The Urge to Theurge - A Theurge Handbook WIP

[sonofzeal]

Seriously, no. Blasting is, and always will be weak.

Mailman and Cindy would disagree. Blasting, when optimized, is either a "Save or Die" or a "No Save Just Die". If the ability to permanently remove an enemy or multiple enemies from the battlefield isn't powerful, I don't know what is. I'd far rather kill someone than cast Grease under them or leave them in Solid Fog.

Healing is, and always will be weak.

This is more true, to an extent. Still, consider the phrase I used: "retroactively deny them actions".

What if I had a standard action spell that could, with no save or SR, and bypassing all immunities, and with unlimited range, daze an enemy for a round? Would that be a spell worth preparing? Now what if I could do it retroactively?

That shouldn't be a character's only ability... but it's not a bad one. I certainly wouldn't call it "weak". Perhaps not "strong" either, I'd want a more favourable ratio of actions denied for that, but I think it earns the title off "decent".

[Mystic Muse]

Alright. Since you've got plenty of feedback about the handbook itself, I'd just like to mention two things about the formatting.

In the first post, with class combinations it's kind of hard to tell the difference between one or the other. For example, Wizard/Cleric is just above Druid/Wizard. It would be best to put the Combinations in bold so that they're easier to distinguish.

Additionally, I would mention the source of anything you suggest. Not only so that players can find what they're supposed to be looking for, but also so they can avoid searching for something from a book that isn't allowed in their campaign. This reduces the time you have to look through your books for something you have, and prevents you from looking through your books for something you don't have.

There used to be a list of common abbreviations for the various books, but I can't seem to find it now. Sorry to not be of more help.

[Wyntonian]

{{scrubbed}}

Amen, brotha. Also, LB, I appreciate the points that you're making. I also assume you're trying to teach people something. Sarcasm makes people less likely to listen and absorb what you're trying to say, making it damn near impossible to learn anything. If you want to make a guide that shows how smart you are, and how you know so much more about optimizing and playing a batman than anything else, please do so. But call a spade a spade, a handbook a handbook, and a vanity thread a vanity thread.

[NineThePuma]

Silver is really irritating to read on a white background. Request alteration of color.

[Little Brother]

What has a Cleric/Blaster mage done to you to evoke such wrath agaisnt those play styles?

Blasting is a Tool, Batman is a Utility belt, Utility Belts carry tools thus a Batman can blast and still be a valid batman (a Theurge Batman has access to a very good quality First Aid Kit as well as the tool belt)

The choices on what you can do with a Theurge are very large and varied, all the options work. Whether a player thinks them optimal or not is up to them but it does not make any choice less valid to another player.

Okay, let's continue that tool metaphor. Blasting is a tool, yes, but it is an oversized, overweighted, badly-built wooden Batarang, compared to, say, the sleek, metal batarang with the options for bolo or rope attatchments, which is decent control. Plus, a good wizard will focus specialize and get rid of evocation, necromancy, and something else in this build that the cleric covers.

That depends. If you want to take out a group of enemies standing 700 feet away on a field which you previously doused in oil, Solid Fog and grease are suboptimal. Of course, in a typical fight, fireball is suboptimal. You know what is optimal? Crafting some goggles of the golden sun onto your face slot item, so that you can prep Solid Fog but still do the job when your party could use a fireball. Or just getting a scroll of fireball.

Which is why scrolls of mostly useless situational spells is a good idea.

A wizard who preps 2 damage spells per day or a cleric that can convert to a heal is neither a blast-wizard nor a healbot. Its a guy with options. The guy with the most options is the guy who is most likely to have the correct option.

A wizard should not waste his preped spells, given that he has 10+ spontaneous slots at mid-level.

And a cleric should take Spontaneous Domain ACF. If you need a heal-bitch get a ranger or something to do it. The only heal you should bother with is Heal.

Mailman and Cindy would disagree. Blasting, when optimized, is either a "Save or Die" or a "No Save Just Die". If the ability to permanently remove an enemy or multiple enemies from the battlefield isn't powerful, I don't know what is. I'd far rather kill someone than cast Grease under them or leave them in Solid Fog.

