For any who have read previous posts of mine, they realize I have a bit of an obsession with the cleric class in Dungeons & Dragons. It's not that the cleric is a favorite of mine, but it's rather one that makes me ponder about its purpose, use, and worldbuilding implications the most. That might seem strange given that we have magic-users who completely bend the perceived limitations of the metaphysical world. However, clerics present some far more unique aspects that I find fascinating to consider. One of these aspects is clerical spell access in classic D&D.
Why do all clerics have access to all spells? That is the default as set in the game since OD&D. Now AD&D 2e altered this somewhat with the introduction of specialty priests and spheres, thus slightly differentiating the priests of differing deities from one another in terms of spell selection (amongst other things). I really love this approach and always require PC clerics to be specialty priests in my AD&D campaigns.
In prior editions it did explain that "evil" clerics had access to the reverse versions of spells like cure disease or cure light wounds, or at the very least that it was an evil act to use them. But with the introduction of the nine-point alignment system in 1e, I always found it "problematic" to have all clerics get all spells. It means that deity choice doesn't matter in terms of spell access (aside from good vs evil I guess).
I do not think this same problem is present in the original game nor in B/X or BECMI. Why do I say such a thing? The answer is simple: 3-alignment system. You had Law, Neutrality, and Chaos. In OD&D, they had to be aligned with either Law or Chaos. Neutrality was reserved for druids. B/X does not have druids and thus that limitation is not given. BECMI did introduce the druid class option for neutral clerics that were 9th level.
Personally, I believe the original 1970s version of D&D handled it the best. Lawful clerics had access to all spells as written, whereas chaotic clerics had access to the same spells but then the reverse version instead of the "good" version. Again...why do I think this to be so? As alignment fits into a cosmic force structure in the implied D&D worlds, every lawful cleric is dedicated to this aspect of the cosmic forces. deity names, spheres of influence, etc. do not matter so much. They are all of Law. The same is true in reverse of course. What this allows for is a consistency of world lore. You are a cleric dedicated to the forces of law, therefore you have access to all spells associated with that force. Even if the practices, names, buildings, and interpretations of the deities of Law differ, the goals are the same.
What I then tend to do in order to differentiate the deities (or equivalencies) in my OD&D worlds tends to come down to customs, weapons, rituals, and granted boons for worship/sacrifice. Leaving a sacrifice at a shrine to the patron deity of travel might give the PC a bonus on a roll to not get lost or avoid a monster encounter.
These are just some more rambling thoughts on how I justify and explain clerics (and other classes) and their mechanics in my old-school D&D campaigns. In an upcoming "part 2" I will discuss another option for clerics receiving their spells as they progress in levels.
Comments
Post a Comment