D&D 3E/3.5 On Deities weapons in 3.5 edition

[AuraSeer]

But I can see it being nonsensical that when an acolyte cleric is being trained in the mace and crossbow and shortspear, his superiors dont train him in the use of their patrons favored weapon?

The examples you named are simple weapons. They have that name because they're easy to learn. Even I can fire a crossbow reasonably well, after maybe a day's practice. Learning to wield a broadsword effectively took a lot longer.

A cleric must be able to defend himself, so he gets some basic weapons training. But fighting isn't his primary job, so he doesn't spend very much time practicing for it. That's why he only learns the simple weapons.

If the deity thinks weaponry is important, then the cleric has access to the War domain. If not, the church doesn't train acolytes with the favored weapon, and a cleric who wants to know it anyway will have to train with it on his own time. That means he has less time to learn other stuff (i.e., he has to use up a feat slot on MWP).

And what about deities like Eilistraee? she's not a war goddess and doesnt have the war Domain but she is the godess of swordplay...and skill with swords is a tenet of her religion. And theres quite a few like her.

This would be a problem with the deity description, not with the core rules. If this particular omission bothers you, give that deity the War domain, or perhaps a custom "Sword" domain if you prefer. Don't randomly grant new abilities to all clerics everywhere.

 

[Merlion]

The examples you named are simple weapons. They have that name because they're easy to learn. Even I can fire a crossbow reasonably well, after maybe a day's practice. Learning to wield a broadsword effectively took a lot longer.

A cleric must be able to defend himself, so he gets some basic weapons training. But fighting isn't his primary job, so he doesn't spend very much time practicing for it. That's why he only learns the simple weapons.

True. But you missed the point. Clerics are devoted to there deity and try to emulate him/her/it. So to me it stands to reason that they would train, and be trained in them regardless of diffaculty. And, I was addressing another poster who said he felt the idea of clerics being autoproficient in there deities favored weapon was nonsensical. I was stating a reason why to mean it seems very sensical.

If the deity thinks weaponry is important, then the cleric has access to the War domain. If not, the church doesn't train acolytes with the favored weapon, and a cleric who wants to know it anyway will have to train with it on his own time. That means he has less time to learn other stuff (i.e., he has to use up a feat slot on MWP).


This would be a problem with the deity description, not with the core rules. If this particular omission bothers you, give that deity the War domain, or perhaps a custom "Sword" domain if you prefer. Don't randomly grant new abilities to all clerics everywhere.

A problem with the deity descreption? why is it a problem for the descpretion to describe the deity being the way he/she/it is in game and in the stories? Swordwork is part of Eilistraees portfolio..but not war..so she doesnt get the war domain. A Sword domain is actualy probably a good idea and I'm half surprised they didnt do one in FR.

again I am NOT saying that they SHOULD give all clerics autoprof with there deities favored weapon. I'm saying I do think it WOULD be a good idea and it certainly WOULD make sense.

 

[Merlion]

That didnt come out right I am still geting used to this board lets try again


True. But you missed the point. Clerics are devoted to there deity and try to emulate him/her/it. So to me it stands to reason that they would train, and be trained in them regardless of diffaculty. And, I was addressing another poster who said he felt the idea of clerics being autoproficient in there deities favored weapon was nonsensical. I was stating a reason why to mean it seems very sensical.

 

[the_mighty_agrippa]

it's not a question of where he grips it...

deities that place strong emphasis on certain weapons have as much folklore and dogma attached to the weapon as real religious significance.

take eilistraee for example:

despite a martial focus, she is not a martial goddess. that is, she is tireless force for harmony, for overcoming predjudice and inspiring dance and song.

the sword is an add-on. if i was playing a priestess of eilistraee and i wanted to opt out of the philosophy classes for weapons training, i would use my feats to build in that area. conversly, if i was interested in divination and avoiding conflicts before they happened, i would concentrate my feats and skills towards social talents and metamagic.

not every priest of tempus is an axe wielding sociopath and not every priestess of the red knight is a master swordman. the church of tempus has chaplains as well as warmasters and the red knight prizes strategy over brute force. since you get a choice in domains, feats and skills, you can customize your cleric as needed.

 

[Merlion]

Not argueing any of those points. and I'm not going to get into an arguement about the specfics of Eilistraee's faith and get off the general subject.
I just agree that it would be a nice idea, and makes perfect sense in-world.

 

[AuraSeer]

I don't think I missed your point, but if you don't like that argument, here's another.

Clerics are already one of the stronger, more well-rounded class in the game. They have great spell selection, good BAB and saves, flexible domain abilities, and so forth. On top of all that, do you really think it's balanced to give every cleric an additional bonus feat for free?

 

[Corinth]

I see no reason as to why clerics should not receive proficiency in their patron god's favored weapon, in addition to the boilerplate set of weapon and armor proficiencies.

 

[Merlion]

I was never talking about balance. And again, I dont neccsarily think it should be done, and I know its not going to be done officialy. I was mainly responding to the other posters notion that it was nonsensical...since in fact the way it is could be easily seen as nonsensical from an in world perspective.
Yes, a free feat at 1st level for clerics would be drasticaly unbalanced.
A free weapon proficiency(if there deities weapon isnt one they can use already) would quite possibly be a bit overpowered, although I dont think it would be breaking.
Its just an idea that I agree would be neat, and make lots of in-world sense.

 

[AuraSeer]

I see no reason as to why clerics should not receive proficiency in their patron god's favored weapon, in addition to the boilerplate set of weapon and armor proficiencies.

Game balance. See my previous post, directly above yours.

 

[Spatzimaus]

Clerics have a lot of style problems, and the weapon proficiency thing is only one of them. In the 3E rules, your domains just didn't seem to matter much, since most of your spell slots were filled with general Cleric spells, and you swapped for cure/inflict spells.

I'm hoping they make some changes here in 3.5E, but I'm not going to hold my breath. IMC we'll probably continue to use our modified Cleric class instead. Of course, discussion of that sort of thing should go in the House Rules forum.

I just find it ironic that the classes they're changing in 3.5E happen to be exactly the same ones my group rebuilt for our world (Barbarian, Monk, Ranger, and to a lesser extent Bard and Paladin). I'm guessing these are the most often modified classes in everyone else's worlds, too.