GX.Sigma
Adventurer
Calling them deities, then saying that they're not actually deities, is stupid. Calling them domains actually removes the problem.
D&D 5E The Cleric
Calling them deities, then saying that they're not actually deities, is stupid. Calling them domains actually removes the problem.
Falling Icicle
Adventurer
There's alot of different ways of looking at it. One interpretation is that clerics that serve an abstract cause instead of a deity still get their power from a divine source that isn't a deity, much like how druids in some settings draw their power from the divine forces of nature instead of a god. Perhaps good, evil, darkness, the sun, etc. are omnipresent divine forces and those who become spiritually aligned with those forces can tap into them for power. The difference between a fighter that champions some cause and a cleric is a matter of spirituality. The fighter may serve the same cause, but it isn't a part of him the way it is a part of his cleric friend. He just doesn't share the same enlightened understanding of the forces he serves that the cleric does.
Another way of interpreting it is that maybe the source of divine power is the cleric himself. This can even be the case if there are gods, the gods just help mortals ignite that divine spark within themselves that enables them to use divine magic. In this case, there can be many alternative paths to such enlightenment, devotion to a deity is just one of them. But how does this differ from arcane magic? Well, it's an entirely different approach. Arcane magic is about understanding the way the universe works, and learning how to "hack" it. It's like a programmer who learns the universe's operating system and ways of exploiting it to have it do what he wants. Divine magic is spiritual and about personal enlightenment. A practitioner of divine magic may not really understand the technicality of how he does what he does, it works simply because he has a strong enough belief that it will.
Sekhmet
First Post
[MENTION=17077]Falling Icicle[/MENTION] When Druids choose to venerate "nature", the deity with the Nature domain is granting their spells. Clerics don't get to choose Domains as their deities, because all domains have deities. They choose the deity with the domains (and therefor, "causes") that work for them. Then, they champion those causes (Sun, Good, killing undead, hey Pelor, how you doin'). The deity gives them their spells because they are doing the God's work.
At no point has it been suggested that "good", "evil", "darkness", or "the sun" are divine forces. It makes no sense at ALL for that to be the case.
There is absolutely no difference in spirituality between a devout Fighter and a devout Cleric. They both went to Church, they both studied their deity, they both believe fervently, and worship every day. The difference is that the Cleric learned how to channel divine magic and the Fighter put his efforts into swinging a sword better.
Everyone can pick up a sword and swing it to various degrees of success. Very few can channel divine magic.
If "championing a cause" with enough "spirituality" is all that matters, then everyone can channel divine magic to various degrees of success.
At no point has it been suggested that "good", "evil", "darkness", or "the sun" are divine forces. It makes no sense at ALL for that to be the case.
There is absolutely no difference in spirituality between a devout Fighter and a devout Cleric. They both went to Church, they both studied their deity, they both believe fervently, and worship every day. The difference is that the Cleric learned how to channel divine magic and the Fighter put his efforts into swinging a sword better.
Everyone can pick up a sword and swing it to various degrees of success. Very few can channel divine magic.
If "championing a cause" with enough "spirituality" is all that matters, then everyone can channel divine magic to various degrees of success.
While I am on the "Clerics are priests. They have deities dammit!" side, I see no reason one can't have a world where clerics worship multiple deities at once or only allow a single deity or some esoteric "force/spirit" [i.e. the "Druids use Nature" arguments] or have clerics of causes/virtues/navel lint if they want in their games.
The bottom line is, this is a completely "personal preference" and "game-world-setting-specific" kind of thing. Whether the GAME calls them "gods" or "domains" or "spheres" or "causes" matters...well, not a whit to whatever you want to be the case in your game/world. A single sentence to that effect in the section on clerics or listing of the "generic gods" should more than suffice for those who want to take a more vague/tangential way of cleric class design.
So...I'm not sure why this is a debate/discussion.
The bottom line is, this is a completely "personal preference" and "game-world-setting-specific" kind of thing. Whether the GAME calls them "gods" or "domains" or "spheres" or "causes" matters...well, not a whit to whatever you want to be the case in your game/world. A single sentence to that effect in the section on clerics or listing of the "generic gods" should more than suffice for those who want to take a more vague/tangential way of cleric class design.
So...I'm not sure why this is a debate/discussion.
Falling Icicle
Adventurer
That is true in some settings, like the Forgotten Realms, but it isn't true for every setting. The 3rd edition rules, by default, allowed clerics and druids to get their power from abstract sources instead of gods. The FR book explicity said that such wasn't the case in that setting. In the Dragonlance setting, on the other hand, there is also what is called Mysticism, a way of using divine magic without the gods, drawing upon the divine power of one's own spirit. Mystics in that setting are basically the divine equivalent of sorcerers.
Being granted spells by a diety is only one of many ways that divine magic could work. You make that sound like that is the only way, as if it were black and white, cut and dry, my way or no way. In your game world, maybe that is the only way divine magic works. But don't tell me that it has to work that way in mine.
Why not? Many cultures believe that things like the Earth, the sun, the moon, and other forces are divine. Some associate those things with gods or spirits, others simply see them as forces of nature, but still divine and deserving of respect and adoration. Maybe the gods themselves are just pawns of those same cosmic forces. Maybe the gods don't define good and evil, law and chaos, light and darkness, maybe those things define them.
And just what is the cleric learning when he learns "how to channel divine magic?" Is he studying a book and learning religious lore and rituals? Is that all there is to it? Or is it a spiritual journey? Is there a much deeper personal enlightenment required to work divine magic than simply uttering the right incantations?
