Priestly hierarchies not of clerics

[Agback]

G'day

I was just discussing in another thread the fact that the 'cleric' character class in D&D is not designed to represent an ordinary ecclesiastic, a village pastor or a clerk in a big temple. My first thought was that D&D 4.0 ought to have a class that does represent these people. But my second though is "What if the rules as they stand (and have stood for ages) represent the way things really are in the D&D reality?" What if the gods can't create new classes?

Anyway, one of the thoughts that ensued was that some gods might prefer hierachies substantially composed of someone other than clerics. Druids are an obvious choice for such gods as have the right alignment and an interest in attracting agricultural worshippers. And thinking on how much time mediaeval priests spent singing, I bethought me of an hierarchy of bards. A bard makes a pretty good parish priest, except of course when his or her flock are threatened by the undead.

Regards,


Agback

 

[Staffan]

IIRC, "grunt" priests in D&D are supposed to be represented by the Adept NPC class (just like grunt soldiers are supposed to be Warriors rather than Fighters), or maybe Experts if they're more of the intellectual/non-spellcasting type.

 

[Hand of Evil]

Masons would be a possibility, an group for the building and construction along a ordered plan.

 

[Fenes 2]

In my heavily modified Mulhorand/Unther campaign, where a theocracy reigns, the average "Priest" in a temple is a cleric/multiclass, with expert the most common, followed by fighter for guards. I usually try to make the levels correspond to the standing, history and function of the NPC in the temple.

 

[Agback]

IIRC, "grunt" priests in D&D are supposed to be represented by the Adept NPC class (just like grunt soldiers are supposed to be Warriors rather than Fighters), or maybe Experts if they're more of the intellectual/non-spellcasting type.

Does the adept do a good job as a pastor or clerk? His or her class skills don't look at all right. How is his/her spell list? Warrior/clerics, expert/clerics, and aristocrat/clerics sound more the speed.

Does anyone agree with me that these important generic NPCs ought to be included in teh NPC tables in the 4.0 DMG?

Regards,


Agback

 

[Chimera]

To a certain extent, they have to be Clerics.

You have to be a 3rd level Cleric to Consecrate. This is the level IMC that one is entitled to be called "Priest".

You have to be a 9th level Cleric to Hallow (or Raise Dead for that matter). That is the level of "High Priest" or "Bishop" (or any number of equivalents) IMC.

But beyond that, it doesn't necessarily follow that the Head of the Sect or of any of particular part of it is the highest level Cleric in that organization.

Or the most pious, or the most organized, or the most charismatic, or the most learned, or the one with the highest Knowledge(Religion) skill.

It is whomever rose to the top of that organization for whatever reason.

Sometimes because the other candidates don't want the responsibility. Sometimes out of politics. Sometimes (or is that "often"?) by some odd custom of succession. Sometimes because they were placed there by a stronger political figure.

 

[dren]

I've always liked the idea of both a travelling priest who takes care of the in-your-face evil as well as a stay at home type who tends the flock kind. Neither is strictly independent from each other (especially in a world of REAL EVIL MONSTERS) but they have a completely differing set of motivating factors.

In my campaign, all fifth level and lower priests are of the travelling kind, then the ones who have secured tenure stay at one of the shrines and become a PrC priest. The others, well, those are mostly the few PC clerics who decide not to settle down. Each are dependent on each other, and each uses the other kind as a great source of strength, information and faith...

Ecclesiastic hierachies can be anything you want them to be. And I think the ideas presented with bards, druids, or "grunt clerics" all have their place in individual religions. Also, the idea of a "blessed one" or extremely devout / charismatic individual being given the keys of the church (as presented by Chimera) also works really well.

 

[Keith]

Interesting topic, Agback. I’ve thought about that too, and yes, I agree that the system should take some account, however small, of a wide variety of ecclesiastical roles that non-spellcasting, “ordinary” people would fill in a semi-magical society such as D&D postulates. By which I mean, not everyone uses magic, and possibly very few do, so that vast majority of societal roles would be filled with “ordinary” folk. Who may of course have a host of skills, maybe even mirror PC classes like fighter and rogue, but don’t cast spells.
There seems to be a popular notion that where divine magic exists (or is believed to exist, and appears to function), those who cast it would not only dominate a religion (which does seem fairly reasonable to me), but also push out all those who do not, which is not reasonable to me. Spellcasters would doubtless have prominent and powerful roles in a church, but the idea that devote and intelligent people who did not chose to learn spellcasting would not also prosper is a fairly repugnant one to me. It suggest a very narrow-minded, intolerant structure to me. Which is certainly one way to portray things, but I don’t think it is the only one. The religions I use in D&D are composed primarily of non-spellcasters. The spellcasters are very influential, but also lower-level ones tend to be local healers and such- not distinguished too much from their fellows who make beer or cheese in terms of influence.

 

[Olive]

IIRC, "grunt" priests in D&D are supposed to be represented by the Adept NPC class (just like grunt soldiers are supposed to be Warriors rather than Fighters), or maybe Experts if they're more of the intellectual/non-spellcasting type.

Adepts aren't really like clerics in the way the warrior/fighter split works. The skill list is wonky, and the adept doesn't have a stripped down cleric spell list, they have quite a unique spell list (lightning bolt?!?!?).

If you want parish priest types, I'd use experts, or cleric/expert.

 

[paulewaug]

... not everyone uses magic, and possibly very few do, so that vast majority of societal roles would be filled with “ordinary” folk. Who may of course have a host of skills, maybe even mirror PC classes like fighter and rogue, but don’t cast spells.

I agree, I also agree that the Expert seems to be the most suited to filling this role.
As has been said, the Adept really doesn't have the right feel at all. It really only works for a "Witchdoctor" type of Shaman, IMO. IMC I have started making the majority of the folks found in a temple Experts, with a rare Cleric here and there.
I also will likely start using the "Priest" class that I just got emailed to me from Lela.
Basically to make the "Priest", you just use the basics for the Wizard class, but give them access to Divine spells rather than Arcane spells and allow them to have spontaneous casting, that's it, don't even look at the cleric class when doing it.

There seems to be a popular notion that where divine magic exists (or is believed to exist, and appears to function), those who cast it would not only dominate a religion (which does seem fairly reasonable to me), but also push out all those who do not, which is not reasonable to me. Spellcasters would doubtless have prominent and powerful roles in a church, but the idea that devote and intelligent people who did not chose to learn spellcasting would not also prosper is a fairly repugnant one to me. It suggest a very narrow-minded, intolerant structure to me. Which is certainly one way to portray things, but I don’t think it is the only one.

I have to recommend Sepulchrave's story hour
if you have not already read it, it is truly excellent and has a lot of this kind of stuff going on! The church has many people that are not truly clerics and there is some excellent politic coverage of the goings on within the organization. It is actaully spread out over several different threads. The above link contains a link to each one. The first one is here