Cleric Base development



  • So admittedly I’m new to clericing but I have been browsing the officials quite a bit to get a better idea of how to handle a melee cleric. I’ve also noticed that generally clerics are in a good place spell wise with only a handful of more minor issues: 1) physical AS tends to fall behind, as not to be practical for high levels, 2) no in combat mana restoring spell or ability (outside of societies), 3) lower bolting AS, 4) lack of reliable knockdown beyond Unbalance, 5) expense of 307 for pure CS clerics. Here is a suggestion on addressing these issues through the 300s.

    307 New Spell
    Make 307 a new spell that provides a scaling bolt AS bonus (identical to current spell) and a scaling physical AS bonus of up to 15 (at level 27) with a max of 25 (+10 bonus AS) with blessing lore. Keep mana costs same as current 307. This allows CS only clerics to skip an expensive spell.

    309
    Combine 309 and 315 into the same spell with the 315 version using a different trigger (evoke maybe?) and costing more mana.

    315 Revised Benediction
    Provides a flat +15 AS and DS with current 307s group mechanics. This could be scaling if necessary to balance for lower levels. Mana cost for current 307 at 27 (when the group benefits max) is 17 so a cost of 15 mana isn’t unreasonable. Keep the blessing lore bennefits of current 307.

    320 Manuever spell
    I believe this is the GMs preferred vision for the spell and I have no real flavor suggestion. I would just request a crit that provides a good chance for knockdown.

    Combat Mana Regen
    Since this is also an issue for empaths, it would make sense to address through the 200s. Unfortunately the only open slots in that circle are 235 and 250, which seem costly for a mana regen ability. I have no real suggestion here just pointing out the shared issue.

    Overall these suggestions would tweak the cleric circle without adding anything overly radical. It addresses a QoL issue for CS clerics with regards to 307. The physical AS increase for mele cleric would be 15 (up to a max of 25 with lores) over the current. Bolting clerics would get an additional 15 AS from 315. Neither bonus is game changing but they help increase the professions natural flexibility.


  • TownCrier

    Replying:

    “4) lack of reliable knockdown beyond Unbalance”

    Why do you need reliable knockdown when you have reliable immobilization with 316? (Not a rhetorical question; I’m not sure if I’m missing something. Enemies in the Sanctum of Scales shake off 316, but other than that I can’t think of any reason I’d want knockdown.)

    “2) no in combat mana restoring spell or ability (outside of societies)”

    I have no experience playing a pure cleric to know how big a deal this is, so my only comment here is that since you’re thinking about the major spiritual circle as a place for something like this, combining 212 and 217 would be a way to open up a slot.

    “3) lower bolting AS”

    Well, I won’t say no to buffs, but this hasn’t been an issue at all to me thanks to 301, 316, 118, 214, or 240 depending on level and enemy.

    In the past I’ve been disappointed by 306 being not as generally useful as 1110 or 713, though, but now I’m okay with it since at Simucon they mentioned having an idea for a major spiritual bolt, albeit a low priority one.

    “5) expense of 307 for pure CS clerics”

    The mana cost is over the top, but, well, the simple fix is reducing the cost. I do agree that 309 and 315 badly need to be combined, but it’s kinda odd to combine two spells and then turn around and fill the new slot by splitting 307 into two spells…

    Also, your idea would need more testing than you might realize. 15th level spells are eligible to appear on scrolls, so it could affect every profession’s AS and DS.

    “1) physical AS tends to fall behind, as not to be practical for high levels”

    As someone with a capped war cleric, capped warpath, and a warmage in her 50s… I do want an AS bump for my cleric, but IMO that’s only a start because AS in a vacuum isn’t really an issue. I’m not even sure it’s practicality, really, so much as fun factor.

    Warpaths have 45/55/60 more AS depending on self-cast or using items, but clerics have a better way to reduce DS, so for pure numbers it’s kind of a wash. What pushes warpaths over the top to be generally better is 1117 multiplying their number of hits. That spell is so strong that sometimes my warpath has been more efficient at destroying a room with her weapon than my paladin, never mind my cleric, and on top of that it’s great fun and there’s nothing else like it. (Edit: To be fair to my paladin, my empath using a THW instead of OHBs goes a long way toward closing the offensive gap too.)

