Rules of the Game: All about Clerics, Part 1

[Hypersmurf]

Well, Part 1 is mostly cut'n'paste from the PHB.

Only thing I take issue with:

A cleric could have no deity at all (see page 32 in the Player's Handbook). A cleric with no deity can have any alignment, but the cleric's choice of alignment can affect which clerical domains the cleric can choose (see the next section).

Strictly, a cleric with no deity can't be Neutral, since only clerics of Neutral deities can be Neutral. A cleric with no deity isn't a cleric of a Neutral deity, by definition.

-Hyp.

 

[Thanee]

I guess they meant that only clerics from LN, CN, NG, NE deities cannot be neutral, since they could be, judging only from the one-step alignment rule.

Bye
Thanee

 

[sullivan]

Given that the context of that sentence about Neutral alignment restriction assumes that the Cleric has a deity, I've always read in the missing words (in bold): A cleric that is devoted to a deity may not be neutral unless his deity’s alignment is also neutral.

If you aren't willing to do that then Clerics not devoted to a deity have much bigger problems in your campaign. Read the Turn or Rebuke Undead (Su): section and see where the most literal of readings of the section, without reading in implied non-devotee specific text, leaves Clerics that don't have a deity.

 

[sullivan]

I guess they meant that only clerics from LN, CN, NG, NE deities cannot be neutral, since they could be, judging only from the one-step alignment rule.

Bye
Thanee

Yes, very much this is the case. Notice here, for one example, the word choice:

Spontaneous Casting: A good cleric (or a neutral cleric of a good deity)...

There are other examples. Basically the writers got loose with terminalogy as two different meanings of "neutral" are used. One is the old "True Neutral" alignment, and the other denotes the middling portions of the alignments LN, NG, CN, NE, and True Neutral. Sometimes "neutral" can also be the middling on one axis of a collection of these as seen in the above quote. Otherwise if you read it as "True Neutral" cleric of a LG/NG/CG deity, or even treat "good" as slang for NG, it is in direct conflict with Hypersmurf's interpretation of the Alignment section, and even your own more liberal interpretation unless you go with "good" being slang for NG.

So something has to give to make it all fit together and not contradict each other, and recognizing the dual meaning of "neutral" would seem to make the most sense, especially given D&D rule history. It easily follows that "neutral" could also refer to a set union of the two groups of alignments that each share a middling on an axis, which is where you are getting at.

Chalk one vote up for the return of the term "True Neutral". Or at least capitalizing Neutral when they mean True Neutral, and lower case when they don't. That would be an improvement, though still not ideal since it leaves ambiguity when the word "Neutral" begins a sentence.

EDIT: Fixed up some things for clarity, sorry if you quote before you get the refreshed text.

 

[Staffan]

The thing I find upsetting is that someone thinks it's a good idea to pay Skip for these. If I could, I'd trade in all the Class Acts and Rules of the Game articles for a single Dragonshard, and come out way ahead.

 

[beaver1024]

Isn't it strange that the article didn't cover leaving slots open during the day for maximum flexibility or maybe divine spell research. Maybe that's in the next article.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Isn't it strange that the article didn't cover leaving slots open during the day for maximum flexibility or maybe divine spell research. Maybe that's in the next article.

The next article is on 'preparing spells'... so yeah, I'm guessing leaving slots open will be in there.

-Hyp.