Designing a Class: Cleric

Clerics - They Kill by Healing

OK, so the design goals for the D&D Next Cleric are up, and contain nothing really substantial. I'm a little worried by some of the aims, which point to them working only as buffers, or really focusing on healing.  On the other hand, some of the points in the article state that clerics will still be able to hit things while buffing and healing, which sounds more promising.

Now, don't get me wrong - I'm good with clerics being healers.  More than good - it's their iconic role, and they should be great at it. But alarm bells ring when the articles include lines such as "A cleric might help overcome an ogre berserker by healing the party's fighter, allowing the fighter to survive long enough to deal a deadly attack". I don't seem to be the only one for whom this is the case.

So rather than just go and whine on the comments threads, or take to EN World and express my dismay, I figured I'd take a quick stab at what I'd like a cleric to look like, given what WotC have come out and said so far about Clerics specifically, and D&D Next in general.

What we Know

So a summary of the assumptions I'm using when bashing this together, going on what's been said so far:

• Vancian casting is back, but caster classes will also have access to At Will powers (at least in certain builds)
• Divine magic will focus on healing and buffing
• There are multiple spell levels, and you can prepare spells in higher level spell slots to get more powerful effects
• The action economy is 1 main action, plus a move
• Clerics will reflect their deity
• Different builds will be available - a fighty, smitey Cleric, a buffing caster Cleric, a ranged Cleric.. options are good
• Builds will be modified by Class, Theme and Background, with Class and Theme being the choices which affect the character's mechanics and advancement
• We'll still have healing surge values in some form or another
• Similar weapons will have similar effects - for example, there wont be a major advantage or drawback to using a 1 handed hammer vs a 1 handed axe or sword by default

 

An idea

Given this, I came up with a rough outline in my mind of what I'd like to see, which would allow a player to choose to play either a 4e style cleric (who heals and buffs while hitting things), or an older fashioned one who uses full actions to cast.

For balance, we should expect that people who give up the ability to attack and focus on casting will cast more effectively, but aren't contributing to damage as regularly.

So a quick run down of what I'd like things to look like... bearing in mind that I've thought about this for all of a couple of hours on the bus trips to and from work.  It's rough, and certainly wont be perfectly balanced....

Class Features

Divine Caster - Casters can prepare 'x' number of known Divine spells per day, at the levels given.  Each spell can be cast once for each time it is prepared, but can be prepared in multiple slots.
Orisons - Clerics can prepare 'x' number of 0 level Diving spells as Orisons.  Orisons can be cast any number of times.
Channel Divinity - in addition to the above Divine spells and Orisons, a cleric knows 'x' number of Domain abilities which can be used.  Only 'y' number can be used per encounter, but each power can be used multiple times.
Spontaneous Healing - the cleric may spontaneously cast Heal Wounds in place of any prepared spell. Heal Wounds is cast at the level at which the spell was prepared.
Proficiencies - proficient with armour up to chain mail, simple melee weapons, shields and the Cleric's deity's favoured weapon

Theme Options 

Battle Cleric: Class feature - if you attack using your deity's favoured weapon, you can cast a Divine spell you have prepared as part of the attack.  When using your Deity's favoured weapon, you may use your Wisdom modifier in place of your strength or dexterity on your attack and damage rolls.
Casting Cleric: Class feature -  any Divine spell that you cast count as being 1 spell level higher than the slot in which it is prepared.

Example Divine Spells

Guidance (level 0+) - grant an ally a bonus to their next attack role, saving throw or skill check equal to the level the spell is prepared at + 1.
Virtue (level 0+) - grant an ally temporary hit points equal to your Wisdom modifier + the level at which the spell is cast
Bane (level 1+) - the enemy takes a penalty on attack rolls and skill checks equal to the level at which the spell is cast
Cure Wounds (level 1+) - An ally may spend a healing surge. They regain HP equal to their healing surge value + (your Wisdom modifier * the level at which the spell is cast)
Shield (level 1+) - An ally gains a bonus to all defences equal to the level at which the spell is cast.
Bless (level 1+) - All allies within 40 feet gain a bonus to attack rolls and skill checks equal to the level at which the spell is cast

(and so on, you get the idea by now I'm sure - I'm sure that any number of out of combat utility type spells will be around as well, but I've not included them for the purposes of this write up)

I've not gone into the Channel Divinity spell list, but the spells for this feature should reflect the domain - a cleric of Kord might give himself a bonus to his own attack and damage roll for a turn, for example.  These could be spells of their own, or from a domain spell list as in Pathfinder, either should work fine.

