Durkon can still cast? Actual DnD rules?

[Scrynor]

Thematically speaking it seems odd to me that Durkon can still cast spells. Why would Thor grant the spells of a now-evil-vampire-thrall Durkon? Or is Nurgal granting his spells now? And if so, why didn't he reset to cleric level 1? Or is it like you build up the capacity to channel magic by leveling or something so he's still got the same loadout and it doesn't matter that the source switched from Thor to Nurgal?

Are there actual DnD rules on this? What happens to a now undead alignment shifted cleric?

[Nilehus]

Durkon still has the spells that Thor granted him for the day. This means he had at least a couple castings of Planar Ally, hence the fiend. Next morning, if he isn't now worshipping Nergal, he'll most likely be able to get his spells from the Negative Energy Plane. Clerics don't necessarily need to worship a deity to get power. :)

[hamishspence]

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/vampire.htm


Clerics
Vampire clerics lose their ability to turn undead but gain the ability to rebuke undead. This ability does not affect the vampire’s controller or any other vampires that a master controls. A vampire cleric has access to two of the following domains: Chaos, Destruction, Evil, or Trickery.

[ThePhantasm]

This quote brought to you by the Index of the Giant's Comments.


Tell you what, you read the vampire template entry, particularly the part where it explicitly says that vampire clerics can still cast spells (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/vampire.htm) just with different domain access, and you tell me where it says anything about gods or temporary loss of access there. It doesn't. Vampire clerics do not need to worship a god to cast spells, because NO cleric needs a god to cast spells. The rules specifically allow for "non-theistic" clerics, and explains exactly what the effects of turning into a vampire has on a cleric: Rebuke instead of Turn, different domains. Period.

The only thing worse than the usual irrelevant rules pedantry is incorrect irrelevant rules pedantry.

[Bulldog Psion]

Thematically speaking it seems odd to me that Durkon can still cast spells. Why would Thor grant the spells of a now-evil-vampire-thrall Durkon? Or is Nurgal granting his spells now? And if so, why didn't he reset to cleric level 1? Or is it like you build up the capacity to channel magic by leveling or something so he's still got the same loadout and it doesn't matter that the source switched from Thor to Nurgal?

Are there actual DnD rules on this? What happens to a now undead alignment shifted cleric?

May I courteously direct to you to the main discussion thread, where this dead horse is beaten beyond a pulp and into monomolecular dust?

[Scrynor]

Yikes, if I were a 6 year old my lower lip would trembling right now.

I imagine The Giant was probably responding to a much more angry and drawn out thread than my simple curiosity about the real rules but the reflected heat of his stern gaze still triggers small pangs of shame...

[hamishspence]

Clerics with deities can lose their powers for "grossly violating" their deity's rules, it must be said.

However I think the Vampire Clerics rule seems to be treated as overriding that, in this case.

[rodneyAnonymous]

I buy that either getting turned into a vampire is not a violation (gross or otherwise) of Thor's rules, or he simply hasn't noticed.

[The Pilgrim]

A relevant bit of the rules says...


A cleric who grossly violates the code of conduct required by his god loses all spells and class features, except for armor and shield proficiencies and proficiency with simple weapons. He cannot thereafter gain levels as a cleric of that god until he atones (see the atonement spell description).

As I interpret it, technically speaking, IF Durkon grossly violates Thor's code, then he would lose all spells granted by him... until Durkon converts to a new set of beliefs and meditates to win spells from that God/Domain/Plane/Whatever.

Calling in a fiend with Planar Ally is on the border of what I would consider a "gross violation of conduct" for a good Deity. However, it's the Giant's interpretation what matters here.

If I were the DM I wouldn't let a player shift ship that fast - you wanna change deities, ok spend a good chunk of time shucking up to your new patron until it acknowledges you as it's follower. But being turned into a vamp is an special occasion and I'd assume some vamp deity or the Negative Plane automatically acknowledges it's brethen. I'd still force the character to Meditate before granting him spells, through.

