Resurrection and Alignment Restrictions

[ThrorII]

OK, so in my game (set in Greyhawk 576), the neutral gnome wizard/illusionist got his head bit off by an owlbear in the Cairn Hills while searching for a specific cairn.

This gnome had previously been delving into evil necromantic tomes and willingly suffered corruption (moving towards chaotic evil--he started as lawful neutral) to gain knowledge and power. He relished in his necromantic spell casting, and was steadily moving down the path of corruption.

The group decided to backtrack to the City of Greyhawk and pooled all their resources to pay for a resurrection spell from a Patriarch of Rao, in the City of Greyhawk.

I allowed it, but later regretted it. I have a problem with a lawful good deity (or one of his patriarchs for that matter) raising a non-Raoan, non-good, necromancer, just to raise a few coin. The commerical aspect of it seems to cheapen the religion, and I can't see Rao being thrilled by it.

In hindsight, I should have had the Patriarch deny them (after suitable divination on the type of person the gnome was). If they choose to find a non-good cleric of suitable level (possibly of Nerull or Wee Jas) who would inevitably require a geas of dubious nature to raise their dubious comrade, giving the players (one of whom is a gnome paladin) a great moral dillema.

So tell me, does anyone here treat clerical spell casting by NPC's as more than monetary transactions? Do you require the castee to be of the same faith, or do something to promote the caster's faith? Or is it just like "Temple of Wal-Mart": You want remove curse, isle 5, it costs 500 gp's, check out to your left, with Bishop Himlen.

[Omote]

This has come up many times in the games I have run. While, I hate to a player depressed that a character died (particularly a well loved character), I do try to play up the strong religious overtones. One of these overtones is that if the dead character and/or the party looking for a ressurection is not a member of the faith, they don't get brought back to life! I don't simply say no, but I have the patriarch or high level cleric give a speech on why they can't bring such a soul back. If the non-believers really role-play the situation and the need out, I will sometimes grant the ressurection/raise dead, etc. Through good roleplay, I will try to have the PCs take up some mission for the faith, or require some sort of other thing for the PCs to do. One time I had the PCs attend the service of the church for 1 month in game time, twice per week, as payment for raise dead.

I try very hard not to use a Geas as I think that is a cheap trick, and sometimes works against your the spirit of a game. I have used Geas in this situation where the PCs had to submit to the casting of the spell for the church to raise the dead too.

~O
_________________
> Omote's Advanced C&C stuff <
Duke Omote Landwehr, Holy Order of the FPQ ~ Prince of the Castles & Crusades Society

[Tadhg]

I don't enforce alignment or faith restrictions generally, but if you're not comfortable with the cleric "buy a spell" situ . . perhaps have a die roll to cut the percentage of success when outside of faith or alignment.
_________________
Count Rhuveinus - Lejendary Keeper of Castle Franqueforte

"Enjoy a 'world' where the fantastic is fact and magic really works!" ~ Gary Gygax

"By the pricking of my thumbs, Something wicked this way comes:" - Macbeth

[AGNKim]

ThrorII wrote:
... just to raise a few coin...

Why would religion then be any different than religion now?
There is really no way the cleric raising the spirit would know the alignment of the soul. I see no problem with it.
_________________
kim@trolllord.com

Click here: http://tiny.cc/4rvo5

[Screenmonkey]

I wouldn't require the dead character to follow the exact same faith as the cleric casting the resurrection. But IMC no deity would grant a resurrection to a character who did hold blatantly opposite beliefs and acted against the deity's dogma in life.

Perhaps in this case, Rao saw some hope in the dead necromancer giving him a chance to see the folly in his ways and redeem himself. Or perhaps he granted the spell in order to fight evil with evil.

[clavis123]

In my campaigns I make it clear to the players that most clergy are just ordinary people who cannot work miracles. The temples are corrupt, so even the leaders will often lack the power to Cure Light Wounds. Finding a Saint who can work a miracle like Resurrection is itself an adventure. They are never found in the halls of power. PC clerics who can work miracles are rare, militant zealots, and will be remembered as saints themselves.

In the situation outlined by the OP, I would suggests having the character be haunted by the spirits of those who died unjustly, only able to make them go away if he puts things right. The character was a necromancer after all, so perhaps Rao decided to put him to work. If the PC wants any peace at all, he has to do works of justice. In this way, the god could trick an evil being into doing good by making him do it for his own selfish reasons.

[Go0gleplex]

In my world/games, resurrection is available for members of the same faith in exchange for some coin and a service to the church once recovered.

