Actions of a Cleric? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Actions of a Cleric? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Ossyrian Ush'Bel
12-07-04, 09:53 AM In a campaign I am currently running I have an th level cleric of Pelor. Last session the group was ambushed by a group of hill giants. As the battle went on the cleric got roughed up a bit and was getting frustrated. Another member of the party had openned a dimension door and dropped in behind one of the giants and was engaged in melee, the cleric proceeds to cast flame strike into the melee almost wiping out her comrade. Here is my question, does casting a spell like this into melee with full knowledge of your comrade being there and with no chance to avoid the damage violate some clerical code of conduct? If so would a temporary suspension of clerical magical ability be a fitting punishment from her god? Thanks for the info!
Joe Khol
12-07-04, 11:04 AM It rather depends on whether you have done or said anything to suggest it was a possibility. If Clerics are meant to obey Paladinesque codes of conduct then it is only fair that you let the players know this before hand. Just dropping it on them out of the blue is a little off and I wouldn't be at all surprised if the player took it badly.

That’s not to say such codes are a bad idea (indeed, it makes sense), only that it needs to be laid out as the Paladins code is.
Erix d'Pheer
12-07-04, 11:28 AM As per the RAW, there is no "Cleric Code of Conduct," no rules (like in 2nd Ed.) that say, "All good clerics act like this!" You simply have to decide whether or not said flame strike was an evil act and if so, whether or not it's enough to actually cause an alignment shift, which could have consequences. In my opinion, flame striking a comrade is neutral at best, and probably somewhat chaotic too, but unless this cleric was already teetering on the edge of his alignment it's not enough to push him over.

Of course, if you think that Pelor would seriously frown on this sort of thing, you can impose all the penalties you want. If it were me, I wouldn't, but that's because I don't like the idea that the gods are keeping an eye on every single cleric devoted to them at all times (in fact, I don't think gods are concerned with their clerics at all; the idea of hands-on gods doesn't make sense to me).
Ipsissimus
12-07-04, 11:31 AM IMO your cleric and the player he roasted would have more conflict than with your deity. You didn't do it just because you want to light your comrade on fire.

If however you cleric flamestruck some commoners or people who are helpless just to maximize damage/area of affect that might warrant some discipine.

otherwise...your friend should have rolled a higher reflex save.
Ossyrian Ush'Bel
12-07-04, 12:12 PM Thanks for the responses. I wasn't sure since her alignment is CG if this would impinge upon that. Especially since there was another giant down the way that was fighting a conjured Hound Archon. Naturally the player who was consequently flamestruck was not happy and questioned me about it later, and I had been thinking about it since she did it. He was upset since it dropped his HP from around 70 is to 1....then his move was not further improved due to the fact that I dropped a dead giant on him due to the limited space they were fighting when the giant died he failed another reflex and was knocked unconscious by a falling giant. I think I will hold off on any penalty as of yet. She got pretty angry since the giants were nailing her so I will write this one off as blinded by anger, if it becomes common hat to set fire to party members then we may have a problem.
jsaving
12-07-04, 04:37 PM As per the RAW, there is no "Cleric Code of Conduct," no rules (like in 2nd Ed.) that say, "All good clerics act like this!" You simply have to decide whether or not said flame strike was an evil act
Yes and no. There is no single code of conduct that every cleric must obey, but the PH does say that all clerics must follow codes of conduct laid down by their respective deities. It also lays out a punishment system that's similar to the one given for paladins:

"A cleric who grossly violates the code of conduct required by his god loses all spells and class features, except for armor and shield proficiencies and proficiency with simple weapons. He cannot thereafter gain levels as a cleric of that god until he atones (see the atonement spell description)."

Ideally, you and the player would have already worked out a code of conduct that Pelor would expect his character to follow. Evidently that hasn't happened, so I suggest you lay out such a code now and treat the flame strike as a "yellow flag" for his character. Or if you aren't going to enforce the code-of-conduct provisions in the PH, you should nail that down now so your player will know he doesn't have to worry about them in the future.
mermin_8403
12-07-04, 05:19 PM I don't like the idea that the gods are keeping an eye on every single cleric devoted to them at all times (in fact, I don't think gods are concerned with their clerics at all; the idea of hands-on gods doesn't make sense to me).

