|
Post by Lady Frost on Jun 12, 2019 14:11:38 GMT -5
I'm not going to put this in the DM Q&A because I want others to be able to comment freely, that said, this -is- directed towards the DM team.
I've been a strong opponent to the previous cleric change of faith policy, so seeing that the DM Team has considered a revision is positive for me, however, I'm still disappointed in the revision. Why does XP continue to be the sacrifice players and characters must suffer? Yes, while it controls casting level, it also controls a vast number of things that should -not- be affected, such as bab, many feats, skills, hitpoints, and on.
The change of faith for a character -especially a cleric- is an extremely big deal; most characters are very set in their ways. Now, on top of that near impossibility for converting a cleric, you have to convince the player to be willing to lose - in many cases - years of progress. We've dumbed down death penalties many times due to the 'harshness' of xp loss, we allow OOC raises because "people shouldn't be penalized for RP", yet for some of the most intense, deep, RP (faith conversation or fallen paladins) we force extremely strong xp penalties.
I've always been open to the RP of Zodika's faith being able to be changed under the right circumstances, but when I consider all the things she'd lose that don't make any IC sense, it greatly detracts from my OOC willingness. Even if she kept the same alignment and domains, Zodika would lose many years worth of xp, which is where most of her persuade feats and skill points come from, yet despite that, she'd still be able to call on 9th level and epic spells from her new god. That seems backward.
My suggestion is to not force any xp penalties, but to instead impose lost spellcasting during the conversion and heavy spellcasting restrictions after the conversation, which gets reduced over time. The severity can be decided by the DM team on a case by case basis, perhaps based similarly to the new method. If it can't be enforced mechanically, then characters that break the set rules (cast beyond their given capacity) face being denied all spellcasting abilities, being excommunicated from their faith, or even player banning. I think that's a far more fair and realistic path than forcing character level reductions which punishes players for potentially very deep and important RP choices.
|
|
|
Post by uriziel on Jun 12, 2019 15:23:36 GMT -5
I feel somewhere in the middle for this, but I actually would prefer the rule as "You need to be DM approved to change religion as a priest" and here's why.
Page 10 of Faiths and Pantheons makes specific mention against this. "The task of granting divine spells places very little demand on a deity. It is the training, skill, and dedication of the spellcaster that makes preparing and casting a divine spell possible."
A priests power is not solely from the deity. In fact, most of the power of a cleric(or other divine caster) comes from themselves first, as well as their faith in their diety. I feel a great metaphor for divine magic is how arches are constructed in real life. Everyone says the keystone is the most important part of an arch, but it's just another part. The arch isn't going to work if you take any of the stones out. A diety is the key stone, everyone thinks it's the absolute most important part divine casting, but in truth the cleric is shouldering a huge portion of that burden.
That being said, say you're changing faiths, or even doing stuff that your god would not like. Especially an epic cleric, your gods going to notice. Faerunian gods are largely fickle and petty, with very few gods being caring and understanding. You start doing unjust things, Tyr's gonna slap you. You start easing the suffering of people, Loviatars gonna get mad. Depending on how mad they get, they may start to deny you spells or send people (or outsider emmisaries) to reel you in.
The reason why I don't like the level hit is because all things said and done, you aren't losing your own strength or knowledge. But I do think that there needs to be a temporary power loss, as the current deity starts to deny spells and you start becoming accustomed to the new requirements of the new deity.
I do like your thoughts on how you'd lose spellcasting ability for a time, which can be accomplished by lowering the persons wisdom score to 9 temporarily with an item, and giving them an item with a bonus to will save equal to the lost points. Could be done over time, and result in some pretty neat ideas.
My only concern is with the whole redemption/corruption character arcs. Sometimes they can be well done, but often times you end up with Anakin in episode three saying that from his perspective the jedi are evil after wrinkles told him "Hey, do it." Of course, that's why it requires DM approval, to make sure it doesn't end with a collective facepalm. This definitely could just be my own bias, don't expect anyone else to hold it, I just have watched some really bad redemption/corruption rp over the years (still cringing over how badly I did it as a 14 year old years ago.)
|
|
|
Post by lucid on Jun 12, 2019 15:25:59 GMT -5
To me there should not be a plan nor a policy for changing faiths. Each individual case should be examined individually. This is not a “one size fits all” thing, but should depend on history and context. Some could involve XP loss as you are sacrificing to make the shift, a great testing away and subsequent healing, but others may not, and if the story was done right, some could see an XP gain. Some could make the transition seamlessly, some should probably have some wrack.