Zeal, I got a lot of respect for you, and I think you're a pretty cool guy, but, seriously, context is cool. Just a tip.

This is more true, to an extent. Still, consider the phrase I used: "retroactively deny them actions".

Except for the fact that, outside of heal, your healing ability is far lower than the average damage of that level. Compare an Orc Barbarian, level 1, with a falchion. Compare this thing's damage to a 5th level cleric's heal. 3d8+5<2d4+14. A CR 1 enemy just did more than your heal. Nice.

What if I had a standard action spell that could, with no save or SR, and bypassing all immunities, and with unlimited range, daze an enemy for a round? Would that be a spell worth preparing? Now what if I could do it retroactively?

Sure, I agree. Solid Fog is a great spell to prepare. Healing, however, doesn't work that way.

That shouldn't be a character's only ability... but it's not a bad one. I certainly wouldn't call it "weak". Perhaps not "strong" either, I'd want a more favourable ratio of actions denied for that, but I think it earns the title off "decent".

By more favorable, you mean able to stop something more than 4 levels below you? I mean, the only healing spells that people should remember is the Vigor line and Heal. Nothing else can heal enough to bother at the level you get it.

Alright. Since you've got plenty of feedback about the handbook itself, I'd just like to mention two things about the formatting.

In the first post, with class combinations it's kind of hard to tell the difference between one or the other. For example, Wizard/Cleric is just above Druid/Wizard. It would be best to put the Combinations in bold so that they're easier to distinguish.

Additionally, I would mention the source of anything you suggest. Not only so that players can find what they're supposed to be looking for, but also so they can avoid searching for something from a book that isn't allowed in their campaign. This reduces the time you have to look through your books for something you have, and prevents you from looking through your books for something you don't have.

There used to be a list of common abbreviations for the various books, but I can't seem to find it now. Sorry to not be of more help.

I'll start on that tomorrow. I'm hitting hay right now.

[sonofzeal]

Zeal, I got a lot of respect for you, and I think you're a pretty cool guy, but, seriously, context is cool. Just a tip.

I have no idea what you mean here.

Except for the fact that, outside of heal, your healing ability is far lower than the average damage of that level. Compare an Orc Barbarian, level 1, with a falchion. Compare this thing's damage to a 5th level cleric's heal. 3d8+5<2d4+14. A CR 1 enemy just did more than your heal. Nice.

Sure, I agree. Solid Fog is a great spell to prepare. Healing, however, doesn't work that way.
By more favorable, you mean able to stop something more than 4 levels below you? I mean, the only healing spells that people should remember is the Vigor line and Heal. Nothing else can heal enough to bother at the level you get it.

Sure... if you're not putting any effort into it at all.

Again, I've played a Healer. At 5th level I was healing well over 30 hp a pop, and I wasn't even trying to optimize that hard - specifically, I wasn't taking advantage of the many many ways to boost the Caster Level of Healing spells.

In my infamous Druid thread, I used the example of a basic CR 5 Troll to demonstrate the importance of AC at low/mid levels, because Trolls have a nasty offence against low-AC enemies. My Healer though? At level 5, they could heal about as much damage as that Troll could dish out in a round.

So no. You're repeating another bit of board "common knowledge" that fails to live up to reality. A half-decent effort on a terrible class can match enemy DPR with their healing. Cure Serious Wounds won't solve your problems straight out of the box with zero effort, just like blasting spells without metamagic and/or special effort aren't worth using, but both have a lot of effects and feats and items and abilities that help boost them. Even a moderate investment can get the numbers high enough to be quite relevant.

[Leon]

Plus, a good wizard

Any wizard can be a good wizard - what they specialize in has nothing to do with being good. What makes any class Good is how they utilize what they have chosen to use.

And a cleric should take Spontaneous Domain ACF. If you need a heal-bitch get a ranger or something to do it. The only heal you should bother with is Heal.

So groups below the level that Heal is available at have to live with low health & party deaths due to the classes with healing options not using them?

The Cure line are useful for mid combat refills on those that need it, more so the ones who have less HP that others like Wizards (no reason to cast a spell that heals 150 on a PC with 60).

