Are Anti-Clerics the ultimate enemy in OD&D

[dicebro]

It appears that they might be. I would like to discuss the pros and cons here. Thanks!

[Finarvyn]

This is a cool question. The literary sources that inspired OD&D don't do much with clerics, so in my mind the evil wizard or twisted sorcerer has always been the ultimate baddie. However, magic users are somewhat removed from alignment, which is to say that their spells have no pre-assigned goodness or badness. Fireball does not care if it is used against good guys or bad guys.

However, anti-clerics are clearly bad guys and their spells reflect this. Putrify food and water? That's just nasty. Curse? So mean! There is a whole range of chaos magic spells in an anti-cleri's arsenal which are reverses of the lawful equivalent and are designed to really mess with people.

Great topic!

[geoffrey]

Anti-clerics in general and evil high priests in particular are indeed the ultimate evil enemy in OD&D: "...Chaotic creatures will generally obey a Balrog before a human (except for an Evil High Priest who is slightly more influential)."

Purple worms are the ultimate neutral enemy in OD&D: "These huge and hungry monsters lurk nearly everywhere just beneath the surface of the land."

[dicebro]

The source for the Anti-Cleric: It seems as if the Anti-Cleric might have a connection to Arneson’s Temple of the Frog. I have learned from interviewing Stephen Rocheford last year that, before D&D’s debut in 1974, Arneson had asked Rocheford to create an enemy for the Blackmoor group. Rocheford created an enemy that closely resembles a powerful Anti-Cleric. I would be willing to bet that the Anti-Cleric is one of Arneson’s contributions to the pages of Men & Magic. If I am wrong, I will happily eat my words.

[retrorob]

I guess they are, at least that's what I always do. Remember Thulsa Doom? I sometimes add A-C some powers, for example Charm, Sleep, Speak with Dead (I love this spell) and some form of controlling the Undead.

[Deleted]

I tend to use Anti-Clerics as "the middle management of Chaos", with some evil sorcerer or Undead as the actual boss. My approach to Clerics in general is that their magic works by intense faith in pretty much who- or whatever; it isn't actually "granted" by a deity or anyone else, even though the Cleric or Anti-Cleric probably thinks it is. It therefore borrows the same "cosmic forces" as Magic-User magic, but because it is funneled and focused differently, it manifests as different types of effects — and so the different spell lists, turning Undead, etc. As a result, Anti-Clerics are usually in service to someone else, usually an evil wizard, demon, devil, or Undead who is cunning enough to start a "shell cult" they themselves do not believe in but which gets and maintains followers, some of whom are able by natural talent to manifest the abilities of Anti-Clerics.

In short: Anti-Clerics tend to work for those smart, powerful, and cynical enough to manipulate "people of faith" into becoming Anti-Clerics in the first place. Anti-Clerics thus make great unit commanders and champions but poor generals.

[Deleted]

Jan 29, 2021 12:57:54 GMT -6 retrorob said:

I guess they are, at least that's what I always do. Remember Thulsa Doom? I sometimes add A-C some powers, for example Charm, Sleep, Speak with Dead (I love this spell) and some form of controlling the Undead.

I came to this thread to mention the likes of Thulsa Doom. The Evil High Priest archetype is definitely well-represented in pulp literature and its adaptations. It makes sense that this type of person has more influence than a Balrog, by the way, as in the LOTR lore, Sauron was technically the equivalent of a High Priest of the actual dark Lord, Morgoth. When you envision a sufficiently high level Evil High Priest as a Sauron type you can imagine the vile legions they could command. 

[dicebro]

Jan 29, 2021 14:25:48 GMT -6 @ampleframework said:

Jan 29, 2021 12:57:54 GMT -6 retrorob said:

I guess they are, at least that's what I always do. Remember Thulsa Doom? I sometimes add A-C some powers, for example Charm, Sleep, Speak with Dead (I love this spell) and some form of controlling the Undead.

I came to this thread to mention the likes of Thulsa Doom. The Evil High Priest archetype is definitely well-represented in pulp literature and its adaptations. It makes sense that this type of person has more influence than a Balrog, by the way, as in the LOTR lore, Sauron was technically the equivalent of a High Priest of the actual dark Lord, Morgoth. When you envision a sufficiently high level Evil High Priest as a Sauron type you can imagine the vile legions they could command. 

