So I understand why OSR folks might call this "blasphemy", but my questions are two-fold:

If we assume in "regular D&D fantasy" that Clerics are healers and can turn/destroy/command Undead...

Do you think that a cleric's patron Deity whose portfolios have *nothing* to do with these things, should make clerics more distinct?

I do not like the idea that a Cleric is seen as merely a "healbot" from a gaming perspective. I feel it's a recapitulation of a vast oversimplification that was magnified by videogames trying to emulate D&D. Enough debate has gone on over the years as to "what is a Cleric" - where a lot of people agree they were representative of Knights Hospitallers or crusaders. Much like people confuse the intent of the Monk class with tonsure-headed mead-making scribes and their Shaolin counterparts in China.

I *deeply* love the Specialty Priest rules of 2e which tried to make these distinctions. So much so, that I banned the Cleric class afterwards. There were *only* Specialty Priests.

What do you all think of these ideas: healing and undead manipulation being traded out for God-specific other abilities appropriate to their creeds where applicable?

Edit: I'm asking because I'm doing a big revision of my Cleric rules for my Savage Worlds Graybox Forgotten Realms rules and I'm thinking about overhauling the Turn/Destroy/Command Undead abilities as universal for Clerics.

See, the way I typically view this is that the gods a cleric in the party aligns in are fundamentally not human in their psychology. And by fundamentally not human, I mean they completely lack creativity. In human terms, we would call them special needs, but the problem is actually that nobody divine understands metaphors or idioms or can anticipate creative solutions.

So the fact that all the clerics have cookie-cutter abilities is something of an inside joke among clerics that their patrons aren't exactly sharp enough to do something different, and it's part of their job to keep that secret.

Given that I think the cleric class first went off the rails when it went from 'wonder-worker/Knight Templar/van Helsing' combo to 'priest of polytheistic gods,' that I also think 3E's removal of specialty priests was probably part of their whole "D&D for the sake of D&D" misstep, and that Savage Worlds doesn't need magical healing and undead turning as much as any form of D&D (whether Old School or WotC) does, I'd say 'go for it.'

I definitely prefer specialty priests.  I also did the all "priest are specialty priests" thing myself for 2E and designed 20 custom priests, one for each god of the culture the PCs were from.

The problem with Clerics is it's clear in aesthetics and function they are "modeled" after the Christian conception of a saint or holy priest, at least that's my reading into it, also Cleric is a term that has Papal/Catholic connotations behind it, this sort of becomes a problem with the more Pagan inspired cosmology of D&D.

To that point, the cosmology and settings of D&D lend itself to a pantheistic world view where there are many gods with different domains, however D&D (especially modern D&D) suggests that Clerics are devoted to a specific deity from a pantheon. that's kind of odd from a pagan perspective because you're suppose to make offerings to all the gods, and for different things, you don't worship any one of them in isolation.

The exception was the Mystery Cults and city/racial gods, but they were fairly exclusionary and small to my understanding, and there are way too many clerics in D&D settings running around to account for that.

So early D&D Clerics having a bunch of different odd abilities that seemingly belong to different portfolios would actually to me make more sense than them being exclusionary priests.

My main issue with the Cleric is it's aesthetics and presumed purpose clashes with the cosmology and actual purpose of priests in a pantheistic context, It's a mash up of religious iconography and concepts that doesn't work together or make sense.

Don't know how useful it will be, but I can tell you what I'm doing that sidesteps the issue entirely.  Though of course it matters how closely you want to be able to emulate some of the D&D tropes (or not).

I don't have a "cleric" class at all.  Or a priest class, for that matter.  Or even "divine" magic.  I think it's the divine magic category that actually causes more of the trouble you are seeing than the classes.

Instead, I have some various caster classes.  Then I have various magic traditions.  The "celestial" tradition is most like divine magic, has the best healing, does some ice/water magic, along with some sun/moon magic.  But that's neither here nor there, except to show it's not "divine". 

