Divine Spellcasting and Neverwinter Nights

[Wids]

So one complaint that we all hear sometimes is how Divine spellcasters are supposedly better than Arcane spellcasters. Much of that perception lies in the limitations for each magic type, and how the two compare to each other.

At the fore of the issue is Arcane Spell Failure. A Cleric or a Paladin can march around in full plate armor while bearing a tower shield, and his spellcasting won't be hindered in the least. Wizards and Sorcerers can't even wear padded armor without running the risk of wasting spells, and the more armor they wear, the greater the risk becomes.

But the other side of the coin that people often don't see is that Arcane magic doesn't have any behavioral limitations or Alignment restrictions. A Wizard could undergo a series of massive Alignment shifts and slide all the way from Lawful Good to Chaotic Evil, and his spellcasting abilities wouldn't suffer in the slightest. Conversely, Clerics, Paladins, Druids and other Divine casters can't even change their Alignments by one or two steps before their gods take away their spells and other divine abilities (such as Lay on Hands or Wild Shape). And in the cases of certain deities, the consequences of forsaking the deity's dogma or casting the deity aside may be even more severe than that; there's a very good reason why the Church of Umberlee keeps all knowledge about the Drowning ceremony to themselves....

Granted, almost nobody rolls up a Divine spellcaster who is likely to betray his or her deity; if your Cleric is a Cleric of Eldath, then he probably has the mindset and personality which led him to become a Cleric of Eldath--and to be accepted as such, both by Eldath's temples and by Eldath herself--in the first place. Thus, the odds of a Cleric of Eldath going on a rage-fueled killing spree and flying right in the face of Eldath's dogma are pretty slim. So while straying from the Divine path isn't likely, it is possible, and if it's not possible enough, then the DM can always set up a catch-22 where any action that the spellcaster takes is bound to end in a violation of the deity's imposed code of conduct (or a violation of the natural order, in the cases of Druids and Rangers). "You want to seal the dam and stop the poison from flowing into the river? Then you'll have to use that magic grave dust to turn that ogre's corpse into a zombie and command him to help. Sorry, Mr. Druid, but it's the only way."

In tabletop, it's easy enough to enforce that limitation on Divine spellcasters. But while Neverwinter Nights has Arcane Spell Failure, it doesn't have any way to monitor the behavior of Divine spellcasters and decide whether or not a given Divine spellcaster has crossed any lines; after all, how can a computer determine whether or not a Cleric of Mask has been too honest with her enemies? So this judgement must fall to whichever DM is there to witness the character's actions.

Unfortunately, it also seems that Neverwinter Nights doesn't give DMs the means to impose these limitations on Divine spellcasters. If a Paladin of Tyr submits to greed, accepts a thief's bribe and lets the thief go free and escape justice, how can a DM stop the player from filling his Paladin's spell slots or remove the Paladin's ability to Smite Evil or to Lay on Hands? Is docking Experience really the only thing that a DM can do in such a case?

Discuss, if you will.

[minion]

in that specific case, one can give/take evil/chaos points. in this case, i would take "lawful points" from the PC, and no small amount. not necessarily enough to cease to be able to take paladin levels the first time it happened, but enough to make it clear someone is paying attention and s/he risks losing that ability permanently.

i realize that's uniquely useful when dealing w/paladins, but at least that's pretty easily covered.

for clerics, yes, docking xp (and presumably changing alignment as well, whether or not the player particularly cares) is the only noteworthy penalty that makes much sense. there are more drastic measures one could take, however, including reducing the PC's wisdom to alter their ability to cast spells, but... that would likely be taken very poorly by any player who's already willing to ignore their PC's alignment/dogma long enough or often enough to make needing something like this possible.

[Wids]

Ah, if only there were a way to impose Alignment restrictions on individual Clerics, a la "This is a Cleric of Sune. If he/she ceases to be Chaotic Good, Neutral Good or Chaotic Neutral, he/she may no longer gain Levels as a Cleric". With a restriction like that, Good/Evil points and Law/Chaos points would be useful as consequences for a Cleric's deviations from the chosen deity's path. And even the non-roleplaying powergamers might be given pause at the threat of no longer gaining Cleric levels (unless, of course, they're those annoying twinks who take one entire Level of Cleric just to have Turn Undead, all armor proficiencies and/or the ability to use Cleric-only magic items).