I know how much more Chaotic I am than most of you so I am always more comfortable with more Spirit and less Word, but this seems like it is not something the Word will ever pin down. Too many people, too many variables. It’s like expecting an answer key for the Essay section of the test, all you can really write are Expected Content and list a few examples, beyond that it is always going to be a judgement call.
|
|
|
Post by Southpaw on Jun 12, 2019 16:22:27 GMT -5
I think a cleric changing faiths has less impact on other players than it does on the one making the change. The only way it affects another player is if it gets to be so commonplace or poorly done that it provokes the aforementioned collective facepalm, or so prohibitive that the players of characters you’d love to convert are unwilling to do it because of the cost. So I think enough hassle to make it so it won’t be done lightly is in order, but enormous penalties may be a bit much. To me, plausibly following natural role play and letting your character be affected by things should be generally rewarded in some way, not punished.
I could see shutting off xp gain for a time, if it could be done, and/or specific quests to prove commitment to the new deity to be done without special powers. That would be rewarding for the RP generated.
|
|
|
Post by tingly on Jun 12, 2019 16:50:21 GMT -5
XP is very abstract and puts the player far away from feeling the nature of the change. Spellcasting failure certainly is closer, failing the ideal case of close DM attention and heavy IC trials to pass.
|
|
|
Post by malclave on Jun 12, 2019 18:02:58 GMT -5
I feel somewhere in the middle for this, but I actually would prefer the rule as "You need to be DM approved to change religion as a priest" and here's why. Page 10 of Faiths and Pantheons makes specific mention against this. "The task of granting divine spells places very little demand on a deity. It is the training, skill, and dedication of the spellcaster that makes preparing and casting a divine spell possible." The FRCS actually gives an explicit method for changing deities. I would also apply it to Divine Champions. So, no spells, domain powers, or channeling divine energy. Things like a paladin's bonus to saves or a druid's immunity to poison would also be lost. DM approval would kick in because the character would have to go on a special quest to get those abilities back.
|
|
|
Post by uriziel on Jun 12, 2019 18:08:44 GMT -5
I feel somewhere in the middle for this, but I actually would prefer the rule as "You need to be DM approved to change religion as a priest" and here's why. Page 10 of Faiths and Pantheons makes specific mention against this. "The task of granting divine spells places very little demand on a deity. It is the training, skill, and dedication of the spellcaster that makes preparing and casting a divine spell possible." The FRCS actually gives an explicit method for changing deities. I would also apply it to Divine Champions. So, no spells, domain powers, or channeling divine energy. Things like a paladin's bonus to saves or a druid's immunity to poison would also be lost. DM approval would kick in because the character would have to go on a special quest to get those abilities back. My point is that they keep other things, such as AB, normal class saving throws, HP, etc. Losing levels means you lose things that hit things not given to the character by the deity. Secondary point is that the progression to losing ones faith is something that would have repercussions prior to the actual faith change. Reducing spellcasting until that point would very commonly be part of that repercussion.
|
|
|
Post by xeneize on Jun 13, 2019 6:55:03 GMT -5
Faith changing is a huge deal, especially to those of us that play hardcore and true and must put up with the people that claim deity changes overnight. While i am not in favor of the level hit, i am in favor of something being done.
The first cleric i ever rolled was back in a custom setting; (hi to all my empires of eternity buddies). He did things that went against his god s commandments and he ended up having his levels converted to fighter.(mind you this was also a setting where dms were expected to take over the mantle of an active deity to moderate as needed).
I personally think that was a good idea, if this line of thinking must continue, i prefer the 20% cleric level loss be replaced with fighter levels, or whatever non-divine class fits that character, over straight level loss.