A 10th level Anti-Cleric could point the “Finger of Death” three times a day. That’s heavy.

[Deleted]

Jan 29, 2021 15:10:22 GMT -6 dicebro said:

Jan 29, 2021 14:25:48 GMT -6 @ampleframework said:

I came to this thread to mention the likes of Thulsa Doom. The Evil High Priest archetype is definitely well-represented in pulp literature and its adaptations. It makes sense that this type of person has more influence than a Balrog, by the way, as in the LOTR lore, Sauron was technically the equivalent of a High Priest of the actual dark Lord, Morgoth. When you envision a sufficiently high level Evil High Priest as a Sauron type you can imagine the vile legions they could command. 

A 10th level Anti-Cleric could point the “Finger of Death” three times a day. That’s heavy.

That is not a man or woman to be trifled with by any means. By no means at all. Even a fully grown dragon could easily fail one of three saves, especially if kept occupied by the Anti-Cleric's minions between attempts. 

[doublejig2]

Digression: evil high priests.

For a taste of evil high priest as NPC, consider dedication to the contrary as regards the above discussion. While infrastructure remains important for these servants of “cursed and malign” beings, domicile concern most often is regarded as a mere asset toward still darker purposes. Of the latter, these perversions feature abhorrent rituals, abominable rites, or gruesome sacrifices. Even the more so, of craven hospitals, crazed cult camps, crystalline compounds, dangerous dungeons, deathly prisons, injurious asylums, or massive evil temples, etc., the so shadowed milieu arises and engenders around collaborated, mind-numbing, stunning fear. From an evil place, the evil high priest so spreads despair.

This NPC commends the roots of evil. He may profane sacred places or steal or destroy sacred artifacts. He may corrupt vast holdings of followers. And to feed his demonic, diabolic, or undead forces, he may capture, sacrifice, or slay lost commoners, pilgrims, or unlucky others who fall into his gripping, surging, or perhaps wildly unhallowed grasp. For subverting all levels and skills, whether ill-deceived heretic or merciless advocate given to forbidden practices or inconceivable ones beyond the pale, whether through slow accretion, steady drainage, or by dark crusade, the evil high priest also seeks to further his blackened religion. It’s no surprise that responses to these matters demand hurried, fearful attention from community-minded authorities.
Will they have enough?

[dicebro]

Jan 29, 2021 15:43:38 GMT -6 doublejig2 said:

Digression: evil high priests.

For a taste of evil high priest as NPC, consider dedication to the contrary as regards the above discussion. While infrastructure remains important for these servants of “cursed and malign” beings, domicile concern most often is regarded as a mere asset toward still darker purposes. Of the latter, these perversions feature abhorrent rituals, abominable rites, or gruesome sacrifices. Even the more so, of craven hospitals, crazed cult camps, crystalline compounds, dangerous dungeons, deathly prisons, injurious asylums, or massive evil temples, etc., the so shadowed milieu arises and engenders around collaborated, mind-numbing, stunning fear. From an evil place, the evil high priest so spreads despair.

This NPC commends the roots of evil. He may profane sacred places or steal or destroy sacred artifacts. He may corrupt vast holdings of followers. And to feed his demonic, diabolic, or undead forces, he may capture, sacrifice, or slay lost commoners, pilgrims, or unlucky others who fall into his gripping, surging, or perhaps wildly unhallowed grasp. For subverting all levels and skills, whether ill-deceived heretic or merciless advocate given to forbidden practices or inconceivable ones beyond the pale, whether through slow accretion, steady drainage, or by dark crusade, the evil high priest also seeks to further his blackened religion. It’s no surprise that responses to these matters demand hurried, fearful attention from community-minded authorities.
Will they have enough?

Ditto!

[Deleted]

Worse yet - he may sometimes borrow your favorite books, and then claim he can't find them for months upon end when asked to return them. He will wipe his fingers on your fine furniture after feasting on the greasiest leg of mutton or goose, and will make inappropriate passes at your significant other in full view of everyone present. His table manners leave much to be desired and he jay walks with abandon and glee. His beard is unkempt and his checks bounce, despite his tremendous wealth. Nobody actually enjoys his jokes but they laugh nervously lest their hearts be suddenly pierced by death rays. Overall, a real jerk.

