Order Domain Cleric + Rogue Can't Get Along?

[Merudo]

I'd like to play an Order Domain cleric but I'm concerned because there might be a Rogue joining the party.

The Order domain is all about upholding the law at all costs. Obviously an Order Domain Cleric will not do any thievery, breaking and entering, impersonation, etc. However, how should the Cleric reacts when other party members commit such acts (presumably for the greater good)?

Seems to me the only outcome is either the Rogue stops using half of its features & respects the law, or the party breaks apart. Both are really un-fun outcomes. Any help here?

[CTurbo]

There are no real restrictions to these character. Order Cleric could easily be Lawful Neutral or even Lawful evil and a Rogue could easily be chaotic good. Not all Rogue's are thieves either. I don't see any issue here.

[Lonely Tylenol]

Inquisitors engage in no small amount of subterfuge and extrajudicial tactics to maintain order for their holy... Well... Order. And, in addition to being a historical example, they’re a subclass for the rogue.

A character’s class, or even class/subclass combo, are not (or should not) alone be the reason any two people are incompatible. Those are just mechanics. Let the actions of the character resolve that question for you.

[Zhorn]

In these situations, I tend to ask how does your character define law and chaos (in terms of alignment).
Are they a lawful character because they uphold the laws of the realm, laws of the crown? What if the rulers of the realm are corrupt? Would that mean those laws are still just a right?
Or do they uphold the laws and tenets of their faith? Do the gods concern themselves with the mundane properties of mortal beings? Does a god consider a gold coin of more worth when held in one hand as opposed to being held in another?
What about their own personal code? By being lawful are they acting on a code of conduct that they hold dear to themselves? Would they impose their code onto others like a tyrant, or try to steer those who are wayward in their methods gently towards a virtuous path?

A good aligned lawful may very well see it as their duty to shepherd a chaotic party member towards a better life. And a good shepherd does best when keeping their flock close and helping them follow as opposed to casting them away and chasing them off for being bad sheep.

Look at our favourite comic. Durkon is fully aware of the less-than-agreeable traits others in the party have (especially Belkar), but he stands by them and tries to guide them to be better without tyrannically dominating them with restrictions.

[Asmotherion]

Can't get along and can't form a party is two entierly diferent subjects. You can role play heated arguements over next courses of action. Not everyone needs to be the same for a party to be functional as long as there is a greater good that pushes them to function together (DM's job).

in other words your job as a player is to create a character you'll enjoy. Leave creating a story that holds together to the DM. Unless the DM specifically requests some roles to be filled or some polar oposit alignments not to be included in his game trust him with his job and do your best not to ruin everyone's fun in your RP as a rule of thumb (for example don't go "we should execute that guy because he stole"... try to interpret your RP as "since we can't get rid of that guy i should teach him to stop stealing stuff for everyone's benefit").

[Wilb]

Write a contract dealing with intra party activity, duties, concessions and waives between members, consider being very open and leaving a lot of stuff for interpretation. Let the rogue do as he wishes but remind him of the contract if, and only if, he does something that both disgusts your character and affects the rest of the party negatively too.

Think of it as norms set up by necessity, and you paying heed to rules set up by yourself, a cleric illuminated in the way of multiversal order, taking precedence over those set up by those out of tune with the greater order. You want to (or need to) go adventuring and paving your way with order is the logical first step in doing it.

Also don't forget the rogue could also try to act like, or even be, a mafia member (or leader), with its own inner set of rules that could amuse you as well, as in "How can he, amidst the filth, chaos and disorder, carve such code of conduct? With no tool other than his hands and his wit...".

Also, think of "Belkar and Durkon" antics as well.

[Neknoh]

Have you watched Hellsing?
Or better yet, Hellsing abridged? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxF4v5asYNc

[HappyDaze]

If you have the Order Domain, you probably have the Guildmaster's Guide to Ravnica. In it you'll find that Order Domain Clerics are found in the Azorius Senate and the Orzhov Syndicate. Both of those also have Rogues (Inquisitive for Azorius and both Assassin & Thief for Orzhov) as common classes. Obviously having an Order Domain Cleric is not antithetical with having a Rogue in the party.

[Neknoh]

For some context on Orzhov:

They are basically a religious mafia (think russian mafia + vatican style illuminati ****), ran by a ghost council, dealing in protection rackets and the trading of souls. It's pretty dark stuff and as mentioned, they employ rogues, thugs, fallen angels and are generally a very, very bad time to be dealing with if you've made an enemy of them.

Here are some of their cards:

https://d1f83aa4yffcdn.cloudfront.net/pMEI/magister%20of%20worth.jpg
https://img.scryfall.com/cards/normal/en/mm2/176.jpg?1517813031
https://img.scryfall.com/cards/large/en/gpt/134.jpg?1517813031
https://blogs-images.forbes.com/danieltack/files/2013/02/Knight-of-Obligation.jpg
http://mythicspoiler.com/gtc/cards/mercilesseviction.jpg
https://res.cloudinary.com/csicdn/image/upload/c_pad,fl_lossy,h_300,q_auto,w_300/v1/Images/Products/mtg%20art/Guildpact/full/Orzhov%20Basilica.jpg
https://aetherhub.com/images/cards/mtg-RNA/Orzhov%20Enforcer.jpg
http://mythicspoiler.com/gtc/cards/deathpactangel.jpg
http://mythicspoiler.com/gtc/cards/executionersswing.jpg

If this is not a cleric that can work together with an assassin or thief, I do not know what is.

