TheRPGSite

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.

(https://www.batintheattic.com/images/majesticcoversm.jpg)

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.

Quote from: Fheredin on March 20, 2025, 08:02:42 PMIn human terms, we would call them special needs

In human terms, "special needs" means something that is probably not what you intend.

Quote from: ForgottenF on March 20, 2025, 09:58:02 PMHealing is just too important.

Less so in 5e though. There's very few injuries that can't be slept off with a Long Rest.

I always liked the idea of portfolios and special, deity / pantheon specific features but, I can appreciate the OSR healbots / undead blasters with all their limitations.

It seems to me though that if you want something very specific, just create another appropriate class. I seem to recall NPC class alternatives like "Shaman" that get both cleric and mu spells, but only up to a certain level.

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?

Personally in my D&D like hacks I've more and more advice players that healing magic is unnecessary as a role, mostly due to in combat healing only slowing down combat and out of combat healing only increasing the number of encounters per day for a average group.

The first is bad for the pacing of a session, my idea these day is keep fights short and brutal. The second is bad for the number of potentially trash encounters that need to be inserted by the GM.

Clerics are also much more fun playing when mirroring the actual interests/domains of their gods then interchangeable heal bots.

Quote from: HappyDaze on March 21, 2025, 12:28:24 AM

Quote from: ForgottenF on March 20, 2025, 09:58:02 PMHealing is just too important.

Less so in 5e though. There's very few injuries that can't be slept off with a Long Rest.

Yeah, in 5e I've found my players' clerics being less healbotty than expected. If they haven't chosen the Life domain, they have other kewl powers they want to use, and healing is an afterthought / emergency option / out-of-combat activity. I think my current campaign's Paladin does more healing than the Cleric ever has - the cleric originally wanted to be Twilight, then when after a couple of sessions I said "No, this has proved there's a reason Twilight wasn't in the list of subclasses available", ended up as a Trickster - which was also not in the initial subclass list but wasn't too much of a stretch to fit into the cosmology & a more appropriate power-level.

Cleric as healbot is boring and a losing strategy, but somehow persists.

Interestingly, I never saw this phenomenon until 3rd edition. The clerics in my AD&D games were much more, and I think this was because healing was limited appropriately. It was one of many things you had in your one-off bag to use judiciously. In those games, healing would be used on the one character who was actually in the process of dying that round. It was life-saving emergency magic.

Later it became an endless squirt gun of PC preservation; a secondary well of HP for the entire party. Yawn. Just give everyone more HP to start with if you really want a slower game, instead of making one of the PC's essentially sit out the adventure to do it.

To the OP, yeah, priestly abilities should match the deity and setting. The original Cleric makes sense to the extent that their deity is pseudo-Christian and a "Van Helsing" type jives in the setting. If your setting is otherwise, then yes it needs its own priestly magic.

(Frankly, the cleric never worked well for me in D&D either for this reason -- it often felt out of place in the setting to me. Could be that's because my group tended towards more rural and pagan adventures, while others lean urban and Christian? For me "Fighter, Wizard, Druid, Ranger" makes a much better core four for D&D.)

As far as I'm concerned, not many players wanting to play a cleric is a feature, not a bug.  It makes the ones who do play a cleric stand out more, and makes it that much easier on the GM to manage all the role playing bits you all are discussing. 

It's funny to me when the relative rarity of "clerics" in any system comes up, because any time I run a long game in old school style, the net effect is that whatever the equivalent of cleric is becomes more popular than wizard.  I've seen the same pattern for over 40 years now, though admittedly since those are all my games, maybe it's just me and/or those players.  It's a large sample size of players, though.

The exception seems to be when the healer abilities are more fluid, as in my system.  Then it's not uncommon for someone to go the robed "priest/healer" route instead of the armored fighting healer route, though I do have one of those in my current game that is enjoying it.  She rarely heals during a fight, either. 

It's funny. One of my first successful characters was a cleric...only because nobody in the group wanted to play one. Over time, the cleric has become my favorite class to play for several reasons. With the standard cleric:

-the ability to turn or destroy undead
-healing
-a decent secondary in combat

Now, that's with the standard cleric as written. Over the years, after playing several variations of the cleric class, I like having options available in the game I run if somebody wishes to play a cleric. It doesn't mean that a player can't play the standard cleric. In fact, I highly recommend playing a standard cleric at first to get a feel for the class.

With that being said, the things I've introduced into my game are influenced from several sources. I'd say the primary ones being The Complete Book of Clerics for 2e AD&D and the Zealot's Guide to Wurld Conversion for Hackmaster 4e. TBH, the HM version is almost entirely the same as the 2e book.

Other source for inspiration I utilized as the Greyhawk Adventures book for 1e/2e and the original DeityBase for the World of Greyhawk. A link to the Deitybase is right here, in case anyone is interested:

Deitybase (https://knights-n-knaves.com/dmprata/)

Also keeping with a more generic type of cleric, but with some flair, Dragon magazine issue #115 has a breakdown of all the gods in the DDG book and their preferred weapon of choice for their clerics.

So, some of the things I've incorporated into my game for clerics:

- weapon of choice for god: this might include weapons that are edged (OH NO! GASP!) and bows and crossbows (WHAT?), depending on the god one choses to worship. For my game, the cleric is +1 to hit and damage with his god's weapon of choice.

-ability to turn/command undead: if it's the WoG, it's based right off of the Deitybase. If it's a god out of DDG, it's very simple:

good aligned: as per PHB
good aligned, apposed to evil as per description: turn one level higher
neutral deities: clerics cannot turn or control undead
evil aligned: control undead as per PHB
evil aligned, apposed to good as per description: control one level higher

-healing/damage ability:

if the god is a god of healing/health, the cleric's healing spells work as if one level higher.
if the god is a god of death/decay/rot/disease, the cleric's reverse healing (cause damage) spells work as if one level higher.

Druids: there have been some debate over the years if druids worship any gods, which I find amusing. With what we know about the druids in the historical record, they absolute did worship gods. The Celtic ones in particular, because the druids were the religious leaders of the Celts. So for my games, if the player is playing a druid, they may choose to worship a neutral nature god of their choice. Otherwise they just...pray to the trees...I guess...Because nobody knew where they came from, or where they were going...(what? you didn't think I wasn't going to have a Spinal Tap reference about the druids here? That's too easy to pass up.)

I think 5E missed a bit on their Cleric. They have the concept of archetypes that plug in at certain levels, they should have removed all healing from the base cleric and put that all into the Healer Archetype. As is the Battle domain Cleric isn't different enough from the Healer Doman because they both have that base-level healing.