Then I have things that you can tack onto your character (bigger than feats, less than classes).  Three of them are healer, priest, and paladin (advanced, not available to level 1 characters).  Healers are the most effective healers in the game, including laying on hands.  Priests have undead/demon repelling abilities, and paladins I'm still testing, but leaning towards aura/protection abilities.  So if you stack healer/priest on the mystic class with celestial magic, you are in spitting distance of a cleric.  But you could just as easily have a "primeval" caster with healer or a "wizardry" caster with priest (complimenting that undead repelling ability with blasting them with fire).  For that matter, you could even be a plain warrior with healer options, and then maybe evolve into an outright paladin later.  There's also a "master healer" I'm working now that is conveniently the only way to truly raise a character from the dead.

I would think that Savage Worlds would mix and match this way easily.  I always thought this is what specialty priests wanted to be, but were constrained by the nature of the system they were building on.  Where I think you do need some "leveling light" is that the abilities need to be tiered, instead of trying to make them all equally useful, however SW does that.

Quote from: tenbones on March 20, 2025, 07:19:57 PMSo I understand why OSR folks might call this "blasphemy", but my questions are two-fold:

I guess I have been a heretic since 2009.

Quote from: tenbones on March 20, 2025, 07:19:57 PMIf we assume in "regular D&D fantasy" that Clerics are healers and can turn/destroy/command Undead...

Well from 15 years of playtesting, classic D&D (or 5e for that matter) doesn't break if you don't make that assumption.


Do you think that a cleric's patron Deity whose portfolios have *nothing* to do with these things, should make clerics more distinct?

Quote from: tenbones on March 20, 2025, 07:19:57 PMI do not like the idea that a Cleric is seen as merely a "healbot" from a gaming perspective.

While yes in later editions the Cleric is a healbot. In OD&D, B/X D&D, and a little of AD&D, the cleric works better as Van Helsing type. A knowledgeable characters, that has a variety of useful "skills" i.e. spells who is absolute murder on the undead.

Plus keep in mind the Vampire was one of the original "boss" monsters. The whole Cleric as a healbot is more of a 3e on up thing.

This character is one I played for a year using B/X D&D in 2019.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CzLx9qrDH_sd__Wkbb7DVlKB2pQ07cBm/view?usp=sharing

I survived 1st level with only 1 hit points. I don't have spells on the sheet as I got so few I just made notes on the ones I memorized.

Quote from: tenbones on March 20, 2025, 07:19:57 PMI *deeply* love the Specialty Priest rules of 2e which tried to make these distinctions. So much so that I banned the Cleric class afterward. There were *only* Specialty Priests.

In essence that is what I did with my Majestic Fantasy Clerics.

However, I also made a part of a consistent theological framework, which I think is important to making religion "pop" as part of a campaign. It is not so much kewl powers and gods with stats block but more about fleshing the culture behind a religion. This is more useful as it helps with roleplaying clerics and those faithful to the religion.

Quote from: tenbones on March 20, 2025, 07:19:57 PMWhat do you all think of these ideas: healing and undead manipulation being traded out for God-specific other abilities appropriate to their creeds where applicable?

Classic D&D doesn't break if you don't go crazy with it. For my part each religion had the following mechanics defined differently: Armor allowed, weapons allowed, a granted spell at 3rd level (1/day), Additional Powers (like turn undead or something else), and since I had ritual casting as part of my system how that worked with clerics of a relgion.

For example a cleric of Nephthys the goddess of Wealth and Pleasure had

QuoteNephthys
She is the goddess of fate, wealth and pleasure. Her religion originated in the Desert Lands and spread through the trade routes to other regions. Now she is widely worshipped throughout the Majestic Wilderlands by merchants and other involved in trade and commerce. The hedonistic elements of her ceremonies contribute to her popularity.
Armor: Leather
Weapons List: Dagger, Staff, Crossbows, Darts.
Granted Spells (at 3rd Level): Greater Command
Additional Powers: Command 1/day at 1st Level, Suggestion 1/day at 5th Level, Quest 1/day at 7th Level.
Rituals: Can cast rituals equal to ½ highest level spell they can cast +1. For example, at 1st level they can cast 1st level rituals, at 3rd level they can cast 2nd level rituals, at 7th level they can cast 3rd level rituals and so on.

while a cleric of Set the god of war and order.

