Clerics vs. Wizards

[Russ]

Wow, Omicron, if that's how you run a cleric, no wonder you don't get anywhere with them...

[Xen]

Oh and Wizrads/Sorcerers [img]smile.gif[/img] get Spell Triggers,Contengencys,Spell Sequncers...
and Clerics do not get this.
Well another point for Wizards [img]smile.gif[/img] .

[andrewas]

Originally posted by Mick the bard: Rod of Resurrection? If you want to waste gold, sure. After all we know mages don't spend a copper for their scrolls... Oh wait, that's a cleric/druid thing too

At full cheesiness, a party sorc could cast PI, which uses the rod of resurrection to resurrect everyone without burning any charges from the original rod, then recharges the original sorcerors spells through spelltrap, all for a net cost of less than zero, factoring in the spells a PI may be able to use to the parties benefit before expiring. If nothing else, its good for a kamikaze attack.

You were saying something about gold?

[Alson]

Originally posted by Rataxes: Well, it wouldn't have been the first time I found flaws in the guide, would it?

Such a large document is bound to have its errata.

Silence - The only Arcane version that is somewhat equal in power is Power Word, Silence. Who in their right mind would sacrifice a lvl 6 slot on silencing a mage though? There probably wont even be all that many spellcasters vulnerable to silence left by the time your Mage can cast lvl 6 spells Clerics get their version much earlier and they also don't have to sacrifice as much to get it, there aren't many other hot spell choices on that level.

The sole purpose of Silence is to prevent enemy spellcasters from casting their spells. Mages have much better ways to do it than any silence spell in the world. Breach + frontliners, MAA, Skull Trap - you name it.

Animate Dead - So the versions are identical, but for Mages, getting one of these means getting one less Lower MR, Breach or Spell Immunity. Clerics have to give up a Holy Smite

So the Clerics' version is better because Wizard have better spells generally? [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Prot from Evil - No way is Protection from Evil anywhere near as good Prot from Evil 10'Radius, not for parties anyway

Yes, Pro-Evil-10'-Radius is powerful. However, if a Mage really wants to protect his whole party from evil, all (s)he'll need is 5 scrolls of Pro-Evil (easy to obtain), and a Clone spell that is not Mislead.

Why 5, you ask? Because Mages have The Staff, too. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Holy Smite and Harm are as useful and powerful as any Arcane spells (maybe not quite ).

Exactly. Not quite.

The potential power of Harm is greater than that of any Arcane spell, even though it may have very specific uses.

I disagree, as I see Harm as a mediocre insta-kill spell - and Mages have much better insta-kill spells. Symbol: Death and Power Word: Kill are decent, but Time Stop->Shapechange: Mind Flayer is unstoppable.

And how do you reach arctic saves in the early/mid-game? 2-3 Potions of Invulnerability could be needed per character to attain complete immunity (how many such potions are even available?) , and even then it'd only last for 5 turns, making it very battle-specific, and even then it doesn't protect you from those saveless disabling spells. Ok sure, low saves go a long way to compensate for the lack of CC, but there's no beating the original

I agree - the original is better. But then again, with low saves, Potions of Clarity and a Greenstone Amulet, the original is far from being crucial.

Lesser Restoration is vastly inferior to it's greater brother, the only thing it's good for is restoring lost levels. Greater Restoration can turn a battle from certain defeat to victory in an instant. To get even a half-decent substitute for GR without a Cleric (once per day still isn't that hot), you definitely need to go to Abizigals lair.

... or to have an army of Planetars. Heck, a Planetar is about as good as any high level Cleric (with Druid spells, to boot!).

Guess that's where the difference lies, I rarely use mages to deal damage. I find them far more useful as supporting characters - disabling enemies with Slow and Hold Monster, clearing the way for my fighters with Breach, boosting their offensive capabilities with Haste/Imp Haste, boosting their defensive capabilities with PfME, Imp Invisibility and Prot from Fire, tanking with PfMW, Blur, Mirror Image, Stoneskin and SI. Using them to deal damage is really a second priority.

Yep, that would explain the difference of opinions, probably.

