a cleric who aligns themselves against their deity - ramifications?

[da newt]

If a PC in one of your games was a cleric of a chaotic god (pick any - maybe Selune for example) and they decided to align themselves with the side of Law in the eternal struggle against Chaos (taking up one of the pieces of the Rod of Law for example), would there be any implications to this 'betrayal' of faith / joining the opposition against your own god?

[J-H]

That's up to the DM.
I'd probably say the cleric doesn't get any spell slots refilled and can't change prepared spells around until the cleric finds a new source of power.

But that's just me.

[Asmotherion]

That's up to the DM.
I'd probably say the cleric doesn't get any spell slots refilled and can't change prepared spells around until the cleric finds a new source of power.

But that's just me.
Not just you. I seccond this. :)

[JNAProductions]

Story consequences? Sure.

Mechanical consequences? Only if they were discussed with the player and they’re cool with it.

[Naanomi]

Gods tend to keep seperate affairs from those sorts of cosmic forces actually; in fact Gods who tried to get involved in the War of Law and Chaos got depowered or otherwise smacked down. Gods keep their own tenants and have their own agendas that rarely align explicitly with the great cosmological forces out there

[chiefwaha]

I say it certainly depends on the deity. I can see some Chaotic gods being just fine with Law and not particularly caring (Selune as just one example, nothing in her portfolio really screams Chaos or anti-Law)

[KorvinStarmast]

If a PC in one of your games was a cleric of a chaotic god (pick any - maybe Selune for example) and they decided to align themselves with the side of Law in the eternal struggle against Chaos (taking up one of the pieces of the Rod of Law for example), would there be any implications to this 'betrayal' of faith / joining the opposition against your own god? Are you asking as the DM or as the player?

[loki_ragnarock]

If a PC in one of your games was a cleric of a chaotic god (pick any - maybe Selune for example) and they decided to align themselves with the side of Law in the eternal struggle against Chaos (taking up one of the pieces of the Rod of Law for example), would there be any implications to this 'betrayal' of faith / joining the opposition against your own god?

God of Chaos: "Well, I didn't see that coming."

Beat.

God of Chaos: Smiles "Good job, cleric. Proving my point, yet again."

[sithlordnergal]

Mechanically speaking, according to RAW nothing happens to them.

[OldTrees1]

There could be ramifications. Here is how I would approach it as a DM. If you are not the DM, then mention it to the DM so you can start the coversation.

1) I would want to confirm what the player was intending to do. Maybe I misheard them and they want their Cleric of Selune to pick up the Rod of Law as part of siding with Good rather than siding against Chaos. Maybe there is context where the Cleric's actions follow Selune's creed / values even more than the stereotypical answer would have. For example holding off one of Selune's angels to prevent a tragic mistake.

2) Once I understand the player's intent, I would talk to them about what I would expect the goddess's position/perspective would be on the event. If the deity is going to feel betrayed, I want the player to know.

3) I confirm if the player still intends that course of action now that it is an informed choice.

4) Then I talk with the player to figure out what the consequences would be and what future the character has. Maybe the Cleric switches deities. Maybe nothing.



That said, why would Selune object to one of her Clerics picking up a piece of the Rod of Law? This example does not make sense to me. I don't see the betrayal. I don't see Selune caring more about Law vs Chaos than about Good. At best if I stretch / exaggerate, I could see you asking about a Cleric of Selune that decided to follow LG principles rather than CG. Maybe that is enough to break the bond between Cleric and Selune, but the shared respect for Good makes it sound like an amicable breakup rather than a betrayal.


Also we should not forget some deities have whims. IIRC some drow suspect Drizzt is favored by Lloth despite Drizzt being opposed to Lloth.

[KorvinStarmast]

That said, why would Selune object to one of her Clerics picking up a piece of the Rod of Law? This example does not make sense to me. I don't see the betrayal. Me either. The two axis system, being assumed, hardly requires that a chaotic god not allow a tool of law in the hands of their servant so long as their servant continues to pursue the agenda/aims of their deity. If, on the other hand, the old L/N/C single axis system was in place, this might be a near impossibility. If Selune is a chaotic god in that system, the cleric would likely take damage from merely handling the Rod of Law.

[Kuulvheysoon]

It's a little tragic to see this kind of situation crop up. We wouldn't even be having it if this conversation was about the Good/Evil axis. The Law/Chaos conflict is just so underrepresented in D&D and fiction in general because it's a lot harder to define what is is precisely. And that's ignoring the common conflation of Good with Law and chaos with Evil.


Story consequences? Sure.

Mechanical consequences? Only if they were discussed with the player and they’re cool with it.This is important. Maybe they lose contact with their own deity, but retain their powers. Why? Did another god take up their cause, and are lending them their silent support? How does the PC feel about that? And how do they feel about the identity of said new deity once they're revealed?


Also we should not forget some deities have whims. IIRC some drow suspect Drizzt is favored by Lloth despite Drizzt being opposed to Lloth.I'd always run with the assumption that Lolth favored him under her guise as a Chaos deity, to help separate the weak from the strong, not that she actually favoured his goals. More what he could do for her, not what he represented. The relationship doesn't have to be two-sided, after all.

[KorvinStarmast]

It's a little tragic to see this kind of situation crop up. We wouldn't even be having it if this conversation was about the Good/Evil axis. The Law/Chaos conflict is just so underrepresented in D&D and fiction in general because it's a lot harder to define what is is precisely. Elric of Melnibone is on the phone; he'd like a quiet word. :smallbiggrin:

[Kuulvheysoon]

Elric of Melnibone is on the phone; he'd like a quiet word. :smallbiggrin:

I did say underrepresented, not completely absent. That's one series as opposed to what, hundreds of series that focus on Good versus Evil? I stand by my statement. :smalltongue:

[Cheesegear]

would there be any implications to this 'betrayal' of faith / joining the opposition against your own god?

Absolutely. No spells and no Channel Divinity for you. It is not in the Deity's interest to invest power in a Cleric that no longer serves them, especially if that Cleric is actively working against them. If they want their powers back, they need to be aligned with their Deity. Roleplaying matters. Especially for characters with borrowed power.

