War Cleric hiding in the back during combat

[mgshamster]

From the perspective of the world of Forgotten Realms, is it acceptable for a War Cleric of Torm to spend half the combats hiding in the back, behind the wizard, doing nothing but casting cantrips?

To note, the cleric is not out of spells, just out of their "extra attack" ability. Once the PC is at about half of their resources, the player starts complaining that we need to head back to town for a long rest, and refuses to engage in combat beyond casting cantrips from the rear of the group, because he's afraid his PC will get killed.

[Nhorianscum]

From the perspective of the world of Forgotten Realms, is it acceptable for a War Cleric of Torm to spend half the combats hiding in the back, behind the wizard, doing nothing but casting cantrips?

To note, the cleric is not out of spells, just out of their "extra attack" ability. Once the PC is at about half of their resources, the player starts complaining that we need to head back to town for a long rest, and refuses to engage in combat beyond casting cantrips from the rear of the group, because he's afraid his PC will get killed.

Disgression is the better part of valor?

Sounds like the player is a bit of a PITA but strictly speaking there's nothing more frontliney about war cleric than any other cleric.

[iTreeby]

Disgression is the better part of valor?

Sounds like the player is a bit of a PITA but strictly speaking there's nothing more frontliney about war cleric than any other cleric.

Aside from the heavy armor proficiency

[DeTess]

From the perspective of the world of Forgotten Realms, is it acceptable for a War Cleric of Torm to spend half the combats hiding in the back, behind the wizard, doing nothing but casting cantrips?

To note, the cleric is not out of spells, just out of their "extra attack" ability. Once the PC is at about half of their resources, the player starts complaining that we need to head back to town for a long rest, and refuses to engage in combat beyond casting cantrips from the rear of the group, because he's afraid his PC will get killed.

It sounds like your issue isn't with how the cleric character is behaving, but with how the cleric player is behaving. As always with things like this, an OOC talk is your best bet for a solution. It'll work better than trying to IC browbeat them into behaving how you think they should, at any rate

[mgshamster]

Aside from the heavy armor proficiency

Player even put a feat in heavy armor mastery.

[mgshamster]

It sounds like your issue isn't with how the cleric character is behaving, but with how the cleric player is behaving. As always with things like this, an OOC talk is your best bet for a solution. It'll work better than trying to IC browbeat them into behaving how you think they should, at any rate

Doesn't work. So I'm hitting it up from a new angle.

Same player also bitches about how other Cleric PCs aren't being RP'd well enough according to game lore.

Edit:

To give more details, we were infiltrating a den of orcs. After killing the last of the combatants, the DM has us find a group of non-combatants. War Cleric of Torm wants to kill them all. Cleric of Mystra wants to show mercy and bring them back to face justice at the local town.

Player of War Cleric claims that no Cleric of Mystra would care about anything other than magic, and especially not the well being of orcs, so player of Mystra Cleric shouldn't be arguing for mercy.

[Demonslayer666]

Sounds like the player wants to waste their resources early and not play below full power. They should be relying on their AC to carry them through, or manage their resources better.

After looking up Torm, I think he would frown on such behavior (duty, loyalty), although it sounds like the player is doing it to try and convince everyone else to recharge, or to force it. Moving a front line character to the back will make the combat more difficult.

[Skylivedk]

In short, no. Definitely not. I don't see a Torm cleric slaughtering non-combatants either with out due process. Maybe he is just pretending to be a Torm cleric?

[JNAProductions]

Doesn't work. So I'm hitting it up from a new angle.

Same player also bitches about how other Cleric PCs aren't being RP'd well enough according to game lore.

Edit:

To give more details, we were infiltrating a den of orcs. After killing the last of the combatants, the DM has us find a group of non-combatants. War Cleric of Torm wants to kill them all. Cleric of Mystra wants to show mercy and bring them back to face justice at the local town.

Player of War Cleric claims that no Cleric of Mystra would care about anything other than magic, and especially not the well being of orcs, so player of Mystra Cleric shouldn't be arguing for mercy.

You know, clerics are people too.

In other words, even if the TYPICAL cleric of Mystra wouldn't care, this one can.

