D&D 5E Clerics and Wisdom

[Oofta]

Wisdom fits for certain kinds of clerics. Where I'm coming from is that it doesn't fit the type of cleric I imagine the iconic D&D cleric to represent. And I will continue to argue that if we assume a cleric's main goal is spreading their faith, charisma is by far the more appropriate ability to represent their effectiveness. I think some people that are arguing in favor of wisdom conceptualize the staple D&D cleric as the non-proselytizing sort, which is totally fine, I just don't think it's suggested well at least in older materials.

Where are you getting this idea of an "iconic D&D cleric"? I just grabbed some old books
- AD&D: "The class of a character bears a certain resemblance to religious orders of knighthood of medieval times". Clerics in that edition were pretty much fighters with spells.
- AD&D 2nd Edition: "The priest is a believer and advocate of a god from a particular mythos. More than just a follower, he intercedes and acts on behalf of other, seeking to use his powers to advance the beliefs of his mythos...Clerics are sturdy soldiers..." Druids were also classified as priests in this edition, and clerics were somewhat limited in armor and weapon selection.
- D&D 3.5: "A cleric uses the power of his god to make his god's will manifest"
- D&D 4: "Clerics are battle leaders who are invested with divine power"

I can find nothing in any of the PHBs where it states that clerics spend their time tending to the faithful or spreading the word of their deities.

The proselytizing cleric may be a staple of your campaign experience, but it's not an assumption of any of the books of any edition of D&D.

 

[Oofta]

Clerics were originally wis and cha based. Cha was used for their supernatural abilities and wis specifically for their spells. I'm of the opinion it would be better to have a separate spell casting stat used for all divine casters and another for all arcane casters. Or just one magic power stat period. Then maybe a separate accuracy stat for attacks and everything would start to be a bit less crunchy.

Not in any of the books I've seen ... and I just pulled some old books out of my shelf out of curiosity.

Of course my perusal probably only proves 2 things
1) I've been playing D&D way too long
2) I've wasted far too much time on this.

If you can convince your DM to run an evangelist subtype of cleric, more power to you. But it's never been an assumption of the rules as far as I can tell.

 

[Umbran]

I do think it's a draconic rule (people should be challenged, honestly)...

It may be that people should be challenged, but, as the saying goes, there is a time and place for everything. Here is not the place. Everyone here agreed to the rules when they created their accounts, and they still hold.

Just a couple months ago, we had an experiment that allowed for some such discussion - Morrus actually put the rule to a test. Much of it went well, for a while, but there were a few events that showed that, despite our best intentions, such discussion can and will get in the way of the site's primary mission, and so the rule was fully reinstated, and does hold now.

Both sides seem to have stepped back, which is good. Please abide by the rules going forward - no real-world politics or religion. Show each other respect, even when you disagree. Don't make the discussion personal: address the logic of the post, not the person of the poster. All the usual stuff.

In this kind of discussion, I'll add - if you find that you cannot imagine anyone saying something that could shift your position even a little bit, it is likely time for you to step away from the discussion.

 

[pemerton]

Where are you getting this idea of an "iconic D&D cleric"? I just grabbed some old books
- AD&D: "The class of a character bears a certain resemblance to religious orders of knighthood of medieval times".

<snip>

I can find nothing in any of the PHBs where it states that clerics spend their time tending to the faithful or spreading the word of their deities.

What do you think the religious orders of knighthood of mediaeval times were concerned with?

From St Bernard's tract "In Praise of the New Knighthood", which lauds the Knights Templar and sets out the basis of their rule:

It seems that a new knighthood has recently appeared on the earth . . .

This is, I say, a new kind of knighthood and one unknown to the ages gone by. It ceaselessly wages a twofold war both against flesh and blood and against a spiritual army of evil in the heavens. . . . He is thus doubly armed and need fear neither demons nor men. Not that he fears death - no, he desires it. Why should he fear to live or fear to die when for him to live is Christ, and to die is gain? Gladly and faithfully he stands for Christ, but he would prefer to be dissolved and to be with Christ, by far the better thing. . . .

