|
Post by snorri on Nov 22, 2009 16:09:23 GMT -6
On the ODDguild mailing list, there is an interesting discussion about Clerics & Weapons. Yes, a classical one, but with a good point: "Clerics gain some of the advantages from both of the other two classesI Fighting-Men and Magic-Users) in that they have the use of magic armor and all non-edged magic weapons (no arrows!), plus they have numbers of their own spells." (M&M, p. 7). The classical reading is that clerics can't use edge weapons. It make sense and was the rule in later editions. But, the text prohibit him to use edged magic weapons only. Nothing is said about edged non-magic weapon. A lot of good arguments can be raised in defence of the classical reading, but nothing as fun as this nice btb one. Now, look Supp. II. Blackmoor, p. 11. What's the weapon in the hands of the third guy, the one with a cross on his helmet?
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Darke on Nov 22, 2009 17:42:03 GMT -6
Interesting. I'm divided about this but leaning to opening swords to clerics. After all, you're looking at the same damage a sword gives with other weapons.
As a bonus it makes a good idea for the cleric who uses 'The Sword of the Lord'
|
|
|
Post by calithena on Nov 22, 2009 19:50:37 GMT -6
Rule-wise it just barely matters who uses which non-magical weapons. But I'd still prefer a principled decision for clerics. A lot of stuff that happens in OD&D isn't covered by the rules after all.
|
|
|
Post by tavis on Nov 22, 2009 21:46:45 GMT -6
A principled reason for clerics not to use magic weapons is that in 3LBB OD&D they're all swords with some degree of intelligence, right? I could easily believe that such a sword demands a degree of fealty that a cleric is sworn only to give a god. (I can imagine Patera Silk delivering such a justification, for example.)
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Nov 23, 2009 0:54:23 GMT -6
The justification is that the medieval catholic church (on which the cleric is loosely based) forbade clerics from shedding blood. (Note that historically, they went ahead and shed blood if they wanted to). If anyone needs a more game-specific reason, they need to go through their own referee.
It wasn't specified in the manner of today's games because rampant rules-lawyerism wasn't as big a problem back then (when you had a strong referee like Gary of Dave dealing with the upstart players). In short, Gary made allowances for common sense, not realizing it isn't actually that ... common.
(To be honest, I'm still trying to decide if the poster over there is intentionally trying to be a jerk or not. I mean, I hope he's not, but given the nature of the internet, I can't be sure.)
|
|
|
Post by snorri on Nov 23, 2009 7:18:44 GMT -6
The cleric with blunt weapons is a feature of D&D history, well established by Holmes, the classic D&D and by AD&D. It seems it was in use even before. I don'thave trouble with this - depending on his own campaign, every DM is free to use it or not. I was just saerching another information in Supp. II, and found this funny picture: As thre are three characters, the fighter and the magi-suer are obvious, so the cleric could be the man with a cross on his helmet. And he got a sword in hand. As we know, the drawers didn't allways paid so much attention to game details, but that's fun anyway. One could argue this a supp. 1 paladin and everything would be allright. Coffee gave Gary's explanation of the "cleric with blunt weapon", which as spread througout the D&D culture. I read it elsewhere several time and think this is the good answer. But it raise an intersting question: did Dave's clerics use blunt weapons? Maybe Greyhawk clerics did use maces and Blackmoor clerics did use swords...Another archeological find?
|
|
Drohem
Level 1 Medium
Posts: 16
|
Post by Drohem on Nov 23, 2009 10:50:32 GMT -6
Maybe Greyhawk clerics did use maces and Blackmoor clerics did use swords...Another archeological find? This is an interesting thought to run with, and it would cool if it could be confirmed; that the priests from different lands could be using weapons to define and differentiate their Orders and values.
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Nov 23, 2009 10:59:37 GMT -6
Well, to me this brings up another question: Did Gary even use Clerics before he got them from Dave?
There aren't any in Chainmail. As I understand it, the Cleric class came about as a direct counter to Sir Fang, a very powerful vampire in Dave's game. So the lineage of the Cleric as a Blackmoor/Arneson creation is pretty solid.
Do we have any of Dave's old players left around here? If not, is anyone in contact and could they ask them what they recall about this?
|
|
|
Post by philotomy on Nov 23, 2009 11:56:18 GMT -6
I'd let a magic user or cleric wield a non-magic sword (heck, in my game it's all d6 damage, anyway). Magic swords prefer fighters, though, and would rebel (probably just functioning as a normal sword in the hands of anyone but a Fighting Man).
|
|
|
Post by snorri on Nov 23, 2009 13:42:41 GMT -6
Philotomy's method makes sense and fits the rule. The question behind is to know how did Dave handle classes. On this board, he said "The major changes were lack of 'well defined' character classes (...)" and FFC shows how a hero could learn magic. In some way, the definition of the cleric as gaining "some of the advantages from both of the other two classes (Fighting-Men and Magic-Users)" fits that possibility too. There's probably something to dig there too.
