So we have an Enchanter... but no Enchantments... we have telekinesis... but no psionics... we have a Loremaster that can be drooling idiot and won't be any worse for it.
Are you noticing any kind of disconnect here?
The Class they have set up for Cleric draws its strength from... strength. And that doesn't seem completely borked? Not at all? Not even a LITTLE TEENY BIT?
Immersing oneself in a gameworld is as dependent on your ability to accept the rules, concepts, and logic of the universe as it does on the writers creating a cohesive and comprehensive world. In this way, most of your arguments constitute a failure (and I don't mean the word to imply any judgment) on your part to immerse yourself in an atypical fantasy universe and not a failure on the part of the writers. I saw this when I posted on the Age of Wonders 3 board; if you can't immerse yourself in the idea of advanced technology in a fantasy setting, for example, that's on you, not the writers.
As I understand it, telekinesis in this game isn't a trait of psionic ability, but an aspect of magical disciplines. Enchantments are merely a specialization within the field of said disciplines. Intelligence could reasonably influence loremaster, but there's no reason that someone of middling intellect (and I've seen no in-game examples that suggest roleplaying an idiot is possible) couldn't be specialized in that field. Being intelligent isn't the same as being omniscient, after all, and human beings wouldn't be such a remarkable species if those of average intellects couldn't excel in intellectual topics.
I do see your point on man-at-arms in regards to clerical magic, though, and I think you could call foul if no satisfactory in-game explanation is provided on that front.
