Clerics with no gods

[fusangite]

Isn't it a little ironic that people are poo-pooing the idea of a non-god worshipping cleric because it doesn't make sense? Because elves, halflings riding dogs, half-orcs and magic in general makes a lot of sense, right?

What matters is not whether a game world is consistent with ours but whether it is consistent with itself. We all have our own idiosyncratic requirements for what it takes to suspend disbelief and become invested in the game. If godless clerics don't interfere with suspension of disbelief and are part of a self-consistent world, more power to you. But for many of us, godless clerics interfere with suspension of disbelief and make our worlds internally inconsistent so we don't allow them. I make my druids worship gods too, by the way.

It's a role-playing GAME not a role-playing Philosophy.

Next to invoking Hitler, this has to be the single most ridiculous thing people do in debates on ENWorld. We all acknowledge D&D is a game. We just have our own individual criteria for what it takes to make the game fun for us. Let me put it this way: if you went to a movie and your enjoyment of it was ruined by the boom mic constantly appearing in the shot, I wouldn't say, "It's just a movie, you know."

 

[kenobi65]

What? Why? {regarding Living Greyhawk not allowing non-deity clerics}

Not sure as to the why, but I suspect it has to do with controlling access to domains.

Here's the line in the Living Greyhawk Campaign Sourcebook:

A cleric must serve a specific non-evil deity from the Living Greyhawk Deities document (found on the campaign website). PC clerics may not serve Wastri.

However, note that this stricture only applies to clerics. On that same page:

A paladin need not (but may) serve a patron deity. Non-cleric or paladin characters are not required to worship a deity, but if they do, they must pick from the same chart as clerics.

(Do note that this is a restriction only for the RPGA's Living Greyhawk campaign; AFAIK, it isn't a general restriction for the Greyhawk campaign setting.)

 

[Tinker Gnome]

Godless Clerics are fine by me.

 

[Staffan]

I find it interesting that returning to the old concepts of D&D is often seen as becoming more like a video game.

Right. From the Rules Cyclopedia (and I'm pretty sure Basic D&D said something similar): "A cleric is a human character who is dedicated to serving a great and worthy cause. This cause can be an Immortal being dedicated to a specific goal or attribute; sometimes the cleric is serving only his alignment, and has no interest in immortal beings." (for those who never played Basic/Rules Cyclopedia, Immortals was the term used for gods in the setting).

 

[Stormborn]

To complicate matters further there is this possiblity:

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=101621&highlight=Pelor

 

[ricoboc]

Clereic without a god

This can be played and very fun for the player if handled right.
I was allowed to play a Rogue Cleric kicked out of the church and in search of my own God and calling. THINK BIG PEOPLE!!! Characters can be handled anyway one chooses. Nothing is written in stone. Thats the beauty of D&D. All the rules are basic guide lines not RULES at all. A good DM can make anything work, anytime. For those of you without an imagination perhaps Monopoly would be more suited for you.

 

[leporidae]

To me a cleric without a diety makes a lot of sense, what wouldn't make sense to me is a cleric without a church (in the sense of a group of beings with similiar beliefs and common rituals, whether or not they have a building set aside for rituals). Dieties are commonly seen as deriving power from their church, which they then distribute to the clerics. What if the church was able to cut them out of the deal and grant the collected magical power directly to the cleric? For the cleric, being in harmony with the church's gestalt, or abiding by church law would take the place of the individual judgement of a diety.

These churches could either form on their own, or it could happen if the diety dies, gets bored, or disappears. (In my old campaign a conspiracy of high level clerics had in the past locked all dieties out of the prime material plane and took control of the combined churchs' power themselves. So there was only one church, and no dieties.)

Has anyone had clerics in a campaign without either a diety or a church?

 

[HellHound]

Leporidae - yes.

As I was saying earlier, I feel that faith is more powerful than the icon of the faith. If anything, a cleric of an ideal in most games has the immediate penalty of not having a church to back him or her. Clerics of organized religions have the benefit of an organization (and thus the friends and potential temporal power that it brings with it), and the disadvantage of a codified religion. Clerics of ideals have a codified religion, but it is one that they believe in whole-heartedly, not one passed down unto them by others who were there before them.

 

[adwyn]

Has anyone had clerics in a campaign without either a diety or a church?

A while back one of our PC's died during a trek across the desert. A few minutes later the player had his new PC - a hermit who hadn't seen another living soul in months. He was nuttier than a fruitcake, abhored all gods (he believed, he just didn't like them), and was bound and determined to destroy all churches. When one of the other players started to ask how, the player in question demanded a DC 40 knowledge (religion) check which was impossible to pass, and then began berating the fool for his impudence and lack of faith.

The player kept on with the character for several months before retiring him when he no longer fit in with a new party mix. It worked amazingly well and even lended itself to thge creation of several story arcs.

The long and short of it is its amazing what can be fit into the campaign without really rocking the boat if the DM keeps an open mind.

 

[ThoughtBubble]

What matters is not whether a game world is consistent with ours but whether it is consistent with itself. We all have our own idiosyncratic requirements for what it takes to suspend disbelief and become invested in the game. If godless clerics don't interfere with suspension of disbelief and are part of a self-consistent world, more power to you. But for many of us, godless clerics interfere with suspension of disbelief and make our worlds internally inconsistent so we don't allow them. I make my druids worship gods too, by the way.

So, what you're saying is that having all clerics have a diety is just one of those 'things' that helps you to enjoy the game. But there's nothing inherently wrong with having godless clerics, it's just not a flavor you like.

Here's what I've always wondered. How does having clerical powers need to spring from a diety interact with gods of magic? Does all magic come from the magic diety? Does magic exsist independently, and they're more of the god of studying magic? What does being a cleric of a god of magic entail, and shouldn't that person be a mage instead?