Why Did The Cleric Have Spells?

[Delta]

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

No, it's the other way around. Looking right now at the OD&D spell lists, I see 9 overlap, and 17 unique to clerics.

I'd also disagree the theory that clerics were the "medics" from wargaming. Clerics don't exist in Chainmail, and there are no medics of any sort in those rules.

 

[frankthedm]

IRL the ancient world abounded with staged priestly 'miracles' to impress temple goers. Speaking statues, Wire based levitation and advanced technology{for the time] were all pressed into service to show the might of the Deity in question, so a 'spellcasting priest' is actually a historical concept.

 

[Korgoth]

Like a lot of things in D&D, it seems to be several things at once. It is a campaign-specific innovation (a counter to Sir Fang's power). It is inspired by pop culture (Hammer, et al.). It is based upon several different historical things: religious order knights, saints with miraculous powers, medieval clergy who fought in battles, lawyering around the shedding blood prohibition, etc. It fulfills some game functions (healer, anti-undead, hybrid of fighting man and magic-user, etc.).

As written, it works. Interestingly, in OD&D the assumption (what with "Cross" in the equipment list and the fact that only Lawful clerics getting to Raise Dead, etc.) seems to be of a Christian milieu.

Cleric seems very much a "third" class to me. Fighting Men are the main class, of course, and Magic-Users come in second. Of the original three, Cleric seems the most dispensible. After all, there are any number of ways to make the MU into a healer (such as my "channeling" method: he expends a spell and heals 1d6 damage per level of the spell expended; you could also just add the cure spells into the MU list).

The Cleric is a better class than Greyhawk's Thief, however.

 

[Delta]

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?

Dude, unified mechanic.


I've written on my blog about my long-time problems with the Cleric. In Chainmail you've just got Fighters and Wizards. OD&D adds the Cleric, very much middle-ages and Christian specific (unique spells pretty much right out of the Bible, all protective and defensive). Then over time it evolves into a pantheistic pagan-priest, and that in particular has never worked for me in conjunction with the powers, armor, medieval-style churches, etc., that the class has. I, too, yanked the Cleric out of my "Diminutive d20" rules (link below).

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

As many have already pointed out, many of the 1Ed clerical spells were essentially miracles lifted from the Bible, stories of saints, and some other religious texts and stories.

Sticks to Snakes? Moses.

Attonement? The Christian sacrament of Reconciliation (aka Confession).

Cure spells? Religions abound with tales of priests, saints, avatars and God/gods who walk the Earth healing their faithful, or in some cases soon-to-be-converts.

Raising the Dead? The story of Lazarus, and others in other faith traditions.

And so forth.

 

[TerraDave]

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.

The story I heard was that it was included to provide a christian alternative to apease EGGs wife of the time.

The irony works on various levels.

 

[Set]

A variant Priest that used Channel Energy instead of spells, being able to channel energy to heal, erect a protective ward, bless items (such as an allies weapon, allowing him to smite with it), buff allies, etc. would be interesting. Instead of having spells, the Priest would have X number of channel energy uses a day, and start out with two or three different ways to use that energy (with using it to heal pretty much being a staple), depending on feat use. As he leveled up, he'd get more uses / day *and* he'd get bonus Feats that he could spend on channeling feats, each of which would teach him a new way to channel that divine power, to put up the magic circle of protection, or to exorcise an outsider, or to repel undead, or to smite the unrighteous, for instance.

No spells at all. Just channeling options and channel energy uses. One might put all of his Feats into smiting stuff and buffing stuff, and be more of a Fighting-Priest, while another might focus on more healing and protection effects, and be a support character, while a third might focus on channeling the energy into bolts of glowing energy and be a kind of 'blaster' priest who calls down the fury of his diety on foes at a range (instead of wading into melee like the Smiting-Cleric).

 

[Nifft]

This is one of those "fact is stranger than fiction" details. Yes, Gary and Dave included this restriction because clerics were "forbidden from shedding blood." Thing is, they didn't make that up. That "logic" was actually used by some warrior-priests during the Crusades--yes, in the real world--to get around prohibitions on priestly violence and bloodshed.

Which only goes to show that rules lawyers actually pre-dated D&D.

If I weren't constitutionally opposed to giant sig-quotes, this exchange would be in there.

Cheers, -- N

 

[green slime]

This is one of those "fact is stranger than fiction" details. Yes, Gary and Dave included this restriction because clerics were "forbidden from shedding blood." Thing is, they didn't make that up. That "logic" was actually used by some warrior-priests during the Crusades--yes, in the real world--to get around prohibitions on priestly violence and bloodshed.

Bishop Odo.

Is, I'm sure, a large part of what made Clerics what they are in DnD.

He wielded a mace at the Battle of Hastings:

In his hand he held a mace, and wherever he saw most need he held up and stationed the knights, and often urged them on to assault and strike the enemy

"A Dictionary of Chivalry"
Maces were favourite weapons with soldier-churchmen like Odo, the warrior-bishop who fought at Hastings, and went on crusade in 1096. Since the weapon was only a crushing and bruising weapon they were able to argue that they were not shedding blood with the sword, which was forbidden by the Scriptures.

 

[Jack Colby]

The true story is the Cleric was a response to Sir Fang, a vampire PC in Dave Arneson's game who had gotten too powerful. The Cleric was based on Hammer horror films. I'm guessing Gygax added the more medieval take later.