[Zetakya]

This situation sounds like the perfect justification for a vision quest in which the Cleric is enlightened by their deity as to what their god expects of them.

[mgshamster]

This situation sounds like the perfect justification for a vision quest in which the Cleric is enlightened by their deity as to what their god expects of them.

That's awesome. I love that.

[Yogibear41]

Once the PC is at about half of their resources, the player starts complaining that we need to head back to town for a long rest, and refuses to engage in combat beyond casting cantrips from the rear of the group, because he's afraid his PC will get killed.


IDK how your game works, but resource management is a big part of ours. I've seen many a group run out of spells etc. but want to keep going through the dungeon which was a horrible idea and almost always ended badly, so from that perspective I get where the cleric is coming from. Not to mention there is always a risk of running into more encounters on the way back to rest, so always having a few abilities in reserve in case of emergency isn't a bad idea. Also what level are you at because 1/2 of your resources at level 5 vs say level 15 is a huge difference.

Just playing devil's advocate here. Sometimes it a good idea to stop and think maybe I'm the one who's wrong, even if you aren't you can at least better understand the other person's point of view.

[Zetakya]

I am a big fan of using deities as Characters, not just batteries full of Divine Magic power.

Deities have an agenda. They empower Clerics in furtherance of that agenda. It's not at all wrong for a DM to have them display displeasure to Clerics who act contrary to that agenda.

[Nagog]

Sounds like the player wants to waste their resources early and not play below full power. They should be relying on their AC to carry them through, or manage their resources better.

After looking up Torm, I think he would frown on such behavior (duty, loyalty), although it sounds like the player is doing it to try and convince everyone else to recharge, or to force it. Moving a front line character to the back will make the combat more difficult.

Agreed, Torm would frown upon such actions. Perhaps another Cleric of Torm sees him acting cowardly like this and challenges him to a duel, 1v1? You can BS some stats to be sure he has to fight without his multiattack, and try to show him he can still be quite effective without that ability. That ability is, frankly, icing on the cake at most.

[BoringInfoGuy]

Sometimes people get seemingly strange ideas on how the game should be played, paladins and clerics in particular.

I know one player who steadfastly insisted that clerics should NEVER be in melee combat, to the point where it was interfering with the rogue being able to use his sneak attack ability.

Now, my general take is to give a certain amount of leeway on how a player wants to play their own character.

But in that same vein, players need to give each other that same respect. Their character, their decision on how to play them. (Occasional advice or suggestions is usually fine, as long as the player is making their own decisions).

But if one player is seriously ruining the game for everyone else, and talking about it does not help? If the DM won’t drop the player, you may need to leave and find a table where you can actually enjoy your recreational activity.

So, as is, can you still enjoy the game?

[Friv]

Player even put a feat in heavy armor mastery.

So, this sounds like the player is very paranoid about getting killed. They stacked a defensive build not because they want to tank enemies, but because they are afraid of getting caught by surprise and taken out, so when their resources start to run down they hold back enough to handle such a surprise and refuse to fully commit. It's a risk-averse thing, and you're not likely to be able to break it short of playing with them long enough for them to trust that you aren't going to take advantage of that.

However...


Doesn't work. So I'm hitting it up from a new angle.

Same player also bitches about how other Cleric PCs aren't being RP'd well enough according to game lore.

Edit:

To give more details, we were infiltrating a den of orcs. After killing the last of the combatants, the DM has us find a group of non-combatants. War Cleric of Torm wants to kill them all. Cleric of Mystra wants to show mercy and bring them back to face justice at the local town.

Player of War Cleric claims that no Cleric of Mystra would care about anything other than magic, and especially not the well being of orcs, so player of Mystra Cleric shouldn't be arguing for mercy.

This is garbage, and yeah, it's an OOC problem that needs an OOC solution. The player is trying to use metagame arguments to keep people from disagreeing with them, and they need to know that you don't get to play other people's characters, and that frankly they're on thin ice with any "all clerics of a god must follow that god's tenets exclusively and care about nothing else" front.

[LibraryOgre]

To give more details, we were infiltrating a den of orcs. After killing the last of the combatants, the DM has us find a group of non-combatants. War Cleric of Torm wants to kill them all. Cleric of Mystra wants to show mercy and bring them back to face justice at the local town.