One of the most important healing spells i have found as a Cleric player is a level 2 spell - Close Wounds has stopped a lot of PC deaths

[herrhauptmann]

Compare an Orc Barbarian, level 1, with a falchion. Compare this thing's damage to a 5th level cleric's heal. 3d8+5<2d4+14. A CR 1 enemy just did more than your heal.

2d4+14?
Are we talking an optimized player with a 24str (2d4+10str+2PA)? Or the NPC orc barbarian?
Because either way, I'm not seeing the +14 damage. And yes, at low levels, that +2 actually matters.

So groups below the level that Heal is available at have to live with low health & party deaths due to the classes with healing options not using them?

No, obviously any skilled player doesn't bother playing if he can't enter his first PrC. Because those early levels can be filled with PC deaths or even TPKs solely because the DM rolled a crit at a bad time.

[Little Brother]

Amen, brotha. Also, LB, I appreciate the points that you're making. I also assume you're trying to teach people something. Sarcasm makes people less likely to listen and absorb what you're trying to say, making it damn near impossible to learn anything. If you want to make a guide that shows how smart you are, and how you know so much more about optimizing and playing a batman than anything else, please do so. But call a spade a spade, a handbook a handbook, and a vanity thread a vanity thread.

If I wanted to show off or anything, I wouldn't have wasted hours on writing and updating the guide.
This is to try to reduce the frequency of Theurge-Day, right after Monkday. Seriously, though, a guide is about optimization. I am not going to tell people to build some jank. I am going to tell them how to make a good build, and if they decide to play sub-optimally with it, that's their call.

Silver is really irritating to read on a white background. Request alteration of color.

Will do.

I have no idea what you mean here.



Sure... if you're not putting any effort into it at all.

Again, I've played a Healer. At 5th level I was healing well over 30 hp a pop, and I wasn't even trying to optimize that hard - specifically, I wasn't taking advantage of the many many ways to boost the Caster Level of Healing spells.

In my infamous Druid thread, I used the example of a basic CR 5 Troll to demonstrate the importance of AC at low/mid levels, because Trolls have a nasty offence against low-AC enemies. My Healer though? At level 5, they could heal about as much damage as that Troll could dish out in a round.

So no. You're repeating another bit of board "common knowledge" that fails to live up to reality. A half-decent effort on a terrible class can match enemy DPR with their healing. Cure Serious Wounds won't solve your problems straight out of the box with zero effort, just like blasting spells without metamagic and/or special effort aren't worth using, but both have a lot of effects and feats and items and abilities that help boost them. Even a moderate investment can get the numbers high enough to be quite relevant.

A Theurge is tight on feats and skills, and putting effort into a sub-optimal mechanic is a bad idea. I know you can put a lot of effort into making healing keep up, PrC and feat investment, but a Theurge is better off using those feats for Practiced Spellcaster, Alternative Spell Source, and other, actually good, feats. I can make a truenamer decent if I want to. Or, I Can make a jank truenamer. Which should I do?

If you need something to give a bunch of healing, get a Ranger, or wands, or Heal. A Ranger can do it just as well as a cleric, and rarely has better things to do at the levels you are referring to. You can put effort into any jank, and make it passable. You can put effort into something good and make it a lot better. Which is a better idea, I wonder? If you are really so terrified of damage that you need a healbot, you can use something ACTUALLY GOOD, like say, DMM Persist, to persist a Mass(Lesser) Vigor. A lot more healing, using ONE spell slot.

Any wizard can be a good wizard - what they specialize in has nothing to do with being good. What makes any class Good is how they utilize what they have chosen to use.

No. Absolutely false. A Focused Evocater is and always will be bad, especially if they ban Transmutation and Conjuration.
[quote[So groups below the level that Heal is available at have to live with low health & party deaths due to the classes with healing options not using them?[/quote]I hear wands are cheap. I hear Vigor is an actually half-decent chain if you REALLY need it and lack something good, like, say, a Bard or Ranger or some such.

The Cure line are useful for mid combat refills on those that need it, more so the ones who have less HP that others like Wizards (no reason to cast a spell that heals 150 on a PC with 60).

