#granted as much as I love dnd I always have a real hard time focusing on it for more than an hr without feeling suuuuper drained afterwards | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

utilitycaster · 4 years

Note

This is not an obscure or ridiculous question, but I do have a question I didn't know who to ask. I'm kinda new to playing DnD. What exactly is the difference between a paladin and a cleric, mainly in terms of the relationship to their god? The phb wasn't too helpful for me. I admit I chose cleric because they get more spells, but is that the only difference? One fights via magic the other mainly with weapons (but can enhance them with divine magic)? Thank you and have a great weekend!

Good question! I’m going to editorialize a little but the lore here will all be pretty standard; the editorializing is more about my personal thoughts on mechanics, rules as written, etc. Also this is going to be long but I’ve split it up so you can stop reading when you’re like “ok I get it shut up”

Relationship to a god

(note: in some interpretations, clerics can be devoted to a pantheon, and paladins can be devoted to more of a concept. I don’t super love the idea of a cleric to a pantheon, but I do think some interpretations of paladins devoted to a concept, particularly oath of the ancients, can work. That said I’m focusing on clerics or paladins of a specific deity).

Clerics: there’s some leeway but as a rule they are the chosen ones of a god. In general this is played as mutual; a god chooses one of their faithful and grants unto them magic powers.

Rules as written they need to be no more than one step away from their deity’s alignment; since alignment in my opinion works more as a general suggestion than a hard-and-fast rule you don’t need to be super strict but in terms of flavor you should focus on being at least kind of similar? Like, if you’re the cleric of a deity of chaos, you should probably be a little chaotic yourself; if you’re the cleric of a good deity you should not be evil.

A cleric can damage their relationship with their god, but there’s a bit more wiggle room than with paladins.

Paladins: paladins have been granted powers by a god, but specifically in their devotion to an oath to said deity (or concept). That oath is their defining feature, more so than the god.

In past versions, paladins were always lawful in their alignment. This has been relaxed in 5e, and I agree with that, but they should be absolutely adherent to their oath. They can be chaotic in every other way but they need to stand by this promise. If they break that oath, they lose their powers. That’s how paladins work. (obviously this shouldn’t be done lightly, but a serious misstep, like deliberately killing an innocent when you’re a good-aligned paladin, should be dealt with as as betrayal of your oath).

Mechanics (spells and stats)

Clerics: Mechanically they are full spellcasters, like bards, druids, wizards, and sorcerers (warlocks are their own thing).

Flavor-wise/also mechanically, they are wisdom-based prepared spellcasters [people here more for spicy takes than discussion of mechanics, please skip to the bottom]. What this means:

Wisdom: based on that stat and the skills based on them, clerics will be decent at reading people and situations, working with animals, they’ll be perceptive, and they’ll either be intuitively good at healing or have some training in it.

Prepared spellcasters: this means clerics can choose their spells every time they take a long rest. Clerics are the most powerful healers in the game, and have a lot of utility. They have, in my opinion, the most versatile spell list in the game (wizards have far more spells, but clerics can do a little of everything).

In battle: clerics can serve multiple purposes because of how versatile they are. Typically they do serve as the main healer, but they can also do a lot of damage, and they can also do a lot of support for their allies/grant disadvantages (either literal disadvantage, or other drawbacks) to their enemies. Clerics are also a decently hardy spellcaster; they can often wear medium or heavy armor, they can use shields, and they get a d8 for hit points.

Paladins: Mechanically they are hybrid battler/spellcasters and are usually grouped with the battlers. They have comparatively few spells, they don’t have cantrips (so when they’re out of spells, they’re out for the day), and they are more reliant on their prowess with weapons - especially melee (5 ft range) weapons.

Stats: they are charisma and strength based, as written. They can wear heavy armor and their powers come from strength of will. They are good at persuasion, intimidating people, lying, performing, and feats of strength.

Prepared spellcasters: They can also choose their spells each day; however, they have far fewer spell slots than clerics, they don’t have nearly as high spell slots (top out at level 5, instead of level 9) and they have a much more limited spell list. And as you said, a good deal of their spells are based on augmenting their weapon damage (smites). Paladins also have both healing spells and a feature called lay on hands, where they can grant some healing/restoration from a limited pool.

In battle: the classic paladin build, at least, has a high armor class (medium or heavy armor), fights primarily in melee, and are much hardier than a cleric - they are harder to hit, as a rule, and have more hit points (they get a d10). They’re also somewhat versatile, but more skewed towards doing damage, soaking up damage, and minor healing. As mentioned their spells that do damage are mostly spells that augment weapon damage (vs. clerics, where the spell does the damage on its own). They have a few support spells for their allies, but they’re much more limited than clerics and are expected to spend most of their time damaging rather than casting spells.

My thoughts on Clerics and Paladins/how they’re often played

Clerics: you can play around with the non-wisdom stat for clerics but by dint of that stat they’re often kind of the mom friend? They don’t need to be, but that’s often how they are - they’re often the group confidant, especially if they have at least decent charisma. I love me a gruff, low charisma-with-heart-of-gold cleric too, but even then they often end up being the comforting one in their own weird way.

Thanks to the high wisdom clerics are often hardest to charm or control, and in general make a good voice of reason - even chaotic and ridiculous ones.

Because of your giant flexible spell list you can play around a lot - you can focus on damage, on healing, on buffs/debuffs. If you want to be a good player, in my opinion, look at the rest of the party. If you’re the only healer you can take damage spells but be prepared to spend a lot of time healing. Don’t let your friends die because you wanted to look cool. Also, speaking as someone who actively likes to play healers and utility casters...if you’re not prepared to heal you shouldn’t play cleric (we joke about Merle from TAZ and Jester in Critical Role but both actually do a whole lot of healing).

Paladins: I actually really love the more old-school interpretation, not so much the lawful aspect (as mentioned, I care more about devotion to an oath than to an alignment) but the slightly more black and white morality aspect. Which is weird, because I love campaigns with a lot of moral grayness, but maybe that’s why - I like that there are characters who do say “well, no, there is in fact good and there is in fact evil.” They’re a little less understanding at times, but a lot more intense.

Paladins as a rule are played as having less chill than clerics, and being a lot more action-oriented. Clerics might sit around and ponder; paladins are about enacting their oath in the real world.

Editorializing and Spicy Takes

With a few exceptions (letting a warlock use intelligence as a main stat which WOTC has condoned, and letting a paladin be dex-based instead of strength-based if there’s a really good in-story reason) I strongly dislike the idea of taking an existing class and saying ‘actually the casting stat is whatever I want it to be’. The fundamental concept of a wizard, for example, is that they have gained their magic through study and investigation. Basing them on charisma is not how they work, throws off all the lore, seriously unbalances certain subclasses, and makes your backstory worse. You can make a charismatic wizard! You can even make a wizard who is more charismatic than they are intelligent, if you want! You can make a wizard with intimidation or charm or other charisma-based skills as a major part of their story and character, and Caleb Widogast is a fantastic example. But in my opinion, the mechanics aren’t just a way of arbitrating or adding rules - they are part of the game, of the lore and of the flavor, and the experience is much richer for respecting that.

Also intelligence is often the least interesting mental stat to dump and you can fight me on that in the Denny’s parking lot of your choosing.

#d&d #dungeons & dragons #clerics #paladins #Anonymous

123 notes · View notes