Clerics made simple

[zot]

In case there are people who don't already know this, my Theurgy thread is called "A different take on priests".

It's not a minimal system like the one Nils suggests.

[Nils_Lindeberg]

Originally Posted by zot

In case there are people who don't already know this, my Theurgy thread is called "A different take on priests".

It's not a minimal system like the one Nils suggests.

I have read most of it I think. And I kind of like it for what it is. But I am a little apprehensive about rules bloat. The more you add, the more detail and flavor you add, the harder it will be to change the system to fit your campaign and the longer it will take to make a character and it will make the system more crunchy.

I kind of love the 5 min NPC.

So in my eyes, the best house rule or suggestion for change is the ones that change little but still have an impact in the right direction. It doesn't have to solve everything since the vanilla system worked fairly well.

But then again, the Priest system is almost none existent, so it is hard to change it just a little and make a great system out of it. :-)

[zot]

Originally Posted by Nils_Lindeberg

I have read most of it I think. And I kind of like it for what it is. But I am a little apprehensive about rules bloat. The more you add, the more detail and flavor you add, the harder it will be to change the system to fit your campaign and the longer it will take to make a character and it will make the system more crunchy.

I kind of love the 5 min NPC.

Oh, believe me, it takes WAY less time to make a theurge than it does to make a wizard!

[Nils_Lindeberg]

Originally Posted by zot

Oh, believe me, it takes WAY less time to make a theurge than it does to make a wizard!

I saw this char of yours in the other thread… I've played with Rich's rules too, and they make for interesting characters and options, but 5 min NPC are hard to do. (And that lost talent point you mentioned was probably Literacy.) :-)

And I kind of doubt that this character took 5 min to put together. But it looks interesting and it is far from a basic vanilla 32 pointer. But 20 "spells" takes time to choose and write down. The cult/religion needs to be specified. Players need to write down times for ceremonies, adjust the play around said ceremonies and I'm not sure that appeals to the people that want a fast paced hack a slash? Maybe if the GM do all the prep work ahead of time, and only let the rule focused people play Theurgs. Then a lot of the rule crunch wouldn't slow down play.

And there are some good things too, like placing most of the Priest stuff outside combat, and more of an in between type of activity. The ritual times seems a little bit arbitrary. It would work great for some religions, but not at all for others.

And I am not quite sure why theurgy needs to be excluded from wizardly magics and vice versa? If you want them to exclude each other, just make the Priest talents cost triple for wizards. In most religions there are no distinction between wizards and priests. And in many fantasy pantheons there are gods of magic.

But all in all an interesting read. And if I had a campaign starting I might consider using some of them. But I would rather see it as an optional rule if it was implemented in the new version of TFT. Just too much crunch. It is like Rich's divine system with a 4th attribute. It works, but it adds too much. I am a minimalist when it comes to house rules. Do some with little rather than everything with a lot.

[zot]

To get the crunch level straight: don't be fooled by the font size and formatting. The actual rules for theurgy would fit into less than 3 pages of Advanced Wizard (about 2 1/4 pages, by word count). I'd call that very slim for an alternate magic system that's as fun to play (IMHO) as TFT magic is.

Btw, AW's spell list is actually in a smaller font and the complete list of talisman powers and ceremonies would fit into less than 2 of those pages. The complete rules, talisman powers, and ceremonies would fit into 4 pages of Advanced Wizard.

It's less crunch by a huge amount than the current rules for wizards and magic, which are already part of TFT, so I don't think the crunch level of theurgy is at all inappropriate for TFT.

Originally Posted by Nils_Lindeberg

I saw this char of yours in the other thread… I've played with Rich's rules too, and they make for interesting characters and options, but 5 min NPC are hard to do. (And that lost talent point you mentioned was probably Literacy.) :-)

And I kind of doubt that this character took 5 min to put together. But it looks interesting and it is far from a basic vanilla 32 pointer. But 20 "spells" takes time to choose and write down. The cult/religion needs to be specified. Players need to write down times for ceremonies, adjust the play around said ceremonies and I'm not sure that appeals to the people that want a fast paced hack a slash? Maybe if the GM do all the prep work ahead of time, and only let the rule focused people play Theurgs. Then a lot of the rule crunch wouldn't slow down play.

