Stop Homebrewing Cleric Doctrines | Pathfinder 2e

[@londonmatthews9565]

Great take. It’s discouraging to see so much hate rain down on the warpreist when it’s clearly trying to do something radically different from the cloistered cleric.

[@lincr.1988]

It's the same sin people accuse the Alchemist of: not being a Martial class.

[@AlexKlindt]

I could see an inquisitor doctrine work pretty well where the cleric gets more rogue/investigator adjacent abilities at the loss of spellcasting proficiencies.

[@tinear4]

You’ve convinced me. I’m still dissatisfied with the P2E Cleric, but I am now convinced it’s the overly circumstantial spell list that is to blame. If you want to be a healbot, the font is great. But if not, you will always beep like a second-class caster, even as a cloistered cleric. And that makes me sad, because the RP opportunities for a P2E cleric are really strong.

[@BestgirlJordanfish]

These are definitely some interesting points, but I still definitely think that the cleric has unexplored design space remaining, giving new directions for expression rather than power. Warpriest has shown not just altered proficiency growth rates, but features and feats provided. There is so much to play with there. Different feats, features, proficiencies, spell slots, and so on.

[@aventuraenlafogata649]

I would argue that there is one design space open still that can be interesting. That is: to change the Divine Font from Charisma to Intelligence.

[@SwingRipper]

I think that is a really smart take on the idea of design space. I did not know the history of the warpriest... Great video!

[@Josephrobrose]

Just want to say thank you for your videos and insight into pf2e! been helping me A LOT when learning the system

[@1dm564]

Thanks so much! It's great to know I've helped someone learn the system.

[@justinsteger2407]

I think the issue I have with warpriest is that compared to druid it just feels worse. Perhaps this is more of an issue with druid. But through a beast companion or through shape-shifting feats a druid has access to better to hits and damage than the warpriest. They have access to shield block and medium armor regardless of their build, and they continue to be legendary casters. I want the warpriest to be just as powerful as a melee centric druid build, but they just are not. I understand that druids do not have a font of free heals/harms, but they do have access to significantly better focus spells as well.

[@Gibbons3457]

From what I understand warpriests really need some stronger class feats unique to them.

[@cmeast]

I agree, and I also think the Warpriest is pretty good as is. Spell DCs and Proficiencies aren't necessary for buffs and heals and the divine spell list has plenty of options for both. I think maybe it's a branding issue - thinking cloistered means defense/support and Warpriest is offensive, when actually both are a balance of support and offense (in that order) but one primarily uses spells while the other supplements that was martial abilities. Even then, the Warpriest is less about damage dealing and more about tanking, flanking and supplementing damage.

[@nicholasromero238]

My biggest problem with the warpriest is that I can get the same effect with champion dedication on a cloistered cleric and keep the better spell progression. The only major hits is not having crit specialization (which imo isn't really a big deal, my filler actions are probably going to be skill actions or raising a shield rather than a strike most of the time) and from levels 7-10 having a lower strike proficiency, but again, I'm probably just going to be throwing athletics maneuvers, bon mot, or demoralize over a strike. I don't think warpriest is terrible, I just can't think of much that they do better than a cloister/champion

[@lamarabbit]

exactly! Having no good DC or Attack means you want to use buffs and heals. Meaning all the feats for the healer cleric actually fit better on a Warpriest and are wasting the strong DC of a cloistered

[@guardian_of_the_rune]

@@lamarabbit although not having Master armor proficiency doesn't make you any better at being the midline than the normal cleric so your life as a warpriest is going to be full of 2 action heals spells and shield block reactions. Where standing in the back and buffing your allies might be the best option for both the normal has the option to effectively debuff as well.

[@williammclyr3330]

Great video, but I actually disagree with your main point. At our table we are using clerics+ homebrew and it is superior to base cleric basically in every way, despite having 3 doctrines.

[@freezinpee91]

Well said. Balance is important. I understand your term of design space

[@astrid2432]

a problem what I have with warpriest is: it feels like a middle ground cloister is full caster warpriest can go in melee or tank, but still can cast quite good what is missing a more (melee) combat focus cleric, like a inquisitor or so. maybe he is just master too, but he would get more focus on dmg with features similiar to other classes or maybe siwtch things up: master in weapon, but expert in spells I'm not an expert in game design, I'm not even trained in that so idk how it should look like

[@Dramon8888]

This is pretty much how I feel about the warpriest, but I couldn't put it into words. It seems to me that warpriest would be better as a class archetype, and now I wonder if we are going to get any for the cleric, or if we are just going to get doctrines. I don't get the complains people have about the subclass, do they want the warpriest to be able to do everything? I know that's what clerics are in previous editions, but that's why I always felt they were the most OP class.