First step; is have your player attempt to convince their Deity (i.e; You) that they are still working in the Deity's interests by doing whatever it is they're doing. This can be easier or more difficult, depending on what the players' actions actually are and how flexible the Deity in question, is their goals and how to achieve them. You get to keep your Powers if your actions make sense.

Second step; If that's not possible, start designing a storyline and/or adventure in which the player redeems themselves in the eyes of their deity. However, until their redemption, I don't know what you should do. Obviously, the character in question still has to participate in the current adventure, but also not be a dead weight without spells or abilities. Maybe they get to keep their spells, but their spell selection is limited? This would be very complicated without actually talking to the individual player, and the tone you want to set for your campaign.

Third step; If the second step sounds like a lot of work and/or other players wont be interested in doing that. This is the easiest and simplest solution: It's time to pick a new Deity, and pick a new Subclass (Tasha's). At the very least, pick a Deity who is similar to the current one, but is more flexible or amenable to whatever the player is doing. This should leave the character with some kind of mark. Not necessarily visible, but certainly discernible by certain people, that the character has abandoned a Deity, and the Deity in question was none too pleased when that happened.

[Unoriginal]

It's a little tragic to see this kind of situation crop up. We wouldn't even be having it if this conversation was about the Good/Evil axis. The Law/Chaos conflict is just so underrepresented in D&D and fiction in general because it's a lot harder to define what is is precisely.

Untrue. It's pretty easy to define a conflict between collectivism and individualism.

It's just that 5e has decided that, aside from the Blood War, the conflict between Law and Chaos was ancient history. It's an artistic choice, not a question of difficulty to portray it.


would there be any implications to this 'betrayal' of faith / joining the opposition against your own god?

In 5e, you're not a Cleric because you believe in a deity, you're a Cleric because a deity believes in you.

Is the mortal doing this enough to make the god lose faith in them?

IMO, it'll likely depends on which deity and which mortal.

[Zevox]

I say it certainly depends on the deity. I can see some Chaotic gods being just fine with Law and not particularly caring (Selune as just one example, nothing in her portfolio really screams Chaos or anti-Law)
Yeah, this. Especially when it comes to Law vs Chaos, some gods will very much care more than others. Selune is likely to just shrug and not much care, so long as her Cleric is still upholding her own tennents, which are more about being good than anything else (hell, part of her dogma in Faiths & Pantheons, the old 3E book about the FR gods, is "Promote acceptance and tolerance. See all other beings as equals."). Selune herself is a free-spirited type and said to be accustomed to change over the eons, and thus her alignment is considered Chaotic, but that doesn't mean she has some stanch opposition to order in general.

But do the same thing as a Cleric of another god that is more strongly Chaotic in outlook, such as Talos or Sharess for example, and you're more likely to get a reaction, probably including the Cleric losing access to their powers and needing to find a new deity.

[Cheesegear]

In 5e, you're not a Cleric because you believe in a deity, you're a Cleric because a deity believes in you.

If I was the kind of person who sig'd random things I liked, this would be one of them.
Instead, I'll just commit it to memory.

[Unoriginal]

If I was the kind of person who sig'd random things I liked, this would be one of them.
Instead, I'll just commit it to memory.

Thank you, that's huge praise.

[KorvinStarmast]

In 5e, you're not a Cleric because you believe in a deity, you're a Cleric because a deity believes in you. Bingo. It appears that someone here has read the PHB. +1. :smallsmile:


Is the mortal doing this enough to make the god lose faith in them? IMO, it'll likely depends on which deity and which mortal. Well framed. :smallsmile:

I did say underrepresented, not completely absent. That's one series as opposed to what, hundreds of series that focus on Good versus Evil? I stand by my statement. :smalltongue: Hawkmoon of Koln (four books) touched on it (can't recall the Count Brass/Castle Brass books well enough); Poul Anderson had two or three books (Operation Chaos, its sequel, Three Heart Three Lions) with the law/chaos theme.
While it's more than one series, your point on the body of work over the past 50 years .... yeah.

[DwarfFighter]

If a PC in one of your games was a cleric of a chaotic god (pick any - maybe Selune for example) and they decided to align themselves with the side of Law in the eternal struggle against Chaos (taking up one of the pieces of the Rod of Law for example), would there be any implications to this 'betrayal' of faith / joining the opposition against your own god?

Diverging alignments need not be a dealbreaker, the Cleric should nevertheless act and worship along the tenets of the faith. I could see any DnD deity have Lawful guardians of their holy sites, Chaotic visionaries pushing the limits of their spheres of influence, Good healers, Evil self-serving theocrats, and Neutral mentors that encourage the faithful.

The deity's alignment is fine for giving a hint at for what purpose regular worshipers might pray or sacrifice to them, but for the full-time clergy there is more to everyday life than sermons and ritual. There are practical concerns to attend to, and personal motivations that promote oneself, and that do not conflict with the goals of the deity.

A Lawful Evil witch hunter might conceivably serve a goddess of healing.

[Sorinth]

Do you allow clerics to have a different alignment from the god? If yes then I don't see how you would justify taking away someones spells. And from a game pov, you should talk out of game with the player to see what they would enjoy because taking away all the players toys is rarely fun even if it fits the story.

In my homebrew the Gods aren't actually the source of a cleric's magic, nor are Patrons the source of a Warlocks magic. What they do is awaken and help grow the power already inside the person. So if the player pisses off their God/Patron there's not much they can do against the player beyond tell their other servants to bring the player to heel.

[Unoriginal]

Do you allow clerics to have a different alignment from the god? If yes then I don't see how you would justify taking away someones spells. And from a game pov, you should talk out of game with the player to see what they would enjoy because taking away all the players toys is rarely fun even if it fits the story.

TBF there is a difference between "being of a different alignment from your god" and "doing X specific action the god personally disapproves of".

[Cheesegear]

Do you allow clerics to have a different alignment from the god? If yes then I don't see how you would justify taking away someones spells.

Because actions and alignment aren't the same thing.

Do actions cause alignment? Or does alignment cause actions? Since player agency is one of the most important things in the game - not necessarily character agency, that's different - it's actions that cause alignment.

