|
|
Post by Malchor on Jan 27, 2023 18:04:58 GMT -6
Someone else must have asked this at some point in the last 49 years.
M&M mentions the concept of reverse spells for evil clerics, however, thinking about it, why limit them to evil clerics?
For example, is there really a difference between a cleric with a mace bashing someone's head in versus using a Cause Wounds spell? The deities of the clerics may be Law, but tend not to have the morals of certain monotheist religions, plus the cleric may have a pantheon to call on rather than a single god.
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jan 27, 2023 19:00:47 GMT -6
(1) I think technically it's "chaos" clerics, not evil.
(2) An interesting rules change happened in the 5th printing. Printings 1-4 say that clerics can be Law or Chaos. Printings 5+ ass in the phrase "of 7th level and greater" to the statement. I learned from a 4th printing, so we always played that clerics had to choose Law or Chaos at character creation, so they would define their career from the start. I guess the current rules mean that you get both Law and Chaos spells (so spells and the reverse spells) but then lose half of them upon reaching 7th level.
(3) None of this really addresses your question. I think that the key is that you are thinking of deities from a "modern" approach where you are "a cleric of XX" but in the older days our group assumed that clerics were sort of Christianity or anti-Christianity (Satanism? I'm not sure we ever really said). Good-guy clerics would never use magic to hurt people, was our rationale at the time. Nowadays my players of clerics all want to pick a deity and I can see where the law/chaos distinction gets pretty blurred.
|
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Jan 27, 2023 19:50:14 GMT -6
Giving Law clerics access to reverse spells can add some drama to the class.
I.e., it's a mechanism for them to be turned to Chaos, or excommunicated from their Order for their misdeeds by using the normally 'forbidden' powers.
This kind of thing is explicit in the finger of death version of raise dead (M&M p34), and also hinted at in the cleric description.
|
|
|
|
Post by tombowings on Jan 27, 2023 22:53:09 GMT -6
To my mind, clerics service the "powers above". So long as the reverse spell is performed in service to those powers, I don't see them having any complaints.
|
|
|
|
Post by Desparil on Jan 28, 2023 0:19:20 GMT -6
(1) I think technically it's "chaos" clerics, not evil. (2) An interesting rules change happened in the 5th printing. Printings 1-4 say that clerics can be Law or Chaos. Printings 5+ ass in the phrase "of 7th level and greater" to the statement. I learned from a 4th printing, so we always played that clerics had to choose Law or Chaos at character creation, so they would define their career from the start. I guess the current rules mean that you get both Law and Chaos spells (so spells and the reverse spells) but then lose half of them upon reaching 7th level. (3) None of this really addresses your question. I think that the key is that you are thinking of deities from a "modern" approach where you are "a cleric of XX" but in the older days our group assumed that clerics were sort of Christianity or anti-Christianity (Satanism? I'm not sure we ever really said). Good-guy clerics would never use magic to hurt people, was our rationale at the time. Nowadays my players of clerics all want to pick a deity and I can see where the law/chaos distinction gets pretty blurred. It's both, isn't it? Chaotic clerics are directly and repeatedly referred to as evil in Volume 1: Volume 3 doubles down with Evil Priests and Evil High Priests on the encounter tables, as separate entries from Priests or Patriarchs no less. |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jan 28, 2023 5:49:04 GMT -6
It's both, isn't it? Chaotic clerics are directly and repeatedly referred to as evil in Volume 1: Volume 3 doubles down with Evil Priests and Evil High Priests on the encounter tables, as separate entries from Priests or Patriarchs no less. You are correct, of course, but I was just pointing out the verbal distinction that technically "chaos" might not be "evil." OD&D presents us with that paradox that alignment is stated as Law/Neutral/Chaos and then spells are given like "Protection from Evil" and technically "evil" is never defined. My campaigns always assumed that chaos = evil and law = good, but it has been pointed out to me that in cases like Star Wars the Empire is probably "law" and the rebellion is likely "chaos" and this turns everything sideways. Since Law/Chaos in OD&D is based on Poul Anderson's and Michael Moorcock's stories we have a bit of a gray area. Anderson's Law/Chaos seems to clearly fit Good/Evil, but Moorcock's is harder to pin down since his heroes (anti-heroes?) often follow Arioch or other gods of Chaos. OD&D's Law/Chaos was origindally more of an Us/Them thing. Again, not saying you are wrong. Just pointing out an oddity. |