...and would serve me wonderfully to demonstrate the vast versatility of the Mage. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[ 06-12-2003, 03:59 AM: Message edited by: Alson ]

[Jim]

You really can't compare these two. They are completely different classes that serve completely different purposes and where one shines the other sucks.

My 2 Euros:

• A cleric will have a vastly superior AC over a mage
• A cleric will have a superior THAC0 and choice of weapons over a mage
• A cleric has more HP than a mage
• A cleric is therefore much more of a tank than a mage
• A cleric can destroy undead with great ease, much, much more effectively than a mage
• A cleric can buff his summons and party like no other. Simply group them all together and then cast bless, chant, protection from evil 10' radius and defensive harmony
• Then he can buff himself - Armour of Faith, Draw upon Holy Might, holy power, death ward, righteous magic etc to rub the "I'm a tank and you're not" statement in that little bit more
• A cleric can heal the entire party including summons from almost the entire area of the map by using a single casting of greater restoration, all for the megre cost of fatigue on the caster (thanks for Rataxes for pointing this one out). Sure, a mage can use andrewas' clone+rod of ressurection combo, but this limits to one healing per round only. How about fully healing 6 party members and masses of summons with a single spell casting
• A cleric can remove offensive cloud spells such as stinking cloud, incendary cloud, cloud kill, death fog etc. A mage has no way of dispelling these, making life harder for fellow party members
• A cleric can cure disease, poisons and remove curses. A mage cannot.
• Clerics can summon aerial servants. I love these things. They only hit once per round, but I've seen them hit for over 70 damage on a critical hit! I'd much rather have one of these than an Air Elemental. Druids miss out here. Between Aerial servants and mountain bears, clerical summons will own arcane summons of 6th level or below (I'm sure I'll get flamed for that statement!).

As for casting pure damaging spells, of course the mage wins here, but don't rule out:

• Call lightning (massive continous damage over several rounds)
• Holy smite (potentially party friendly and good area damage spell)
• Flame strike
• Fire Storm

If you're comparing a cleric and a mage going head to head against each other, then the mage has the potential (with the correct tactics) to obliterate the cleric. In a large party however, a cleric is an invaluable addition, and I hardly think they aren't effective nor do they get shaft (especially with all their buffs and healing abilities - their summons and offensive spells are a bonus). However, in a situation where a mage is confronted by multiple highly magic resistant foes, then I feel the cleric will have the advantage (due to the tank factor). Sure the mage can slowly lower the resistance of each one, and follow up with an arsenal of offensive spells, but this will take time. Especially if a chain contigency/spell trigger needs to be fired at each foe with 3xlower resistance before the spell casting proper can begin. The cleric can blade barrier/globe of blades and buff up to buggery before engaging each one in melee or unleashing a non resistable firestorm all around him.

By the way, although it looks like I'm trying to say a cleric is better than a mage, this is far from my point. I am simply trying to prove that clerics are far from useless and they do not get shafted (clerics in IWD were substantially worse IIRC, with a VERY limited selection of 6th and 7th level spells). I am actually pro mage! But clerics will always serve a great purpose for me.

[RANDOM THOUGHT]Does improved alactrity enable a mage to use wands with the same no pause per round effect as he/she gains from casting spells? I've never tried this, but if this is possible, then a mage could unload entire wands with 50 charges of fireballs/lightning and cause utter chaos![/RANDOM THOUGHT]

[Assassin]

No, they cannot. However, a Mage can also cast a non-resistable Sunfire or Dragon Breaths. And, Stoneskin/PfMW for Tanking is very useful. Who needs AC, when it's virtuably impossible to damage the person? Anyways, what I'm trying to say is that Clerics may be powerful, but not single-classed ones. At least, in my opinion.

[Alson]

Originally posted by Jim: My 2 Euros:

Excellent post! So good, in fact, that I would feel guilty not to reply.

Here goes, my 2 NIS:

cleric will have a vastly superior AC over a mage A cleric will have a superior THAC0 and choice of weapons over a mage A cleric has more HP than a mage A cleric is therefore much more of a tank than a mage

Do you really find AC and HP more valuable, tank-wise, than Blur, Mirror Image, Spirit Armor, Stoneskin, Pro-Magical-Weapons, X-Mantle (blah, but anyway) and the like? Add Spell Immunity: Abjuration if you're feeling petty. "not taking any damage" is much, much better than "hardly taking any damage".

