 days to make it happen, unless you wish for something that just helps your own army to advance, like some big cloud, or it's an emergency in the first place in which case you probably shouldn't rely on it... For material destruction, once it's done, it will take months to rebuild. Even just ice cold could demoralizing a marching army or hurt logistics by icing crops.

Just (all) that makes it good enough to warrant that level 10 in my eyes (well of course if your DM just blatantly refuses those use-cases, then it's probably not worth it, but you may have bigger problems then).

Provided you have decent luck (or your DM works with "Inspiration" which (s)he should ^^) and your DM is opened to a bit more leeway, as long as it's justified obviously, you could...
- Get some regain of spell slots for yourself or an "instant short rest" for your party when on harsh adventuring days (sure, you have a high chance to fail, so you can't really count on it, but that could make for a nice surprise though).
- Get the effect of a Cleric spell without concentration (like a Conjure Celestial) or an improved version of one (like Planar Ally, except with low cost or already convinced to help)
- Get the effect of any spell (like Magic Secrets and Wish combined).
- Possibly even temporarily give you the equivalent of a class feature.
Would still make it very hazardous as a last resort or emergency solution, but as long as you have time in front of you, they would many many interesting ways to use it.
With such a DM (hint: I'd myself allow mostly any kind, as long as it's not blatantly overpowered compared to your level or you really invested so much in deity relationship roleplay that it justifies exceptional answers to your requests. No idea whether I'm a lone wolf in this or not though ^^).

[PhoenixPhyre]

And with that Divine Intervention--

There's no downside other than a 7 day cooldown and that only if the God answers you. It's like wish, on steroids, 7 levels earlier. And without the nasty "weakened and you can't cast this again" risk.

Of course, if your DM is a jerk...then don't play with them.

[kardar233]

or the RoI from conjuring up 24 velociraptors with inherent magical weapons and buffing them all to ~30 HP apiece (7th level spell slot + Bear totem) while also giving PCs and minions advantage on their grappling/shoving Strength checks.

Got to stop you here: Conjure Animals is stated both in rules text and in Sage Advice that you do not get to choose the animals you summon. This is honestly a pretty important limitation on the power of the spell; without that, it reshapes encounters to a greater degree than any spell under 6th level. A gang of velociraptors, giant poisonous snakes, or (my favourite) constrictor snakes can absolutely obliterate entire encounters. With random or DM-chosen beasts, the spell isn’t nearly as effective due to the wide variety of usefulness in any beast CR bracket.

Additionally, from a practical optimization perspective, I would be morally certain that the DM would throw a book at my head if I summoned 24 beasts. In my last game, the DM asked me to stop using the “8 CR 1/4 beasts” option of Conjure because it was slowing down the combat and pushing the rest of the party out of the limelight. It would be far worse upcasting it that way.

I’d be interested to try balancing Conjure by barring the CR 1/4 option entirely, but allowing the player to choose what beasts they like in the other options. I’m not going to do that though, because after 11 levels of Moon Druid, I will say screw Druids and their Concentration-hogging, Strength-save-loving spell list.

[MaxWilson]

And with that Divine Intervention--

There's no downside other than a 7 day cooldown and that only if the God answers you. It's like wish, on steroids, 7 levels earlier. And without the nasty "weakened and you can't cast this again" risk.

Of course, if your DM is a jerk...then don't play with them.

Wish on steroids? Not hardly.

Wish can, without controversy, replicate the effect of any spell of 8th level or lower in a single action. Can you Wish for a Simulacrum without spending gold? Yes, clearly. Can you wish for a Clone of yourself? Yes, clearly (though you might need an appropriate receptable for it to grow to maturity). Can you wish to be True Polymorphed into an Ancient White Dragon? No, not without risking the 33% clause and associated penalties. Can you wish for a True Resurrection? Again, no, not without risk.

Divine Intervention can, without controversy, replicate the effect of any cleric spell or cleric domain spell. Can you ask for a True Resurrection? Yes. Can you ask for a Clone? Not unless your DM is feeling generous. Can you ask for a Simulacrum? Again no, not without controversy.

