Poll : Do you allow godless clerics?

Do you like/allow clerics without a diety?

  • I don't like godless clerics for mechanical reasons.

    Votes: 14 5.4%
  • I don't like godless clerics for flavor/homebrew gameworld reasons.

    Votes: 115 44.6%
  • I don't like godless clerics for other reasons I will outline below.

    Votes: 5 1.9%
  • I'm OK with godless clerics.

    Votes: 76 29.5%
  • I love godless clerics!

    Votes: 40 15.5%
  • I never knew you could have a cleric without a patron god until reading this thread...

    Votes: 8 3.1%

Psion

Adventurer
I am so on the same page, Storm Raven. The Greyhawk deities and the godless cleric clause have caused me countless headaches every time a player makes a divine spellcaster. I do explain the fact that these are the religions, but "what's in the book" seems to have primacy in the players' mind, despite rule zero.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Xeriar

First Post
Storm Raven said:
No, he's describing their faith as not being conducive to having members with kewl powerz granted by a figurehead deity.

There is a problem with that view, however.

Do you have to have a cadre of individuals with kewl powerz to have a spiritual bent? Divine spell casters don't have a corner on the concept of spiritual study and enlightenment, they just have a particular method of expressing it.

Taoist and Buddhist practicioners frequently end up with kewl powerz in legend. If D&D is supposed to emulate legend, then calling them merely scholars is WestoCentric.

In D&D terms, their focus would be on things like Knowledge: Philosophy, Knowledge: Religion, and Knowledge: Nature, so in D&D terms, he's pretty much right.

If you can tell me how any skill, partial skill, group of skills represents Taoism, then I might consider conceding the point that they should be experts in those skills or at least have them.

From my understanding of Taoism, the idea that they would all (or even a majority) take even one of those knowledge skills makes no sense at all.
 

diaglo

Adventurer
Psion said:
I am so on the same page, Storm Raven. The Greyhawk deities and the godless cleric clause have caused me countless headaches every time a player makes a divine spellcaster. I do explain the fact that these are the religions, but "what's in the book" seems to have primacy in the players' mind, despite rule zero.

well it could be your choice of editions.... :D
 

Xeriar

First Post
Storm Raven said:
I have been trying to explain to him that I am not telling him how to run his character, just the probable consequences for running his character in the manner he is running it. His response has been that "my choice of deity is nothing more than which domains I select from, and means nothing more". On the other hand, I view the deities as having particular agendas, which they bestow their followers with powers to promote and advance. Thus, we are at loggerheads.

By the way, I'm by no means advocating that these philosophies can allow someone to pick two random domains and ignore the philosophy, either. A boddhistava has still followed the eightfold path (a long way), and though the religion does not have the concept of sin as such, you can lose your way, and stumble backwards on the path.
 

Psion

Adventurer
well it could be your choice of editions....

Yes, you're right. For both of the players I mention, they had only played prior editions, and were used to the rulebooks being "the law from on high" as spoken by Gary instead of a toolkit. ;)

Edit/Clarification: No, I don't really beleive my players are worth deriding because of the editions they prefer/are experienced with/choose to play. This is merely a "right back atcha" for diaglo.
 
Last edited:

Kahuna Burger

First Post
Storm Raven said:
No, he's describing their faith as not being conducive to having members with kewl powerz granted by a figurehead deity.

Because they are instead conductive to having the class abilities assigned to the spiritually active spellcasters. Using stupid terms to implicitly insult anyone who thinks a cleric can represent non deity centered religious or spiritual traditions is just making you look immature...

Do you have to have a cadre of individuals with kewl powerz to have a spiritual bent? Divine spell casters don't have a corner on the concept of spiritual study and enlightenment, they just have a particular method of expressing it.

In D&D terms, their focus would be on things like Knowledge: Philosophy, Knowledge: Religion, and Knowledge: Nature, so in D&D terms, he's pretty much right.

I'd say you're missing the point, but its looks more likely that you're ducking it.

The cleric class represents divine casters... casters who derive their powers through some form of spirituality. The actual descriptions of divine power indicate that sentient dieties are only one source of it. There are numerous real world examples of diety free spirituality. Saying that they could only be represented by a magic free npc class is saying in almost so many words that "they aren't real religions". Its insulting and serves no purpose.