Does it take 5 minutes to make a wizard character? There are 51 spells to choose from just for an IQ 12 wizard and 77 for IQ 14...

But even so, are wizards reserved for "rule focused people"? In my opinion, wizards aren't and neither are theurges. Also, as I note at the top, the theurgy rules would fit into less than 3 pages of Advanced Wizard.

And there are some good things too, like placing most of the Priest stuff outside combat, and more of an in between type of activity. The ritual times seems a little bit arbitrary. It would work great for some religions, but not at all for others.

Thanks, making important out-of-combat activities was one of my goals for the system.

If there is a system that works great for every religion, though, I'd like to see it. Each major world religion does rely on "appointed times", as well as every other religion that I have know of. In general, Protestants have very few appointed times, but Catholics have many, as do Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Wiccans, Druids, etc. As far as I know, all of the ones I listed, except for Protestants, have daily appointed times.

And I am not quite sure why theurgy needs to be excluded from wizardly magics and vice versa? If you want them to exclude each other, just make the Priest talents cost triple for wizards. In most religions there are no distinction between wizards and priests. And in many fantasy pantheons there are gods of magic.

Maybe it doesn't. Theurgy 1 costs 5 talent points, which would be 10 for a wizard. Maybe that's prohibitive. I'll have to think about it.

One reason I did it was to give heroes one leg up on wizards, just this time. Heroes already get -4DX for spell casting, in addition to the -4 DX from any iron weapons and armor that might have.

Another reason was to try make a naturally emerging rivalry / jealousy between the two groups.

But all in all an interesting read. And if I had a campaign starting I might consider using some of them. But I would rather see it as an optional rule if it was implemented in the new version of TFT. Just too much crunch. It is like Rich's divine system with a 4th attribute. It works, but it adds too much. I am a minimalist when it comes to house rules. Do some with little rather than everything with a lot.

Well, I'm with you there. Of course, theurgy certainly isn't trying to do everything and it's not a lot.

[Nils_Lindeberg]

In my experience rules doesn't tend to shrink much when you write final versions. They tend to expand with explanations, background/flavor and exceptions/clarifications and secondary dependencies on other rules that might be found in play testing.

But if you compare them to the whole magic system, they are very light indeed. I compare them to my suggestions that are more of an errata, one small new talent and a paragraph of fluff and application. I would still say that implementing my rules would take very little effort and playtest. Implementing yours would be a lot of effort (new rule pages, testing, balancing, etc), probably more than SJ wants to do, since he rather let go of the whole religion thing completely if possible. I just hoped that he might try some errata type of change that almost makes it playable as is.

But if they said they wanted a proper cleric system, yours looks very interesting.

When it comes to times for worship, I think there are very few religions that are so picky. Most stick to a few days per year, and maybe one day per week or they have a range of smaller holydays spread out for regular service. But for individuals that are not in a temple/cloister setting I think there is a lot of leeway. Muslims being the only exception that I know of that pray many times per day.

And if you go back in history and look at other pantheons the specific times are usually connected to temple rules. If everyone should congregate at regular intervals it was easier to implement it at sunup, sundown or other easy to recognize times. But again outside the temple I don't think they followed such strict time rules. Especially religions where many priests also did other things, like being a mystic, ruler, local politician, war leader, councilor, seer, etc.

But even if this was true for most real religions, don't bind player's and GM's hands with rules about it. Leave it as suggestions or examples in your presented religions. And discuss other limitations that could fill the same function.

Not all religions even have regular praying. Many focus on leaving offerings or live by example in all things or have another day job.