Previous Message: Re: A new beginning
Next Message: Re: Negative AC's
Month Index: August, 1998
From: Thatotherguy <spellj@??????????.com> Date: Fri, 7 Aug 1998 04:04:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: A New beginning
> I'd seriously have to disagree with your assessment of the restriction > placed upon the "standard" cleric. Clerics are forbidden from using > edged weapons because it is a tenant of their faith. Wrong. Clerics are standardized, they are _all_ the same. Thus it is not a tenant of any _one_ cleric's faith not to use edged weapons. It is merely a class restriction. This is why specialty priests are individualized to their deity. Because all their restrictions _are_ tenants of their faith. Paladins are also generalized but they have different restrictions and a special code to live by. That's part of their class. That's why _all_ paladins (under the standard rules) are LG and _not all_ deities have them. _All_ deities have clerics (and yes I know there are a couple exceptions like Tyr out there, that's his choice, the point is still a cleric is a generalized class available to any deity, if they choose not to allow it then that's their choice). Specialty priests (like paladins) accept a much narrower scope of actions and choices in return for greater (or at least different) power. Clerics choose to be less restricted in their individual actions but sacrifice the extra powers their deity grants in order to do this. Just as a lay worshipper has chosen not to mess with the whole thing by not entering the clergy at all. Now they can freely do as they please with no repurcusions. > Using a sword > doesn't just cause a -3 to hit, it goes against everything the cleric > was taught. You mean he just wasn't taught it. It goes against nothing he was taught (though I suppose one could make the argument that using an edged weapon is significantly different from using a blunt one just as using a battle axe is different from using a dagger). > Even though the cleric isn't a specialty priest he still > has to atone for his sins to the god or higher power that he worships. True. When he actually commits a sin. One thing I think you're missing here is why clerics can generally multi- or dual-class but specialty priests and paladins can't (there are a few noted exceptions based on the deity worshipped but in general it is recommended this not be allowed for most specialty priests and paladins). It is because the cleric has chosen a broader course, one that allows for such freedoms while specialty priests and paladins have chosen a very narrow course and given up a lot of options based on their beliefs. The level of dedication is not necessarily greater but they have definitely chosen a more narrowly defined path (sort of like choosing to be a deacon instead of a priest in many christian religions). > Use of a sword no matter what the reason is a violation of ethos and > should result in at least a minor transgression with removal of some > benefits or powers. Except that it has only violated a class stricture and not an ethos. Otherwise we'd have one god to whom all clerics pray and all other gods would be stuck strictly with specialty priests. > Playing priests/clerics should be quite different > from playing mages. A mage's restrictions were designed to be a result > of the time and study it takes to learn the arcane arts, while priestly > restrictions were set up by the deities as their ideal of how people > should conduct themselves. Yes, playing a priest (as in specialty priest) is much different from playing a general cleric. The cleric takes only class/alignment restrictions and a few broad restrictions on behavior based on the deity served (for example a deity of agriculture and civilization is going to get mad if his clergy of any sort starts championing the wilderness unless it is specifically to the good of the civilization in some way) whereas a specialty priest has a very narrowly defined code to live by based specifically on the deity served. Those are choices that particular clergyman (woman) chose upon entering the clergy and choosing a specific profession therein. _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @?????.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
Previous Message: Re: A new beginning
Next Message: Re: Negative AC's
Month Index: August, 1998
| Subject | From | Date (UTC) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A New beginning | Will A Wagner | |||
| A New beginning | Thatotherguy | |||
| Re: A New beginning | Staffan Johansson | |||
| Re: A New beginning | Thatotherguy | |||
| Re: A New beginning | Erik Loren Jerks | |||
| Re: A New beginning | Downer, Chris | |||
| Re: A New beginning | Staffan Johansson | |||
| Re: A New beginning | Harry Bandoian | |||
| A New beginning | Thatotherguy | |||
| Re: A New beginning | MaceScen@???.com | |||
| Re: A New beginning | MaceScen@???.com | |||
| Re: A New beginning | MaceScen@???.com | |||
| A New beginning | Thatotherguy | |||
| A New beginning | Thatotherguy | |||
| A New beginning | Thatotherguy | |||
| A New beginning | Thatotherguy | |||
| Re: A New beginning | matrix | |||
| Re: A New beginning | matrix | |||
| Re: A New beginning | matrix | |||
| Re: A New beginning | Thatotherguy | |||
| Re: A New beginning | MaceScen@???.com | |||
| Re: A New beginning | MaceScen@???.com | |||
| A New beginning | Thatotherguy | |||
| A New beginning | Thatotherguy | |||
| Re: A New beginning | Staffan Johansson | |||
| Re: A New beginning | Downer, Chris | |||
| Re: A New beginning | MaceScen@???.com | |||
| Re: A New beginning | MaceScen@???.com | |||
| Re: A New beginning | Staffan Johansson | |||
| Re: A New beginning | Manuel Gonzalez | |||
| Re: A New beginning | Harry Bandoian | |||
| A New beginning | Thatotherguy | |||
| A New beginning | Thatotherguy | |||
| A New beginning | Thatotherguy | |||
| Re: A New beginning | Thomas F. Cullen | |||
| Re: A New beginning | Lyle Leeman |