Help me convince my players that the Cleric is cool

[The Thayan Menace]

Campaign Premise & Shameless Plugging

Trainz:

Your campaign premise rocks, however I am used to dealing with very anarchic players.

You are fortunate to have such a cooperative group, and they are lucky to have a cool DM.

Also, did you check out my campaign stuff? (shamelessly plugs)

 

[maddman75]

Players are problematic that way, IME. They are naturally rebellious. If you tell them that they really should do X, they'll insist they had their heart set on Y. Not knowing your premise, I'd suggest either NPCing the cleric or altering the plot to match the characters you do have.

And I don't believe you were ever specific about what they don't want. Do they not like clerics? Or Ehlonna? Or females? Or that combination? Or, more likely, being told what to do.

You could always go all rat-bastardy on them, and have some horrible tragedy happen that only a cleric of Ehlonna could have prevented. But there were none to be found. I put this player rebelliousness to good use myself - in last night's game I wanted them to search for a way to escape the city they were in. All I had to do was have the guards tell them no one could leave and they were frantic for a way out.

 

[The Thayan Menace]

Jungian D&D

You could always portray Ehlonna as one of three pagan feminine archetypes.

Take, for example, this sample trinity (using canon Greyhawk deities):

Ehlonna could be the young woman, representing the power of primal sexuality and fertility. She is the promise of life.

Berei could be the mature woman, the maker of hearth and home. She is the patron of the family and the harvest.

Wee Jas could be the crone, representing the withering of age and the frightful aspects of widowhood. She is the harbinger of death.

Considering that you run a homebrew setting, you could easily expand upon their available domains.

Better yet, you could grant female clerics the option of worshipping the trinity as a whole and drawing their domain selection from all three goddesses.

 

[Arnwyn]

I'm trying, here, to point out that a cleric isn't essential in a party unless the DM and the rules conspire to make him essential.

Actually, it's more like "a cleric isn't essential in a party unless the players make inappropriate decisions based on their character selection and party make-up".

And the rules are the rules... no 'conspiring' there.

 

[Trainz]

Trainz:

Your campaign premise rocks, however I am used to dealing with very anarchic players.

You are fortunate to have such a coooperative group, and they are lucky to have a cool DM.

Also, did you check out my campaign stuff? (shamelessly plugs)

I did check it and it is quite fascinating (especially that critter you sent me).

You do realise that you might end up with an all evil campaign ?

 

[The Thayan Menace]

No Fear of an Evil Party

You do realise that you might end up with an all evil campaign ?

Did you look at page 9 of the CRIMSON RECKONING pamphlet?

Although I do enjoy playing in games with good PCs, I've found that evil campaigns lend a certain complexity to D&D that make gaming very interesting and challenging for veteran players.

Granted, I usually do not request that players use evil characters. However, fate (i.e., the DM) often conspires to push them towards acts of malice.

Basically, I am a huge fan of seductive and pervasive evil. When used well, your typical PC embraces it wholeheartedly.

Very few PCs are truly righteous; in my games, I make you earn that label.

Still, I will admit that I have forced the issue lately (blows his conductor's whistle ... ALL ABOARD).

No one in my current campaign can play a good character; that's my take on Thayan culture anyway.

Therefore, if people choose to play evil characters ... so be it.

 

[Trainz]

Did you look at page 9 of the CRIMSON RECKONING pamphlet?

I did. But I went again and just realised that the alignments were also listed. 4 out of 5 are evil. Interesting.

I did a few all-evil games in the past, and only once it didn't end in a TPK. The last time, they managed to pee-off half the nations and, well, vessimilitude oblige, I just had to throw it all out on them.

But when a player of mine plays an evil PC, he understands that his survival is chancy at best.

I want to thank you for your valuable input and great demeanor.

And I want to thank all you guys, for participating in this thread and giving me more ammo than I expected. After all those specs, if the players STILL don't want to play that cleric...

...so be it.

 

[The Thayan Menace]

Roleplaying Zealotry

And I don't want to hear any grumblings about "party unity" - personalities and faith get in the way, they always manage it somehow.

While I applaud your love of roleplaying, I encourage you to consider gameplay and verisimilitude as well.

I believe, as do many DMs, that party unity is essential to running a campaign with any staying power. Although ocassional squabbles are to be expected, cooperation between the PCs is vital to the success of your game.

Ideally, PC cohesion should be a reality before your third session. If it is not, your campaign is not likely to last.

Also, keep in mind that fanaticism has worked to destroy nations, families, and individuals. Do you really believe that it has no potential to destroy your game?

History would disagree with you.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Although you have made some good points, this isn't one of them.

You need to appreciate ghouls, my friend. No level draining there, just a lot of paralysis and disease.

Who says clerics are not essential?

Well it's not the paralyzed guy getting his face chewed off by a ghoul, that's for sure.

There are solutions to the ghoul problem - namely that if you don't have an entire party paralysed, you don't have a TPK, and all you have to do is WAIT, and you'll not be paralysed any more.

Similarly with disease. Skills that are available to all, and are, in fact, useable untrained can be used to avoid the daily damage, and the disease eventually goes away on its own.

AND cure disease is available to druids as well as clerics.

Actually, it's more like "a cleric isn't essential in a party unless the players make inappropriate decisions based on their character selection and party make-up".

And the rules are the rules... no 'conspiring' there.

C'mon then, tell me of a way to handle level-draining undead in their typical environment (ie - close quarters) without needing a cleric.

 

[Trainz]

Ideally, PC cohesion should be a reality before your third session. If it is not, your campaign is not likely to last.

Also, keep in mind that fanaticism has worked to destroy nations, families, and individuals. Do you really believe that it has no potential to destroy your game?

History would disagree with you.

Heh... dragging the enemy on your home turf so that you get the advantage... brilliant.

You must indeed be one hell of a DM.