"Cleric of X" vs "Cleric". Is that a rules thing or a Golarion thing?

[Moppy]

I see "Cleric 7 of Sarenrae" and never just "Cleric 7". Same for Champions.

Is this a convention for Golarion setting or a core rule?

If the patron defines the character why don't they write "baba yaga witch" instead of witch?

[Dubious Scholar]

It's a convention thing more than anything else I think. Clerics and champions are more strongly defined by their deity, so people will state that.

A witch is much more open ended by comparison, even if their patron is Baba Yaga herself.

[Temperans]

Because of the Domains and bonus spells gotten from Deities, as well as the overall theme of those 2 classes, the deity is often (not always) mentioned.

Its effectively the same as saying what type of Righter or Ranger it is. However, it has a lot more meaning for Cleric and Champion as it also gives an idea of what your character's philosophy is.

[thenobledrake]

There's also a significant impact on just the basic mental image of the character if you know which deity they garner power from as a Cleric or Champion because there's associated colors, styles of dress, preferred behaviors, and symbols that accompany each.

For example, if the character jovially day-drinking to excess in the middle of the tavern while leading a crowd in a song about catching the eye of a lusty fishwife gets noted as "Cleric 7" you might be questioning what's happened to drive them to this strange circumstance - but if the character is noted as "Cleric 7 of Cayden Cailean" the scene already makes sense.

[Moppy]

thenobledrake wrote:

For example, if the character jovially day-drinking to excess in the middle of the tavern while leading a crowd in a song about catching the eye of a lusty fishwife gets noted as "Cleric 7" you might be questioning what's happened to drive them to this strange circumstance - but if the character is noted as "Cleric 7 of Cayden Cailean" the scene already makes sense.

I feel this behaviour would be fine for the majority of the major 20 deities clerics, and feel you might be interpreting cleric via the lens of a real world religion.

[Ventnor]

Moppy wrote:

thenobledrake wrote:

For example, if the character jovially day-drinking to excess in the middle of the tavern while leading a crowd in a song about catching the eye of a lusty fishwife gets noted as "Cleric 7" you might be questioning what's happened to drive them to this strange circumstance - but if the character is noted as "Cleric 7 of Cayden Cailean" the scene already makes sense.

I feel this behaviour would be fine for the majority of the major 20 deities clerics, and feel you might be interpreting cleric via the lens of a real world religion.

I think Erastil wouldn't be too happy about one of his clerics blowing off their responsibilities to drink in the middle of the day, Asmodeus would expect his clerics to have more class than to sing a drinking song, and I'm pretty sure that you're excommunicated from the Church of Gorum if you don't start a barfight when you have the opportunity.

[Creative Burst]

I think it mostly the flavor of the class that the reason. A cleric is a mortal servant of a deity and a champion is well a champion of one. A big part of these two classes' identity is tied to the deity they serve. The thing they are expected to are tied to the diety. A cleric and champion are general at least in my mind serve or have some relation to the church of thier diety serves. Not all church has the same structure and organization. All in all, it most defining thing for the cleric and the second for the champion being there cause but only by a bit.

[Quandary]

A good chunk of Cleric abilities are defined by Deity: Anathema, Heal/Harm Font, Deity Spells, Domain access, Favored Weapon. Easily much more influential than a Wizard being Evocation vs Enchantment Specialist or Universalist, although even there such a niche will often be directly referenced.

[thenobledrake]

Moppy wrote:

I feel this behaviour would be fine for the majority of the major 20 deities clerics, and feel you might be interpreting cleric via the lens of a real world religion.

I think you think I was saying "they are drinking" is the thing that would be odd for most clerics when what I was actually saying was "they are karaoke drunk at lunch on purpose, regularly"

Because no, I'm definitely not trying to inflict any real world religious views on my gaming experience.

[Moppy]

thenobledrake wrote:

I think you think I was saying "they are drinking" is the thing that would be odd for most clerics when what I was actually saying was "they are karaoke drunk at lunch on purpose, regularly"

Sounds like a nornmal day for the UK. :-)

[Deadmanwalking]

thenobledrake wrote:

Moppy wrote:

I feel this behaviour would be fine for the majority of the major 20 deities clerics, and feel you might be interpreting cleric via the lens of a real world religion.

I think you think I was saying "they are drinking" is the thing that would be odd for most clerics when what I was actually saying was "they are karaoke drunk at lunch on purpose, regularly"

Yeah, fair.

