D&D (2024) The Cleric should be retired

[Yaarel]

I've had characters start older than 30. There's nothing that requires PCs to be teenagers. Rabbis start in mid 20's, and priests of Ilmater start at the age of 6. Made that up, but this is fantasy, so nothing says you have to be 30ish to be a priest.

It is a game. At the same time, ethically, people should not be endangering their own lives unless they are an adult. America has soldiers from the age of 18 to risk dying in war, being one kind of adulthood. But 21 is the age of responsibility to drink alcohol, being an other kind of adulthood. So roughly 20 years old is a reasonable age for adulthood in every sense.

There are exceptions, but generally speaking, it is reasonable to expect most level 1 characters, who decide to risk death as adventuring combatants, to be roughly around 20 years of age.

In my head canon, I keep in mind the following age brackets, unless I have an exceptional individual in mind. Most people in the game world dont reach high levels, but the ones that do tend to do so by the following ages.

Age: Tier
16−19: Background (level 0) (foster, novice)
20−24: Student Tier (levels 1−4) (apprentice, page, jack, college student)
25−31: Professional Tier (levels 5−8) (journeyer, squire)
32−39: Master (levels 9−12) (guildmaster, knight, sire/dame)
40−49: Grandmaster (levels 13−16) (noble, lord/lady)
50−62: Legend (levels 17−20)
63−78: Epic (levels 21−24)
79−99: Mythic (levels 25−28)
100+: Immortal

The ages are a rule of thumb to give a sense of the world.

 

[Yaarel]

priests of Ilmater start at the age of 6. Made that up, but this is fantasy, so nothing says you have to be 30ish to be a priest.

If a child at the age 5 is "consecrated" as some formal sacred officiate, that would definitely be "background".

This goes back to the difference between background features and class features.

I generally view D&D classes as combat styles, whether fighting by swords or spells. I view classes starting when characters are fully adult.

 

[Azzy]

That may once have been the case, but isn't any longer. Game of Thrones has clerics, Raymond Feist has clerics, the Dresden Files has clerics and paladins and I'm sure that there are others. It's not just D&D books that have them.

And then there's the litRPG genre. And plenty of fantasy and isekai anime.

 

[Horwath]

The last character I played was an elven bladesinger. I added to the game that bladesinging was taught to the gifted faithful of the elven gods and took the acolyte background. I was 100% wizard, but I lead prayers and was a devout priest of Corellon.

This is great.

I played elven(eladrin) monk that was high guard of Evereska.
Trained in unarmed combat so he can always be ready to defend no matter the level of preparation.
Dropped all that "oriental" baggage from class and all "mystical" aspects of the class was described to elven magical training an innate magical abilities.

OFC, we house ruled one step increase in martial die and d10 HD.

 

[Starfox]

Late to the party here. As I see it, the cleric could have variants in all the roles; tank, scrapper, buffer, blaster. The current cleric is buff with a pinch of tank. The paladin is the pure tank variant. You can flavor a bard to be the pure support version. Light/Storm domain clerics are support/blaster. So basically, all but scrapper is covered. You can make a scrappy paladin, but otherwise the religious role does not need to fill that niche.

What I do miss are rogues and fighters with a pinch of cleric, like the Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight has a pinch of wizard, so I wrote my own versions.

 

[Maxperson]

It is a game. At the same time, ethically, people should not be endangering their own lives unless they are an adult. America has soldiers from the age of 18 to risk dying in war, being one kind of adulthood. But 21 is the age of responsibility to drink alcohol, being an other kind of adulthood. So roughly 20 years old is a reasonable age for adulthood in every sense.

Nobody is risking their lives playing a game and games don't need to mirror real life. Starting a PC adventuring at 15 or 16 is not unethical in any way, shape or form.

There are exceptions, but generally speaking, it is reasonable to expect most level 1 characters, who decide to risk death as adventuring combatants, to be roughly around 20 years of age.

Or 15 or 50. It's up to the player how old to start their PC.

In my head canon, I keep in mind the following age brackets, unless I have an exceptional individual in mind. Most people in the game world dont reach high levels, but the ones that do tend to do so by the following ages.

Age: Tier
16−19: Background (level 0) (foster, novice)
20−24: Student Tier (levels 1−4) (apprentice, page, jack, college student)
25−31: Professional Tier (levels 5−8) (journeyer, squire)
32−39: Master (levels 9−12) (guildmaster, knight, sire/dame)
40−49: Grandmaster (levels 13−16) (noble, lord/lady)
50−62: Legend (levels 17−20)
63−78: Epic (levels 21−24)
79−99: Mythic (levels 25−28)
100+: Immortal

The ages are a rule of thumb to give a sense of the world.

Almost no one in my experience uses anything close to that chart. If you start adventuring at 16 you hit level 20 around age 16-18. Not many DMs age PCs all that much as adventures happen.

That chart can work for you, but it's not anything close to standard.

 

[Vikingkingq]

Age helps me here.

What a person is likely to accomplish around the age of 16−19 is "background".

What a person is likely to accomplish around the age of 20−24 and afterward is "class".

Of course, the medieval cultures are different, but for example, today the average age when Catholic priests get ordained is in their 30s. So I wouldnt refer to this kind of priesthood as a "background". It seems more like the D&D Master tier (levels 9−12).

I don’t think this schema works for all Species - lifespan affects cultural expectations of stages of development, so Dwarfs don't consider someone an adult until they're 50, Elves 100, Gnomes 40, and so on. Likewise, I don't think it works for backstories where someone studied more than one thing growing up.

 

[Yaarel]

Nobody is risking their lives playing a game and games don't need to mirror real life. Starting a PC adventuring at 15 or 16 is not unethical in any way, shape or form.

In reallife, a game is a safe playful space. Any violence is fantasy violence.

What I meant is. Within the game world, the fictitious characters would be unethical if sending children to die in war.

 

[Yaarel]

I don’t think this schema works for all Species - lifespan affects cultural expectations of stages of development, so Dwarfs don't consider someone an adult until they're 50, Elves 100, Gnomes 40, and so on. Likewise, I don't think it works for backstories where someone studied more than one thing growing up.

The chart works for Elves because Elves reach physical maturity at the same rate as Humans do, about the age of 20.

Because Elves are eternally youthful, living for many centuries and likely living forever magically, many Elven cultures allow individuals an extensive period of time to "find themselves", before deciding what to do with the remainder of their eternal lives. It is similar to college and world travel and self exploration but more intense. At the age of 100, these Elves take on the responsibilities of looking after their Elven communities.

But cognitively, the Elves are like Humans, who would likely do similarly if eternally youthful. A 20 year old is a 20 year old.

 

[Maxperson]

In reallife, a game is a safe playful space. Any violence is fantasy violence.

What I meant is. Within the game world, the fictitious characters would be unethical if sending children to die in war.

Sure, but PCs are not children going to war or being sent off to die in war. The vast majority of the time, they are exceptional individuals who go off on their own. Even if you do take 18 to be the age of majority, that would only apply to humans. Rabbit folk might hit the age of majority at 2.