Medieval Christianity in OD&D

[geoffrey]

In the OD&D books there is a faint implication of clerics being Christians, what with most of the level titles as well as clerics having "crosses" rather than "holy symbols".

What do you think about an OD&D campaign with no polytheistic gods? Instead, lawful and neutral clerics are (nonhistorical!) medieval Christian clergy (Roman Catholic and/or Eastern Orthodox in flavor). Chaotic clerics are Devil worshipers. Voila! Done. No complex pantheons and all the rest. No explaining to players about the campaign's mythology. Just an instantly recognizable and simple division between Orthodox/Catholic clergy on the one hand, and Devil-worshippers on the other.

Of course, I'm not suggesting turning the campaign into a target for historical and/or theological nitpicking players ("Actually, that type of vestment wasn't introduced into the Church until the 18th century." "What does my bishop believe regarding the filioque?" Etc.). That sort of thing would be out of bounds just as much as a player complaining that D&D minotaurs differ from the Minotaur of Greek mythology, or that D&D orcs differ from Tolkien, or etc. D&Dism trumps all.

Instead, watch some of those great old 1930s Universal horror movies such as Dracula, Frankenstein, etc. Look at the way Christianity is treated therein. It's not given a theological treatment. Instead, it is treated as background flavor and as one more arrow in your quiver with which to fight monsters. THAT's the sort of medieval Christianity I'm getting at for an OD&D campaign.

[foster1941]

That's the way I do it. Clerics = members of ahistorical, hierarchial, implicitly-Christian "Church of Law"; Anti-clerics = devil worshippers, more or less. Beyond that there are also ancient spirits, pagan godlings, and demons (including Elder Horrors from alien dimensions) but those are all more like big NPCs or monsters than "deities" in the later-edition-D&D sense. Worshipping and paying homage to such a figure might have no effect whatsoever (beyond perhaps keeping it from eating you) or the being might be able to grant a specific power or two to its followers, but certainly not the whole panoply of spells and powers granted to members of the cleric class.

[crimhthanthegreat]

That is one very good (& easy) way to run a campaign. Remember folks, just discuss this as it relates to the game, lets stay on topic. ;D

For another take on how this is done the Deryni books by Katherine Kurtz are, to my mind, a good take on how to bring real world religion/religious overtones and trapping into a fictional setting. And in practice you would (or at least I would) be using a bit lighter touch that the Deryni books use. I also agree that the 1930's horror movies are a great example of how to run it. Great stuff geoffrey!

[doc]

Firstly, as with any topic pertaining to religion in any form, I apologize beforehand if anybody gets offended.

The whole "one good power, one evil power" can certainly work in D&D and has been around for at least as long as Eru/Melkor in the Middle Earth tales. Considering that clerics must be either Lawful or Chaotic, this poses no real problem. Judaism, Christianity, and Muslim all have the same basic tenants of humility, tradition, justice, and brotherhood, and all distinctly embrace Law. Satanism, with it's teaching of "Do What Thou Wilt," is clearly Chaotic.

What you would need to look at (and what could add to some real fun in creating a game world) is exactly what Christianity would mean in a world populated by races other than human and where arcane magic is a given fact of life. Given that, in OD&D, only humans may become clerics, would this imply that other races are not allowed to belong to the church, or perhaps that other races choose to disregard religion altogether as a human conceit (which is how I do it in my game)? Are magic users actively hunted as heretics? Perhaps it might be like EPT where spellcasters need to place themselves in service to the church to avoid possible persecution.

Then you need to start thinking about regional interpretations of religion. How does a desert kingdom that has existed for thousands of years differ in their beliefs and worship from a teeming urban city that has been in existance for only two hundred years? Even if they worship the same god, there is going to be a big difference (as can be readily seen in our own world).

Just a few thoughts off the top of my head.

Doc

[howandwhy99]

We play a weird way, but I'd have no problem with playing what you're suggesting. Just make sure everyone is down with it. I think D&D can very easily be set up as a Christian or christian-like setting without any real difficulty at all. The cleric is very much a medieval European concept not to mention the Paladin specialty class.

It seems to me a good way to court very Christian opponents of D&D is exactly this way. I've heard of gamers who do this from on ENWorld running a Christian game with missionary adventures.

