What Should Clerics Be Doing?
-
@Cunning:
I have a plan.
We all pick a Deity and write up all we can find on it. At the very least the stuff from the website. Some poor DM (Deadlock, probably) then transfers the text into a number of ingame books. The apropriate book spawned on each cleric when their first cleric level is taken.
This will ensure that every player knows what their god is about. The workload would be huge, but atleast people will know their cleric of lurue is not supposed to be a murderous deathbot.
Clerics who know their gods inside out are the most captivating. Lets ensure they do!
This is actually a very good idea and would go well with adding to the Player Resource Forum. If I can get access to the old Tyrran board, I collected quite a bit of info about Tyr there. I'm sure there are other players who have put together "smart books" on their chosen character's deieties over time and we could start combining that into some files or threads on the forums.
Of course, I guess the best thing to do would be to publish IC books, but some of the info is really OOC and sometimes hard to translate into IC.
While it is a good idea, I'd so much rather see players put these together as clerical characters. That way, they can influence their interpretation of the dogma.
Recall, gods give commands and state dogma–but clerics still interpret it. There are disagreements between temples of the same faith. Tymora is a case in point.
-
Clerics in general, myself included, tend to be pretty black and white on their interpretation of the god's dogma. We should test the limits more often and try new things, see what happens.
Another tip for clerics is not to forget about the character behind the class. Like someone said clerics are often mini-me's of their patron deity (again myself included). But try to remember that your character is just a human and has flaws as well.
-
Well, the thing is that a deity is rarely black and white on their own dogma, which makes players interpreting it in black and white almost odd.
What does it really mean to Helm to "guard the weak" who is "weak" what does it mean to "guard" them?
Break down his dogma, how would your character view these things that are rarely "black and white".
@Helm's:
They must protect the weak, the unpopular, the injured, and the young and not sacrifice them for others.
How do you define "protection" is it giving them charity and aid? Is it teaching them to defend themselves? Is it ensure those too weak are dealt with so they are no longer a drain from your ability to protect those more deserving? Should you seek to aid the unpopular to become popular by convincing necromancers or dark wizards to redeem themselves–or must you guard against harm the unpopular may do in the future and destroy them proactively? Can Helm only strike when it is to protect people in immediate danger, or can he strike proactively?
@Helm's:
They must anticipate attacks and he ready, know their foes, and care carefully for their weapons so that their weapons" can perform their duties properly when called upon.
How should you come to anticipate attacks and know your foes? Must you watch them and stand guard? Can you employ spies? Are double agents ethical manners to watch a foe? Does caring for ones weapons include ones agents as well, and if so, what kind of care do they deserve? What is caring for them? Giving them all they need, teaching them how to care for themselves, or presenting them with carefully regimented duties and obligations that structure their life so they have no free thought?
@Helm's:
"Never betray your trust" is the guiding phrase for faithful of Helm. This philosophy extends to thinking about how best to guard and protect, both in terms of weapons and the deployment of guardians, and to anticipating what attacks may come and having a practiced plan ready to deal with such threats. The faithful and the priests of Helm train and exercise so as to always be able to carry out their duties as best they can.
Answering the earlier questions would help define just what this means.
@Helm's:
Helmites always obey orders, provided those orders follow the dictates of Helm. Helm's wishes are often revealed to his faithful in response to on-the-spot prayer (often via an omen spell). He is very responsive in sending guiding vision, especially when his faithful face conflicting orders or directives, even from his senior clergy.
What must a Helmite do if given orders that violate the dictates of Helm? Must he announce that he can not follow such orders, must he strike down those who issued them?
@Helm's:
The thought of commanding undead rather than turning them or destroying them is abhorrent to Helm, and so his clergy are not allowed to do so and would never dream of trying. This difference in philosophy is a major factor in the rivalry between his church and that of Torm.
