Post/Author/DateTime	Post
LCD2YOU 06-11-06, 10:33 PM	While the lawfulness may change, I'd like to know if a "good" Cleric of a "good" diety has the same types of restrictions on them as a Paladin does in your game. In either case, why or why not? To go first, yes they do. A Cleric is actually togher in my campaign as not only must they uphold the Good to L/N/C thing but the wants of their diety. In truth, just like RL, if your cleric's diety says, "Do x, y and z", and you think that it may be actually against your alignment, guess what? You'd better be doing X, Y and Z or be branded a heretic and watch the zealots come after you with "righteous fury" looking to score additional brownie points with their god.
Gedrin 06-11-06, 11:41 PM	IMC paladins and clerics are held to the same codes, dependent on diety.
Yak of Darkness 06-11-06, 11:49 PM	In truth, just like RL, if your cleric's diety says, "Do x, y and z", and you think that it may be actually against your alignment, guess what?Just like in real life, when you're a cleric and your god (also in real life) is telling you to do X, Y, and Z? I've never had that problem. Glad I'm a student and not a cleric.
DarkRhystar 06-12-06, 12:08 AM	While the lawfulness may change, I'd like to know if a "good" Cleric of a "good" diety has the same types of restrictions on them as a Paladin does in your game. In either case, why or why not? To go first, yes they do. A Cleric is actually togher in my campaign as not only must they uphold the Good to L/N/C thing but the wants of their diety. In truth, just like RL, if your cleric's diety says, "Do x, y and z", and you think that it may be actually against your alignment, guess what? You'd better be doing X, Y and Z or be branded a heretic and watch the zealots come after you with "righteous fury" looking to score additional brownie points with their god. A good Cleric in my game is simply that, a good person who is also a Cleric. The only connection there is alignment and deity must be reasonably similar... otherwise no relation. A Paladin in my game is the epitome of goodness, generousity, kindness, honesty, chivalry...etc and an example to all those of what a kind and good person should be. Being a Paladin in my game isn't just being Lawful Good... it's taking the very essence of goodness to a whole other level. It all comes down to the fact that Paladins have a strict code of conduct and Clerics don't. To put it into simpler terms (with a very weird analogy): the Cleric is a good student walking the halls of a school and the Paladin is the student hall monitor. The Cleric can mess up and can get in trouble once in a while, but as long as he is still a good student all is well. The Paladin can screw up too, but she will lose her hallmonitor status. Also Clerics and Paladins who commune with their deities are a rarity. Gods in my games don't come down from the heavens and tell Joe the Cleric to go do something. I've just always considered that approach way too heavy-handed so I don't use it.
Vanamir 06-12-06, 04:46 AM	In short: yes, clerics are accountable to their gods just the same way as paladins are. This applies to clerics of all faiths and alignments, not just the good ones. If you refuse your god's commands or fail to further his cause your clerical abilities will ultimately be revoked. IMC you don't become a cleric for just going to the church but instead you are a chosen by your god to carry out his will. If you are not up to the task the god will find someone else who is, it's that simple. Still clerics and paladins alike are allowed the occasional minor infraction. After all they are just mortals and thus not infallible. Especially the good and more chaotic gods are usually somewhat more lenient in this regard.