No reason to heal 20 on a guy with 10 HP left, when the average DPR of the enemy is 50+. A Wizard that actually ends up in melee deserves the death it gets. No reason to waste a bunch of slots on terrible spells.

One of the most important healing spells i have found as a Cleric player is a level 2 spell - Close Wounds has stopped a lot of PC deaths

And what, exactly, does it do in combat against, say, a Balor, or a Titan, or anything worth its CR above level 10?

2d4+14?
Are we talking an optimized player with a 24str (2d4+10str+2PA)? Or the NPC orc barbarian?

Decent Orc Barbarian, 22 Str(18+4), in a Rage, that's a +8 modifier. Two-handed to +12 damage, PA to 14.

[Mystic Muse]

Decent Orc Barbarian, 22 Str(18+4), in a Rage, that's a +8 modifier. Two-handed to +12 damage, PA to 14.

To be fair, NPCs and enemies don't get 18s in any stat without DM modification. A standard Orc Barbarian would only have a 21 Strength while raging. That's still a decent amount, but not as much as you're saying it is. An Orc with the Elite array would be 23, but I'm pretty sure standard enemies don't get the elite array.

[MukkTB]

Whats this 'You're a bad player if you play at low levels stuff?'

[dextercorvia]

Okay, let's continue that tool metaphor. Blasting is a tool, yes, but it is an oversized, overweighted, badly-built wooden Batarang, compared to, say, the sleek, metal batarang with the options for bolo or rope attatchments, which is decent control. Plus, a good wizard will focus specialize and get rid of evocation, necromancy, and something else in this build that the cleric covers.

There are non evocation blasting options, some of which are especially useful against something in an AMF.

[herrhauptmann]

Decent Orc Barbarian, 22 Str(18+4), in a Rage, that's a +8 modifier. Two-handed to +12 damage, PA to 14.

You regularly participate in games where even mooks start with a 18 stat before racial modifiers? (CR 1 in a game with a level 5 PC)

Whats this 'You're a bad player if you play at low levels stuff?'

Sarcasm, relax.

[dextercorvia]

You regularly participate in games where even mooks start with a 18 stat before racial modifiers? (CR 1 in a game with a level 5 PC)

Sarcasm, relax.

LB has stated before that no one with less than an 18 in their primary stat would take class levels, so probably.

[Little Brother]

There are non evocation blasting options, some of which are especially useful against something in an AMF.

You mean the orbs of 4~ damage/CL? Yeah, that totally will do a decent amount of damage to something of the appropriate CR.

LB has stated before that no one with less than an 18 in their primary stat would take class levels, so probably.

No, I have said nothing of the sort. Care to try again?

[NineThePuma]

No, I have said nothing of the sort. Care to try again?

If I weren't busy and running in circles, I'd show you where you said it.

[Gnorman]

What I mean by "one specific build with a handbook disguise" is that your guide basically assumes that you will be a Wizard / Cleric (most likely of the cloistered variety), and that you will use the specific early-entry tricks you mention. While you do mention and evaluate a few alternate builds, you mostly do so offhandedly at best and derisively at worst.

In general, while this is an optimization handbook and therefore yes, you will recommend choices that bring a higher power level to the table, I think you assume too much in that regard, and it limits access to casual players or those whose style of play differs from yours. Handbooks should provide options, the more the better, and an evaluation thereof. There's also a caustic tonality to what you consider "suboptimal," which I think does not help your case and creates a more hostile lens through which some people will evaluate your product. Phrases like "Laugh at anyone who suggests it" or "Revoke/deny any relationship with anyone who suggests this" are unnecessarily vicious - you could benefit greatly from some distance, perspective, and a healthy dose of objectivity (the journalistic, dispassionate kind rather than the evaluative, "this is objectively better" kind, which you already seem to possess). Yes, sorcerers are inferior to wizards, but they're still Tier 2, which is more than enough for quite a few play styles and groups. Yes, beguilers are inferior to a cloistered cleric with proper domain choices, but some people prefer the spontaneity and situational versatility afforded by the class.