I'd say "different but equal" if high-level cleric spells were as awesome in their way as high-level spells from any other spell list. But I don't think they actually are. Being able to invoke AnyClericSpell with a 10-100% chance of success, once per day, at the cost of an action is... not garbage, but not particularly exciting either. And arguably it's not even you doing it anyway, it's some big offscreen NPC... but that's probably a different topic (Why I Hate D&D Religions).

BTW, Citan, I don't buy the "please let us be protected from magic next time we fight " as something which is covered by "the effect of any cleric spell or cleric domain spell would be appropriate." What you're asking for is basically Contingency IX (a spell which doesn't exist in 5E and is certainly not on the cleric spell list) + Antimagic Shell. You can pray for Antimagic Shell on the spot, with a 10%+ chance of success, but I don't buy that you're intended to be able to attach a delayed trigger to the Antimagic Shell request. Also it sounds like you're expecting (under the bullet point about gaining favor with a warlord) to be able to pray for remote effects, like Earthquake in a distant location. Again, that doesn't pass my sniff test, since Earthquake can't be cast remotely. (And Earthquake is a moderately weak spell anyway--difficult terrain, make everybody save to not fall prone, save to not lose concentration, create cracks in the ground that you don't control, and do damage that applies only to buildings and not to people/monsters. Buildings in 5E don't have well-defined HP in the first place so the utility of this is very situational.)


Got to stop you here: Conjure Animals is stated both in rules text and in Sage Advice that you do not get to choose the animals you summon.

The rules and Sage Advice both agree that it's appropriate for you to express a desire for a certain type of animal when you cast the spell, and it's up to the DM what you actually get. The DM can choose to grant your request, he can roll on random tables appropriate to the terrain, he can choose according to what he thinks is funny, he can do whatever.

It doesn't matter that much though because 24 of [I]anything CR 1/4 with temp HP from the Bear aura is still a metric ton of meatshield all equipped with magical attacks. There is no summon you can get that is bad. You're nitpicking something which is tangential to the point: Divine Word isn't game-changing in the same way things like Wall of Force, Forcecage, or high-level (Conjure Animals + Shepherd Druid buffs) are.

[Pex]

Likely more than a couple of 2nd level spell slots. Damage doesn't tend to be distributed evenly over a party. If one PC has taken 70 points of damage and another has taken 22 and the others have taken zero, you can patch all that up with one Extended Aura of Vitality (from e.g. the Paladin 9/Divine Soul 3) or two regular Auras of Vitality (from, say, a Bardlock), or you can patch most of it up with one Aura of Vitality and leave the other damage unhealed for now.

But what you can't do is patch all of it up with a couple of second-level cleric spells.

If that much damage is taken it was a tough fight. Certainly it will vary by campaign, but after such a fight it is likely the party will short rest given it's not the end of the adventuring day for a long rest. Players will spend HD to heal. Potions of healing if any might get drunks. One healing spell might be cast. If multiple PCs can heal others and/or themselves by class features that will be done. More than one healing spell might be cast, but an individual PC only casts one. If someone has Healer feat that will help, a lot. I know that from experience.

[MaxWilson]

If that much damage is taken it was a tough fight. Certainly it will vary by campaign, but after such a fight it is likely the party will short rest given it's not the end of the adventuring day for a long rest. Players will spend HD to heal. Potions of healing if any might get drunks. One healing spell might be cast. If multiple PCs can heal others and/or themselves by class features that will be done. More than one healing spell might be cast, but an individual PC only casts one. If someone has Healer feat that will help, a lot. I know that from experience.

That's what is so great (i.e. game breaking) about Aura of Vitality and now Healing Spirit: they trivialize the aftermath of even a tough fight and mostly eliminate attrition as a concern, so only a single large Deadly encounter (or a smaller encounter that's deadly despite the official rating, e.g. Intellect Devourers) threatens to TPK them.

Prayer of Healing won't do that.

Clerics are not very good HP healers in 5E.