A cleric can destroy undead with great ease, much, much more effectively than a mage

True. Although Pro-Undead scrolls really do go a long way. I would say that dealing with Undead is more convenient with a Cleric, but not really easier.

A cleric can buff his summons and party like no other. Simply group them all together and then cast bless, chant, protection from evil 10' radius and defensive harmony

Major disagreement! From my experience, Haste + Mass Invisibility together trumps any possible combination of divine buffs. It's an amazingly powerful combination, giving the summons and the party better ApR, movement rate, THAC0, saves - you name it - everything you need for a bashing fiesta.

Then he can buff himself - Armour of Faith, Draw upon Holy Might, holy power, death ward, righteous magic etc to rub the "I'm a tank and you're not" statement in that little bit more

I'm skeptical on whether divine buffs are really more powerful than arcane ones - but they're mighty, nonetheless. Suffice to say, both the Mage and the Cleric have means of protecting themselves from melee... but where's the Cleric when in comes to protecting himself from Magic? Sure, Magic Resistance will give you some %s... but it's nothing, considering the vast potential of, say, Spell Immunity.

A cleric can heal the entire party including summons from almost the entire area of the map by using a single casting of greater restoration, all for the megre cost of fatigue on the caster (thanks for Rataxes for pointing this one out). Sure, a mage can use andrewas' clone+rod of ressurection combo, but this limits to one healing per round only. How about fully healing 6 party members and masses of summons with a single spell casting

Can't argue with that. Greater Restoration is mighty.

A cleric can remove offensive cloud spells such as stinking cloud, incendary cloud, cloud kill, death fog etc. A mage has no way of dispelling these, making life harder for fellow party members

This could've been a strong point, but... just how many enemies in the game cast such spells?

A cleric can cure disease, poisons and remove curses. A mage cannot.

That's what potions are for!

Clerics can summon aerial servants.

Mages can summon Mordenkainen's Swords. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

I love these things. They only hit once per round, but I've seen them hit for over 70 damage on a critical hit! I'd much rather have one of these than an Air Elemental. Druids miss out here. Between Aerial servants and mountain bears, clerical summons will own arcane summons of 6th level or below (I'm sure I'll get flamed for that statement!).

I disagree. Aerial Servants & Mountian Bears are great... but they lose to the (admittedly, party unfriendly) trustworthy xN Webs + x5 Spiders.

As for casting pure damaging spells, of course the mage wins here, but don't rule out: Call lightning (massive continous damage over several rounds)

Isn't this one Druid only? [img]graemlins/1ponder.gif[/img]

Holy smite (potentially party friendly and good area damage spell) Flame strike Fire Storm

These are all decent spells.

If you're comparing a cleric and a mage going head to head against each other, then the mage has the potential (with the correct tactics) to obliterate the cleric. In a large party however, a cleric is an invaluable addition, and I hardly think they aren't effective nor do they get shaft (especially with all their buffs and healing abilities - their summons and offensive spells are a bonus).

Does anyone really uses Clerics for healing, with the abundance of regeneration items and healing potions around? Healing spells are pathetically useless in the heat of battle.

However, in a situation where a mage is confronted by multiple highly magic resistant foes, then I feel the cleric will have the advantage (due to the tank factor). Sure the mage can slowly lower the resistance of each one, and follow up with an arsenal of offensive spells, but this will take time. Especially if a chain contigency/spell trigger needs to be fired at each foe with 3xlower resistance before the spell casting proper can begin. The cleric can blade barrier/globe of blades and buff up to buggery before engaging each one in melee or unleashing a non resistable firestorm all around him.

Mordenkainen's Swords are incredibly fast-casted, and serve as a wonderful tool of distraction. It's almost a foolproof tactic, given the poor targetting skills of most enemies. Really.

[RANDOM THOUGHT]Does improved alactrity enable a mage to use wands with the same no pause per round effect as he/she gains from casting spells? I've never tried this, but if this is possible, then a mage could unload entire wands with 50 charges of fireballs/lightning and cause utter chaos![/RANDOM THOUGHT]

Heh... if only it was so. [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img] Even Improved Alacrity is not that broken.