The Deity takes away their Clerics' power because the Cleric is trying to end the Deity's existence. Not because the Cleric turned Chaotic.


because taking away all the players toys is rarely fun even if it fits the story.

Then the player should think about their actions before their character takes them. Taking away their toys is the consequence of making bad choices.
You can present the option of giving them back. But you should never, ever be afraid of taking the toys away.

'May I have permission to punish you for your actions?' Just...That's certainly a DMing style, for sure. Not one that I would ever go for. But sure.


What they do is awaken and help grow the power already inside the person.

So, a Sorcerer?


So if the player pisses off their God/Patron there's not much can do...

If a Patron in your world can not control the subjects they 'activate' the power inside, then why would they do it?

[greenstone]

…would there be any implications to this 'betrayal' of faith / joining the opposition against your own god?

In my game, yes. It is part of the world design that clerics are servants of gods (mostly one god, but ocasionally small groups of gods with similar interests). Their power is given to them to advance their god's interests. Continually working against their god's interests results in at least the removal of the power.

I agree with other posters in this thread that this is not necessarily about alignment. Gods generally care more about their interests than about a mortal's motivation.

[Sorinth]

Because actions and alignment aren't the same thing.

Do actions cause alignment? Or does alignment cause actions? Since player agency is one of the most important things in the game - not necessarily character agency, that's different - it's actions that cause alignment.

The Deity takes away their Clerics' power because the Cleric is trying to end the Deity's existence. Not because the Cleric turned Chaotic.

The OPs example wasn't anywhere remotely close to the Cleric trying to end the Deity's existence.



Then the player should think about their actions before their character takes them. Taking away their toys is the consequence of making bad choices.
You can present the option of giving them back. But you should never, ever be afraid of taking the toys away.

'May I have permission to punish you for your actions?' Just...That's certainly a DMing style, for sure. Not one that I would ever go for. But sure.

At the end of the day it's a game, so yes players and dms need to be on the same page for things like this. Ideally it's something to be brought up at a session 0.

There's a reason it used to be included in the rules but was dropped.



So, a Sorcerer?



If a Patron in your world can not control the subjects they 'activate' the power inside, then why would they do it?

To a certain extent yes you can think of everyone as a Sorcerer, the classes are just a set of mechanics they aren't actually real things in the world.

As for why a Patron would help activate/grow someones power, the simple answer is that it's one of the easiest ways to get servants to do the Patron's "work" in the mortal realm. The longer answer is that it's an investment since when the person dies their soul will more often then not end up in the Patron's domain/possession, and the Patrons can use those souls as a power source of sorts. So a Devil will help Warlocks and in return eventually get the Warlock's soul which they then might consume to increase their own power, or use in some other way to advance up the devil hiearchy. A "Good" diety is similar they will still use souls as a power source if/when necessary but probably aren't directly consuming them.

[Naanomi]

it's actions that cause alignment.
Eh, there are effects still in the game that forcefully change alignment that are expected to influence behavior. It is more complex than either/or


Regarding the Gods thing: very setting dependent. Clerics of Eberron it wouldn't matter at all. Same with elemental clerics of Athas. Most of Faerun's Gods care about what their clerics do but don't care explicitly about alignment much. Several of the Gods of Krynn are very involved directly in Alignment matters and explicitly track that sort of thing for intervention.

My own home setting, the Gods allow their clerics to do what they want; and if they had to interfere it would be with agents (divine or other clerics) to reprimand them rather than stripping their powers

[Kane0]

If a PC in one of your games was a cleric of a chaotic god (pick any - maybe Selune for example) and they decided to align themselves with the side of Law in the eternal struggle against Chaos (taking up one of the pieces of the Rod of Law for example), would there be any implications to this 'betrayal' of faith / joining the opposition against your own god?


Error 907: Further context required.

[Sigreid]

So RAW, being a chosen cleric doesn't actually have anything to do with the god you worship for some reason. I think mostly just their desire to not have any behaviors enforced in this edition.

That said, even if you want to have the actual worship of a god matter, the next question is, is the character supporting a specific lawful cause, or are they rebelling against the teachings of their god? If the former, there's no particular reason to for them to lose their power. If the latter, another god may be jonesing to sponsor a powerful cleric. Or, a god may feed them power to lure them further into lawfulness or because it's just funny.

[Unoriginal]

If a Patron in your world can not control the subjects they 'activate' the power inside, then why would they do it?

The writers' default expectation for 5e is that once the Patron gives you a spark of power/you've taken a spark of power from the Patron, they cannot take it back. Some Patrons add clauses that you can't use your powers anymore if you do X, Y or Z, and some Patrons have the capacity to strip beings of their power if they get their hands/tentacles/minds on you directly, but the idea is that the "got power from an otherworldly entity" thing is a done transaction (and maybe an one-sided one, with either the Warlock or the Patron imposing it) by lvl 1.

As to why they'd knowingly do it if they can't control the people once it's done, well, it's the same reason why a merchant would sell a weapon: either the benefits of the transaction exceeded the risks and the costs that came with it, in their opinion, or they were somehow coerced into it.

[Cheesegear]

If a Cleric Breaks Faith With Their God

Unfortunately, there's no Oathbreaker Subclass option for Clerics, like there is Paladins. Presumably that's because in previous editions, Fallen Paladins were always a thing. However, nobody ever talked about Fallen Clerics because what even is that? However, in the fluff, it's pretty clear that that's a possibility. Similar to a Warlock, a Cleric actually is serving their Patron's interests, and that's why they're granted power. But what should happen if the Cleric no longer serves their Patron's interests?

Reversible
The Patron should present an opportunity for the character to redeem themselves.

1. Cut Off. No Spells, No Channel Divinity, and definitely no Divine Intervention. You can keep your Level 1 Subclass abilities, sure. This makes sense. A Patron isn't going to give out Power when they're not gaining any return. However, D&D is a cooperative game, and this kind of thing isn't just punishing for the player - as they deserve - but it's punishing for the party, as they now have to lug around a character that is simply dead weight. A Cleric without spells or CD is basically just a walking, talking block of wood with higher stats. If this wasn't the kind of thing that could severely cripple the entire party, then it's the one I would go for. As I said, it's what makes the most sense. Unfortunately, it's the least valid for the player, since why would they keep playing if they aren't being useful?

