Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8410356" data-attributes="member: 42582">This is not correct. [USER=2209]@Voadam[/USER] just upthread quotes it accurately. It preserves the DMG rule but adds a twist: a demi-god has no suitable spell-granting minions and so has to grant 3rd to 5th level spells directly, and can't grant spells of higher level; and a lesser god can't grant 7th level spells.If (say) Orcus is treated as a lesser god, this means clerics of Orcus can have up to 6th level spells. I don't know if there's an example of this in print. I've already pointed to the example, in an early 2nd ed source (City of GH boxed set) of a cleric of Asmodeus with 7th level spell ability.Nothing in any book says, or even implies, that he is the source of spells for clerics of devils. You're just making that up! Which as I say is fine from the point of view of playing the game; but doesn't tell us anything about the content or interpretation of the actually published works.Again, this isn't right. The only mention of being a goddess in FF is at the top of her entry, as [USER=2209]@Voadam[/USER] pointed out upthread. The text opens "The demoness Lolth is a very powerful and feared demon lord" (p 24) and says nothing about her being a god. In T1, in the description of the cleric Lareth the Beautiful, Lolth is described as a "Demoness" with no reference to her being a god. In D3 the text is the same as FF but without the parenthetical "Lesser God". In Q1 the parenthetical reference likewise is missing, and the text again is the same, but at the end of the entry (on p 32) there is a heading "Optional Abilities" which opens "As a lesser goddess, Lolth has certain attributes common to all divine beings" and goes on to plug DDG before setting out some of the DDG information - her stats (with mechanical explanations) and the rules from that book for running deities.I don't understand what you are saying here.As has already been explained upthread (by me and [USER=2209]@Voadam[/USER]), should be treated as (the DDG wording) does not mean may be treated as, should one be so inclined. This is not an optional rule: it's an instruction. And as far as clerics are concerned, a superfluous one. Materials were being published in which Lolth has clerics before the DDG was published. T1 is 1979 (and that suggests that Gygax already had the idea for The Temple of Elemental Evil by that time - and it seems at least probable that he was including clerics of Zuggtmoy). D1-3 are 1978.Plenty of people may have ignored the DDG instruction, and prior to that may have not had clerics of devils and demons - I really have no idea about that. But these classic D&D texts do not draw any contrast between evil gods, devils and demons in respect of having clerics, nor more generally in respect of their place and role in the game's cosmology. Something like that does being in MotP but is not consistently adhered to thereafter (see, again, City of GH boxed set; and Dead Gods).</blockquote>

Verification