    Similar thing for warmages, at least from comparing everything up to Bonespear to my same experiences with a cleric. They have similar AS to war clerics with self-cast spells, but 506’s 1 second RT makes them stand out as viable, fun, and unique. Bards can do that too, admittedly, but they start on it later than wizards.

    (Sidenote… when scrolls, imbeds, group hunting, or multi-accounting are in play, wizards can get a huge bump in AS from 211, 215, and 307 to exceed clerics’ AS anyway while still having their 1 second swings. I’d like to see profession-specific buffs to various spells in major spiritual to make them drastically better for clerics than anyone else in the way that, say, 506, 511, and 520 in major elemental are drastically better for wizards than anyone else.)

    Personally, I haven’t come up with any idea I’m really in love with when it comes to helping out war clerics. Always looking, though…



  • Leafiara is a hell of a cleric, I support her responses on pretty much everything.

    #4 I agree with Leafiara that Censure is super more powerful than a knockdown. Sure, high warding requirement, and slightly more mana, but a hell of a lot more powerful.

    1. Bolt AS… all Bolt ASes suck. Critters are generally scaled for it. However, you have a lot easier access to 513 than wizards have to 215/307 typically. 211 is fairly available.

    2. Is there some typos over 307 versus 317? I agree that there’s a gap in CS offensive spells in the cleric circle in the 5-10 range that should be addressed.

    Now that paladins are released… I guess I don’t understand why clerics should be entitled or compelled for competitive physical AS growth. They’re right around sorcerers, which basically means terrible. Wizard AS really isn’t that much better, it’s just 902/509/425 that provide a little edge over 215/211/307. It comes down to haste being their main benefit. Empaths get the highest physical AS of a pure with 1120 at the cost of 307, but, given their physical prowess, it’s not THAT unreasonable.



  • Firstly thanks Leafiara for the posts you made on the other forums about UAC cleric. I’ve been following many of your suggestions!

    Honestly I forgot about 316 since I’m not at a position to use it often. Knockdown isn’t a huge gain, but it seems to be something every profession but Cleric, Paladin, and Empath have a reliable access to. It probably isn’t needed, but it feels like something the GMs like.

    Mana is definitely an issue for pure empaths at early through mid levels. I could see how a non CoL cleric would be in a similar place. The lack of a combat mana regen was so bad for my empath that I finally gave up and fixskilled him into a warpath. It’s been a huge improvement even though it felt pretty out of character for him.

    As I pointed out Clerics as a profession don’t lack much. My suggestions were mild tweaks to boost non CS play.

    I’ve heard the argument that war clerics have been superseded by paladins but I don’t really buy it. The play style of a warcleric and a paladin are different.
    Also, Cleric’s physical stat growth and their combat skills costs put them at the end of the squarest of the pures, so it feels weird to say it’s not an intended training path. If you do the math on the suggestions I made, it would put Clerics second, AS wise, to Empaths, which I think is a reasonable place for them to be, given their prowess. One of the nice things about GSIV is the ability to make lots of builds work, even though they may not be the easiest or the most optimal.



  • My Cleric has been the easiest one to bring to cap so far for me, my Sorc a close second. Pretty much 302’d my way to the top. It was crazy how many one-shot kills I’d get with that spell - and really cool. The only challenge was starting OTF really where I started to mix and match a bit. 317 is nasty, 316 freezes most things, and having a basic “get out of jail free” card for the first swing of any critter. Oh, then toss in 340 and you can really char some stuff. I think I have 3 symbols that can hold it and it’ll easily get me through a hunt.

    When I first played GS years ago my Cleric ran around with a sword and shield and was probably considered more of a Paladin there. I think I mostly would freeze stuff and then hack away at it. Now, that’s what my Pally is for and still played somewhat like a Cleric. Wish they could raise more often and a few other things, but it’s a different character.