While that's copied verbatim from a canon source–it is actually a typo. Helm DOES command the undead. Its a major source of doctrinal division within his church. Is it right or wrong to command the undead? Do not the undead watch and wait and obey perfectly? Would that not make them ideal Guardians and Protectors? Or does the nature of an undead's evil make it so abhorrent that it is unsuited to being a protector?
This major question could be something that adds incredible interest to Helm and certainly isn't black and white.
Many deities could be examined the same way, and while not every PC priest would want to do this--it would certainly be interesting to see some try to answer these questions.
Ilmater is one of the deities with the MOST interpretations; but all of them are open to it.
-
No one "dominates" the city. That's the entire point of v4.
When Darmos can swing his sword around and cut down 6th-7th lvl chars (which represent 50% of the server population) in one swing, I kinda call that "Dominating."
Priests should also be using the dieties favored weapon and any armor restrictions.
Such as some faiths only let thier priests wear armor up to chainmail
Agreed. But, for example, Helm's Preferred weapon in the Bastard Sword, and his clerics are rarely seen in LESS than FULL PLATE. Kinda screams "Battle Priest"….
whole buncha Helm-y stuff
That's neat. Funny how I got chastised and was even told I was playing a lousy representation of a Helmite Cleric because I was doing that very thing. No offense to Love Potion at all - because I actually do like Kwalu, and Kwalu and Angela had some really good debates on Dogma - but he got all sorts of kudos and acknowledgment for playing such a focused representation of the dogma, and that he was doing patrols and blah blah… Angela was doing partols before he came along, and Jaron was patrolling the whole bloody server long before that. Angela preached to her Brotherhood regularly about the need to "interpret the dogma" in order to understand it, that blindly following the staple of the dogma in a zealot's capacity will inevitably help no one.
I think I screwed up as a Helm priest when Angela chose a side in the war. The Helmites really should have stayed neutral, and observed the major forces, and try to keep them in check/ counsel them on a peaceful solution. Which is why I've shelved her, so I can do some more research and consult with the DM's on how to take a new approach to her.
I would have to say that not all clerics should be "Battle Priests" yes. But I think it needs to be clarified that some deities are "Battle" deities, or that most of their clerics actually are "Battle Priests," and that you should do your homework before you decide on who your character should follow.
Mostly, you should just do your homework. I TOTALLY agree with DS in that this is a "freaking game people," and we're here to "have fun." I think the RP on this server is fantastic, partly because so many players are willing to do the "homework" to give their characters that extra "something" to make them "more." Clerics are one of those characters that really need the background "homework" in order for them to be a cool addition to the server.
-
No one "dominates" the city. That's the entire point of v4.
When Darmos can swing his sword around and cut down 6th-7th lvl chars (which represent 50% of the server population) in one swing, I kinda call that "Dominating."
I don't.
I call that Darmos and 250 militia privates and 1250 Pheonix Legionaires against 1000 Purple Dragons and 12 adventurers. No one dominates the server, don't make the mistake of presuming one specific scene limited by engine capabilities accurately reflects the full reality of the entire module.
Priests should also be using the dieties favored weapon and any armor restrictions.
Such as some faiths only let thier priests wear armor up to chainmail
Agreed. But, for example, Helm's Preferred weapon in the Bastard Sword, and his clerics are rarely seen in LESS than FULL PLATE. Kinda screams "Battle Priest"….
whole buncha Helm-y stuff
I think I screwed up as a Helm priest when Angela chose a side in the war. The Helmites really should have stayed neutral, and observed the major forces, and try to keep them in check/ counsel them on a peaceful solution. Which is why I've shelved her, so I can do some more research and consult with the DM's on how to take a new approach to her.
No, actually–I think its BRILLIANT the Helmites chose a side. It made sense to pick a side. It was almost bizarre to me how many people didn't try to pick a side, or at least play both sides.
I was thrilled to see some of the Helmites actually pick a side. Sure they picked the side that lost--but those things happen. They finally took a risk, and it didn't pay off but consider if it had---Helm would certainly have been replacing Tymora in the city with the support of the Crown.
