• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Why do clerics charge for spells?

DreadPirateMurphy said:
WOW! You sound just like Richard Stallman! Software is free!
So you mean that neither software nor healing should be free? ;)


(Perhaps it is just the source code, i.e. the sermons, that should be free.)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Expected tithes, IIRC, were usually set to 10% of your income at a minimum. That included nobles and wealthy merchants.

IMC, tithes and membership fees only exist for certain money-focused churches.

The rest make all their money off of healing up adventurers or selling them magic items. :)
 

Another issue to consider: most non-adventurers are MUCH cheaper to heal, and there are far more people to heal them.

Example: "Brother Mun! Come quick! Morgan has been trapped by a falling log and his legs are crushed!" "Fear not, young one. I have spent three summers in the tutelage of Pelor, and his divine touch is known through me." One Cure Light spell later: healed peasant.

Example 2: "Hail, Brother Mun! We've just come from the Caves of Despair, and I bear horrible wounds, while my companion has nearly had his very life pulled from him by the foul undead who dwelt there. Can you aid us?" "Mayhaps I can, Sirrah, but your wounds are greivous. It will take all my divine power to restore you...your companion must needs wait upon Abbot Feng...only he can cure such a malady, and then he shall be unable to lend aid to one of our flock, should they fall victim to such peril." Three Cure Serious Wounds and one Restoration later, the PCs are healed. Should the church's enemies attack, the abbot will be unprepared to defend the abbey, though.

Dread Pirate Murphy said:
If I still have spells left at the end of the day, aren't I just wasting that potential (especially with spontaneous healing)?
No, you're just paying a different hidden cost. If you don't use up your spells, that isn't a waste because they were available for use in case of an emergency. If lightning struck a nearby farm in the middle of the night and the family was hurt when the ceiling collapsed, then it wouldn't be a waste that you had reserved spells for just such an emergency. The cost is the peace-of-mind knowing that you're prepared for such an eventuality. It may be a market inefficiency, but there you are.
 

Henrix said:
So you mean that neither software nor healing should be free? ;)


(Perhaps it is just the source code, i.e. the sermons, that should be free.)

A little off topic, but...ownership has value (to the producer and the consumer) in and of itself, and software always costs something to produce. My personal opinion is that the free software movement frequently loses sight of those facts.

As for healing...well, if Timmy comes in with a broken leg because he fell down a well, then a cleric of a good deity should have no problem burning a 1st- or 2nd-level spell slot to spontaneously cure little Timmy. A cleric of a neutral or evil deity may or may not, depending on their goals and the perception they're trying to create in the community.

I could also see a lord paying an annual donation to the church in return for healing any vassals that come down with a disease or are injured. That would be a good investment in keeping estates productive. The only circumstance where this wouldn't make sense would be a lawful evil society with overpopulation -- then the lord could just evict the sick laborer and find one who could work. In effect, the lord's payment is the fantasy equivalent of socialized medicine. :)
 

How about becuase other churches do.

Think about it like this church A decides to charge for curing and makes a few bucks after the other churches have used up their spells healing the poor/sick for free. Now with some capitol Church A can throw money around and aquire more followers. Maybe they don't charge a lot but they charge something and then poor that money back into gaining foloowers.

The pool of followers is limited so when they gain the other chruchs that don't charge lose some followers. Yes they gain a little good will from healing but the other church is feeding us most day and clothing us were as we probably would have healed on our own.

Church B sees Chruch A start pulling ahead with more followers and decides it need to charge as well.

Eventually I see a price war occuring then prices finally stabilizing and settling down.

Just another thought I didn't see mentioned

later
 

I always play that the "cost" of a cleric casting a spell is becuase it is something outside their normal real of behavior.

a villager injured in a town, and a follower of the god that happens to have a temple there. The cleric heals for free.

And adventurer walks into the nearby forest and gets injured. He has no relations with the townsfolk. He probably isn't the same religion. Why should the priest assist such individual? So the cleric charges. The funds go and pay for many good things for the town (or eveil or neutral things, depending on the alignment of the cleric)

Mind you, thats for basic stuff. Raise dead and the like. The fees are there for a different reason. In mythology people could cure themselves of diseases deal with geasa and the like through holy behavior. Of course in the middle ages it was also possible to buy absolution from things. Think of the money in the same way in this case. You can either do it the hard way, or pay the money.
 

Shallown said:
The pool of followers is limited so when they gain the other chruchs that don't charge lose some followers. Yes they gain a little good will from healing but the other church is feeding us most day and clothing us were as we probably would have healed on our own.

If the temples that heal/cast for free don't gain any good will, doesn't that mean that healing/casting is so worthless that no one will want to pay for it in the first place?
 

tensen said:
And adventurer walks into the nearby forest and gets injured. He has no relations with the townsfolk. He probably isn't the same religion. Why should the priest assist such individual?

Because he's Good.

“Good” implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.

If he doesn't heal the adventurer, he's going against his God!
 

LostSoul said:
Because he's Good.



If he doesn't heal the adventurer, he's going against his God!

What makes you so sure that his god cares about that particular adventurer? Your assumption is that gods think like humans do. But obviously gods let people die all the time. Bad things happen to good people all the time. The gods do not stop it.

On a purely philosophical level, it is an issue of free will and living with the consequences of your actions. If you could get healed for free or raised from the dead for free, then there would be no consequences to our actions. People would be free to kill and fight, engage in reckless behavior, and otherwise live in anarchy because they know the gods' servants will take care of them. It suddenly becomes a Divine Welfare System. Perhaps the greater good (teaching individuals about personal responsibility) is better served by not just healing every adventurer for free.
 

Henry said:
In real life, churches hold bake sales as fundraisers. :)

:chuckle:

That might make an amusing adventure hook. Just imagine, a bunch of litte old ladies selling cakes, pies, and brownies to raise money for the local church of St. Cuthbert. Then something goes wrong. :lol:
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top