2. Restrictions. No Subclass Abilities - including Domain spells - other than the ones you got at Level 1, and again no Divine Intervention, as if. You can still cast Spells, and you can still Turn Undead. But the Power you get from your patron is now a leaky faucet, rather than an unending tap. This is a lot less punishing than what would actually make sense, your Patron is still giving you Power even though you're working against them? Okay. Sure. Deity works in mysterious ways. As always I couldn't care less about an individual player, I care about how a player's choices affect the group. The Cleric can still cast all the spells that they would normally, and they can still Turn Undead for whatever that's worth. But fact is that they can still cast spells, and that's a damn sight more than they deserve, since Clerics can prepare new Spells every Long Rest and take whatever Spells they want. This is likely a lot more palatable for the player since Spells are the most important part of being a Cleric - at least mechanically - and the player gets to keep the vast majority of them, so what's the problem?
I would probably even rule that their Holy Symbol no longer functions as the 'M' component for Spells.

3. Wayward. You've done good work so far. The Deity recognises that. They're not going to take away your accomplishments, nor the strides you've made so far. You have all your Cleric levels. But, you can no longer gain Cleric (or Paladin) levels. The Deity doesn't want you to die or anything. But all the same, you can't stay here. Time to multi-class. You can come back to Cleric levels when you apologise.

Irreversible
The Cleric and/or Patron has abandoned the other. This should leave the character with a non-visible, but discernible mark against their soul.

4. Faith Redirected. Choose a new Deity, choose a new Subclass. This was always possible. But Tasha's addresses it explicitly. Ideally, you would choose a similar Deity, and just continue with the same Subclass. But if the player doesn't care too much about roleplaying or narrative, then they aren't actually being punished for their actions - not even a little bit. What difference does one Deity make over another if the player doesn't actually care about their Deity because the Deity isn't mechanical? Whatever. Narratively, the Deity in question might ask what's to stop the Cleric from breaking the faith again? And again? And again? How can the character be trusted when their soul is already burned?

5. Character Rebuild Same name, same race species, height, weight and appearance - maybe even same stats, but that might not be workable. Just start writing a new character with some of the boxes (e.g; Species) already pre-filled in.

[Toadkiller]

“Humans are odd. They think order and chaos are somehow opposites and try to control what won’t be. But there is grace in their failings. I think you missed that.” – Vision

Something that could be fun is- ignore it for awhile. Maybe there are some other faithful encountered who are mad about it. But the god seems to not notice.

If they go far enough perhaps they encounter the god(or angel or whatever) who takes a similar point of view as Vision. “Oh little one - you think you can see the consequences of your actions? Nothing you do brings order for anything more than the blinking of my eye. Your heresy, if it makes you happy to think of it that way has increased chaos with every step you’ve take “. Or whatever - write it better than that.

After all - entropy will always increase.

[Unoriginal]

However, nobody ever talked about Fallen Clerics because what even is that? However, in the fluff, it's pretty clear that that's a possibility.

Well, one of them is a character in Descent into Avernus.



Similar to a Warlock, a Cleric actually is serving their Patron's interests, and that's why they're granted power. But what should happen if the Cleric no longer serves their Patron's interests?

A Patron and a deity are not the same. And neither the Cleric nor the Warlock have to serve the interests of the Patron or god.

A god of trickery could make the most close-minded, by-the-book police officier in the realm their cleric, just because they find it funny. As for Warlocks, one of the possible relationships the PHB talks about is "Warlock is stealing power from the Patron".

[Cheesegear]

A Patron and a deity are not the same.

I'm using patron to mean 'the one who grants you support'. Probably shouldn't have capitalised it so much.
No, a Patron and Deity are not the same. But Deities are patrons (lower-case).


And neither the Cleric nor the Warlock have to serve the interests of the Patron or god.

Uhh...That's a strong disagree from me.


A god of trickery could make the most close-minded, by-the-book police officier in the realm their cleric, just because they find it funny.

So...That would be serving the Deity's interests, even if the patsy doesn't know it.


As for Warlocks, one of the possible relationships the PHB talks about is "Warlock is stealing power from the Patron".

That's not so much a Patron as it is something else. Host? Gravy Bucket? Either way, the Warlock is a parasite, and the Patron is not a patron.

[Vampyre_Lord]

something like this seems like a good thing to turn into a character moment. why did they do it? are they serving what they believe is the gods interests? is it a long term decision or just a one off (like, do they intend to continue to oppose their deity's alignment/wishes, or was it circumstantial)? as the DM you need to determine what the deity actually thinks about it, as people have mentioned, the example given of selune might not care. i wouldnt take anything away from the player (class abilities, etc) but its up to them to figure out why they still have that.

there should ALWAYS be ramifications to actions. never waste plot potential. but also work with the player to figure out what the best most interesting ramification can be.

[Unoriginal]

Honestly, though, if a Cleric lost their deity's support because they grabbed a piece of the Rod of Law and claimed it as their own, I could totally see the Cleric go: "Who care about your power? I have more in my hand!" then use the Rod's piece to empower themselves (or at least attempt to) thanks to its connection to the concept of Law.

[Glorthindel]

Bingo. It appears that someone here has read the PHB. +1. :smallsmile:
Well framed. :smallsmile:
Hawkmoon of Koln (four books) touched on it (can't recall the Count Brass/Castle Brass books well enough); Poul Anderson had two or three books (Operation Chaos, its sequel, Three Heart Three Lions) with the law/chaos theme.
While it's more than one series, your point on the body of work over the past 50 years .... yeah.

I have always been kinda sad that Warhammer erased the Gods of Law, and just made their Chaos Gods Evil by another name.

[Warder]

In my games all classes that rely on external sources of power (warlock, paladin, cleric, to a much lesser extent druids & rangers) can have their powers taken away. So far this has never happened even once, though a warlock came pretty close at one time. I think it's not only fair to run things that way, but very good for roleplaying, as long as it's all clearly communicated to players before it becomes an issue.

[da newt]

Are you asking as the DM or as the player?