Edit: FFC, p. 32, 6th level of Blackmoor castle: "3 Evil Priests (Sorcerors): AC 1,6/19 HTK; AC 4 6/23 HTK; AC 4, 6/21 HTK"
In OD&D, Sorcerers and High Evil priests are the same level (9).
|
|
|
Post by irdaranger on Nov 23, 2009 20:29:02 GMT -6
A principled reason for clerics not to use magic weapons is that in 3LBB OD&D they're all swords with some degree of intelligence, right? This is what I was going to say. Swords had Alignments and Egos, with their own goals and ethics. A Fighter might be willing to compromise on those things to get the benefit of the sword's power, but a Cleric would not be allowed to do that if he wanted to retain his powers. This also makes sense as a game design issue. Non-magic weapons did all the same damage anyway, so that's not important, but keeping magic swords to F-Ms only would have been a major class advantage that would have balanced out the Cleric's spellcasting a bit.
|
|
|
Post by bobjester on Nov 26, 2009 13:48:27 GMT -6
The justification is that the medieval catholic church (on which the cleric is loosely based) forbade clerics from shedding blood. (Note that historically, they went ahead and shed blood if they wanted to). If anyone needs a more game-specific reason, they need to go through their own referee. It wasn't specified in the manner of today's games because rampant rules-lawyerism wasn't as big a problem back then (when you had a strong referee like Gary of Dave dealing with the upstart players). In short, Gary made allowances for common sense, not realizing it isn't actually that ... common. (To be honest, I'm still trying to decide if the poster over there is intentionally trying to be a jerk or not. I mean, I hope he's not, but given the nature of the internet, I can't be sure.) LOL! No, the poster that originated that topic at the OD&D Guild was not trying to be a jerk or a troll, and he was afraid that then pointing out that M-U's weren't specifically forbidden to use swords may cross that line. As an imperfect media for communication, much is lost in the translation of the spoken word to the written word, especially in the express lane of communication that is the Interwebz. Only so much of our body language and subtle, vocal nuances gets through in the written word that tells the reader of the writer's genuine intentions or if we're being snarky or sarcastic. That said, I always thought the implied rule that clerics could not use swords or any other bladed weapon was a little odd, but I accept it as part & parcel of the game, as it lends a bit of diversity to the classes (although it was a forced rule that eventually gained acceptance as 'it just is'...) in that fighting men handle the swords, clerics handle maces & some spells & M-U's handle spells. (And, I might add, that the poster over there in question IS the quintessential Rules Lawyer of our Face 2 Face group.) Snorri: Nice pictorial find! That guy is obviously a cleric with a sword, as the pic definitely defines the 3 main classes, as Blackmoor Supplement applies to the LBB's, not counting Greyhawk's Thief class inclusion...
|
|
|
Post by aldarron on Nov 26, 2009 19:06:54 GMT -6
A very informative discussion of the topic is here www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=34843&start=15Basically, the thread discloses that Gygax created the restrction on edged weapons as a matter of game balance, inspired by some medieval christian examples. The original Blackmoor cleric was a Vampire hunter with healing powers and no particular weapon restrictions.
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Nov 27, 2009 0:45:52 GMT -6
No, the poster that originated that topic at the OD&D Guild was not trying to be a jerk or a troll, and he was afraid that then pointing out that M-U's weren't specifically forbidden to use swords may cross that line. I'm just curious, but did you really mean M-U's here? Because I would have thought that the line on page 6 of Men & Magic: DOES specifically forbid them from using swords...