It was a huge risk and had it paid off--it'd have had huge dividends. It was definitely something the DMs wanted to see.
Religious people have a god, their god wants them to do things--staying neutral and always sitting on the side lines is not what most gods want their clerics to do.
-
When Darmos can swing his sword around and cut down 6th-7th lvl chars (which represent 50% of the server population) in one swing, I kinda call that "Dominating."
Darmos is one of those targets that requires outside the box thinking. Devil pacts, opening a portal to another plane and sucking his butt into it or something else beyond the normal. If you come up with an idea that generates enough player interest and you really work at making it exciting, vibrant and worthwhile the DM's are likely to be willing to let you try.*
The world is very changeable. I mean isn't that the point of V.4?
*Understandably its probably going to be very, very hard though.
-
I'd like to point out that clerics don't necessarily have to care so much about converts. They can just live for their duty to their deity, and aforementioned deity's dogma.
I see nowhere in any god's dogma, save for Cyric - "convert all who do not follow me, or I will be very very cross with you."
In fact, I can see Ilmater wanting his clerics to have people be more selfless and kind-hearted, and not caring so much who they pray to so long as they help each other out and be all Santa Claus.
Edit: Also, can we make people research the race they're playing, too? No more three year old Halflings or Huelves, imo.
-
I see nowhere in any god's dogma, save for Cyric - "convert all who do not follow me, or I will be very very cross with you."
The great point of Cyric is to have everyone following him. So if you arent converting or killing people who dont worship him, or at least ploting to do so, you arent doing much. :wink:
But i think i understand your point, and agree with it. There are many ways to follow a god. You could be a cleric of cyric and spend your days on basement writing poems of Cyric just to have them spread later through out the streets.
What i still feel is that we lack a certain type of clerics. I dont have anything against battlepriests, like i said, i would just like to see less of them and more of something else.
-
What i still feel is that we lack a certain type of clerics. I dont have anything against battlepriests, like i said, i would just like to see less of them and more of something else.
And the something else would be…
-
I think the stumbling block on clerics not being battlepriests in Arabel is the concept of "might makes right." I've heard discussions on "why should I bring a mage who buffs if I can bring a cleric to do the same thing and wear armor?"
Especially in the lower levels, if you're a cleric healing and wearing robes you're most likely going to be sidelined for someone in heavy armor busting out the bull strengths and magic weapons. Though, I'm not sure I've seen that many that fit into the first category, just an observation.
-
"Downslide"And the something else would be…
There are so many things. The possibilities are infinite. You could be just a preacher, someone more focused in spreading the word or blessings rather than in combat, like Rolliander Deephollow.
And being a battlepriest is far from being bad, it isnt just new. What i find bad is those who pick the self buffer class and dont roleplay a cleric. Those that if you replaced those clerics levels for figthers, you would not see the difference.
-
Especially in the lower levels, if you're a cleric healing and wearing robes you're most likely going to be sidelined for someone in heavy armor busting out the bull strengths and magic weapons. Though, I'm not sure I've seen that many that fit into the first category, just an observation.
I belive that there is more to a battlepriest than wearing heavy armor.
I would prefer a Cleric in my party, whos major concern is to zeal for the welfare of everyone, than one who buffs himself with bull strength and magic weapon and cares not for the others.
But a Battlepriest can be either of them. I dont understand why Battlepriest has become such a pejorative term, because in my eyes it is not. -
Something else would be what was mentioned before:
Picking spells that fit your god and doing what your ability scores say you can do.
Going another route than 14/12/14/10/14/12.
Not buffing everyone just because you have the power to if your deity couldn't give less of a f*** about protecting people who want some rats dead.
And that's just the aspects that influence combat. "Something else" can be anything else if you see the cleric as more than a means to achieving certain effects via spells.
-
What i still feel is that we lack a certain type of clerics. I dont have anything against battlepriests, like i said, i would just like to see less of them and more of something else.
