• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

D&D 5E Clerics and Wisdom

Like I said previously, the archetypal holy person is noted as being wise, insightful, enlightened, and imbued with the understanding of divine workings.

Yes, but the archetypal "holy person" is not really what the cleric class represents in D&D. They represent something more akin to crusader priests.

Not only that, but the archetypal holy person is perceived as being wise, insightful, enlightened, and imbued with the understanding of divine workings, but not necessarily actually possessing any of those qualities. That the people have that perception of them can be as important as actually having those qualities. Which, too, is imho indicative of Charisma being much more critical than Wisdom for most clerics. After all, in both the real world, and more importantly in this case in fiction, look at how often these people perceived as wise actually engage in actions that are profoundly unwise, sometimes quite often.

But really, in a lot of ways spells probably shouldn't be tied to any specific stat at all. A lot of the core of the system of D&D has always been a bit "off" in that regard.

Like, Dexterity should probably be used to hit for all melee weapons. Strength for damage with most of them. You can be the strongest person in the world, but if you aren't agile and coordinated enough to connect with the target, you will miss a lot. BUT...if you DO hit, man will you hit hard.

I don't actually see a reason for any given class to have their abilities tied to one specific ability score, with the possible exception of bard with Charisma (because really, what kind of performer are you really going to be without stage presence and the ability to hold your audience's rapt attention?).

On the contrary. A scholar priest will need Intelligence more than Wisdom, and Wisdom more than Charisma. But a prophet will need Wisdom much more than either of the other mental stats. And a sermon giver will need Charisma more than the other two. Yet, all of these would be divine holy people, channeling the will of their deities in the material realm. Their spells should reasonably not be tied to any one of these stats, and instead different features tied to each one, making the investment in a specific stat better for that aspect of the class.

So priestly abilities that represent knowledge of dogma, understanding of the planes and the celestial realm's composition, et al, would feed off of Intelligence. Interpreting the will of their god, the signs, how best to focus divine power, would key off Wisdom. And influencing the masses to come and worship, to convert, to fervently act in accordance with the priest's wishes and the god's needs, would fall under Charisma.

The same holds true for other classes. An enchanter should probably need Charisma a whole lot more than Intelligence. They might need the latter somewhat, but not to nearly the same degree as a scholarly wizard might, or a wizard utilizing highly complex interactions, such as teleportation, or planar shifting. An evoker, on the other hand, might not need Intelligence or Charisma all that much, but need the Wisdom to most effectively know when to blast something or not, and to focus their willpower (again, something generally covered by Wisdom, imho), or possibly even Constitution to push themselves to channel all that arcane might without exhausting themselves.

The ways stats are handled now can be simpler, yes. Relatively easy to follow, sure. But also can lead to odd breaking of the suspension of disbelief in many situations, in my opinion.

If the abilities within every class were tied closely to the stat that actually made the most sense, and not merely that class's "core stat" as is generally done now, it would lead to many more builds, and also more interesting variety. Three clerics might all have the same exact mix of abilities, of class features, but because one focuses on Int, one on Wis, and one on Cha, they have three wildly different strengths and weaknesses within the same abilities. They can all do the same stuff, but each will be able to do certain aspects of the class WAY better than the other two.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

This is because wisdom gives you to ability to understand the nuanced nature of reality and to understand a variety of perspectives.

No. This is in D&D terms simply an alignment position. The assertion that the fundamental nature of reality is nuanced, changeable, and requires understanding from a variety of possibly conflicting perspectives is in D&D terms simply the assertion that Chaos is a superior and more correct viewpoint than Law.

Besides which, for all your attempts to make Wisdom in opposition to Dogma, the statement "wisdom gives you to ability to understand the nuanced nature of reality and to understand a variety of perspectives" is a dogmatic statement, which shows you really don't even know what dogma is. Even something like "There is no one truth." is also dogma, in that if that belief is abandoned the system of belief will cease to have its fundamental character.
 

So, yeah, forgive me if we do get a bit defensive, because it was definitely in there.
To be fair, I don't think it was Einlanzer0's intent to pose an argument by proxy. I see what you see, but the conversation is simply leveraging loaded terms and distinctions for those of us who aren't bringing a purely secular or objective perspective to the table, which may not be evident to all involved.

We're discussing a game, the game defines its own terms, and it's important that we remain within that context for the sake of discussion.

:)
 

No. This is in D&D terms simply an alignment position. The assertion that the fundamental nature of reality is nuanced, changeable, and requires understanding from a variety of possibly conflicting perspectives is in D&D terms simply the assertion that Chaos is a superior and more correct viewpoint than Law.

