Subtle dig at godless clerics

[Jaxzan Proditor]

I would say the OP is simply reading too much into it. Gontor's lack of theism is simply for story purposes to allow the High Priest of Hel to attack, not to make a pass at optimizers.

[ti'esar]

Like the Giant, I have to confess that I'm extremely surprised to discover that playing a non-theistic cleric is considered the optimal choice for an optimizer in the first place.

[Crusher]

Like the Giant, I have to confess that I'm extremely surprised to discover that playing a non-theistic cleric is considered the optimal choice for an optimizer in the first place.

Indeed. In most campaigns there are a bazillion gods. Finding one with the right domains and roughly the right alignment shouldn't be that hard.

[Shining Wrath]

The Giant has already addressed his intent, so I'll just speak to the optimality of the non-theistic cleric: it depends upon the campaign and the DM. Some DM's have active involved gods, and some (e.g., Eberron campaigns) have distant, hands-off gods.

Were OotS to be a campaign, it would have deities directly involved in the world; in the case of HPoH, nearly every action he takes is guided by Hel's evil plan. In such a world, having a deity who talks to you, guides you, and might actually show up if you really need them is much better than getting to pick your domains and not being expected to tithe or go on crusades.

[Bird]

In such a world, having a deity who talks to you, guides you, and might actually show up if you really need them is much better than getting to pick your domains and not being expected to tithe or go on crusades.

On the other hand, in that case you're expected to follow a specific plan when you may prefer to be doing something else for any number of reasons. That could be a big deal. I also think that it's fairly rare for a deity to micromanage his or her cleric--most don't have as much riding on one worshipper as Hel ostensibly has on Durkula.

Sometimes your deity is a big help (see: Durkon & Thor vs. Leeky Windstaff), but sometimes the deity is no help ("Nergal, sssssssaaaaave me") and sometimes they might royally screw you in the long run (Redcloak & the Dark One, perhaps?).

So, really comes down to circumstances, I think. I agree with you that it's a DM/campaign issue.

[Xihirli]

Someone in the comment thread pointed out that Gontor's not having a deity means no other god will object to Hel taking his soul, even though he died in combat- honorably by dwarf standards. That's not really much of a dig, I don't think- more of an "unanticipated job hazard". HPoH was actually pointing out why Gontor was a good tactical choice of targets.

I'm sorry, I'm not seeing the dig. It's just for the sake of the story.

Um, Hel doesn't get their souls if they die in combat, end of story, unless that nine-year-old girl who lost a fight to a tree was a cleric. However, the soul can be imprisoned in the vampire's body, as we've already seen.

[factotum]

On the other hand, in that case you're expected to follow a specific plan when you may prefer to be doing something else for any number of reasons. That could be a big deal.

It seems likely that any reasonable DM would only use the "Your god has sent you on a quest" card to send the party onto the next stage of the scenario he's got planned out, and you'd want to follow that anyway, so I don't see it being an issue at all.

[Guancyto]

Like the Giant, I have to confess that I'm extremely surprised to discover that playing a non-theistic cleric is considered the optimal choice for an optimizer in the first place.

I've seen people talk about clerics and paladins who follow a god as lower than non-theist clerics, on account of there's some loyalty they have that 'might' be higher than their loyalty to the party.

The idea that even a non-theist cleric might have, you know, principles that might take precedence over that old "whatever I want," or that a party member who tries to demand such undying loyalty at the get-go will probably never win it in the first place, or (as occurs in this strip) there might be significant benefits to being pre-attached to a powerful organization with a deific backer, never seems to come up.

[Bird]

It seems likely that any reasonable DM would only use the "Your god has sent you on a quest" card to send the party onto the next stage of the scenario he's got planned out, and you'd want to follow that anyway, so I don't see it being an issue at all.

Oh sure, I agree that a DM who has a scenario planned out won't hijack her own campaign and will want to fit the cleric's quest into whatever outline she has in mind. But I think that many DMs would want to avoid using gods as candy dispensers. That is--if at some point the god helps the cleric or gives useful advice for free, at some point they're going to want him to make an enemy of someone it would be convenient to befriend. Or sacrifice something he'd like to keep. Or pay for the privilege of having a high-intervention god in any number of other ways that feed into the deity's plans.

My point overall is that the drawbacks of being a cleric of an up-close-and-personal deity with a specific plan for you can equal the benefits.

[factotum]

My point overall is that the drawbacks of being a cleric of an up-close-and-personal deity with a specific plan for you can equal the benefits.

Which would mean they'd cancel out and there would actually be *no* significant advantage or disadvantage to being a theist cleric as opposed to a non-theist one, surely?