[howandwhy99]

Check out B2 and the commanders of all the monster groups in the Caves of Chaos. An EHP is certainly possible of being a powerful foe and leader.

Any class of named level evil NPC is about as equivalent as any other. Its all about their specialty. EHPs are like demons and devils, while evil archwizards are closer to beholders or dragons.

[geoffrey]

Anti-clerics often pretend to be lawful clerics, infiltrating holy temples. Consider the well-liked priest and his two acolytes in the KEEP.

[dicebro]

I’ve heard that some Referees have eliminated the Cleric Class altogether. Perhaps Clerics have a true purpose after all, other than just being party healers and undead turners. With Evil Anti-Clerics buzzing around Cities doing their mischief, a proper Patriarch might be the ultimate asset in some campaigns.

[dicebro]

Some have asked, “why would a Patriarch stoop to cast ‘raise the dead’ on a lowly first level character?” I think herein lies the answer. Imagine a village that religiously pays its tithes to a Church of Law. An Anti-Cleric has been polluting the water and shriveling the crops. The Church, due to the war effort against Chaos, cannot send assistance. So some first level adventurers go to stop the menace and are killed by the minions of evil. Their bodies are recovered and brought to the Patriarch to be restored. I can see this happening, even without a fee.

Alas, Hobbits cannot be raised from the dead. (I wonder if this was an intentional edit to the Brown Box rules, which I’ve never seen!)

[dicebro]

Jan 29, 2021 15:40:47 GMT -6 @ampleframework said:

Jan 29, 2021 15:10:22 GMT -6 dicebro said:

A 10th level Anti-Cleric could point the “Finger of Death” three times a day. That’s heavy.

That is not a man or woman to be trifled with by any means. By no means at all. Even a fully grown dragon could easily fail one of three saves, especially if kept occupied by the Anti-Cleric's minions between attempts. 

Thus, A fully grown dragon might decide to serve such a powerful human, even without being subdued.

[Deleted]

Jan 30, 2021 8:22:01 GMT -6 dicebro said:

Jan 29, 2021 15:40:47 GMT -6 @ampleframework said:

That is not a man or woman to be trifled with by any means. By no means at all. Even a fully grown dragon could easily fail one of three saves, especially if kept occupied by the Anti-Cleric's minions between attempts. 

Thus, A fully grown dragon might decide to serve such a powerful human, even without being subdued.

In addition to fear, a sufficiently leveled Anti-Cleric with the use of three Fingers of Death likely has the gold and gems to bribe a dragon into service.

[dicebro]

Jan 29, 2021 14:25:48 GMT -6 @ampleframework said:

Jan 29, 2021 12:57:54 GMT -6 retrorob said:

I guess they are, at least that's what I always do. Remember Thulsa Doom? I sometimes add A-C some powers, for example Charm, Sleep, Speak with Dead (I love this spell) and some form of controlling the Undead.

I came to this thread to mention the likes of Thulsa Doom. The Evil High Priest archetype is definitely well-represented in pulp literature and its adaptations. It makes sense that this type of person has more influence than a Balrog, by the way, as in the LOTR lore, Sauron was technically the equivalent of a High Priest of the actual dark Lord, Morgoth. When you envision a sufficiently high level Evil High Priest as a Sauron type you can imagine the vile legions they could command. 

Cool. Here is a link to some info on TD. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thulsa_Doom

[tetramorph]

dicebro, Yes, I think that Evil Clerics are the ultimate enemy in D&D (original).

Finarvyn, I know what you mean. Classic sword and sorcery has sorcerers. But I would agree with @ampleframework, though, that sword and sorcery has plenty of evil clerics as well. I would say that the classic sword and sorcery sorcerer is kind of divided between high-level chaotic magic-users and evil clerics in D&D (original). Magic comes from different sources, perhaps even names different things. Sorcerery is about summoning and making pacts with preternatural beings that the sorcerer summons, or "sources." There is also necromancy. Same thing but summoning and making pacts with the dead. Then there is the calling of wonders from a heavenly or infernal patron. If chaotic, and thus evil priest, this is pretty much classic sorcery. Others include alchemy and words of power.

IMC, MUs use alchemy and words of power, in the main. But evil MUs use sorcery and necromancy. Evil Priests are like the ultimate sorcerers and necromancers. I allow chaotic, evil clerics to command and summon undead, the reverse of lawful turn and dispel.