|
|
|
Post by Malchor on Jan 28, 2023 7:29:20 GMT -6
(1) I think technically it's "chaos" clerics, not evil. (2) An interesting rules change happened in the 5th printing. Printings 1-4 say that clerics can be Law or Chaos. Printings 5+ ass in the phrase "of 7th level and greater" to the statement. I learned from a 4th printing, so we always played that clerics had to choose Law or Chaos at character creation, so they would define their career from the start. I guess the current rules mean that you get both Law and Chaos spells (so spells and the reverse spells) but then lose half of them upon reaching 7th level. (3) None of this really addresses your question. I think that the key is that you are thinking of deities from a "modern" approach where you are "a cleric of XX" but in the older days our group assumed that clerics were sort of Christianity or anti-Christianity (Satanism? I'm not sure we ever really said). Good-guy clerics would never use magic to hurt people, was our rationale at the time. Nowadays my players of clerics all want to pick a deity and I can see where the law/chaos distinction gets pretty blurred. (1) This is one of the spots where evil pops up, "Note that underlined Clerical spells are reversed by evil Clerics." Though, I agree, they can be considered synonymous for the purpose of the rules. (2) Thanks for pointing that out. We really need a list of the key additions sort of in the format of an errata, as a list of optional rules (owners of printings 1-4 can add them, or owners of printings of 5+ can ignore them). Knowing this group, I should ask, who has already done this and where I can download it? (3) In the olden days, I had all characters, not only clerics, pick a deity. Your actions and how they related to your alignments were viewed through the lens of that deity, so it gave more latitude than what was explained in the alignment section. And your pick came with a pantheon. I still play the same way, I have a cleric pick a main deity, but they still have to contend with the pantheon. For me anyway, my campaigns are not monotheistic, though due to Poul Anderson, there is a monotheistic sect in the background that has been mentioned. |
|
|
|
Post by Malchor on Jan 28, 2023 7:34:59 GMT -6
Giving Law clerics access to reverse spells can add some drama to the class. I.e., it's a mechanism for them to be turned to Chaos, or excommunicated from their Order for their misdeeds by using the normally 'forbidden' powers. This kind of thing is explicit in the finger of death version of raise dead (M&M p34), and also hinted at in the cleric description. Love it! As mentions in my reply to Finarvyn, I've always weaved alignment and deities. As an adult, alignment is a byproduct of massinations of the various deities and pantheons. Tempting and tricking mortals aligns perfectly. |
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Jan 28, 2023 7:49:58 GMT -6
I may be completely wrong on this but here’s my W.A.G. I got the impression, from doing a little reading about the early days, that there may be no other reason than it illustrates the dichotomy between the sources of the divine powers associated with Law (Constructive) and Chaos (Destructuve). The Anti-cleric appears in the very first published expression of the game. There was limited space for printing and limited time to reflect on the rules due to printing deadlines. Therefore only the very basic concepts were introduced with the expectation that Referees would take the ball and run with it or develop something else that worked for their campaign world. For example, in volume 3 only the very basic ideas relating to Arneson’s rules for air combat were included. Arneson had written a whole lot more, but Gygax may have needed to make cuts due to limited space.
So there possibly was no reason in particular, considering that TSR had limited resources and the designers were working on several products other than D&D at the time. According to Peterson they had no idea the game would become wildly popular. Therefore they just weren’t inclined to work out all the little details and possible inconsistencies.