  • TownCrier

    @zombiesdontrun said in Cleric Base development:

    I’ve heard the argument that war clerics have been superseded by paladins but I don’t really buy it. The play style of a warcleric and a paladin are different.
    Also, Cleric’s physical stat growth and their combat skills costs put them at the end of the squarest of the pures, so it feels weird to say it’s not an intend training path. […] One of the nice things about GSIV is the ability to make lots of builds work, even though they may not be the easiest or the most optimal.

    I agree with every sentence here, but especially wanted to single out play styles and TP costs, so thanks for articulating that! Having lower TP costs than others in your profession grouping (squares/semis/pures) should usually be–and in almost every case is–a helpful indicator to players that they can make good use of that skill if they train it. With clerics, someone playing for efficiency really has to ignore the signals.


  • Tart Lovers Anonymous

    Lower training costs for physical skills and spells that rival wizards and sorcs have always left a bad taste in my mouth. They get their cake and they get to eat it too.


  • TownCrier

    @sabotage said in Cleric Base development:

    Lower training costs for physical skills and spells that rival wizards and sorcs have always left a bad taste in my mouth. They get their cake and they get to eat it too.

    I don’t think you’d be saying this if you knew how many people have told me it’s crazy to continue to swing as a cleric past 50 (or even 40 and a few times I’ve even heard 30). Cheaper costs don’t impact anything if people aren’t training those skills in the first place.


  • Tart Lovers Anonymous

    @leafiara Um… its literally every physical skill except for dodging and shield use. So CMs are cheaper to train and the only thing more expensive for your magical skills is you pay 1 more mental point for spell aim. Want to train disarm to stop that? Its cheaper. Even your PF is cheaper. Your training costs are out of line with being a pure. Not to mention you even get lower spell hinderance.

    So yes, you get your cake and you get to eat it too.


  • TownCrier

    @sabotage said in Cleric Base development:

    So CMs are cheaper to train and the only thing more expensive for your magical skills is you pay 1 more mental point for spell aim. Want to train disarm to stop that? Its cheaper. Even your PF is cheaper. Your training costs are out of line with being a pure.

    Costs for Combat Maneuvers, Physical Fitness, and Spell Aiming:

    Clerics: 10/6 for CM, 7/0 for PF, 3/2 for SA
    Empaths: 12/8 for CM, 2/0 for PF, 3/1 for SA
    Sorcerers: 12/8 for CM, 8/0 for PF, 3/1 for SA
    Wizards: 12/8 for CM, 8/0 for PF, 2/1 for SA

    If all of these professions were 1xing CM and PF and 2xing SA, the costs would be:

    Clerics: 26/12
    Empaths: 23/11 (realistically they’d be 2xing for 27/11, though)
    Sorcerers: 29/11
    Wizards: 26/11

    Now let’s say these professions were training 1x mana control, 1x lore (only one mana control and lore per level for empaths and sorcerers), 1x MIU, and 1x AS. Then the cost is:

    Clerics: 26/25
    Empaths: 23/24 (or 27/24 with 2x PF)
    Sorcerers: 29/24 or 29/25 depending on if they were training sorcerous lore or spiritual/elemental
    Wizards: 26/23

    Nothing looks out of line to me. Edit: adding in 1x THWs too:

    Clerics: 36/28
    Empaths: 36/27 (or 40/27)
    Sorcerers: 43/27 or 43/28
    Wizards: 40/26


  • Tart Lovers Anonymous

    @leafiara said in Cleric Base development:

    @sabotage said in Cleric Base development:

    So CMs are cheaper to train and the only thing more expensive for your magical skills is you pay 1 more mental point for spell aim. Want to train disarm to stop that? Its cheaper. Even your PF is cheaper. Your training costs are out of line with being a pure.