I'd add in other cultural religions just to be earth-like, but it certainly isn't necessary.

We have a mix of everything. The Ref has religions set all over with different cultural histories and practices. But we as players make up our own god or gods to worship when we start the game. We could even do it in the middle of a campaign just as we might extend our backgrounds from before the campaign started later on during play. The religions we create become part of the world and are as real for us as anyone else. Cleric classes receive powers and Paladins have their own codes to follow. In our game we find out our own god may have other "faces" with different names covering faiths similar to ours, similar portfolios for instance, but as PCs we don't have to believe that is true. The practices, ceremonies, morals, and expanding of the faith are up to us to determine. To gain by revelation perhaps. It's a fun and very, very inclusive way to play with religions and I like it. Pretty much everything from Gods, Demi-Gods & Heroes is included. Including the expansions in DDG. it makes things very flavorful as we players don't often recognize Gods from the DDG until we find someone to tell us the names of those gods whose, um, ruins? in the world we find.

Lots of Gods operate in secret too and there's no telling how large our religions grow. Sometimes a PC will pass on, but surely, if they made an effort to expand their religious beliefs, we see repercussions in the later game time. These things tend to spread after all.

Edit: I like to tell people when I started playing the Ref said I could worship anything and I was like: "I can worship Sifl & Olly those sock puppets from Nickelodeon?" Yep, it's as serious or goofy as we want it to be. (this made me institute the "no carebearing the setting w/o unanimous approval" rule in my own games) (yes, we could be carebears as a race if we so desired)

[foster1941]

doc said:

What you would need to look at (and what could add to some real fun in creating a game world) is exactly what Christianity would mean in a world populated by races other than human and where arcane magic is a given fact of life. Given that, in OD&D, only humans may become clerics, would this imply that other races are not allowed to belong to the church, or perhaps that other races choose to disregard religion altogether as a human conceit (which is how I do it in my game)? Are magic users actively hunted as heretics? Perhaps it might be like EPT where spellcasters need to place themselves in service to the church to avoid possible persecution.

In the first regard some of Poul Anderson's fantasy books (The Broken Sword and especially The Merman's Children) might provide some good ideas. The interplay between Christianity and sorcery also gets some attention in Lord Dunsany's The Charwoman's Shadow. Fletcher Pratt's novel The Blue Star is about a world where magic is real but is suppressed by the church and may hold some inspiration for your latter idea.

[casey777]

That's pretty much how I remember D&D being run locally back in the day, esp. with those like me who started in Basic D&D first. Law -> Good, Chaos -> Bad could give a Dogs in the Vineyard approach if you want it, to use a more current RPG example. Where the PCs know they're in the right even though that sometimes means having to make tough choices. Worked for Solomon Kane.

I kinda like the "sanctioned" magic-user idea. From what I've heard this is somewhat how magic use is in Blackmoor and Tekumel's magic certainly is Pavar Orthodoxy temple controlled. Mind, I also like modern fantasy/horror & shows like Hellsing and Witch Hunter Robin, where spellcasters either work for an agency (sometimes the Church) or are hunted.

[casey777]

Hammer horror films are also good fodder for this, usually having use of the cross but with strength of will as important (not necessarily the same thing as faith!). (edit: agreed, Christianity as another weapon in an arsenal) The big films (Dracula etc.) are good as well as lesser known gems such as "The Karnstein Trilogy" & Captain Chronos.

Witchfinder General would also fit IMO.

foster1941 said:

Beyond that there are also ancient spirits, pagan godlings, and demons (including Elder Horrors from alien dimensions) but those are all more like big NPCs or monsters than "deities" in the later-edition-D&D sense.

Good candidates for Neutral -> "self interest / out for survival" motivation perhaps (the entities themselves at least)? They could still be worshiped, though limited to certain areas or groups. A good way to highlight the "otherness" of rarer peoples, PC suitable races or not.

Not just cults, lost world types, or far off tribes on islands either. Could include people from the culture not currently in charge of a region, a certain class or profession (nobles, peasants, leatherworkers, sailors, whatever), students, or your pick of fantasy races (many dwarves are pagans who worship the Norse gods still, elves from the Great Forest still sacrifice to the Great Tree Spirt etc.).