|
|
|
|
Post by talysman on Jan 28, 2023 11:16:13 GMT -6
(1) As waysoftheearth mentions, it's not impossible for clerics of Law to use reversed spells, according to the text. They are just judged for using those spells. (2) "Is there really a difference between a cleric with a mace bashing someone's head in versus using a Cause Wounds spell?" Yes. In the first case, the cleric does it themselves, the way any person could. In the second, the spirits do it for them. Think of it more as: What can clerics of Law get supernatural aid to do? (3) In fact, the text doesn't say clerics of Law can't use reversed spells. It says that anti-clerics must use them. In other words, anti-clerics can't heal wounds. (4) Evil clerics can't turn undead, according to the text below the Clerics versus Undead Monsters table. And unlike later editions, they don't gain the power to command undead. Think of the nasty reversed spell powers as the compensation for anti-clerics being less powerful. |
|
|
|
Post by retrorob on Jan 28, 2023 17:08:21 GMT -6
It's both, isn't it? Chaotic clerics are directly and repeatedly referred to as evil in Volume 1: Volume 3 doubles down with Evil Priests and Evil High Priests on the encounter tables, as separate entries from Priests or Patriarchs no less. You are correct, of course, but I was just pointing out the verbal distinction that technically "chaos" might not be "evil." OD&D presents us with that paradox that alignment is stated as Law/Neutral/Chaos and then spells are given like "Protection from Evil" and technically "evil" is never defined. My campaigns always assumed that chaos = evil and law = good, but it has been pointed out to me that in cases like Star Wars the Empire is probably "law" and the rebellion is likely "chaos" and this turns everything sideways. Since Law/Chaos in OD&D is based on Poul Anderson's and Michael Moorcock's stories we have a bit of a gray area. Anderson's Law/Chaos seems to clearly fit Good/Evil, but Moorcock's is harder to pin down since his heroes (anti-heroes?) often follow Arioch or other gods of Chaos. OD&D's Law/Chaos was origindally more of an Us/Them thing. Again, not saying you are wrong. Just pointing out an oddity. I'd say the Empire is chaos & evil (tyranny). The rebellion, fighting for the restoration of the old Republic, is law & good. In Anderson's 3H&3L the Third Reich is chaotic. |
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Jan 28, 2023 17:11:49 GMT -6
(4) Evil clerics can't turn undead, according to the text below the Clerics versus Undead Monsters table. And unlike later editions, they don't gain the power to command undead. Think of the nasty reversed spell powers as the compensation for anti-clerics being less powerful. Another anti-cleric compensation for not being able to turn the undead away is they can "abide" the undead. E.g., per the Evil High Priest retainer table (U&WA p15). Read into it whatever you like, but it seems to me these vampires and spectres are not attacking the EHP as they would a Law cleric. Not being attacked by undead is... something  FWIW, the M&T entry for Skeletons/Zombies says they act as instructed by a "motivator" which can include a M-U or Chaos cleric. Animate Dead is a 5th level m-u spell explicitly for creating skelies and zombies, but there is no equivalent cleric spell listed in the 3LBBs (or GH?). Nor does it say anything specifically about "motivating" the newly animated, or pre-existing, skelies/zombies. So... there's wriggle room there to argue that Chaos clerics might have some kind of influence over skelies/zombies. |
|
|
|
Post by Mordorandor on Jan 28, 2023 21:00:54 GMT -6
You are correct, of course, but I was just pointing out the verbal distinction that technically "chaos" might not be "evil." OD&D presents us with that paradox that alignment is stated as Law/Neutral/Chaos and then spells are given like "Protection from Evil" and technically "evil" is never defined. My campaigns always assumed that chaos = evil and law = good, but it has been pointed out to me that in cases like Star Wars the Empire is probably "law" and the rebellion is likely "chaos" and this turns everything sideways. Since Law/Chaos in OD&D is based on Poul Anderson's and Michael Moorcock's stories we have a bit of a gray area. Anderson's Law/Chaos seems to clearly fit Good/Evil, but Moorcock's is harder to pin down since his heroes (anti-heroes?) often follow Arioch or other gods of Chaos. OD&D's Law/Chaos was origindally more of an Us/Them thing. Again, not saying you are wrong. Just pointing out an oddity. I'd say the Empire is chaos & evil (tyranny). The rebellion, fighting for the restoration of the old Republic, is law & good. In Anderson's 3H&3L the Third Reich is chaotic. Agreed. Alignment of an entity is determined by its actions/intentions relative to the world order and the human instinct to build Civilization. Law means to build “it” all up. It being Civilization, all that is good and just and benefits life. Chaos means to tear it all down. (And is generally associated with outside, supernatural “terror/tyranny,” if you will.) Chaos can have its order, structure, and armies. And the Empire in Star Wars is the epitome of that. Han Solo and the like are the Neutrals. The Senate and Rebellion the Lawfuls. |
|
|
|
Post by tombowings on Jan 28, 2023 22:34:50 GMT -6
It's very interesting how many different interpretations we can have regarding the nature of Law and Chaos.