Anyway, under normal circunstances such a controversy wouldn't arise, as vampire victims are required to pass 1d4 days buried before arising - more than enough time to assume he/she has attuned his/her mind with a new power source and refreshed his/her spell list. Of course the Giant has been forced to override the burial process due to plot requeriments, so it's not that a stretch to assume an automatic change in the power source of his spells.

[Olinser]

The simple answer is that Thor simply didn't notice - for all we know he's still arguing with Hel.

Another handwave answer is that Thor DOES know - and he has a plan, so he's letting Vampire Durkon keep his spells... for now.

Maybe he plans to yank his spells back right when he gets into combat, or something like that.

[rodneyAnonymous]

Maybe he plans to yank his spells back right when he gets into combat, or something like that.

What spells? I don't think Durkon has many (any?) left.

[Olinser]

What spells? I don't think Durkon has many (any?) left.

Assuming that he didn't get his spell slots refreshed, and that was his Greater Planar Ally, you are correct, he has no spells above 4th level prepared. (Except whatever level Thor's Might is - but he said the ceiling was too low to use).

However, that still leaves him with Cure (or Inflict) critical wounds.

A heal spell fizzling at the right moment can cost you the fight very easily.

[EmperorSarda]

Clerics pray for spells in the morning. That means they have use of that spell until they use the spell, or lose via energy drain/temporary loss in levels. In the case of Durkon, Thor granted the magic in the morning, but he doesn't personally monitor each and every spell that every single cleric casts. That means the spells are available to use until lost. And thus Vampire Durkon has access to all his remaining spells that he prayed for while alive that morning.

Also, it wasn't greater planar ally that he cast, but planar ally. Durkon hasn't cast any 8th level spells.

[Katuko]

Thor has already granted his spells, and Durkon is just holding that spell energy at the ready. This is how wizards do it as well: At the start of the day they fill their mind with half-realized spells that they can later release. Thor will likely not grant any more spells to Durkon next morning, but Durkon does not need it. After having been vampirized, he is either getting spells from Nergal (as a new follower by proxy of Malack) or he is getting them from the Plane of Negative Energy.

In any case, Durkon would not be labeled as a "gross violator" of his code, as he did not willfully become a vampire. The undead monstrosity that he is now will likely still have some semblance to his old self once it is freed from thralldom, but the alignment (and thus at least part of his personality) has been forcibly shifted to Evil.

Malack seemed to think that if a vampire is killed and then resurrected, then part of their persona would be erased. Whether this was simply metaphorical (since he feels that he is at home in his vampire self and could not live any other way) or accurate (his resurrected self would be more or less as he once was), I think Durkon would have a better ground for change here. He is a Lawful Good cleric who's now Evil, and a quick kill plus resurrect before he has had time to adjust might let him feel like vampire was just a bad dream. He could probably still get the Lawful Good afterlife.

If he goes for years and starts to revel in his new form, though, who knows? Would Thor get his Lawful Good soul because he originally died heroically in combat with Malack? Would Hel get him because his soul is considered Lawful Good but his vampire self might end up killed by "mere" sunlight? Would Nergal get him because he is now an evil creature serving under that god? I have no idea, and I don't think we can say for certain what god Durkon's soul is now "owned" by.

I'm willing to conclude that he's lost the ability to get cleric spells from Thor, at least, simply because Thor hates undead and Durkon is not even himself anymore.

[ericgrau]

He's getting spells from another source now and is no longer a follower of Thor. That much is pretty simple and straightforward. In 1 day all this will all be irrelevant.

What's hazy is what happened to his old spells. Normally a spawn takes 1d4 days to rise, so normally this is also irrelevant. Malack has a spell to speed this up. We don't know the details of that spell. So you know what, just say it's part of the spell and move on.

Rich was also quite clear that he doesn't need to follow the rules, on multiple occasions. But I can see why this was extra annoying to him.

Comic predictions spoilered.