[Deleted]

For adding the flavor of an "Abrahamic" themed clergy to D&D, I would like to recommend several books:

1. 1066: The Year of the Conquest (David Howarth)-Coming in at barely over 200 pages, this neat little (& quick) read provides a good deal of insight into the machinations of the Late Dark Ages/Early Medieval Church (when capitalized, "Church" refers to the Latin Church [Roman Catholicism]). Lots of good meat & potatoes if your interested in a "Dark Ages" flavored campaign as well. One of my favorite history books, hands down.

2. Roman Britan & Early England (Peter Hunter Blair)-Part (1) of "The Norton Library History of England". A little dry if your not into purely scholastic study; however, chapters 7, 9, 12, & 13 are very informative about the formation of the early Celtic church. Interesting & useful, IMO.

3. An Encyclopedia of Myth & Legend: British & Irish Mythology (John & Caitlin Matthews)-An easy-reference encyclopedia of the myths & legends of Britain. Most importantly, this book contains a lot of info on how the early Church adopted the worship & veneration of local gods & goddeses into the greater theological consciousness. Could be out of print (not sure).

4. Life in a Medieval Village (Frances & Joseph Gies)-Tons of info on the medieval Church, & their place within society. IMO, with the Gies, you can't go wrong.

5. 1453: The Holy War for Constantinople and the Clash of Islam and The West (Roger Crowley)-A gritty book about Ottoman Sultan Mehmet II & his obsessive compulsion to capture Constantinople from Emperor Constantine XI, & the Emperor's even more obsessive compulsion to hold the city at any cost. This book really delivers if your looking for insight into comparative religions at war. One of the best true war books I've ever read. Non stop action & violence from begining to end. If you only read one book out of these I listed, let it be this one--Highly Recommended. ;D

6. People of the First Crusade (Michael Foss)-Kind of speaks for itself. If you ever wanted to know what drives people to commit acts of brutal violence on their enemies, & even on others of their faith who "just aren't praying right", this is the book for you. Highly entertaining.

6. The Crusades through Arab Eyes (Amin Maalouf)-So often we only hear one version of the story; now, here is the other. A great book for delving into the muck of religious fanaticism, on both sides of the conflict. Very interesting.

7. The Complete Idiot's Guide to the Crusades (Paul L. Williams, Ph.D.)-No joke; one of the most comprehensive books about the Crusades & the medieval Church I've ever had the pleasure of reading. Reads very quickly, & has tons of interesting (& bizarre) facts. Lots of fun.

Not an exhaustive list by any means, but there is a lot of info you could use to flesh out a "Christian" mythos for D&D. Geoffrey has a great idea for a campaign religion. It's something that (most) people are somewhat familiar with, & could be a lot of fun if everyone goes for it.

And as doc said, I apologize in advance if anybody is offended by my choice of literature; just wanted to offer suggestions if anybody wants to check them out--good material for adding flavor, &, well, no one is ever too old to learn or read.

[geoffrey]

doc said:

What you would need to look at (and what could add to some real fun in creating a game world) is exactly what Christianity would mean in a world populated by races other than human and where arcane magic is a given fact of life. Given that, in OD&D, only humans may become clerics, would this imply that other races are not allowed to belong to the church, or perhaps that other races choose to disregard religion altogether as a human conceit (which is how I do it in my game)? Are magic users actively hunted as heretics? Perhaps it might be like EPT where spellcasters need to place themselves in service to the church to avoid possible persecution.

Then you need to start thinking about regional interpretations of religion. How does a desert kingdom that has existed for thousands of years differ in their beliefs and worship from a teeming urban city that has been in existance for only two hundred years? Even if they worship the same god, there is going to be a big difference (as can be readily seen in our own world).

Here's what I'm thinking regarding the points you raised:

1. Only humans worship anything at all. Non-human sentient races (dwarves, elves, goblins, etc.) regard religion as a purely human activity.

2. Magic-users hunted as heretics? Nah. I'd hand-wave this away and allow for the Church to have no problem with magic.

3. Regional interpretations of religion. I'd mostly hand-wave this away, too. (If pressed, I'd compare it more to Eastern Orthodoxy than to Roman Catholicism because Orthodoxy isn't as centralized. That allows for the D&D campaign world to have independent hierarchies that still believe pretty much the same thing. Historically, for example, the Orthodox believers in Syria had little or no contact with those in Serbia. They each had hierarchies independent of one another, yet they were part of the same overarching Church. That's the sort of thing I'd go for in a campaign world. But again, I'd mostly hand-wave it away.)

