RP-ing and Evil Cleric (Faerun)

[delericho]

I'm trying to get my head around how I'd roleplay an evil cleric. This is more of a hypothetical as I usually DM but it's something which has niggled at me for a while.

Aside from Bane who has military/law/organisational aspects and Azmodeus who is similar (though less overt) I can see very few 'evil' deities which could be i) openly worshipped (as opposed to appeased) and ii) would have any rational, sane followers given that good/neutral deities *mechanically* offer the same benefits. But in a world where the local parish priest* can literally cure cancer this has to be taken into account

*ok probably a bishop, but still..

It's the motivations - why do these things, especially as wise/semi-intelligent beings? When good or neutral gods give you as good a powers and blessings as evil ones why worship (in a major way) evil ones?

To a certain extent, it's probably a good thing that you have a hard time understanding what might motivate a person to Evil.

However, in an attempt to actually help...

Evil, like Good, is not a monolithic thing. For each deity, and each follower of the deity, their is a unique way in which they are Evil and a unique reason why they are evil. A follower of Lolth is not a follower of Cyric, who is not a follower of Mask.

To a large extent, Evil gods probably recruit from the cast-offs of society - the outcast, the abused, and the damaged. And, frankly, they're not going to be short on potential recruits - even the benign nations of the FR setting tend to be either monarchies or have a very strong mercantile bent, and in either case this means that there is a fairly small privilidged group and a much larger group of people who aren't. When you're a peasant grinding away in some village, just like your father, and his father before him, with no prospect of things ever improving, and with the local lord taking most of what you have as his "divine right"... perhaps it's time to start listening to that other divine voice, the one that tells you that you could be lord...

Then there are those who get drawn in by the "forbidden fruit" aspect of the Evil gods. The likes of Loviatar probably get a lot of traction there, but it's quite likely that Cyric, Mask, and perhaps Shar do well, too.

Then there are several deities who really are all about appeasement - Talos, Auril, Besheba.

And then there are the racial gods - Lolth, Tiamat, Malar, etc. Surely there's no mystery about why they are followed?

 

[TwoSix]

Talos - What lead me to this - he's chaos/anarchy/weather/storm/lightning etc - I can see priests instigating rebellions and smiting things to show strength but also to appease talos which is more 'neutral // good' Why would you worship him in any major way? I realise that power is good, but so is fireballs from Lathander!

Because NPCs don't powergame their own lives. You worship Talos because you grew up in a barbaric culture, at the mercy of the elements, and the tribe's wise man taught you that making offerings to the Storm Lord would grant you power and protect you from the storms. Lathander? Who's that?

To a large extent, Evil gods probably recruit from the cast-offs of society - the outcast, the abused, and the damaged. And, frankly, they're not going to be short on potential recruits - even the benign nations of the FR setting tend to be either monarchies or have a very strong mercantile bent, and in either case this means that there is a fairly small privilidged group and a much larger group of people who aren't. When you're a peasant grinding away in some village, just like your father, and his father before him, with no prospect of things ever improving, and with the local lord taking most of what you have as his "divine right"... perhaps it's time to start listening to that other divine voice, the one that tells you that you could be lord...

Yep. The Forgotten Realms isn't a liberal democracy, with any inherent cultural belief about the dignity of man or things like basic human rights. Some areas, sure. But in many areas, the idea of any loyalty to people outside of your family or kin group would be viewed as odd at best and inherently dangerous at worst. Gods who promise strength and power would probably be quite popular.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Cyric is insane, how do you even know what to do? I appreciate that lies, strife etc fuel him but other than randomly cause havok or even organisedly cause it WHY do it ?

Worship of Cyric makes no sense to me.

Loth - seriously a genocidal crazy spider queen demon thing who is racist and xenophobic should have died off ages ago. But her fear based society of 'better than you' drow make sense. But again escaping that fear and tyranny should happen.

Most drow are born into her worship. They have no choice.

