Why Did The Cleric Have Spells?

[Scribble]

I'm kind of curious... Why was the original Cleric given spells? It seems somewhat redundant, since the Wizard already had the "spells schtick."

Why wasn't he instead just given the ability to heal, or counter negative effects a number of times per day? Or maybe a percentage chance to do so?

What purpose did the design of the cleric originally intend to serve?

Anyone?

 

[jadrax]

I'm kind of curious... Why was the original Cleric given spells? It seems somewhat redundant, since the Wizard already had the "spells schtick."

Why wasn't he instead just given the ability to heal, or counter negative effects a number of times per day? Or maybe a percentage chance to do so?

What purpose did the design of the cleric originally intend to serve?

Anyone?

They where basically originally a Hybrid of Magic-User and Fighting-Man, the first Gish class if you will.

 

[Scribble]

Did they originally pull from the same pool of spells? I can't remember this being the case, but...

 

[Mouseferatu]

Did they originally pull from the same pool of spells? I can't remember this being the case, but...

Nope. There was the occasional overlap (I think they both had light as far back as Basic, if not earlier), but they were two separate lists.

 

[jadrax]

Nope. There was the occasional overlap (I think they both had light as far back as Basic, if not earlier), but they were two separate lists.

As I recall, originally it was mostly overlap, they had around 11 spells that where not also available to magic-Users.

 

[WayneLigon]

I'm kind of curious... Why was the original Cleric given spells? It seems somewhat redundant, since the Wizard already had the "spells schtick."

Why wasn't he instead just given the ability to heal, or counter negative effects a number of times per day? Or maybe a percentage chance to do so?

What purpose did the design of the cleric originally intend to serve?

I think attributing a design purpose to the cleric in OD&D is probably overthinking things a bit; I think it was more reaction than action and also based more on the flavor-over-purpose principle.

He's both a holy knight type, and also be a religious archtype based on Christian priests or saints; it wasn't uncommon for both to be attributed powers common to the early cleric: the power to drive off evil spirits, heal wounds, cleanse areas, and in general defend the populace. He wasn't allowed to use a sword because of the prohibition again shedding blood (I can't remember if this reason was debunked as an urban legend later on or not) for monastic orders. The term 'lay on hands' didn't originate with D&D; healing is the single most common attribute given to Christian saint-figures (flying or levitation is a close second, along with divination, purifying food, speaking in languages, bilocation, speaking to and commanding animals; some duplicate Biblical miracles such as duplication of food (Create food), bringing water into the desert (create water), Moses' acts (Sticks to Snakes), etc)

Now on the other hand, your archtypical wizard is almost never a healer. Witches sometimes are portrayed as such, but that doesn't come into play as a common fantasy archtype until the early Eighties as neoPaganism begins to remake the witch's image. So, someone has to heal people and it falls to the cleric, whose inspirational source already has that rep.

 

[Dykstrav]

Well... Why not spells? They're one-time magical effects, just like the other spells of the game. Just because they're cast by a different class doesn't necessarily make them something different. If a light spell functions the same way for everyone who casts it, why muddy the waters by calling it something different?

Not all clerics are the archetypical heal-and-smite type, and giving them a flat chance to remove afflictions or heal X times per day limits the class dramatically. Sure, maybe the typical adventuring cleric wants cure light wounds and remove disease. There's also the clerics of Zeus who wants command or the clerics of Ares that want remove fear or the clerics of Hecate that want detect magic. It makes it far easier to customize a cleric to suit their patron deity by expressing their abilities as spells rather than by their most-sought function in an adventuring group.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

I think clerics were given spells in order to replicate miracles. There are (extremely dubious) claims of saints having healed people, even after death, as well as holy people walking on water (wasn't Water Walk a cleric spell?), etc.

 

[Remathilis]

I'm kind of curious... Why was the original Cleric given spells? It seems somewhat redundant, since the Wizard already had the "spells schtick."

Why wasn't he instead just given the ability to heal, or counter negative effects a number of times per day? Or maybe a percentage chance to do so?

What purpose did the design of the cleric originally intend to serve?

Anyone?

Wargame roots.

Fighting-man: Infantry
Magic-user: Artillery
Cleric: Medical

As stated, they were originally "religious knights" who learned to emulate various religious miracles (fun fact: until AD&D 1e, clerics got their first spell at 2nd level. They had no spells at first.) The first miracle they got was Turn Undead (vaguely based on the idea of a cross repelling a vampire) and then they got spells used to represent the miracles.

Supposedly, the ideas was a cleric waded into melee like a fighter, but used his spells after a battle to heal and aid (vs. a m-u, who was expected to use his spells in combat). The balancing factor for a cleric gaining spells was the limit to blunt weapons (most of which capped a 1d6, vs 1d8 or 1d10 for most swords) and the fact they had little or no combat-ready spells (excluding cause/inflict X wounds).

Ironically, While being one of the original classes, its perhaps the most-often removed class for exactly why you say. Much like thieves, many believe clerics exist solely because of a fake/useless divide in the magic system in D&D (and later emulated in everything from Final Fantasy to Magic: The Gathering) and the game would suffer none for their ultimate removal/combining with the other spellcaster class. (Much like how thieves could be removed by simply allowing everyone chances at thief-like maneuvers and spells).

 

[RFisher]

Looking at oD&D, it seems clear to me that mechanically the cleric was the fighter/magic-user. The class was given different spells to further distinguish it from magic-user. To give it more of a unique role in the group.

According to Mike Mornard, the cleric first appeared in Blackmoor, Arneson’s pre-D&D campaign. This cleric was given undead fighting abilities in order to counter a particularly powerful vampire PC. As I understand it, in Blackmoor at that time any PC could learn to cast spells rather than it being a class feature.

I’ve certainly been tempted to create a cleric-like class that just had special abilities instead of spells.