Musings on the Cleric

[Von]

Religion is important in the social architecture of Titan, as I've imagined it, and in my approach to the genre and the construction of roleplayable scenarios.

In order for that approach to be accessible and meaningful in play it must be available to players, through the medium of the 'divine spellcasting' classes, chief among which is of course the Cleric.

The Cleric has proven to be problematic for some of my more historically astute players, or at least the adventuring Cleric who goes down dungeons. E. identifies them as odd because they shouldn't be strolling around; they're a kind of courtier or official of a church in a place. What we're seeing in our games is the missionary or ambassador, which is in E.'s mind more associated with a Victorian/colonial period. An ambassador would be a court player, rather than an adventurer; the missionary would be a religious warrior first and foremost, not something which she associates with the term 'cleric' but more with 'templar' or what have you. I offered some resistance to this, citing the Christianising of Scandinavia as an opportunity for clerics to operate in hostile territory. It might well be that 'Cleric' becomes 'Priest' or something broader. We are not certain.

In the light of my continued opposition to the reflexive and unthinking adoption of Vancian systems, I have also been attempting to produce a set of Cleric 'powers' - things that Clerics can do independent of the 'spell level/slots per day' paradigm, effects like Turn Undead that are options which the Cleric has available.

I asked around the group and they came up with the following list. Some items appeared twice.

• Special powers over their antithesis (demons, undead etc.)
  
• Special knowledge of religion, and higher general knowledge due to education
• Regional 'buffs' depending on the status their religion enjoys
• Oratory and inspiriation
• Bestowing and removing curses
• Inflicting and curing wounds
• Bless or curse items (create holy water)

A list of roles of the cleric, meanwhile - things you'd go to one for - came up as follows:

• Sanctuary (protected spaces)
• Curing and healing
• Lore (relics and stuff)
• Oratory
• Forgiveness
• Intercession and calling down
• Transmogrification (water into blood and all that)
• Community knowledge
• Literacy
• Crafts - beekeeping, alemaking, things monasteries do
• Oblations or tithes
• The holy personhood of them - the especially religious do not need food or rest, it hurts to be around them if you are a sinner. This is more the Paladin, I think.

I'm letting all this simmer and see what boils away, for the time being.

[The Semi-Retired Gamer]

Very cool lists and relevant also. I will be paying particular attention to this thread ams the information unfolds. I really dig comparative religion information in real life so I'm getting quite in depth with the various religions for Toldara.

[jmccann]

I think you have some good thoughts here. I think you should continue to develop them. I'd like to read more about how these considerations affect play, or how you expect them to affect play.

[Von]

Jun 10, 2015 1:27:28 GMT -5 jmccann said:

I think you have some good thoughts here. I think you should continue to develop them. I'd like to read more about how these considerations affect play, or how you expect them to affect play.

That's what I have to work out before the first games, really.

I envisage the Cleric working like a more hierarchical, organised version of the Cunning Man/Wise Woman from Backswords and Bucklers - there is a list of abilities and the Cleric adopts a new one with each level gained. The idea is that an adventuring Cleric is one who can perform a given... 'miracle', for want of a better word... on tap. Balance between classes is achieved by the Fighter and associated classes becoming progressively better at the things they do, whereas the Cleric and Magic User learn to do new things.

My task now is to assign some meaningful mechanics to that list of things Clerics can do, and to decide which of those things are more suited to the Paladin.

[Von]

I have been reminded by an acquaintance that one M. A. R. Barker has already engaged in a project similar to this one and prepared the following list of Cleric/Priest abilities:

1. Theology(skill)
2. Demonology(skill)
3. Languages
4. Light for 2 hours(30 foot radius) (1/day)
5. Detect holy/unholy (1/day)
6. Heal wounds (touch, minor) 1/day
7. Sense thoughts (1/day)
8. Send telepathic message to single person 1/day 18 mile range with reply
9. Protection from Evil – 3 turns 1/day
10. More Healing
11. Dominate (specified non-undead, non animal non-construct)
12. Remove curse

Given that I intend to cap levels at 10 in any one class I need to reduce the number slightly. I believe I can make Languages and Theology basic features of the class rather than things to be developed arbitrarily during play. More Healing, whatever that means (I am copypasting from someone's summary), is redundant if we have a healing power already: I shall be replacing that with a divination effect characterised by calling upon the Ancestors for guidance. Sense Thoughts and Send Telepathic Message are a little out of kilter with what I want: I think a Bless equivalent, something which instils Ancestral 'holiness' in an object once per day, and an oratorical effect upon Morale, are what's called for here. That leaves us with something like this:

1. Light (2 hours, 30 ft radius)
2. Detect holy/unholy (100 ft radius)
3. Heal wounds (1 hit die's worth)
4. Divination (question to the Ancestors)
5. Bless (instil holiness in an object or area)
6. Protection from holy/unholy (3 turns, 30 ft radius)
7. Oratory (+something to Morale)
8. Dominate (speak a word of power and command a target, save vs. spell to resist)
9. Remove curse

The advancing Cleric chooses one of these miracles every time they gain a level.

[todd]

Love the discussion! What about the Friar Tuck sort of archetype for the cleric? He was a holy man, a drunk, a wanderer, and a renowned swordsman.

[Von]

Jul 3, 2015 11:24:37 GMT -5 todd said:

Love the discussion! What about the Friar Tuck sort of archetype for the cleric? He was a holy man, a drunk, a wanderer, and a renowned swordsman.

That's the archetype that E. adopted for our Castle Ravenloft playthrough. Certainly a good one. Why do you bring it up?

[todd]

Just as far as other possible models of cleric for ideas/inspiration. That's cool that someone threw it at Ravenloft.