I never played 3E but the srd has some interesting domain level powers for different clerics, they should have worked from that.

In my own setting Cleric/Religious is a Background not a Class.

A warrior can be a priest. A spellcaster can be ptiest. A non-combatant with no magic can be a priest.

Relatedly, outside of some rare exceptions, magic is just a learned skill akin to becoming a neurosurgeon or rocket scientist.

And organized religions are one of the few institutions in the setting where one can learn to use magic if you aren't wealthy or talented enough to become an independent wizard's apprentice.

And just as the wizards can only teach their apprentices the spells they know, so too do the religious institutions focus on teaching magic appropriate to their faith's dogmas.

A student could go outside the faith to learn other spells, but do you really want to risk being labeled a heretic or infernalist for it? Especially when you're required to receive extensive instruction on the tenants of the faith and be passed by an instructor on those aspects before you even learn your first cantrip-tier spell?

How badly do you want the magic?

Greetings!

I think that Clerics can be very diverse and interesting characters. In my Thandor world, the various priest characters all have special spells and abilities based upon the particular pantheon of deities that they worship. So, many different Pagan religions have priest characters that are very different from one another. Then, of course, the different monotheist religions have their own priest characters, which are likewise distinctive and different from the Pagan priests. "Healing"--such as it is, is more of a mystical power than a particular "job" per se. Individual priest characters may or may not have specialization in Healing. Beyond that, I have diffused Healing amongst several other character types, such as Mystics, Witches, and Druids, for example. Even Alchemists can specialize in healing, and provide some interesting and useful healing abilities.

I certainly think that a "Van Helsing" type character is a formidable and prominent archetype, though by no means is it the only worthwhile expression for a priest character. Likewise, having a specialization in destroying and fighting Undead hordes is very useful and powerful, but it is one specialization amongst many. I have developed religious organizations, systems, and religious culture, as well as overarching theological world views to a great extent of detail for my world of Thandor. Religion, and spirituality, unlike much of typical D&D milieus, is very prominent throughout virtually every society in the world of Thandor. Religion is an absolutely prevailing factor in people's views of the world, their behavior, customs, and influences their social interactions through many levels and aspects of life. I think that key aspect is crucial in highlighting the importance and prominence of any kind of priest character, of whatever religion or faith. Thus, priest characters in the world of Thandor are never "Healbots".

Priest characters can and should be far more than such "Healbots"--but such prominence and effectiveness must be fleshed out by the DM. The DM really must do the work in developing the region's religions, theologically, on one hand, but then also the earthly, mundane religious organization so as to establish not just the spiritual foundations of the faith, but the social and political foundations for priest characters. Priest characters in every society based upon their religion, have many aspects in common with one another, regardless of faith. Such priest characters are involved in many different activities, interests, and specializations, and the possibilities are very broad and inspiring!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Lynn on March 21, 2025, 01:41:02 AMI always liked the idea of portfolios and special, deity / pantheon specific features but, I can appreciate the OSR healbots / undead blasters with all their limitations.

It seems to me though that if you want something very specific, just create another appropriate class. I seem to recall NPC class alternatives like "Shaman" that get both cleric and mu spells, but only up to a certain level.

I agree here. If you want clerics to not be healers / undead-blasters / secondary fighters, then they aren't really a class any more. If there's no center, then it's not a class. It's better to get rid of the class and have multiple different classes instead.

In my old vikings campaign, I had a prophetess (gyðja). Her main function was to read omens and talk to spirits. In combat, she would grant rerolls to other players. She could also do some more serious magic when comatose on a raised platform, like venture forth in animal form or send curses, but in practice she didn't use that much.

It really depends on the world one is using. I like the idea of having druid and shaman as core priestly classes, maybe adding on others like mystic and witch.

because I run sandbox, it's important for there to be inherent consistency in how the world is presented regardless of the PC's presence (who are free to change things via their own agency).

For example - if I allow a class like the Cleric from D&D/Pathfinder to be representative of "Clerics" writ-large regardless of the God(s) in the world, the world would *not* look like a D&D world. That's the problem. Much like having Vancian Wizards running around - shit in a forest city like Arabel, in Cormyr, there's three Archmages. One is like 24th level.

Having all Clerics be able to be healbots would massively change how the world would operate where such abundance of healthcare would be readily available. Sure you could require tithing or payment etc. But the ethos of Gods (especially good gods) wouldn't necessarily be in it for the money, obviously. Money is another issue entirely to be honest.

But the fact that in the early days of D&D the spells for Clerics and Wizards were designed for specific flavors of play - not *necessarily* what we'd call sandbox today, which has different demands than dungeoncrawling. *We* are the ones, along with the designers, that injected these assumptions into the game.

So while I appreciate the Savage Worlds Pathfinder Core Rules a LOT. The problem I have with them is it's a direct translation of the *assumptions* of the d20 system. So yes, it's absolutely D&D style fantasy. But it leans towards the elements I *dislike* about D&D fantasy that are purely mechanical.

i.e. they introduce Classes as Class Edges and with that they slide in all the "fat" for those classes. Clerics in Pathfinder *are* healbots, and their Deity portfolios matter a bit, but not too much.

Since I want that "1e/2e Realms feel" I've been leveraging the SWADE rules to tweak the Cleric class specifically with the making it more "God specific". I'm practicing my layout skills (or lack thereof) to make it presentable and it will be free.

But I suppose this is less of a direct translation, than it is an inspiration of Graybox as I feel it should be in Savage Worlds.

I was very curious if others felt the same about this idea about the Cleric. I'm kinda pleased at everyone's feedback.

@Shark yeah that's my feeling how it should be done.

@jhkim - the *Cleric Class* shouldn't be centered on what the role is for the party in a game-specific scenario. It is, in sandbox terms, centered on being the living representation of the Gods on this plane of existence in whatever capacity the mechanics support that role. A cleric is an agent that has been vested with the powers of a deity. What that agent does, should ideally, be to further the creed and motives of their god. This is what distinguishes them from other members of the faith. they are actual miracle-workers. This is a narrative shift from the gamey-notion that Cleric are healbot wizards that mechanically are no different than the Wizard class. These are both true - but the emphasis needs to be on the GM to make that distinction in play.

This serves to preserve roles as well as narrative insulation against game mechanics over setting conceits. i.e. Clerics and Wizards use the same casting rules, but in-game their roles have significantly different demands and requirements to meet them that have nothing to do with the mechanics. This ideally should be true of all "classes".

