The Actual Clerical Archetypes and How they Measure Up

[moorewr]

PnP is a whole other kinda beast. Like a previous poster I based a few characters on some of my PnP characters and it doesn't always crossover as well.

..and yet they are supposed to be the same class. You could have said a cleric that does not heal isn't a healer. No one can argue with that circular statement.

[samho]

Perhaps I did misunderstand your post. When you said the "real" battle clerics were not included I assumed you were in favor of including those with cleric levels that don't "pretend healer" - and yes they are out there I have had the dis-pleasure of grouping with them.

Maybe you just choice the wrong word at your original word?

So as far as I see it (and many others) a Battle-Cleric is defined as a cleric first, a meele combatant 2nd. The wanna-bes and/or everything else that has a cleric icon but does not heal is a tank with mana ( much like a warforged fighter with a level of sorc/wiz).

What you describe was battle-medic or combat-healer, but not necessary a battle cleric -- just because some of the battle cleric choice to take *healer* at a higher priority than *battle*, doesn't mean every other battle cleric must choice to do so. It's not such type of battle cleric NEVER use their cleric spell even like HEAL and MASS CURE, it's that they don't pretend to be a healer, unless in emergency. If I play my melee speced battle cleric, I almost always party with another cleric (no matter which type of cleric he is, even another extreme battle cleric as myself) since I KNOW:


(1) I have much less spell point, so the BEST USE of my spell point shouldn't be HEAL PEOPLE -- unless it's emergency, or myself. (it's no point to put my burden on any other person, right?) I choice to spend on buff, occasionally put a maximized blade barrier for strategy point to end the battle quicker (was the monster die MUCH faster and economically with my blade barrier? if so, WHY should I not to do so?), and emergency healing.

(2) I was designing such character to provide similar / better combat performance as well as STOP enemy damage our ally, and/or eliminate them. When I make up the decision that my action will benefit our goal much better, I will continue process my action. It may include doing emergency healing, or not pretend to be a healer.


Personally, I would love to name those who take *healer* first (I'm sorry, it's not *cleric* first), a meele combatant 2nd as *semi-battle cleric*, a *balanced battle cleric* or like sirgog mention, a *generalist*. Could they still be the battle cleric? Sure, why not, if we only have 3 archetype, but they are just one dividsion of the battle cleric, not the whole.

It's been said, I'm not totally agree with the final statement of Grenfell's definition of Battle Cleric, while I agree most other argument of the original post.

[sigtrent]

Perhaps I did misunderstand your post. When you said the "real" battle clerics were not included I assumed you were in favor of including those with cleric levels that don't "cleric" - and yes they are out there I have had the dis-pleasure of grouping with them.

I was just arguing that more than one non-cleric level does not disqualify you from being a cleric.

Clerics that don't use their healing on other members of the party are just being selfish and it has nothing to do with the build. I've played with "heal bot" builds that are terrible at actualy keeping the party alive (or themselves for that matter).

Now a battle cleric is less likely to be an extreemly attentive healer as they are in the thinck of things fighting most of the time, but again, its a play style choice and not really the build since they could probably whack red bars with the best of them if they wanted to.

My own cleric is an offensive caster (Max wis, empower, maximize, quicken, heighten, extend) but I have a paladin level (extra SP and defenses) and I carry a couple of greatswords and short swords (vulkoorum speced) and I fight when it makes sense for me to do so (and when its fun to do so). But its not by any means a battle cleric build (10 starting con, 14 str, no combat feats).

For builds I really see the 4 types
Battle Clerics - Str focused with melee combat feats
Generalists - Decent Str and Con but still wisdom focused wtih full spell range
Offensive casters - Max wisdom, nearly all casting oriented feats
Heling specialists - Wis and Cha emphasized, empower healing, very heavy mana focus

[cinoaz]

This post forgot to include the "Turning Cleric".....ahem.....

Anyway, one statement I thought pertinent to repeat:

"I never run out of Mana unless I'm going into full drain mode, mana management is necessary"

I run every type of cleric there is, I have 6 of my 7 slots tied up in clerics. I play each one differently depending on my mood. I do, however, employ serious Mana Management all the time, regardless of cleric type. Mana Management is vital to keeping the party going.

I don't always res a fallen party member right away, I don't keep everyone's health topped off all the time, I don't willie nillie hand out buffs just because someone asks, I often know the quest myself and what to expect, I won't waste a fire protect if there are 1 or 2 fire mephits coming up and that's it for a while.

If I wanted to be brain dead and hack and slash all the time, I would make a Bbn or Tank. I have to think when playing my cleric, have to manage my resources and adjust to the dynamics of the group, that, for me, is the fun of a cleric.

[Grenfell]

I've a feeling that were going straight to 20 next time, but well see.

See... thats the problem wtih yoru disticntion... there isn't one. You arn't really including battle clerics in your descriptions becasue you don't think they are clerics. Anyone wearing the cleric icon is a cleric in my book and in most peoples estimations. Your Battle cleric really is a generalist and by not including the real battle clerics your guide, in my opinion, falls short of covering teh real archatypes avalable for the class.

Maybe this is a question of semantics, sigtrent. I guess to me, it's a question of mindset, playstyle, goal and then the build's ability to deliver on that mindset/playstyle/goal.

I think of a battle cleric as a cleric first, and melee second. That's my mindset, and that's my goal -- I will keep my party upright using all the tools at my disposal (including a nice greataxe if need be), and when that goal is being filled, I will beat down the enemy.

The healing tank, to me, is a tank first, and healer second. My priority there is to kill mobs using melee, and if the primary healer goes down, to step in and 'rescue' the situation. In mindset, for me anyhow, this is not that different from playing a paladin or a battle bard: the priority is the killing, followed by the healing.

If by 'real battle clerics' you mean that your priority (in gameplay, in mindset, etc.) is to kill mobs, then I submit that you're really a healing tank, being closer to a paladin than anything else. It doesn't matter whether you have 16 cleric levels or 1; the point of the build is to kill mobs primarily via melee, and as such, it should be judged on its ability to do that. Any healing ability is secondary.

The exact reverse is true for "battle clerics". I do agree that I don't know what a 'generalist' cleric is, as I consider them to be all battle clerics.

Hope that makes sense. And yes, I realize this is just my own personal take on things, but I offer it out there as a way to think about things.

/gren