These are mostly quibbles about tone and accessibility, and I think that your handbook could stand to gain some benefit by mellowing things out a bit and opening yourself up to a wider range of options.

[Little Brother]

What I mean by "one specific build with a handbook disguise" is that your guide basically assumes that you will be a Wizard / Cleric (most likely of the cloistered variety), and that you will use the specific early-entry tricks you mention. While you do mention and evaluate a few alternate builds, you mostly do so offhandedly at best and derisively at worst.

I've done some updating, as has TDC, and I will get a lot more done on monday. More specifics on what you want?

In general, while this is an optimization handbook and therefore yes, you will recommend choices that bring a higher power level to the table, I think you assume too much in that regard, and it limits access to casual players or those whose style of play differs from yours. Handbooks should provide options, the more the better, and an evaluation thereof. There's also a caustic tonality to what you consider "suboptimal," which I think does not help your case and creates a more hostile lens through which some people will evaluate your product. Phrases like "Laugh at anyone who suggests it" or "Revoke/deny any relationship with anyone who suggests this" are unnecessarily vicious - you could benefit greatly from some distance, perspective, and a healthy dose of objectivity (the journalistic, dispassionate kind rather than the evaluative, "this is objectively better" kind, which you already seem to possess). Yes, sorcerers are inferior to wizards, but they're still Tier 2, which is more than enough for quite a few play styles and groups. Yes, beguilers are inferior to a cloistered cleric with proper domain choices, but some people prefer to spontaneity and versatility afforded by the class.

The issues aren't that they're inferior. The issue is that you lose 9s, and, for the list casters, unless you use Versatile Caster, and anything they can do, the divine side can do better. The sorcerer has no synergy outside of FS, and they both die with CL loss. I mean, it's not that it's bad, it's that, unless you're in a group where fighters can keep up, wizards are blasting, you will suck beyond belief. They can complement each other in a Gestalt build, but you're 2 levels behind in casting most of the time, and you have fewer known spells anyways. I won't judge your group, but, if you're optimizing, you cannot in good conscious use this. You can, theoretically, go with a human, take Southern Magician, Able Learner, and Versatile Caster, then take Sorcerer and Druid, take a bloodline at level 3, and then go Mystic Theurge to Fochlucan Lyrist. You do need intelligence 16 and high Wisdom and Charisma. You could take Dynamic Priest to reduce the MAD slightly, and pull off double-9s. This is still sub-optimal at best.

These are mostly quibbles about tone and accessibility, and I think that your handbook could stand to gain some benefit by mellowing things out a bit and opening yourself up to a wider range of options.

Explain?

[Gnorman]

If my table rarely goes above level 15, what do I care about 9th level spells? Evaluate the class on its own merits, not relative to hypothetical level 20 power builds. Spells are tools, and I don't need to use a sledgehammer when a smaller one would do. It's not about the class you have or the spells you know - it's about how you use them. I think that your handbook efforts would be better spent exploring how to use those options rather than dismissing them outright. Try to meet us halfway in terms of optimization level? List casters may not have the full range of options available to them, they may be "inferior," but I personally much prefer their mechanics and find them to be more user-friendly and intuitive. Why can't I use them in a theurge?

Say I want to make a theurge using Sorcerer as a base. Instead of telling me that I'm wrong and I shouldn't use the Sorcerer, perhaps you could come up with a build that complements and builds on the chassis of the class?

You can, theoretically, go with a human, take Southern Magician, Able Learner, and Versatile Caster, then take Sorcerer and Druid, take a bloodline at level 3, and then go Mystic Theurge to Fochlucan Lyrist. You do need intelligence 16 and high Wisdom and Charisma

That's exactly what I'm getting at. That's perfect - rather than saying "Sorcerer doesn't work, don't use it," you say "Here's a way to make the Sorcerer work." I don't care if it is suboptimal in general - it's optimized based on what it is. There's also a subtle but important change in tone, a more positive and accommodating one.

Explain?

Your tone can veer towards the vituperative, the sarcastic, and even sometimes borderline hostile towards options you consider "inferior". It's not a particularly constructive method of presentation, and I think it fosters divisiveness that can detract from your efforts.