QuoteSet
Set is the god of war, serpents, and duty. He is the conqueror, the emperor, and the dragon. He teaches that one must obey those placed above and expect those below to obey. Set is the implacable enemy of all demons and those who follow them.
Armor: Any
Weapons List: Any
Granted Spells (at 3rd Level): Stick to Snakes. The Cleric may also see and hear through an individual serpent.
Additional Powers: Turn Undead
Rituals: Can cast rituals equal to ½ highest level spell they can cast

Quote from: tenbones on March 20, 2025, 07:19:57 PMEdit: I'm asking because I'm doing a big revision of my Cleric rules for my Savage Worlds Graybox Forgotten Realms rules and I'm thinking about overhauling the Turn/Destroy/Command Undead abilities as universal for Clerics.

So this is the quick reference card I made in the mid 2010s. Is compatible with OD&D in the form of Swords & Wizardry Core rules.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1f56Bn7b5LZypJQgx89-1h-VAzg_ECP3K/view?usp=sharing

If you want my current Majestic Fantasy version just PM me.

I also made a D&D 5e take.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1swrTn33Yvn995uxqQFknzejbVKI_IBr1/view?usp=sharing

Since like GURPS, Savages Worlds has more mechanical stuff for characters than classic D&D you may find my 5e take useful in that regard than my Majestic Fantasy stuff.

Also I recommend coming up with a theological framework (with a light touch) to make the end result more interesting than a list consisting of Diety of XXXXX. You don't have to talk about it much but doing the behind the scene work make the end result hang together better. Especially when it comes to some of the monsters like demons and undead.

Hope these helps.

Quote from: Socratic-DM on March 20, 2025, 09:01:56 PMThe problem with Clerics is it's clear in aesthetics and function they are "modeled" after the Christian conception of a saint or holy priest, at least that's my reading into it, also Cleric is a term that has Papal/Catholic connotations behind it, this sort of becomes a problem with the more Pagan inspired cosmology of D&D.

It started out as a religious Van Helsing vampire hunter. During Dave Arneson's Blackmoor campaign, Dave Funk's character got transformed into a Dracula style vampire. The players were having a tough time handling "Sir Fang" until one of them pointed out if Sir Fang is like Dracula wouldn't it be possible for a players to be a "Van Helsing"? Dave said sure, mashed up some stuff like Bishop Turpin and came up with a prototype clerics that Gygax later adapted for OD&D.

This, along with other aspects of D&D origins, fell by the wayside, leading to what you have observed. From trying out the Van Helsing approach, I found it works way better for OD&D RAW.

If you want to break clerics out of the role of a dedicated healer, I think the best thing you can do is give magical healing to more other classes. Healing is just too important. If you keep it restricted to one or two classes, it's inevitably going to be their primary role.

I'd argue that the Cleric is one of D&D's wholly original contributions to fantasy literature. Yeah, you can talk about religious knightly orders and Hammer horror films, but nothing from the real world or from pre-D&D literature properly fits the flavor of the D&D cleric to me.

The armored, mace-wielding priest is an image right out of the Middle Ages (even though it probably wasn't very common), but those were mostly high-ranking political figures like bishops. Most D&D clerics are itinerant preachers, more akin to friars in the medieval church. Come to think of it, Friar Tuck is actually a pretty good literary model for a cleric. And then there's the actual performance of miracles, which maybe aligns them with mystics or faith healers, but to me is much more akin to the portrayal of pagan priests as magicians in stories like those of Robert Howard, or even of real-world witch doctors. Then you add to that the uniquely a-historical approach to religion as a whole that Socratic DM as talking about, I'd say the end result is a wholly different animal.

EDIT: You know, I really shouldn't have said "preacher" there. I don't think I've ever seen a D&D cleric give a sermon, though I did have one give a damn impressive eulogy once.

Well of course you get it Rob. LOL

I was genuinely curious about what everyone else felt. I'm *not* saying that any of the strains of Cleric in D&D don't "belong" - as always for me it's contextual to the setting.