Summing Up

So, what would I like about this kind of class design?  Well, if it's what you wanted to do, a cleric can still hand out buffs, temp HP and healing while hitting things. If your deity favours ranged weapons, you can even be a bow wielding cleric and accomplish the same thing.  The spell list is much shorter, as there's no need for multiple spells which accomplish the same thing, but at a higher level.

Clerics who opt to stay out of combat and cast will heal and buff more efficiently - they'd be giving out a +2 bonus on their at wills as opposed to the +1 that the fighty cleric is handing out. They're healing for probably an extra 4 points per heal at level 1 (assuming ability mods stay roughly the same as they have been for the last while).  Clerics who opt to fight can be capable warriors or archers, just as long as they use their god's favourite sharp (or blunt, as the case may be) object.

However, the problems with Vancian magic in general still exist - if the heroes can stick to 1 fight a day, they'll have access to all their high level spells for every fight.  I'm not sure this is (or ever has been) a class design issue - I really think of it more as an adventure design issue.

Thoughts and opinions?  Are either of these options anything you'd like to use, or see in use at your tables?

4th Ed Dungeon Crawling - pt 2 - Groups o' Mooks

This is part 2 of a series of articles - if you've not read it, it's probably best to start with part 1, which is  here.

The (Tar) Devil is in the Details

Last post I gave a bit of an overview on my thinking for running a dungeon crawl using 4E D&D, as a more freeform dungeon exploration of the type you'd get using Pathfinder or other systems, cutting down on the big break between the combat encounters and exploration.  After the first session, I got thinking about the monster design for the rolling encounters, and got a bit more about waves of reinforcements and things.

The Mooks

(All the base stats that I tinkered with were taken from either the Essentials Monster Vault or DM Kit, or from Monster Vault: Threats to the Nentir Vale, with a bit of help from the ever awesome Sly Flourish DM Cheat Sheet.   They should match up with the base monster maths given in Monster Manual 3, with the exception of number of hit points)

We're all familiar with the base enemies of 4E by now - minion, standard, elite, solo.  As explained last time out, for my purposes I needed a category between a minion and a standard. I'm calling them Mooks - it seems appropriate; they're never going to be a serious threat to the players individually, these are the guys that get in the way until the big guys turn up.  The base level for these guys, and what I did for the first session, was to take a standard soldier or brute, and reduce his HP to about 30.

During the first session, we found that a wave of a few of these guys goes down in about 3 rounds of fighting (makes sense, it's about half the number of rounds that a normal fight should usually take).  This was intended, but it could quickly turn into a problem if each wave of these guys turns up with high damage encounter powers... standard 4E balance assumes about 1 enemy per hero, with an encounter power or two - if your heroes are going to be fighting 3 waves of 4 mooks each instead, that's going to be a lot of extra damage getting thrown at them.  I decided that was too much to be sensible - I played conservative with numbers during the first session anyway, and decided I wouldn't use the encounter powers on the sheet.  I left them off entirely for the next session.  The idea of these fights was a gradual spend of the party's resources; if every wave of 3 Mooks turned up and used encounter powers, that'd move us into high spike damage territory.