I do sometimes get annoyed because OotS spellcasters tend to auto-succeed on tactics and get away with questionable tricks. But they also tend to get overconfident and fail by plot. Rich has been clear that just because someone is a caster doesn't mean he'll auto-win. The fact that Nale is relying on 4 casters and is certain they will easily roll over the OotS almost seems like foreshadowing that it will fail spectacularly.

[Holy_Knight]

Yikes, if I were a 6 year old my lower lip would trembling right now.

I imagine The Giant was probably responding to a much more angry and drawn out thread than my simple curiosity about the real rules but the reflected heat of his stern gaze still triggers small pangs of shame...
Yes, he was. In fact, the person he was responding to actually claimed he had "gone too far this time", which seems like a rather insulting thing to say (in addition to being incorrect about the rules violation to boot, as the Giant pointed out in his reply.) So I don't blame him for being a bit irked. Anyway, all this is to say that there's nothing wrong with wondering about the mechanics of the situation like you are here. :smallsmile: However that turns out, it raises interesting questions in terms of the story, etc.

[Katuko]

Comic predictions spoilered.

I do sometimes get annoyed because OotS spellcasters tend to auto-succeed on tactics and get away with questionable tricks. But they also tend to get overconfident and fail by plot. Rich has been clear that just because someone is a caster doesn't mean he'll auto-win. The fact that Nale is relying on 4 casters and is certain they will easily roll over the OotS almost seems like foreshadowing that it will fail spectacularly.


I'd say Durkon is actually worse off than he would be if he had risen normally, since he has expended so many of his spells already and won't get new ones in time for the battle Nale plans to conduct. Malack, two, has used up at least one Harm to heal himself, so a sudden meeting with Roy's sword could very well leave him seriously hurt if they get overconfident. Zz'dtri is tailored to fight V, and since they have already seen his Flesh To Stone trick the Order might be more ready for him. Certainly Haley can peg that guy if needed. Nale is lacking his sword and would be worse off in melee for it.

What I'm worried about right now is Belkar's extremely weakened state, and the lack of counter-magic for as long as V is not around. I think that the elf will soon be on the move, however, and if it comes to straight-up combat then we'll see if the Order is still packing enough to defend themselves.

My personal prediction, though? Malack turns on Nale, because he has the advantage of Durkon and his summon in tow, because he doesn't like Nale at all, and because he will probably try to honor Durkon's request of not killing off all his friends.

[Tebryn]

A relevant bit of the rules says...



As I interpret it, technically speaking, IF Durkon grossly violates Thor's code, then he would lose all spells granted by him... until Durkon converts to a new set of beliefs and meditates to win spells from that God/Domain/Plane/Whatever.

Calling in a fiend with Planar Ally is on the border of what I would consider a "gross violation of conduct" for a good Deity. However, it's the Giant's interpretation what matters here.

If I were the DM I wouldn't let a player shift ship that fast - you wanna change deities, ok spend a good chunk of time shucking up to your new patron until it acknowledges you as it's follower. But being turned into a vamp is an special occasion and I'd assume some vamp deity or the Negative Plane automatically acknowledges it's brethen. I'd still force the character to Meditate before granting him spells, through.

Anyway, under normal circunstances such a controversy wouldn't arise, as vampire victims are required to pass 1d4 days buried before arising - more than enough time to assume he/she has attuned his/her mind with a new power source and refreshed his/her spell list. Of course the Giant has been forced to override the burial process due to plot requeriments, so it's not that a stretch to assume an automatic change in the power source of his spells.

A few things though.

1. This isn't your game.
2. Clerics don't need to worship a God to get spells
3. Getting spells back with an atonement only means that you get the spells back from your previous God.
4. The Giant already answered this. Word of God > Your Opinion

[Mastikator]

The most likely scenario IMO is that Durkula had a chance to reset his spells when he was turned into a vampire and has a completely new set of spells. It's very unlikely that Thor does consider the new Drukon to be the same as the old one, I don't think he sees it as a gross violation, I think he sees Durkon as dead and that thing is just an undead evil monster using his body and powers.