Besides which, for all your attempts to make Wisdom in opposition to Dogma, the statement "wisdom gives you to ability to understand the nuanced nature of reality and to understand a variety of perspectives" is a dogmatic statement, which shows you really don't even know what dogma is. Even something like "There is no one truth." is also dogma, in that if that belief is abandoned the system of belief will cease to have its fundamental character.

That...is not what dogma means. Dogma is explicitly a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true. It doesn't merely mean any closely held belief, or even basis of a system of belief in the general sense. Both of the statements you just asserted are dogma are inherently non-dogmatic in nature, unless you only believe them to be true because an authority has laid them out as incontrovertibly true. And rare is the dogmatic system that has those sorts of beliefs laid down as incontrovertibly true.
 

That being said, I've never understood how a sorcerer's ability to interact effectively with others gives rise to balls of fire.

It makes sense if you assume an animistic universe were everything has a spirit (or genius) which is its animating principle. A magical world is not a world of dead physical laws, but a world of aware spirits. Those spirits obey the law which governs them, but can be commanded to act in extraordinary ways by someone with the authority to do so.

So the sorcerer gets greater and greater power, the more that they are able to compel the universe to obey their wishes. Charisma in this sense measure the sorcerer's authority; it's how much the universe respects the sorcerer as the rightful rule over the things he wishes to command. So, great balls of fire appear because fire recognizes in the sorcerer the authority to command it, the sorcerer's bloodline represents the superhuman source of this authority that goes beyond mere mortal power. And the sorcerer levels up as he comes more and more in touch with his own genius.
 

Also, nuance is entirely possibly even within Lawful alignments. That is where you get the arguments between two lawful types discussing philosophically whether the spirit or the letter of the law is more critical. Two very firm believers in strict laws can still argue an awful lot of nuance on such bases.
 

That...is not what dogma means. Dogma is explicitly a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true. It doesn't merely mean any closely held belief, or even basis of a system of belief in the general sense. Both of the statements you just asserted are dogma are inherently non-dogmatic in nature, unless you only believe them to be true because an authority has laid them out as incontrovertibly true. And rare is the dogmatic system that has those sorts of beliefs laid down as incontrovertibly true.

We all stand on the shoulder's of giants. It's extremely rare that anyone believes anything that they did not start believing because they heard someone else say it. I suppose there are cases where people believe something entirely novel and of their own invention, in which case they are laying down their own dogma on their own authority. But that is probably extremely rare. The more usual case is for people to appeal to authority of some sort as the proof of their beliefs.
 

We all stand on the shoulder's of giants. It's extremely rare that anyone believes anything that they did not start believing because they heard someone else say it. I suppose there are cases where people believe something entirely novel and of their own invention, in which case they are laying down their own dogma on their own authority. But that is probably extremely rare. The more usual case is for people to appeal to authority of some sort as the proof of their beliefs.

There is a profound difference between being convinced of the truth of a statement based on the past intellectual pursuits of others, versus believing it to be incontrovertibly true due to an authority laying it out. One is dogmatic, the other is not. Words have meanings. You might as well be saying that an axe is a sword because they both have a sharp edge, and the sharp edge itself is what determines "sword-ness".

And note that one of the defining characteristics of dogmatism is incontrovertible truth. Not merely truth, not merely belief, incontrovertible.
 

To be fair, I don't think it was Einlanzer0's intent to pose an argument by proxy.

For that matter, I certainly don't think it was Einlanzer's intent to pose an argument by proxy either. I just think that Einlanzer, like pretty much everyone, didn't consider his own biases when posing the argument.

We're discussing a game, the game defines its own terms, and it's important that we remain within that context for the sake of discussion.

:)

Sure. But this particular conversation began with the assertions that the games definition of the terms was wrong, and specifically that wisdom should not be associated with piety because according to the poster it just isn't.
 

One person's condescension is another person's facts.

I think you continue to conflate RL with the game. There are gods with no particular requirement to evangelize. In addition, your views seem to be influenced by the idea of some type of pulpit/sermon/conversion; while it is entirely possible that some religions will have this, it is not a necessary prerequisite. Some clerics might be evangelizing (in which case, RP it and take a high charisma), others might be more secretive.

In essence, you seem very caught up in the idea of evangelizing a religion, which is great for RP purposes. To be honest, to the extent that we are bringing in real world ideas, there are just as many uncharismatic priests as unwise ones.

But if you really like it- RP it! I am RPing a false prophet who is a warlock. Whatever works for you.

Amen brother. Clerics in D&D are warrior-priests, not lead-the-congregation priests. Admittedly the line between cleric and paladin is a little blurry, but to me the difference is focus. Clerics primarily channel holy power while paladins are warriors who augment their fighting skills with holy power.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top