    Costs for Combat Maneuvers, Physical Fitness, and Spell Aiming:

    Clerics: 10/6 for CM, 7/0 for PF, 3/2 for SA
    Empaths: 12/8 for CM, 2/0 for PF, 3/1 for SA
    Sorcerers: 12/8 for CM, 8/0 for PF, 3/1 for SA
    Wizards: 12/8 for CM, 8/0 for PF, 2/1 for SA

    If all of these professions were 1xing CM and PF and 2xing SA, the costs would be:

    Clerics: 26/12
    Empaths: 23/11 (realistically they’d be 2xing for 27/11, though)
    Sorcerers: 29/11
    Wizards: 26/11

    Now let’s say these professions were training 1x mana control, 1x lore (only one mana control and lore per level for empaths and sorcerers), 1x MIU, and 1x AS. Then the cost is:

    Clerics: 26/25
    Empaths: 23/24 (or 27/24 with 2x PF)
    Sorcerers: 29/24 or 29/25 depending on if they were training sorcerous lore or spiritual/elemental
    Wizards: 26/23

    Nothing looks out of line to me. Edit: adding in 1x THWs too:

    Clerics: 36/28
    Empaths: 36/27 (or 40/27)
    Sorcerers: 43/27 or 43/28
    Wizards: 40/26

    @leafiara K, but then your armor skill is half the cost (which is yuge at lower levels)…for reasons… And your armor hindrance is lower. Also notice that there isn’t a scenario presented that clerics have higher or equal training costs to sorcerers.

    Looking at it closer its just that sorcerers have higher skill costs than all the pures for …reasons. @Wyrom Fix sorcerer’s skill costs!



  • Every profession specializes in something and have certain weaknesses. Giving all of these suggestions to Clerics will be quite ridiculous, what would be the point if they swing as well as a paladin, ward as well as a sorc, bolt as well as a wizard, etc etc etc.

    If you want knockdowns so bad, get one of those 20x a day recharging ewave pins.



  • @darconas

    25 additional physical AS or 15 bolt AS does not come close to making a cleric equal to a paladin or a wizard. Suggesting so is beyond hyberolic. Paladins combat abilties will always grossly exceed clerics (as it should) and the math in my suggeations was very deliberate. Clerics would still have lower physical AS than empaths and lower bolt AS than wizards.

    Clerics are really the bards (think D&D bard not GSIV bard) of GSIV pures. They are decent at a lot of things but masters of none (except raising the dead). I do think it very reasonable that Clerics should be a closer second to empaths in melee. Honestly that was the entire reason I made a suggestion, I just attempted to balance it by giving something to everyone.



  • @sabotage said in Cleric Base development:

    @Wyrom Fix sorcerer’s skill costs!

    I’ve been thinking this forever. If sorcerers are meant to be the least physical of the pures (which I agree with actually) then they should be balanced by having lower magical training costs. But their magical costs are the same, or higher, as/then every other pure. Wizards have cheaper arcane symbol training than sorcerers. How does that even begin to make sense?



  • @zombiesdontrun Sorcs don’t need anything more, if anything I would advocate a nerf. You guys are in such a good place right now I would be more worried about keeping the stuff you have than getting extra benefits.



  • @zombiesdontrun said in Cleric Base development:

    @sabotage said in Cleric Base development:

    @Wyrom Fix sorcerer’s skill costs!

    I’ve been thinking this forever. If sorcerers are meant to be the least physical of the pures (which I agree with actually) then they should be balanced by having lower magical training costs. But their magical costs are the same, or higher, as/then every other pure. Wizards have cheaper arcane symbol training than sorcerers. How does that even begin to make sense?

    Yeah, but they’re also attuned to two mana spheres, which I would imagine is a lot more difficult than focusing in on just spiritual/elemental without considering the others.

    All of that being said, in regards to TP costs/etc… PREVIOUSLY, GMs have said that this was not going to happen. The problem is that it would cause a cascade update within the database against all player objects in the database to recalculate TP values. The problem is that there’s no way to delineate active/inactive characters, so it would end up cycling a recalculation function causing a substantial outage for up to a day in order to get it done.