|
|
|
|
Post by hamurai on Jan 29, 2023 2:15:48 GMT -6
(3) None of this really addresses your question. I think that the key is that you are thinking of deities from a "modern" approach where you are "a cleric of XX" but in the older days our group assumed that clerics were sort of Christianity or anti-Christianity (Satanism? I'm not sure we ever really said). Good-guy clerics would never use magic to hurt people, was our rationale at the time. Nowadays my players of clerics all want to pick a deity and I can see where the law/chaos distinction gets pretty blurred. Interesting, I honestly never thought of Chaos Clerics as evil or satanists. Evil clerics and satanists sure are part of the chaotic clerics, but in my games, chaotic also included "heathen" as in shamans, viking priests... In my understanding, the non-reversable (damaging) spells are an evil use of divine power - you cannot or shall not use divine power to (directly) harm, if it's meant to be used for healing. Heathen priests will have a different approach and their deities will be OK with that. |
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jan 29, 2023 6:11:26 GMT -6
(3) None of this really addresses your question. I think that the key is that you are thinking of deities from a "modern" approach where you are "a cleric of XX" but in the older days our group assumed that clerics were sort of Christianity or anti-Christianity (Satanism? I'm not sure we ever really said). Good-guy clerics would never use magic to hurt people, was our rationale at the time. Nowadays my players of clerics all want to pick a deity and I can see where the law/chaos distinction gets pretty blurred. Interesting, I honestly never thought of Chaos Clerics as evil or satanists. Evil clerics and satanists sure are part of the chaotic clerics, but in my games, chaotic also included "heathen" as in shamans, viking priests... In my understanding, the non-reversable (damaging) spells are an evil use of divine power - you cannot or shall not use divine power to (directly) harm, if it's meant to be used for healing. Heathen priests will have a different approach and their deities will be OK with that. We never had Satanism in our games, so I'm not sure what was on my brain when I typed that. Typically our bad guys were priests of Set, a la Robert E Howard's Conan stories. |
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Jan 29, 2023 6:34:40 GMT -6
It's very interesting how many different interpretations we can have regarding the nature of Law and Chaos. I like that it’s not specific. Maybe one side’s law is another side’ chaos. Maybe it’s yin & yang. Order and disorder. Predictability and unpredictability. I recall that it was in Chainmail and seemed to refer to how the belligerents “align” themselves on the battle field. Ok, simple enough. But later on Gygax applies it to individualized behavior with a weird set of tracking rules that seemed to piss off my players when I tried to apply them. So I chucked and eliminated Paladins and Assassins as character “classes”. |
|
|
|
Post by jamesmishler on Jan 29, 2023 7:24:19 GMT -6
Interesting, I honestly never thought of Chaos Clerics as evil or satanists. Evil clerics and satanists sure are part of the chaotic clerics, but in my games, chaotic also included "heathen" as in shamans, viking priests... In my understanding, the non-reversable (damaging) spells are an evil use of divine power - you cannot or shall not use divine power to (directly) harm, if it's meant to be used for healing. Heathen priests will have a different approach and their deities will be OK with that. We never had Satanism in our games, so I'm not sure what was on my brain when I typed that. Typically our bad guys were priests of Set, a la Robert E Howard's Conan stories. Well, just as the Hyborian world was Howard's analogue of ancient/medieval Earth, so too were Mitra and Set his analogues for Christ (sans the Trinity) and Satan. The temple of Mitra was clearly a Christian analogue, in every description. Set was both an analogue for Satan in his wickedness and opposition to Mitra. The cult of Adonis and Ishtar and the Cult of Erlik were analogues of Islam among the Arabs and Turks, respectively. |
|
|
|
Post by tombowings on Jan 29, 2023 10:03:45 GMT -6