Also, he's more powerful now, much more powerful. He may even exceed Malack once he's been released from Malack's thrall.

[FleshrakerAbuse]

Tebryn, saying that the matter has been solved/answered by the Giant might work better than saying that his opinion "doesn't really matter".
To the original thread poster, like others have been saying, think of clerics as paragons and embodiers of a certain ideal. This ideal may be the worship of gods, in most cases, but worship of other things would still be feasible.

My view is that switching gods isn't going to have to require restarting classes; channeling a higher power's abilities has been practiced by the cleric prior, and thus the cleric has skill wielding that magic. Course, as stated, the Giant decides what he wants.

[Waspinator]

How clerics interact with their gods and what happens when they tick them off varies wildly from setting to setting. See the Eberron cleric rules. How it works in homebrew worlds like the OOTS one is pretty much up to the author.

[hamishspence]

My view is that switching gods isn't going to have to require restarting classes; channeling a higher power's abilities has been practiced by the cleric prior, and thus the cleric has skill wielding that magic.
Most books that mention the subject of clerics changing deities, take this approach. Defenders of the Faith and Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting, in 3.0, Player's Handbook 2 in 3.5.

[Smolder]

Normally a spawn takes 1d4 days to rise, so normally this is also irrelevant. Malack has a spell to speed this up. We don't know the details of that spell. So you know what, just say it's part of the spell and move on.


Good point. A typical spawn never rises on the same day they died, so this issue never arose before. The vampire cleric would wake up on day 1d4 with no spells, as would a normal cleric who somehow slept for 1d4 consecutive days.

[hamishspence]

Actually, as far as I can tell, a cleric who never "reprepares" his spells, retains all the ones they've not used yet- they don't just reset to no spells.

[The Pilgrim]

A few things though.

1. This isn't your game.
2. Clerics don't need to worship a God to get spells
3. Getting spells back with an atonement only means that you get the spells back from your previous God.
4. The Giant already answered this. Word of God > Your Opinion

Have you actually read my post? Because nothing you have written there contradicts what I have stated in my previous message.

[EmperorSarda]

Most books that mention the subject of clerics changing deities, take this approach. Defenders of the Faith and Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting, in 3.0, Player's Handbook 2 in 3.5.

Except Durkon isn't changing deities in the way that the role playing books expect. He died and is a vampire, he's not even his own person; he has no free will so long as he is in full thrall mode.

As he is subject to Malack's every whim, he probably worships Nergal because he has no other choice.



But being turned into a vamp is an special occasion and I'd assume some vamp deity or the Negative Plane automatically acknowledges it's brethen. I'd still force the character to Meditate before granting him spells, through.


For new spells, yes. He will have to meditate before getting new spells. But he still has all the rest of his uncast spells that he prepared while living.

[ericgrau]

Actually, as far as I can tell, a cleric who never "reprepares" his spells, retains all the ones they've not used yet- they don't just reset to no spells.
Who knows, but normally he has a chance to refresh his spells to full so he ends up with full spells either way.

[137beth]

Except Durkon isn't changing deities in the way that the role playing books expect. He died and is a vampire, he's not even his own person; he has no free will so long as he is in full thrall mode.

As he is subject to Malack's every whim, he probably worships Nergal because he has no other choice.
That post would make more sense if you didn't start it with "except." Nothing you say is arguing against what you quoted.

[Shred-Bot]

The simple answer is that Thor simply didn't notice - for all we know he's still arguing with Hel.

Another handwave answer is that Thor DOES know - and he has a plan, so he's letting Vampire Durkon keep his spells... for now.

Maybe he plans to yank his spells back right when he gets into combat, or something like that.

Perhaps Durkon simply had the presence of mind to make one final, off-panel prayer to Thor before his eyes turned into X's, simply calling "no backsies" (a binding magical contract that must be obeyed even by the gods themselves!).

