Re: Clerics choose Law vs Chaos « Reply #30 on Nov 15, 2008, 10:39pm »
I think that Clerics need to pick one alignment and stay there. I think that if a god is willing to grant powers to the Cleric, that Cleric needs to follow the alignment of that god. If you don't follow the teachings of the god (i.e. you do things not of his alignment) then the god will stop giving you spells.
I voted for 1st level becasue it makes more sense to me that way.
Re: Clerics choose Law vs Chaos « Reply #31 on Nov 15, 2008, 11:01pm »
> 2. Also, if one argues that cleric spells are given by a particular god, what happens when that neutral cleric opts to choose a lawful or chaotic alignment? Does that mean that a different god is now supplying the spells?
Perhaps up until 7th level both chaotic and lawful gods have been granting spells to cleric in an attempt to woo the cleric to their side.
A very interesting and dangerous game to be playing the gods off one another. I very much like it.
Joined: Sept 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 942 Karma: 27
Re: Clerics choose Law vs Chaos « Reply #32 on Nov 16, 2008, 1:00am »
I'm not sure to what degree alignment in the three LBBs has such cosmic or even sectarian implications, or follows the equation of Law=Good and Chaos=Evil. Certainly Gary wrote (in the magazine article presenting his expanded alignment scheme) that he had thought in "just about the same" terms to some extent. ("Notice I do not say they were synonymous in my thinking at the time.") He also wrote that the wording had led to "considerable confusion" to which Greyhawk added ("for by the time that booklet was written some substantial differences had been determined").
I don't think it's indicated in the books that a Cleric's spells (as they are explicitly termed) are granted/witholdable by a deity. It is stipulated that both Clerics and MUs require spell books. Note that in days of yore, "clerk" (derived from "cleric") not only denoted literacy but sometimes connoted lore of enchantment. I can't think of anything in the LBBs suggesting that the spell-casting process so differs by class. To infer such an elaboration from other class factors seems to me unwarranted. No rationale (much less a detailed supernatural one) is given for restrictions on use of arms and armor.
In other words, a Cleric's magic may be of the same kind as an MU's -- and something quite apart from god-worked miracles.
Law, Neutrality and Chaos refer to conflicting "stances" among men and monsters. To presume that God (or a god) must be on the side of one of the "alignments" (whatever those may be) is to impose a constraint not in the text.
Might not theologically competing sects (or even rival nations "in communion") be Lawful versus Chaotic -- yet worshipers of the same deity? One might think of Byzantium (herself riven by fierce disputes) and her neighbors.
The matter becomes a bit different as one adds the supplements, which in so many ways approach the assumptions taken for granted in later editions and by later "generations" of players.
Of course, the Judge is free to interpret, alter and add rules in his or her own campaign! If attempting to present "the rules" given in the LBBs, though, I would be wary of going so far beyond the text even to make implied (by later sources) subtext explicit. Should not new enthusiasts have the same opportunity to arrive at their own readings? Else, why not simply turn to one of the less ambiguous editions?
On that principle, I'll vote for the later and less exclusive option. It does not bar imposing a penalty of the Referee's devising for alignment changes (or Neutrality) at lower levels.
Finarvyn Administrator Dungeon Master member is offline
Joined: Jun 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 4,674 Location: Near Chicago Karma: 178
Re: Clerics choose Law vs Chaos « Reply #33 on Nov 16, 2008, 8:18am »
Okay, here's another nugget to consider...
I'm looking at page 22 of my Men & Magic (once again, 4th printing)
Quote:
Note that under lined Clerical spells are reversed by evil Clerics. Also, note the Clerics versus Undead Monsters table, including the strong effect fo the various clerical levels upon the undead; however, evil Clerics do not have this effect, the entire effect being lost.
No mention is made of "neutral" Clerics here, which might imply that one cannot be "neutral" but must choose sides.
So, under the "pick at 7th level" model...
A 6th level Cleric can: * cure and cause light wounds * purify and putrify food and water * detect good and evil * protection against good and evil * light and darkness * bless and curse * cure and cause disease * continual light and darkness * cure and cause serious wounds * protection from good and evil, 10'r * turn undead
A 7th level Cleric can: * gain one extra d6 hit die * gain a 5th level spell * loses half of the abilities listed above
Why would I ever want to advance to 7th level? I don't think that a "neutral" Cleric was ever supposed to be an option. Here's a quote from Men & Magic page 7 (4th printing again) Quote:
Note that Clerica are either "Law" or "Chaos", and there is a sharp distinction between them.
Of course, this is slightly muddied by the next line, which says: Quote:
If a Patriarch receiving the above benefits changes sides, all the benefits will immediately be removed!
This second line would seem to imply that changing sides is possible.