My cents.
|
|
|
Post by Dobian on Jun 13, 2019 8:49:22 GMT -5
Page 10 of Faiths and Pantheons makes specific mention against this. "The task of granting divine spells places very little demand on a deity. It is the training, skill, and dedication of the spellcaster that makes preparing and casting a divine spell possible." So basically the same thing as saying if an NBA basketball player converted from Christianity to Islam his free throw percentage would suddenly drop from 80% to 50%. I get the rest of what you all have said. If a character converts to a new deity there should always be a little DM-run story attached to it involving them going through some test or temporary hardship for abandoning their old god.
|
|
|
Post by uriziel on Jun 13, 2019 9:57:39 GMT -5
Page 10 of Faiths and Pantheons makes specific mention against this. "The task of granting divine spells places very little demand on a deity. It is the training, skill, and dedication of the spellcaster that makes preparing and casting a divine spell possible." So basically the same thing as saying if an NBA basketball player converted from Christianity to Islam his free throw percentage would suddenly drop from 80% to 50%. I get the rest of what you all have said. If a character converts to a new deity there should always be a little DM-run story attached to it involving them going through some test or temporary hardship for abandoning their old god. Not unless that basketball player gets his ability to sink freethrows from god. The best real world analogy would be a US lawyer, licensed in CA trying to practice law in NV. You might get a special dispensation, but more than likely you have no power there.
|
|
|
Post by Warlord on Jun 13, 2019 11:06:17 GMT -5
I'm not going to put this in the DM Q&A because I want others to be able to comment freely, that said, this -is- directed towards the DM team.I've been a strong opponent to the previous cleric change of faith policy, so seeing that the DM Team has considered a revision is positive for me, however, I'm still disappointed in the revision. Why does XP continue to be the sacrifice players and characters must suffer? Yes, while it controls casting level, it also controls a vast number of things that should -not- be affected, such as bab, many feats, skills, hitpoints, and on. A level 20 cleric incurring a 20% loss is 4 levels. That puts the PC at 16 cleric - clerics are best at 15+ - I think the dip and loss for the cleric is rather negligible considering the advantage kept. The goldilocks zone of XP is between 10 - 20 anyway. If you're level 10 that's 2 levels, keeping a PC 1 level shy of +3 buffs. If the PC is level 12that's still +4 material ... If the cleric incurred a 40% loss @ level 20, that's level 12 - placing them just 3 levels shy of +5 material. All while getting to keep the gear? I think "mechanic impact" is ... playful at best knowing the utter potential of reacquiring the XP. I wouldn't express this as suffering I'd probably consult a player to simply make a new character in the foremost. At a point of high enough levels, in a clerics long career, to reconsider their faith - while feasible in the realms - may just end up not being feasible mechanically in NwN, I admit, but I'd just consult the player to make a new PC. Now that a rubric is on the table, older pc's that may want to convert, know what they're getting into. If I want to someday make Ragnhild follow Tempus instead of the red knight, I rather like the math favors for re-acquiring any literal XP loss. The plus and minus of such is hardly detrimental knowing the value of a consistent result I'll be getting as a player with the rubric. What stuff would she loose? You keep your gear, the estate, and other achievements. If anything it's an incentive to revisit some oldie places and challenge things anew to "get back up to level," if someone of her calibur wanted. Not to mention, don't all of us in the 1% of the 30's always complain we ain't got nobody to travel with anyway? I am trying to displace my own capacity of gargantuan playtime too in the assessment. I just .. I mean .. it's a cleric. Clerics never really hurt for struggling to recop such a mechanical loss. The biggest impact from the total possible value of loss will be astounding, but I think statistically speaking, the average PC won't be experiencing such gargantuan impacts. Most law people are inclined to stay within the law oriented deities, and alignment axis therein, so on and so forth. Chaotic Good Helga going to Lawful Neutral or Lawful Evil deity with complete domain shifting is by far a ludacris notion of a most rare value. I'd sooner consult such players to, again, maybe just consider a whole new PC. Evolution wise, if that extreme does occur, the player of said character is likely low enough level anyway to remain in the goldilocks zone of good xp. I rather like the change myself!
|
|
|
Post by malclave on Jun 13, 2019 13:16:21 GMT -5
That got me to thinking (or at least what passes for thinking inside my head)... if there is a level penalty, perhaps it could be halved if the two deities share a patron/ servant relationship. This would only apply to the 20% for the actual deity change, not any of the other bullet point items.