    That being said… DECREASING costs makes sense, but what about the impacts of INCREASING the costs and forcing people into Negative TPs? There’s been a long standing stance on not changing anything regarding the character manager due to old systems, those impacts above, and the intent of stacking the new endgame whatnots on top of the training system rather than replacing/amending the training system in order to remediate these concerns. Add more string to the ball!



  • @whirlin

    I’m never in favor of increasing costs, that borders on nerf territory. Nerfing is a lazy way to fix imbalances that only ever serves to make people unhappy and never actually addresses the core reason for the imbalance. I think, at a minimum, sorcerers should have the same costs for AS (and probably MIU since their costs tend to be paired) as wizards. I’d also advocate lowering lore costs to 5 for sorcererous lores (necro and demon). This would represent the unique relationship that sorcerers have with these lores (they are the only non shared lore set in the game) and make it more feasible for sorcerers to work on other lore skills pre cap.

    I also think I’ve gone about as off topic as I should lol.


  • Tart Lovers Anonymous

    @whirlin I’d be more than happy with just a spell hindrance update. I’m not holding my breath for any sorcerer updates though. Those last ones were pretty awesome and I’m sure other professions could use some love.


  • Platinum

    A cleric with a lot of spirit lore and web bolt is pretty awesome in my opinion. I’m looking forward to higher levels when I have over a 75% chance to web opponents and quite a few times web bolt knocks mobs over too. I play a half-krolvin pole-arm wielding cleric. Getting to level 41 has been cake so far. Her CS is junk, but her bolting AS is good when using holy bolt or web bolt.


  • TownCrier

    @sabotage said in Cleric Base development:

    @leafiara K, but then your armor skill is half the cost (which is yuge at lower levels)…for reasons…

    When pures aim for 0 hindrance, which most of them do, sorcerers and wizards pay 60/0 for 4 ranks, clerics pay 64/0 for 8 ranks, and empaths pay 120/0 for 8 ranks.

    And your armor hindrance is lower.

    Most cleric players wouldn’t see anything above 0 hindrance as “having your cake,” but for the sake of the argument, let’s say they do. A cleric can wear brig for 7% hindrance or chain mail for 8%. For this tradeoff, the benefit is better protection when they get hit. Empaths can get better protection just with their higher PF cap and don’t even need the better armor, though they have that option too. Wizards have higher DS and have crit padding from 520. It all works out and is well balanced, actually, other than maybe sorcerers–I don’t have experience with those, so not going to comment there.

    Edit: One other benefit to better armor is higher CvA, but pures generally don’t have trouble against CS attacks no matter how light their armor is.


  • TownCrier

    @darconas said in Cleric Base development:

    Giving all of these suggestions to Clerics will be quite ridiculous, what would be the point if they swing as well as a paladin, ward as well as a sorc, bolt as well as a wizard, etc etc etc.

    Empaths already swing far better than clerics would with Zombiesdontrun’s proposal because they’d have 30 more AS and 1117. They bolt better than his proposal because additional CS-based damage cycles from 1110 outweigh slightly higher AS. They have a stronger single-target warding spell unless 317 got a buff that I don’t know about since a year and a half ago. Empaths also have other perks like 3x Physical Fitness and the ability to cast from empath base with no arms, fried nerves, and an injured head.

    It all works out and actually isn’t ridiculous since even a profession that’s good at everything can only pick RT for one thing at a time.



  • @leafiara said in Cleric Base development:

    It all works out and actually isn’t ridiculous since even a profession that’s good at everything can only pick RT for one thing at a time.

    This was really my goal here. As I said I don’t think clerics are in desperate need of anything but a few tweaks would make some other paths a bit more reliable, and there is room in their circle for tweaks. Unless you are way way over capped, pure melee and bolting is all about attrition. The set up spells help, but you are still hoping for a lucky crit most of the time. Every little bit helps, but I definitely don’t won’t to take away anyone’s thunder, especially Empaths. My first character was an empath back when they still had the 800s. Hunting was beyond painful. Having lived through that I’m happy to see Empaths be good at something besides wearing fluff and healing.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to Elanthian Forums was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.