Shar - My favourite deities (mainly for the fact that she opposes the mary sue god aka Mystra) - but it seems like all her followers would just be horrifically depressed and/or nihilistic. Nuke the world - then what? People who have nothing to loose ?

Is Shar actually trying to destroy the world?

Talos - What lead me to this - he's chaos/anarchy/weather/storm/lightning etc - I can see priests instigating rebellions and smiting things to show strength but also to appease talos which is more 'neutral // good' Why would you worship him in any major way? I realise that power is good, but so is fireballs from Lathander!

I figure he's a cultural god, popular in some areas, where people are born to worshiping him. Community leaders might be priests of Talos.

Mask - dead, a theif, again not sure why totally evil, stealing is not always bad..

Also assassins. Mask is evil because he's evil, not because he's a thief. His worship is really handy for some careers. Maybe this thief isn't a cleric, but because he worships Mask can get a cleric of Mask to cast spells on him.

Tiamat - evil dragon god, dragons are magic so probably seen more as an uber magical space dragon. Fair enough really.

I would expect lots of draconic worshipers, but this doesn't seem to be the case. Kobolds too. But why would a human worship Tiamat, unless they're a member of the Cult of the Dragon?

Any orc deity - why worship anything other than the biggest strongest ork IE gruumish?

FR has too many gods. Too many pantheons, IMO. Why are there so many dwarf gods? Why aren't there any evil elf gods? (Lolth doesn't count.) An evil racist human-hating elf cleric worships who? In the Warhammer setting, the split between elf and "drow" is less (cultural, not racial) and "drow" can even infiltrate elf society and run pleasure cults. Any elf there can worship "Bloody-Handed Khaine" who is certainly evil.

 

[Phototoxin]

I would expect lots of draconic worshipers, but this doesn't seem to be the case. Kobolds too. But why would a human worship Tiamat, unless they're a member of the Cult of the Dragon?

I agree this one is easy for me - dragons are all powerful, almost god like, tiamat is the head of that logic - she's a dragon uber god. Humans might be greedy for riches, power or as mentioned in the cult of the dragon

FR has too many gods. Too many pantheons, IMO. Why are there so many dwarf gods? Why aren't there any evil elf gods? (Lolth doesn't count.) An evil racist human-hating elf cleric worships who? In the Warhammer setting, the split between elf and "drow" is less (cultural, not racial) and "drow" can even infiltrate elf society and run pleasure cults. Any elf there can worship "Bloody-Handed Khaine" who is certainly evil.

I agree - but in warhammer Khaine is the god of war as well as murder.

I think its more the CE gods Cyric and Talos that are the most difficult

Also in terms of understanding evil - amateur philosopher and theologian means that I ponder these things a lot!

 

[pemerton]

even the benign nations of the FR setting tend to be either monarchies or have a very strong mercantile bent, and in either case this means that there is a fairly small privilidged group and a much larger group of people who aren't.

The Forgotten Realms isn't a liberal democracy, with any inherent cultural belief about the dignity of man or things like basic human rights. Some areas, sure. But in many areas, the idea of any loyalty to people outside of your family or kin group would be viewed as odd at best and inherently dangerous at worst.

I feel that down this pathway madness lies.

If we start thinking about the reality of pre-modern and early modern monarchical systems of government, and the sorts of social relations and opportunities (or lack thereof) that are inherent in them, then isn't there a danger that we will conclude (as many people in the real world did and have) that they are not morally defensible? Which then leaves all our paladins, LG benevolent kings, etc somewhat adrift, with no home in the campaign world. That works if we want a Conan-style game - REH is (in my view at least) a resolutely modernist author - but an obvious feature of Conan is that there are no paladins and no good clerics, only sorcerers and warlocks (some of whom in D&D you might model as evil clerics).

That conclusion can be avoided by looking at the gameworld with our Tolkien-tinted glasses on: that is, we accept (as part of our suspension of disbelief) the truth of romantic conceptions of kingship, the middle ages etc. But in that case, there are not these masses of suffering people to further the worship of dark gods.