[waysoftheearth]

Apologies if this is somewhat off-topic, but perhaps it's worth taking a step back for a moment?

Jun 28, 2015 9:35:31 GMT -5 Von said:

That's what I have to work out before the first games, really.

This is one perfectly valid approach; another is to begin with only the broadest strokes in mind and allow the game to develop organically. The former places an emphasis on referee control/responsibility/set-up. The latter places more emphasis on joint creativity on-demand and can result in a game that's driven as much by the players as the ref. Some of each approach is possibly desirable.

Jun 28, 2015 9:35:31 GMT -5 Von said:

Balance between classes is achieved...

Design balance isn't something that's traditionally emphasized by OD&D; this becomes even clearer with the introduction sub-classes. Comparing the ranger, paladin, and illusionist, for example, balance seems to be relatively unimportant. The capabilities of the OD&D classes are typically weighted against their own specific XP requirements, rather than against any sense of overall between-class balance. I.e., an expectation of "balance" between a 4th level Burglar requiring 4,800 XP and a 4th level Hero requiring 8,000 XP is not necessarily desirable!

One might draw a valid(?) comparison between player-types with equivalent amounts of XP, which would likely show those classes requiring the fewest XP getting ahead on the saving throw and attack matrices, and reaching their "top" benefits soonest.

Apologies once again. I do get a bit carried away with this stuff...

[/end of diversion]

[Von]

This is one perfectly valid approach; another is to begin with only the broadest strokes in mind and allow the game to develop organically. The former places an emphasis on referee control/responsibility/set-up. The latter places more emphasis on joint creativity on-demand and can result in a game that's driven as much by the players as the ref. Some of each approach is possibly desirable.

A fair point! However, I have found that things like "how the Cleric class works in play" need to be fairly tight before a player chooses to play a Cleric, largely because they want to know what their Cleric can do. Being able to answer that in reasonably rigorous and rigid terms seems wise. It's worth doing for its own sake because taking the Vance out of D&D is a worthwhile experiment and something I have been asked to do for players who really, really hate their magic working that way - because they're not Vance fans and see D&D as something discrete from its inspirations. If you have a look in the other threads on this subforum you should find notes on a discussion with C., who is very... vocal... in her distaste for Vancian magic. The shift toward a limited selection of on-demand powers was inspired by other rules sets to which I have access and also by her ranting in my ear for the best part of an hour.

In terms of the Cleric I actually think I have enough to go on for the time being and would feel comfortable with players playing one to test them out.

Furthermore, I am not just using Titan for D&D: I have every intention of writing original fiction set in this world and frankly that means I want more control over the architecture of that world. Religion, spirituality and magic are very important elements of that architecture, intersecting with social class and race and region, and so again, I want to have those worked out. Doing so in gameable terms ensures that there's no odd disparity between what the background says is possible and what the rules permit. At the end of the day, players may come and go, campaigns may begin and end, but I intend to dwell in this world for a while and I think that entitles me to take the tack I have. Players come and share in it for a while but I'm the one who has to live here.

A note on style, too. Within the confines of a given 'game' (a word to which we assign a lot of definitions, and which I find useful to differentiate from 'setting' or 'world' or 'campaign' for clarity of reference and thought), the players drive to a far greater extent than I do. The world as they experience it is defined by what they are interested in and what they do. Chances are whole cities will be defined organically; the fine detail of the world is painted in by many hands. With Titan I am experimenting with a more authoritarian style of 'world building' (we'll talk about my dislike for that term later) but at the small scale where actual gameplay occurs, player creativity will have a much greater influence and may end up taking the helm as it usually does.

[Von]

Design balance isn't something that's traditionally emphasized by OD&D; this becomes even clearer with the introduction sub-classes. Comparing the ranger, paladin, and illusionist, for example, balance seems to be relatively unimportant. The capabilities of the OD&D classes are typically weighted against their own specific XP requirements, rather than against any sense of overall between-class balance. I.e., an expectation of "balance" between a 4th level Burglar requiring 4,800 XP and a 4th level Hero requiring 8,000 XP is not necessarily desirable!



One might draw a valid(?) comparison between player-types with equivalent amounts of XP, which would likely show those classes requiring the fewest XP getting ahead on the saving throw and attack matrices, and reaching their "top" benefits soonest.

Ah, I see what's happened here: I've been lazy and mis-spoken. 'Balance' was not the word I should have used.

I can describe the phenomenon but I can't put a name to it. Essentially, what I want to avoid is that feeling that characters who don't do magic are crowded out of the game by those that can, because (within the confines of that game) magic is always a more efficient solution to a given problem. I also want to ensure that gaining a level feels like a worthwhile experience regardless of class. With some classes - Fighting-Man and Thief types - that means their narrow range of capabilities becomes more finely honed, they become more effective; with the spellcasters it means that they develop a new capability. One grows sideways, one grows upward.

You make a fair point about XP and how many of them a new level in a given class should require for the sake of internal balance (for want of a better word). lt's something I'll have to keep in mind, especially since I'm buggering around with the core mechanics of several classes.

[Von]

I'm wondering if I haven't come at this topsy-turvy. I may take a different tack with the development of religion on Titan and adopt a new structure to the classes. In this sense divine magic in the 'spells' sense will be the province of the high-level Paladin and Ranger while low level healing and so on remain the province of the Cunning Man class from my beloved Backswords & Bucklers. Given that I want to make a big deal out of both social class and the comparative rarity and privilege of the 'prestige' classes (i.e. those with demanding prerequisite characteristics) I might be able to side-step the whole problem. In a forthcoming post I shall lay down the law as regards playable characters and demonstrate the new idea through ACTUAL GAMEABLES. Crazy talk, I know.