Thinking About OD&D

WSmith said:
Oh one more thing. There would be absolutely positively no reversible spells, i.e., lawful clerics could not cast "Cause Serious Wounds" or "Finger of Death."

My tendency is to stipulate that Lawful clerics cast only the 'obverse' and Chaotic clerics cast only the 'reverse' versions. So no Chaotic healing or resurrection, and no Lawful fingers of death.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I have mixed feelings on Clerics and options to make their spell-casting more flexible. I think of the cleric as a "second class" spell-caster (heck, he doesn't even get spells until 2nd level) rather than a "primary" spell-caster like the magic-user. (He's a "second class" fighter, too.) Consequently, I'm not very keen on giving clerics more power/flexibility in their spell-casting.

I would almost rather introduce a new class that is a primary cleric-spell-caster without any of the fighting elements (similar to the "cloistered cleric" from Dragon Magazine). Such a class would be similar to the magic-user in most respects, wearing no armor, having magic user HD, and using a spell progression similar to magic users (i.e. starting with a spell at first level, etc).

Interesting ideas, though. It's true that breaking the strict Vancian model for clerics would clearly set them apart from magic users, conceptually. (And I associate the Vancian feel mostly with magic users.) I'll have to consider it.
 

In AD&D (or, presumably, 3E) where the cleric has a lot more spell slots (both generally, and due to high Wisdom) and a wider variety of spells to choose from, allowing them to cast spontaneously would be too big of an advantage (IMO), but in OD&D where the cleric is, as you note, a distinctly second-class spellcaster (remember also that they can't use the wands and staves that give mages a lot of their firepower (and are, in fact, their main source of firepower -- a mage isn't able blast lightning bolts every round because he has a ton of 3rd level spell slots, he's able to do it because he was a wand of lightning bolts or a staff of power)) having free choice between 4-6 spells for their 1 or 2 slots/level doesn't seem like a game-breaker. I can also see only allowing spontaneous casting for level 1-4 spells and demanding that 5th level spells be prepared in advance.
 

I agree that the limited variety of spells available to the cleric helps make spontaneous casting a more viable option. Nevertheless, that "balancing factor" assumes that the cleric spell list will not expand, which may not be a safe assumption.

Allowing clerics to swap out any memorized spell for an equivalent-level healing spell seems pretty safe, though.
 

T. Foster said:
(remember also that they can't use the wands and staves that give mages a lot of their firepower (and are, in fact, their main source of firepower -- a mage isn't able blast lightning bolts every round because he has a ton of 3rd level spell slots, he's able to do it because he was a wand of lightning bolts or a staff of power)
Which, in turn, means that in AD&D and beyond, there is a much lesser reliance on magic... expect to hit magical creatures... and in 3.X, not even that.
 

PJ, would you allow a MU to intimidate some opponents with spell special effect?

Korgoth said:
My tendency is to stipulate that Lawful clerics cast only the 'obverse' and Chaotic clerics cast only the 'reverse' versions. So no Chaotic healing or resurrection, and no Lawful fingers of death.

I've always preferred to let the cleric do whatever he wants & then let his patron decide whether that specific use was justified or not. Although, some might intervene before the spell actually takes effect. & there's still room for specific divine patrons to inflict a blanket ixnay upon their own followers.
 

Korgoth said:
One variant I thought about for Clerics was to make them spontaneous casters, but limit not only daily castings but "spells known" to what is indicated on the chart. So a 3rd level cleric might have CLW and Prot. vs. Evil; he could cast each once per day or one of them twice per day, but only knows those spells. I think this goes along with the idea that clerical spells are like 'miracles' that the cleric can perform as a granted power.

I haven't made up my mind about it yet, though.

That's exactly what I do in my 3E game, with the exact same thought process (using 3E Unearthed Arcana's "Variant: Spontaneous Divine Casters").
 

RFisher said:
PJ, would you allow a MU to intimidate some opponents with spell special effect?
Yes; I'd certainly factor a special effect into any intimidation attempts.

I've always preferred to let the cleric do whatever he wants & then let his patron decide whether that specific use was justified or not. Although, some might intervene before the spell actually takes effect. & there's still room for specific divine patrons to inflict a blanket ixnay upon their own followers.
I like that approach, too.

Also, think there's a lot to be said for the OAD&D guidelines about how cleric spells are granted. That is, 1st and 2nd level spells are generally "granted" through the cleric's personal faith/piety/knowledge. 3rd-5th level spells are generally granted through the intercession/aid of supernatural servants of the cleric's deity. Any 6th level or higher spells require the direct approval of the deity in order for the cleric to memorize them. Of course, the deity in question could "override" this scheme, should he desire.

An interesting consequence of this approach is that it allows for heretical and schismatic cults or even completely false gods with clerics that can cast 1st-2nd level spells. It also allows for some "politics" within the supernatural hierarchy. For example, it might be possible that a cleric has a particular supernatural servant that handles his "spell requests." That supernatural servant might have a personality and agenda of its own. There are lots of interesting complications and storyline possibilities in such an arrangement, if the referee wants to use them.
 



Remove ads

Top