[Particle_Man]

Also doesn’t the order cleric have abilities that benefit the rogue?

[sophontteks]

Rogues aren't thieves. There is nothing in their kit that obliges them to break the law. Unless, of course, they are playing the thief archtype.

[Ganymede]

Classes are not personalities. An order cleric could resort to thievery in the same way a rogue could be a straight arrow when it came to obeying the law.

[Toofey]

First you have to decide if it's going to be a problem for you that his character does things your character doesn't like. Then you have to decide if these are things that are going to bother your character, or if the 'greater good' of whatever rationalization you're using works. If your character is really going to be bothered by this you need to make it clear out of character and in character.

then you need to work with whatever solution you and the other players, or your characters, come up with works.

I really hate when people let their own class choices become an issue for the party as a whole, don't be that guy who ruins someone else's game because you chose to play a lawful character to the hilt.

[Ganymede]

First you have to decide if it's going to be a problem for you that his character does things your character doesn't like. Then you have to decide if these are things that are going to bother your character, or if the 'greater good' of whatever rationalization you're using works.

That is really important advice.

Too often, players assume that a personality/goal conflict between PCs inevitably means that it must bog the game down with mutual sabotage and PVP. Instead of shutting the game down and ruining everyone's (including the DM's) fun with that behavior, use it as a springboard for a fun roleplay moment.

Think of all the comic books, films, TV shows, and books that feature odd-couple pairings of protagonists that might express their disdain for one another or have terse exchanges but, at the end of the day, still work together toward a common goal.

In the end, the choice is yours. Will you use this PC tension to have memorable roleplay opportunities, or will you use it to ruin your and your friends' evening?

[GreyBlack]

Sure you can.

Just because you take the rogue thief archetype doesn't mean you steal willy nilly. For example, a government spy doesn't just break into a random villagers house to steal stuff; he might do it because his commanding officer is trying to find evidence of wrongdoing by a suspected terrorist cell.

And, just because your character is an Order cleric doesn't mean that he won't manipulate the law to his own benefit. Maybe you come up with an agreement with this thief to sow some chaos to encourage the people of their need for order in their lives.

Your archetype is not your character, and your character is not your archetype. Your class and archetype have nothing to do with your roleplaying. All your character class and archetype are are a set of combat abilities designed to make something happen when thrown into the fray. Everything surrounding those abilities can be flavored however you want.

[GreyBlack]

Sorry for the double post.... but I do have a relevant continuation.

Is this for a home game or for adventures league? If for the former, go hog wild. If the latter, you will feel significantly constrained and you may feel forced to play your character in a way that doesn't make sense for a character but does for the archetype. Be warned of that.

[Laserlight]

My lawful neutral wizard detective went adventuring in SKT with a party of a wanted assassin, a wanted pirate, and an elf ranger slid from CN to CE over the course of the campaign. I did it because I was under orders from my faction to do so. Also, I figured that I would either resolve the problem with the giants, or some of my party would get killed in the course of things; and no matter what, at least I was keeping these nutjobs and criminals away from civilization.

[CosmicOccurence]

I'd point them both to this (http://www.giantitp.com/articles/tll307KmEm4H9k6efFP.html) excellent article by The Giant himself. Specifically the section called Decide to React Differently. It really changed the way I think about role playing and my role at the table.

[Mellack]

Don't confuse Order with Law. Law is often designed to preserve order, but is not necessarily so. Take the old trope of the mad king. His word is law, but he likely is creating chaos with that law. Would your cleric blindly follow those laws even though they are disruptive to the order?

[MarkVIIIMarc]

I'd like to play an Order Domain cleric but I'm concerned because there might be a Rogue joining the party.

The Order domain is all about upholding the law at all costs. Obviously an Order Domain Cleric will not do any thievery, breaking and entering, impersonation, etc. However, how should the Cleric reacts when other party members commit such acts (presumably for the greater good)?

Seems to me the only outcome is either the Rogue stops using half of its features & respects the law, or the party breaks apart. Both are really un-fun outcomes. Any help here?

I can get along with all kinds of crazy people at work. If I were in some crazy life and death military or adventurers life situation I could probably get along with a lot of people if they were generally on my side.

We frequently hear Chaotic Evil does not mean chaotic stupid.

Also Lawful Good doesn't mean lawful shortsighted.

Feel free to preach to the fellow though or talk about the "right way" to accomplish things. Maybe especially after things have blown over.

[HappyDaze]

Don't confuse Order with Law. Law is often designed to preserve order, but is not necessarily so. Take the old trope of the mad king. His word is law, but he likely is creating chaos with that law. Would your cleric blindly follow those laws even though they are disruptive to the order?

To be fair, the descriptive text for the Order Domain does say:

The ideal of order is obedience to the law above all else, rather than to a specific individual or the passing influence of emotion or popular rule.

[Ganymede]

To be fair, the descriptive text for the Order Domain does say:

The ideal of order is obedience to the law above all else, rather than to a specific individual or the passing influence of emotion or popular rule.

This is pulled out of context.

Above that line, it says "The Order Domain represents... devotion to a society or an institution and strict obedience to the laws governing it."


It is not referring to "the law" in a general sense, or even referring to the lawful alignment, it is referring to the law of whatever society or institution you are devoted to. Even then, it isn't a straightjacket; a PC flaw or other vagary of real life might result in this being breached.