[FrankNorman]

I'm seeing some muddled use of terms here, I think.
A "non-theistic cleric" would still be a theist, in the same sense that characters like Roy or Vaarsuvius are - they believe the gods of that universe exist, they worship them - or at least try not to offend them, they just aren't praying for spells from them.
Is anyone in the OOTSverse not a theist?

[Peelee]

I'm seeing some muddled use of terms here, I think.
A "non-theistic cleric" would still be a theist, in the same sense that characters like Roy or Vaarsuvius are - they believe the gods of that universe exist, they worship them - or at least try not to offend them, they just aren't praying for spells from them.
Is anyone in the OOTSverse not a theist?

Well, it'd be a bit silly to be atheistic in OOTSworld (or in any D&D based world), since empirical proof of the gods' existence exists. Non-theistic certainly makes sense, as in character like Roy could acknowledge the gods' existence, but not really be all that religious.

[FrankNorman]

Well, it'd be a bit silly to be atheistic in OOTSworld (or in any D&D based world), since empirical proof of the gods' existence exists. Non-theistic certainly makes sense, as in character like Roy could acknowledge the gods' existence, but not really be all that religious.

Some real-world Atheist types I know could pull it off - they might, for example, claim that non-theistic clerics being able to get "divine" spells showed that the supposed "gods" weren't really necessary as an explanation for anything.
Obviously such a character will only appear in the story if it suits the plot.

[gia]

Some real-world Atheist types I know could pull it off - they might, for example, claim that non-theistic clerics being able to get "divine" spells showed that the supposed "gods" weren't really necessary as an explanation for anything.
Obviously such a character will only appear in the story if it suits the plot.

atheist, they aren't "gods", they are just extremely powerful wizards, all your praying goes to their egos and you get "miracles" in exchange, go ahead and suck up to those *******s, I won't.

[Peelee]

atheist, they aren't "gods", they are just extremely powerful wizards, all your praying goes to their egos and you get "miracles" in exchange, go ahead and suck up to those *******s, I won't.

At that point is there really a difference? "Oh, it's just incredibly powerful wizards that can also grant incredibly powerful abilities to those they worship them. They also created the world, and are immortal. But it's just incredibly powerful wizards." Isn't it just semantics then?

[Keltest]

At that point is there really a difference? "Oh, it's just incredibly powerful wizards that can also grant incredibly powerful abilities to those they worship them. They also created the world, and are immortal. But so just imagery powerful wizards." Isn't it just semantics then?

Yes, it is. And I seem to recall that there is a group of priests who think like that in Sigil. They are not especially well respected for their beliefs.

[factotum]

Yes, it is. And I seem to recall that there is a group of priests who think like that in Sigil. They are not especially well respected for their beliefs.

Not priests, specifically, but the Athar faction in Planescape are who you're thinking of. They don't deny the gods exist, but they *do* deny that there's anything special about them--as far as the Athar are concerned, gods are just unusually powerful outsiders who do not deserve worship.

[Keltest]

Not priests, specifically, but the Athar faction in Planescape are who you're thinking of. They don't deny the gods exist, but they *do* deny that there's anything special about them--as far as the Athar are concerned, gods are just unusually powerful outsiders who do not deserve worship.

And its not like theyre wrong, in the technical aspects of divinity. Whether they choose to worship a being for being powerful is their own choice. Though the Wall of the Faithless in the forgotten realms would probably influence that choice a bit, if they were actually subject to it.

[The Giant]

No one in the story is saying they are or are not a "theist" in the sense of believing gods exist. The religion is non-theistic, in that its religious precepts do not have anything to do with gods. It's much the same as non-dairy cheese—it doesn't mean the makers of the cheese don't acknowledge that diary exists elsewhere, there's just none of it here, even though the usual definition of cheese implies dairy.

If you want to get really technical, remember that the characters have no conception of a world without gods, and their language would have evolved accordingly. As a result, a word that maybe has one strict definition in our world may have a slightly different one in theirs. Likewise, the concept of a religion in the OOTS world has never included the idea (common in our world) that other religions are factually incorrect—they're merely different teams with different priorities. The closest example I can think of would be to think of them as we do nations: you can be a citizen of one country, or another, or no country, but there isn't anyone sane walking around saying that countries don't exist, or that my country exists and yours doesn't. "Belief" has little to no role to play in OOTS religion, and "faith" only goes so far as trusting that your god(dess) has better intentions than those other guys' god(desse)s and putting your life in his/her hands as a result.

If you want to get less technical, it was a lot quicker for me to use the perhaps-slightly-imprecise word "non-theistic" than devote two or three unnecessary panels expositing about the details of religions that don't follow a god when the entire concept was about to be rendered academic due to the character getting killed on the same page, and I was more than willing to accept a degree of inaccuracy in my word choice as a result (especially when 99% of the audience would understand what I meant anyway).

