Clerics and Druids, Why is everyone against them?

[Togath]

As the title implys I'm wondering why people think the cleric is over powered, I can kind of understand the druid being considered over powered(mainly if the druid was played by a munchkin), but the cleric seems about the same as a paladin, minus the smite attack, mount, +1/lvl base attack bonus, and martial weapon proficiency. As a note, this isn't a complaining thread, I really would like to understand why clerics are considered over-powered, as ive only GMed a group using a paladin instead of a cleric(so I dont have much experience with clerics in game).

[Curious]

Short Version: Because Clerics have spells.

Long Version: Clerics have a whole list of powerful spells which give them bonuses upon stackable bonuses, which can then be DMM: Persisted to last the whole day. A Paladin or Fighter just can't compete.

[Keld Denar]

Spells >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not spells.

Period.

Anything full BAB, Smite, Mount, etc, can do, spells can do better, more often, more reliably, and usually for the whole party.

[Togath]

Hadn't known until I looked that clerics had non heal spells , just took a look at their list and can understand the views on the cleric a bit better now.

[TheCountAlucard]

Hadn't known until I looked that clerics had non heal spells , just took a look at their list and can understand the views on the cleric a bit better now.

And Druid not just gets spells, he also gets the ability to turn into superpowered animals, and an animal companion that's almost as good as a Fighter in its own right.

[huttj509]

Hadn't known until I looked that clerics had non heal spells , just took a look at their list and can understand the views on the cleric a bit better now.

Similarly the druid has some nice buffs and control spells...and can cast them as a bear...while summoning bears...riding a bear.

[erikun]

I assume we're talking about 3.5e?

Then yeah, it's the spells. Take a look at what Holy Word can do, to every creature nearby, without a saving throw. (The save is for the banishment effect only.) Other spells aren't quite as impressive, but still tend towards the very good side.

The other issue with Clerics is that, with one or two spells, they can stand in or surpass standard melee characters such as the Fighter or Paladin. See Righteous Might for an example. The Druid gets Wild Shape for this purpose.

Beyond that, there have been an unusually large number of Cleric-based threads lately, either for questions or builds or fixes. This isn't much different then the various Wizard's-broken-fixit threads we get occasionally, or the ever popular Monk threads.

P.S. Paladins have some nice abilities with their mounts, especially if you focus on them. Paladin buff spells are good too, but come far later in the game.

[Leon]

People Consider them overpowered due to Spells and what you can potentially do with that resource - However Smart Play and Self restraint in making those choices in a group environment are all people need to not be over the top and game disrupting.

Clerics when played well can make the Whole group massively better, Druids can as well but with less broader options than the Cleric. Druids however have more control options and like to bring a menagerie along.

[HappyBlanket]

On the reason why people dislike Druids:
There's a thread currently running that compares the utility and power of a single classed Fighter to a Druid's Animal Companion. Not the whole Druid, mind you. Just the Animal Companion.

[Steward]

On the reason why people dislike Druids:
There's a thread currently running that compares the utility and power of a single classed Fighter to a Druid's Animal Companion. Not the whole Druid, mind you. Just the Animal Companion.

If that's accurate, then that has to be pretty humiliating. The only way to balance this out is to give Fighters a sword that can cast quickened 9th level spells as an Epic-level wizard.

[Togath]

Looking at that thread I think I understand now why druids are over-powered if optimized(I hadn't added up the druids animal companion stats before)

[Daverin]

The worst part is, of the classes that are railed as the most broken, the wizard, druid, and cleric and etc, the druid is usually targeted as the one that is the most dangerous in the sense that the others DO take some kind of fu to at least know what are actually good spells. The druid, however, has an animal companion, spontaneous summoning, and wild shape, as well as a bevy of minor class features; they are easy to break out of the box, no optimization required. Ironically, the brokenness aside, they have, in the sense of fun class design, one of the better ones, at least according to one of the class design threads I saw on here somewhere by... someone. Wish I could remember, it was a very good read...

[erikun]

The druid, however, has an animal companion, spontaneous summoning, and wild shape, as well as a bevy of minor class features; they are easy to break out of the box, no optimization required. Ironically, the brokenness aside, they have, in the sense of fun class design, one of the better ones, at least according to one of the class design threads I saw on here somewhere by... someone.

Druids are like psionics and Tome of Battle, in that it is very easy to find and use their highly effective potential. As you mentioned, Clerics and Wizards (especially Wizards) require some knowledge of their spell lists to use effectively; a new Cleric is unlikely to pick the spells that allow them to overpower encounters.

The flip side is that psionics and Tome of Battle are frequently banned just for that reason - it is very easy for a player to reach adequate or full potential by just playing a Psion or Crusader and picking whatever is fun. As such, they tend to outshine the Fighters and Sorcerers still struggling with their choices, and are viewed as "brokenly overpowered" by a lot of newer DMs.