[@12thLevelSithLord]

I think the main issue, for me, is that the war priest doesn't feel very war priest-y. You're still mainly a caster, you're just a less good caster that can wear armor poorly and hold a sword poorly. I think what I'd want out of a war priest is probably closer to just playing a martial of some flavor with a cleric archetype, tbh.

[@Dramon8888]

@@12thLevelSithLord in that case, why don't play a warpriedt and then take a martial archetype? Like Sentinel, Mauler, or a multiclass archetype. If I was playing a cleric of Erastil, for example, I would go for the Archer archetype and then the Eldritch Archer archetype. A warpriest of Gorum with the Mauler archetype sounds like a really fun character. And any good cleric going to the Knight of Lastwall archetypes would be awesome in a campaign against undead.

[@kat_boss5520]

@@Dramon8888 That's why archetypes are so amazing, you can do pretty much everything

[@12thLevelSithLord]

@@Dramon8888 Mainly because that doesn't fix my core issue of "my warpriest is bad at melee combat". Those archetypes can do some cool stuff, I'm sure, but Paizo's been pretty good about not letting archetypes through that just straight up improve your basic combat numbers.

[@Treehouse22009]

Warpriest and Cleric were not the same class in 1e, which is where much of the folly of stuffing Warpriest in Cleric was to begin with. People don't want the Warpriest to do everything. Even if they did, the Cleric chassis in its own right has enough innate weaknesses (having to follow a deity, stuck on the Divine list, can't get a physical stat as a key ability score, poor feat selection, lack of actual features) that it balances out such a thing. Warpriest needs to something of its own right other than just more healing. They can't even benefit from frontline sustain as much as they should as Heal/Harm 1-action variant is Somatic, meaning it triggers attacks of opportunity. Warpriest doesn't have good combat, Warpriest doesn't have good defenses, and Warpriest doesn't have good spellcasting. They don't get a good thing that a built-up Cloistered Cleric would get. They are just literally underbudgeted compared to other classes, being only good for low-level one-shot games where their frontloading of "important stuff" is appreciated and they don't have to suffer the consequences and opportunity costs of their build. Maybe if Warpriest was allowed to turn their Divine Font into a True Strike/Fear Font, something that lets them buff up or debuff the enemy a limited number of times per day that pulls from the same resource as their healing without removing their healing, they would be a more competitive pick. Maybe they should redo Cloistered as well, give them the Healing Hands or Cast Down feats automatically, something that incentivizes using their Font and Spell Slots in creative ways like the Wizard. Something that makes both their sacrifices actually worth it then just the vague sense of balance that exists right now. What people want is Cleric to function like the other classes, create interesting choices through their subclasses, class features, and/or feat selection. Cleric gets none of this, and Warpriest itself gets less. They want a class, not a compromise.

[@JonWaterfall]

I haven't had a good chance to try Warpriest in actual play yet, but it seems to be one of the better foundations for the Marshal archetype(behind champion, ofc). You're already encouraged to have good charisma for your font spell slots, and the added defensive abilities will hopefully keep you where you need to be.

[@LazarusXavier]

On homebrew in general, especially for PF2e, I'd say too many homebrewers are throwing stuff in without any research, mostly with trying to make whole classes (I would say, compared to other classes, the cleric doesn't really even have subclasses but two different cleric classes). Sure, you can make an item with the GMG and comparing it to other items. You can make a lot of spells by comparing to other spells and you could even make a lot of feats if you are careful not to overpower it compared to other feats of the level. But I'm currently trying to design a class for Infinite and it's taking me over a hundred hours of research and I'm maybe only halfway there. I quickly found out that 2e class design is Very specific, very tight, and the line between an OP and weak class is a very thin line. You can't just slap a class together, you've got to analyze how it interacts with the party, the spell lists, archetypes, obscure or less used game mechanics of which there are a lot.

[@1dm564]

Absolutely. This game is extremely easy to homebrew something for because of its modularity, but at the same time it's extremely hard to homebrew something that's balanced as the designers intended.

[@ronaldsanfran]

Good take. I agree!

[@rafasiqalv]

That makes me wonder how, if Paizo will do it, fit the Inquisitor in PF2E. Maybe as a Class Archetype, but that’s basically what the Doctrines already are: trading features/proficiencies of the class for others. Also, Warpriests could get a lot of Master proficiency in Armor later on.