Player of War Cleric claims that no Cleric of Mystra would care about anything other than magic, and especially not the well being of orcs, so player of Mystra Cleric shouldn't be arguing for mercy.

Yeah, Mystra is NG (unless that's changed)... She might well look favorably on protecting non-combatants.

Clerics are a varied lot, with a lot of different approaches to their individual deity, and depend on the deity, themselves. A cleric of Mystra might simply see magic as the best way to accomplish goals, and want to encourage that in the world; they're pro-magic in a way that comports with what Mystra wants, but magic isn't their sole concern.

TBH, if the Tormite was pulling that crap on me, I'd start listing stereotypes about Torm that he's not fulfilling. I mean, Torm is a Lesser Deity because he sacrificed himself fighting Bhaal, as part of his portfolio. This sounds like a Tormite who isn't living up to his god's example far more than a priest of someone who was slightly soft-hearted mage within living memory, and who had to be talked out of stopping evil people from using magic.

[darknite]

Why not? Warfare is more than combat. For every front line soldier there are a dozen troops providing support. The player probably knows best how to play their character.

[JNAProductions]

Why not? Warfare is more than combat. For every front line soldier there are a dozen troops providing support. The player probably knows best how to play their character.

Torm is, according to a quick google search, Lawful Good. Now, taking prisoners of people who are aiding the war effort is fine-better to have peace, even if it's through force, than to let war continue unabated.

Killing defenseless people without a trial, even if they're aiding the enemy war effort, is not Good behavior, nor Lawful.

And the player doesn't get to pull the "That's what my character would do!" card when they're ALSO trying to dictate what the other PCs should do.

[darknite]

Torm is, according to a quick google search, Lawful Good. Now, taking prisoners of people who are aiding the war effort is fine-better to have peace, even if it's through force, than to let war continue unabated.

Killing defenseless people without a trial, even if they're aiding the enemy war effort, is not Good behavior, nor Lawful.

And the player doesn't get to pull the "That's what my character would do!" card when they're ALSO trying to dictate what the other PCs should do.

But that's how the player wants to play it. Torm may favor the bold but I doubt they punish those who spread their liturgy. War is an ugly thing.

[Cygnia]

But that's how the player wants to play it. Torm may favor the bold but I doubt they punish those who spread their liturgy. War is an ugly thing.

However, it sounds like the player is playing in such a way that it is detrimental to the rest of the group's fun.

[JNAProductions]

But that's how the player wants to play it. Torm may favor the bold but I doubt they punish those who spread their liturgy. War is an ugly thing.

Two things:

1) As mentioned already, you don't get the "That's what my character would do!" card when you're ALSO dictating what other PCs should do.

2) That's a crap card to play anyway-you are responsible for your character, and if they're disruptive, that's on you.

Now, it's possible the Mystra Cleric was the disruptive one because everyone else was gung-ho for murder, but it doesn't seem like that's the case.

[mgshamster]

So, this sounds like the player is very paranoid about getting killed. They stacked a defensive build not because they want to tank enemies, but because they are afraid of getting caught by surprise and taken out, so when their resources start to run down they hold back enough to handle such a surprise and refuse to fully commit. It's a risk-averse thing, and you're not likely to be able to break it short of playing with them long enough for them to trust that you aren't going to take advantage of that.

That's some good insight, and let's me view the issue from an entirely different perspective.

[Sir_Chivalry]

But that's how the player wants to play it. Torm may favor the bold but I doubt they punish those who spread their liturgy. War is an ugly thing.

That's fine, all the player has to do is erase Torm on their sheet and write Cyric instead, then cowardice and murder as actually appropriate

[Ninja_Prawn]

This sounds like a Tormite who isn't living up to his god's example

Definitely. Thinking back to Keldorn Firecam from Baldur's Gate and Aubrin Crownsilver from Brimstone Angels, they were the type to put themselves in harm's way to protect their allies at every opportunity. Tormites are characterised by their loyalty, mercy and humility... and I'm not seeing much of this in the cleric mgshamster describes.

I think, when you choose to play a cleric, you open yourself up to the possibility that the gods will get personally involved in your story. Maybe that needs to happen here? The player can always switch gods if they want to keep playing this way.

