priest and theologian

[Terquem]

Thanks for the correction guys.

[JLV]

Originally Posted by Rick_Smith

Hi Everyone, JLV.
Having a healer is a needed job in an adventuring party, but it is kinda dull. I think you are missing a bet if you make the priest all about healing.

Also, lots of religions are not about healing. Thor is the god of partying and smiting. He is not a clever god, but he drank a lot and killed a lot of giants in the sagas. I would like to keep that sort of flexibility for my various religions.

As for not allowing miracles to be too powerful... just don't give over powered abilities.

The trick to making 'active clerics' fun, is to find quirky and cool rites for priests that open up roleplaying possibilities. I also usually give them one or two good combat rites so that they don't feel they've wasted attributes every time there is a fight.

Warm regards, Rick.

Clearly you missed my point. My point was that I want Clerics to be DIFFERENT from Wizards or Warriors. They should have power, but they need to be applying it INDIRECTLY instead of directly. That is, they help, but don't (generally) get involved in the "toe-to-toe nuklear war with the Russkis" stuff unless there's a dire emergency or they get ambushed. And then they should have some skills, but perhaps surprising ones. Such a character could be enormously fun to play -- something like a Jedi, as opposed to a tank.

When I said make the Clerics the primary healers, I meant (as I pointed out later) that they should be the primary ones taking that kind of skill. They should also have other skills that support the party, as opposed to just being another tank or Wizard wearing a different color of cloth. I've very seldom read of any warriors of the middle ages who were also physicians. (In fact, I think there should be another healing talent, call it "Medic," that warriors can take easily which basically just involves stabilizing someone or maybe healing a single hit point.) Real healing is an art, and a time-intensive one at that, especially during the medieval period. Which is why Monks and Nuns were the ones learning it and doing it. It's also why today's doctors generally go to school a lot longer than say, a Marine Corps grunt needs to. Which is not to belittle the grunt's skill set, just reminding you that it's acquired and exercised differently.

Trying yet a third explanation; if tanks and Wizards are the infantry and artillery, then Clerics are the logistical support needed to get them there and keep them fighting, and as everyone has heard before, amateurs talk about tactics, while professionals discuss logistics... ;-)

As far as role-playing goes, I think it would be VERY interesting to play a character who has little opportunity to directly attack an enemy, but who, at the same time, can indirectly manipulate things to ensure that enemy is defeated before the first arrow flies. Besides, as we've pointed out in other places on this forum, building and running TFT characters is so easy that there's no reason why you can't have one of each kind.

[tbeard1999]

Originally Posted by ak_aramis

Some religious groups are genuinely all about the smiting their enemies.
The Thugee come immediately to mind.
The Jewish Zealots, as well.
The more extreme forms of Islam have spawned several, as well.
Christianity has the Knights Templar arise from its loins, too.

Warrior priests are not the provenance of fiction alone.

True, but warrior priests don't necessarily have to be magic users. And my point is that allowing clerics to directly smite could unbalance the game (or at least make the clerics undesirably duplicative of wizards). So the proposal is have the clerics mostly able to improve the combat performance of others.

Followers of the war god Slima, for instance, might be commanded to slay non-Slima followers wherever they find them. But Sliman clerics would carry this out by using spells that make Slima followers more effective in combat, rather than by using spells that directly inflict damage.

[ak_aramis]

Originally Posted by tbeard1999

True, but warrior priests don't necessarily have to be magic users. And my point is that allowing clerics to directly smite could unbalance the game (or at least make the clerics undesirably duplicative of wizards). So the proposal is have the clerics mostly able to improve the combat performance of others.

Followers of the war god Slima, for instance, might be commanded to slay non-Slima followers wherever they find them. But Sliman clerics would carry this out by using spells that make Slima followers more effective in combat, rather than by using spells that directly inflict damage.

If the prereqs are correct, and the slot cost is adequate...

[Rick_Smith]

Originally Posted by tbeard1999

Yeah, the accounting overhead might not be worth it. You could simplify it so that a certain minimum amount of activity is assumed - i.e., if you work part time at your faith, you get 1 fp per day; if you work full time at your faith, you get 2 fp per day. Then make a much shorter list of extraordinary one-time faith bonuses (such as large tithes, major acts of selflessness, etc.)

This would require priests to tend to their flocks, which might not be attractive to PCs. One way of addressing that would be to make major miracles available at relatively low fp cost. I'd also have a list of minor miracles that the priest can do (say) three times per day.

Hi all, Ty.
Well, the question is what does the god want the priest - adventurer do? Does the god want a 40 attribute cleric sitting in town advising people on marital problems, or should the adventurer-cleric be fighting the demon spawn invasion?

If the GM feels that he or she WANTS the players to be tending their flocks, then powering rites and miracles for doing that makes sense. I think that this is a decision that should be not be in the rules as a given for all religions. Rather that it should be pushed down to the religious descriptions. Some gods might want people to spend a lot of time tending flocks. Other religions would prefer lots of high value donations, and reward those who tithe a lot.