That's not exclusive to Cayden Cailean, but it's only pretty typical for maybe three or four deities out of the core 20 (I think this would be expected behavior for Clerics of Cayden Cailean, and not unexpected for those of Desna and Calistria, and pretty plausible for those of Shelyn due to the singing).

[Moppy]

My question is why clerics are held to different standards to non-clerics. I've only ever heard that line from religious folk IRL.

[thenobledrake]

Moppy wrote:

My question is why clerics are held to different standards to non-clerics. I've only ever heard that line from religious folk IRL.

It's a little less true than it used to be since more classes have Anathema in PF2, but generally it comes from the having a specific behavioral code mentioned.

Like, a fighter can do whatever they want and while it might make them an unlikable person, but they won't lose what makes them a capable adventurer as a result of their behavior - where that's always been the flavor, if not also the mechanical reality, of clerics.

[Moppy]

For most, I don't see an anathema that prevents you getting very drunk in public.

The standards for drink are really no different, except for maybe Erastil or someone.

[thenobledrake]

It's not just anathema that shapes the expectation on behavior though, it's the having of specific things you are supposed to be dedicated to doing.

More "can't be partying in the middle of the day because you have stuff to do" than "getting drunk is bad"

[Temperans]

Its not so much anathema but a general sense of the philosophy of each god. Things like being seriousness, cleanliness, general mannerisms, and other subtle things that are not really anathema but might represent their deity.

[Moppy]

Doesn't having stuff to do in the day apply to everyone with a job? I mean, clerics have a job being clericy, right?

The philosophy of the god argument is circular. It's already been said, but no-one has explained why it's like that (for the majority of deities, which I claim is not true) or why it isn't in the boons and anathemas.

edit: Decorum issues are present for anyone in a uniform, or from any recognisable company or organisation. Clerics are basically in a uniform because of their holy symbols. How many organisations actually care? If some company's staff are always rowdy in a bar, is the company really going to care so long as no-one gets arrested?

[Nefreet]

I'm not sure where this discussion is going, but to answer the original question, clerics have a "deity" class feature, and champions have a "deity and cause" class feature, so each must choose a deity. A witch has a "patron" class feature, so they must choose a patron, but they could also choose to worship a deity in addition to that. Same for druids and their order.

Those mechanics manifests themselves as different naming conventions to quickly and easily display the basic chassis of the character to other players (and presumably characters).

The best modern day equivalent would be politicians belonging to a party, or a religious leader representing their faith. Sure, two Republicans can have different ideas about politics, but they're generally going to be different enough from a Democrat that the naming convention still holds a level of representative meaning. Same for religions, etc.

[Nitro~Nina]

It's interesting that Wizards seem to have lost this trait. One's School used to be just as defining and restrictive as a Cleric's deity, if not more so, but now it's simply a spell preference, focus power, and flavour guide. From what I've seen, it used to be that you'd speak about "Evokers" or "Conjurers" before you'd speak about "Wizards" as a general rule, I think partially because they'd end up with rather different playstyles.

[Creative Burst]

Both barbarian and druids have anathemas but not edicts. So Clerics and Champions diety effects not only what they can't do but what they're supposed to be doing. Different diety have different edicts and anathemas and is a major influence on how that character acts more so than any other class because of edicts. Say I am a cleric of Shelyn will tell give you an idea of how my character will act but if I said I was a cleric of Asmodeus the expectation of what my character would do and act would be completely different. Saying I'm just a cleric would be leaving out the most vital information about my character.

[OrochiFuror]

Moppy wrote:

Decorum issues are present for anyone in a uniform, or from any recognisable company or organisation. Clerics are basically in a uniform because of their holy symbols. How many organisations actually care? If some company's staff are always rowdy in a bar, is the company really going to care so long as no-one gets arrested?

Depending on the company, very much so. Just look at the WWE, several wrestlers have been fired for breaking character too severely while off the clock, never mind while at work. Many companies make you sign contracts and waivers to limit your ability to say bad things about them or do things to make them look bad. It's corporate lifestyle, in the same way most clerics and champions live the lifestyle befitting followers of their god.

[Temperans]

Nitro~Nina wrote:

It's interesting that Wizards seem to have lost this trait. One's School used to be just as defining and restrictive as a Cleric's deity, if not more so, but now it's simply a spell preference, focus power, and flavour guide. From what I've seen, it used to be that you'd speak about "Evokers" or "Conjurers" before you'd speak about "Wizards" as a general rule, I think partially because they'd end up with rather different playstyles.