[darknite]

...
1) As mentioned already, you don't get the "That's what my character would do!" card when you're ALSO dictating what other PCs should do.

Sure they can. Doesn't mean the other players have to do what's dictated.


2) That's a crap card to play anyway-you are responsible for your character, and if they're disruptive, that's on you.

I agree. However we're getting one side of the story. And the term 'distruptive' is very subjective. Lecturing a player on what a cleric of Torm is supposed to be seems to be pigeon holing their interpretation. Maybe this is a cowardly priest whose penance in the Church of Torm is to adventure until they learn the lessons of valor? Or maybe the clerical body of the Church of Torm has its' share of clerics who are in it for the principles of Torm's faith but feel they are not best suited to embody them. But saying, "You're playing a priest of Torm, get up there and swing that warhammer!" is engaging a stereotype rather than affirming a player's character choices.

[mgshamster]

Sure they can. Doesn't mean the other players have to do what's dictated.



I agree. However we're getting one side of the story. And the term 'distruptive' is very subjective. Lecturing a player on what a cleric of Torm is supposed to be seems to be pigeon holing their interpretation. Maybe this is a cowardly priest whose penance in the Church of Torm is to adventure until they learn the lessons of valor? Or maybe the clerical body of the Church of Torm has its' share of clerics who are in it for the principles of Torm's faith but feel they are not best suited to embody them. But saying, "You're playing a priest of Torm, get up there and swing that warhammer!" is engaging a stereotype rather than affirming a player's character choices.

The PC literally sings the praises of Torm loudly and proudly while wading into combat. He's all about being up front and in the middle of it all, swinging with his sword, while other clerics stay back to heal him. He always takes the front of the line to be the first into combat.

Right up until he runs out of extra attacks and uses about half his spells - and starts saying we need to go long rest. When the group outvotes him and does a short rest, then he's meek, doesn't engage, hides in the back of the group, refuses to go into melee, and only uses cantrips from afar no matter how strong or weak the enemy is. Even when we set up our minis on the map and the DM assumed he'd be in front like he always is, he grabbed his mini and moved it to the back of the line, saying things like "Sorry guys, I can't take the front line without a long rest."

[Composer99]

But that's how the player wants to play it. Torm may favor the bold but I doubt they punish those who spread their liturgy. War is an ugly thing.

D&D is a game premised on teams of adventurers embarking on quests, and is neither a simulation of the logistical support of military operations - which, I might add, does not remotely resemble 'hang out in the back going "pew pew!" with cantrips' - nor of the typical atrocities committed by real-life armies when sacking cities.

Your statements don't really make sense in the context of what the game is usually about, nor do they make any sense in the context of the behaviour of this player with respect to getting along with their fellow players, nor in the context of the behaviour that prompted this thread - that is, a cleric of Torm hanging out in the back going 'pew pew' with cantrips.



From the perspective of the world of Forgotten Realms, is it acceptable for a War Cleric of Torm to spend half the combats hiding in the back, behind the wizard, doing nothing but casting cantrips?

To note, the cleric is not out of spells, just out of their "extra attack" ability. Once the PC is at about half of their resources, the player starts complaining that we need to head back to town for a long rest, and refuses to engage in combat beyond casting cantrips from the rear of the group, because he's afraid his PC will get killed.

I would say that as a lawful good deity of courage and self-sacrifice, Torm would not smile upon one of his chosen War clerics who hung around in the back going 'pew pew!', nor upon one of his chosen War clerics who advocated for slaughtering the infirm and infants (both of whom tend to be among groups of undefined "non-combatants").

As long as it's not causing problems at the table in or out of combat, this player can play his War cleric how he wants, from 'pew pew!' to bloodthirsty RP. The only thing that really bothers me in and of itself is the "you stay out of it!"-style attempt to overrule the other cleric's objections to slaughtering non-combatants. Suffice to say that if he's causing problems at the table, something needs to be done about it.

That said, the setting in which a game is set should mean something. If this cleric is not behaving in a manner behooving of a chosen cleric of Torm, there ought to be consequences for such behaviour. Torm is not a magic battery - he is a living, breathing entity who bestows power upon those called to his service in exchange for their devotion and dedication to his ethos. He's under no obligation to bestow power upon those who aren't even trying to uphold his ideals.