[sonofzeal]

Will do.

In line with this - DeepSkyBlue is fine while bolded, but on my home screen it is difficult to read when unbolded. And PaleGreen is headache-inducing. My work machine shows colours somewhat differently, so I know it varies from computer to computer, but I also know the way it displays for me is a fairly common one.

Just something to be aware of.

A Theurge is tight on feats and skills, and putting effort into a sub-optimal mechanic is a bad idea. I know you can put a lot of effort into making healing keep up, PrC and feat investment, but a Theurge is better off using those feats for Practiced Spellcaster, Alternative Spell Source, and other, actually good, feats. I can make a truenamer decent if I want to. Or, I Can make a jank truenamer. Which should I do?

My character spent a grand total of one feat on it. One feat, and a 1st level class feature, let her match high-DPR monsters in healing. Some day I might sit down and figure out how much healing I could actually get out of Cure Serious, if I were truly committed to it. But a 5th level character who only spent a single feat there was healing as much as a CR 5 Troll could dish out, while the rest of the party was free to do their thing in safety. Few other Cleric spells would have been as significant in that fight, at least off the Core list - Calm Emotions and Bestow Curse are the only ones I can see, but both offer more failure points.

I'm not saying a Theurge should focus on healing. But your examples as to how much it sucks are completely ridiculous, and massively exaggerating the point. It generally gets a bad rap on these boards and that's okay, but you take it to a level of vitriol and denigration that is simply not warranted.

[Leon]

No. Absolutely false. A Focused Evocater is and always will be bad, especially if they ban Transmutation and Conjuration.

Nothing in D&D is an absolute - it has so many Variables that what you hold as the best way to play a Wizard will not always work and what you hate most for the class to do will.

All Classes work well when played well.

[sonofzeal]

Nothing in D&D is an absolute - it has so many Variables that what you hold as the best way to play a Wizard will not always work and what you hate most for the class to do will.

All Classes work well when played well.

On this note - my all time favourite spell in the game is (Explosive Forceful) Great Thunderclap. Make ALL the saves!

Spoiler

Show

[Little Brother]

In line with this - DeepSkyBlue is fine while bolded, but on my home screen it is difficult to read when unbolded. And PaleGreen is headache-inducing. My work machine shows colours somewhat differently, so I know it varies from computer to computer, but I also know the way it displays for me is a fairly common one.

Just something to be aware of.

Okay, I'll go fix it.

My character spent a grand total of one feat on it. One feat, and a 1st level class feature, let her match high-DPR monsters in healing. Some day I might sit down and figure out how much healing I could actually get out of Cure Serious, if I were truly committed to it. But a 5th level character who only spent a single feat there was healing as much as a CR 5 Troll could dish out, while the rest of the party was free to do their thing in safety. Few other Cleric spells would have been as significant in that fight, at least off the Core list - Calm Emotions and Bestow Curse are the only ones I can see, but both offer more failure points.

And mine spent a minimum of one feat, too, depending on which early entry I went with. Guess which one of these two will contribute more to the party? Grease shuts down said troll. Glitterdust, Web, and so on do the same thing. The difference is, I used a powerful, useful spell that can be used in other situations.

I'm not saying a Theurge should focus on healing. But your examples as to how much it sucks are completely ridiculous, and massively exaggerating the point. It generally gets a bad rap on these boards and that's okay, but you take it to a level of vitriol and denigration that is simply not warranted.

Explain.

Nothing in D&D is an absolute - it has so many Variables that what you hold as the best way to play a Wizard will not always work and what you hate most for the class to do will.

All Classes work well when played well.

No. A Truenamer does not work well, ever. It works passably, at best. A Focused Evocater does not work well. There is an absolute to everything, and, in this case, the absolute is that those classes do. Not. Work. The Evocater mentioned above? Doesn't work. It lacks all of the toys, and cries when Cindy pokes her head in, or when the mail arrives. A Truenamer doesn't work. I've played one. It can keep up in the same team that a Samurai or a fighter can keep up. It cannot keep up with a bunch of ToB/Casters.