And I would imagine that IF Thor is able to withdraw all his previously granted spells so quickly, it's equally possible that another god more aligned with Vampire Durkon's situation could step in just as quickly (Nergal and Hel being the two most likely, of course).

[Aquillion]

Technically the rules don't allow clerics to change deities (or for a cleric of a god to become a non-theistic cleric of an ideal), but they also explicitly allow vampire clerics to continue to cast. 3e D&D rules are clunky and contradictory, who knew?

I think the more reasonable interpretation is that clerics can change gods and that the rules just didn't bother to spell it out.

The rules say that a cleric who has grossly violated his god's code of conduct "cannot thereafter gain levels as a cleric of that god until he atones", which is also ambiguous -- does it mean they can gain levels again if they change gods? Does it mean that clerics of different gods are considered different classes, so you'd have to start over again from level 1?

I have an unfortunate feeling that the intention was that latter; but I think it obviously makes for much more interesting gameplay if you assume the former, and allow clerics to change gods without utterly wrecking their character in the process.

Anyway, either way, vampires can still cast because the rules say they can.

[Obscure Blade]

If he goes for years and starts to revel in his new form, though, who knows? Would Thor get his Lawful Good soul because he originally died heroically in combat with Malack? Would Hel get him because his soul is considered Lawful Good but his vampire self might end up killed by "mere" sunlight? Would Nergal get him because he is now an evil creature serving under that god?
He gets staked, and Thor gets him because he died heroically fighting a tree? :smallbiggrin:

[isoriveil]

Actually, I believe Thor would not withdraw his help. Nor did he really ignored Durkon's fight with Malack — sure, he was arguing with Hel at the same time, but he is the freaking God!
This all was and still is Thor's masterplan to take his loyal priest from under the control of the Order of the Stick, so that Durkula would be able to fight that root of evil, to bring Death and Destruction upon that agent of Arboreal Empire and free the Order, thus thwarting their scheme.
So why would Thor refuse aid to his foremost bulwark of fight against Thor's main enemies? Sure, he is somewhat undead, but he should be able to allow the lesser evil to fight the greater one.

[Porthos]

Except Durkon isn't changing deities in the way that the role playing books expect. He died and is a vampire, he's not even his own person; he has no free will so long as he is in full thrall mode.

As he is subject to Malack's every whim, he probably worships Nergal because he has no other choice.

I actually doubt he's worshiping Nergal because his spell aura is different from Malack's.

[Mantine]

but they also explicitly allow vampire clerics to continue to cast.
Where is that stated?
I keep seeing this "explicitly" line over and over but with no real presence in the actual rules. :smallconfused:

[Mantine]

Actually, I believe Thor would not withdraw his help. Nor did he really ignored Durkon's fight with Malack
Three words: Protection from Evil (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/Protection_from_evil).

It's a freaking lvl1 spell and no decent cleric would go out fighting without having two or three memorized.

[hamishspence]

I think the more reasonable interpretation is that clerics can change gods and that the rules just didn't bother to spell it out.

Splatbooks, like PHB2, do spell it out, however.

[Silverionmox]

I have an unfortunate feeling that the intention was that latter; but I think it obviously makes for much more interesting gameplay if you assume the former, and allow clerics to change gods without utterly wrecking their character in the process.

Actually, not switching gods as if they were dirty underwear would be more interesting. Either they could say "clerics are a manifestation of divine power achieved through dedication to a god", or "clerics are just another kind of spellcaster like wizards and sorcerer, and their attitude towards their spells doesn't make them less effective".

[Aquillion]

Actually, not switching gods as if they were dirty underwear would be more interesting. Either they could say "clerics are a manifestation of divine power achieved through dedication to a god", or "clerics are just another kind of spellcaster like wizards and sorcerer, and their attitude towards their spells doesn't make them less effective".Switching gods like they're dirty underwear is bad, but that's a matter for the group to discuss with the player (in terms of playing their character behaving in a reasonable manner), not the rules. You do have to be legitimately devoted to your god, so it's not like you can just "tactically" switch deities.

