|
I was listening to an optimization podcast the other day and it advocated that everyone take the Travel domain. I heard similar advice in a cast about dipping. I'm wondering, do GMs typically require some sort of roleplaying 'nod' to the domains a particular cleric selects?
E.g., Travel:
prd[/url]]Travel Domain
Granted Powers: You are an explorer and find enlightenment in the simple joy of travel, be it by foot or conveyance or magic. Increase your base speed by 10 feet.
I think it stands to reason that such a cleric would never, for example, sit on a throne to rule a kingdom. Serve as a messenger for a king, oh yes, certainly. But anything that requires, as a job duty, restricted travel would be off limits. Right?
I just wonder if people don't jump right to the base speed increase without realizing that they're creating a person who WORSHIPS the concept of travel.
Thoughts?
Such a character does not worship the concept of travel. The character worships a deity who is known to be concerned with travel, and focusses on that aspect.
|
|
How many characters really plan for their character to eventually become a king?
That said, I think a cleric king with the travel domain could be a very interesting character, much more concerned with going out in the field and seeing how things really are as opposed to staying in and playing at court. Perhaps more willing than most to push his boundaries, especially into unclaimed lands.
So, you agree with the interpretation but not the example?
|
|
Such a character does not worship the concept of travel. The character worships a deity who is known to be concerned with travel, and focusses on that aspect.
Assuming the cleric has selected a deity, and as per RAW, that's not required.
Question still stands, though. Do you think it has an impact or not?
|
A cleric's deity influences her alignment, what magic she can perform, her values, and how others see her. A cleric chooses two domains from among those belonging to her deity. A cleric can select an alignment domain (Chaos, Evil, Good, or Law) only if her alignment matches that domain. If a cleric is not devoted to a particular deity, she still selects two domains to represent her spiritual inclinations and abilities (subject to GM approval). The restriction on alignment domains still applies.
So a cleric following a god doesn't have to account for the domain selections as OP said, but a non-devoted cleric would. For other classes with domains, like the inquisitor, it remains the same (or has a stronger influence). If the character starts to stray from these principles, like an unaffiliated cleric with the travel domain becoming a king and does not advocate exploration or travel himself, he should find his faith-granted power begin to waver.
But having the power granted by the deity means adhering to the guidance of the deity, not the domains. Said god has the power to dole out as he/she wishes and thus grant that benefit to any subject, even if the subject was not an explorer.
Such a character does not worship the concept of travel. The character worships a deity who is known to be concerned with travel, and focusses on that aspect.Assuming the cleric has selected a deity, and as per RAW, that's not required.
Question still stands, though. Do you think it has an impact or not?
To a certain degree, but any domain choice will be coloured by the deity (if he has one, which I'd personally consider the norm even if I weren't playing in the Pathfinder Campaign Setting, where clerics need to worship a deity).
Look at Abadar. A LN deity with the travel domain. Definitely pro throne. The travel aspect is more the travel necessary for trade, and maybe the patrols the city watch does.
And many rulers don't sit the throne all day.
In general, I think the cleric should be believable in, some way, as a cleric of said deity and with the domain choices.
The travel aspect is more the travel necessary for trade, and maybe the patrols the city watch does.
That's a good point. If the cleric is king of a city, that city's existence may be an aid to people traveling. The King of Magnimar provides safety and economic support, allowing people to travel about Varisia. Without Magnimar, the forts would fall, the smaller cities would become isolated, and travel would become far more dangerous.
The real concern of the OP I think is people choosing mechanics over roleplay. That's always been a concern, and it will always happen. Should players be harshly punished for not roleplaying good enough? Maybe, or maybe they should join a group that's more in line with their play style.
i had the same problem. Wanted a cleric with travel / trickery but I couldn't imagine a roleplay I would like to do with that. So had to dump trickery for something more manageable for RP (like good). I roleplayed that , as a professional, i would like to do my job to the best of my ability and that in order to serve good better id learn "travel" (as a master or ph.d) in order to avoid dying grappled by a monster. That so many clerics met their end that way and that i would serve good better if i managed to stay alive. of course i wouldn't be able to act against travel dogmas, but i believe it was a more less credible story.
The travel/trickery combo might have worked quite well for a gnome PC. Travelling the world to experience all they can and playing simple tricks on people to lighten their moods (or not).
That basic concept could work for any race, but gnomes just sort of came to mind as I thought of it.
|
Travel/trickery sounds to me like a classic "cleric of Olidammara" from 3.X-- the perfect domains for a cleric with levels in rogue. I'd've just roleplayed him like a rogue, minus the pickpocketry.
TBH, I've never really seen a cleric fail to roleplay in accordance with his or her domains. Clerics who take good, healing, or sun do plenty of healing and good works, clerics who take strength, destruction, or war do plenty of fighting (and usually take a fighter dip), etc. However, I've also never seen firsthand a cleric with the Travel domain. Sort of makes me want to roll one myself...
|
|
However, I've also never seen firsthand a cleric with the Travel domain. Sort of makes me want to roll one myself...
One of the builds recommended was using the movement bonus as a way to negate armor movement penalties. It just strikes me as odd to add encumbrance to a travel-minded person. I'd think the opposite would hold true.
|
However, I've also never seen firsthand a cleric with the Travel domain. Sort of makes me want to roll one myself...One of the builds recommended was using the movement bonus as a way to negate armor movement penalties. It just strikes me as odd to add encumbrance to a travel-minded person. I'd think the opposite would hold true.
Prudence is an attribute of many people, especially travelers. To not be properly protected when traveling through a dangerous area would actually, in my opinion, be AGAINST the philosophy of travel.
Some sort of patron of gypseys perhaps.