Posted by : David Guyll April 26, 2011

Not it!

In all seriousness, my experience with clerics can be briefly summed up as, "I never played one before 4th Edition." Ironically, it was the first character I actually played as part of a two-man delve, run by a person that had never ran D&D before, and it was a shitload of fun. Being able to smash and blast things while giving my ally bonuses (but still be able to heal), was so much better than standing behind the fighter and keeping him propped up and letting him get all the glory; people in my games just never got as excited about rolling 8 hit points of healing as they did over critting for 29 damage (or instantly slaying a dragon with a single spell and botched saving throw).

On another note, apparently writing free articles talking about D&D's history--something he specifies in vain each time at the top of the column--is garnering Mearls forum hostility. That's not surprising as doing pretty much anything makes you fair game for internet rage, and while I can understand that you might not find them interesting remember that you are also not paying for it (nor is it eating up pages out of the admittedly leaner-looking Dragon or spartan Dungeon). What I find only slightly surprising is the claims that Mearls is going somewhere with this that we don't want to go, perhaps with a 5th Edition that will play more like 3rd and/or lack a cleric class--this is sadly a refreshing change of point-of-view from past columns where he allegedly attacked 4th Edition.

Personally I'm taking these columns as a D&D enthusiastic just, you know, talking about the game--even if it's about gaming history that some of us experienced first hand (most of my running time was in 3rd Edition, so I got the end of this particular lesson). Yeah he's a WotC employee, but that doesn't mean that he can't post shit on the site that doesn't have some sort of ulterior motive.

{ 4 comments... read them below or Comment }

  1. Healing, what? 3.5 edition Clerics are supposed to be a masterstroke of trolling and better than every other character in the party unless your GM is a tosser or you are playing egregiously wrong. Healing the Fighter in 3.5 is so far beneath you, you could be spending that time WINNING with your CLERICBLOOD. I healed a Fighter once in my entire 3.5 career and he paid me to do it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Don't forget to pick up a few warlock levels and the Adonis Heritage feat.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Indeed, when built and played right, the 3.5 cleric was the "anything you can do, I can do better" class.

    In my campaigns, the cleric is usually a DMPC who mainly just follows the PCs around and helps them not die. It's almost a necessity when you only have two (sometimes three) players and nobody wants to play an optimized 3.5 cleric.

    In 4e, they're played even less often, but mainly because the warlord and bard seem to be my group's leaders of choice.

    ReplyDelete
  4. My return to D&D after 20 years was 4e. I played a cleric in 2nd to help the party. The first major campaign was Revenge of the Giants. We had a meat shield in the party but the cleric took more damage than he did. The Cleric seem to be at the forefront of the attacks and the battles while dishing out healing where needed. Long live the cleric. Happens to have been on of my best adventures ever.

    David

    ReplyDelete

Followers

Recent Comments

Popular Post

Blog Archive

- Copyright © Points of Light -Metrominimalist- Powered by Blogger - Designed by Johanes Djogan -