This is largely due because Arcane Schools whent from an awesome and flavorful abilities to just a few extra spells and a meh to useless Focus spell. All the design space that was previously taken by the Arcane School was taken over by the Thesis.

Then it doesnt help the nerfs to magic have left most Specialist Wizards in a situation where they have to be preparing a bunch of spells from other schools to stay relevant.

Clerics on the other hand have gotten even stricter about how they need to act. While previously their guideline was basically dont oppose your Deity. They now need to deal with behavior limitations.

In other words, people would previously say they were a "Cleric of X" out of Pride and a sense of "This is how my character thinks". Now its a case of Pride and a sense of "this is how my character needs to act".

[thenobledrake]

Moppy wrote:

Doesn't having stuff to do in the day apply to everyone with a job? I mean, clerics have a job being clericy, right?

That's exactly the point I was making. Cleric is not just a class, it's also a job (a set of duties, at least) - while most other classes don't have the same assumption that you have a job you're meant to be doing, so behavioral assumptions are a lot more loose.

[Jar of Crows]

Moppy wrote:

My question is why clerics are held to different standards to non-clerics. I've only ever heard that line from religious folk IRL.

There might be a reason for this; although, I think the framing is a bit backwards.

I agree with the sentiment from previous posts that it’s generally about decorum and not about specific behaviours being anathema. However, I’m not sure that the comparisons with expectations of decorum from real-world organizations is the best comparison. In these comparisons, the reason to behave in a certain way is still driven by external factors, to avoid repercussions or reprisals for breaking certain rules. I would flip it around and say that clerics are held to a higher standard by others less than they would hold *themselves* to a higher standard. After all, if you truly believe in a cause, wouldn’t you be incentivized to behave in a way that presents your cause in a positive light, even in the absence of specific rules? (Note: definitions of “positive” may vary based wildly based on deity) As a result, this kind of motivation for the character towards certain perceived ideals, and the advancement of those ideals, affects how people choose to roleplay a Cleric and forms how people in general expect a Cleric to behave.

Not that this is universally true; one could easily play a Cleric that is rather ambivalent about the whole religion thing and only avoids doing certain things purely out of a desire to avoid the consequences (anathema), but as far as I can tell that would be the exception and not the rule.

[PossibleCabbage]

I think the thing is that even if the level, class, and alignment is the same you're going to expect very different things from (LN for example) a cleric who serves Erastil and a cleric who serves Abadar.

Or a cleric who serves Urgathoa and a NE cleric who serves Nethys.

Or a NG cleric who serves Pharasma and an NG cleric who serves Shelyn.

etc.

So just saying "8th level, chaotic neutral cleric" gives you much less of a clear picture of who this person is than "8th level cleric of the Lantern King."

[Apellosine]

thenobledrake wrote:

Moppy wrote:

Doesn't having stuff to do in the day apply to everyone with a job? I mean, clerics have a job being clericy, right?

That's exactly the point I was making. Cleric is not just a class, it's also a job (a set of duties, at least) - while most other classes don't have the same assumption that you have a job you're meant to be doing, so behavioral assumptions are a lot more loose.

The example given of a Cleric leading singing at the bar while drinking and dancing in the bar is all a part of the day job for a Cleric of Cayden Cailean. They are likely leading worship for their congregation over lunch while doing all this.

It would however be odd for a Cleric of Milani (also CG) to be doing the same thing. This cleric would likely by standing on a crate calling out to people about the tyranny of the government.

[The Raven Black]

Changing the deity you worship is incredibly easy in Golarion. And a Cleric or Champion has to follow their deity's dogma. So you can expect the vast majority to have behaviors and worldviews that fit their deity almost 100%.

[RealAlchemy]

Knowing which deity a cleric or champion follows helps with characterization. A true neutral cleric of Nethys will have a different outlook than a true neutral cleric of Pharasma. Likewise a NG champion of Arshea is likely to have a different emphasis than a NG champion of Sarenrae.

[Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich]

In answer to the OPs original post, it is a convention that (as far as I remember seeing it) goes back to at least AD&D. It is not required by rules.

[TriOmegaZero]

It’s a Golarion thing. Now that 2E is tied closer to Golarion than 1E was, it’s also a rules thing.

[Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich]

Notation is definitely not a rules thing. And, such notation was definitely around before Golarion and even Paizo was a thing.