Ideally, a character would not need to take the penalty for an alignment change. The player would have hopefully notified the DMs of a desire to change alignment, allowing them to monitor the character and award alignment points to change the character to Neutral along the G/E and/or L/C axis as needed, before the actual deity change.
|
|
|
Post by Dobian on Jun 13, 2019 13:32:44 GMT -5
Not unless that basketball player gets his ability to sink freethrows from god. The best real world analogy would be a US lawyer, licensed in CA trying to practice law in NV. You might get a special dispensation, but more than likely you have no power there. Yeah what I meant was, it would be ridiculous to expect an athlete to suffer a drop in their performance because they switched religions, and that D&D rule or commentary likewise says a cleric shouldn't suffer diminished performance from switching.
|
|
|
Post by xeneize on Jun 13, 2019 15:11:26 GMT -5
Not unless that basketball player gets his ability to sink freethrows from god. The best real world analogy would be a US lawyer, licensed in CA trying to practice law in NV. You might get a special dispensation, but more than likely you have no power there. Yeah what I meant was, it would be ridiculous to expect an athlete to suffer a drop in their performance because they switched religions, and that D&D rule or commentary likewise says a cleric shouldn't suffer diminished performance from switching.
We are in a fantasy world where gods are a very present thing everyone can see; it is illogical to use real life examples to compare. God won't come down to pay my bills; it isn't unheard of that God will put food in your fantasy character's table from time to time; or his servants(they can create it).
|
|
|
Post by uriziel on Jun 13, 2019 15:14:41 GMT -5
Yeah what I meant was, it would be ridiculous to expect an athlete to suffer a drop in their performance because they switched religions, and that D&D rule or commentary likewise says a cleric shouldn't suffer diminished performance from switching.
We are in a fantasy world where gods are a very present thing everyone can see; it is illogical to use real life examples to compare. God won't come down to pay my bills; it isn't unheard of that God will put food in your fantasy character's table from time to time; or his servants(they can create it).
In this case it's alright, cause they're not wrong: Physical attributes are not affected by changing a diety for divine spellcasters.
|
|
|
Post by gathera on Jun 13, 2019 15:14:52 GMT -5
A cleric to me is the tip of the pinnacle of the faithful. Someone who has been gifted the powers of the divine. There can be many followers of a faith; dutiful pious and even zealots of that religion who will likely never experience the touch of the divine save by rare miraculous occurrences. To denounce your faith should have a major impact on the character. You as the cleric have taken it upon yourself to turn your back on your god/goddess. This must have consequences.
Now I do agree in principle with Lady Frost. Ideally to have all spells denied for a goodly time is an excellent consequence. However this isn't pen and paper. I am uncertain whether such a thing could be mechanistically done in Neverwinter Nights the game and whether it would place an impact on the server performance. I suspect that it can not be easily accomplished nor without server performance issues. What I do see is the loss of level as reflecting a easy game mechanical solution to the punishment for the loss of spell abilities. At lower level you can not access the same spells. As time passes i.e. you gain xp the new god/goddess chooses to grant you the spells that you once had. It might not be an ideal fix but it does reflect and incorporate the sentiment of loss of spell ability and its slow regain.
Now as player of one certain faith in-game I have been blinded and maimed (Twice maimed) for just failing to do something requested. Slap that particular goddess in the face by turning to another, well yikes *laughing*
|
|
|
Post by Lady Frost on Jun 13, 2019 15:47:30 GMT -5
Warlord, First, I think it's based off xp, not levels, so losing 50% xp at level 31 would still leave a character at level 22 or so. However, don't want a character in the goldilocks zone for leveling. I don't want a character I have to go level at all anymore. I don't play Zodika for experience points. I want to be able to roleplay out of my roleplay decisions, and not have to try to roleplay for 200,000+ lost xp which would probably take over 175 RL years. Your suggestion to make a new character instead of going through the RP of changing faiths doesn't make any sense. If I want the same character with a new faith, making a new character doesn't give me that. What she would lose are lots of stats that don't make sense for her to lose. Her social stats are part of her greatest arsenal of weapons inside her political world and those shouldn't change based on her changing faiths unless it's directly related to something her god provides, which, in this case, I don't see that it is. Even if Zoe switches to Bane, she'd lose 40% of her xp. It's a massive OOC obstacle that keeps characters from changing faiths. RP-wise, I'd be open to it, but her level and stats are more important than allowing rp which could see hundreds of thousands of xp removed. I think every cleric wanting to change faiths should be ruled upon on a case by case basis. I feel like you're just trying to make me feel better rather than directly addressing why issues make sense or don't.
