D&D 2E On AD&D 2E

[Voadam]

The problem is that "priests of a specific mythoi" and "specialty priests" aren't exactly interchangeable; in fact, "specialty priest" doesn't even exist as a term in the PHB. In addition, each book that discusses priests, kits, and multiclassing combinations in general has it's own rules, making it kind of a mess to figure out what should or should not be allowed.

It is a sprawling mess.
I think that you have to look more at the individual source and not mix and match applicability.

I did acknowledge that COYOTE THIEF! was not something most tables would approve of, exactly due to things like this.

I am agreeing.

When looking at Legends and Lore, do remember that this book isn't about demihuman deities; if the priesthood calls out that you can multiclass it states that this is an exception to the rules about humans not being allowed to multiclass.

Sort of.

Take Isis priests.

"Priests of Isis are, in actuality, multi-class wizard/priest characters. In the case of human worshipers, the normal prohibition against multi-class characters is waived."

This mentions that in the case of human worshipers it as an exception for humans, but this phrasing indicates humans are not the assumed only case.

Later in the Ravenloft book Domains of Dread it explicitly adopts a number of Legends & Lore pantheons as the default worshipped pantheons for different native Ravenloft demihumans.

 

[James Gasik]

It is a sprawling mess.
I think that you have to look more at the individual source and not mix and match applicability.

I am agreeing.

Sort of.

Take Isis priests.

"Priests of Isis are, in actuality, multi-class wizard/priest characters. In the case of human worshipers, the normal prohibition against multi-class characters is waived."

This mentions that in the case of human worshipers it as an exception for humans, but this phrasing indicates humans are not the assumed only case.

Later in the Ravenloft book Domains of Dread explicitly adopts a number of Legends & Lore pantheons as the default worshipped pantheons for different native Ravenloft demihumans.

I had missed that bit about Isis, I guess I assumed that L&L wasn't assuming Half-Elven priests of Isis (the only demihuman in the PHB who can be a priest/mage, gnome priest/illusionists notwithstanding). Some of the priests in L&L are seriously crazy (though not to the extent of Forgotten Realms priests): I just tripped over this fellow-

Fu Hsing

PW5) priests of Fu Hsing gain spellcasting as a Bard of equal priest level.

 

[Voadam]

As an aside about Druid multiclassing, I recently came upon this tidbit from 1e's Unearthed Arcana that I didn't know about: I'd always assumed 2e was less restrictive about multiclassing compared to 1e, but it's actually the reverse:

1e UA bumped up demihuman class options, multiclass options, and level limits a bunch from the 1e PH. No explanation, just an updated chart.

 

[Staffan]

Given that Complete Priests tells us that Cleric is busted and should be removed as an option, some have speculated that TSR expected us to make our own unique priesthoods and put the Cleric in as a placeholder.

That's pretty much the vibe I'm getting as well. The section on priests of specific mythoi starts by saying, paraphrased: "You can use the cleric if you don't want to do too much world design, but the REAL DMs who build PROPER settings will use different priests with different powers."

The Forgotten Realms setup, with both Clerics and Specialty Priests does not seem to have been the original intent. It says "If your character follows a particular mythos, expect him to have abilities, spells, and restrictions different from the generic cleric."

That said, I think the Complete Priest's Handbook was perhaps a little overly conservative, not recognizing how few spells some priests would have. Part of that is because the Spheres are pretty darn narrow – particularly in areas that aren't the expertise of the classic cleric or druid (since the priest spell list was basically made by mashing the two together). In addition, some spheres should probably be folded into the All sphere, such as the Astral sphere (traveling the planes should be something any high-level priest could do).

Another issue is that while POSMs are great from a world-building perspective, they kind of suck from a game balance/design POV. The job of the cleric is to heal and protect, and fight a little bit. Many POSMs can't do that. In that respect, 5e's clerics work better, as they have the core cleric functions as part of the base class, and then a domain on top of that adding additional abilities. I'd probably prefer to move some more abilities to the domains or some other optional part (there's really no reason for control water to be a regular cleric spell, for example), but it's fine as written.

 

[Staffan]

It is a sprawling mess.

"Sprawling mess" pretty much describes the whole of 2e, IMO.