Project Image, on the other hand...

[Jim]

Originally posted by Assassin: No, they cannot. However, a Mage can also cast a non-resistable Sunfire or Dragon Breaths.

Good point regarding the sunfire and dragons breath, but lets assume that we're dealing with intelligent enemies that are immune to fire damage (so we can rule out firestorm too). There are times when even a mage will have to resort to melee.

And, Stoneskin/PfMW for Tanking is very useful. Who needs AC, when it's virtuably impossible to damage the person? Anyways, what I'm trying to say is that

But the mages protections are temporary and dispellable/breachable. The cleric unbuffed is naturally very protected. PfMW is no good against normal weapons and stoneskins will disapear very quickly if your surrounded by enemies with high APR rates. Magical protections aren't guaranteed to protect you for long, especially against intelligent foes. AC is definately not to be ignored.

Clerics may be powerful, but not single-classed ones. At least, in my opinion.

So you don't think the ability to heal the entire party including all summons in a single spell casting isn't powerful? For the average party, in terms of buffing and healing, clerics are the only choice.

[White Lancer]

Good point regarding the sunfire and dragons breath, but lets assume that we're dealing with intelligent enemies that are immune to fire damage (so we can rule out firestorm too). There are times when even a mage will have to resort to melee.

Mages have other types of spells for fire-immune enemies... finger of death comes to mind.

But the mages protections are temporary and dispellable/breachable. The cleric unbuffed is naturally very protected. PfMW is no good against normal weapons and stoneskins will disapear very quickly if your surrounded by enemies with high APR rates. Magical protections aren't guaranteed to protect you for long, especially against intelligent foes. AC is definately not to be ignored.

While I'll agree that AC is important, it is less so for a mage. PfMW and stoneskin will handle most situations, and when you add mirror-image ontop of that... Not to mention the mage's lovely ability to obliterate almost anything before those protections wear off/are broken. But even with those gone, mages still get Spirit armor, which acts as full plate mail (AC1). I'd like to see any cleric that can get a lower AC than a mage.

So you don't think the ability to heal the entire party including all summons in a single spell casting isn't powerful? For the average party, in terms of buffing and healing, clerics are the only choice.

In terms of healing, there is absolutely no contest at all. Mages dont get any healing spells... at all. If you're lucky (or unlucky depending on how you look at it) you'll get some cure light wounds ball-spawn abilities, but thats it. But then, the mage's overwhelming offensive power means that you will take less damage as well. I guess its just a matter of preference. Personally, i'm all for mages, i dont really like clerics.

[Jim]

Originally posted by Alson: Here goes, my 2 NIS:

Excellent reply! I feel obliged to respond to these

Do you really find AC and HP more valuable, tank-wise, than Blur, Mirror Image, Spirit Armor, Stoneskin, Pro-Magical-Weapons, X-Mantle (blah, but anyway) and the like? Add Spell Immunity: Abjuration if you're feeling petty. "not taking any damage" is much, much better than "hardly taking any damage".

No, althought the fact cannot be overlooked that a lower AC is better than a higher one, and more HP is better than fewer HP. If you're protected from abjuration, then divination will still prevail and remove your mirror images and blur effect. As for pro magical weapons/mantle, sure you can protect yourself from 99.99999% of enemy attacks, but you're not invincible. Normal weapons will always get through PfMW and a +5 weapon will always ingore mantle effects. All it needs is a smart enemy with a large weapon range that watches what you cast. Spirit armour is useless against an emeny with anything above a reasonable THAC0 and stoneskins will disappear quickly once the enemy has found a weapon that you're vulnerable too.

True. Although Pro-Undead scrolls really do go a long way. I would say that dealing with Undead is more convenient with a Cleric, but not really easier.

Agreed. But PfU may not be available at the time, and even if you are protected, you still need to wait an age to lower the resistances of the liches and skeletal warriors before casting/beating them down. The simple click of a button with a (high level) cleric will obliterate all undead in seconds. Combine this with the fact that PfU scrolls are finite.