I suppose my conclusion would be that "neutral" Clerics do not exist (or that they are Druids, if these are allowed) but that Clerics can choose to switch between Law and Chaos if they are less than Patriarch (8th level).
What say you all?
By the way: I would be interested to find out if anyone has a later printing or PDF with differences in the quotes above. I'm curious now if that one change from the OP was a fluke or if someone was actively trying to change the rules about Clerics...
Marv / Finarvyn DCC playtester (2011) C&C playtester (2003) I'm partly responsible for the S&W WhiteBox Builder of the TrollBridge Master of Mutants; MA since 1976 OD&D Player since 1975
"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!" - Dave Arneson
Joined: Sept 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 942 Karma: 27
Re: Clerics choose Law vs Chaos « Reply #34 on Nov 16, 2008, 11:57am »
Advancing to 7th level is a prerequisite for attaining 8th ...
But seriously,
Note: There are Anti-Clerics (listed below) who have similar powers to Clerics. Clerical spells underlined on the table for Clerical Spells have a reverse effect ...
(M&M, p. 34)
How does it follow that a Neutral character would have the powers of both a Cleric and an Anti-Cleric? That looks like a straw man, not a wicker man!
It is nowhere indicated that one can be both at once, nor that one is Lawful and the other Chaotic short of 8th level!
The clear point of the "7th and up" rule has to do with the bennies received at 8th.
Choose a rule if you insist; perhaps it's better (in "S&W WB") to present both. Please, though, refrain from adding rules of your own to such an offering.
Joined: Jul 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 410 Location: Urbana, IL Karma: 26
Re: Clerics choose Law vs Chaos « Reply #35 on Nov 16, 2008, 12:51pm »
I'm with dwayanu on this one. As I read my copy of Men & Magic a starting cleric may be of any alignment. If Chaos is selected they are an Anti-Cleric, commanding undead and using reversed spells. In all other cases, the normal cleric rules apply. A Neutral Cleric must choose a side, Law or Chaos, in order to advance to 7th level. If they choose Chaos, they immediately become an Anti-Cleric.
Joined: Oct 2008 Gender: Male Posts: 679 Location: Lille, France Karma: 45
Re: Clerics choose Law vs Chaos « Reply #36 on Nov 16, 2008, 2:19pm »
I hopes it's clear I don't suggest my reading is not the only possible one, but just a fun attemps to read it "by the text" - which is an abuse of reading. This is an archaeology of od&d - and I'm an archaelogist, IRL.
I'll continue with the spell list soon - today, It's my Labyrinth's lord weekly session but I wanted to remind a point : it seems, form the description of Finger of death, that's it's the distinctive trait of the Evil high cleric : any high-level cleric can use it carefuly, but abuse turns you into an Evil anti-cleric. Dark side of the force...
But lower level anti-clerics do exists (and be shaman at 3d level), so even if the firts anti-clerics were those who abused of Finger of death, it's clear they created their own hierarchy. This also, as many people reminded it, suppose that clerics don't get their spells from Gods ["Powers", in the text], but from their spell books, just as magic-users. But the way they use their spells leads them to various ways - and this is one point which could be in support of "no neutrality after 6th level".
This way of turning to evil is also close to the idea that Law, Chaos and neutrality are various views in the same church, or at least in the same religious frame.
Joined: Sept 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 942 Karma: 27
Re: Clerics choose Law vs Chaos « Reply #37 on Nov 16, 2008, 2:37pm »
Evil Clerics commanding undead rather than turning them is yet another "rule" not included in (indeed directly contradicted by) the LBB. (Nothing against its being Jeff's rule!)
Choose a rule if you insist; perhaps it's better (in "S&W WB") to present both.
Well, if I remember right, the decision of the "steering committee" was to go with the "choose at 7th level" version since that's the most common and the version you get in the OD&D PDF if you buy one.
Please, though, refrain from adding rules of your own to such an offering.
Thanks for the vote of confidence. It's always been my intention NOT to add my own house rules as mandatory rules. (Occasionally there might be an "optional house rule" text box, but just as a source of ideas and not as an official suggestion.)
My entire point throughout this whole thread is that folks like to throw the "by the book" phrase out a lot, but clearly if "the book" has changed from printing to printing then the waters are kind of muddy in a few instances. Your "by the book" might not agree with mine, and it's not just a "depends on how you read it" issue if the actual text isn't constant throughout every printing.
Marv / Finarvyn DCC playtester (2011) C&C playtester (2003) I'm partly responsible for the S&W WhiteBox Builder of the TrollBridge Master of Mutants; MA since 1976 OD&D Player since 1975
"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!" - Dave Arneson
Joined: Sept 2007 Gender: Male Posts: 942 Karma: 27
Re: Clerics choose Law vs Chaos « Reply #39 on Nov 16, 2008, 6:34pm »
"... nor that one is Lawful and the other Chaotic short of 8th level."