With the exception of faith healers and other frauds, there aren't a lot of real world traditions that claim to give access to planned, controllable bursts of supernatural energy. Therefore, NO religion should have "in D&D terms" spellcasting power. So I guess clerics don't exist... :rolleyes: In fact, cleric is a class. Its used to represent a) a certain style of magic and b) a certain kind of character. I and others have easily fit characters unconcerned with gods, or even rejecting of gods into both the mechanics and flavor of the class with no problem.

Now, a lot of people run campaigns that they feel those characters wouldn't fit into, fine. But I'm frankly amazed at the level of insults, false information on real world spirituality, deliberate bending of others' words and dogmatic insistance that those who don't have your 'limits' are doing it wrong... To the point that I'd encorage any mods around to just close this thread as having served its purpose (its true that a lot of folks don't like godless clerics and its a flavor issue) and having no where good to go from here.

Kahuna burger
 

Zappo

Explorer
Psion said:
Just how is that Planescape?
Planescape had generic priests. If I recall correctly, it even specified that a follower of the Athar could not receive healing by a priest that follows a deity, but that at faction headquarters they could find friendly generic clerics. I think that they were mostly assumed to be worshipping an alignment, rather than a generic ideal. However, expanding the concept to let a cleric worship an ideal is very in theme with Planescape.

A cleric with a deity, however, has the advantage of an established church to rely upon.
 

Kahuna Burger

First Post
Psion said:
Yes, you're right. For both of the players I mention, they had only played prior editions, and were used to the rulebooks being "the law from on high" as spoken by Gary instead of a toolkit.

Which you have replaced with "the law from on high" as spoken by you, regardless of the enjoyment of the group as a whole? :confused: When you say :

I do explain the fact that these are the religions,
It seems like your players can't contribute to your world except by filling the roles that you've laid out and approved. Maybe that works for you, but I've always had success allowing the players some latitude in expanding the game world through their character creation, and that includes religious and societal choices.

Just to clarify your policy here, if someone wanted to play a non cleric class with an alternate religion (say a small one centered in their home village) would you reject that even as a background choice with no impact on the stats?

Kahuna burger
 

Psion

Adventurer
Zappo said:
Planescape had generic priests. If I recall correctly, it even specified that a follower of the Athar could not receive healing by a priest that follows a deity, but that at faction headquarters they could find friendly generic clerics.

Did you bother reading my post?

The priests of the Athar were considered exceptional/remarkable in planescape, and even those priests had a plane-located source.
 

Psion

Adventurer
Which you have replaced with "the law from on high" as spoken by you, regardless of the enjoyment of the group as a whole?

Before I begin stating how I disagree with you, let me emphasize that my statement was phased specifically as a retort in mock-diaglo mindset. In actually, I wasn't/wouldn't deriding the players. They are good players overall, and the whole issue could have been avoided if the PHB better emphasized the DMs role in establishing the prevailing cosmology. The game should serve the players, not the players the game.

That said: I am sorry to have to differ with you, but it is the GMs duty and responsibility to provide the enviroment for the players. When the books facilitate in this endeavor, this is good. When they are intrusive in this endeavor, it is bad.

It seems like your players can't contribute to your world except by filling the roles that you've laid out and approved.

They sure can contribute -- if they are willing to create a divinity that works with the existing cosmology; I don't allow players to insist I use a deity from another setting (and I have had them try). I allow players to make suggestions. In fact, my closest accomodation to this godless cleric thing is that I allow the player to define a minor power/demigod that fits a role closer to that the player desires if none of the presented ones will do. In my game, the pantheon of deities that exists is extensive like some animist faiths, with thousands of powerful spirits worthy of being called demigods and capable of granting spells.

But I as the GM reserve the final say on what it appropriate, and I am not going to write something into the game that is inconsistanct with the cosmology as it is defined. Large aspects of the campaign are based around the idea of the pantheons, the divine compact that exists between them, and their relationship with the world as it exists.

Just to clarify your policy here, if someone wanted to play a non cleric class with an alternate religion (say a small one centered in their home village) would you reject that even as a background choice with no impact on the stats?

What do you mean "non cleric class". Non divine spellcasters can beleive anything they want; it is not going to have a bona fide impact on the game beyond their behavior. Divine spellcasters of all stripes, though, need to get their divine power from a divine source; the concept of the faith itself generating the power is simply not part of my cosmology, at least not directly. Faith is power that divinities can use, but IMC, expecting faith alone to power spells is like expecting a full can of gas to cruise down the road like a car. You are missing a necessary intermediate step.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top