That being said, please avoid discussing real-world religious issues—including real-world atheism—as per our Rules of Posting.

[Grey Watcher]

No one in the story is saying they are or are not a "theist" in the sense of believing gods exist. The religion is non-theistic, in that its religious precepts do not have anything to do with gods. It's much the same as non-dairy cheese—it doesn't mean the makers of the cheese don't acknowledge that diary exists elsewhere, there's just none of it here, even though the usual definition of cheese implies dairy.

If you want to get really technical, remember that the characters have no conception of a world without gods, and their language would have evolved accordingly. As a result, a word that maybe has one strict definition in our world may have a slightly different one in theirs. Likewise, the concept of a religion in the OOTS world has never included the idea (common in our world) that other religions are factually incorrect—they're merely different teams with different priorities. The closest example I can think of would be to think of them as we do nations: you can be a citizen of one country, or another, or no country, but there isn't anyone sane walking around saying that countries don't exist, or that my country exists and yours doesn't. "Belief" has little to no role to play in OOTS religion, and "faith" only goes so far as trusting that your god(dess) has better intentions than those other guys' god(desse)s and putting your life in his/her hands as a result.

If you want to get less technical, it was a lot quicker for me to use the perhaps-slightly-imprecise word "non-theistic" than devote two or three unnecessary panels expositing about the details of religions that don't follow a god when the entire concept was about to be rendered academic due to the character getting killed on the same page, and I was more than willing to accept a degree of inaccuracy in my word choice as a result (especially when 99% of the audience would understand what I meant anyway).

That being said, please avoid discussing real-world religious issues—including real-world atheism—as per our Rules of Posting.

Of course, there's further hairs to be split between those who simply choose not to worship any gods, like the late Gontor, and those who think worshipping the gods is a Bad Idea, like the late Girard Draketooth. Still, as you say, no one in the OOTS world has denied that beings commonly known as "gods" exist.

[Rodin]

I'm sure this question has been answered on this forum before, but could someone please explain to a non-D&D player how non-theistic clerics even work?

I mean, in theory a cleric isn't doing anything with their own power. They're requesting a boon from their god, who decides to grant it because said cleric is going to act in a way beneficial to that god's interests in the world. The boon is granted while the cleric is praying/meditating and thus able to commune and ask the god for specific divine powers.

How does a cleric that doesn't believe in the gods get those powers? Or if basic-level belief is required, how does a cleric that doesn't follow any one god convince them to give spells consistently? And if he's somehow drawing energy from some other source, how does he know how to cast the spells given that they aren't really spells but divine boons? It's not like he spent 50 years in a tower studying how to cast Control Weather like Vaarsuvius did.

[Silverionmox]

I'm sure this question has been answered on this forum before, but could someone please explain to a non-D&D player how non-theistic clerics even work?

I mean, in theory a cleric isn't doing anything with their own power. They're requesting a boon from their god, who decides to grant it because said cleric is going to act in a way beneficial to that god's interests in the world. The boon is granted while the cleric is praying/meditating and thus able to commune and ask the god for specific divine powers.

How does a cleric that doesn't believe in the gods get those powers? Or if basic-level belief is required, how does a cleric that doesn't follow any one god convince them to give spells consistently? And if he's somehow drawing energy from some other source, how does he know how to cast the spells given that they aren't really spells but divine boons? It's not like he spent 50 years in a tower studying how to cast Control Weather like Vaarsuvius did.

They're just attuning their chakras to the vibration of the earth.. using a form of meditation rather than praying.

[The Giant]

This is how I have always understood it (and keep in mind this is a basic D&D answer, and not a statement about OOTS per se):

On the most basic level, the substance of D&D multiverse is able to be shaped by personal belief. This is one of the main tenets of the Planescape setting, where planar locations shift around based on the moral leanings of the population. Most mortals don't have enough belief to really accomplish anything on their own, though, but the gods do. So mortals become clerics of a god, and their devotion to the god allows the god to funnel that belief-power back to them in the form of concrete magical effects. The gods aren't really the source of the power as much as they are the catalyst to convert it into something useful. They can tinker with the power in the process, by dictating spells or withholding power or what have you.

Non-theistic clerics get their spells from a wide distributed network of beings with similar philosophies who can act as catalysts for the cleric—but because these are not centralized, none of them can exercise "veto power" over the cleric, nor is the cleric required to acknowledge their dominance (or even their existence). In Gontor's case, it may be that a powerful Earth Elemental is granting him his spells, but it could be a different one each day, or even some spells from one and some from another. If any of those elementals decide they don't like what he's doing with his magic, he just gets his spells from someone else that day. He may even be entirely oblivious to which elemental provides his spells at any point, and therefore is under no obligation to any of them. Unfortunately, that also means that no single elemental is going to be invested enough in Gontor to care what happens to him.