[Daverin]

Indeed. Which is sad. I am a supporter of ToB, and I strongly think the psionics system is a much more fluid and fun version of spellcasting "slots."

[RandomNPC]

Here's an example. Standard 3.5 game.

We had a game run 5 years, to level 16. The drow druid was the only one to survive the entire thing.

By the end his opener for combat was as follows:
Start off in wild shape
Send in Dire Wolf
Summon an elemental
If he felt it was needed he'd toss in flaming sphere on the next round.

It's all about turn economy, he had himself, his pet, his summon, and a flaming sphere doing damage every round.

[Divide by Zero]

Basic optimization for a druid: take Natural Spell, pick animals with high physical stats, and don't use terrible tactics. Wizard might have a higher maximum power level, but druid is certainly easier to break without trying.

[HappyBlanket]

Druids are like psionics and Tome of Battle, in that it is very easy to find and use their highly effective potential. As you mentioned, Clerics and Wizards (especially Wizards) require some knowledge of their spell lists to use effectively; a new Cleric is unlikely to pick the spells that allow them to overpower encounters.

The flip side is that psionics and Tome of Battle are frequently banned just for that reason - it is very easy for a player to reach adequate or full potential by just playing a Psion or Crusader and picking whatever is fun. As such, they tend to outshine the Fighters and Sorcerers still struggling with their choices, and are viewed as "brokenly overpowered" by a lot of newer DMs.

Of course, if you're determining whether or not a class is overpowered by comparing it to the Fighter, you know you're doing something terribly wrong.

...Plus, since when are Psionics and ToB overpowered? And since when has that been the real reason for banning them?

[Leon]

The simple way to reduce to a potentially broken Druid is to be different and interesting and not take the crutch of a feat that natural spell is.

[Saintheart]

Hadn't known until I looked that clerics had non heal spells , just took a look at their list and can understand the views on the cleric a bit better now.

There's also that, whereas Wizards theoretically have to sacrifice higher level spell slots to get their spells to be even stronger/more versatile/permanent -- which in theory limits their power -- Clerics have Divine Metamagic, which removes any need to consume higher level spell slots and instead uses of an ability that is entirely optional and not always required (turning or rebuking undead.) DMM "abuse" is one of the oldest and most powerful tricks that clerics can pull.

[Talya]

The simple way to reduce to a potentially broken Druid is to be different and interesting and not take the crutch of a feat that natural spell is.

Natural Spell is a great feat, don't get me wrong, (and by great I mean, overpowered), and I certainly agree with banning it for several reasons (the strongest of which is to stop druids from spending all day as furries), however...it's not what breaks druids. They're already broken, even without it.

[Bob]

Clerics/Druids may seem more powerful than other casters because the devs folded special abilities and half a fighter into their class features, as if to apologize for the expectation of being the healer. The result is a class with levels worth the weight of like half again the levels other classes in features.

and spells are broken, if you haven't read than enough by now.

[Zaq]

The simple way to reduce to a potentially broken Druid is to be different and interesting and not take the crutch of a feat that natural spell is.

To hell with Natural Spell, you could ban Wild Shape and I'd still put the Druid at T1. Maybe not at "without even trying" levels of power, sure, but that spell list is enough to cause (or fix, depending on perspective) a LOT of problems just on its own. I'd easily rate it above the Cleric list, personally.

[gbprime]

Power is only one aspect of why these casting classes are broken. The other aspect of it is versatility. With the right selection of spells, the cleric or druid can do any job, can be any archtype. And they can change that from day to day.

Skill monkey? Check.
Blaster? Check.
Tank? Check.
Healer? Check.
Summoner? Check.
Controller? Check.
Debuffer? Check.
Detective? Check.
etc...

Meanwhile, all the fighter can do is bash things. (If you're using Tome of Battle, then you're using a Warblade instead and they're really GOOD at bashing things, but still... all they can do is bash things.)

From this perspective, the way to fix it is to use classes like Shugenja, Favored Soul, Spirit Shaman, Dread Necromancer... even Healer... instead of cleric or druid. This locks the player to a more limited set of spells and prevents them from doing everyone else's job better.

[NecroRick]

I can't see the Druid's animal companion getting even into the same ballpark as a dungeoncrasher fighter.

The fighter gets a big lead in feats, he should spend them well. For AC there is always the dreaded and reviled

Spoiler

Show

shield

also I hear there are things called

Spoiler

Show

medium and heavy armour

.

Additionally, the fighter gets to spend money on magic items including

Spoiler

Show

magic armour and shield!

to get better. Whereas the Druid (even if he tries to be an artificer, in which case the Druid is the sucker for this round) has to split the magic items between himself and the animal companion.

The big abuse everyone keeps coming back to? Transforming into a bear and then still casting spells!!! Madness!!! Or perhaps simply silliness? Personally a bear casting spells doesn't strike me as especially game-breaking, and is weaker than 90% or more of the combos that get tossed around here-abouts.