[sonofzeal]

Okay, I'll go fix it.

Appreciated.

And mine spent a minimum of one feat, too, depending on which early entry I went with. Guess which one of these two will contribute more to the party? Grease shuts down said troll. Glitterdust, Web, and so on do the same thing. The difference is, I used a powerful, useful spell that can be used in other situations.

Given that most monsters deal hitpoint damage, especially at low/mid levels, the ability to keep pace with them IS useful in a variety of situations. And since Clerics have spontaneous healing, there's no real opportunity cost; prepare your Bestow Curses and whatnot in your Cleric slots, but tossing out a 30-point heal at lvl 5 is a valid use of the slot. The spells you list ar all Arcane and not likely going in your Cleric slots, and even then Glitterdust and Web have failure points in the saving throw, and Web additionally requires environmental features to be used at all. And Grease is a little overrated, especially since most parties have one or more melee people who are fairly likely to run up to the thing and start swinging anyway. It's a good spell, but more in an "I don't know what else to do so maybe this'll help a bit" sort of way. Great for wands, and situationally awesome, but

Explain.

While a lvl 1 character can do a huge amount of damage with a single swing if fully optimized for it and using a 1/day ability and assuming they hit, a lvl 5 Orc Barbarian (which is what we should be comparing the Cleric to) is doing... about the same, give or take depending on optimization and situational boosts. At 5th level the Barb won't have special enhancements on their sword. They'll have exactly one more feat to play with. Their Strength has gone up a measly 1 point. Their Rage hasn't improved at all. They might, best case scenario, have a +2 enhancement to Strength. These are piddly little boosts compared to the numbers they're putting out at lvl 1.

Meanwhile, you're comparing against a bog standard Cleric who hasn't even glanced at his Cure line before. You're comparing a character fully optimized for single-hit damage, with a character who's put exactly zero effort into making Cure worthwhile. You'd be better off comparing it to the damage a lvl 5 Human Warrior with Elite Array does with a longsword; that's the type of apathetic approach to Healing you've taken. It's a totally false comparison, and completely distorts the situation. But you say it like it proves that nobody should be using Healing and that it's a total waste of time and resources.

[Little Brother]

Appreciated.

Given that most monsters deal hitpoint damage, especially at low/mid levels, the ability to keep pace with them IS useful in a variety of situations. And since Clerics have spontaneous healing, there's no real opportunity cost; prepare your Bestow Curses and whatnot in your Cleric slots, but tossing out a 30-point heal at lvl 5 is a valid use of the slot. The spells you list ar all Arcane and not likely going in your Cleric slots, and even then Glitterdust and Web have failure points in the saving throw, and Web additionally requires environmental features to be used at all. And Grease is a little overrated, especially since most parties have one or more melee people who are fairly likely to run up to the thing and start swinging anyway. It's a good spell, but more in an "I don't know what else to do so maybe this'll help a bit" sort of way. Great for wands, and situationally awesome, but

Web still applies, Glitterdust, and so on do as well. Or, if you really want something else to do, you can use the buffs that make a Cleric good. Your buddy the Warblade? I think he could use an Animal Buff, maybe Bear's Strength, or whatever. You could Fear a target, depending on its HD. Summon a minion. Hold Person is pro. You have domains for a reason, too. I can go on.

While a lvl 1 character can do a huge amount of damage with a single swing if fully optimized for it and using a 1/day ability and assuming they hit, a lvl 5 Orc Barbarian (which is what we should be comparing the Cleric to) is doing... about the same, give or take depending on optimization and situational boosts. At 5th level the Barb won't have special enhancements on their sword. They'll have exactly one more feat to play with. Their Strength has gone up a measly 1 point. Their Rage hasn't improved at all. They might, best case scenario, have a +2 enhancement to Strength. These are piddly little boosts compared to the numbers they're putting out at lvl 1.

At level 5? A +1 weapon, a +2 Str item, and other stuff'd work. You get, with a +2 str item and a +1 Falchion, 2d4+1+13+10., or, on average, about 29, as opposed to the 19 we were averaging at level 1. Let's bump it up to level six, though. What can this hypothetical healer or cleric do at level 6? This hypothetical Orc has a Valorous Falchion(since the basic orc starts with it), +2 Str gauntlets, and I dunno, something else. Even if we don't go Valorous, we can grab the Bands of Blood Rage. Our damage turns from 29 to 116, or at least 68.