Since I have a deity devoted to healing, any person may petition the clergy for healing or more extreme restorations such as resurrection regardless of their faith. However, should the person to be resurrected have a reputation that is known for evil deeds and such atrocities, not even this clergy will return them from the dead. A tithe for such services is encouraged but not required as long as the petition was accepted.

Evil faiths will not perform a raise dead or resurrection (we got your soul now...and it is OURS to KEEP for eternity! muwahahahah) unless the person in question is needed to thwart some critical mission of goodness by others or is vital to a grand evil design. Payment is typically not in gold but in reaping of innocents etc. (though since I don't allow evil characters in my games, this last is a bit moot as far as the players are concerned.)
_________________
The obvious will always trip you up FAR more than the obscure.

Baron Grignak Hammerhand of the Pacifica Provinces-

High Warden of the Castles & Crusades Society

[ThrorII]

clavis123 wrote:
In my campaigns I make it clear to the players that most clergy are just ordinary people who cannot work miracles...PC clerics who can work miracles are rare, militant zealots, and will be remembered as saints themselves.

Same here. Most priests are just 0-level humans. They cannot cast spells on their own. Within the temple walls, with the proper rituals, they can petition their deity or the deities avatar to act on their behalf.

The level of spell available is dependant on the priests rank in the church. Low level adepts are 1-2 level. Common Priests are 3rd level. Higher level priests are 4-5 level. Bishops are 7th level. A patriarch is 10th level or higher (The Canon of Veluna, head of the Temple of Rao, is himself only 12th level or so) [yes, I run lower level campaigns].

Now, certain faiths (St. Cuthbert, for instance) are more martially inclined, and produce true clerics more often.

But yes, most true "clerics" are special. They have been blessed as true Saints, able to commune with deities and avatars, cast spells on their own, etc.

All clerics are priests. Not all priests are clerics.

[serleran]

Druid + reincarnate = problem solved.
_________________
If it matters, leave a message at the beep.
Serl's Corner

[DaveyB]

An interesting dilemma to be sure and one that I've never really thought about in my campaigns, although I do like the idea myself (now that I sit here and think on it)! Gives a nice little opportunity for some plot and role-playing. This also reminds me of a debate I was having on another forum belonging to some guys near a coast that cast magic.

Someone mentioned going by rules as written in the newest edition of D&D that since clerics/paladins don't get their powers directly from their deity, that they therefore could pretty much do whatever and suffer no loss of their powers as a result; since apparently divine casting/powers come from "rituals, ceremonies, and investiture in a certain faith" and not directly from one's deity.

So I first made the mistake of saying that the idea of that bothered me and then went on to ask that if the ability to wield divine power comes from a ceremony/ritual, why do I have to belong to a faith at all? Why not just seek out a rogue cleric or headmaster and pay him a few thousand gold pieces to perform the ritual for you?

I then made the mistake of mentioning that if powers weren't granted from the deity itself, then why call them "Divine" powers? Also, why have "Channel Divinity" feats dedicated to each deity if they don't grant their powers directly to mortals? It doesn't make sense to me that each CD feat has a pre-requisite of having to worship that deity if the power technically doesn't come from it....

So of course I was rebuffed by the frothing hordes about how losing your powers for grossly violating your god's tenets was "wrong" and how that makes your character "impotent". To which I rebutted that if used by a responsible DM it was usually only temporary (unless you switched alignments), could make for a great plot device (redemption from corruption, atoning for past transgressions, doing evil things while under geas or charm/domination, etc.), and that clerics/paladins are far from "impotent" due to their martial training. To which someone said that since pretty much all cleric and paladin powers have the "Divine" keyword that they would be pretty much useless except for basic attacks, and then I looked and realized they were right.

That's when it really hit home as to how limiting 4e's keyword-based powers system truly is. Take away access to someone's power source and they are pretty much screwed, thus making plot-enhancing things such as loss of powers very punishing indeed. One would still be able to perform rituals and use basic attacks, but the cleric and paladin would be bereft of the greater bulk of their powers. Personally I still maintain it's easy to do in 4e and that it would make for a great plot-driven element, but what do I know; apparently that's "bad wrong fun" and "crappy" spells like geas shouldn't be used...
Hmmm...seems I went a bit off kilter there. In summary, I like the idea of limiting resurrections and raise dead spells to certain alignments, etc. Provides an interesting twist to the usual "Give the priest his 5000 GP worth of crushed diamond so we can res the halfling's sorry behind and get on with our adventure". Now players might think before they take foolish actions that may get them killed, but what do I know?