I think the only issue is that some D&D like games have "cleric healbot' built in, so you'd need to figure out the impact of that.

Quote from: tenbones on March 21, 2025, 04:12:13 PM@jhkim - the *Cleric Class* shouldn't be centered on what the role is for the party in a game-specific scenario. It is, in sandbox terms, centered on being the living representation of the Gods on this plane of existence in whatever capacity the mechanics support that role. A cleric is an agent that has been vested with the powers of a deity. What that agent does, should ideally, be to further the creed and motives of their god. This is what distinguishes them from other members of the faith. they are actual miracle-workers. This is a narrative shift from the gamey-notion that Cleric are healbot wizards that mechanically are no different than the Wizard class. These are both true - but the emphasis needs to be on the GM to make that distinction in play.

Sure, I think it makes sense that all miracle-workers are in the same category in a sense - but not necessarily the same mechanical class.

In the mechanics of a class-based system, members of a class should have some common features. In standard D&D, clerics have in common things like weapon proficiencies and armor allowed, along with Hit Dice and THAC0 - as well as undead turning, spellcasting and a core set of spells.

But the gods truly are different, then two different representations might be as different in practice as a Druid and a Paladin, for example. Those might be good classes to represent a God of Nature vs a God of Righteous War, say.

Other representations might be even more different, like a Norse prophetess or a Chinese taoist.

Greetings!

I imagine I'm being somewhat stodgy and mundane--but as I mentioned previously about diffusing Healing abilities amongst different classes, including but beyond the Cleric/Priest Character? Right. So, in my world of Thandor, I have also quite extensively developed the medical profession--so Physicians are definitely a thing. Besides having a good Doctor potentially available, there are professionally trained Medics. In our own historical times, the Medics and Physicians of the Roman Legions had developed the medical profession to a very high standard--not equalled until well into the 19th and perhaps early 20th century in our time. The Romans embraced what the earlier Persians, Egyptians, Greeks, and Carthaginians had achieved, and sharpened and improved upon all of that lore and expertise, reaching even greater heights of skill, innovation, efficiency, and achievement.

Not to forget, wise and skilled professional Herbalists can also provide some jaw-dropping forms of healing and aid to people in need. Chinese and Indian Herbalists have been doing amazing healing work for many thousands of years, tackling a huge variety of problems and ailments, from physical accidents and diseases, to battle wounds, and problems from old age or in childbirth.

So, in the world of Thandor, I have Physicians and Herbalists that serve many functions of "Healers". True, the nature of that "delivery" isn't in the form of being zapped by a rainbow ray of light immediately in battle, but then again, I generally run Thandor as a more gritty, realistic world of harsh brutality. Magical "Insta-Healing" is definitely more on the uncommon side of things occurring. Of course, I include some of that kind of uber magic, especially for bands of elite Adventurers and special forces in the military--but the larger percentage of the population is accustomed to dealing with Physicians, Medics, and Herbalists. Sometimes Witches, or an odd Mystic or talented Alchemist. I like keeping the uber magic somewhat restrained as an overall flavour principle.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: SHARK on March 21, 2025, 06:36:20 PMGreetings!

I imagine I'm being somewhat stodgy and mundane--but as I mentioned previously about diffusing Healing abilities amongst different classes, including but beyond the Cleric/Priest Character? Right. So, in my world of Thandor, I have also quite extensively developed the medical profession--so Physicians are definitely a thing. Besides having a good Doctor potentially available, there are professionally trained Medics. In our own historical times, the Medics and Physicians of the Roman Legions had developed the medical profession to a very high standard--not equalled until well into the 19th and perhaps early 20th century in our time. The Romans embraced what the earlier Persians, Egyptians, Greeks, and Carthaginians had achieved, and sharpened and improved upon all of that lore and expertise, reaching even greater heights of skill, innovation, efficiency, and achievement.

Not to forget, wise and skilled professional Herbalists can also provide some jaw-dropping forms of healing and aid to people in need. Chinese and Indian Herbalists have been doing amazing healing work for many thousands of years, tackling a huge variety of problems and ailments, from physical accidents and diseases, to battle wounds, and problems from old age or in childbirth.

So, in the world of Thandor, I have Physicians and Herbalists that serve many functions of "Healers". True, the nature of that "delivery" isn't in the form of being zapped by a rainbow ray of light immediately in battle, but then again, I generally run Thandor as a more gritty, realistic world of harsh brutality. Magical "Insta-Healing" is definitely more on the uncommon side of things occurring. Of course, I include some of that kind of uber magic, especially for bands of elite Adventurers and special forces in the military--but the larger percentage of the population is accustomed to dealing with Physicians, Medics, and Herbalists. Sometimes Witches, or an odd Mystic or talented Alchemist. I like keeping the uber magic somewhat restrained as an overall flavour principle.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

I took a similar approach in my game - there are three skills that are useful to healing.  I'm not sure how hard it would be to do this in a class based system. The physician skill can fix just about anything given time and can provide limited benefits in the short run.  An alchemist can brew potions that provide quick fixes, and can do a few things physicians can't.  Life magic is probably best for in-combat healing, but there are a lot of things that it can't do.  The most useful overall is the physician skill.  I also specifically designed the system to avoid D&D whack-a-mole healing.  If you're "wounded" then you're out of the fight for the duration even if a healer can get you mobile.

Quote from: SHARK on March 21, 2025, 02:19:14 PMIndividual priest characters may or may not have specialization in Healing. Beyond that, I have diffused Healing amongst several other character types, such as Mystics, Witches, and Druids, for example. Even Alchemists can specialize in healing, and provide some interesting and useful healing abilities.

SHARK - what rules were you using for these? As I recall, your Thandor games had been using D&D 5E. Did you use official classes like the Unearthed Arcana Mystic class (https://dnd5e.wikidot.com/mystic), homebrew classes, or something else?

For OSR and D&D I would not bother with changing the default cleric. Classes come with built in assumptions to make the game easier to play. Why can every fighter in the entire world wear plate mail? Why can every thief backstab? Why does every magic-user in the world have a spellbook? If I don't feel like using those assumptions I would likely just use a different set of rules.

Just because I was curious I looked up casting a spell on Google. I see black magic, witchcraft, Icelandic rune magic, astrology, and Wiccan spells just on page one. Having every magic-user use a spellbook makes no more or no less sense than having every cleric turn undead. But classes make it easier for many players to find a niche and a role and play the game.

Very few games/settings do polytheism sufficiently well to justify a lot of distinct classes to account for different deities. Although you can probably easily swap-in/out some features without too much trouble.