Both. In this case I am a Player in the party w/ the Cleric in question, but I also DM (and have a good idea what I'd do as DM). I was looking to see what everyone else thought.

As for the Chaos vs Law is different from Good vs Evil, I'm no expert on the lore, but as I understand it the Wind Dukes and the Rod of Law gave exactly zero fox about 'good' (or evil), which adds an interesting layer to this.

[Cheesegear]

I was looking to see what everyone else thought.

Well, I think you've got a problem. Is the problem you outlined in the OP, a hypothetical, or is that what actually happened?

No. Changing your alignment is not enough to justify a Deity removing a Cleric's Powers. You can justify anything. Unoriginal even outlined a potential way that a Lawful (Good?) creature can potentially be a Cleric of Trickery; The creature serves a purpose, even unknowingly.

You can even have an 'Ends Justify the Means'; The Deity asks 'WTF!?' Trust me, it'll make sense in the end. This is for you, let me explain how...I'm using my free will to act in a way that a Deity with a fixed worldview can't understand unless I explain it to them. There aren't too many Deities that mess with free will. One of Selune's portfolios is Divination, I don't know how She couldn't see the outcomes of your actions. But hey, it's the example.

Actions and intent dictate your...Service? Picking up a Rod of Law, isn't enough to break from Selune. That's...Not anything Selune cares about.

If you were to use your Cleric powers to start hunting down Werebears and Doppelgangers-who-are-minding-their-own-business,
If you started actively proselytizing for Shar,
If you started raising Undead and Demons,
If you made it your business to start hunting owls,
If you started going around burning prophecies and sacking observatories,

Yeah. You're going to have problems with Selune. But picking up a Rod of Law? That's not something to be concerned about. Not really.

Title: What happens if a Cleric aligns themselves against their deity? ...A lot of bad things, I should hope.
Example: What happens if a Cleric of a Chaotic Deity, is Lawful? ...Probably not much. If this is actually a real example, and not a hypothetical, then it's fine.

[KorvinStarmast]

In my games all classes that rely on external sources of power (warlock, paladin, cleric, to a much lesser extent druids & rangers) can have their powers taken away. So far this has never happened even once, though a warlock came pretty close at one time. I think it's not only fair to run things that way, but very good for roleplaying, as long as it's all clearly communicated to players before it becomes an issue. Your last sentence encapsulates a lot of sound points. +1. How invested in your world and your cosmos are your players? That will inform how successful this approach can become RP wise.

Both. In this case I am a Player in the party w/ the Cleric in question Then here is your stance, if I were to be advising you.
1. Discuss with your DM, in your game, at your table, since we aren't there. Arrive at an accord with the DM.
2. If you want to use the Rod of Law while serving this Chaotic deity, go back to my first post about how this deity being far more interested (since you are in a two axis system) in whether your cleric is still serving her interests. If you can show your deity, or your temple's leadership, that you are, by whatever means, still serving the deity's interests, then there is no problem and you have RP's your way into, once again, the chosen one of your deity going forth and doing great things.

Your cleric is a chosen one of their deity. That's in the PHB in the descriptions of the cleric's class.


Clerics are intermediaries between the mortal world and the distant planes of the gods. As varied as the gods they serve, clerics strive to embody the handiwork of their deities.
No ordinary priest, a Cleric is imbued with divine magic.
Healers and Warriors
Divine magic, as the name suggests, is the power of the gods, flowing from them into the world. Clerics are conduits for that power, manifesting it as miraculous Effects. The gods don't grant this power to everyone who seeks it, but only those chosen to fulfill a high calling. {snip}
When a cleric takes up an Adventuring life, it is usually because his or her god demands it. Pursuing the goals of the gods often involves braving dangers beyond the walls of civilization, smiting evil, or seeking holy relics in ancient tombs.
Deities often make additional allowances for their favorites, their chosen ones.
(Unless your DM, who plays the deity, does not).

So I'll double down: keep furthering the aims of your deity, regardless of the weapon and tools to hand, and trust that your deity is not so close minded as to obsess over a single aspect of her general alignment portfolio.
Note: clerics are NOT required to have the same alignment as their deity. (IIRC, that has been true in the AL rules since game's release). You can be the lawful good, or lawful neutral, cleric of a chaotic good deity.
Yeah, you can.
Since I seem to recall that you have some Navy experience, let's use a maneuvering board (https://youtu.be/j197C0XuNUA) illustration of how to plot alignment. Don't use this artificial 'has to be one of nine boxes' alignment model.
You could be anywhere within the 360 degree circle, with North (360/0) equal to Good, South (180) Equal to Evil, West (270) Equal to Law, and East (090) Equal to chaos, circle has a diameter of 10nm.
You could be at, for example, coordinate 050 at 3 nm. 080 at 9nm. 030 at 7 NM. All of those are somewhere in the CG spectrum, but each puts a different general emphasis on how they trend ... where is your cleric on that Maneuvering Board? You can also be 300 at 7 nm, since you can be a lawful neutral (trending good) cleric of a chaotic good deity.

[Millstone85]

In 5e, you're not a Cleric because you believe in a deity, you're a Cleric because a deity believes in you.
If I was the kind of person who sig'd random things I liked, this would be one of them.
Instead, I'll just commit it to memory.
Bingo. It appears that someone here has read the PHB. +1. :smallsmile:My reading is that the cleric and the deity must believe in each other.

Indeed, a deity chooses their clerics:
The gods don't grant this power to everyone who seeks it, but only to those chosen to fulfill a high calling.

But also, cleric spells need devotion:
A cleric might learn formulaic prayers and ancient rites, but the ability to cast cleric spells relies on devotion and an intuitive sense of a deity's wishes.
Wisdom is your spellcasting ability for your cleric spells. The power of your spells comes from your devotion to your deity.

[Unoriginal]

My reading is that the cleric and the deity must believe in each other.

Indeed, a deity chooses their clerics:

But also, cleric spells need devotion:

Well, you are a Cleric if and only if a god believes in you, but you're only going to cast spelld Cleric if it is reciprocrated.

[da newt]

To be clear, I am not the Cleric in question or the DM, I am a Player of a different PC in the party - an interested observer.