Life indeed is a fruitful thing and victory is glorious, but a holy death is more important than either. If they are blessed who die in the Lord, how much more are they who die for the Lord! . . .

The knights of Christ may safely fight the battles of their Lord, fearing neither sin if they smite the enemy, nor danger at their own death; since to inflict death or to die for Christ is no sin, but rather, an abundant claim to glory. In the first case one gains for Christ, and in the second one gains Christ himself. The Lord freely accepts the death of the foe who has offended him, and yet more freely gives himself for the consolation of his fallen knight. . . .

Thus when the transgressors of divine law have been expelled, the righteous nation that keeps the truth may enter in security. Certainly it is proper that the nations who love war should be scattered, that those who trouble us should be cut off, and that all the workers of iniquity should be dispersed from the city of the Lord. . . .

Once they have been cast out, he shall return to his heritage and to his house . . .

Rejoice Jerusalem, and recognize now the time in which you are visited! Be glad and give praise together, wastes of Jerusalem, for the Lord has comforted his people. He has ransomed Jerusalem. The Lord has bared his holy arm in the sight of all peoples.​

The mere existence of these orders of knighthood is a "spreading of the word", a testament to their religious conviction and zealotry ("The Lord has bared his holy arm in the sight of all peoples"). The "tending to the faithful" by the Templars is concerned primarily with military defence; but the Hospitallers also (as their name indicates) operated the Hospital of St John, which is a more direct tending to the faithful. (And in D&D terms, correlates to the cleric's miraculous ability to cure injury and disease with a touch.)

 

[happyhermit]

So, still trying to get an idea of how this forum goes, and I must say it is a little confusing to see this;

It may be that people should be challenged, but, as the saying goes, there is a time and place for everything. Here is not the place. Everyone here agreed to the rules when they created their accounts, and they still hold.

Just a couple months ago, we had an experiment that allowed for some such discussion - Morrus actually put the rule to a test. Much of it went well, for a while, but there were a few events that showed that, despite our best intentions, such discussion can and will get in the way of the site's primary mission, and so the rule was fully reinstated, and does hold now.

Both sides seem to have stepped back, which is good. Please abide by the rules going forward - no real-world politics or religion. Show each other respect, even when you disagree. Don't make the discussion personal: address the logic of the post, not the person of the poster. All the usual stuff.

In this kind of discussion, I'll add - if you find that you cannot imagine anyone saying something that could shift your position even a little bit, it is likely time for you to step away from the discussion.

Followed by this;

What do you think the religious orders of knighthood of mediaeval times were concerned with?

From St Bernard's tract "In Praise of the New Knighthood", which lauds the Knights Templar and sets out the basis of their rule:

It seems that a knew knighthood has recently appeared on the earth . . .

This is, I say, a new kind of knighthood and one unknown to the ages gone by. It ceaselessly wages a twofold war both against flesh and blood and against a spiritual army of evil in the heavens. . . . He is thus doubly armed and need fear neither demons nor men. Not that he fears death - no, he desires it. Why should he fear to live or fear to die when for him to live is Christ, and to die is gain? Gladly and faithfully he stands for Christ, but he would prefer to be dissolved and to be with Christ, by far the better thing. . . .

Life indeed is a fruitful thing and victory is glorious, but a holy death is more important than either. If they are blessed who die in the Lord, how much more are they who die for the Lord! . . .

The knights of Christ may safely fight the battles of their Lord, fearing neither sin if they smite the enemy, nor danger at their own death; since to inflict death or to die for Christ is no sin, but rather, an abundant claim to glory. In the first case one gains for Christ, and in the second one gains Christ himself. The Lord freely accepts the death of the foe who has offended him, and yet more freely gives himself for the consolation of his fallen knight. . . .

Thus when the transgressors of divine law have been expelled, the righteous nation that keeps the truth may enter in security. Certainly it is proper that the nations who love war should be scattered, that those who trouble us should be cut off, and that all the workers of iniquity should be dispersed from the city of the Lord. . . .

Once they have been cast out, he shall return to his heritage and to his house . . .