In Deities and Demigods (non-core and 3.0, I know) It says that Deities can perceive all within their divine rank miles of any of their temples or clerics. It's how they keep track of what's going on in the world.
There is an argument to be made that this means that they definitely are paying attention (since they're capable of seeing it all at once), unless Pelor is a particularly aloof god.
If this is the sort of action that would have angered Pelor, but not enough to make him punish the cleric, the cleric could always receiving a warning when he next prays for his spells. It shouldn't be too unusual to have brief contact with your deity when you're high enough level to cast flame strike.
Ossyrian Ush'Bel
12-07-04, 06:47 PM Wow,

jsaving-I had not laid down a code of conduct as such, but from right off the bat she played this cleric so dead on there was never a need for one. Honestly when she said it I had to do a double take and make sure I heard her right. I am not sure if it was just a fit of rage and bloodlust(they had been through a couple of tough encounters but had not had combat in 2 sessions), or if she was just frustrated that in her clerical raiment she made such a tempting target for rock hurling giants.

mermin_8403-I kind of like the aspect of fantasy with the direct interaction with the gods, and Pelor definitely has an interest in this group. So he is definitely aware of what is happening, which is why I wanted to get some feedback for this weeks session, there are some big things happening and if the group loses its clerical input then it will be a fun fight.
Arcane Guyver
12-07-04, 07:15 PM Nobody died due to her actions, so it should be no prob. Might have to patch things up between the players/characters, but...

This just reminds me of that one scene in Rush Hour (loosely quoted from memory):
"One cop was shot, another lost a pinky."
"Nobody died though."
"You blew up the entire city block."
"That block was already messed up."
"And most importantly, you did a good job."
"I...what?"
"Everyone so worried about outward appearances, they're scared of their own goddammed shadow. I like cops who're willing to put it all on the line, to get the job done."
"You know captain, I'm always saying that-"
"Once in awhile we have to let the public know we can still blow **** up."
"Damn straight!"
Darth K'Trava
12-07-04, 07:47 PM Wow,

jsaving-I had not laid down a code of conduct as such, but from right off the bat she played this cleric so dead on there was never a need for one. Honestly when she said it I had to do a double take and make sure I heard her right. I am not sure if it was just a fit of rage and bloodlust(they had been through a couple of tough encounters but had not had combat in 2 sessions), or if she was just frustrated that in her clerical raiment she made such a tempting target for rock hurling giants.

mermin_8403-I kind of like the aspect of fantasy with the direct interaction with the gods, and Pelor definitely has an interest in this group. So he is definitely aware of what is happening, which is why I wanted to get some feedback for this weeks session, there are some big things happening and if the group loses its clerical input then it will be a fun fight.

You can make the gods as close to the material plane and their worshipers as you want. That happens in the FR world. But I think that the cleric (and her player) should've watched where they placed that Flame Strike. It can be aimed to not land directly on the giant but still hit it and hopefully miss her comrade. Take it as a (pardon the pun) "clerical error" and don't judge too harshly unless she develops a pattern of Flame Striking party members as well as the enemy.... then Pelor would take a disliking to it.
Ossyrian Ush'Bel
12-08-04, 02:45 PM I am afraid that this little episode has created a rift between the two characters. The fighter for this party was lost some time ago, so the character who was blasted has taken up the mantle of party tank. He was a fighter/sorc/dragon disciple(silver) and this is not the first time that someone in the party has zapped him in melee and for all the beating he takes he doesn't complain....much. But the roleplaying that will stem from this interaction makes my mouth water since the party is pretty much divided 2 and 2, with all the healing on one side and the magic and fighting ability on the other.

I have pretty much decided that this will be a heads up to Pelor, it surprised the DM and thus I have ruled that it surprised Pelor. If it becomes standard that she blasts then heals her companions then I think a little divine silent treatment is in order. I will see how the next couple of sessions go and how things turn out between her and the other character and the only thing I can see coming from that interaction is adding tension to an already tense group(there have been several fights in the group already).
DarkSorcerer
12-08-04, 03:05 PM I have pretty much decided that this will be a heads up to Pelor, it surprised the DM and thus I have ruled that it surprised Pelor. If it becomes standard that she blasts then heals her companions then I think a little divine silent treatment is in order. I will see how the next couple of sessions go and how things turn out between her and the other character and the only thing I can see coming from that interaction is adding tension to an already tense group(there have been several fights in the group already).Sounds like a good policy. But keep this in mind, acrifice for the greater good is heroic. The giants had to die. The spell was available. The Dragon Disciple was unfortunately within the area of effect. Sometimes a pawn must be sacrificed to be achieve checkmate.