But having a cleric be converted or having them change deities due to some life-changing event in their life? That makes for a good story.

[EmperorSarda]

I actually doubt he's worshiping Nergal because his spell aura is different from Malack's.

Except spell aura doesn't depend on the god you worship. It's a flavor thing, a sign of their personality if you will.

[Silverionmox]

Switching gods like they're dirty underwear is bad, but that's a matter for the group to discuss with the player (in terms of playing their character behaving in a reasonable manner), not the rules. You do have to be legitimately devoted to your god, so it's not like you can just "tactically" switch deities.

But having a cleric be converted or having them change deities due to some life-changing event in their life? That makes for a good story.
The concern mostly seems to be not to let the party healer run out of juice for as much as a split second.

I can accept losing your connection to a deity. I can accept finding a new one. I can even accept making the transition in a very short time under the right dramatic circumstances. But clerics being able to draw from "the negative energy plane" or similar as if it were a spare jerrycan? Come on, let's just declare them ordinary spellcasters then and drop the "divine bond" pretense.

(Further proof that clerics are just spellcasters is that they can/have to research spells, instead of their god simply granting them; or write scrolls and send them to their god's arch enemies on the mortal plane with a big ribbon around them if they please, or using scrolls from your enemies' god to destroy his followers: no god would ever protest under the rules as written.)

[Water_Bear]

The concern mostly seems to be not to let the party healer run out of juice for as much as a split second.

I can accept losing your connection to a deity. I can accept finding a new one. I can even accept making the transition in a very short time under the right dramatic circumstances. But clerics being able to draw from "the negative energy plane" or similar as if it were a spare jerrycan? Come on, let's just declare them ordinary spellcasters then and drop the "divine bond" pretense.

(Further proof that clerics are just spellcasters is that they can/have to research spells, instead of their god simply granting them; or write scrolls and send them to their god's arch enemies on the mortal plane with a big ribbon around them if they please, or using scrolls from your enemies' god to destroy his followers: no god would ever protest under the rules as written.)

The problem is that, at least in D&D, the power doesn't come from the deity but from the Cleric's belief in the deity. When a Cleric casts a spell, that's their spell slot and it's effects are based on their level. After all, if Divine Magic was literally miracles from on high, why would a Cleric even need to gain XP at all? Their quest is righteous, so why would their God let them get pancaked five minutes into an adventure when they could just throw down some divine lightning?

That's why you can have Clerics of abstract concepts like "Law" or "Nature," of non-deific entities like Demon Lords, and yes even creatures like Vampire Clerics. The Gods don't have all that much to do with the Cleric other than being something they can worship; their inspiration if you will.

[Necris Omega]

Eh, while I think the rules do generally demand most cases of clerical power to be a direct non-deity to sentient-deity or deity like entity, Vampiric Clerics are common enough, and... ultimately, the Giant as DM is free to interpret the rules as fits his story/campaign.

While I can see the argument for Durkon falling under Nergal, I think there's likely a broader explanation. Sure, being tied to Malack gives him ties to Nergal, but what about Vampiric Clerics who fall to NON-vampiric clerics? Who or what do they draw power from? Draculagonstic the Vampiric Rogue likely doesn't a single Bleh! about Nergal.

Perhaps vampirism itself is such a fundamental concept that it in itself can fuel deific spells like as was mentioned straight ideals. Really, if some interchangeable, one of a set, collect-em-all Archdevil can grant such spells, why not this most signature of states of undeath? Perhaps in this world Vampirism is a direct divine construct (as it often is) and the inflicted fall unto whatever unnamed deity's portfolio by default in the interim. Perhaps even Nergal himself IS this world's source of Vampirism, and thus, again, takes the prize by default.