[@brolveth6665]

I belive they will do something more kin to ranger. No spell slots, some fighting abilities of his own etc

[@DanTalksGames]

Master armor proficiency is the one buff I think I'd give to warpriest. It's fairly benign but still gives it something to edge out over CC, plus if you give it at level 19 as part of their doctrines, it meets parity with other non-plate martials.

[@rafasiqalv]

@@DanTalksGames yup! I like this specially because everything the Warpriest has now it’s achievable through other feats, so a Cloistered Cleric can do anything a Warpriest does while also having legendary proficiency for spells. It doesn’t feel right. I saw the idea of giving the Warpriest the option to choose STR or DEX as a key ability score too, which would help a lot but IDK if would resolve the problems of later levels, since their weapon proficiency doesn’t get better than expert.

[@NuclearPoweredGinger]

@@rafasiqalv That’d put them only -2 behind non-fighter martials at that point, and I think that’s the only real bump they’d really need for marital offenses. I also don’t see a massive problem with giving them master armor at 19, as AC is less about not getting hit in this system and more about not being crit. I’d probably try one or the other first though, don’t want to overbuff and accidentally make something absolutely busted at endgame. Biggest problem is I don’t know how they play at endgame in the first place though!

[@datonkallandor8687]

Either no spells at all, or a half-caster with 4 spell slots following the Magus and Summoner Template.

[@cheezeofages]

Framed that way it's almost like the Warpriest is more of a prototype form of the upcoming Class Archetypes (due in Secrets of Magic) that trade out class features.

[@quzzar]

Warpriest is almost like a Cleric class archetype.

[@TheHarimir]

i abolutely agree. if you vant to homebrew something make gods, feats or spells

[@hehecactusboy4312]

I don't think I will stop, well, not that I had planned to homebrew more than the one I already have. Even though I disagree with you, I like that at not even one point during the video did I hear any amount of aggression in your voice. This is the first time I've subscribed to someone I disagree with.

[@raven_roäc]

Love this channel

[@guardian_of_the_rune]

You could think of the cloistered cleric as the only cleric. The only thing warpriest get over the cloistered is medium armor so you can lower your dexterity and still get the same AC, Shield Block to reduce the damage you take once per round, and Master in Fortitude Saves. Your not any better at fighting with weapons and your not going to take more hits and all of your spell casting is 10% worse forever. Plus the cloistered cleric can multiclass and get everything the warpriest gets earlier but the warpriest will never be as good at spell casting. I don't know. I would like it better if it was just one class but if warpriests were Masters with their Deity’s favored weapon it would give it some reason to existed. But as it stands you should just be a fighter and multiclass into a cleric and you'll still better than a warpriest at spell casting.

[@derrickbonsell]

People are trying to fit 2e content into a 1e or even 3.5 paradigm and I think that's very limiting.

[@mirageowl]

Losing previously interesting cleric builds to sorcerers and champions is limiting

[@deadstones1]

I don't see why everybody thinks the war cleric spell proficiencies are so devastating. You have a spell list that is mostly buffs and healing, neither of which care about your proficiency, or your wisdom for that matter, except for in the very niche case of someone dispelling your spells. People argue that it isn't worth it, since you can get everything war cleric has just by picking feats and archetypes, but they forget the opportunity cost that entails. For example, if you pick Sentinel as your level 2 archetype, for the medium armor, you are locking yourself out of other archetypes for 6 levels.

[@aamiranauthor]

Inquistor might be a good doctrine, giving up spell DC to be aggressive and skilled where warpriest does it to be tanky.

[@ryokirah]

I think the main issues are with the spell list. It's just bad. All the support spells are circumstantial, making that one feat a MUST take. All the damage spells are alignment-based. 80% of the domain spells are bad and/or boring. Very little to work with to play an offensive playstyle for EITHER doctrine, forcing you to take archetypes

[@jhonea6535]

They need to go ahead and add inquisitor tho 🤷‍♂️

[@SamBrockmann]

I don't think that sacrificing spellcasting on a full caster is bad. A lot of 1E archetypes would sacrifice various amounts of spellcasting to grant different features. Obviously, 1E is different than 2E in how archetypes work, but the idea that you shouldn't give up spellcasting for some other gain, to me, it's about "Gain vs. Loss". If you gain a really cool feature, but lose some spellcasting, I think it's fine. That said, warpriest is fine as-is. It's a good divine Gish.

[@Asurendra334]

is this on reddit so I can give you an award buddy ;-)

[@1dm564]

It is now but the subreddit hates it XD

[@hehecactusboy4312]

@@1dm564 Reddit hates everyone.

[@guardian_of_the_rune]

Just remove warpriest from the game and replace it with something useful or just pretend it doesn't exist.