Cantankerous 06-12-06, 05:02 AM	While the lawfulness may change, I'd like to know if a "good" Cleric of a "good" diety has the same types of restrictions on them as a Paladin does in your game. In either case, why or why not? To go first, yes they do. A Cleric is actually togher in my campaign as not only must they uphold the Good to L/N/C thing but the wants of their diety. In truth, just like RL, if your cleric's diety says, "Do x, y and z", and you think that it may be actually against your alignment, guess what? You'd better be doing X, Y and Z or be branded a heretic and watch the zealots come after you with "righteous fury" looking to score additional brownie points with their god. Hi L, In my campaigns they tend to be as focused, but differently implementing that focus. The Paladin is primarily a warrior, primarily aggressive, the Cleric is primarily supportive and by THAT token, also more dominant. The Cleric, even more than the Pally, must continually look to his lords desires and their fulfilment. If he does not, that which determines his entirety, his very reason for being, will be withdrawn and he'll be at fault. It is easier for a Paladin. His Code makes for much clearer delianations of his responsibilities; nor is he in direct service most of the time...unless a Cleric serves an ideal, his service is always direct. At the same time, it's the Cleric himself, not the deity, who is his own greatest critic. For this reason even those in service to an ideal, or to an abstraction, such as the Divinity of Man, or of Good, can be harder on themselves, more demanding and unflinchingly critical than most paladins ever aspire to be. Not just with Lawful Good either, but it's this way with ALL Clerics in my games. Their god, or ideal, is their primary focus, and must be, or they'll soon be former Clerics, either by self castigation or loss of faith, which since it is the channel for the energies they use, is even more vital for a Cleric than for other types of Magic Users. Isshia
Lokathor 06-12-06, 08:25 AM	Paladins: basically what the PHB says for paladins to do, "take the high road", accept surrenders, defend the innocent, convert those who cannot see the light towards the side of good, etc. This includes capturing intelligent creatures who surrender, and taking them back to civilization to be held to justice and hopefully reformed. There are many brotherhoods and sisterhoods making up the paladin order, and most of them will take in creatures repentent of thier ways. Clerics are a whole 'nother matter, in a way. The "Clerics" of my game are separated by alignment, but don't fallow deities, instead they follow the planar domains. (Which includes True Neutral inner plane clerics who pick two domains from Fire, Earth, Air, Water, Healing, and Destruction.) Because of this, a good cleric would be representative of either Arborea, Celestia, or Elysium. Aborea clerics are held to high standards of good, but there's no code about it, being CG and all. Freedom of everyone is of the highest importance (similar to a paladin of freedom). Celestia clerics are held nearly to the paladin standards, with less focus on following the laws of any particular society and more on being lawful in general. Elysium Clerics are held to the high standards of good, but they are expected to follow them without bias for law of chaos (obviously). Unlike other neutral alignments (because of their good nature), Elysium clerics are expected to seek to end conflict between law and chaos and bring peace to situations if possible, to ensure that by standers are not harmed by possible outbreaks of conflict.
wrecan 06-12-06, 08:58 AM	No. Paladins may never engage in a single evil act. Good-aligned clerics are given more leeway and a single act of evil will not necessarily result in punishment.
Ut-Napishtim 06-12-06, 09:57 AM	Interesting question LCD2YOU. For my games I allow Paladins to be of any alignment, so long as it matches their deity's. For Paladins that serve an idea rather than a deity they should select something appropriate (i.e. no CE Paladin of Justice). For Clerics things are less restrictive, their alignment can usually be one, and in some rare cases two steps removed from their deity's. Like in popular fiction Clerics, like Aramis, may serve more than one cause, and may exercise some creativity with how they do so. Paladins on the other hand are called from birth to not serve as preists, but holy warriors - making them the zealous military arm of the church they sevre.
Kaligrad 06-12-06, 10:08 AM	Generally, clerics have their gods to look to for advice and guidance. Paladins have a code they must adhere to, in addition to any god that might (but doesn't have to) sponsor them. Thus, clerics have more elbow room, and this (oddly enough) allows them to act more like their god than a paladin could, as a paladin must act like a paladin instead. Unless you make any changes, clerics are allowed to make more mistakes than paladins, especially considering that they can be up to one step away from their god in alignment. The important thing is the tennants of the religion (for instance, no matter what his alignment is, a cleric of Kord who cheats in a competition WILL be repremanded).