There may not be a lot you can do, but I think the player's game-play in combat could be handwaved away by having his character worship a different deity - the Red Knight, perhaps?

[Demonslayer666]

Why not? Warfare is more than combat. For every front line soldier there are a dozen troops providing support. The player probably knows best how to play their character.

I'm all for a player playing their character any way they want, but deliberately hampering the party because you want to mitigate risk of losing your character, is kinda selfish and silly.

[Willie the Duck]

Same player also bitches about how other Cleric PCs aren't being RP'd well enough according to game lore.

This is definitely the point where the rest of us get to get our feathers ruffled. If this were not the case, the rest of this is fine.

War clerics are a hard lot to deal with. They don't quite work as I think they were intended. Clerics in general, I think the designers thought that they would be out swinging their maces (/warhammers or greatswords) every round, while it seems that after a certain level they should be dodging while their Spiritual Weapons and Spirit Guardians do much of the combat heavy lifting. However, a war cleric with GWM or PAM or MI for some SCAGtrips can actually do a pretty good job of dealing out damage while saving their spells for critical encounters or the like. But there are more than one way to do this and I don't think the OP's co-player is necessarily playing their cleric wrong*, except that they are telling other clerics not to play outside of their stereotypical vision of said character type.

*Excepting that, from a strategic standpoint, they might well genuinely be screwing up at most effectively achieving their own goals. Cowardice amongst heavy armor characters in D&D is generally counterproductive. The party is going to have a harder time protecting the truly squishy characters and the full weight of the damage the party receives is landing strictly on the dedicated frontliners (meaning that they have to be tanks instead of damage-dealers).

[darknite]

So he doesn't just hang out in the back. He kicks butt while he has the resources to do so and then fades back when he judges he's vulnerable. And the rest of the party doesn't listen to him when he asks for rests to get back to his best? Wow. I guess he's playing that cleric all wrong... :/

[Tawmis]

So... the root of the problem is the player.

First, they're not behaving like a typical War Cleric. (However, people are different... did they fill out their Traits, Flaws, etc? Is there something there or in their background that would allow this?) If not, as already noted a "Vision Quest" may be in Order (and be clear that, a War Cleric of Torm should be dealing justice and damage to those who commit acts of war; but spare the innocent to be put on trial, even if it's clear that they're evil - for example, someone who surrenders their weapon and surrenders).

Now the same person is telling another person how THEIR Cleric isn't behaving correctly (ironic consider it sounds like they're not playing their own character correctly).

So, speak with the player - enforce the idea that people will play their own characters however they see fit. So do not step on the toes of other players. They have their own character. If their god (The DM) sees something wrong with a Cleric their Deity (The DM) will "speak" with them.

If they continue their behavior (hiding in the back, or just generally being an ass) - the longer it continues, increase a % dice roll that the spell will "fail" because their Deity does not find them worthy and has their eyes on other Paladins and Clerics who are following the correct Path.

[Willie the Duck]

So he doesn't just hang out in the back. He kicks butt while he has the resources to do so and then fades back when he judges he's vulnerable. And the rest of the party doesn't listen to him when he asks for rests to get back to his best?

We don't actually know this. At all. We know that they are "not out of spells, just out of their 'extra attack' ability," and not clearly out of either hp or HD to spend. The rest is conjecture. It is true that clerics without a lot of long-rest recharging abilities left are less useful than one at full loadout, but hardly 'vulnerable' (certainly compared to, say, a wizard in the same situation). They can still be out there absorbing hits and swinging their weapon.

Without a full accounting of how a gameday goes down, we don't know if the character is nova-ing and then complaining that everyone else wants to do more than a 5-minute workday (all the while avoiding the front line like the plague) or a judicious character who cautiously measures out their resources with precision and is being disserved by the rest of the party (who does not appreciate their contributions and sacrifices). We simply don't know.


Wow. I guess he's playing that cleric all wrong... :/

Sarcasm noted. I think we got it.

[darknite]

Willie, you're right on point. The issue is that we don't know much here at all. We have one person's perspective and a lot of people saying, "That's not how a War Cleric should be played!"

