Clerics and Druids, Why is everyone against them?

[Engine]

That doesn't follow. I have played and DMed all caster parties, and played and DMed balanced parties. I don't agree that the former work better. Maybe it's because we don't use persist spell, or DMM?

A lot of times I've played without DMM, and I found that spellcasters work better. I found they work better even just in Core.

You're using a 3rd level spell slot at the start of every fight? And relying on winning initiative?

Every character relies on winning the Initiative. Even the Fighter.

Fighter: Hang on... You don't sound like a terrbily viable character in all.. Are... are you... are you just a theoretical build?

We have a Witch, a Cleric and a Wizard: none is a theoretical characters, and we do just fine. Because an encounter heavy on party's resources is heavy on Fighter's resources, too. To me, it seems that is your Fighter the theoretical character: a Fighter who can go on on fighting all day without running out of HP just like spellcasters run out of spell slots, who can effectively tank the enemies thus protecting the other party members without a single mechanic that let him do that (houserules don't count).

I love the concept of the Fighter; I hate the Fighter class.