I like that it’s not specific. Maybe one side’s law is another side’ chaos. Maybe it’s yin & yang. Order and disorder. Predictability and unpredictability. I recall that it was in Chainmail and seemed to refer to how the belligerents “align” themselves on the battle field. Ok, simple enough. But later on Gygax applies it to individualized behavior with a weird set of tracking rules that seemed to piss off my players when I tried to apply them. So I chucked and eliminated Paladins and Assassins as character “classes”. To be fair, the only reason the paladin class exists is because clerics can wield swords. Personally, I tend to think of Law as cooperation, Neutral as competition, and Chaos as might makes right. |
|
|
|
Post by Malchor on Jan 29, 2023 12:38:30 GMT -6
(1) As waysoftheearth mentions, it's not impossible for clerics of Law to use reversed spells, according to the text. They are just judged for using those spells. (2) "Is there really a difference between a cleric with a mace bashing someone's head in versus using a Cause Wounds spell?" Yes. In the first case, the cleric does it themselves, the way any person could. In the second, the spirits do it for them. Think of it more as: What can clerics of Law get supernatural aid to do? (3) In fact, the text doesn't say clerics of Law can't use reversed spells. It says that anti-clerics must use them. In other words, anti-clerics can't heal wounds. (4) Evil clerics can't turn undead, according to the text below the Clerics versus Undead Monsters table. And unlike later editions, they don't gain the power to command undead. Think of the nasty reversed spell powers as the compensation for anti-clerics being less powerful. (2) Let's say a Cleric of Thor going up against giants. Thor would generally support no punches pulled in that fight. (3) and (4): This is where rulings over rules and an individual Ref's world is going to need to decide. It is good to see some wiggle room there. I do not see why an evil cleric could not heal one of their own, should they find reason to do so. |
|
|
|
Post by dicebro on Jan 29, 2023 14:19:15 GMT -6
I like that it’s not specific. Maybe one side’s law is another side’ chaos. Maybe it’s yin & yang. Order and disorder. Predictability and unpredictability. I recall that it was in Chainmail and seemed to refer to how the belligerents “align” themselves on the battle field. Ok, simple enough. But later on Gygax applies it to individualized behavior with a weird set of tracking rules that seemed to piss off my players when I tried to apply them. So I chucked and eliminated Paladins and Assassins as character “classes”. To be fair, the only reason the paladin class exists is because clerics can wield swords. Personally, I tend to think of Law as cooperation, Neutral as competition, and Chaos as might makes right. Reminds me of Hobbes and Locke. |
|
|
|
Post by jamesmishler on Jan 29, 2023 18:12:40 GMT -6
(1) As waysoftheearth mentions, it's not impossible for clerics of Law to use reversed spells, according to the text. They are just judged for using those spells. (2) "Is there really a difference between a cleric with a mace bashing someone's head in versus using a Cause Wounds spell?" Yes. In the first case, the cleric does it themselves, the way any person could. In the second, the spirits do it for them. Think of it more as: What can clerics of Law get supernatural aid to do? (3) In fact, the text doesn't say clerics of Law can't use reversed spells. It says that anti-clerics must use them. In other words, anti-clerics can't heal wounds. (4) Evil clerics can't turn undead, according to the text below the Clerics versus Undead Monsters table. And unlike later editions, they don't gain the power to command undead. Think of the nasty reversed spell powers as the compensation for anti-clerics being less powerful. (2) Let's say a Cleric of Thor going up against giants. Thor would generally support no punches pulled in that fight. Actually, Thor would be appalled at the use of magic by his followers. Magic in Norse myth is "women's power," and only Odin was mighty enough among the gods to wield it without being called a nithling or worse. In D&D terms, using clerical magic after a battle would be acceptable. But using it in battle would be considered grossly unmanly. That's one of the reasons everyone hates Loki... In AD&D, in the Deities & Demigods, the best they could do to emulate this was limit clerical healing. |
|
|
|
Post by Malchor on Feb 6, 2023 8:54:54 GMT -6
(2) Let's say a Cleric of Thor going up against giants. Thor would generally support no punches pulled in that fight. Actually, Thor would be appalled at the use of magic by his followers. Clerics do not do magic though. |
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Feb 6, 2023 9:52:28 GMT -6