Meanwhile, you're comparing against a bog standard Cleric who hasn't even glanced at his Cure line before. You're comparing a character fully optimized for single-hit damage, with a character who's put exactly zero effort into making Cure worthwhile. You'd be better off comparing it to the damage a lvl 5 Human Warrior with Elite Array does with a longsword; that's the type of apathetic approach to Healing you've taken. It's a totally false comparison, and completely distorts the situation. But you say it like it proves that nobody should be using Healing and that it's a total waste of time and resources.

Okay, I'll bite. Orc(Because humans are stupid for optimized non-initiator melee) Orc Warrior 5. I've got PA, Str 20~, and BAB 5. That's 2d6(Greatsword)+17, or 24. With a longsword, we're looking at 21, or 19 one-handing it. Whaddayknow? Same thing when using a jank weapon 1-handed. Looks like your cleric is SOL.

And, for reference, no. I said Cure spells are a waste of time. Just stick with Vigors and Heal and you'll be fine.

EDIT: Damn you, arithmetic! I will get you yet!

[sreservoir]

you're optimizing a build somewhat, and comparing the result to and entirely unop build for healing. of course your numbers will be skewed in favor of the damage-dealer.

[Leon]

the absolute is that those classes do. Not. Work.

They Work, now whether they work to your exacting requirements is another matter but overall they work and all are playable options.

Now with "keeping" up - a good group will keep up and work well regardless of what actual classes make its numbers.

We did have a batman style wizard in the current group for a while, he was a ok character but for all that fancy control magic its pointless if he doesn't work with the rest of the group, the player was eventually asked to leave outside reasons but we didn't miss that wizard at all and probably have done better since without it

Now I'm puzzled, you dislike Evokers for what they do yet are happy with the mailman sorcerer (which from what i read a damage optimized sorcerer) which with a similar amount of Optimization the Evoker would do similar things.

No idea what a cindy is aside from a Character sheet that was posted here which isn't helpful. The Mailman guide has some useful stuff in it to keep in mind should i every want to play a Artillery Platform.

[sreservoir]

also mind that, even if a wizard focus specializes in evocation and bans conjuration, transmutation, and illusion, it's still a wizard with divination, necromancy, abjuration, forcecage, and contingency, and still has a huge toolkit.

[Little Brother]

They Work, now whether they work to your exacting requirements is another matter but overall they work and all are playable options.

Gee, I never realized a class that gets worse as it leveled was a good thing. Maybe you should meet up with the guy who came up with Risen Martyr and the Mountblanc PrC.

Now with "keeping" up - a good group will keep up and work well regardless of what actual classes make its numbers.

Absolutely false. A monk will never be able to keep up with a StP Erudite. EVER,

We did have a batman style wizard in the current group for a while, he was a ok character but for all that fancy control magic its pointless if he doesn't work with the rest of the group, the player was eventually asked to leave outside reasons but we didn't miss that wizard at all and probably have done better since without it

Then he sucked. Next.

Now I'm puzzled, you dislike Evokers for what they do yet are happy with the mailman sorcerer (which from what i read a damage optimized sorcerer) which with a similar amount of Optimization the Evoker would do similar things.

Because Mailmen do it WELL, an Evoker doesn't

also mind that, even if a wizard focus specializes in evocation and bans conjuration, transmutation, and illusion, it's still a wizard with divination, necromancy, abjuration, forcecage, and contingency, and still has a huge toolkit.

A toolkit full of oversized, old, rusty, out of date and falling apart tools? Yeah, no. It has almost none of the important toys. It is terrible.

[Master Thrower]

Absolutely false. A monk will never be able to keep up with a StP Erudite. EVER,

Maybe when a player is not playing with a group, but against hypothetical numbers then yeah sure, but ultimately if playing with a group of people, especially ones friends, people aren't going to be trying to make somebody feel useless.