|
|
|
Post by xeneize on Jun 13, 2019 15:48:29 GMT -5
We are in a fantasy world where gods are a very present thing everyone can see; it is illogical to use real life examples to compare. God won't come down to pay my bills; it isn't unheard of that God will put food in your fantasy character's table from time to time; or his servants(they can create it).
In this case it's alright, cause they're not wrong: Physical attributes are not affected by changing a diety for divine spellcasters.
They can though, and that is my point.
|
|
|
Post by uriziel on Jun 13, 2019 15:54:20 GMT -5
In this case it's alright, cause they're not wrong: Physical attributes are not affected by changing a diety for divine spellcasters.
They can though, and that is my point.
Well, rule wise, no they cannot. A deity could smite you, curse you, and all other manner of things. But there's already rules in place for switching deities. Bane might blow you up, but he ain't taking out your levels if you decide to go follow Cyric.
|
|
|
Post by xeneize on Jun 13, 2019 16:25:40 GMT -5
They can though, and that is my point.
Well, rule wise, no they cannot. A deity could smite you, curse you, and all other manner of things. But there's already rules in place for switching deities. Bane might blow you up, but he ain't taking out your levels if you decide to go follow Cyric.
They can modify your body in a way it will affect your skills. Plenty examples out there of heroes and fallen heroes with past and present deities too. Still my point is that it is laughable to try to talk fantasy religion with real religion, by the way isn't there a rule that prevents one from discussing such real-life topics?
Point.
|
|
|
Post by uriziel on Jun 13, 2019 18:30:16 GMT -5
Well, rule wise, no they cannot. A deity could smite you, curse you, and all other manner of things. But there's already rules in place for switching deities. Bane might blow you up, but he ain't taking out your levels if you decide to go follow Cyric.
They can modify your body in a way it will affect your skills. Plenty examples out there of heroes and fallen heroes with past and present deities too. Still my point is that it is laughable to try to talk fantasy religion with real religion, by the way isn't there a rule that prevents one from discussing such real-life topics?
Point.
Hence they can: Curse you, blow you up etc. Being maimed doesn't remove experience. It grants penalties.
|
|
|
Post by Dobian on Jun 14, 2019 9:16:49 GMT -5
The point is, the talent to cast divine spells has to do with a person's skill and talent at manipulating divine energy, not the fact that they pray to some god. So they can switch gods and still be just as good at manipulating divine energy. And a god they used to pray to can get pissed off and punish them for it, and a DM can roleplay that and decide what that punishment is. But a permanent xp hit to their ability simply from the act of switching, even if their god is completely unaware of it, isn't consistent with that blurb written about it in the D&D lore.
|
|
|
Post by shivers on Jun 14, 2019 13:09:35 GMT -5
i agree with you southpaw.
this has no impact on any other player - so why have a punishing xp hit?
the server is rule heavy enough as it is. to me, this is an interesting line of rp- and given it is an rp server, i hope the admins will reconsider.
|
|
|
Post by Dobian on Jun 14, 2019 19:59:04 GMT -5
If a rule causes players to not do something, like not have their character switch gods, then the rule needs to be revised. Unless you are perfectly fine with players never roleplaying switching gods or whatever else.