***

My basic measure is that the rules should err on the side of making drama possible. How does adding clerics with magical powers make the game more dramatic and interesting? (Assuming that they are different enough, they add more variety to the possible characters, which is good.)

In GURPS: Dungeon Fantasy, clerics were pretty typical. They could turn undead, had a collection of spells (especially healing spells), could detect evil, sanctify holy places, etc.

It would not be hard to make something like this for TFT. But I would be thrilled to have an expansion to clerics in TFT that does more.

Warm regards, Rick.

[JLV]

Again, I agree with Rick on this. I would LOVE to see a "cleric" expansion for TFT at some point. Especially if it can break the D&D mold of how clerics are "supposed" to work (i.e., get rid of some of the various tropes around the "Cleric" class) and has the flexibility to allow evil as well as good clerics in an organized and effective way.

I think a certain amount of ground work has been laid for something more sensible, flexible and generally interesting (read: "more dramatic," as Rick says) in things like GURPS Religion, and so on, but it would take some pulling together to make something suitable for TFT (which, after all, has less detailed rules for many of the actions players take during the game).

It's also probably worth pointing out that, like other adventurers, the cleric-type should be a unique and definitely NOT run-of-the-mill type of character. All those run-of-the-mill guys are the ones tending their pastoral flocks and blessing the local wheat crop and that sort of thing. The ones out adventuring would, sort of by definition, be of the "kick ass and take names, and I forgot my notepad for taking names today" kinds of people. Just as regular adventurers aren't the typical peasant farmer or local magic shoppe proprietor either... So, again, we'd be dealing with the exceptions, not the typical types, and all those rules for tending to the locals' spiritual needs and keeping the holy water font full aren't really what adventuring clerics would be all about.

[Jim Kane]

Originally Posted by JLV

As far as role-playing goes, I think it would be VERY interesting to play a character who has little opportunity to directly attack an enemy, but who, at the same time, can indirectly manipulate things to ensure that enemy is defeated before the first arrow flies.

JLV, this is an intriguing idea for simulating the "Act of God" and "Deus Ex Machina" elements within a story/Adventure.

However, as a PC, I imagine the character you describe would play on the tactical-level much like the "Vancian-Style Magic-Users" who can only "cast _____ once per day", and then are forced into a liability position within the rest of the Adventure Party.

This idea has potential merit worth exploring. If you really want to open the dialog up JLV, why not start a separate thread so everyone can read your fully fleshed-out ideas on this?

I for one would be very interested in hearing more from you on your idea.

JK

[zot]

Moved this to a new thread

[Rick_Smith]

Originally Posted by zot

Hi guys,

This post is longer than I thought it would be...

To make priests really different from wizards, what about giving them time consuming rituals, not useable in combat situations at all (but some can affect combat). ...

Hi Everyone, Zot.
I really like this. However, rather than giving one spell list to all priests, I would allow it to be customized by religion.

Warm regards, Rick.

[zot]

Originally Posted by Rick_Smith

Hi Everyone, Zot.
I really like this. However, rather than giving one spell list to all priests, I would allow it to be customized by religion.

Warm regards, Rick.

Hi Rick,

Thanks!

I'm sorry for the monolithic post, it makes it hard to keep track of everything in there. Would you believe I had to remove large amounts of elaboration in order to get it down to 10000 characters? In any case, yes, that's my intent which is why I say under "RITUALS":

Different gods should provide access to different rituals. A nature god might provide a beast form ritual and a fire god might not.

The idea is to make yet another list, this time a list of gods and the rituals that they provide access to for their followers. I think this is a chance to make some really interesting non-D&D gods, maybe including some of the gods from actual earth. I think each god might allow X rituals and Y talisman options at each level (priest, theologian, theologian 2, etc.). This would allow easy creation of new gods without worry about "how powerful" followers are compared to followers of other gods. One motivation is to make it easy for players to customize their own gods. You want shape shifting with electricity, like for a Native American-ish pantheon with the Thunder Bird? You can do that...

I included the talisman's "beast form" to give a Celtic/Druidic example, like ak_aramis was talking about, very early on.

Also, I was thinking of changing the term "ritual" to "ceremony" because A) I think it's more in the spirit of what I'm trying to do with this and B) to further distance this from D&D's concept of "ritual casting", which is simply an alternative type of casting that takes a lot of time but doesn't expend a spell slot.

Also, ceremonies (using that term now) that are mechanically the same might "look" very different for different gods (i.e. have different trappings). All the ceremonies for a particular god would probably have common forms or at least common elements. Ideally, each god would have its own little booklet which would include descriptions for each of its ceremonies. It's a lot of work but it's also a lot of flavor.

Something I left out of the example ceremonies (yes, using that instead of "ritual" now) was utility ceremonies, like things that help you get out of a pit or a prison. A thief or mechanician god would have several of those...


-- Bill