The goal wasn't to kill the dragon disciple, it was to kill the giant. The action was chaotic and served the greater good. In the definition of NG (Pelor): A neutral good character does the best that a good person can do. CG: A chaotic good character acts as his conscience directs him with little regard for what others expect of him. Sounds like the character was played perfectly within alignment.

Morality story. I played a Rogue/Sorc in a campaign of ours. The other rogue was scouting ahead and got surrounded. I fireballed her. With evasion she would take no damage on a reflex save. She rolled a 1. To this day we both agree it was the right thing to do.
Ossyrian Ush'Bel
12-08-04, 04:54 PM Agreed that a sacrifice for the greater good of things is noble and would be accepted as within the alignment, but there were 3 giants 1 engaged with the rogue and a summoned creaure, one with the DD and one who was still nailing her with rocks. She could openly see this giant whose cover had been blasted away with a lightening bolt and was hurling boulders unchallenged. There were two enemies who were well in hand, and one that was pelting her with stones. If it had been a "In order to save the day..." type of situation then things would be different, but the fact that the enemy she picked was being taken care of and she still cast knowing full well her companion would take damage as well is what has got me so hung up on this. There were alternatives, and this was not a last resort situation which is why I chose to question.
WCrawford
12-09-04, 07:57 AM If the cleric continues to be reckless with damaging, area effect spells, you could try to use an optional rule I once read in a 2nd edition supplement (pre Skillz & Powerz era).

The basics were that instead of withholding clerical ability for not acting in accordance to a deities intentions, the deity would send a message to the cleric by denying the use of certian spells and replaceing them with others. The example I remember was a cleric of a healing deity with a more passifistic nature who contantly used damaging spells would not be granted those spells and instead would be given cure spells or other healing type spells.
DM Zoc
12-09-04, 08:06 AM If the cleric continues to be reckless with damaging, area effect spells, you could try to use an optional rule I once read in a 2nd edition supplement (pre Skillz & Powerz era).