Major disagreement! From my experience, Haste + Mass Invisibility together trumps any possible combination of divine buffs. It's an amazingly powerful combination, giving the summons and the party better ApR, movement rate, THAC0, saves - you name it - everything you need for a bashing fiesta.

Mass invisibility gives +4 to attack bonuses, saves and AC. I guess this is slightly more powerful than being blessed, chanted and defensive harmonied and protected from evil. Haste definately tips the balance in favour of the mages summons, but once worn off, fatigue will take its toll. The cleric can still however heal its summons if things get a little too close for comfort. In the end, all summons are susceptible to having their defences dispelled by either the cleric or the mage, so this becomes a stalemate situation

I'm skeptical on whether divine buffs are really more powerful than arcane ones - but they're mighty, nonetheless. Suffice to say, both the Mage and the Cleric have means of protecting themselves from melee... but where's the Cleric when in comes to protecting himself from Magic? Sure, Magic Resistance will give you some %s... but it's nothing, considering the vast potential of, say, Spell Immunity.

Well, if we're talking about protection scrolls here, then MfM will be our protection. Spell immunity will only make you safe against one school, so again, your not 100% protected.

Can't argue with that. Greater Restoration is mighty.

The clerics saviour!

This could've been a strong point, but... just how many enemies in the game cast such spells?

In the game, few (although the threat is still there). Rather than viewing the cleric/mage battle as restricted to the encounters present in SoA/ToB, I'm trying to think much more globally about these 2 living out their lives in Faerun.

That's what potions are for

Hmm, didn't think that one through very well lol! Although potions are still in finite supply, and you might just not have the one you need at the wrong moment. There's still always the curse.

Mages can summon Mordenkainen's Swords. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

MS may have excellent defense, but are still vulnerable to magic damage, and in terms of offense, I have to favour the aerial servant and mountain bears.

I disagree. Aerial Servants & Mountian Bears are great... but they lose to the (admittedly, party unfriendly) trustworthy xN Webs + x5 Spiders.

If the cleric so wished, he could cast free action on his aerial servant and watch in joy as the spiders produce nothing but "weapon ineffective" messages and get splatted by a damage range of 25-35 each hit.

At this point, I feel that my earlier post was trying to put the cleric head to head against the mage, where I have already admitted that the mage will always win (in ideal circumstances). I am merely trying to prove that the cleric is not useless , and the fact cannot be denied that in certain circumstances, clerics can be more effective than mages.

Isn't this one Druid only?

Yes. My mistake.

These are all decent spells.

Decent enough to resist the statement that clerics gets shafted?

Does anyone really uses Clerics for healing, with the abundance of regeneration items and healing potions around? Healing spells are pathetically useless in the heat of battle.

Regeneration items are pretty redundant in the heat of battle. Regenerating 1 HP per round (or 3 if we're lucky ) is not likely to save you when your fighting improved Abazigal on insane. I strongly disagree with healing spells being redundant in the heat of battle. The tanks will take the front, and the cleric can stay back and watch the HP levels of fellow party members. Greater Restorating is classed as a healing spell IMO and we've already proved how useful that can be. If 4 of your warriors are near death, they will all quickly be returned to 100% health. Rinse and repeat as necessary. Healing in battle in essential.

Mordenkainen's Swords are incredibly fast-casted, and serve as a wonderful tool of distraction. It's almost a foolproof tactic, given the poor targetting skills of most enemies. Really.

Yes, but again, they're not 100% safe (magic damage?) and can be dispelled with death spell (I hope).

While I agree with many of your points, clerics and mages will always have advantages and disadvantages. Rather than saying mage x is better than cleric y but only when mage x is of level z and has spells a-e memorised with protection f, g and h up. Where would a mage stand if he had no spells memorised or he had an empty spell book? Or in an area of dead magic? This is another strong advantage of clerics, since their wisdom provides there spells rather than relying on scrolls, and physical hardship is not to be overlooked.

Heh... if only it was so. [img]graemlins/hehe.gif[/img] Even Improved Alacrity is not that broken. Project Image, on the other hand...

Oh well! Was just hazzarding a guess to see if Improved Alac removes the innitiative delay for everything or just spells. Project image is always there though [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 06-12-2003, 10:14 AM: Message edited by: Jim ]