And the something else would be…
Subtle stealth-priests
Religious leaders that garner warriors about them to do the defending bit
Healers
Priests that spread word of their deityYou can be a priest that occasionally participates in combat without being a "battlepriest" of a god like Lurue.
-
Very interesting… i notice, playing a cleric of a lesser known god (lurue) most people arent very interested in dogma, or learning about the god/gods in any way more than getting their swords enchanted.
So be it, is that not much like real life, where many, maybe most people, are simply materialistic, cowardly, and uninterested in the "unknown"?
Anyway, maybe some of you saw or ventured with my character (Derek Aira) on Monday night , on the Tree of All-Seeing quest, i hammed it up quite a bit and was very very fun and hope to work on it more again today and tonight.
Take care and best wishes.
(thanks to all the great DMs and players involved)
-
I'd like to point out that clerics don't necessarily have to care so much about converts. They can just live for their duty to their deity, and aforementioned deity's dogma.
I see nowhere in any god's dogma, save for Cyric - "convert all who do not follow me, or I will be very very cross with you."
In fact, I can see Ilmater wanting his clerics to have people be more selfless and kind-hearted, and not caring so much who they pray to so long as they help each other out and be all Santa Claus.
Agreed. Taking Elrilia as a case in point (because she's the one I know best). The Ilmatari point of view is perhaps unusual in Arabel, in that it's one of the few religions that exists primarily for the benefit of people that don't belong to it. If someone expresses an interest in following Ilmater, she's thrilled to help them, teach them, talk with them and generally encourage them. If someone decides to turn from an evil god and take up a good-aligned god that isn't Ilmater, she's just as thrilled, and will point them in the direction of the appropriate priests whilst encouraging them in their new faith. If someone is inspired to start helping others but isn't interested in faith or theology, then she'll do whatever she can to encourage them in that. And if someone is suffering, then she'll try to ease that. (Even evil people who have no intention of stopping, although in those cases she has to walk a careful line between easing their pain and helping them in evil pursuits, which would violate her oath) Mostly it's about trying to nudge people in the right direction, according to where they are at the moment. Every step in the right direction is a victory, even if they never take another one.
-
Very interesting… i notice, playing a cleric of a lesser known god (lurue) most people arent very interested in dogma, or learning about the god/gods in any way more than getting their swords enchanted.
Yes, well. Lurue on Arabel is one of the most prominent deities. It comes as a surprise to many that Lurue does not actually have her own temple in Arabel. (YET)
I'm sorry if my answer wasn't awfully helpful.
-
I'd like to not see things like spell-failure as "punishment". It's disappointing that the DM resumé appears to indicate that such events are usually taken poorly - but I do believe that there is a very real, and potentially very interesting, possibility of having fun with these kinds of IC events.
I am very much not a masochist in real life, but I greatly enjoyed trying to struggle through my sorceresses' spell failure when it struck - and the story and RP SFP had thought-up for it. I have also played a cleric who was intended to walk on the sharp edge of the dogma to accomplish something - and the temporary disappearance of some spell slots was a cool and subtle IC reminder that it was going too far.
Things like that can be great story devices. They can be stick and carrot as well, yes, but I'd rather not see them as such. Avoid mixing the IC and the OOC too much.
-
Priests are trained in armor and weapons for a reason. Most are adventuring clerics who must have a way to fight and defend themselves somehow. I see nothing wrong with priests in armor and maces, even Lurue or Ilmater. Every deity has enemies and their followers must be prepared.
But, not every priest should be a buffing fighter either.
-
@Khamal:
Priests are trained in armor and weapons for a reason. Most are adventuring clerics who must have a way to fight and defend themselves somehow. I see nothing wrong with priests in armor and maces, even Lurue or Ilmater. Every deity has enemies and their followers must be prepared.
But, not every priest should be a buffing fighter either.
@movie:
Reverend Oliver: [explaining to his church why he is marching off to war] A shepherd must tend his flock. And at times… fight off the wolves.