A couple of further thoughts:

An easy way to tell if a certain hierarch in D&D Land is really a member of the Church is if he can cast cleric spells. If yes, then he must be OK. If not, he obviously has problems.

I wouldn't want lawful clerics to be fighting against each other in religious wars. I'd therefore have them all part of one big Church, rather than have them in rival churches or religions. My main historical analogue would be European Christianity (from Ireland in the west to Russia in the east) circa A. D. 1000, before the schism of A. D. 1054. That way you still get a medley of differing cultural takes, but everybody is still in the same Church. No religious wars, no crusades, no theological debates, etc. Just lawful clerics with crosses turning undead. Christianity D&D-style.

[korgoth]

I think this is a fine idea, geoffrey.

One thing you could do with the "fey" (elves, dwarves, goblins, etc.) is to cast them as attempting to remain unaffiliated in the struggle between good and evil. Of course, the Church sees that no middle ground is possible... but the fey are like spirits who have "gone native" in a way. That's one way to approach it, anyway. Some would be obviously hostile to the Church, some would be dismissive, some would seek a sort of detente. Most would bemoan the loss of the "old ways" when they had more sway over humanity.

I think that your approach in general fits very well with OD&D. For one thing, the lack of spells at 1st level means that the vast majority of clerics have not become sufficiently firm in their faith to be able to work miracles (always worked by grace and not the cleric, of course!).

I think that I would not allow most clerics to bear arms, however. Christian clerics are not supposed to shed blood (and that includes inflicting compound fractures with a big ol' mace!). The exception would be military orders such as the Hospitallers. But these should be using edged weapons too!

As for Magic-Users, I like the idea of the magic-user as persecuted by the Church. After all, there aren't that many good wizards in the medieval romances! Wizards may flock to the Chaotic cause, or they may keep to themselves (perhaps hiding within Lawful society and putting on a Christian image).

Anyway, a good topic. If I weren't so tired, I'd have more to say.

[geoffrey]

korgoth said:

I think that I would not allow most clerics to bear arms, however. Christian clerics are not supposed to shed blood (and that includes inflicting compound fractures with a big ol' mace!). The exception would be military orders such as the Hospitallers. But these should be using edged weapons too!

I'd let the D&D rules trump historical considerations such as the above: "Clerics are kind of like Orthodox Catholic clergy from circa A. D. 1000, but they are armed and armored and encouraged to kick-butt." ;D

[calithena]

IME a lot of the old school campaigns included all real world religions as well as endless pantheons of fantasy gods.

For example my high school AD&D game featured me playing a Christian cleric, an elven prince who was interested in converting, a greek warrior-woman who served Nike, and a penguin illusionist who had no faith at all, among others.

Then there's the old trick of having the Jewish/Muslim/Buddhist etc. vampire who just laughs when faced with a cross. Got to have the right holy symbol to do the job, see...

If you want to rationalize law/chaos I think having Christianity as part of law makes sense, but then you have to decide if e.g. dwarves loves them some Jesus or if they're lawful in some other way, just like elves are often chaotic but not necessarily all that hot with chaos demons in traditional games.

[dwayanu]

I think that warlike clerics in the middle ages did indeed use the mace to avoid "shedding blood" by a convenient interpretation of canon law. Many took their positions as "lords spiritual" because their elder brothers took the lands associated with a temporal peerage.

Simak's Where the Evil Dwells is an alternate-historical fantasy in which the threat of monsters and magic kept the Christianized Roman Empire going (and technology at near-standstill) up to the 1970s.

The Church, I think, was not always bitterly opposed to magicians.

Not entirely with tongue in cheek, I suggest that Episcopalians (the Anglican Communion) -- especially from the Victorian Era on -- might make a felicitous model for a fantasy-game Church.

[James Maliszewski]

dwayanu said:

I think that warlike clerics in the middle ages did indeed use the mace to avoid "shedding blood" by a convenient interpretation of canon law.

This is my understanding as well. That said, ordained clergy who took up fighting were rare in the High Middle Ages, when the prohibition against bloodshed was more strictly enforced. That's why even the Inquisition generally handed over suspected heretics to secular authorities for torture and/or execution.