Analogy time! Regular clerics have an employer-employee relationship, where the employer (god) consumes the work (prayer) that the employee (cleric) generates and in return provides them with compensation (spells), where that compensation is actually generated by the work being done by the entire company (church). A non-theistic cleric is more like a freelance writer; they perform the work (believe in a philosophy) that they feel is right for them, and then sell that work to whatever client (quasi-deific elemental beings) is willing to pay (provide spells) for it. The freelancer has more flexibility than the employee to do as they wish, but they also do not have many benefits of steady employment.

[Deliverance]

Analogy time! Regular clerics have an employer-employee relationship, where the employer (god) consumes the work (prayer) that the employee (cleric) generates and in return provides them with compensation (spells), where that compensation is actually generated by the work being done by the entire company (church). A non-theistic cleric is more like a freelance writer; they perform the work (believe in a philosophy) that they feel is right for them, and then sell that work to whatever client (quasi-deific elemental beings) is willing to pay (provide spells) for it. The freelancer has more flexibility than the employee to do as they wish, but they also do not have many benefits of steady employment.

On the other hand, this analogy has the freelancer living in freelancer utopia, where the mere existence of a freelancer guarantees the presence of some client willing to pay him what he wants every day - a phenomenon not generally associated with freelancers.

Getting the same regular supply as the employee cleric strikes me as a problem with your analogy, because the predictable regular salary is the greatest difference between employees and freelancers where the benefits of steady employment are concerned.

Then again, no analogy is perfect, and this analogy is better than most I've seen that try to make understandable that bizarre D&D phenomenon of non-theistic clerics that get all the cleric mojo without the benefits or drawbacks of gods being involved.

[Vinyadan]

The freelancer has more flexibility than the employee to do as they wish, but they also do not have many benefits of steady employment.

Like a ThorPrayer©!

[mouser9169]

I'll use this opportunity to point out something very cool Giant did with this 'non-theistic' cleric:

He's explaining the 'rules' of the Godsmoot without subjecting us to an exposition dump where someone narrates off rule after rule.

We just learned that there are 'tiers' of people there. Some have to wait outside (or in the balcony). Others are inside but without the full protections of the Godsmoot. Then you have the 'fully protected' members.

We also learned that the deities are paying attention and may object to rules violations or mistreatment of their clerics (in whatever format they use to settle their grievances).

Storytelling at its finest!

[Bulldog Psion]

Like a ThorPrayer©!

I would think that the absence of those would be a benefit, also.

[Rodin]

Thank you Giant for an excellent explanation, that answers my question rather thoroughly. Getting the magic from something like an Earth Elemental never even occurred to me.

[drazen]

I wonder if part of this "correctly unfolding plot" means Gontor will be instantly resurrected using the staff, and then directed to attack other Godsmoot/Creed members. While HPoH cannot break the rules without (presumably) incurring the wrath of the gods, what are the consequences for the administrators who break the rules? A vampirized Gontor would presumably still be godless, and perhaps subject to different rules. And I guess since he was vampirized, he wouldn't be an administrator anymore, either.

[Reddish Mage]

This is how I have always understood it (and keep in mind this is a basic D&D answer, and not a statement about OOTS per se):

On the most basic level, the substance of D&D multiverse is able to be shaped by personal belief. This is one of the main tenets of the Planescape setting, where planar locations shift around based on the moral leanings of the population. Most mortals don't have enough belief to really accomplish anything on their own, though, but the gods do. So mortals become clerics of a god, and their devotion to the god allows the god to funnel that belief-power back to them in the form of concrete magical effects. The gods aren't really the source of the power as much as they are the catalyst to convert it into something useful. They can tinker with the power in the process, by dictating spells or withholding power or what have you.

Non-theistic clerics get their spells from a wide distributed network of beings with similar philosophies who can act as catalysts for the cleric—but because these are not centralized, none of them can exercise "veto power" over the cleric, nor is the cleric required to acknowledge their dominance (or even their existence). A non-theistic cleric is more like a freelance writer; they perform the work (believe in a philosophy) that they feel is right for them, and then sell that work to whatever client (quasi-deific elemental beings) is willing to pay (provide spells) for it.

So that's how it works in Planescape. It also means that if a "non-theistic" cleric was to choose a cause so abstract and unpopular, there wasn't enough of a network behind it, they wouldn't get spells. Only popular causes could have powerful clerics.