In other words, I think this is one of those places where the default approach of D&D - wanting to combine the romantic Tolkien-esque world of kings and paladins with the REH-ish world of dark gods and anti-clerics - reveals some of its internal tensions. My personally preferred solution is therefore not to look too closely at the logic of the setting, and accept it as what it is: a mish-mash that will not withstand close sociological scrutiny.

 

[delericho]

I feel that down this pathway madness lies.

Well... four things:

If we start thinking about the reality of pre-modern and early modern monarchical systems of government, and the sorts of social relations and opportunities (or lack thereof) that are inherent in them, then isn't there a danger that we will conclude (as many people in the real world did and have) that they are not morally defensible?

1) Actually, in a level-based system, feudalism is morally defensible. Likewise, in a world of active gods, Clerics, and Paladins, theocracy is morally defensible.

Besides, no matter how you arrange society, someone will end up on the bottom, at which point my logic applies - there's someone who will be easy prey to that voice saying, "you deserve better."

(I'm also far from convinced the inequalities in our "liberal democracies" are any more morally defensible, but that's obviously politics, so...)

That works if we want a Conan-style game - REH is (in my view at least) a resolutely modernist author - but an obvious feature of Conan...

That conclusion can be avoided by looking at the gameworld with our Tolkien-tinted glasses on...

2) Of course, according to Gygax, REH (and Leiber, and Lovecraft) were much greater influences on D&D than was Tolkien.

3) Tolkien, for the most part, made his forces of evil explicitly inhuman, and when he did have Men working for the Enemy they were generally explicitly 'othered' - Reavers, Southrons, Wildlings. A DM seeking to keep his Tolkien-tinted glasses on should probably do likewise - no Evil humans from 'civilised' lands.

Perhaps most importantly, though:

4) My suggestion of the "guy at the bottom kicking back" works even if our Evil peasant-turned-priest is the only peasant who felt that way, and even if he's being entirely unreasonable. So, really, it's up to the DM to decide how much he wants to work the gritty social injustice aspect into his campaign. That is, where along the He-Man/Cthulhu scale does he want to place himself?

 

[Phototoxin]

This does partially touch on what I am wondering - unlike say a cleric of bahamut, who a kid might grow up seeing as heroic and as an exemplar and might one day aspire to be, I'm guessing that most people don't see the cleric of talos as something to aspire to, although I can imagine a pretty hacked off kid seeing an outcast cleric of talos smiting a village that opposes him then the kid things 'that's who them' and joining up. But seriously how long does petty hate last? It needs to be constantly refreshed and supported otherwise people become apathetic (neutral?) Which to some could be worse than being evil ('hitler was wrong but at least he knew fought for what he believed in!')

But again, I suppose the word I'm thinking of is **motivation** how/why do you enter the priesthood of talos and why do you continue it when nice shiny tolkienesque things happen to good people?

I tend to play my FR as a bit grittier, yes heroes are special but bureaucracy leads to corruption and the wealthy upset the poor. (I think they got this right with murder in BG for example.)

I can totally understand evil in Dark Sun - it pays to be a paranoid sunva' lich when the very planet is out to eat your desiccated husk!

 

[Storminator]

Didn't Tolkien have huge swaths of his world worshiping a dark god tho?

I've never been a big Cyric fan, but if I were I'd have him put temples to other gods everywhere. So you think you're praying to Lathander, but you're in a false Cyric temple.

PS

 

[Phototoxin]

Didn't Tolkien have huge swaths of his world worshiping a dark god tho?

I've never been a big Cyric fan, but if I were I'd have him put temples to other gods everywhere. So you think you're praying to Lathander, but you're in a false Cyric temple.

PS

Fallen angel, the whole thing is an ode to catholicsm.

Although false temples run by lyricists would be **deliciously** evil

 

[pemerton]

Didn't Tolkien have huge swaths of his world worshiping a dark god tho?

The sociology of LotR is puzzling, and in my view doesn't withstand close scrutiny.

It's not clear to me whether the Easterlings et al worship Sauron, or have struck some sort of deal with him. It tends to feel like the latter.