But due to the nature of D&D-fantasy being class-based, I'm genuinely curious to how other GM's approach it (or do they just not care?) and what changes they make. Obviously this is trickier in OSR mechanics, but obviously it can be done but it's a little bit of a heavier lift in terms of time/effort.

I've got the Channelling Companion for Rolemaster Standard System.  It adds many more base lists for clerics and a build your own cleric option but the open and closed lists for the realm of Channelling are still heavy on healing spells, though, really the Rolemaster Cleric isn't focussed on Healing because that stuff is in the base lists anyhow.

2e introduced the idea of clerics with some variety in how they functioned.

AD&D Clerics are actually not bad frontline conbatants with a fair to hit and can use any armor.

Many of the most classic modules are built assuming that someone can turn undead.  If you aren't planning on having compatibility with those, then the idea is absolutely solid.

I will say that the AD&D 2e cleric handbook was such a nerf to clerics that absolutely no one I knew back in the day was interested in them at all.  It was hard enough to get any of those edgelords to run a cleric in the first place, but now they have extra roleplay requirements and have to wear hospital gowns with their asses showing?  It's a tough sell.

Quote from: Venka on March 20, 2025, 10:48:11 PMI will say that the AD&D 2e cleric handbook was such a nerf to clerics that absolutely no one I knew back in the day was interested in them at all.  It was hard enough to get any of those edgelords to run a cleric in the first place, but now they have extra roleplay requirements and have to wear hospital gowns with their asses showing?  It's a tough sell.

The trick is for the referee to acknowledge that religion is a dominant factor in most cultures.

One straightforward way to handle that is for the referee to have the default NPC reaction to a Cleric PC, is to treat them as a rockstar. You don't have to go overboard, but the default reaction should be "a positive reaction until proven otherwise".There will be exceptions, but it should just be that, exceptions.

It could be viewed as lenient, but I submit it is a better reflection of the reality of clerics especially if you are going to add complications like honor codes, faith, creeds, and religious hierarchy.

In my Majestic Wilderlands, I done things this way for decades across multiple system. However to be fair to your observation, despite knowing about the rockstar treatment, most players wind up prizing their free agency more so clerics are still not that common as a character type.

Interestingly enough, I am running a 5e campaign in my Majestic Fantasy Realms and three out of seven players are clerics of various religions; Veritas the God of Creation and Truth, Delaquain the Goddess of Honor and Justice, and Mantriv the Thunder God of War and Battle. All three share sufficiently similar philosophies that conflicts are minimal. A fourth player opted to play a Paladin of Delaquain.

The party is smart in that they actively try to find the evil guys and focus on them and so far stayed away from anything involving politics.

Quote from: tenbones on March 20, 2025, 10:00:46 PMWell of course you get it Rob. LOL

You have a point.

I am steadily whittling away at my project list and will get around to writing about this kind of stuff sooner rather than later.


I was genuinely curious about what everyone else felt. I'm *not* saying that any of the strains of Cleric in D&D don't "belong" - as always for me it's contextual to the setting.

Quote from: tenbones on March 20, 2025, 10:00:46 PMObviously this is trickier in OSR mechanics, but obviously it can be done but it's a little bit of a heavier lift in terms of time/effort.

Why? If we were talking 3.X, 4e, or 5e sure I would agree there are some fiddly bits. But OSR
mechanics? It not like GURPS where it is deliberately designed as toolkit so that if you can articulate in plain English likely you can translate that into GURPS mechanics. But it is not particularly complicated either especially if you go the Shadowdark/BX minimalist route.

The two biggest issues are unlike GURPS, Savage Worlds, Hero, etc. The assumptions of the core mechanics are not explained well. I figured it out by reading all the recent RPG history books, such as those by Jon Peterson. But even there, I had to combine separate threads to figure it out.

The other is that to do minimalism well, things put into the book have to pull their weight. One weak subsystem will likely nerf a substantial part of the system thus reducing its utility. That is one reason Shadowdark works so well.

But Minimalism is not always the answer either, which is why I didn't stick with OD&D but added skills and additional details to the magic system to cover details I felt were important to making my campaigns distinct.