|
|
eris
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 161
|
Post by eris on Nov 27, 2009 12:55:52 GMT -6
No, the poster that originated that topic at the OD&D Guild was not trying to be a jerk or a troll, and he was afraid that then pointing out that M-U's weren't specifically forbidden to use swords may cross that line. I'm just curious, but did you really mean M-U's here? Because I would have thought that the line on page 6 of Men & Magic: DOES specifically forbid them from using swords... I read it that way originally, and no edged weapons at all for the cleric, but later house ruled those restrictions partly away. For the cleric, he could pick one weapon associated with his god and even if it was an edged weapon he could use that one with no restrictions plus all "non-edged" weapons. Some players picked longsword or ax, (most did not) and that did no damage to the game that I could see. For the MU, he could pick one "light" weapon (I called daggers, short swords, spears, quarter staffs, rapiers, darts, lt. crossbows, and such light weapons) to arm himself with. With that weapon he was trained and could fight well, but if he was using any other weapon he got a big negative DM. PC's would adventure a bit, then take some time...weeks even...in a town basically on R&R. We, of course, passed that time in a few minutes of game time, but what we did during those few minutes was roll for, play out, or in some other way decide what the PC's were doing all that time. Everybody healed, but that was only one thing. In addition, generally, fighters "trained with weapon masters" getting better with their weapons, ie. picking up extra XP and/or bonus on their weapons; Clerics "prayed with Priests", that's where they learned new clerical spells; and MU's "studied and created magic items", that's where they got new spells, potions and scrolls. However, I also allowed the two spell casting classes to "train with weapon masters" during these breaks, instead of their usual procedures, if they wanted. If they did, they would get better at fighting, but no better at their spell casting (ie. no extra XP). Clerics could gain bonus on weapons and MU's could either gain bonuses on the weapons they knew how to use or learn to use a new weapon. I don't think I ever wrote any of this down, it was just something we developed at the table. I've been doing this so long, over 30 years now, that doing it this way just seems like the right way to me.
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Dec 6, 2009 11:45:46 GMT -6
Since all non-magical weapons are the same, it probably never occurred to Gary or his group to worry about what non-magical weapons a character was carrying.
|
|
|
Post by bobjester on Jan 4, 2010 1:45:33 GMT -6
Falconer: I think that was the very point that my friend eventually came to while thinking further about the question of clerics & edged weapons. The OD&D rules do not say anything about clerics using non-magical edged weapons, but specifically says that they may not use magical swords. We think that was one way the rules give an 'edge' (pun intended) to Fighting Men; that they be more effective in combat by being the only class to use magical edged weapons.
|
|
|
Post by Random on Jan 17, 2010 17:22:17 GMT -6
On the ODDguild mailing list, there is an interesting discussion about Clerics & Weapons. Yes, a classical one, but with a good point: "Clerics gain some of the advantages from both of the other two classesI Fighting-Men and Magic-Users) in that they have the use of magic armor and all non-edged magic weapons (no arrows!), plus they have numbers of their own spells." (M&M, p. 7). Since we're nit-picking the text here, that passage absolutely does not forbid Clerics the use of edged magical weapons. It says that they can use non-edged magical weapons, except arrows. With a strict literal reading, Clerics are forbidden only the use of magical arrows. Just because they can use non-edged magical weapons does not automatically mean they cannot use edged magical weapons. Sure, it's implied, but I figured I'd chime in since we're nit-picking the exact wording of the rules.
|
|
|
Post by kenmeister on Jan 17, 2010 18:31:25 GMT -6
On the ODDguild mailing list, there is an interesting discussion about Clerics & Weapons. Yes, a classical one, but with a good point: "Clerics gain some of the advantages from both of the other two classesI Fighting-Men and Magic-Users) in that they have the use of magic armor and all non-edged magic weapons (no arrows!), plus they have numbers of their own spells." (M&M, p. 7). Since we're nit-picking the text here, that passage absolutely does not forbid Clerics the use of edged magical weapons. It says that they can use non-edged magical weapons, except arrows. With a strict literal reading, Clerics are forbidden only the use of magical arrows. Just because they can use non-edged magical weapons does not automatically mean they cannot use edged magical weapons. Sure, it's implied, but I figured I'd chime in since we're nit-picking the exact wording of the rules. You lost me. With a literal reading, I'd say clerics can even use a bow and arrow, as long as they are non-magical.
|
|
|
Post by Random on Jan 17, 2010 18:40:49 GMT -6
Exactly, Mr. Ken-do-nim. The passage quoted forbids only the use of magical arrows, with a totally literal reading.
I was pointing out that as it is stated, Clerics could also use magical swords. The text quoted says they can use non-edged magical weapons (except arrows), but it does not say that they can't use edged magical weapons. It says no such thing explicitly.
(I don't really care that much; I'm just pointing out what the sentence states, technically speaking.)
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Jan 18, 2010 15:54:41 GMT -6
By the literal interpretation arrows are banned but bolts, and thus crossbows, are perfectly allowable.
|
|
|
Post by philotomy on Jan 18, 2010 16:33:07 GMT -6
Crossbows and bolts are an interesting twist.
In the case of cleric weapons, I'm not terribly concerned with parsing out an exact literal interpretation. I see the restriction as being "gamist," in that it's supposed to reserve some of the best offensive capability to the Fighting Man (i.e. the ability to use magic swords, and the ability to use bows, which allows multiple arrows per round per Chainmail rates of fire). I base my cleric weapon rulings on that concept.
