test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Options
Query on the weapon choice for Clerics Cryptic.
warsiren
Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users Posts: 2 Arc User
Hey there,
Now I have played DnD for a long time. I usually play Leader Classes, (Clerics, though more recently Rune Priests.) and in all my years playing a cleric, I have not once ever simply used a Holy Implement for my Character, when I think Cleric I think 1 handed mace and shield (Apparently so does Reaper Mini's as most of their clerics have mace's and Shields.). Hell I've never personally known anyone that has built a Cleric simply using a Holy Implement (or focus what ever you want to call it.)
So my question is why? Why go with the implement over the Mace and Shield route? Are you saving that for another style of Cleric? (Warpriest mayhaps?) Now don't get me wrong I love the play style of my Cleric, she's loads of fun. But for the life of me I hate that my weapon is holding a Mirror shaped paddle in front of my face, with no option to use a different weapon (say Mace and Shield.).
So I was just wondering is someone Official can chime in on to why this was the decided weapon and not the more Iconic Mace and Shield route.
*P.S. - I'm not really complaining, more curious of the creative process that decided this option.
**Edit** Also is there any chance as an Idle animation that our clerics can pull a small red ball from our belts and play Paddle ball with our Holy implement?
Now I have played DnD for a long time. I usually play Leader Classes, (Clerics, though more recently Rune Priests.) and in all my years playing a cleric, I have not once ever simply used a Holy Implement for my Character, when I think Cleric I think 1 handed mace and shield (Apparently so does Reaper Mini's as most of their clerics have mace's and Shields.). Hell I've never personally known anyone that has built a Cleric simply using a Holy Implement (or focus what ever you want to call it.)
So my question is why? Why go with the implement over the Mace and Shield route? Are you saving that for another style of Cleric? (Warpriest mayhaps?) Now don't get me wrong I love the play style of my Cleric, she's loads of fun. But for the life of me I hate that my weapon is holding a Mirror shaped paddle in front of my face, with no option to use a different weapon (say Mace and Shield.).
So I was just wondering is someone Official can chime in on to why this was the decided weapon and not the more Iconic Mace and Shield route.
*P.S. - I'm not really complaining, more curious of the creative process that decided this option.
**Edit** Also is there any chance as an Idle animation that our clerics can pull a small red ball from our belts and play Paddle ball with our Holy implement?
Post edited by warsiren on
0
Comments
"The Player's Handbook presents two Cleric builds, Battle Cleric, which focuses on offense, melee combat and Strength-based prayers, and Devoted Cleric, focusing on support, ranged combat and Wisdom-based prayers, many of the cleric's Strength and Wisdom based prayers have secondary effects related to Charisma."
The Devoted Cleric is ranged based so no Shield/Mace. Hopefully they will add the Battle Cleric eventually.
But you can say this about every class in this game. My two-handed users never used a greatsword, in fact no one does in 4e (it's about one of the weakest 2handers in terms of DPR (damage per round)).
Defender using a longsword? Weak!
Like the orb for the wizard, but where are the staves (yeah, dual wielding staves), foci, daggers, etc.
Comes down to this game being a glorified arcade game with a multiplayer lobby between instances.
And there are plenty of people like me, both of my groups that I played with loved 4e and were happy for the switch (though we are looking forward to D&D Next.
Either way, 4e, 3.5e, 3e, 2e, advanced, whatever.... classes weren't stuck with 1 type of weapon.
4E has been out for about 5ish years, 5E (playtest named Next) is at LEAST 2 years off, and is no where near ready in it's current state. 4e get's a lot of <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> but it had a lot of good things too, while I personally prefer 2 and 3 (3.5 was alright I guess.) there were things I very much enjoyed about 4e, and I am still having fun playing it weekly with my firends, as for 5th I think anyone that participated (well participating 2 more sessions left.) in this seasons Next Play test Encounters, can tell you it's not even near ready.
Baaaaaaaaaack on Topic.
True, I suppose I just never play a ranged cleric, with Healing word being a Burst 5, just seems more reliant with game mechanics to play close ranged. So I never even bothered making a Cleric with a Holy Implement. Though Truth be told, I hope they add the Warpriest path in at some point. It's my favorite incarnation of cleric.
Jesus christ I need it now!
What does it do?
It's a Strength Based Healer that toggles between Runes of Protection, and Runes of Destruction to add, added effect to their attcks. (Destruction provides Offensive group Buffs, Protection Provides Healing and defensive buffs.) Lined up with some very nice healing options for their encounters and dailies.
I play mine (Dwarf) with a Mordenkrad, it's amazing it's like playing a Leader that can contribute to the overall damage of the party. It came out with the Players Handbook 3 for 4e
Anyways I digress. "Devoted Cleric", last time I checked our class had two words and not one, it is not cleric just like GF is not Fighter since that'd conflict with GWF too since that'd also be Fighter... Battle Clerics aren't in the game (yet atleast) but those are likely what you are asking for.
The Battle Cleric should be drawing these levels of aggro - which of course is why players think the current one would be better with a shield.
Having a ranged class that pulls aggro from here to the moon results in exactly what you get - a repetitive series of tragicomedy chases around the dungeon areas.
"Mod 6. Oh my f****** god. It gutted the game pure and simple. And what wasn't gutted was messed up by the poorly thought out new level cap and equip. The game never recovered from that atrocity".
..............not this one then.............
Sooo it's safe to say I'm not the only one that get's the Benny Hill music in my head in Dungeons when I aggro everything?
Also even Battle Clerics shouldn't be aggroing. The jobs are the same Leaders, clerics are not defenders unless you build a Hybrid one... In which case you'd be better off using a Rune Priest/Defender Hybrid class, since it's main stats are strength and con as well.
So personally I hope they NEVER make a Cleric Tank, because that's what Paladins are for Clerics are pure leader class plain and simple, not a defender... and yes I know clerics are technically tanking atm, which needs to have a stop put to it asap. That's a defenders class role not a leaders.
Cleric tactics:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9I4nZx8UCs
"Mod 6. Oh my f****** god. It gutted the game pure and simple. And what wasn't gutted was messed up by the poorly thought out new level cap and equip. The game never recovered from that atrocity".
..............not this one then.............
rofl, love this