(The Cleric in question has no idea where to patrol her assigned screen kilo in the alignment mo-board analogy - no clue who the guide is)

[KorvinStarmast]

My reading is that the cleric and the deity must believe in each other.

Indeed, a deity chooses their clerics:

But also, cleric spells need devotion:
Please see the DMG, pages 10-13, forces and philosohpies. But that said, I mostly agree with the 'they must believe in each other' idea since it enforces the "you are my special one" idea and "the chosen one" while hundreds of other acolytes and priests are not the chosen one.

@da newt: oh my gosh, that takes me back a few decades! :smalleek: (I did once have to refresh for a JOOD how to compute the relative wind so that he got the wind right during flight quarters ... :smalltongue: A few of the QMs made some rather sharp jokes about an aviator teaching a blackshoe how to drive a ship ... so it goes)

[PhoenixPhyre]

I like the model that clerics are delegated some fraction of the god's power (via spells & channel divinity). That delegation can be removed, but generally the mind and ways of gods are not those of man, especially for chaotic ones. So even if the character thinks they're going against their deity's will, the deity might not think so. I'd not penalize anything unless the player and I had discussed it OOC and wanted to go that way.

-------
Not directly on topic, but my personal setting has the concept of mistaken devotion--you think you're devoted to god X and empowered by them, but really you're doing the work of god Y and they're the ones acting as your divine sponsor. This is most evident with a group of NPC clerics (and other fanatics) who believe that they have been empowered by the goddess of hearth, home, and family (notorious for being non-violent and preferring that her servants are the same) to "take on the necessary sins that the believers may be safe". By which they mean "cleanse the world of unclean creatures, including basically everyone who isn't human, elven, halfling, or dwarf under that definition." They're raging bigots, who use the undeniable fact that they have divine power to imply that the goddess herself supports that.

She doesn't. Not at all. Those that used to be her clerics were dumped by her long ago. They're really sponsored and empowered by the god of practical jokes, who finds the whole thing hilarious. He's not a very nice person.

So the end result is that you can get dumped by your god, but another god can pick up the reins without you even knowing (if you're particularly zealous or obtuse).

[Millstone85]

Please see the DMG, pages 10-13, forces and philosohpies.Okay, I did. What of it?

[KorvinStarmast]

Okay, I did. What of it? A cleric does not technically have to have a deity, though the cleric generally does serve one if we take the 'overall genre' approach.

[Millstone85]

A cleric does not technically have to have a deity, though the cleric generally does serve one if we take the 'overall genre' approach.Okay, but my post was about the relationship between a deity and their cleric, so... :smallconfused:

Anyway, since forces and philosophies have been brought up, I will say that I imagine things work much the same with those. That is, a cleric's attunement to a force or philosophy, and thus the cleric's ability to use its power, can be described in terms of devotion and worthiness.

[Glorthindel]

Note: clerics are NOT required to have the same alignment as their deity. (IIRC, that has been true in the AL rules since game's release). You can be the lawful good, or lawful neutral, cleric of a chaotic good deity.

While that is definitely the case now, in older editions (I don't know when it changed, but it was definitely the case in 2nd ed) you were limited to one step removed (So a follower of a Chaotic Good deity could be Neutral Good or Chaotic Neutral, but not Lawful Good or Chaotic Evil)

[KorvinStarmast]

While that is definitely the case now, in older editions (I don't know when it changed, but it was definitely the case in 2nd ed) you were limited to one step removed (So a follower of a Chaotic Good deity could be Neutral Good or Chaotic Neutral, but not Lawful Good or Chaotic Evil) We are discussing 5e, though. I also do not agree with the OP that simply using that tool, the rod of law, is necessarily aligning against their deity. Alignment isn't that simple in terms of 'on off switch' In This Edition.
The DM can, however, choose to have the deity react however they'd like to. Which makes it an issue for that table. :smallcool:

[Joe the Rat]

Separating alignment from interest (since 5e), Opposing your deity is a good way to find yourself on an Atonement arc. Strike 1, no CD, Strike 2, No spell recovery, Strike 3, hello random semi-martial adventurer. But we're talking significant strikes for permanent loss (losing channel divinity for a day is a solid rebuke), and it is likely that there will always be a path back. 5e Clerics are chosen to receive power - this is not something you get from faith and practice alone. You were chosen for a reason, and will have a way to return to the fold. Unless you were chosen to be an example of What Not To Do.

So from the DM side, you need to decide if whatever action is taken is truly against the Deity's wishes, or if it fits into their larger plan for your purpose.


I have always been kinda sad that Warhammer erased the Gods of Law, and just made their Chaos Gods Evil by another name.

Warhammer started with a Law-Chaos axis, with Good and Evil being less "extreme" versions of those forces. Dumping the Boring Old Powers of Law was a misstep, but there's not a lot for them to do besides stand behind Team-Not-Chaos and say "Go get 'em, guys!"

You'd need something a bit more blatantly Moorcockian to really make them interesting - by which we mean that both sides are ******s that must be fought. Or a page out of Haggard, "Civilization is only Savagery silver-gilt." Good and bad are in both.


Incidentally this is why I like to put my cosmic conflicts on Law-Chaos, and my deities oblique to alignment, based on their domains.

[KorvinStarmast]

You'd need something a bit more blatantly Moorcockian to really make them interesting - by which we mean that both sides are ******s that must be fought. Or a page out of Haggard, "Civilization is only Savagery silver-gilt." Good and bad are in both.

Incidentally this is why I like to put my cosmic conflicts on Law-Chaos, and my deities oblique to alignment, based on their domains. I find that a better fit as well. More room to work and more oddball alliances among not quite allied groups ...

[Glorthindel]

We are discussing 5e, though.
Whoops, put that one down to a miss-read, I read your "the AL" as "all", and thought you were talking about all the way back to the original edition.

[SirDidymus]

I did say underrepresented, not completely absent. That's one series as opposed to what, hundreds of series that focus on Good versus Evil? I stand by my statement. :smalltongue:

Since I don't think anyone's mentioned it, L.E. Modesitt's Magic of Recluse series focuses on the order vs. chaos conflict. It even has books with perspectives from either side, in case people are interested.