 

[Bayushi_seikuro]

Something else I think is worth pointing out about thieves and fighters in general, those were generally options for people who didn't roll well. you only need a 9 in each of their primary attributes. So if you roll a character who has low stats and their highest score is Dexterity you are often playing a rogue because that was the best choice with what you had.

I believe they tried to frame that in terms of, no matter how crappy genetics were to you, you could become a town guard or a thief because those were 'unskilled'. Fighters and thieves were the Subway Sandwich Artists of D&D

 

[James Gasik]

I believe they tried to frame that in terms of, no matter how crappy genetics were to you, you could become a town guard or a thief because those were 'unskilled'. Fighters and thieves were the Subway Sandwich Artists of D&D

Hey it turns out all you need to cast magic missile is an Int of 9, and anybody with Wis 9 has a 95% chance to cast a 1st level Priest spell! Years of training and incredible talent, my a$$!

 

[James Gasik]

Actually all my diving through SOSM/SP's has led me to some odd questions I don't think there are answers for. Here's a few:

Monster Mythology, page 23, Erevan Ilesere grants 3rd level Priests: +5% to 1d6 Thief skills if Dual-Classed. Barring a mention of potential Elf Dual-Classing in the Complete Guide to Elves, huh? Is Erevan trying to get dual classed Human Thieves into his fold?

Page 38, Yondalla's priests, at 1st level, can use Shield...functioning with non-metal armor. Huh? Shield gives a set AC. Do the mean you can cast Shield as long as you aren't wearing metal armor? Odd choice since her priests can wear any kind of armor and must always carry a real shield.

And finally, Legends and Lore, page 77, Fu Hsing. At 10th level his priests can "cast any spell known to them by playing a single note on any instrument they are proficient with." That can't do what it sounds like it does unless it's a 1/day thing or they're just trying to say this is a fancy way to circumvent V,S,M components?

 

[Bill Zebub]

On a scale from 1-10, how much do people like THAC0?

Shouldn't that be "On a scale from 10 to 1"?

 

[Voadam]

Actually all my diving through SOSM/SP's has led me to some odd questions I don't think there are answers for. Here's a few:

Monster Mythology, page 23, Erevan Ilesere grants 3rd level Priests: +5% to 1d6 Thief skills if Dual-Classed. Barring a mention of potential Elf Dual-Classing in the Complete Guide to Elves, huh? Is Erevan trying to get dual classed Human Thieves into his fold?

I would think that is just a typo of multi-classed. Worth noting they get different abilities in Demihuman Deities.

Page 38, Yondalla's priests, at 1st level, can use Shield...functioning with non-metal armor. Huh? Shield gives a set AC. Do the mean you can cast Shield as long as you aren't wearing metal armor? Odd choice since her priests can wear any kind of armor and must always carry a real shield.

It is an odd phrasing.

"PW 1) shield (can function with non-metal armor)"

Not sure why a priest ability would not otherwise function with armor. I would think a wizard spell used as a priest power would not generally be restricted by wizard armor restrictions.

Shield
(Evocation)
Range: 0 Components: V, S
Duration: 5 rds./level Casting Time: 1
Area of Effect: Special Saving Throw: None When this spell is cast, an invisible barrier comes into being in front of the wizard. This shield totally negates magic missile attacks. It provides the equivalent protection of AC 2 against hand-hurled missiles (axes, darts, javelins, spears, etc.), AC 3 against small device-propelled
missiles (arrows, bolts, bullets, manticore spikes, sling stones, etc.), and AC 4 against all other forms of attack. The shield also adds a +1 bonus to the wizard’s saving throws against attacks that are basically frontal. Note that these benefits apply only if the attacks originate from in front of the wizard, where the shield can move to interpose itself.

And finally, Legends and Lore, page 77, Fu Hsing. At 10th level his priests can "cast any spell known to them by playing a single note on any instrument they are proficient with." That can't do what it sounds like it does unless it's a 1/day thing or they're just trying to say this is a fancy way to circumvent V,S,M components?

That is very narrative and open to interpretation mechanically. A 1 casting time? Since AD&D goes with spell memorization for its terminology instead of later editions known and prepared, I would probably not take this as any spell on the priest's list, but possibly only the ones they know as a bard since the bard class specifically references learning spells. I would assume a spell must still be memorized and not that they can cast unlimited bard spells.

I think a single instrument note bypasses V, S, M and possibly casting time is a good interpretation.