|
|
|
Post by gathera on Jun 14, 2019 23:08:20 GMT -5
If a rule causes players to not do something, like not have their character switch gods, then the rule needs to be revised. Unless you are perfectly fine with players never roleplaying switching gods or whatever else. Most often a change in faith is to the extreme. I do think for a more minor shift say Ilamter to Torm the penalties should be mitigated. The question then is what is an effective penalty that can be instituted and (a big "and" here) can be implemented by the game mechanics. I like Lady Frost's idea of spell loss. it is simply I do not think it can be done mechanistically by the Neverwinter night's game engine. No the loss of levels isn't ideal but well other solutions please then. If anything thinking on the matter I do believe that change away from the faith should be taken into account. That is how different are the two ethos. For example lets use a Loviatarian cleric. A change to Bane well not such a big deal. They are faiths that work together. A change say to Asmodeus a bit more of an issue. Its of similar alignment but of a faith not co-operative. A change to Ilamterian then yes ramifications. The rule I believe was brought in not for the small changes in faith but the more the radial swings. For changes of such magnitude there to my mind must be consequences. So I will ask then if not loss of levels what?
|
|
|
Post by simo2003 on Jun 15, 2019 5:48:44 GMT -5
A change of patron deity should be DM-approved and ideally come with a DM-run event, as per the description Uriziel noted from the FRCS. IMHO, that's literally all that should happen.
Were I running said event as a DM, I'd want to see RP leading up to the event consistent with a cleric losing their faith in one god and falling into the faithful of another. I haven't read any FR novels, but there have been a few clerics that have done this in those books (didn't Midnight and Kelemvor have a cleric buddy who switched?) - simply put, it makes a good story, and that's all it should be on FRC too.
|
|
|
Post by gathera on Jun 16, 2019 6:13:17 GMT -5
A change of patron deity should be DM-approved and ideally come with a DM-run event, as per the description Uriziel noted from the FRCS. IMHO, that's literally all that should happen. Were I running said event as a DM, I'd want to see RP leading up to the event consistent with a cleric losing their faith in one god and falling into the faithful of another. I haven't read any FR novels, but there have been a few clerics that have done this in those books (didn't Midnight and Kelemvor have a cleric buddy who switched?) - simply put, it makes a good story, and that's all it should be on FRC too. Believe me, I do agree with you. It is a great premise for a story and can be very rewarding for the player and others involved to have such RP on the server. I would even suspect, my opinion only, that the DM's might even mitigate or even possibly wave the penalty for a really good story arc. The issue is to put the brakes on more flippant changes. Yes it has happened on FRC in the past at least once to my knowledge and likely more times than that even. Spurious near random changes. For a long involved evolution over time I do have a certain faith in the powers that be, for the matter to be noted and discussed by the DM team. Just because the axe is held over ones neck doesn't mean it necessary must fall but yes sadly I believe the axe must be seen.
|
|
|
Post by simo2003 on Jun 16, 2019 7:15:28 GMT -5
That's why it should require DM approval - there wouldn't be any 'flippant changes' if this was the case. I should add that switching faiths should happen once per character, ever. In fact, a second switch would, I think, require leaving the cleric class altogether - what god would want so fairweather a priest? This would require a rebuild to, say, Fighter, with an equivalent AB to the original cleric, if it got DM approval at all.
|
|
|
Post by Southpaw on Jun 16, 2019 7:52:57 GMT -5
Spell casting can be shut off with an item that can't be removed to simulate the effect, and lowers wisdom to the point that spells can't be cast. But honestly, if a player has the honesty, integrity, and commitment to role play to allow their character to be affected by other PC's actions or story events, and notify the DM team of the change to begin with, I'd personally trust them not to be breaking the requirements of not casting spells for a while. In fact, to a player who is in that mode of thinking, they may actually find it fun to play along with the fact no deity is granting them spells for a time.
|
|
|
Post by shivers on Jun 17, 2019 12:43:46 GMT -5
what do they need a penalty for? if a player wants to switch gods - let them embark on a holy quest from the new god and be done with it. you dont need a thousand new rules to be implemented orlines of widget coding. sure - maybe you will have a bit of an influx at first...but really, how big a problem is this? once the novelty wears off, something else will take its place. . like - assassins signing up with the church of Torm. . uh - oh - i just stirred the pot. rp is already homogenized - loosen the reigns a bit! let the crativity flow! woooohooooo
|
|