There is no right or wrong answer to that question. I was simply offering alternative explanations that people can use in their games if they wish.
Anyone can pick up a sword, but that doesn't mean anyone can fight like a fighter. Anyone can pray and worship, but that doesn't mean anyone can use the miracle of divine magic. The way I see it, members of every class have gone above and beyond what ordinary people do, and are something special.
ZombieRoboNinja
First Post
But calling them domains adds a new, even weirder problem: now if a cleric of Mystra and a cleric of Shar both choose the Magic domains, they're mechanically identical.
This was less of an issue in 3e because you got two domains at first level, so the cleric of Shar could be "Magic" and "Shadow," and the cleric of Mystra could be "Magic" and "Knowledge" or whatever.
I kind of like the implications of the current system. Everyone in the Grand Church of Bahamut reads the same canonical prayer book and trains in the same mystical techniques, so they all have the same domain spells and weapon proficiencies and so on. There's still a decent amount of differentiation you can do between individuals in the church, since spell selection is still wide open (not to mention equipment selection, feats, skills, race, multiclassing, etc).
(1) Yes, calling them deities means that clerics get their power from deities. As a tautology, that's true enough. Calling them domains doesn't solve the problem, only begs the question of what a domain is, and how it provides the ability to grant clerics powers, and what relationship that bears to deities, which objectively exist within the game world.
(2) Calling the source deities says nothing about who or what the cleric worships. A cleric can worship as many deities or other things as it likes, as of course may a non-cleric. It says nothing about priests, either, since priest is a background. It only says that the cleric (the individual with a specific relationship to a source of divine power) receives her power from a single source at any one time (since introducing mechanisms for changing deity are trivial).
(3) Nor does it say that all of a given deity's clerics are the same. It says only that the pool of possible manifestations of divine power are the same (and are largely shared by all clerics regardless of deity anyway).
These are not problems, so they don't need to be solved.
Remathilis
Legend
That's not true in multiple D&D worlds...
1.) Mystara has no Gods; they have immortals who (while powerful beings) don't grant spells directly to priests. Clerics draw power from belief (usually in a universal force like Law or Good) and may be a member of a church which worships many deities. A cleric could belong to a church but not worship an immortal (or immortals) or even do neither and still receives his powers.
2.) Athas has no Gods; priests worship aspects of nature (rain, sun, wind, etc) which grants them power.
3.) Eberron, while having deities, also allows clerics of "the Dragon Above", a divine force that is non-sentient (or at least non-communicative) and grants clerics power.
4.) Krynn, at one point, had no deities and clerics (well, mystics) drew on internal power of belief to power divine magic.
5.) Its been said (or merely hinted at) that Ravenloft's Dark Powers have granted spellcasting to clerics in the Mists.
6.) Planescape described the concept of "near powers"; non-deities (such as demon lords, Archdevils, animal lords, elemental princes, or powerful celestial beings) who could grant their priests spells. Two Factions (the Athar and the Believers of the Source) could also draw power from their beliefs (The Great Unknown for the Athar, the Source for the Believers) and gain priest spells there too. Additionally, Many Dustmen didn't worship deities of death, but Death (with a capital D) as a force of the universe.
To say none of these priests are legit because they don't worship "Gods" is bunk.
Last edited:
tuxgeo
Adventurer
Didn't vote. I like ZombieRoboNinja's reminder that D&D 3E gave Clerics *two* domains, plus the comparison about Mystra vs. Shar.
How about this? Call them "Concerns." (And where's the "Other - Explain In Comments" option in the poll?)
Reasons:
1) Domains or spheres are things that the deity (if there is one) is concerned about, in, and with.
2) Organizations are sometimes called "concerns," as in the "going concern" concept in Accounting. Perhaps churches (with or without hierarchy) could count as "concerns."
3) Many people praying as one (with the same concern) should have more of an effect than one of them praying alone, if prayer has any effect at all.
Another idea: Split things up more -- Have armor proficiencies come from the Deity worshipped (no armor for you if you're merely a philosopher!), but have cantrips and domain spells come from one or two things that the deity (or philosophy) concerns itself with. (E.g. a Cleric of a philosophy about avoiding attachments would get no armor, but would be heck-on-wheels at escaping grabs, and could probably cast Freedom of Movement as a 30-second Ritual.) (This also refers back to 3E, wherein specific spells would be different level for different casters, to reflect how well or poorly each spell fits in with the concept of that kind of caster.)
How about this? Call them "Concerns." (And where's the "Other - Explain In Comments" option in the poll?)
Reasons:
1) Domains or spheres are things that the deity (if there is one) is concerned about, in, and with.
2) Organizations are sometimes called "concerns," as in the "going concern" concept in Accounting. Perhaps churches (with or without hierarchy) could count as "concerns."
3) Many people praying as one (with the same concern) should have more of an effect than one of them praying alone, if prayer has any effect at all.
Another idea: Split things up more -- Have armor proficiencies come from the Deity worshipped (no armor for you if you're merely a philosopher!), but have cantrips and domain spells come from one or two things that the deity (or philosophy) concerns itself with. (E.g. a Cleric of a philosophy about avoiding attachments would get no armor, but would be heck-on-wheels at escaping grabs, and could probably cast Freedom of Movement as a 30-second Ritual.) (This also refers back to 3E, wherein specific spells would be different level for different casters, to reflect how well or poorly each spell fits in with the concept of that kind of caster.)
Last edited:
