Re: Clerics putting their stake in

On Wed, 20 Nov 2024 18:18:34 +0100, Kyonshi <gmkeros@gmail.com> wrote:

question I never thought about: you know Clerics, yes? Generally not
happy with the undead.
>
Can they stake vampires?
>
The answer depends on the rules you use and how you interpret them.
>
Basic DnD doesn't say they can't. It bars Clerics from using weapons
with an edge. Is a point an edge?
>
Who knows.
>
Is a stake a weapon?
>
Arguably it might be a tool.
>
>
I checked Labyrinth Lord and Old School Essentials and both add a ban on
pointed weapons, so don't have quite the fidelity they want to have in
this question.
>
ADnD clarifies it in Gygax' overly exacting style, and at the same time
makes it worse: it bans edged and pointed weapons (that draw blood)
>
...
>
Do vampires actually bleed when you stab them? That opens a whole other
can of worms.  Technically your cleric might now be banned from stabbing
vampires right after their meal.
You might want to ask first.
>
Starting from 3.0 the rules don't have any language regarding banned
weapons, neither do later rules. It was found to be problematic during
playtest.
>
Does it even matter? Any weapon hitting your face is going to make you
bleed, so not having edged weapons is kind of pointless in the first place.

The old restrictions were based on old stories about various
priest/warriors who didn't want to spill blood,* and as an attempt to
balance the classes. It has no real logic or consistency to it; I
mean, most maces (the traditional cleric weapon) have sharp and pointy
bits on it anyway! It was one of those game rules you just didn't look
at too closely because it really didn't make much sense, like wizards
not being able to wear armor or only rogues knowing how to sneak.

Which is why it --like demihuman level restrictions and other silly
rules-- went away when WOTC streamlined the game in 3E. Personally, I
don't agree with the change, but not because I think the rules made
sense -either for a balance or world-building- but it was part of the
game's overall tone. But I understand why a lot of people disagree
with me there.

But even in OD&D/1E/2E, the rules were followed more in spirit than
actuality. After all, one thing priests -especially those of
polytheistic beliefs - are famous for doing is making sacrifices to
their gods... which usually requires slicing up some poor animal with
something sharp. Many Dragon magazine articles discussed the topic,
with the conclusion usually being, "it really depends on the god being
worshipped and the methods used." So a priest of Ozbarnikus, Bane of
the Undead, probably wouldn't have any restrictions on staking a vamp,
but a priest of Polywumpus, Goddess of the Cuddly-Wuddlies, might face
heavenly sanction doing the same thing.






* Swords were also symbolic of the nobility -and thus of worldly
power- which priests were supposed to renounce.