At first, I hated running EHPs. Their spells were not as bad-*ss as those of MUs and they could still get just as killed as one.

So I have made reverse versions of almost every clerical spell; e.g.:

Inflict light wounds
Darkness
Putrefy food and water
Bane
Conceal traps
Release person
[I'm thinking about "speak as animal"]
Continual darkness
Inflict disease
Curse
Remove water
Inflict serious wounds
Poisoning
[I'm thinking about "render comatose" as the reverse of speak with plants]
Snakes to sticks
Excommunicate (removes all clerical abilities from targeted cleric)
Remove food
Sending, Evil
Finger of Death

This has rendered evil clerics scary as h*ll IMC. My players think they are so totally cool and really scary. I had an EP cast "remove water" on an NPC henchman. The henchman dehydrated and fell over immediately. That scared the poop out of the party.

geoffrey, I forgot that note about balrogs and EHPs as more influential over chaotic creatures. That is powerful and scary. Really, EHPs should have fell minions surrounding all the time, right? I also like the idea of them infiltrating a legitimate lawful mission or stronghold. I have used that once. I should probably remember to use that more.

retrorob, yes, Thulsa Doom for sure. All my EHPs are either Thulsa Doom, Ma'ak (EP in Beastmaster - played by Rip Torn - do we need to say anything else?) or some combination of the two.

@theghoulpriest, I like your approach. I think it would work for me if I considered chaotic gods to be high level chaotic monsters -- which, upon writing it down, yes, of course I do.

howandwhy99, I have not found that character classes are equal. At least for me behind the screen. That is probably just bad playing on my part. My high level fighting-men just get cut down by my player's party of characters. I have found that only high level magic-users and clerics pose any real threat. But, again, that may just be me playing fighting-men poorly.

Also, just to note, IMC "clerics" name crusaders -- knights of religious orders. They are not "clergy" of churches or temples. Everyday clergy are just that. They may be able to "cast" clerical spells, but only through long intense rituals -- not on the spot like crusading knights.

Lawful clerics are in different orders of religious knights and each cleric may adopt his or her own patron -- but they all in some way or another serve the single Church of Law.

Evil clerics, on the other hand, serve the myriad gods of chaos: chthonic, demonic, infernal, elder gods, outer gods, ancient ones, etc. However, as servants of chaos, they all more or less ruefully acknowledge one another as sharing common cause against law.

[waysoftheearth]

What does the "Release Person" spell do?

How are chaotic superheroes not fearsome? (e.g., a Conan-like figure with a 9 lives stealing battle axe and gruesome entourage ambushes the players. What happens?)

[Deleted]

As a slight aside from the main topic and perhaps better suited to its own thread, it helps me to envision antagonistic high level fighting men as five star generals, not foot soldiers. They're not gonna fight you with a sword. They're gonna call in an air strike. Yes. An air strike. Their trained Roc will drop a boulder on you, because they're rich and influential and paid a beast master to get that done.

[retrorob]

Jan 30, 2021 14:04:29 GMT -6 tetramorph said:

@theghoulpriest , I like your approach. I think it would work for me if I considered chaotic gods to be high level chaotic monsters -- which, upon writing it down, yes, of course I do.
(...)
Evil clerics, on the other hand, serve the myriad gods of chaos: chthonic, demonic, infernal, elder gods, outer gods, ancient ones, etc. However, as servants of chaos, they all more or less ruefully acknowledge one another as sharing common cause against law.

Same here. IMC evil clerics (anti-clerics) often serve balrogs, dragons, vampires, powerful M-U etc.

As for the inflict wounds, I follow Gygax early play example from "Europa" zine, where it is described as ranged attack.

[tetramorph]

waysoftheearth, "release person" frees the target from any physical or magical constraint.

So, it would undo a "hold person" spell. But also, if the person is tied up, manacled, ball-and-chained, in a cage, etc. - they would be released.

Having reversed this spell, I've come to realize that, really, THIS is the lawful version of the spell. Holding someone against their will is the chaotic reversal. But, for the sake of tradition, I will not change it in the way I list the rules. Nor would I penalize a lawful cleric for using Hold Person. It is in the tradition at this point. Thanks for asking.

And in terms of a high level fighting man -- I don't know -- all the PCs seem to get in a hit and pretty soon they've knocked him down. But I like your approach. I am going to try to beef up my FM and get them scarier.