Even the idea of the "Cleric" is a bit wrapped in to Christian/monotheistic thinking to my eyes though. Historical cultures tended to be a lot more fluid in how they viewed spirituality than D&D presents, but it's very hard to break away from that at the table (and it's hard to definitively say that any setting would develop as we see in history, since the deities are usually quite present).

Quote from: Kravell on March 21, 2025, 08:31:00 PMFor OSR and D&D I would not bother with changing the default cleric. Classes come with built in assumptions to make the game easier to play. Why can every fighter in the entire world wear plate mail? Why can every thief backstab? Why does every magic-user in the world have a spellbook? If I don't feel like using those assumptions I would likely just use a different set of rules.

This is similar to what I said in the recent thread "Broad vs narrow classes - should they be specific to culture?" (https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/broad-vs-narrow-classes-should-they-be-specific-to-culture/)

It's possible to have a different set of core classes and still use the same rules otherwise, but maybe that's a bridge too far for some?

Quote from: Zelen on March 21, 2025, 10:37:48 PMEven the idea of the "Cleric" is a bit wrapped in to Christian/monotheistic thinking to my eyes though. Historical cultures tended to be a lot more fluid in how they viewed spirituality than D&D presents, but it's very hard to break away from that at the table (and it's hard to definitively say that any setting would develop as we see in history, since the deities are usually quite present).

That last bit is a key element to why I keep the divine distant and don't have any means for the living to reach the afterlife (the setting itself is already a fantasy otherworld so you don't need to plane hop to see the fantastic)... it keeps the thoughts and motivations of mere mortals more in line with human historical norms.

Ex. if the afterlife was a certainty so long as you pick a patron and stick to their tenants (a PC just visited his beloved grandfather in Celestia last month) then you're going to see a lot of people living entirely for the next life and little fear of death anywhere outside of soul corrupting or destroying supernatural effects.

Similarly, if faithful followers of evil gods also get rewarded after their fashion, many villains would also be fanatics... "the god of murder demands I kill as many as possible so I can have the joy of slaughter throughout eternity!"

Basically, if the gods are imminent and the afterlife provable then there is no faith in the setting, only devotion, threats of death do not motivate, and little in life matters except pleasing the gods.

It's still something we can conceive of, but its about as alien in perspective (unless you've been brainwashed into a cult) relative to historical experience as Eclipse Phase's post-humanism is.

Which is why I avoid it and force people in my settings to have to take such matters on faith.

Quote from: Mishihari on March 21, 2025, 07:02:08 PM

Quote from: SHARK on March 21, 2025, 06:36:20 PMGreetings!

I imagine I'm being somewhat stodgy and mundane--but as I mentioned previously about diffusing Healing abilities amongst different classes, including but beyond the Cleric/Priest Character? Right. So, in my world of Thandor, I have also quite extensively developed the medical profession--so Physicians are definitely a thing. Besides having a good Doctor potentially available, there are professionally trained Medics. In our own historical times, the Medics and Physicians of the Roman Legions had developed the medical profession to a very high standard--not equalled until well into the 19th and perhaps early 20th century in our time. The Romans embraced what the earlier Persians, Egyptians, Greeks, and Carthaginians had achieved, and sharpened and improved upon all of that lore and expertise, reaching even greater heights of skill, innovation, efficiency, and achievement.

Not to forget, wise and skilled professional Herbalists can also provide some jaw-dropping forms of healing and aid to people in need. Chinese and Indian Herbalists have been doing amazing healing work for many thousands of years, tackling a huge variety of problems and ailments, from physical accidents and diseases, to battle wounds, and problems from old age or in childbirth.

So, in the world of Thandor, I have Physicians and Herbalists that serve many functions of "Healers". True, the nature of that "delivery" isn't in the form of being zapped by a rainbow ray of light immediately in battle, but then again, I generally run Thandor as a more gritty, realistic world of harsh brutality. Magical "Insta-Healing" is definitely more on the uncommon side of things occurring. Of course, I include some of that kind of uber magic, especially for bands of elite Adventurers and special forces in the military--but the larger percentage of the population is accustomed to dealing with Physicians, Medics, and Herbalists. Sometimes Witches, or an odd Mystic or talented Alchemist. I like keeping the uber magic somewhat restrained as an overall flavour principle.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

I took a similar approach in my game - there are three skills that are useful to healing.  I'm not sure how hard it would be to do this in a class based system. The physician skill can fix just about anything given time and can provide limited benefits in the short run.  An alchemist can brew potions that provide quick fixes, and can do a few things physicians can't.  Life magic is probably best for in-combat healing, but there are a lot of things that it can't do.  The most useful overall is the physician skill.  I also specifically designed the system to avoid D&D whack-a-mole healing.  If you're "wounded" then you're out of the fight for the duration even if a healer can get you mobile.

Greetings!

Hey there, Mishihari! Yeah, my friend, brilliant minds think alike! *Laughing* I think it is great that you have developed Physician, Alchemy and such. I have found that embracing such ideas adds depth and realism to the game world as a whole, as well as really making the milieu more grounded. I especially enjoy these ideas as embracing them does a lot of the heavy lifting for avoiding the whole "Magical Healthcare" dynamic that really can develop from the basic rules, unfiltered.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: jhkim on March 21, 2025, 07:29:28 PM

Quote from: SHARK on March 21, 2025, 02:19:14 PMIndividual priest characters may or may not have specialization in Healing. Beyond that, I have diffused Healing amongst several other character types, such as Mystics, Witches, and Druids, for example. Even Alchemists can specialize in healing, and provide some interesting and useful healing abilities.

SHARK - what rules were you using for these? As I recall, your Thandor games had been using D&D 5E. Did you use official classes like the Unearthed Arcana Mystic class (https://dnd5e.wikidot.com/mystic), homebrew classes, or something else?

Greetings!

Yeah, Jhkim, I have been using the ShadowDark system, which has some of the classes like Witch. Beyond that, I have developed my own classes for Shaman, Mystic, Alchemist, and more.

I have developed an extensive and detailed Skill System, as well as a Tradesman Class. Embracing Professions such as Physician, Herbalist, and Barber provide a range of solid abilities for healing and rehabilitation that is grounded and inspired by historical realism and authenticity.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

For all the criticism of the healbot, there's an enduring appeal to the character archetype and its play-style. It appears in numerous games across multiple genres, and there are people who like playing this kind of character. It only really works in games that have hit points.

Savage Worlds is not this game.