[Angelalex242]

Rod of Law vs Selune, who's primarily a love deity.

"Great. Go convince people to get lawfully married."

[KorvinStarmast]

Rod of Law vs Selune, who's primarily a love deity.

"Great. Go convince people to get lawfully married." I think Selune may end up causing the rod of law to go and find a blue pill ....

[Zevox]

Rod of Law vs Selune, who's primarily a love deity.

"Great. Go convince people to get lawfully married."
I think you're confusing Selûne for Sune. Sune is the Goddess of Love, basically the FR version of Aphrodite; Selûne is the Goddess of the Moon and eternal foe of her sister Shar, Goddess of Darkness.

Nonetheless, yeah, Selûne is also not particularly going to be bothered by one of her Clerics being more on the lawful end of things either.

[Angelalex242]

You're right, I did.

My bad.

Still, Moon deity vs. Law?

The moon, despite being ever changing, still follows a set cycle, and itself controls things like the waves. There's more order in the moon than there appears to be.

[Millstone85]

I think you're confusing Selûne for Sune. Sune is the Goddess of Love, basically the FR version of Aphrodite; Selûne is the Goddess of the Moon and eternal foe of her sister Shar, Goddess of Darkness.And then there is Sharess, who is a different sort of night goddess. Her titles include the Festhall Madam, the Lustful Mistress, the Tawny Temptress, or even the Succubus of Sensation, yet she is chaotic good and pals with Sune.

I don't know how other deities of the Realms feel about having their names yelled in certain intimate situations, but "Oh, Sharess!" sounds appropriate. :smallbiggrin:

[Kuulvheysoon]

I'm just happy that the God of Poetic Justice isn't also a love god. Imagine calling out for Hoar in a moment of passion.

Awkward...

[Angelalex242]

Well, if she cheated on you, and then ended up in that particular profession, it would indeed be poetic justice.

It could work.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Well, if she cheated on you, and then ended up in that particular profession, it would indeed be poetic justice.

It could work.

...well played.

[Demonslayer666]

Entirely up to the DM.

In my game, the gods are very hands off. They do not pay attention to every action your character takes. This is why Devine Intervention only has a chance of working - even when you shout from the rooftops to your god, they are not always listening, in fact, they rarely hear you. It would have to be a severe action to gain the immediate attention of the god (burning their temple, or killing a priest), or a prolonged deviation from the faith (at which point I would discuss it with the player the direction they want to take). In either case, I would warn the player before smacking them with the nerf hammer since it isn't in the rules.

IMO, Cleric powers are earned from your god based on past devotion, the abilities are a preapproved spending limit. In other words, you have already earned them and they are at your disposal. Nothing in the PHB says you only get your spells if your god does an immediate performance evaluation and approves them. You regain them automatically after a long rest is completed - no divine interaction is needed. It says absolutely nothing about your current alignment, or the actions you took the previous day to regain or use your cleric abilities.

As a player, I have been very upset with DMs that nerf on the spot, especially when it overrides what the PHB says it does. My warlock's Guidance spell failed because I cast it on a cleric of Selûne. Nerfing on a whim like that is ridiculous. Now, if we were holding an audience with Selûne, and she was standing right there when I cast it, sure. I'd be fine with it.

All that said, as a player, I would expect repercussions. But I would also expect those repercussions to be reasonable and appropriate (not whimsical or hyperbolic).

In the example provided: taking up the side of law to fight chaos, that could happen without offending/opposing Selûne (CG). You'd have to do it without stepping on her toes. She would oppose evil, and failing to preserve knowledge or life. I think as long as you did that, she would not care. If you went on a LE rampage, destroying knowledge and life for evil gains, I would think there would be serious repercussions. LN and LG are fine IMO, as long as they preserve knowledge and life. In my game, there would not be any immediate repercussions simply by devoting yourself to the law side of the war.

[Naanomi]

Yeah even the most activistic gods in my campaign wouldn't necessarily strip your powers. Send agents to kill you for abusing the gifts you have been given? Maybe

[Kuulvheysoon]

Yeah even the most activistic gods in my campaign wouldn't necessarily strip your powers. Send agents to kill you for abusing the gifts you have been given? Maybe

Wait, they'd send agents to kill the cleric before simply snapping their fingers and stripping them of their god-given powers?

[Millstone85]

Yeah even the most activistic gods in my campaign wouldn't necessarily strip your powers. Send agents to kill you for abusing the gifts you have been given? Maybe
Wait, they'd send agents to kill the cleric before simply snapping their fingers and stripping them of their god-given powers?I am also confused by this.

[PhantomSoul]

I am also confused by this.

Especially when nullifying the powers would make the killing easier!

[Naanomi]

Wait, they'd send agents to kill the cleric before simply snapping their fingers and stripping them of their god-given powers?
Fighting against church and divine agents in your heresy makes for a better story and game experience than crippling your character; and my setting's Gods almost always work through intermediaries

[KorvinStarmast]

... and my setting's Gods almost always work through intermediaries
Likewise.
And for that matter, the Archfey tends to send a warlock or other fey to do their light work ... :smallwink:

[Millstone85]

Fighting against church and divine agents in your heresy makes for a better story and game experience than crippling your character; and my setting's Gods almost always work through intermediariesYes, intermediaries, of which you are one. So if you are judged heretic, why would the god continue to work their magic through you? That's a glaring plot hole, which doesn't make for a better story.


Likewise.
And for that matter, the Archfey tends to send a warlock or other fey to do their light work ... :smallwink:Now, an archfey trying to stop a rogue warlock by sending in more warlocks (who, hopefully, won't go rogue too) is something I can picture. It is a bit silly, yes, but that's what the archfey gets for, well, not being a god. They had to teach secrets to those mortals, and maybe have them go through a ritual to awaken sorcerer-like powers, and that's not something that can easily be undone.

In 4e, the gods' way of granting magic was the same as that of patrons. IIRC, a cleric could even teach someone else how to cleric, with their god being none the wiser. I found that... weak.

[Boci]

Yes, intermediaries, of which you are one. So if you are judged heretic, why would the god continue to work their magic through you? That's a glaring plot hole, which doesn't make for a better story.