Keep in mind, I'm not saying the Giant is wrong by any means - I just find it interesting all the ways he could be right beyond just the rules saying so.

[Chronos]

Yet another point: Most good clerics refresh their spells at dawn or noon, but most evil clerics refresh their spells at sundown or midnight. And I'd be particularly surprised if a vampire cleric refreshed spells while the Sun was up. It's some time close to evening now; maybe Malack and Durkon had a chance to refresh their spells off-panel just now.

[Water_Bear]

Draculagonstic the Vampiric Rogue likely doesn't a single Bleh! about Nergal.

This easily wins best quote of the thread.

[Olinser]

The problem is that, at least in D&D, the power doesn't come from the deity but from the Cleric's belief in the deity. When a Cleric casts a spell, that's their spell slot and it's effects are based on their level. After all, if Divine Magic was literally miracles from on high, why would a Cleric even need to gain XP at all? Their quest is righteous, so why would their God let them get pancaked five minutes into an adventure when they could just throw down some divine lightning?

That's why you can have Clerics of abstract concepts like "Law" or "Nature," of non-deific entities like Demon Lords, and yes even creatures like Vampire Clerics. The Gods don't have all that much to do with the Cleric other than being something they can worship; their inspiration if you will.

The same reason that apprentice wizards can't shatter cities. People have to train and practice molding energy (arcane or divine) before they can access higher level effects. New clerics, regardless of their belief, simply don't have the ability to channel that much energy.

Presumably, if they WANTED to, the deity could intervene directly (as Thor has been shown to do on a couple occasions, most obviously with Weather Control). However, at least in the DnD world, direct divine intervention is EXTREMELY rare, simply because if every deity intervened every time one of their worshippers were in danger, you'd basically have a free-for-all between the gods when two worshippers clashed.

[Waspinator]

It is kind of weird though that an atheist Cleric devoted to the ideals of justice and a devout follower of Odin (or whoever) have identical gameplay effects.

[Aquillion]

The concern mostly seems to be not to let the party healer run out of juice for as much as a split second.

I can accept losing your connection to a deity. I can accept finding a new one. I can even accept making the transition in a very short time under the right dramatic circumstances. But clerics being able to draw from "the negative energy plane" or similar as if it were a spare jerrycan? Come on, let's just declare them ordinary spellcasters then and drop the "divine bond" pretense.

(Further proof that clerics are just spellcasters is that they can/have to research spells, instead of their god simply granting them; or write scrolls and send them to their god's arch enemies on the mortal plane with a big ribbon around them if they please, or using scrolls from your enemies' god to destroy his followers: no god would ever protest under the rules as written.)There's several reasons why clerics of an ideal are allowed.

For one thing, it fits into a real character archetype that isn't really available anywhere else. "I draw my powers from the abstract ideal of freedom" is both cool and thematic for many people, and that provides a good way to do it. (Note that it does still have some of the restrictions a cleric has -- a 'cleric of freedom' who grossly went against the ideals of freedom could temporarily lose their powers.)

Second, divinities and religion are a touchy subject for some people even in a fantasy setting; for that reason, the game's designers decided to have as few thematic restrictions on the cleric's mechanics as possible.

Third, yeah, "never without your powers" is a totally legitimate concern. The game is about having fun; D&D is partially roleplaying but also partially wargaming (it did draw its source material for that) -- and partially a board game. People play it because they want to use these cool powers and tell a story at the same time. A mechanic that forces them to choose between those -- which will totally exclude you from the combat / wargaming side of the game by utterly stripping you of your powers if you pursue certain storylines -- is a bad mechanic. It's generally just not very fun to sit in the back doing nothing while the rest of your group interacts with the mechanical side of the game -- I mean, a fight in D&D can take up the entire session, so you're kinda left there for the whole session, with nothing to do. Not fun.

(This is why they pretty much removed things like Paladins falling in later editions. Sure, it enables some stories, but it ended up ruining a lot more and causing a lot of unfun situations at the table.)