Rejoice Jerusalem, and recognize now the time in which you are visited! Be glad and give praise together, wastes of Jerusalem, for the Lord has comforted his people. He has ransomed Jerusalem. The Lord has bared his holy arm in the sight of all peoples.​

The mere existence of these orders of knighthood is a "spreading of the word", a testament to their religious conviction and zealotry ("The Lord has bared his holy arm in the sight of all peoples"). The "tending to the faithful" by the Templars is concerned primarily with military defence; but the Hospitallers also (as their name indicates) operated the Hospital of St John, which is a more direct tending to the faithful. (And in D&D terms, correlates to the cleric's miraculous ability to cure injury and disease with a touch.)

I am genuinely confused

On the OP though, I see no way that charisma works better for the "classic" D&D cleric, than does wisdom.

This is also in the 5e section, and so for 5e clerics in particular charisma (as opposed to wisdom) makes no sense whatsoever as the class is described in the book. I think Charisma is wonky enough for the Paladin, sorcerer and warlock, who were pretty much given it for balance/distribution rather than logic originally.

 

[pemerton]

So, still trying to get an idea of how this forum goes, and I must say it is a little confusing to see this;



Followed by this;



I am genuinely confused

At least in my experience, discussing the history of the religious orders of knighthood has been permitted. (But debating the merits of their theology, or judging them through a contemporary political framework, generally wouldn't be.)

I trust [MENTION=177]Umbran[/MENTION] to call me to account if he thinks I'm in the wrong.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Which settings do people on either side of the debate tend to play in?

I'm wondering if that might correlate to the different visions of what the cleric is and how their spells work.

Myself, mostly Eberron. There aren't any divine forces there that have a requirement to convert people to their religion (although some do for other purposes.) None of the deities there are reliant on followers (apart from maybe the Valenar ancestor tradition.)

In Eberron its also quite possible for a cleric to cast spells even when doing things that the mainstream view of their religion might find abhorrent. That probably plays into my attitude of the divine power trusted to a cleric having the potential to be misused, so common sense and groundedness playing a part in the level of power that the cleric can be trusted with.

I heard someone mention of Planescape being a place where the primary duty of a cleric is to convert people to their god. I would imagine that that might change your views if you played there exclusively for example.

 

[Einlanzer0]

So, still trying to get an idea of how this forum goes, and I must say it is a little confusing to see this;



Followed by this;



I am genuinely confused

On the OP though, I see no way that charisma works better for the "classic" D&D cleric, than does wisdom.

This is also in the 5e section, and so for 5e clerics in particular charisma (as opposed to wisdom) makes no sense whatsoever as the class is described in the book. I think Charisma is wonky enough for the Paladin, sorcerer and warlock, who were pretty much given it for balance/distribution rather than logic originally.

You failed to explain why you thought wisdom makes more sense and why charisma doesn't for any spellcaster.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Oofta]

What do you think the religious orders of knighthood of mediaeval times were concerned with?

From St Bernard's tract "In Praise of the New Knighthood", which lauds the Knights Templar and sets out the basis of their rule:
...

D&D has never been very concerned with historical accuracy. The popular vision of fighting knights of medieval times in popular culture is probably about as accurate D&D vision of monks. Monks in D&D are based on Bruce Lee and Kung Fu, not historical accuracy.

The knight referenced in a book published in the 70s is based on knights of popular culture such as the knights of the round table, not St Bernard's tract. Clerics were very specifically called out (in 2nd Ed) as being fighters second only to actual fighters.

I have evangelical preacher types in my home campaign, but they aren't soldiers of their deity. Clerics are a type of soldier and like all soldiers some are infantry, some are support medics. While an army may well employ PR and deities may have preachers, a soldier is not a PR guy and a cleric is not a preacher.

I don't see anywhere in the PHB that states that being a preachers/evangelists/proselytizers is part of their core defining characteristic. If you can find something in the PHB that contradicts it, let me know.

If you're just going to keep referring to real world preachers there's not really anything to discuss because we're talking apples and oranges.

Could there be a charisma based class that has a divine power source? Sure. I'd even say we already have one. It's called warlock.