In my game, which uses d6 damage, those elements (i.e. magic swords/multiple shots granted by a bow) are the important part of cleric weapon restrictions. Some people might view the ability to use any long-range missile weapon as the province of the Fighting Man, and I wouldn't argue. Nevertheless, I could also see allowing the (single shot per round) crossbow to the Cleric, while continuing to reserve (multiple shot) bows to the Fighting Man.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2010 16:43:27 GMT -6
Nevertheless, I could also see allowing the (single shot per round) crossbow to the Cleric, while continuing to reserve (multiple shot) bows to the Fighting Man. Thinking along similar lines, I delved in medieval weaponry and came up with pellet crossbows and bows for my clerics (d6 damage, 1 shot per round, range as light crossbow). I believe these weapons later made it into AD&D "canon" in one edition or another (OA for FEADAD comes to mind).
|
|
|
Post by tombowings on Jan 18, 2010 16:54:11 GMT -6
In my current game, I allow clerics to use swords, but the ego scores of magic swords are doubled in the hands of a cleric. So far it's worked out well.
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Jan 18, 2010 19:08:55 GMT -6
In the case of cleric weapons, I'm not terribly concerned with parsing out an exact literal interpretation. I see the restriction as being "gamist," in that it's supposed to reserve some of the best offensive capability to the Fighting Man I agree with this totally, but this kind of meta game justification is, in my mind, secondary to the priorities of the classes. A fighting-man devotes all his energies to weapons training, and thus is all to handle all weapons skilfully. A cleric, on the other hand, devotes much of his time to prayer and meditation. He has less time available to master weapons, and as a result can only train himself in a sub-set of weapons. It follows that clerics would often use simplest fighting tools, as these would (presumably) require less investment in terms of training time.
|
|
|
Post by Random on Jan 18, 2010 20:57:42 GMT -6
In the case of cleric weapons, I'm not terribly concerned with parsing out an exact literal interpretation. I see the restriction as being "gamist," in that it's supposed to reserve some of the best offensive capability to the Fighting Man I agree with this totally, but this kind of meta game justification is, in my mind, secondary to the priorities of the classes. A fighting-man devotes all his energies to weapons training, and thus is all to handle all weapons skilfully. A cleric, on the other hand, devotes much of his time to prayer and meditation. He has less time available to master weapons, and as a result can only train himself in a sub-set of weapons. It follows that clerics would often use simplest fighting tools, as these would (presumably) require less investment in terms of training time. In that case, it seems like crossbows should definitely be allowed. Granted, I'm no archer, but I gather that crossbows would be easier to fire accurately with less training than regular bows.
|
|
|
Post by aldarron on Mar 5, 2010 19:42:34 GMT -6
Noticed somthing interesting for this topic in the Sword Matrix section of the FFC. In notes that are supposed to date to about 1974, Dave Arneson had the ownership history of magical swords determined randomly with a d8 as follows "1=Holy Sword, 2-6= Fighters Sword, 7-8=Magicians Sword"
Holy sword could mean paladin but I think this dates to before the paladin class so that would mean that in Blackmoor each of the three basic classes (clerics, fighters, MUs) could carry magic swords with figters having by far the most.
|
|
|
Post by cyclopeatron on Mar 5, 2010 19:50:50 GMT -6
Noticed somthing interesting for this topic in the Sword Matrix section of the FFC. In notes that are supposed to date to about 1974, Dave Arneson had the ownership history of magical swords determined randomly with a d8 as follows "1=Holy Sword, 2-6= Fighters Sword, 7-8=Magicians Sword" Holy sword could mean paladin but I think this dates to before the paladin class so that would mean that in Blackmoor each of the three basic classes (clerics, fighters, MUs) could carry magic swords with figters having by far the most. Great and interesting find! Clerics use swords in my game, by the way. Not MUs though...
|
|
|
Post by billhooks on Mar 5, 2010 20:08:05 GMT -6
On the ODDguild mailing list, there is an interesting discussion about Clerics & Weapons. Yes, a classical one, but with a good point: "Clerics gain some of the advantages from both of the other two classesI Fighting-Men and Magic-Users) in that they have the use of magic armor and all non-edged magic weapons (no arrows!), plus they have numbers of their own spells." (M&M, p. 7). Since we're nit-picking the text here, that passage absolutely does not forbid Clerics the use of edged magical weapons. It says that they can use non-edged magical weapons, except arrows. The exception proves the rule! I've always wanted to say that.
|
|