Moderator Froggy the Great Posted July 20, 2005 Moderator Share Posted July 20, 2005 Depends on how well the player can sing. I wouldn't want anyone in my group doing that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Swiftblade Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 I dont think I'd LET anyone in my group do that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arvok Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 As far as Clerics being one step from their gods' alignments give this one a try: Imagine a Lawful Good god. Do you suppose he would support torturing to death an innocent in order to end a drought thus benefiting the whole community? NO, because that is EVIL. But, one of his Clerics who is Lawful Neutral might support such an act. That doesn't make any sense to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glen Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 As far as Clerics being one step from their gods' alignments give this one a try: Imagine a Lawful Good god. Do you suppose he would support torturing to death an innocent in order to end a drought thus benefiting the whole community? NO, because that is EVIL. But, one of his Clerics who is Lawful Neutral might support such an act. That doesn't make any sense to me. Nice 'Straw Man' analogy. I don't see a LN cleric condoning the sacrificial death, via torture, of an innocent. The cleric would then either move right on over to the evil side, or he would have one hell of a time attoning for his actions. 3E also redefined how alignments are explained. you should read the changes. Quoting from the SRD: "Lawful Neutral, "Judge" A lawful neutral character acts as law, tradition, or a personal code directs her. Order and organization are paramount to her. She may believe in personal order and live by a code or standard, or she may believe in order for all and favor a strong, organized government." I bet a person with that kind of personality could get hired a a cleric for a LG god. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arvok Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 As far as Clerics being one step from their gods' alignments give this one a try: Imagine a Lawful Good god. Do you suppose he would support torturing to death an innocent in order to end a drought thus benefiting the whole community? NO, because that is EVIL. But, one of his Clerics who is Lawful Neutral might support such an act. That doesn't make any sense to me. Nice 'Straw Man' analogy. I don't see a LN cleric condoning the sacrificial death, via torture, of an innocent. The cleric would then either move right on over to the evil side, or he would have one hell of a time attoning for his actions. 3E also redefined how alignments are explained. you should read the changes. Quoting from the SRD: "Lawful Neutral, "Judge" A lawful neutral character acts as law, tradition, or a personal code directs her. Order and organization are paramount to her. She may believe in personal order and live by a code or standard, or she may believe in order for all and favor a strong, organized government." I bet a person with that kind of personality could get hired a a cleric for a LG god. But Lawful Neutral can still commit acts of Evil, especially if they are for the greater good. Neutral with respect to Evil and Good means one doesn't think one is inherently better that the other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooseyjoe Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 once again you have given a perfect example of an oppurtunity to role play. A cleric who is at odds with his god, what a wonderful character. You could have the god deny him spells, or curse him in some fashion, or strike down those they loved most, until the cleric reforms themselves. In my opinion a group shouldn't have this problem unless they want too, as long as you role play the cleric as following his god their is no problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glen Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 once again you have given a perfect example of an oppurtunity to role play. A cleric who is at odds with his god, what a wonderful character. You could have the god deny him spells, or curse him in some fashion, or strike down those they loved most, until the cleric reforms themselves. In my opinion a group shouldn't have this problem unless they want too, as long as you role play the cleric as following his god their is no problem. Mooseyjoe is right. Let it roleplay out. It would be an excellent opportunity for some fun roleplay. Instead of saying it can't happen, let the player see what happens when his character does something other than what his god wants him to do! Again, I urge you to read the new descriptions for the alignments. I'll post Neutral for you: "A neutral character does what seems to be a good idea. She doesn’t feel strongly one way or the other when it comes to good vs. evil or law vs. chaos. Most neutral characters exhibit a lack of conviction or bias rather than a commitment to neutrality. Such a character thinks of good as better than evil—after all, she would rather have good neighbors and rulers than evil ones. Still, she’s not personally committed to upholding good in any abstract or universal way. Some neutral characters, on the other hand, commit themselves philosophically to neutrality. They see good, evil, law, and chaos as prejudices and dangerous extremes. They advocate the middle way of neutrality as the best, most balanced road in the long run." Neutral with respect to Evil and Good means one doesn't think one is inherently better that the other. That's an extremely narrow interpretation of Neutral in the 2E world and a wrong interpretation in the 3E world. But Lawful Neutral can still commit acts of Evil, especially if they are for the greater good. So can LG characters! They just have to answer for the action as does the LN one! Alignment doesn't remove the character's free will. They can do whatever they want. Any LN cleric that decides that, in order to break the drought, he needs to torture little Timmy until it rains, and when that doesn't work, decides that finally killing him will bring rain, is not going to be LN after that game session! (pay no attention to my grammar mistakes, I'm on a roll! ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mourningcloud Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 If you introduce a min/max character into a standard setting, you will have broken results. The solution is to take them out of their element. They have the uber weapon combo? Send them to a costume party or ball. They one-shot dragons? Feed them a stream of insignificant critters. Having a hammer is no good when you don't have a nail to hit - deny them the nail. Then again, using the hammer in new ways is what makes for satisfying role-play. wow-i dont suppose you are in the Southern California area. I think i would love/hate to play in your campaign, and i need a new dm/game. you are just wicked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rastl Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 One of our cleric-fighters was just paying lip-service to the priest side of the character. Funny how that changed when he didn't get spells after praying. For three days. Gods have a funny way of paying attention just when you least want them too. (And no, it wasn't me. I'm a meatshield and proud of it!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mourningcloud Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 This could just be due to society's overall decline in intelligence as we lower school standards for kids, but I'm going to continue to blame WoTC since they screwed up the game I love. hey and while your at it, you know the terrorism and war in Iraq? well i hear that it is caused by islamic anger due to the advent of third edition D&D, especially the transformation of the armor class system from one which revolves around a central armor class of 0. as you are possibly aware, the number 0-the absence of value, as well as its role as a place keeper in 2+ digit numbers, came to our culture from the middle east, along with algebra and other cultural and intellectual imports from the holy land during the crusades (during those middle ages of which you are so fond). well by updating to 3rd ed we have removed the 0 as the central number in our armor class system, and thereby thumbed our collective gaming noses at islamic culture, religion, and their contributions to modern mathematics. you are right, by removing the 0 as the place holder in our armor class system we have dumbed it down. and they are pissed. if you notice, 9/11 happened not too long after the advent 3rd ed and the d20 system..... so you go ahead and keep blaming d&d. it makes as much sense as several million muslims waging war based on your theories. the truth is out there. This has been another Mourningcloud dissertation; however this time i have NOT said too much. Not one bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Swiftblade Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 Another thing about the D&D dieties is that they are not just an abstract alignment. While torture is probably going a bit far, maybe if the child was possesed the cleric would have good reason to execute it. I usually go off a combination of the dieties alignment, portfolio and domains. I actually think one of my players is using Avrok's nemesis. (joking) He uses a dwarf cleric, following the god of magic. He even has full plate armour, glamered to look like wizards robes and a pointy hat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.