Millennium 06-12-06, 10:50 AM	IMC, Good clerics are not held to the paladin's code. Thus, committing a single evil act -which violates the paladin's code- is not likely to cause a cleric to lose his class features, since a cleric is not bound to the paladin's code. The cleric's church will likely require him to repent his actions, after which it will forgive the cleric, but this is all flavor-wise; there is no mechanical penalty. However, if a Good cleric continues unrepentantly committing evil acts, this will eventually trigger an alignment change. That's a different issue altogether, and could very well result in the cleric's loss of his powers.
Bruunwald 06-12-06, 01:07 PM	In my campaigns clerics have always had it a little easier than their paladins. Being old school, we all came from the train of thought that being a paladin was this special calling that set you apart, even from clerics. A precarious balancing act that required you to be especially good. Clerics had weapons restrictions back then, but more room for levity and even (harmless) mischief. As a result, NPC clerics in my game, to this day, tend to be gentle, mischievous Santa-type mentors to the more serious and idealistic younger PC clerics and paladins. That doesn't mean they can get away with murder, or anything. Just that they are more relaxed, on the whole. Then again, I can see certain orders of clerics wherein a central figure holds sway over the powers of the order, and can "bind" misbehaving members of his clergy from using their powers. Or even a god so concerned with behavior that he does not allow room for levity or mistakes, without atonement or even outright banishment. But to me, such a god, while possibly "good" in the strictest sense, is not kind, benevolent, benign, or forgiving. He's strict, possibly vain from concern over appearances, and to me, neither is immediately equatable to goodness. I don't see any of my players attaching their characters' worship to humorless deities. I wouldn't either. God has to have a personality, to my thinking. Why devote yourself to somebody who doesn't "get" you? You wouldn't marry somebody who didn't ever understand you.
celtredleg 06-12-06, 02:16 PM	Very similar actualy. But then I have diety only clerics and paladins. So they must follow the code of thier god. And alignment itself is less important than the code of the god. I have always seen clerics and paladins as different sides of the same coin, a militant side and a spiritual side.
Lord Yod 06-12-06, 02:21 PM	In my campaigns, a cleric and a paladin of the same god have the same code of conduct. A paladin is basically a fighter who's been sponsored by a deity. A cleric is the same thing, except instead of a fighter, he's a commoner. (Or aristocrat, or expert, etc) More restrictive gods (Pholtus) have clerics that are indistinguishable from paladins. Others (Pelor) are a bit looser in their requirements. If you don't restrict a clerics' behavior to what is acceptable to the deity, then they are basically getting the most powerful class abilities for free. To give an example: If you want to play a persistified divine power/righteous might cleric in my campaign, and you follow a lawful good diety, then you'd better act even lawful good-er than the paladin. You should be vanquishing evil, righting wrongs, saving the weak, and fighting injustice *every day*, or you might pray for spells one day and be told 'you're wasting my gifts, learn to live without them.' Otherwise, the once you get to a certain level, the cleric can solo everything.
Silverthumb128 06-12-06, 03:52 PM	if your cleric's diety says, "Do x, y and z", and you think that it may be actually against your alignment, guess what? *sigh* Cleric's don't disagree with their deity. That's why they are Clerics. They have faith in their god, 100%. They don't follow the given deity out of obligation, and gods aren't stupid. They'll know when their priest if wavering in faith, and will either boot them out, or regain their faith. To a Cleric, which is more important? God, or alignment? Because you can be within a step of the deity's personal alignment, not such a concern.
wrecan 06-12-06, 04:04 PM	*sigh* Cleric's don't disagree with their deity. That's why they are Clerics. That doesn't have to be true. Referencing a Biblical source, Abraham (who is certainly some sort of divine caster!) clearly argues with God over the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah. And Moses argues with God a lot (at the burning bush and then again after the golden calf incident). And there are plenty of incidents in the Iliad in which priests argue with their gods (although that entails some fairly suicidal deathwishes!) I think it's perfectly legitimate for clerics to have alignment differences with their gods. And I think it's even legitimate to have gods change their minds based on arguments of their clerics (although that might require an epic level cleric... like Abraham or Moses).