[Coidzor]

I can't see the Druid's animal companion getting even into the same ballpark as a dungeoncrasher fighter.

Because dungeoncrasher makes Fighter playable up until level 8 or so, and is a good choice.

The animal companion can't compare directly with whatever area a fighter decides to optimize his performance in, but with the generally higher physical scores and size, can do many jobs that the fighter would have difficulty fulfilling (grappling, for instance) with less effort and better and still perform in a comparable fashion with the rest of the fighter, and quite easily exceed the fighter in most-to-all areas if the fighter does not have a specialty.

If the druid gets adequate crafting time, then that will actually break WBL by at least doubling it, as well as get exactly the items they want without careful DM micromanagement, in which case the DM is being deliberately duplicitous to allow that feat on the table and so shouldn't really be relied upon for this kind of general scenario.

gbprime: Best balance is not only more T3s on the high end but also more T3s on the low end, so that players have characters that can contribute outside of combat, for instance.

[LordBlades]

I can't see the Druid's animal companion getting even into the same ballpark as a dungeoncrasher fighter.

A standard animal companion, probably not. One that had his feats reshuffled to something useful (like Leap Attack and Shocktrooper for a pouncing animal for example) and is getting shared buffs from druid can probably give a Dungeoncrasher a run for his money.

The fighter gets a big lead in feats, he should spend them well. For AC there is always the dreaded and reviled

Spoiler

Show

shield

also I hear there are things called

Spoiler

Show

medium and heavy armour

.

That advantage isn't as big as it seems, many because most worthwhile feat chains aren't long enough. Even classes without bonus feats can complete them, which means they're at least as good as a fighter at doing that thing, or better if their class features complement that feat chain.

Additionally, the fighter gets to spend money on magic items including

Spoiler

Show

magic armour and shield!

to get better. Whereas the Druid (even if he tries to be an artificer, in which case the Druid is the sucker for this round) has to split the magic items between himself and the animal companion.

What you don't account for is that the druid, being a spellcaster needs less items. Many of the effects for which a fighter needs a magic item for are just a spell away for the druid.

You want to fly? You need either a magic item or flying mounts. Druid can just wildshape into something that flies.
You need a +str item? Druid can just cast Bull's Strength or Bite of the Werewhatever, shared with the animal companion.
You need a magic weapon? Druid can just cast Greater Magic Fang, shared with the animal companion.

[Divide by Zero]

There's also that, whereas Wizards theoretically have to sacrifice higher level spell slots to get their spells to be even stronger/more versatile/permanent -- which in theory limits their power -- Clerics have Divine Metamagic, which removes any need to consume higher level spell slots and instead uses of an ability that is entirely optional and not always required (turning or rebuking undead.) DMM "abuse" is one of the oldest and most powerful tricks that clerics can pull.

Note that it's not at all difficult to create a broken cleric without DMM. Adding that is just icing on the cheesecake.

To hell with Natural Spell, you could ban Wild Shape and I'd still put the Druid at T1. Maybe not at "without even trying" levels of power, sure, but that spell list is enough to cause (or fix, depending on perspective) a LOT of problems just on its own. I'd easily rate it above the Cleric list, personally.

A druid with no class features besides its spellcasting would easily be solid tier 1. Anything with a flexible spell list like that will be tier 1, and the only way to change that would be a significant overhaul of the magic system.

[KingofMadCows]

They get access to every spell in their perspective lists. That means they get more powerful any time a new cleric/druid spell shows up on the WotC website, in a new book, or in Dragon magazine. Wizards at least have to make some sacrifices to gain access to new spells.

[Kojiro]

Hm. Would cutting the spontaneous summoning feature out at least help them be more balanced? Spontaneous healing on a cleric seems useful but being able to throw anything away to basically pull out another party member or three seems a bit much even without... Everything else. Which is a lot. Hm. I don't think a Druid player would be justified in complaining, at least, if you did so.

The big abuse everyone keeps coming back to? Transforming into a bear and then still casting spells!!! Madness!!! Or perhaps simply silliness? Personally a bear casting spells doesn't strike me as especially game-breaking, and is weaker than 90% or more of the combos that get tossed around here-abouts.

Well, at high levels "bear" gets replaced with, say, t-rex. Things like that. A t-rex that can eat people and cast some major spells and that has a bear/wolf/whatever companion (and possibly more thanks to summoned monsters) is pretty obscene, especially when those spells are cleric and wizard level things.

[Talya]

People often forget how customizable the animal companion is, too.

For instance:

Natural Bond. Ooooh, now you've got a -3 Animal Companion at level 4, but have advanced him just as far as a level 1 companion.

Exalted Companion. If you're playing a very Neutral Good druid, this one is great. Because, as mediocre-to-downright-bad as VoP is on a character, once you've got a 3 Int or higher good companion, your animal companion can take vow of poverty. You know how great Vow of Poverty is on an animal companion?