The basics were that instead of withholding clerical ability for not acting in accordance to a deities intentions, the deity would send a message to the cleric by denying the use of certian spells and replaceing them with others. The example I remember was a cleric of a healing deity with a more passifistic nature who contantly used damaging spells would not be granted those spells and instead would be given cure spells or other healing type spells.
Actually, in 2nd Edition a pacifistic cleric of healing wouldn't even have access to damaging spells. I was about to suggest this, though, that Pelor replace the cleric's chosen spells with all healing.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Ossyrian Ush'Bel 12-07-04, 09:53 AM	In a campaign I am currently running I have an th level cleric of Pelor. Last session the group was ambushed by a group of hill giants. As the battle went on the cleric got roughed up a bit and was getting frustrated. Another member of the party had openned a dimension door and dropped in behind one of the giants and was engaged in melee, the cleric proceeds to cast flame strike into the melee almost wiping out her comrade. Here is my question, does casting a spell like this into melee with full knowledge of your comrade being there and with no chance to avoid the damage violate some clerical code of conduct? If so would a temporary suspension of clerical magical ability be a fitting punishment from her god? Thanks for the info!
Joe Khol 12-07-04, 11:04 AM	It rather depends on whether you have done or said anything to suggest it was a possibility. If Clerics are meant to obey Paladinesque codes of conduct then it is only fair that you let the players know this before hand. Just dropping it on them out of the blue is a little off and I wouldn't be at all surprised if the player took it badly. That’s not to say such codes are a bad idea (indeed, it makes sense), only that it needs to be laid out as the Paladins code is.
Erix d'Pheer 12-07-04, 11:28 AM	As per the RAW, there is no "Cleric Code of Conduct," no rules (like in 2nd Ed.) that say, "All good clerics act like this!" You simply have to decide whether or not said flame strike was an evil act and if so, whether or not it's enough to actually cause an alignment shift, which could have consequences. In my opinion, flame striking a comrade is neutral at best, and probably somewhat chaotic too, but unless this cleric was already teetering on the edge of his alignment it's not enough to push him over. Of course, if you think that Pelor would seriously frown on this sort of thing, you can impose all the penalties you want. If it were me, I wouldn't, but that's because I don't like the idea that the gods are keeping an eye on every single cleric devoted to them at all times (in fact, I don't think gods are concerned with their clerics at all; the idea of hands-on gods doesn't make sense to me).
Ipsissimus 12-07-04, 11:31 AM	IMO your cleric and the player he roasted would have more conflict than with your deity. You didn't do it just because you want to light your comrade on fire. If however you cleric flamestruck some commoners or people who are helpless just to maximize damage/area of affect that might warrant some discipine. otherwise...your friend should have rolled a higher reflex save.
Ossyrian Ush'Bel 12-07-04, 12:12 PM	Thanks for the responses. I wasn't sure since her alignment is CG if this would impinge upon that. Especially since there was another giant down the way that was fighting a conjured Hound Archon. Naturally the player who was consequently flamestruck was not happy and questioned me about it later, and I had been thinking about it since she did it. He was upset since it dropped his HP from around 70 is to 1....then his move was not further improved due to the fact that I dropped a dead giant on him due to the limited space they were fighting when the giant died he failed another reflex and was knocked unconscious by a falling giant. I think I will hold off on any penalty as of yet. She got pretty angry since the giants were nailing her so I will write this one off as blinded by anger, if it becomes common hat to set fire to party members then we may have a problem.
jsaving 12-07-04, 04:37 PM	As per the RAW, there is no "Cleric Code of Conduct," no rules (like in 2nd Ed.) that say, "All good clerics act like this!" You simply have to decide whether or not said flame strike was an evil act Yes and no. There is no single code of conduct that every cleric must obey, but the PH does say that all clerics must follow codes of conduct laid down by their respective deities. It also lays out a punishment system that's similar to the one given for paladins: "A cleric who grossly violates the code of conduct required by his god loses all spells and class features, except for armor and shield proficiencies and proficiency with simple weapons. He cannot thereafter gain levels as a cleric of that god until he atones (see the atonement spell description)." Ideally, you and the player would have already worked out a code of conduct that Pelor would expect his character to follow. Evidently that hasn't happened, so I suggest you lay out such a code now and treat the flame strike as a "yellow flag" for his character. Or if you aren't going to enforce the code-of-conduct provisions in the PH, you should nail that down now so your player will know he doesn't have to worry about them in the future.
mermin_8403 12-07-04, 05:19 PM	I don't like the idea that the gods are keeping an eye on every single cleric devoted to them at all times (in fact, I don't think gods are concerned with their clerics at all; the idea of hands-on gods doesn't make sense to me). In Deities and Demigods (non-core and 3.0, I know) It says that Deities can perceive all within their divine rank miles of any of their temples or clerics. It's how they keep track of what's going on in the world. There is an argument to be made that this means that they definitely are paying attention (since they're capable of seeing it all at once), unless Pelor is a particularly aloof god. If this is the sort of action that would have angered Pelor, but not enough to make him punish the cleric, the cleric could always receiving a warning when he next prays for his spells. It shouldn't be too unusual to have brief contact with your deity when you're high enough level to cast flame strike.
Ossyrian Ush'Bel 12-07-04, 06:47 PM	Wow, jsaving-I had not laid down a code of conduct as such, but from right off the bat she played this cleric so dead on there was never a need for one. Honestly when she said it I had to do a double take and make sure I heard her right. I am not sure if it was just a fit of rage and bloodlust(they had been through a couple of tough encounters but had not had combat in 2 sessions), or if she was just frustrated that in her clerical raiment she made such a tempting target for rock hurling giants. mermin_8403-I kind of like the aspect of fantasy with the direct interaction with the gods, and Pelor definitely has an interest in this group. So he is definitely aware of what is happening, which is why I wanted to get some feedback for this weeks session, there are some big things happening and if the group loses its clerical input then it will be a fun fight.