The Church, I think, was not always bitterly opposed to magicians.

This too is correct, provided by "magicians" one excludes necromancers and others who engage in immoral and diabolical practices. To most medieval thinkers, "magic" was just another kind of science. In a setting where the principles behind magic are understood and explicable, there's no necessity that magic-users would be on bad terms with the Church unless the principles behind magic rely on consort with demons or something of that sort.

[Deleted]

dwayanu said:

I think that warlike clerics in the middle ages did indeed use the mace to avoid "shedding blood" by a convenient interpretation of canon law

You are right on the money. Bishop Odo of Bayeux, William the Bastard's (or Conqueror's, depending on how you feel about him... ;D) right hand man, is depicted on the Bayeux Tapestry with mace in hand (whether he ever actually used it during the battle, or just "rallied the troops" is a long-debated question among historians). He was a warrior before being ordained a Cleric of the Church, so there is no doubt he knew how to use one, & quite effectively, I would assume. In either case, men of the early Church often fought side-by-side with their liege-lords on the field of battle, wielding everything from clubs to staves to maces. They were also permitted to marry (but that is a whole different topic altogether). Truly, "Turning the Other Cheek" was a state of action men aspired to--but which few have ever reached.

And speaking of the Bayeux Tapestry, here is a neat little video I discovered on YouTube. It is an animated rendering of the Tapestry, starting a little more than a 1/4 of the way through the Tapestry itself: www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDaB-NNyM8o

[geoffrey]

jamesm said:

In a setting where the principles behind magic are understood and explicable, there's no necessity that magic-users would be on bad terms with the Church unless the principles behind magic rely on consort with demons or something of that sort.

Exactly so.

[Stonegiant]

As to the use of blount weapons and the cleric archetype you might want to check out this thread over at KnK LINK

[korgoth]

stonegiant said:

As to the use of blount weapons and the cleric archetype you might want to check out this thread over at KnK LINK

Yes, an excellent thread.

[coffee]

While I have nothing to add to this discussion, I gotta say that I'm loving it. I've thought on a number of occasions of using Christianity as the default religion in D&D. But unlike you guys, I never did anything about it (even research).

There's a lot of good stuff in this thread. Keep up the good work!

[James Maliszewski]

Just a small point I'd like to add to this discussion that has some relevance. I asked Gygax some months ago about the relationship of Christianity to D&D and was quite adamant that it was unseemly to allude directly to it in the game. That's why, he claimed, he used obscure names for the devils and demons rather than better known ones and why he never explicitly included "angels" in the game, even though he included angel-like beings. If I get his meaning, what he meant was that analogs to Christianity and/or Christian concepts were obviously fine and appropriate, but he felt uncomfortable with any connection more direct than that.

I offer this just as another perspective, not a normative one. I simply found it interesting.

[geoffrey]

James, I agree with Gary that it is undesirable to get too explicit with Christianity in D&D. It could easily derail the campaign into theological debates and such.

That's why I think that the best way to do it in a D&D campaign is to do what the old Universal horror movies (Dracula, Frankenstein, the Mummy, Wolfman, etc.) did. They implicitly assumed Christianity in the background (what with the efficacious crosses, church buildings, monasteries, etc.), but never said anything theological.

Here's what I'd say to my players in such a D&D campaign:

"All good and neutral clerics are members of the Church which is quite similar (but not identical) to the Orthodox Catholic Church of 1,000 years ago. All evil clerics are devil-worshippers. That's all you need to know."

Or, to put it in a picture, just look at some of those old Sutherland drawings of clerics holding crosses. That's all the "theology" you clerics need to know. ;D

[foster1941]

Something to keep in mind when discussing Gary's take on real-world religion in D&D is that he was very religious (whether he always was or only became so later in life isn't something I'm in a position to state, but it's undeniable that for at least the last 3-4 years he was very religious) and perhaps had theologically-based issues with inserting his own real-life religion into a fictional setting that others of us might not share (or at least not to the same extent).

[Falconer]

I always liked how for the World of Greyhawk (specifically, in the Gord novels, but I think also in the MM2), Gygax took Middle Eastern deities such as Marduk and Nergal, who I believe are not necessarily even evil within their own mythoi per DDG (Marduk is LN for example), and made them CE Demon Lords. I see this as due to their traditional opposition to the Judæo-Christian Yahweh. For all that the Gord novels obsess with demons and daemons and devils and powers of balance, he does leave the good side extremely vague, which would fit with the whole Unmentionable Christianity theory. Regards.

