When Did Cleric Spell Selection Change?

[WayneLigon]

As much as some people complain about it, I truly believe 2E was far closer to how 1E AD&D was actually played by a significant chunk if not a majority of AD&D players.

I'll agree with that. We looked through 2E and essencially said 'Well, here are all the house rules we've been using for years, codified and bound into an official product. Yay!'.

 

[RFisher]

I also wonder if a lot of the design was based on Gygax building things for his own game, and therefore his own players mindset, and not always just how it would be used in general...

I think so. I think Gary expected and trusted groups to do whatever worked for them. (Despite some of his rhetoric.) He was basically saying, “Here’s what worked for us.”

Heck, he put things into AD&D that other people used that he didn’t. Steve Marsh has said that his impression was that AD&D was more Law Shick’s vision of D&D than Gary’s—even if Gary penned it.

Look at how Gary was fine with the discrepancies between oD&D, Holmes, and AD&D.

 

[Henry]

His followers could freely multiclass with Ranger and Monk...and could FoB with anything they could wield.

Including enemies!

If Chuck Norris were a cleric, gods would petition HIM for spells.

Honestly though, getting back to Gary, and Law Schick's visions of AD&D, some of the things I heard Gary say in person were pretty adversarial; that was the way he and the players liked it. One of the reasons his Greyhawl\k city was so byzantine, large, and chaotic was because of one player's photographic memory (Rob Kuntz?) The player would tell HIM everytime he made a mistake on where the blacksmith's shop was, or where a certain tavern was, etc. Plus he could sneak one look at Gary's maps and get an idea of where to go and what to avoid. And remember, it was Rob Kuntz who was the first "spelljammer" using a brass carriage and a flock of geese (or something equally insane) to try to travel to the moons of Greyhawk.

So I surmise Gary preferred to often times just have outright veto power if his players came up with a scheme to outright break the game with the materials at hand.

Admittedly, it does make sense to me that a deity would have veto power on any miracles the cleric would wish to perform in his or her name...

 

[Korgoth]

And remember, it was Rob Kuntz who was the first "spelljammer" using a brass carriage and a flock of geese (or something equally insane) to try to travel to the moons of Greyhawk.

Now that's gamin' right there.

 

[TerraDave]

I found most games of the late 70s/early 80s I played in/witnessed/ran to be a hybrid using the simpler O/B/D&D mechanics for most things and the AD&D classes/spells/monsters/weapon lists, etc. i.e all the expanded options. I never played with anyone who did AD&D combat remotely RAW. Many of us were playing a OD&D/BD&D roll a D6 for initiative or high Dex goes first thing, for example.

As much as some people complain about it, I truly believe 2E was far closer to how 1E AD&D was actually played by a significant chunk if not a majority of AD&D players.

Nice summary. Though the problem with 2E was not mechanics. It was style, or the lack thereof.

What didn't EGG use (much) in ADD (from various readings, including here): Different tracking rules, no weapon vs. armor chart, not much focus on encumbrance for standard equipment, probably pretty generous on components and mu spell access....(I am forgetting things).

I wonder about weapon speeds, tied initiative, surprise rules, and the obscure the parry rule.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I meant to post this earlier, but I created a thread for the Chuck stuff to minimize clutter here.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/off-to...s/241154-church-chuck-norris.html#post4488685

 

[Greg K]

Now more on topic. As is frequently done in 3e the power is out of the DM's hands.

The power is never out of the hands at my table or that of any other DM that I played with. We house ruled the game to do what we wanted. If a player were to have a problem (which never happened), we would point them to Rule 0.

Of course, we are always up front with house rules, but allow for updating them should unforseen rules issues come up with RAW

 

[Voadam]

I think stuff like this is really interesting to look at in relation to where the game has gone, and how it's effected the way the game plays...

People like to mention the cleric and the wizard being too powerfull in 3e, and it seems this (and a reworking of some spells) seems to be a big factor...

It's also interesting to me that such a huge factor of balancing the class was based on DM interpretation... It's like saying the QB doesn't have to worry about fumbling, unless the ref says he does...

I also wonder if a lot of the design was based on Gygax building things for his own game, and therefore his own players mindset, and not always just how it would be used in general...

People have always complained that wizards are too powerful. One of the first issues of Dragon has Gary responding to such complaints and explaining why he chose the Vancian powerful but limited number spell mechanic system.

Clerics were deliberately made more powerful in 3e to give incentives to people to play them and be more than just a healer while still providing the party with healing. This seems to be a much bigger factor causing them to be made more powerful than the desire to remove some DM fiat in spell prep choice.

As a DM in 1e I never vetoed a PC cleric's spell choices from those available as a balancing mechanic. I did, however, limit the spells available when they went plane hopping and were cut off from their gods just like the rules specified. I did however allow them to then gain some types back when they made pacts with new powers as a story/rule driven event.

I never saw a DM in 1e say to a PC cleric "no you can't get that spell because your god doesn't want you to have it."

I don't remember the divine veto rule even being there from the Basic Set D&D cleric rules.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I never saw a DM in 1e say to a PC cleric "no you can't get that spell because your god doesn't want you to have it."

Actually, I DID use it on occasion.

Sometimes it was because the player was choosing spells completely at odds with the nature of the divinity they followed.

More often, however, it was used as an example of the god imposing his will because he knew better than the PC what he'd need in the future- kind of like how Q always kits out James Bond with a bunch of gadgets that 007 figures he'll never need...until he needs them. IOW, the god (DM) knows the PC will need spell X, so insists that the PC learns spell X for at least 1 slot that day, but typical of mysterious divinities, does not tell the PC why. The revelation that the seemingly odd spell choice becomes neccessary later on becomes evidence of the god's superior wisdom and knowledge.

Railroading? Perhaps, but its cryptic and internally consistent railroading.

Besides, used that way, it nearly eliminated parties lacking specific divine spells that they'd really, really need.

 

[Scribble]

Actually, I DID use it on occasion.

Sometimes it was because the player was choosing spells completely at odds with the nature of the divinity they followed.

More often, however, it was used as an example of the god imposing his will because he knew better than the PC what he'd need in the future- kind of like how Q always kits out James Bond with a bunch of gadgets that 007 figures he'll never need...until he needs them. IOW, the god (DM) knows the PC will need spell X, so insists that the PC learns spell X for at least 1 slot that day, but typical of mysterious divinities, does not tell the PC why. The revelation that the seemingly odd spell choice becomes neccessary later on becomes evidence of the god's superior wisdom and knowledge.

Railroading? Perhaps, but its cryptic and internally consistent railroading.

Besides, used that way, it nearly eliminated parties lacking specific divine spells that they'd really, really need.

hrmm...

I wonder what it would do to the game if you made the clerics spell selection completely up to the DM. (Or a random table or soemthing.)

Not to put the DM on a power trip or soemthing, but sort of a way to show the priest as being but a servant of his god...