Bruunwald 06-12-06, 04:38 PM	If you don't restrict a clerics' behavior to what is acceptable to the deity, then they are basically getting the most powerful class abilities for free. To give an example: If you want to play a persistified divine power/righteous might cleric in my campaign, and you follow a lawful good diety, then you'd better act even lawful good-er than the paladin. You should be vanquishing evil, righting wrongs, saving the weak, and fighting injustice *every day*, or you might pray for spells one day and be told 'you're wasting my gifts, learn to live without them.' I don't think any of us is arguing that a cleric ought not stick to the tenets of his lord, or that he can break with alignment or code and not face some reprimand. I think we're talking about something more stylistic and basic to human nature. Whereas many seem to play paladins as if they have sticks up their butts, never smile, frown at the mere hint of a joke, etc., those same players seem to feel okay with giving their clerics room for a less severe personality. I think many of us are in that camp, because we've seen it in popular culture. The Friar Tuck of certain films is the ultimate extreme example of a chuckling, loose-fitting cleric. As the holy man of Robin Hood's group, we love him and we respect his holiness, because when the chips are down, he's on the side of righteousness. We accept his otherwise beer-chugging ways because we know it's fiction, we love the character and we understand his world and the context in which he exists. We wouldn't accept that from a knight at Arthur's court in say, the film Excalibur. Not only because we sense it's unseemly while we're watching the film, but also because the game flavor, since 1st Ed, has taught us to stress this in the paladin, not so much in the cleric. Still, I know where you're coming from. It would not fly with my group, but if it fits the flavor of your campaign, and your players dig the atmosphere, that's all that matters.
Bruunwald 06-12-06, 04:56 PM	That doesn't have to be true. Referencing a Biblical source, Abraham (who is certainly some sort of divine caster!) clearly argues with God over the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah. And Moses argues with God a lot (at the burning bush and then again after the golden calf incident). And there are plenty of incidents in the Iliad in which priests argue with their gods (although that entails some fairly suicidal deathwishes!) I think it's perfectly legitimate for clerics to have alignment differences with their gods. And I think it's even legitimate to have gods change their minds based on arguments of their clerics (although that might require an epic level cleric... like Abraham or Moses). On the one hand, I've known rabbis (and entertained the notion myself) who saw those exchanges as God testing those patriarchs. In other words, God knows the right answer but wants to see if Abraham has the intestinal fortitude (and knows right from wrong enough) to stand up to Him when He is showing Himself in the "wrong." On the other hand, I've known rabbis who saw this as Righteous Hubris on the part of these figures, and have no explanation for why God would be so wrong, but simply let the matter lie. Personally, I'm with you in that I believe you ought to be able to argue with God without being blown out of existence. After all, if Free Will is His invention, then what business would He have, being merciful and forgiving and Universally Understanding, in punishing us for being, well... us? Faith MUST BE a two-way street. God must listen as well as speak. Otherwise, he'd just be a bully, and neither I nor Conan are content with putting up with that anymore. ;) But then, because I am a living paradox, I also believe there's something to the first line of thinking I mentioned. Seems if God knows everything, then any wrong decision on His part might simply be a test for us. In either case, by all means, argue away. There are no stupid questions.
Silverthumb128 06-12-06, 04:59 PM	That doesn't have to be true. Referencing a Biblical source, Abraham (who is certainly some sort of divine caster!) clearly argues with God over the fate of Sodom and Gomorrah. And Moses argues with God a lot (at the burning bush and then again after the golden calf incident). And there are plenty of incidents in the Iliad in which priests argue with their gods (although that entails some fairly suicidal deathwishes!) I don't know anything about Abraham's story. Can you please either explain, or refrain from real-world based religious statements? I only say refrain because the God from the Bible is hardly the same as Pelor, Gruumsh, or Vecna, and they are unlikely to act in similar manners. And there's only one Biblical God, compared to the vast array in D&D. I think it's perfectly legitimate for clerics to have alignment differences with their gods. Again, that's agreeable because, as stated in the PHB, Clerics can be within one alignment step of their deity. But not every deity is going to keep offering divine power to a Cleric who disagrees with them. If they argue on a regular basis, then they could be spending as much or more time second-guessing the deity than worshipping them. With as many gods as there are in the D&D cosmology, they have the ability to say "Worship or get out of my church."