Come to think of it, my last big baddy (Lord Darkhelm, of course) was actually pretty scary. It took an entire mass combat scenario to bring him down. He turned back scores of formed units - killing some, breaking formation of others, breaking morale of still others - but finally, he succumbed - but only when he was attacked by another FM of fairly equal power. Okay, so maybe high level FMs are bad-*sses, after all!

Fight on!

[dicebro]

Jan 31, 2021 16:46:19 GMT -6 tetramorph said:

waysoftheearth , "release person" frees the target from any physical or magical constraint.

So, it would undo a "hold person" spell. But also, if the person is tied up, manacled, ball-and-chained, in a cage, etc. - they would be released.

Having reversed this spell, I've come to realize that, really, THIS is the lawful version of the spell. Holding someone against their will is the chaotic reversal. But, for the sake of tradition, I will not change it in the way I list the rules. Nor would I penalize a lawful cleric for using Hold Person.

Unless he’s busting an evil henchman out of prison shackles.

I always thought of “Hold Person” as giving the power to move someone around like a puppet on a string. 

[cometaryorbit]

Jan 30, 2021 14:04:29 GMT -6 tetramorph said:

I would say that the classic sword and sorcery sorcerer is kind of divided between high-level chaotic magic-users and evil clerics in D&D (original). Magic comes from different sources, perhaps even names different things. Sorcerery is about summoning and making pacts with preternatural beings that the sorcerer summons, or "sources." There is also necromancy. Same thing but summoning and making pacts with the dead. Then there is the calling of wonders from a heavenly or infernal patron. If chaotic, and thus evil priest, this is pretty much classic sorcery.

Yeah, a Cleric of Chaos who serves a demon lord or whatever is pretty sorcerer-like.

Also, just to note, IMC "clerics" name crusaders -- knights of religious orders. They are not "clergy" of churches or temples. Everyday clergy are just that. They may be able to "cast" clerical spells, but only through long intense rituals -- not on the spot like crusading knights.

Yeah, I think this is a better model than cleric = generic priest. Clerics are monster hunters a la Van Helsing, religious-order knights crusading against evil/monsters/Chaos, or both. Ordinary priests may be non-magical religious officials, or have some spellcasting ability (potentially more limited in usability, as you say) but without the fighting capability/HD/armor and weapon training of the "Cleric" class.

That model would also let you have NPCs 'Oracles' who aren't as powerful as a Cleric able to cast Commune would have to be.

[thecoldironkid]

if "hold person" restricts the target's actions, shouldn't the anti-cleric's "release person" strip away their inhibitions? give them the "freedom" to indulge their forbidden desires? [make them Chaotic for the spell's duration]

[clownboss]

I have a Chaotic Cleric in my campaign, and she mostly leans as a Chaotic Good type. She's an Adept now but instead of being an "Evil Adept" we both agreed to rename her into a "Dark Adept". Oddly I don't think the chaotic forms of spells will mean much in terms of her being someone evil, but I think she's gonna grow to be more of an Elric type: Somebody who wants to dismantle Evil and Chaos by using the tools of Chaos.

[dicebro]

Feb 7, 2021 14:05:07 GMT -6 clownboss said:

I have a Chaotic Cleric in my campaign, and she mostly leans as a Chaotic Good type. She's an Adept now but instead of being an "Evil Adept" we both agreed to rename her into a "Dark Adept". Oddly I don't think the chaotic forms of spells will mean much in terms of her being someone evil, but I think she's gonna grow to be more of an Elric type: Somebody who wants to dismantle Evil and Chaos by using the tools of Chaos.

I think Gary would say... Are you and you’re players having fun with it? Because the main thing is to have fun. In my campaign I would probably place the character you describe on the side of  “lawful sneaky”. Lol.

[clownboss]

As a Chaotic person, she has one cardinal rule to follow: She must never, under any circumstances, become a bootlicker.

She's not fighting for the King, for the country, or for God, she fights for herself. She's always in fistfights with cops.

Chaos is, after all, according to Moorcock, the principle of possibility unfettered by rules. Chaos is freedom. The effects of Chaos can be beautiful. Add a little bit of Crowley's Thelema("Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be the Whole of the Law"), and you can get a perfectly working Chaotic good guy in OD&D.