Quote from: tenbones on March 21, 2025, 04:12:13 PMSo while I appreciate the Savage Worlds Pathfinder Core Rules a LOT. The problem I have with them is it's a direct translation of the *assumptions* of the d20 system. So yes, it's absolutely D&D style fantasy. But it leans towards the elements I *dislike* about D&D fantasy that are purely mechanical.

i.e. they introduce Classes as Class Edges and with that they slide in all the "fat" for those classes. Clerics in Pathfinder *are* healbots, and their Deity portfolios matter a bit, but not too much.

You might appreciate some SWADE-specific feedback. I am running three Savage Worlds games where I use Savage Pathfinder to some degree.

The first is a Rise of the Runelords game that started off in 3.x when I acquired the collector's anniversary edition at a used game auction. We switched over to Savage Worlds after player attrition because I needed a game I could run with two people, and PF1e wasn't that. It's now by-the-book Savage Pathfinder, and the closest they have to a cleric is a rogue with Arcane Background (Miracles) and Arcane Trickster. I appreciate that these prestige classes actually work in Savage Worlds, because they were conceptually cool but a lot of multiclass concepts like that suck on the 3.x chassis.

The second is a pirate campaign where I started with the PF1 Skull & Shackles adventure path and started bolting on 50 Fathoms to facilitate the whole "being pirates" schtick. One of my players found out Golarion had a goddess devoted to piracy, and then I received much excitement about her next character. Then I switched to Savage Worlds on her. She started off making a cleric. Then, before she finished, she asked me if she could be an oracle instead, and just call herself a cleric, because she thought the cleric edge was kind of boring, while the oracle edge was exciting. She has Arcane Background (Miracles), she activates powers with Faith, can't that be a cleric? Since I was trying to get the concept of trappings across to her, I just called this a win and started the game.

The cleric edge is rooted in trying to replicate the cleric class from Pathfinder, which is kind of but not exactly the cleric from earlier editions of D&D. The evolution through systems is important, though. The domains in 3.x are an attempt to recreate the specialty priests of 2nd edition after a fashion. It's not exactly that, because they're trying to do more things simultaneously than just the specialty priests, but the specialty priests are a part of that. The cleric maintains turn undead because zombies and skeletons are a staple of D&D, but by the time you get to 3rd edition you're starting to see a lot of adventures that just don't have undead. Pathfinder does channel energy instead, which achieves the same result when used against undead, but allows you to do something else with it in a game that lacks these monsters.

When you move to Savage Worlds, channel energy has the same problem that the original turn undead ability has - it's too narrow in scope. It's very powerful, but most wounds are dealt with through bennies.

This brings me to my third game. Last year I had the big brain idea that I was going to run the original Dragonlance modules for the 40th anniversary, but I would use Savage Worlds instead of AD&D. The 1E cleric doesn't have channel energy, it has turn undead. I can model that with the Destroy Undead edge, but this channel energy feature the cleric has is something that didn't exist in 1984. I treated this feature as an edge, so when I took it away, I gave the cleric a new edge in its place. I had the Fantasy Companion at this time, and I liked how the arcane backgrounds in that book gave more powers/spells, so to compensate for taking away channel energy, I gave the cleric two extra spells - effectively the New Powers edge. I started them with Healing + 4 powers, and made them take two from their domain. I did something similar with the Wizard of High Sorcery. The Savage Pathfinder wizard has a bunch of shit that didn't exist in AD&D, so I stripped that out and gave them more spells to compensate.

The Dragonlance cleric needs to have Healing, because that's a big thing in-world. True healing hasn't existed since the Cataclysm when the gods left. Regardless of the god you worship, the ability to wield magical healing is the mark of a true cleric.

The pirate "cleric" doesn't have the Healing power. She didn't have room for it. Nothing prevented her from taking it, she just didn't have it.

You sound like you're trying to make Savage Forgotten Realms. It seems to me to fly in the face of the novelization as well as the general evolution and presentation of those 80s and 90s settings for clerics to lack healing. Cure Light Wounds was the thing that clerics did. However, just because a cleric could cast the spell doesn't mean they did cast it. After looking through Forgotten Realms Adventures, I do see that Beshaba and Gond lack even minor access to the healing sphere, but they're the only two in the entire Faerunian pantheon. Considering gods like Auril, Deneir, Leira, and Umberlee (lesser deities and demigods with unrelated portfolios) grant healing - to say nothing of gods like Bane, Cyric, and Shar - that just seems "off" to me.

To wrap this up, I'm not married to the notion that a cleric has to have healing magic. Obviously, since I have a cleric in one of my games who lacks said magic. If you're going to call this a faithful Savage conversion of Forgotten Realms, the cleric has to at least be able to select the power, but I don't think they should automatically get it. If you were trying to sell me on Savage Talislanta, I'd be more willing to buy into certain clerics just not having access to the Healing power because I don't know enough about Talislanta to have conflicting expectations.

To differentiate the clerics within the Forgotten Realms, instead of giving them all Healing + 2 powers, I would give them a deity-appropriate power regardless of rank requirement as that automatic power. For example, all clerics of Myrkul would have Zombie even though it's a veteran rank power. Clerics of Leira would obviously have Illusion. Mielikki would grant something like Beast Friend. Sune is going to grant Empathy. Several gods might grant the same power, but with their own specific trappings. This would let you have a cleric of Lathander who looks in all respects like a traditional cleric, but Myrkul's clerics are practically indistinguishable from necromancers, Leira's clerics end up being illusionists who roll Faith instead of Spellcasting, and Sune's clerics probably do have Healing but otherwise mostly look like bards.

I would have it so Clerics are massive specialists of what their god specializes in, extending to non-divine magic skills. A Cleric of the god of martial arts is a master martial artist that can:

- copy techniques just by looking at them and perform them better
- invent new techniques on the fly
- act out of instinct
- predict enemy moves before the enemy makes them happen and perfectly guide them to where they want (instinctively) to attack best

However, this role has limitations. You must do what your god wants. At all times. If you don't, your superhuman martial arts skill goes away.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on March 20, 2025, 08:27:20 PMGiven 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 am not so certain I agree with the magical healing part for Savage Worlds in a "D&D like setting" I find the magical healing can be MORE important given how often it can be used and the fact raises can remove multiple wounds.  My group certainly misses the Cleric the most in any delves if a character should be missing.  The turning undead part I can not say as it has not come up as yet, but with the gang up rules, a swarm of undead can be a real problem for an otherwise strong group of heroes. 