R2-DS 06-12-06, 05:19 PM	Very similar actualy. But then I have diety only clerics and paladins. So they must follow the code of thier god. And alignment itself is less important than the code of the god. I have always seen clerics and paladins as different sides of the same coin, a militant side and a spiritual side. Although I have never (mechanically speaking) held Paladins and Clerics to the same standard, I too agree with the "two sides of the same coin". I find it odd that in one campaign I played in, my Paladin of Helm was far greater a spiritual advisor than the Cleric of Helm that adventured with us. Yet trying to be a good roleplayer I would always have my Paladin look up to him for spiritual concelling and guidance. Where the two classes are of the same deity than maybe the restriction should be tighter. But where the two classes have a different patron or ideal..............i'd loosen that considerably.
wrecan 06-12-06, 05:31 PM	I don't know anything about Abraham's story. Can you please either explain... Sure, in the Book of Genesis, God decides he is going to smite the cities of Sodom and Gemorrah, which He decided were full of wickedness. He decided to tell Abraham about His plans. Abraham begs God to reconsider and actually haggles with God, eventually getting God to agree to refrain from destroying the cities if there were only ten righteous men within. (There weren't, and the cities got smote.) In Exodus, God appears to Moses as the burning bush and recruits him to be His prophet to free the Israelites. Moses spends much of this section begging God to send someone else, claiming he is slow-witted, a poor speaker and other reasons. God does get angry with him, but... relents in that He lets Moses use his brother Aaron as a spokesperson. Later in Exodus, God is angry with the Israelites for building and worshipping a massive idol during their four-decade trek through the desert. God is so upset that He tells Moses that He will kill all the Israelites except for Moses, his wife and his children and create a new people. Moses, in no uncertain terms, tells God that if He follows through with this plan, Moses will tell the other peoples of the world and God will be known as the deity who freed His people form slavery only to kill them. Remarkably, God relents and spares the Israelites (although Moses then has one-third of them executed for idolatry). Now, while rabbis may quibble as to whether this was a test or a real negotiation, the point is that God didn't seem to mind that his followers (two of his most devoted!) were disagreeing with him and negotiating. In fact, it appears that God approved of it! I only say refrain because the God from the Bible is hardly the same as Pelor, Gruumsh, or Vecna, and they are unlikely to act in similar manners. And there's only one Biblical God, compared to the vast array in D&D. Well, the multitude of gods actually means it's more likely for a god to be tolerant of dissent. You've got competition and if you don't listen to your priests, they might find a god who does. If Pholtus starts ignoring his priests' advice, they might start heading over to Pelor... or even Cuthbert. not every deity is going to keep offering divine power to a Cleric who disagrees with them. True. I didn't mean that all gods would be tolerant of dissent. I imagine Grumsh can be a bit of a hard-a$$. ;)
Lord Yod 06-13-06, 11:59 AM	I don't think any of us is arguing that a cleric ought not stick to the tenets of his lord, or that he can break with alignment or code and not face some reprimand. I think we're talking about something more stylistic and basic to human nature. Whereas many seem to play paladins as if they have sticks up their butts, never smile, frown at the mere hint of a joke, etc., those same players seem to feel okay with giving their clerics room for a less severe personality. This I see all too often. Seems to me that paladins are seen as stodgy-do-gooders, and that strikes the wrong cord with me. Know what I think of when I think 'paladin'? In a word, Lancelot.