So for level 5 basic mooks that gives us something like the following (with apologies for very basic formatting):

Brawler - Level 5 Brute
HP: 35; Bloodied 17; Init +4
AC 17; Fort 18; Ref 17; Will 16
Speed 5
Standard Actions
Smack (weapon) - At will
Melee Attack 1; +10 vs AC
Hit: 1d8 + 11 damage

Guardsman - Level 5 Soldier
HP 30; Bloodied 15; Init +8
AC 21; Fort 18; Ref; 17; Will 16
Speed 5
Standard Actions
Jab (weapon) - At will
Melee Attack 1; +10 vs AC
Hit: 1d8 + 8 damage

So that gives us a base line - brutes still have lower defenses than soldiers, but hit a bit harder and have slightly higher HP (they might just about survive an extra hit).  Artillery become similar, but have a lower damage melee at will, and an added ranged attack:

Bowman - Level 5 Artillery
HP 30; Bloodied 15; Init +8
AC19; Fort 15; Ref 18; Will 16
 Speed 6
Standard Actions
Dagger (weapon) - At will
Melee Attack 1; +10 vs AC
Hit: 1d6 + 6 damage
Bowshot (weapon) - At will
Ranged Attack 10; +10 vs AC
Hit: 1d8 + 8 damage

I didn't use any skirmishers in these groups - these were meant to be quick fights to blast through, so no need for enemies shifting around and making things take longer.

The dungeon complex that the party was going through for the first foray into this type of play was the local Iron Circle HQ, so the enemies were a mix of Human Brigand types and Tar Devils.  Most of the groups were either levelled up or down by a level, or got something else added to them for variety. A couple of examples:

• crossbowmen kept the effect that the Iron Circle Sentry minions have in the DM's Kit - a few extra damage if the victim moves before the start of the Mook's next turn.
• The tar devils gained normal tar devil racial resists and vulnerabilities, and deal fire damage instead of untyped (much to the delight of our Tiefling Warlock).

No need to go overboard - since these fights are over quickly, you don't want to have too many things to manage.

Encounter Groups

When planning, I used groups of 4 mooks (usually either 2 soldiers with 2 artillery, or 4 soldiers), or 2 brute or soldier mooks with a normal strength Mage as a leader of the group.  With their low defences, brutes in this form really do go down like chumps, so they're better coming in with something else or as wandering groups to join in already ongoing fights.

Between three and five of these groups should be a good number in between the party's short rests, but that will obviously depend on how much you want to stretch them and how the group plays.


For the top floor of the dungeon, I'd decided on reinforcements arriving by rolling dice to determine whether or not they became aware of an ongoing fight. I'd tried out a D20 roll, with a cumulative +5 modifier for each round a fight had been ongoing for. a result of 20+ including modifiers meant reinforcements came to see what was going on.  This worked out reasonably in that it was simple to run with, but was a bit too random for my taste.

For the second floor, I simply placed the groups around the rooms and decided myself how they reacted - sneaking up behind the group when they started investigating, one of the archers running to fetch reinforcements, a Mage running off to hide elsewhere when they were seperated from their companions by a LoS blocking cloud.  For groups close together, I had intended to make Perception checks to see if they joined in (again, with modifiers as the fights went on longer), but it never came to that in play.  Overall I was happier running things myself like this - it made for a good ongoing narrative feel to the whole floor.

Final Thoughts

In the end, I was pretty happy with how the two floors of dungeon I ran this way worked out (the third floor ran with more standard 4th ed encounters as a run up to the boss fight).  I'm certainly intending on refining the idea further and using it again in the future - as well as dungeons, I can imagine using it for attacks on enemy camps, or the heroes taking part in defending towns and the like.  Any situation where there wouldn't necessarily be set piece fights with a chance for a 5 minute break in between should be fair game, really, so  I may well return to give more details when I've tried out more fights at higher level.

In the meantime, I'm hoping to put together a quick example to show how I might do this in practice now that I've played with the idea, and that'll be the conclusion to this little mini-series.

Dungeon Crawling in 4th Ed

My problem

I love playing and running D&D 4th edition, but one thing that's never quite felt right for me is a lengthy, ongoing dungeon.  Explore a corridor, or a room or two, avoid/disable a couple of traps, then have a fight. Rinse/repeat as needed until you get to the bottom, top, far end, centre as desired.