  I think the undead turning though is far easier to lose than the healing, but I was a bit surprised as to how good magical healing is in SW even when compared to D&D and how it can keep the party moving down in the dungeon or make or break some combat encounters.

Given your assumptions,  I think the answer is trappings, carefully curated power lists and custom modifiers/limitations.  I am a SWADE disciple as well, but I think a little bit was lost with SWEX pertaining to trappings. 

In my opinion, Savage Pathfinder is trash and isn't what you want to reference. It is trying to hard to bring in Pathfinder players which is a detriment to what is possible with the Savage Worlds system. 

The Fantasy Companion is an ok start, but I don't think the domains they present really get to what you want and other settings do it better. For each Specialty Priest, the easy thing to do would be to swap out the healing and rebuke (rebuke might now be in the FC, it might be unique to Rifts and Deadlands?) powers for something else for each priest but I think you'll still run into quite a bit of overlap. 

I would go further and customize an Arcane Background Edge to represent each specialty.  Powers can still overlap, but maybe each priest gets a unique modifiers or way to use the Faith skill that represents their specialty.  Deadlands does an excellent job of this with the various Faith AB's and the SciFi Companion provides the Chaplain and Shepherd which may give you some ideas. 

Taking the Knight Hospitaller example, off the tope of my head I would go with something like the Troubadour Edge as part of the AB, but instead of the Bard trope of linking it to Perform, link it to Faith.  Now you have someone who inspires based on their conviction.

Sometimes limiting other archetypes in what trappings they can use can also make a big difference. Don't let the wizard do stuff that can outshine your cleric.  For example, limiting the holy and and true daylight trapping to AB: Faith users in Savage Rifts gives the Mystic a very important role to play separate from the Ley Line Walker. 

Quote from: Corolinth on March 22, 2025, 07:45:15 PMYou sound like you're trying to make Savage Forgotten Realms. It seems to me to fly in the face of the novelization as well as the general evolution and presentation of those 80s and 90s settings for clerics to lack healing. Cure Light Wounds was the thing that clerics did. However, just because a cleric could cast the spell doesn't mean they did cast it. After looking through Forgotten Realms Adventures, I do see that Beshaba and Gond lack even minor access to the healing sphere, but they're the only two in the entire Faerunian pantheon. Considering gods like Auril, Deneir, Leira, and Umberlee (lesser deities and demigods with unrelated portfolios) grant healing - to say nothing of gods like Bane, Cyric, and Shar - that just seems "off" to me.

To wrap this up, I'm not married to the notion that a cleric has to have healing magic. Obviously, since I have a cleric in one of my games who lacks said magic. If you're going to call this a faithful Savage conversion of Forgotten Realms, the cleric has to at least be able to select the power, but I don't think they should automatically get it. If you were trying to sell me on Savage Talislanta, I'd be more willing to buy into certain clerics just not having access to the Healing power because I don't know enough about Talislanta to have conflicting expectations.

To differentiate the clerics within the Forgotten Realms, instead of giving them all Healing + 2 powers, I would give them a deity-appropriate power regardless of rank requirement as that automatic power. For example, all clerics of Myrkul would have Zombie even though it's a veteran rank power. Clerics of Leira would obviously have Illusion. Mielikki would grant something like Beast Friend. Sune is going to grant Empathy. Several gods might grant the same power, but with their own specific trappings. This would let you have a cleric of Lathander who looks in all respects like a traditional cleric, but Myrkul's clerics are practically indistinguishable from necromancers, Leira's clerics end up being illusionists who roll Faith instead of Spellcasting, and Sune's clerics probably do have Healing but otherwise mostly look like bards.

This is almost exactly what I'm doing. Healing as a specific power is nested within specific Domains (Sun, Nature, Glory and Protection), so if a deity doesn't have those Domains, his Clerics don't have access to it. And it becomes a choice even within those Domains as well.

I'm also making the Turn/Destroy/Command Undead choice as well. For the exact reasons you cited, I came to those same conclusions. Where I feel the deity doesn't have an express reason to Turn/Command undead, I give the Cleric an option. Or a tradeoff - for instance I give Priests of Oghma, Mystra the choice of "Forbidden Lore" which lets them Turn/Destroy Extra Planar creatures in the same vein as Undead - but they have to take the Dread Hindrance (all failed Fear checks get a +2 to the results table). Again, they don't have to take it, it's an option that is intended to support the creed and dogmas of the faith. Other deities grant other options.

Since this is an interim-pass at my conversion from Savage Pathfinder, I'm effectively making Savage Forgotten Realms. But I also plan on using the same structure in my own setting I'm planning on publishing - which will also have some mechanics I'm developing for in-setting features that are more advanced than the starting PC chargen. Think of them like Seasoned Rank Iconic Frameworks.

Quote from: Chainsaw Surgeon on March 24, 2025, 03:09:44 PMGiven your assumptions,  I think the answer is trappings, carefully curated power lists and custom modifiers/limitations.  I am a SWADE disciple as well, but I think a little bit was lost with SWEX pertaining to trappings.

100% agreement here. I have been considering going back to the Deluxe Trappings rules. But my hands are full right now.

Quote from: Chainsaw Surgeon on March 24, 2025, 03:09:44 PMIn my opinion, Savage Pathfinder is trash and isn't what you want to reference. It is trying to hard to bring in Pathfinder players which is a detriment to what is possible with the Savage Worlds system.

I have a bit to say about this. TL/DR You're correct.

I know I've been on this very forum for *years* (since SW Deluxe Edition) opining that I felt Savage Worlds could and should be used for D&D-fantasy. The skepticism had been far more than I would have predicted, even my own players. In my group, Shaintar definitely moved the needle. But Beasts and Barbarians *definitely* won them over. Then SWADE dropped... and now it meant converting the conversions. So I just kinda waited, then they announced Savage Pathfinder.

Now all of a sudden my players are interested - because we played Pathfinder/3.x pushing that system to brutal levels. But the *fact* that Pathfinder was now going to be represented in Savage Worlds, this magically legitimized my claims that Savage Worlds could do D&D faithfully.

Well... it always could. But Savage Worlds Pathfinder does *Pathfinder* faithfully... warts and all. And that's by intention, as you mentioned above, to get modern D&D players into the SWADE ecosystem. My dislike for Pathfinder has not waned. And in SWADE form, the things I dislike are there, just minus the wonkiness of d20. Rather, they codified the silly shit of Pathfinder-specific flavor of 3.x design into SWADE which is just unnecessary.