No one fluff solution will work for everyone, but a quick easy explanation, because the god has no choice. They don't have individual access to their clerics. They could reduce the amount of divine power they give their clerics as a whole, but couldn't laser focus such an effect on any one indevidual. This would place the emphasis on the clerics faith in getting the magic, and once their faith allows them to access it, its largely up to them when they stop doing so, unless of course other servants of their god find and kill them.

[Millstone85]

No one fluff solution will work for everyone, but a quick easy explanation, because the god has no choice. They don't have individual access to their clerics.That's why I brought up 4e and its gods that were glorified warlock patrons.

[Boci]

That's why I brought up 4e and its gods that were glorified warlock patrons.

Okay, but you preferring otherwise isn't a plothole as you initially called it.

[Millstone85]

Okay, but you preferring otherwise isn't a plothole as you initially called it.It is in the context of 5e and its more traditional divine magic.

In mentioning 4e, I was also offering a (to me, unsatisfying) way of patching up the hole.

[Catullus64]

One thing that would enter into it for me, if I were the DM and using any of the gods of my own making, is the fact that the Cleric's deity wouldn't necessarily know about the betrayal immediately.

Because Clerics pray daily for spells (and because of assumptions about how religion works baked into the game fiction, which forum rules forbid discussing), many DMs and players assume that a Cleric's deity is constantly watching over them from afar, and has a closed-circuit monitor set up in their Cleric's soul to detect betrayal. Now, if you are the servant of a god who specifically reads minds and hearts, or sees many things across time and space, fair enough, but not all (and for me, virtually no) gods work like that.

When you prepare spells, you're performing the rituals and propitiation which your deity demands in exchange for receiving their power; only a few spells and class features expliitly put you in direct contact with your deity, and those tend to be narrowly defined interactions. If you don't change the ritual, the god is going to assume you're still faithful until it explicitly learns otherwise, through your own confession, mortal agents, supernatural servants, or its own great (but not omniscient) powers of perception.

So between wielding the Rod of Law and Selune getting angry and exacting retribution, the player has a grace period before the god finds out, and can even take steps to conceal their faithless act from the deity.

[Boci]

It is in the context of 5e and its more traditional divine magic.

Most would disagree I feel. The relationship between cleric and deity is in the DM's territory, since its not hard mechanics. Its not a plothole to change them.

[Naanomi]

The Gods work in mysterious ways to mortal perspectives.
~Maybe they feel you have a better chance at redemption if you are not laid bare during your tribulations and crisis of faith
~Maybe they think you deserve... Earned through years of faithful service... a fighting chance when the church hunts you down.
~Maybe while you have offended one Power and they indeed withdrew their favor... but another has stepped in to fill that void (and will let you know of your obligation in due time)
~Maybe the entire thing is fulfilling a grander goal of the God's, your moral failure is their greater victory
~Maybe the God itself is in crisis of dogma, at a crossroad which may forever change them, and your tiny continued empowerment is just one sign of that fracturing identity (Gods are, after all, at least somewhat shaped by the will and belief of their followers)... Are you a heretic after all, or the herald of a new faith?

[BerzerkerUnit]

If a PC in one of your games was a cleric of a chaotic god (pick any - maybe Selune for example) and they decided to align themselves with the side of Law in the eternal struggle against Chaos (taking up one of the pieces of the Rod of Law for example), would there be any implications to this 'betrayal' of faith / joining the opposition against your own god?

No, at low level the god is unconcerned with the actions of a single neophyte. At higher level it may be frustrated by the independent streak of its adherent and regret so empowering them. Once Divine Intervention is on the table (10+) that god is going to start to wonder if maybe they’re in the wrong and their faithful servant (perhaps following a less popular dogma the god once mandated) is actually doin them a solid by going back to basics (or maybe the cleric is hyper progressive and the god will come to appreciate how their new dogma draws in more adherents).

Gods with ties to elements of cosmic balance recognize their resources will be tipped this or that way, even while scheming to “win” a war that unravels even their own existence.

[tomandtish]

TBF there is a difference between "being of a different alignment from your god" and "doing X specific action the god personally disapproves of".

Very much this.

The important thing to remember that just because a god has an alignment component (good, evil, law, chaos, or neutral) doesn't mean they are actually a champion OF that alignment. Even for gods, most alignments are a result of their portfolios and how they choose to handle them. So in Eberron, The Traveler is probably going to care if you go from lawful to chaotic, but Dol Dorn probably won't care.



My ruling would be that the god cares how well the cleric is performing their duties in regard to the portfolio. If being lawful instead of chaotic doesn't contradict that, a god is probably not going to care.

[Slipjig]

I think one important point that a lot of people are overlooking is that in most cases, while any given deity has an alignment, specifically advancing that alignment is probably not high on their list of priorities. Actions counter to the deity alignment will be much less important than actions counter to their portfolio.

For example, Oghma would probably have a real issue with someone burning down a library, even if they have a really good reason. Likewise, Torm would probably object to a bodyguard standing aside and letting someone kill their protectee, even if the protectee was a REALLY bad person.

[Foolwise]

Deities also play a much longer game. So a single cleric (or even a whole order) going against the grain may seem counterintuitive now, but once all the pieces fall into place, their supposedly adversarial actions were working in the god's favor the entire time.

That said, it is not uncommon for gods to fall and/or die, so allowing said cleric(s) to continue without repercussions could very well have repercussions for the god.

[Psyren]

In 5e, you're not a Cleric because you believe in a deity, you're a Cleric because a deity believes in you.

+100, well said. This is why true clerics are so rare, and the rank and file of various faiths are usually officiants, priests and other pencil-pushers.



Is the mortal doing this enough to make the god lose faith in them?

IMO, it'll likely depends on which deity and which mortal.

And even then, you're likely to get some kind of warning sign before your powers are affected. Various deities have portents or phenomena that they can use to voice their displeasure. You might also get a not-so-good dream where the a servant of the deity looks displeased or tells you off. A drastic final step might be having you wake up from your long rest with a few different spells than the ones you meant to prepare.

[truemane]

Metamagic Mod: but what about ramifications of a poster who aligns themselves against the Rules?