Silly Question: Cleric Domain Abilities

Nail said:
The wording of the cleric domains does NOT limit which class to which the bonus applies.

And really: Why should it?
Exactly. The wording is pretty generic, so unless there is text elsewhere that limits domain abilities to Cleric spells and abilities only, then it counts for Wizard spells, too.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Coredump said:
Isn't this a classic case of the mechanics driving the story? Your character wants to become e cleric, only because you read the rules and saw an advantage. He wants to be a cleric to this god, only because he will get a double bonus. Does not sound much like role-playing to me. Not that it isn't a valid way to approach the game, just seems like something besides role-playing the character.
Role-playing is an inspiration-driven endeavor. Where that inspiration comes from does not affect the quality of the role-playing in the slightest. Some folks find their inspiration in movies or books they've read. "I want to play a brooding anti-hero like Gerald Tarrant!" Or "I want to play a boy slowly slipping into evil like Anakin Skywalker!" This is perfectly valid, but not the only place to find inspiration.

Others can draw inspiration from a set of game mechanics they've never tried before. I once created a character based solely on the fact that I wanted to play a cleric with the Death and War domains. He wound up being one of my favorite characters, from a role-playing perspective. His character was created by looking at the mechanics I had chosen, and developing a personality that fit those mechanics.

You seem to believe that the source of the persona that a player develops indicates the validity of their role-playing. That a character whose personality is created as a natural fit to a set of mechanics is somehow "less" than a character whose mechanics are chosen as a natural fit to his personality. IMO, this isn't the case.

Fitting Persona + Fitting Mechanics = Excellent Role-playing Character.

Using the Commutative Property of Addition (:p), we get:

Fitting Mechanics + Fitting Persona = Excellent Role-playing Character.

Either way, you get a good character. :)
 


That's kind of the way I'm leaning, Nail and Dimwhit.

For the record, I'm asking because a character in a one-shot I'm putting together is a multiclassed Wiz / Clr, who's got a couple domains with similar benefits (Evil and Necromancy, specifically).
 

Patryn of Elvenshae said:
That's kind of the way I'm leaning, Nail and Dimwhit.

For the record, I'm asking because a character in a one-shot I'm putting together is a multiclassed Wiz / Clr, who's got a couple domains with similar benefits (Evil and Necromancy, specifically).
I'd apply them to both classes, barring something specific that prohibits it (which I haven't seen so far).
 


Nail said:
Because it says "+1 caster level", much like an orange ioun stone does, etc.
The orange ioun stone is not a relevant example unless it's specifically a clerical orange ioun stone. Note again that it's a cleric domain.
 

...and being a cleric domain is simply not relevant. The domain power says what it does. Anything you may add to that is just that: added material.

Again, check out the Magic Domain power description.
 

Checking out both edges on this sword, I'd say that Chaos has always tended towards promiscuous, uncontrolled "Oh, sure, you want to be a friend of Chaos? Come on in.." additions.

So opening oneself to a God of Chaos for a few useful spells and more power is fine. Just remember that Chaos now has a big hook in you, and you are part of whatever plan Chaos may have just concocted (more-or-less - it *is* Chaos, after all).

Party rounds a corner, observes a demon being pounded down by a Paladin. Demon senses the Chaos within, and pleads to the character, "Save me, brother!"

Well, do you aid him, or not? :)
 

Nail said:
...and being a cleric domain is simply not relevant. The domain power says what it does. Anything you may add to that is just that: added material.
It's not "added material" if you mean that as non-relevant. It's very relevant material that may help define the context.

Nail said:
Again, check out the Magic Domain power description.
And as a counterpoint, look at the Trickery Domain. The most that these examples show is that it's ambiguous. You can easily rule one way or the other with an equal amount of weight to say yes or no. There's not enough evidence to just allow it (meaning to say it's clear per the RAW) because the individual domain powers don't say no. There's enough evidence that no is a valid option.
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top