I think it's odd to have cookie-cutter expectation about classes and how they should be played. Can you be surprised, annoyed, confused or the like when someone plays a character contrary to your expectations? Sure. Does that make it a bad thing when those things happen? Of course not. D&D is about exploring worlds and the characters that inhabit them.

As for fading back, it sounds like the party needs to discuss tactics and how to manage rests. This person seems to like combat but knows that a cleric without some good buffs is not much more than a mediocre hit point sponge in melee and has decided they do more to aid the party by casting cantrips, which likely do at least as much damage as they would in melee on average.

[Daghoulish]

Willie, you're right on point. The issue is that we don't know much here at all. We have one person's perspective and a lot of people saying, "That's not how a War Cleric should be played!"

I think it's odd to have cookie-cutter expectation about classes and how they should be played. Can you be surprised, annoyed, confused or the like when someone plays a character contrary to your expectations? Sure. Does that make it a bad thing when those things happen? Of course not. D&D is about exploring worlds and the characters that inhabit them.

As for fading back, it sounds like the party needs to discuss tactics and how to manage rests. This person seems to like combat but knows that a cleric without some good buffs is not much more than a mediocre hit point sponge in melee and has decided they do more to aid the party by casting cantrips, which likely do at least as much damage as they would in melee on average.

I might have agreed with you but the primary cleric cantrip, sacred flame, doesn't care about where you are as it's a saving throw cantrip. They have heavy armor and used a feat for heavy armor master making them a far better tank than quite a few other classes. All this is saying they could do everything they are currently doing but also be helping the party by being in front of squishier people, such as a wizard or sorcerer. Also, as much as I would agree with you about cookie-cutter war cleric behaviors, you can't say that being cowardly is the way to play a cleric of Torm. That's the main point people are making I think. You can be a cowardly war cleric if you want but choose a different god than Torm because he is very much a god that would want his clerics acting like paladins, beacons of hope and justice for others by being an example.

[SteelArcana]

As some others have mentioned here, there is sometimes a disconnect between expectations and reality when it comes to the cleric. Broadly speaking, being front and center is not the best thing for a cleric, particularly at low levels. Most of the cleric's important buffs, such as bless, are concentration. If a cleric constantly finds themself in melee, every time they get hit they need to make a concentration check in order to keep their buffs up. The result is that being in melee swinging a weapon as a cleric can often have negative results in terms of the overall outcome of an encounter.

That doesn't stop the cleric in your group from casting their cantrips in melee range though, they're all saving throw spells, so they don't suffer any penalties from being cast in melee. Just keep in mind that doing so may actually detract from the cleric's overall performance.

The last cleric that I played was a life domain cleric of a war deity (Tempus) and my main strategy was to wade into melee using spirit guardians, spiritual weapon and sit there while taking the dodge action.

[Nagog]

So are they staying in the back to heal their allies when they need it or are they in the back to hide from damage? If they're hiding from damage, have somebody attack from behind. It's a tactically sound advance to make, and it'd place them in a situation where it would be them having to defend the Wizard from full frontal attack. If they still chicken out and run away, Have Torm do something to punish them for leaving their ally to die.

[Nhorianscum]

Doesn't work. So I'm hitting it up from a new angle.

Same player also bitches about how other Cleric PCs aren't being RP'd well enough according to game lore.

Edit:

To give more details, we were infiltrating a den of orcs. After killing the last of the combatants, the DM has us find a group of non-combatants. War Cleric of Torm wants to kill them all. Cleric of Mystra wants to show mercy and bring them back to face justice at the local town.

Player of War Cleric claims that no Cleric of Mystra would care about anything other than magic, and especially not the well being of orcs, so player of Mystra Cleric shouldn't be arguing for mercy.

Step 1. Talk to the player. Have a heart to heart over a beer or some shiz. Talk it out. Touch base after future sessions with the party and let everyone share their likes/dislikes

Step 2. If the player is still actively a **** several sessions later boot em and never look back.

Step 3. Fun!

[MeeposFire]

Yeah, Mystra is NG (unless that's changed)... She might well look favorably on protecting non-combatants.