[calithena]

The weird/fun thing about the LBBs to me is that if you look at the spells and abilities, the default interpretation of Lawful Clerics is as Christian, but the default interpretation of Chaotic clerics is as Set-worshippers straight out of Robert E. Howard.

[brumbar]

I think that notion of a single notion of Christian versus devil worshiper can be fine for simplifying game play. BUT why limit to just these two. I think that the party and the Dm could have a conversation before the start of play and establish a theme. Some ideas are the norse patheon of good and evil and the mere mortals are but an extension of this war. Or druidism of Gaul and Britian versus the Christian expansion. Or my favorite law vs chaos with the dwarves being lawful and elves being chaos.

I guess my point is that there are alot of ways to make the religion thing simple other than the simple Christian versus devils scenario.

T

[geoffrey]

The campaign I'm preparing to Judge is set in the Southern Reaches of the Wilderlands, using James Mishler and Peter Bradley's new version of that hoary map.

In order to simplify things, I am going to plunk the Wilderlands right onto our own planet Earth, so I automatically have 24-hour days, 365-day years, a single moon, a familiar night sky, familiar flora and fauna, etc. It's a good way to be lazy.

Going off of the name of the Wilderlands' "Barbarian Altanis", I am going to consider the Wilderlands to be the truth behind Plato's legendary Atlantis. It's thus in the Atlantic and sunk thousands of years before recorded history.

The "semi-consistent world-builder" in me struggled a bit with how to have a "Christian Church D&D-style" in the years B. C. Then it hit me...

The Book of Mormon!

The Book of Mormon has Christians living hundreds of years before Christ was born. Of course, they looked forward rather than backward to Christ.

I'll just do the same with my Wilderlands, having D&D-style Christians living thousands of years before Christ.

This will help "D&Dize" my campaign's Christianity. There will not be any temptation on my part to get overly-analytical. It's "D&D Christianity", with the emphasis on the "D&D" part.

[korgoth]

geoffrey said:

The Book of Mormon has Christians living hundreds of years before Christ was born. Of course, they looked forward rather than backward to Christ.

Aren't they called "Jews"?

You mean they would carry around crucifixes and so on? I don't get it.

[geoffrey]

korgoth said:

geoffrey said:

The Book of Mormon has Christians living hundreds of years before Christ was born. Of course, they looked forward rather than backward to Christ.

Aren't they called "Jews"?

You mean they would carry around crucifixes and so on? I don't get it.

No, these people (living hundreds of years B. C.) explicitly called themselves Christians. They are presented as essentially Protestants living hundreds of years before Christ was born. They believed in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Virgin Mary, the Resurrection, etc. There was no ambiguity in these beliefs. They were explicit.

So what does that mean for my D&D game?

My campaign's Christian Church is going to be very similar to the Orthodox Catholic Church of A. D. 1000. The biggest difference is that they will believe that the first coming of Jesus is in their future rather than in their past.

But again: No overt theology will appear in my campaign. Only good-aligned clerics with crosses turning undead and casting spells (plus the evil clerics with diabolic symbols casting spells).

[coffee]

Geoffrey, I like it.

The thing that always confused me about anti-clerics was: How did people not spot them for what they were? It's like that Chaotic Cleric in the Keep on the Borderlands.

The answer came from a book, but not one I'd typically think of as a source for D&D; the Illuminatus! trilogy, by Robert Shea and Robert Anton Wilson.

Some of the characters in the book were Satanists. They would 'infiltrate' the orthodox church to steal holy items to use in their satanic rituals.

I agree that overt theology doesn't belong in D&D. I think you're 100% correct on that point.

So what I'm getting at is: You can't tell a Chaotic by looking at them. These Anti-Clerics can work alongside the regular Clerics, 'undercover', and further their own goals by doing so. This is part of what makes them so insidious.

Plus, it provides for a tense town adventure when the players realize that there's someone in the local church who works for the other side -- and then they have to figure out who!

(Not for nothing, but I love the way there's no 'detect alignment' spell in Men & Magic...)