On the other hand, the decent roleplayers who set out to incorporate that betrayal or redemption into their character's story won't object to denying themselves the use of cleric spells and Turn/Rebuke Undead, especially if there's the promise of RP XP involved. If the character's premise is something along the lines of "This is a Cleric of Bane who sickens of his patron's injustice after it hits too close to home, and he seeks a way to escape Bane's church and turn to Tyr for protection from his former comrades," then the player understands that Bane will not take that abandonment lightly and that Bane certainly won't fuel the cleric's betrayal with his own power. Everyone who owns Neverwinter Nights has surely heard of Aribeth's story of betraying Tyr for darker forces over a perceived injustice (and thus going from Paladin to ex-Paladin to Blackguard), and some people might try to follow in Aribeth's footsteps. For those characters, the DMs surely wouldn't object to the betrayal and might even help it along...as long as the player's responsible about the whole mess.

Druids, Paladins and Blackguards do come packaged with their own Alignment restrictions and thus can be affected by Alignment points, but what about Rangers? They might even be harder to govern than Clerics are, seeing as Rangers don't even need to have deities or restrictive codes of behavior; they can just hide behind the old "Nature is indifferent to Good, Evil, Law or Chaos" excuse. So as long as they're not destroying the wilderness, they're in the clear. But if a Ranger were to deliberately unleash a power that destroys an entire mountain just to kill all the kobolds inside, I guess we're back to docking Experience or reducing Wisdom.

[828stingstingneo]

I believe in the Forgotten Realms campaign setting even Rangers receive their spells from a deity. As far as I know, it is impossible in the campaign setting to cast divine spells without a patron deity (although it might be possible to have a patron and be unaware of who it is?).

[Wids]

This may be one of those situations where Forgotten Realms and D&D Third Edition butt heads. Like with paladins, for example. Paladins in D&D 3rd (on which NWN is based) need not devote themselves to a deity; devotion to one or more virtues (rather like the Avatar in the Ultima universe is) is also acceptable, ie. a Paladin of Sacrifice, a Paladin of Justice and so on. Paladins in the Forgotten Realms, on the other hand, apparently must devote themselves to a deity in most cases...

...oh. It looks like Fourth Edition got its mangy hands on this page, too. Well, while I've always felt that non-Lawful Good deities should have their own varieties of champions, I can't agree that those champions should all be paladins. The word "paladin" carries with it the airs of virtue and honor, traits which should not be identified with the champions of Neutral Evil or Chaotic Evil gods.

Anyway, rangers and paladins appear to be in the same boat when it comes to Forgotten Realms: though neither one needs devotion to a deity in order to gain divine powers, the ones who don't are in a tiny minority.

[luckbringer]

FR specific rules trump 3rd ed rules. Thus every paladin and ranger must have a patron deity rather than devoting themselves to abstract concepts.

[Wids]

So a Faithless ranger definitely wouldn't work, then.

[luckbringer]

They can be a ranger, but they should not be able to cast spells as they don't have a deity to grant them spells.

[828stingstingneo]

Sept 12, 2011 8:26:55 GMT -5 Wids said:

Anyway, rangers and paladins appear to be in the same boat when it comes to Forgotten Realms: though neither one needs devotion to a deity in order to gain divine powers, the ones who don't are in a tiny minority.

I want to add that although this page does say, "nearly all rangers worship a god" [emphasis added], it also mentions eladrin which is a 4th edition thing. Wiki has changed many of its pages to reflect 4th edition which parts vastly from 3.0 and 3.5 upon which NWN mechanics are based. Because of this, I think we should stick with 3.0/3.5 rules. As luckbringer says, a patron deity is required for casting according to 3rd edition Forgotten Realms rules.

[Wids]

But unfortunately, with that Wiki, it's kind of hard to tell what's 4th Edition and what's 3rd Edition that got slipped into some 3rd Ed supplement that I never read. I wish the Wiki was a bit more clear on differentiating between the various editions of D&D; some of their stuff might even be leftovers from 1st Ed and 2nd Ed/AD&D. Like Loviatar's entry. I still have her in my old Deities and Demigods book (and yes, it's one of the first-run ones with Cthulhu and Elric in them. So I win, internet! ;D ), so Loviatar's older than 3rd Ed by far. And she's just one of many. How much of her Wiki entry is useless 4th Ed stuff, and how much isn't?

[okoserce]

I'm new to your server but have some some knowledge with FR and will alter this post as soon as I track down the relevant source information. I do know there is some information that comes out of FR that points out the possibility of divine magic gained by the following of virtues..say a cleric with Law domain gets his power directly from the forces of Law. This is not to be confused with Ur-Priests who actually steal their magic from deities.