This assumes a later printing than yours (which may differ on these points as well).
The table of "Character Alignment, Including Various Monsters and Creatures" lists Patriarchs under Law, and Evil High Priests under Chaos. I think that's the only alignment demarcation between Clerics and Anti-Clerics (but it's possible I've forgotten another). A 7th level Chaotic character is not necessarily an Anti-Cleric yet.
All EHPs = Chaotic and Evil All Anti-Clerics =Evil (based on level titles, discounting Shaman) but not necessarily Chaotic All Clerics = non-Evil All Patriarchs = Lawful
"... nor that one is Lawful and the other Chaotic short of 8th level."
The table of "Character Alignment, Including Various Monsters and Creatures" lists Patriarchs under Law, and Evil High Priests under Chaos. I think that's the only alignment demarcation between Clerics and Anti-Clerics (but it's possible I've forgotten another). A 7th level Chaotic character is not necessarily an Anti-Cleric yet.
All EHPs = Chaotic and Evil All Anti-Clerics =Evil (based on level titles) but not necessarily Chaotic All Clerics = non-Evil All Patriarchs = Lawful
Hmmm. I hadn't thought about OD&D alignment in quite that way before. I guess I always assumed they interchange Good=Law and Evil=Chaos without distinguishing them.
Y'know ... I exalt you for this. Makes me re-think alignment.
Marv / Finarvyn DCC playtester (2011) C&C playtester (2003) I'm partly responsible for the S&W WhiteBox Builder of the TrollBridge Master of Mutants; MA since 1976 OD&D Player since 1975
"Don't ask me what you need to hit. Just roll the die and I will let you know!" - Dave Arneson
...perhaps it's better (in "S&W WB") to present both. Please, though, refrain from adding rules of your own to such an offering.
That's the approach I favor, as well. In any retro-clone, but especially one for OD&D, I think preserving such ambiguities is important (i.e. don't "clarify" it with personal interpretations that take away the referee's chance to interpret the rule differently). The Law/Chaos vs. Good/Evil thing is another such area; I'm against explicit linkage of law with good and chaos with evil in the S&W WB rules.
On the cleric issue, the consensus of the steering committee on including the rule from the later print was "when in doubt, offer options." That is, offer a standard approach (my personal preference would be to offer a standard approach based on the most common rules: the OCE), and options in sidebars. I don't recall the exact approach that was settled on, though.
A 6th level Cleric can: * cure and cause light wounds * purify and putrify food and water * detect good and evil * protection against good and evil * light and darkness * bless and curse * cure and cause disease * continual light and darkness * cure and cause serious wounds * protection from good and evil, 10'r * turn undead
A 7th level Cleric can: * gain one extra d6 hit die * gain a 5th level spell * loses half of the abilities listed above
Why would I ever want to advance to 7th level?
Maybe to get close to getting a stronghold toguether with a fanatical body of followers. That is worth losing all the rest IMO.
Joined: Oct 2008 Gender: Male Posts: 679 Location: Lille, France Karma: 45
Re: Clerics choose Law vs Chaos « Reply #43 on Nov 17, 2008, 4:04pm »
I adher to dwayanu reading about Chaos / Law / Good / Evil. The only question is about good, because it's only mention"by the text" is to says that poison is not good or evil. We can deduce there's good as an opposite to evil, but it's too implicit to explain it clearly. The only clear thing is that abuse of Finger of death turns you to evil... an idea I like a lot.
So, as promised, I continue with the 2nd level of spell, on the Law point of view. Two titles corresponds to these spells: Vicar and curates, which are clearly in the christian frame. They're suggest a parish, but nothing tell us if this is still the village (from the village's priest) or something else. I guess it its, but this can be widely debated [note: for a long time, I also think titles where poetic at best and I never used them. But in such an exegetic reading, any bit of imformation is good].
So, the spells allow to these vicars and curates to Find Traps, Hold Person, Bless, Speak with Animals. Why should trap finding be a religious task is a question I can't solve; I can't imagine it's just practical, maybe is it linked to the idea of divination, or to body integrity, which would fit better.
Hold person is in the category as charm person, a kind of suggestion. I suggest to understand it as a part of the "law enforcement" mission of the cleric.
Bless pose no major problem, as it's clear that knights-monks bless troops before battle.
Speak with animals is the most interesting one, as it's shows that, before of the druid apparition [which cant' be the "old religion", because it arroves later than llb - it's rather a new one], the link between Law and Nature was not broken. Even if mots animals are neutral, three of the True-Lawfuls (unicorns, pegasi and hippgogrifs) are horse-like, and the two religious orders of Chainmail, Templars and Hospitalers, are also riders. So Law and animals are not opposed, even if the favorite one is the Horse - which should be, in some way, the symbol of Law.