Quote from: Chainsaw Surgeon on March 24, 2025, 03:09:44 PMThe Fantasy Companion is an ok start, but I don't think the domains they present really get to what you want and other settings do it better. For each Specialty Priest, the easy thing to do would be to swap out the healing and rebuke (rebuke might now be in the FC, it might be unique to Rifts and Deadlands?) powers for something else for each priest but I think you'll still run into quite a bit of overlap.

Yep. Done and done.

Quote from: Chainsaw Surgeon on March 24, 2025, 03:09:44 PMI would go further and customize an Arcane Background Edge to represent each specialty.  Powers can still overlap, but maybe each priest gets a unique modifiers or way to use the Faith skill that represents their specialty.  Deadlands does an excellent job of this with the various Faith AB's and the SciFi Companion provides the Chaplain and Shepherd which may give you some ideas. 

Taking the Knight Hospitaller example, off the tope of my head I would go with something like the Troubadour Edge as part of the AB, but instead of the Bard trope of linking it to Perform, link it to Faith.  Now you have someone who inspires based on their conviction.

Sometimes limiting other archetypes in what trappings they can use can also make a big difference. Don't let the wizard do stuff that can outshine your cleric.  For example, limiting the holy and and true daylight trapping to AB: Faith users in Savage Rifts gives the Mystic a very important role to play separate from the Ley Line Walker. 

LOL my god, I swear you sound like one of my players (my rules guy). We were literally having this discussion Saturday night. So my longterm goal is very similar to this. We need a core stripped down set of Fantasy rules that are SWADE at the core, but restructuring "classes" as packages in-line with standard 1e/2e conventions, but with more setting-specific options for not just caster-classes, but for non-casters as well.

I'm in total agreement with you on Deadlands and Sci-Fi companion's handling of Arcane Backgrounds. What I want to avoid is the assumption of non-tradeoff benefits, where being a "mystic Fighter" is better mechanically than a regular "Fighter" without any context. But that's a setting conceit. So I'm very confident I can pull that off.

When I'm done with my Savage Forgotten Realms project, I'm going to have my layout person pretty it up, and we'll hand it out for freeeeeee. This will be a warmup for things to come. We're just going through the production ropes now and figuring out what works best for us before we start doing kickstarters and the rest. We plan on doing some adventures and stuff once we move on to our own property which is in the works now. I figured since I run a lot of Realms, this would be a good place to start for my own personal use as well as fun "practice" run for our production line, while giving people out there some benefit too.

Regarding the arcane backgrounds in other Savage Settings, it's pretty clear when you compare books that those were the template for the Pathfinder class edges.

I am less negative about Savage Pathfinder than I think either of you are, but I do share the overall sentiment. The PFSW line focuses too heavily on trying to recreate every mechanical detail of Pathfinder without asking whether Savage Worlds needs it. This is painfully obvious in the Advanced Player's Guide 2. They wrote an overtuned magus class edge when the eldritch knight prestige edges already gave you what you needed. This leads to players who think they need certain class edges rather than building with the tools they already have.

Quote from: tenbones on March 25, 2025, 12:25:07 PMThis is almost exactly what I'm doing. Healing as a specific power is nested within specific Domains (Sun, Nature, Glory and Protection), so if a deity doesn't have those Domains, his Clerics don't have access to it. And it becomes a choice even within those Domains as well.

I think you should consider whether you want to dispense with domains altogether. They were an interesting idea for 3rd edition D&D to bring a lot of different flavors of cleric together under one mechanical umbrella, but you don't need to make this compatible with Dark Sun, Dragonlance, and Greyhawk. It sounds like more work, but maybe it's not. You wouldn't be juggling the association of deities and spells through the intermediary layer of domains. Sundered Skies handles clerics this way.

If you did that, it would effectively make each priesthood its own arcane background, which is what it sounds like you want when you talk about making every cleric a specialty priest. Another thing to consider is prestige edges for the specialty priests. Give destroy undead a little more competition, and suddenly it becomes a lot less common.

Quote from: tenbones on March 25, 2025, 12:46:54 PMWhen I'm done with my Savage Forgotten Realms project, I'm going to have my layout person pretty it up, and we'll hand it out for freeeeeee. This will be a warmup for things to come. We're just going through the production ropes now and figuring out what works best for us before we start doing kickstarters and the rest. We plan on doing some adventures and stuff once we move on to our own property which is in the works now. I figured since I run a lot of Realms, this would be a good place to start for my own personal use as well as fun "practice" run for our production line, while giving people out there some benefit too.

I actually backed Talislanta hoping they'd hit enough funding to add your Savage Worlds conversion as a stretch goal.

Quote from: Corolinth on March 25, 2025, 09:15:34 PMRegarding the arcane backgrounds in other Savage Settings, it's pretty clear when you compare books that those were the template for the Pathfinder class edges.

I am less negative about Savage Pathfinder than I think either of you are, but I do share the overall sentiment. The PFSW line focuses too heavily on trying to recreate every mechanical detail of Pathfinder without asking whether Savage Worlds needs it. This is painfully obvious in the Advanced Player's Guide 2. They wrote an overtuned magus class edge when the eldritch knight prestige edges already gave you what you needed. This leads to players who think they need certain class edges rather than building with the tools they already have.

You are hitting the big ones. The class edges have problems in that they are better than normal edges, thus encouraging multiclasssing.  Why wouldn't your sorcerer take the wizard edge?  No AB should also grant d4 in the skill, either, that's too much for an edge.  Edge chains are too long, reminiscent of 3.5/Pathfinder feat chains.  That's not, and shouldn't be, Savage Worlds in my opinion.  I also intensely hate Wayne Reynolds art so there is a little bias.  The bestiaries are great resources, though. 

Quote from: tenbones on March 25, 2025, 12:46:54 PMWhen I'm done with my Savage Forgotten Realms project, I'm going to have my layout person pretty it up, and we'll hand it out for freeeeeee. This will be a warmup for things to come. We're just going through the production ropes now and figuring out what works best for us before we start doing kickstarters and the rest. We plan on doing some adventures and stuff once we move on to our own property which is in the works now. I figured since I run a lot of Realms, this would be a good place to start for my own personal use as well as fun "practice" run for our production line, while giving people out there some benefit too.

I, for one, will definitely be looking forward to it!  I tried to do a conversion of 3.5 Forgotten Realms a while ago using Savage Rifts iconic frameworks as a base.  It failed miserably as I didn't really know what I was doing.  I went back and paired down the frameworks significantly to run Ravenloft - mainly just gave them the equivalent of 4 advances with some special perks per class.  My cleric was a shit simple priest of light, though, so it was easy as I didn't mess with what is a larger FR pantheon. My players say it was one of the best campaigns we ever did.  Savage Pathfinder came out right as we were ending and I have to give it credit for having the wish spell as I needed it when the players used a luck sword they found to save their asses. 