Arcane Guyver 12-07-04, 07:15 PM	Nobody died due to her actions, so it should be no prob. Might have to patch things up between the players/characters, but... This just reminds me of that one scene in Rush Hour (loosely quoted from memory): "One cop was shot, another lost a pinky." "Nobody died though." "You blew up the entire city block." "That block was already messed up." "And most importantly, you did a good job." "I...what?" "Everyone so worried about outward appearances, they're scared of their own goddammed shadow. I like cops who're willing to put it all on the line, to get the job done." "You know captain, I'm always saying that-" "Once in awhile we have to let the public know we can still blow **** up." "Damn straight!"
Darth K'Trava 12-07-04, 07:47 PM	Wow, jsaving-I had not laid down a code of conduct as such, but from right off the bat she played this cleric so dead on there was never a need for one. Honestly when she said it I had to do a double take and make sure I heard her right. I am not sure if it was just a fit of rage and bloodlust(they had been through a couple of tough encounters but had not had combat in 2 sessions), or if she was just frustrated that in her clerical raiment she made such a tempting target for rock hurling giants. mermin_8403-I kind of like the aspect of fantasy with the direct interaction with the gods, and Pelor definitely has an interest in this group. So he is definitely aware of what is happening, which is why I wanted to get some feedback for this weeks session, there are some big things happening and if the group loses its clerical input then it will be a fun fight. You can make the gods as close to the material plane and their worshipers as you want. That happens in the FR world. But I think that the cleric (and her player) should've watched where they placed that Flame Strike. It can be aimed to not land directly on the giant but still hit it and hopefully miss her comrade. Take it as a (pardon the pun) "clerical error" and don't judge too harshly unless she develops a pattern of Flame Striking party members as well as the enemy.... then Pelor would take a disliking to it.
Ossyrian Ush'Bel 12-08-04, 02:45 PM	I am afraid that this little episode has created a rift between the two characters. The fighter for this party was lost some time ago, so the character who was blasted has taken up the mantle of party tank. He was a fighter/sorc/dragon disciple(silver) and this is not the first time that someone in the party has zapped him in melee and for all the beating he takes he doesn't complain....much. But the roleplaying that will stem from this interaction makes my mouth water since the party is pretty much divided 2 and 2, with all the healing on one side and the magic and fighting ability on the other. I have pretty much decided that this will be a heads up to Pelor, it surprised the DM and thus I have ruled that it surprised Pelor. If it becomes standard that she blasts then heals her companions then I think a little divine silent treatment is in order. I will see how the next couple of sessions go and how things turn out between her and the other character and the only thing I can see coming from that interaction is adding tension to an already tense group(there have been several fights in the group already).
DarkSorcerer 12-08-04, 03:05 PM	I have pretty much decided that this will be a heads up to Pelor, it surprised the DM and thus I have ruled that it surprised Pelor. If it becomes standard that she blasts then heals her companions then I think a little divine silent treatment is in order. I will see how the next couple of sessions go and how things turn out between her and the other character and the only thing I can see coming from that interaction is adding tension to an already tense group(there have been several fights in the group already).Sounds like a good policy. But keep this in mind, acrifice for the greater good is heroic. The giants had to die. The spell was available. The Dragon Disciple was unfortunately within the area of effect. Sometimes a pawn must be sacrificed to be achieve checkmate. The goal wasn't to kill the dragon disciple, it was to kill the giant. The action was chaotic and served the greater good. In the definition of NG (Pelor): A neutral good character does the best that a good person can do. CG: A chaotic good character acts as his conscience directs him with little regard for what others expect of him. Sounds like the character was played perfectly within alignment. Morality story. I played a Rogue/Sorc in a campaign of ours. The other rogue was scouting ahead and got surrounded. I fireballed her. With evasion she would take no damage on a reflex save. She rolled a 1. To this day we both agree it was the right thing to do.
Ossyrian Ush'Bel 12-08-04, 04:54 PM	Agreed that a sacrifice for the greater good of things is noble and would be accepted as within the alignment, but there were 3 giants 1 engaged with the rogue and a summoned creaure, one with the DD and one who was still nailing her with rocks. She could openly see this giant whose cover had been blasted away with a lightening bolt and was hurling boulders unchallenged. There were two enemies who were well in hand, and one that was pelting her with stones. If it had been a "In order to save the day..." type of situation then things would be different, but the fact that the enemy she picked was being taken care of and she still cast knowing full well her companion would take damage as well is what has got me so hung up on this. There were alternatives, and this was not a last resort situation which is why I chose to question.
WCrawford 12-09-04, 07:57 AM	If the cleric continues to be reckless with damaging, area effect spells, you could try to use an optional rule I once read in a 2nd edition supplement (pre Skillz & Powerz era). The basics were that instead of withholding clerical ability for not acting in accordance to a deities intentions, the deity would send a message to the cleric by denying the use of certian spells and replaceing them with others. The example I remember was a cleric of a healing deity with a more passifistic nature who contantly used damaging spells would not be granted those spells and instead would be given cure spells or other healing type spells.
DM Zoc 12-09-04, 08:06 AM	If the cleric continues to be reckless with damaging, area effect spells, you could try to use an optional rule I once read in a 2nd edition supplement (pre Skillz & Powerz era). The basics were that instead of withholding clerical ability for not acting in accordance to a deities intentions, the deity would send a message to the cleric by denying the use of certian spells and replaceing them with others. The example I remember was a cleric of a healing deity with a more passifistic nature who contantly used damaging spells would not be granted those spells and instead would be given cure spells or other healing type spells. Actually, in 2nd Edition a pacifistic cleric of healing wouldn't even have access to damaging spells. I was about to suggest this, though, that Pelor replace the cleric's chosen spells with all healing.