test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Clerics and 4th Ed
nyysjan
Member Posts: 32
Not familiar with 4th edition D&D rules, so asking others who might be more informed.
Just how accurate is the Neverwinter portrayal of a 4th Ed clerics?
Since when were clerics pure casters/healbots?
I got a dwarf cleric at level 20 now, and while playing it is fine from pure game balance pov (well, agro is rather largish), i still want to go and hit a **** orc with a bloody hammer (and if it is not bloody, it will be afterwards).
Healing is fine (except that it's impossible to target specific players when they all bunch up at the boss mob), survivability is ok (though should be higher imo), and i kill mobs fast enough for a healer class i guess, but being backrow caster class as a dwarf cleric in D&D setting just feels wrong.
Used to be that properly feated cleric could be a monster in melee combat, or improperly feated one could at least hold their own if prepared for a while, now, i'm suddenly a pure caster, who messed this up, cryptic or WotC?
Just how accurate is the Neverwinter portrayal of a 4th Ed clerics?
Since when were clerics pure casters/healbots?
I got a dwarf cleric at level 20 now, and while playing it is fine from pure game balance pov (well, agro is rather largish), i still want to go and hit a **** orc with a bloody hammer (and if it is not bloody, it will be afterwards).
Healing is fine (except that it's impossible to target specific players when they all bunch up at the boss mob), survivability is ok (though should be higher imo), and i kill mobs fast enough for a healer class i guess, but being backrow caster class as a dwarf cleric in D&D setting just feels wrong.
Used to be that properly feated cleric could be a monster in melee combat, or improperly feated one could at least hold their own if prepared for a while, now, i'm suddenly a pure caster, who messed this up, cryptic or WotC?
Post edited by nyysjan on
0
Comments
They do play a bit differently than other mmos, and it seems the devoted is more a ranged. There is a good thread where the cleric starts to run as an off tank type thing, getting in the middle of things, damaging away, healing when needed, and it seems to be the perfect set up. If they ever add the more melee cleric i'm forgetting the name of, that would probably be the one you wanted to play.
We might get a variant cleric for the former ("Battle" Cleric or "Warpriest" are two names used for this kind of Cleric in 4e), but they'll be later additions.
Well the blame gets evenly distributed, hopefully they'll get us a the fun cleric as well eventually.
for now i'll stick to my DC for daily prayers and dungeon AD runs.
On paper you can have all different flavors of divinity from the light wielding cleric to the mace swinging battle cleric to the sword flashing paladin. But on the small screen the cleric cannot look like the warrior, cannot have a sword or even a weapon. So they chose the cleric that would let them have the basic class without stepping on any other classes.
Technically fighters can use bows in the paper version but you won’t see that here. The upcoming ranger will be the one with bows, maybe swords but definitely not daggers.
With Neverwinter one must take what one gets and do the most with it. All sorts of cool things are possible with a creative mindset though. Call yourself a warrior cursed with light, a shaman led by light to evil, a noble slain but raised by the light to do its bidding.
If that sort of thing is important to you, you need not be just “a cleric”
I very much disagree with this.
Just because two classes may look similar at a glance, as long as they have different abilities and play styles, they can stand besides each other in game on their own merits.
Artificially hamstrunging classes in order to make them more superficially varied just cheapens the game.
Yep you are definitely correct and the dude above you was incredibly wrong.
The Devoted Cleric is very close to the pen and paper version. They are all about doing their things from a distance and healing through disabling or hurting their enemies.
I don't think it is less fun. I also don't think they made the wrong choice - can you imagine having melee clerics, plus tanks, plus gwf, plus rogues?
silly and stupid post.
we have 5 classes right now 3 are melee. if 4 were melee that would cause a SERIOUS issue with the game.
if you had more than a token of experience in online gaming outside of herpa-derp fps and moba you'd not have even made your post.
In that poster's defense, the stereotypical D&D group consisted of a melee cleric, fighter, mage, ranger, and bard, at least in the groups I used to run with...
Frankly, when I saw that one of the classes was going to be a "Great Weapon Fighter", that actually struck me as kinda weird...
"Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark
Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
it's an online video game. it's not 4-5 real life friends sitting at a table with a board, some dice and figurines.
there are balance issues to consider. 4 out of 5 classes being melee would not be acceptable at this time for no other reason than game balance and mechanics.
this is not a stereotypical D&D game.
in this game there will not be 'ranger', there will be 'melee ranger' and 'archer ranger'.
in this game there is not figher, there is guardian figher and great weapon fighter.
it's still an online game that has to find a balance. i'm sorry of so many of you are too pig-headed to understand such a basic tenet of mmorpg development. regardless of the ip in question changes will invariably always be made in order to make a playable online game.
this is not your buddies in your kitchen playing fast and loose and adjusting the rules on the fly. deal with or go elsewhere. whining about it is NOT going to change this fact.
pretty accurately actually, 4e ditched the whole idea of a massive hammer wielding priest, for a more cut and dry cleric. What you are wanting is an avenging paladin. They will come later on down the road, they will be the guys wielding a massive weapon and smashing people into the ground, attacks healing them ect... 4e hits it pretty darned close, even the battle cleric i think is a ranged dps class, not melee. i may check it shortly, but pretty sure only divine characters are wielding big weapons are the paladin.
Edit: ok so battle cleric is in face melee oriented cleric, so you probably want to wait for it to get added at some point.
Yeah.. because it would have been *impossible* to simply have fighters be able to use 1 weapon + shield, 1 2-hander, or 2 1-handed weapons, and work with that. I mean... c'mon! The great weapon fighter and guardian fighter can't even share armor! It was just the devs taking the easy way out when it came to the classes...
"Is it better to be feared or respected? I say, is it too much to ask for both?" -Tony Stark
Official NW_Legit_Community Forums
you are confusing this with 3.5...seriously go pick up a 4e manual..its NOT cryptics fault... 4e changed alot of stuff and this was one of the major ones.