For anticlerics, I note the same 4th & 5 level correspond to Evil priest and Evil curate - the priesthood for anticlerics is later than for clerics and is not linked to villages. Are they more urbans? I'll come back on that question when i'm going to speak of Chaos.
Joined: Oct 2008 Gender: Male Posts: 679 Location: Lille, France Karma: 45
Re: Clerics choose Law vs Chaos « Reply #44 on Nov 22, 2008, 7:24pm »
The Bishop is an important step in the carrier of our cleric: he becomes an hero, at least in terms of fighting, but it could have other meanings (like giving a confidence bonus to his followers) and he gains both 3d and 4th level spells, something unusual for later editions readers. The bishop is also a title strongly linked to the Christian hierarchy. Unlike the “village priest”, the bishop is strongly linked to a town and there can’t be two bishop for the same one – another demographic point which ask questions.
The Bishop is able to remove curses, cure disease and neutralize poison, three points which don’t pose problems according to what was already said on law ; same thing about protection form evil, 10’ [which don’t solve the problem of what’s evil] and continual light, ameliorate versions of spells they already had.
The Turn stick to snakes is clearly linked to biblical miracles. Once again, it proves the use of poison by itself is not forbidden by Law. The Old Testament style of some spells is very coherent with the Law: as far as I know, few major religions consider the Law as essential: Old Testament Torah is among these and gives a good base for the Law – the Cleric who use terrible means to defend the Law is a common figure there ; Islam is another, and I already pointed the fact that Sufism is another base, with the presence of derviches ; and the last one is Legism, in Old China, which is not really a religion, but was there before Buddhism, another influence on the definition of the Law. Just think to these Chinese syngagogs, with Persian-speaking rabbins, where the cult of the Emperor was practiced in the name of Yahve, as they were described by 17th century European travelers, and you probably get an interesting picture of the Law.
But the use of Locate Objets, outside of specific needs of adventure, is unclear and cant’ be clearly linked to classical miracles (apart the ability of St Christopher to find lost objects in catholic tradition). In the magic-user list, I would class it as the ‘pre-psionics’ mental abilities spells, along with ESP. But it fits with detection spells, and more, with find traps, with the idea the cleric is a specialist of divination, something which is among the common traits of antiquity priests, but can’t be linked with Christianity. Maybe we can also link it with the next title of Lama, as a rise in the degree of consciousness of the world and the ability to project outside of self.
I note the ability to create water, which is both linked to the ideal of purity, and a typical elemental spell, which tend to prove that elements are not really linked to any alignment in od&d – they went to neutrality with ad&d only.
Lastly, I notice the ability to speak with plants. Like with animals, it makes me think that od&d llb absence of druids makes more place and more sense for Law links with nature. Perhaps nature is viewed as natural Order, something which is strongly connected with Law – and the ad&d and later editions ideas of Nature as typically neutral has no base here. But as these spells have no reversal version, they can be use both by law and chaos clerics, which could lead to considers nature has no alignment at all – and the nature / civilization conflict, as it is described later in Forgotten realms and so son, is senseless here. Afterall, most od&d world seems to be a wilderness, something like a savage frontier, so nature has no use for defenders.
![[Home]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/home.gif "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/topics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/help.gif "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/search.gif "[Search]")
![[Login]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/login.gif "[Login]")
![[Register]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/register.gif "[Register]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/search2.gif "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
![[Print]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/print.gif "[Print]")
![[poll]](http://images.proboards.com/poll_icon.gif "[poll]"){kind=icon}
Poll
Author
![[avatar]](http://ofearna.us/books/zelazny/dilvish.jpg "[avatar]")
Logged
![[avatar]](http://images.community.wizards.com/community.wizards.com/user/finarvyn/avatar.jpg "[avatar]"){kind=avatar}
Why would I ever want to advance to 7th level? I don't think that a "neutral" Cleric was ever supposed to be an option. Here's a quote from Men & Magic page 7 (4th printing again)
![[avatar]](http://i199.photobucket.com/albums/aa152/jrients/BnM_Mogar.gif "[avatar]")
![[homepage]](http://images.proboards.com/buttons/www_sm.gif "[homepage]")
![[avatar]](http://www.freeyabb.com/phpbb/images/avatars/goblinoidgames/210153305548cd4dcd40ac6.gif "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://i88.photobucket.com/albums/k173/PhilotomyJurament/Untitled.jpg "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://www.freeyabb.com/trolllordgames/images/avatars/trolllordgames/49541430946ca706f3ab62.gif "[avatar]")