Clerics are a varied lot, with a lot of different approaches to their individual deity, and depend on the deity, themselves. A cleric of Mystra might simply see magic as the best way to accomplish goals, and want to encourage that in the world; they're pro-magic in a way that comports with what Mystra wants, but magic isn't their sole concern.

TBH, if the Tormite was pulling that crap on me, I'd start listing stereotypes about Torm that he's not fulfilling. I mean, Torm is a Lesser Deity because he sacrificed himself fighting Bhaal, as part of his portfolio. This sounds like a Tormite who isn't living up to his god's example far more than a priest of someone who was slightly soft-hearted mage within living memory, and who had to be talked out of stopping evil people from using magic.

Regardless even if your god does not care about a certain action does not mean the person does not care. The neutral good nature cleric can choose to save a child who is about to get trampled by a horse even if their god may not have much to say in the matter. Cleric characters can make morale choices that have little to do with the direct dogma of their religion.

[Kane0]

Sounds like you're looking at a conservative, defensive, survival-oriented player rather than a character problem. You may want to have a sit and chat.

[MaXenzie]

In most circumstances, talking to the player will do nothing if they're irrationally paranoid about dying in the first place. As the saying goes, you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into. If the campaign isn't a meatgrinder, then he has no reason to be so defensive, but he is.
You can't expect him to flip a switch in his mind and act hardy just because you said "stop it."

[mgshamster]

In most circumstances, talking to the player will do nothing if they're irrationally paranoid about dying in the first place. As the saying goes, you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into. If the campaign isn't a meatgrinder, then he has no reason to be so defensive, but he is.
You can't expect him to flip a switch in his mind and act hardy just because you said "stop it."

That's good advice. Thank you.

[Kane0]

In most circumstances, talking to the player will do nothing if they're irrationally paranoid about dying in the first place. As the saying goes, you can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into. If the campaign isn't a meatgrinder, then he has no reason to be so defensive, but he is.
You can't expect him to flip a switch in his mind and act hardy just because you said "stop it."

Not necessarily true, but I won't argue it.

If you are going to speak to the player, try more questions than statements. Get them to tell you what's going on rather than assuming you know the situation and are informing them about it.
What's the term? Epistemology? It's based on the socratic method, I know that much.

[GoodmanDL]

You can also handle it in universe, if your characters have a lot of social interaction. The cleric who tells people they are worshipping (even other gods) wrong is a thing. It's rude, but also a valid character choice. So is being hyper cautious. Treat it as such.

Torm's clergy have a certain reputation and image they are expected to uphold, and this guy isn't living up to it. Townsfolk and city leaders generally respect Torm's clergy. They won't like him. They will spread rumors. Jesters will make fun of him. He might not be out-and-out shunned, but he won't get red carpet treatment he thints he's entitled to.. He might find it harder to meet ladies.

People might act reluctant to do business with him, lest his bad reputation tarnish their own. He might start hearing atories of better, nobler priests and hearing himself unfavorablly compared. Maybe he gets passed over for some plum honor in favor of someone else. A nobler Tormtar would have to suckered it up and take it. Maybe he gets a talking to from his mentor.

I wouldn't go to "your deity punishes you" until you have to.

[darknite]

You can also handle it in universe, if your characters have a lot of social interaction. The cleric who tells people they are worshipping (even other gods) wrong is a thing. It's rude, but also a valid character choice. So is being hyper cautious. Treat it as such.

Torm's clergy have a certain reputation and image they are expected to uphold, and this guy isn't living up to it. Townsfolk and city leaders generally respect Torm's clergy. They won't like him. They will spread rumors. Jesters will make fun of him. He might not be out-and-out shunned, but he won't get red carpet treatment he thints he's entitled to.. He might find it harder to meet ladies.

People might act reluctant to do business with him, lest his bad reputation tarnish their own. He might start hearing atories of better, nobler priests and hearing himself unfavorablly compared. Maybe he gets passed over for some plum honor in favor of someone else. A nobler Tormtar would have to suckered it up and take it. Maybe he gets a talking to from his mentor.

I wouldn't go to "your deity punishes you" until you have to.

While I'm not sure I'd go to this extent, because the cleric actually does fight, this is good way to go. Reputations are built on perceptions. Just be sure you're not overdoing with respect to their actual behavior.