M&M mentions the concept of reverse spells for evil clerics, however, thinking about it, why limit them to evil clerics? The 1974 D&D game includes four (not three) character classes: fighting-men magic-users clerics anti-clerics Even as magic-users and clerics have different spell lists because the two are different classes, so anti-clerics and clerics have different spell lists because the two are different classes. |
|
|
|
Post by waysoftheearth on Feb 6, 2023 15:27:09 GMT -6
The 1974 D&D game includes four (not three) character classes: fighting-men magic-users clerics anti-clerics Even as magic-users and clerics have different spell lists because the two are different classes, so anti-clerics and clerics have different spell lists because the two are different classes. There are combination figures as well (e.g., Elves). But clerics vs anti-clerics are the only classes that come prepackaged with campaign drama; they epitomise the struggle between Law and Chaos. Many campaigns have the Law/Chaos clerics/anti-clerics struggle as a backdrop, with (neutral like) fighters and wizards mucking about with petty looting as a distraction in the foreground |
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Jun 7, 2023 10:05:35 GMT -6
(3) In fact, the text doesn't say clerics of Law can't use reversed spells. It says that anti-clerics must use them. In other words, anti-clerics can't heal wounds. Where does it say that anti-clerics MUST cast reverse spells? Can't find it. In our campaign, one of the things that makes anti-clerics so " bad ass" is that they can cast either direction without repercussion, whereas clerics are judged by their patron, case by case, for reversing a spell. What would the in-world case be for why a cleric can't cast a reversible spell in a forward-way? Because the devil doesn't heal people, etc.? |
|
|
|
Post by tetramorph on Jun 7, 2023 10:12:26 GMT -6
We never had Satanism in our games, so I'm not sure what was on my brain when I typed that. Typically our bad guys were priests of Set, a la Robert E Howard's Conan stories. We don't have literal Satanism in our campaign either. But the "Church of Law" isn't literally the Christian church, either. So in our campaign anti-clerics are to Satanism as clerics are to the real world church - roughly fictional counterparts. Anti-clerics are "cultists" of chthonic deities, or devil-worshippers infiltrating the church of law from within. For pagan deities, their priests are Magic-users. In fact, in the main, magic-users are initiates into mystery religions. Each "life experience level," they reach, they undergo another initiation, a kind of "dream quest," that opens access to that "plane" of powers, blah, blah, blah (we don't over explain it. Wait, that may be too late . . . ). The Poul Anderson law/chaos thing, however, makes this a little funky. I think, in my mind, chaotic and neutral MUs are chthonic cultists (a la Lovecraft) and pagan priests, respectively. Lawful Magic-users are astrologers (legit science in middle ages, even for the church) and alchemists (also legit science) who channel "natural" powers for "field casting." Okay, I've officially over-thought it. |
|
|
|
Post by howandwhy99 on Jun 7, 2023 19:38:36 GMT -6
I don't think of clerics as casting spells so much as releasing the power of their deities, like when they use a turning / command power.
Clerical Magic, like everything else about a cleric, is about alignment. So I think good clerics can only cast good spells and evil clerics can only cast evil spells. It isn't about having more options. I guess technically everyone has all the options, but it isn't a good idea to take. :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by plethon on Jun 8, 2023 13:40:56 GMT -6
If you are thinking about allowing clerics to reverse spells you can also consider the possibility of certain rare Lawful undead creatures under special circumstances. You could have Lawfully sanctioned mummies or a lawful ghost or spirit. Maybe even the heavenly realms are full of Lawful 'zombies'
|
|
|
|
Post by Piper on Jun 9, 2023 0:45:28 GMT -6
IMC clerics can cast the beneficial forms of cleric spells and can turn undead.
Anti-Clerics can cast the reversed spell forms but can’t turn undead.
Either one using the other type of spell sets place themselves in danger of divine judgment.
I’m now bracing myself for the more opinionated board members here to come by and tell me how wrong I am in this matter of opinion. But that’s how I run it. I ran it by EGG in the early 1980’s and he seemed just fine with this interpretation.
Note that Clerics of 7th level and greater are either “Law” or “Chaos,” and there is a sharp distinction between them OD&D I:7 (emphasis added)
|
|