You are 100% correct on tradeoffs.  The lesson I learned was that an edge isn't always the best answer.  A character only gets so many advances - unless you want to run way past Legendary. Corolinth is right about domains and powers for the same reason.  AB users only get so many of those as well.  You sound like you have that in hand with what you are doing with specialty priests.  If you are going with frameworks for classes, setting rules that only apply to specific frameworks work well -- Fighter gets born a hero for combat edges, for example, turns out to be pretty good. That doesn't help much with clerics, however.   

Quote from: Chainsaw Surgeon on March 26, 2025, 10:57:20 AMYou are hitting the big ones. The class edges have problems in that they are better than normal edges, thus encouraging multiclasssing.  Why wouldn't your sorcerer take the wizard edge?  No AB should also grant d4 in the skill, either, that's too much for an edge.  Edge chains are too long, reminiscent of 3.5/Pathfinder feat chains.  That's not, and shouldn't be, Savage Worlds in my opinion.  I also intensely hate Wayne Reynolds art so there is a little bias.  The bestiaries are great resources, though.

I'm on the fence about arcane backgrounds granting a d4 in the skill. This is in the Fantasy Companion as well. If a new arcane background doesn't give you a d4 in the arcane skill, you're effectively locking characters out of acquiring them later on. I also share your aversion to it, for the reason you stated. It just seems like too much.

At first blush, I agree with you on class edges encouraging multi-classing and I have a player who focuses on exactly what you outline. At the same time, I haven't noticed the rest of my players doing that. I've concluded that the class edges are not as good as they first appear, in part because of opportunity cost. Since switching to Savage Worlds as my primary system, rather than a neat system to play once in a while, I've noticed that opportunity cost plays a big role in balancing the game.

Heh while I wasn't trying to make this specifically about Savage Worlds - so all you OSR nerds feel free to jump in - Savage Worlds is a superb method of discussing the abstractions that come from D&D Fantasy and providing good discussion in how to solve possible perceived "problems".

OSR/d20 as a system makes it difficult to do within the core task resolution mechanic *because* of class. That doesn't mean it can't be done. Savage Worlds is much more modular and it can solve nearly any issue in multiple ways.

So I think a huge factor here is we're talking about the "Cleric class" as a free-standing thing outside of a setting. I think this has been an issue with D&D for one big reason for me - it removes the players from the conceits I want in the setting. And it's the GM's job to enforce those conceits.

If the Cleric class is written as a "healbot" then ultimately the GM has to wrestle with supplements that have temples full of clerics and wandering clerics, and PC clerics, and NPC clerics without any context to the setting other than the rules themselves. Same with Wizards. If the assumptions of the mechanics are the defining capacity of the game, then the setting wouldn't look like how it's presented.

It becomes the GM's job to enforce that. Normally in D&D I do the following (specifically for the Realms, but I do it in other settings too) - as a medieval society with many cultural analogs represented, magic is *rare* and *powerful*. Yes your Cleric is capable of MIRACULOUS healing potential. But not all priests or members of the faith are Clerics (the class), but do contribute to the "faith" writ-large. Clerics are those special people chosen by their Gods as agents of their power to exact their goals on the material world. Wizards aren't *everywhere* - they're cloistered, almost fraternal, they keep each other in check, because the reality is the multiverse is fucked up and dabbling with arcane powers is dangerous, not just because of its capacity to do harm but because *normal people FEAR IT*.

This is not universally true, of course, but it sets the tone that doesn't remove the assumptions of what the class can do mechanically, but it puts the onus on the GM to enforce the reality of the setting by any means necessary on why despite these elements existing, the world operates as its supposed to.

This only really matters when you're running large open-world sandbox games. <--- this is the big dividing line.

Without setting context - it's just sub-systems designed to do combat with itself in varying ways (class differentiation) completely without setting reality. Much in the same way if you play an FPS game like Battlefield - you have role-based classes for specific modes of engaging in combat (Medic, Assault, Support, Engineering, Recon) at no point do I need to discuss theater of operation, gear scarcity, or anything else that would exist in the world in which these characters operate.

So back to the fundamentals - specifically, the Cleric. Are these things necessary as an assumption for the core class? Or should they be specific along the lines of their assumed faith?

Savage Worlds can parse this a number of different ways. But for D&D purists, is this desirable? It is for me because I run the sandiest of sandboxes.

Just wanted to say I like specialty priests too. This is the norm for current D&D, more or less.

One of the coolest ideas I've heard about clerics is making them sorcerers in the S&S style, but most their spells had to be reversed.

Or turn them into snake cultists, with several snake themed spells (sticks to snakes, neutralize poison etc.)

Quote from: Eric Diaz on March 26, 2025, 08:16:31 PMJust wanted to say I like specialty priests too. This is the norm for current D&D, more or less.

Eh, I'm not keen on the 5e approach - it's more like "extra-specialty priests".

A typical 5th-level cleric in 5e is going to have access to 14 spells, of which 6 come from their domain and the other 8 are chosen from more than 50 options. Plus cantrips. Add the channeled spell-like powers.

I'm increasingly sold on not just limiting class choice for campaigns I run, but heavily reworking some. My one current wizard has gotten used to having to spend time reading found spellbooks & hoping there's an interesting spell there, as well as a non-standard list of schools to choose from; in the campaign I just started prepping, I'm hoping I can make time for narrower & more tailored spell lists for clerics. I'd like that 5th level cleric to have the 6 domain spells, and then take choices from perhaps half as many options, if it can work out playable.

Quote from: tenbones on March 26, 2025, 08:00:44 PMSo back to the fundamentals - specifically, the Cleric. Are these things necessary as an assumption for the core class? Or should they be specific along the lines of their assumed faith?

First, sorry for veering off topic.

For me, I do not like the assumption that the cleric is a healbot or needs to have any healing ability whatsoever. I don't have a lot of experience prior to 3rd edition DnD but I envision a cleric to be more like a third edition bard.  One that inspires or, depending on the deity, invokes fear or awe.   

If I were to design one now, they might be able to mitigate damage or provide protection, but true healing should really be a miracle.  This is tough to do in HP systems, so I do see how the class evolved to be what it is currently. As I said, I did not really 'get' the cleric prior to third because we were young and nobody played one.  Looking back, I think it was a bit more in line with how I envision things.