If those fights are a standard, on level encounter they'll last about 5 or 6 rounds most of the time. That's only 30 seconds of real world time, but as anyone who's played 4e knows, it can grind to a halt at a table for up to an hour.  Generally after an on level encounter, the inevitable short rest is needed so that players can spend some surges and get their encounter powers back. That means that after a 30 second fight, they're stopping for 5 minutes. To keep things working as presented in the core books, that's 5 minutes of undisturbed rest - an occasional interrupted rest of probably fine if they're taking them in dangerous territory, but for the sake of player/DM trust, I don't feel you want to be doing that too much.  Usually, running standard encounters, parties will manage maybe 5 or 6 encounters in a good day before they need their extended rest.

That leaves you with an age old problem - during that 5 minute rest, what are the other monsters in the dungeon doing?  Didn't anyone else hear 30 seconds of weapon clashes, screaming and grunting?  How do you balance the common sense approach that things would come and investigate what was happening, or come ambush the party?  Assuming there are more than 5 or 6 groups of monsters in your dungeon, where are the party going to sleep? If it's inside the dungeon, why are there no patrols? If it's outside, why are the early dungeon rooms still empty the next day?

The plan

So, what do you change?  I set up a dungeon over the last few sessions for my players, and wanted to get a more flowing feel, more reminiscent of Pathfinder dungeons I've played through.  The dungeon was set up as a few floors of an ancient Dragonborn temple, each floor being reasonably compact -  2 or 3 large rooms, half a dozen smaller rooms and the corridors between - and I wanted the players to be able to clear a floor between each short rest if that's what they wanted to do.  Planning a bit in advance, I figured I could make it feel like they were fighting through groups of enemies all the way through, but spread the threat enough to  reduce the need for lots of healing (figuring that running out of ways to trigger healing surges would probably be the sign of when the party wanted to rest up).

This formed into a rough plan:

• Many fights, with less threat in each - give the party lots of small encounters, rather than a couple of big ones. These fights are really designed to not challenge the party individually; the aim is that they'll use their normal encounter resources gradually over the course of a few small fights.
• The same number of monsters, but less HP each - to make a fight seem even remotely threatening, the group needs to be fighting at least 3-4 enemies at a time.  Two enemies are easy to lock down, more starts to feel like they've got something to manage.  The difference between a quick fight like what we're looking for and a standard 4th Ed fight is hit points - I gave the enemies enough hit points to take roughly 3 average hits from the heroes.  I found about 30 hit points to be a good number at level 4-5.  A good solid damage roll does enough to bloody the enemy, and they can be one shotted with a critical hit (especially on an encounter power).  I didn't want to go with minions all the way through, but threw a few in here and there to keep the variety up.
• 1 standard enemy makes a decent little sergeant to go with 2 or 3 lower hit point mooks.  2 mook soldiers or brutes along with 1 standard artillery mage made an interesting fight for a few rounds.  Otherwise 4 fairly straight forward brute or soldier mooks makes for a straight up brawl in a corridor.
• Each little group like this might make up about 1/2 the XP budget of a standard encounter, but you can probably throw 3-4 of these groups at them before the party will feel like they're really pushing it.  Spreading out the threat means they should manage to get through more between rests.

Results?

Putting this into practice, the first session contained 2 groups of 4 enemies of 30 hit points each, then a more standard 4E fight in one of the larger rooms.  The party got through the whole floor, blasting through the small groups in 3-4 rounds, and only taking a rest at the end of the final group, but they started the final fight a bit down on resources which made for a different feel.  It was interesting seeing how they managed their resources, especially on the first floor - players went back to hoarding encounter powers, thinking "We might need this more later on" (probably a good decision in this case, as they still had most of their bit hitters when the came to the final fight of the floor against the full strength monsters).  That was pretty much as I expected, and I was happy that things ran mostly as planned.  The whole floor felt like one ongoing exporation, rather than a few seperated encounters, which was great - exactly the feel I was hoping for.

One thing I hadn't banked on was a difference in player perception on how much they had done - in a 3 hour session, we're used to getting 2 standard combat encounters plus a bit of background RP, exposition and background exploration, or maybe 3 fights if they're pretty much back to back.  The players felt like they had got more done in exploring this floor than they normally did in their few hours of play.  That was a pleasant surprise, and definitely something I hadn't thought of in advance.

With the first floor out of the way, and the experience under my belt, I went on to planning the next level and refined my design a little.  More on that later.