A bit of fun historical trivia for your Dungeons & Dragons cleric â both gaming history and history history:
In earlier editions of D&D, clerics were typically proficient only with bludgeoning weapons, with the rationale being that clerics arenât supposed to shed blood. Further, this rule was often claimed to be inspired actual, historical dicta issued by the medieval Catholic Church governing the conduct of their clergy.
Historically, itâs true that the medieval Church did, at various times, issue rules against members of the clergy owning and wielding weapons of war. These rules were issued because many priests and bishops were also wealthy landowners, and often became involved in military entanglements with other landowners â and at least some of those priests and bishops werenât satisfied with leading from the rear. Many were apparently very keen on getting their hands dirty in person, and had to be firmly reminded that itâs not great optics for a bishop to be out there lopping peopleâs heads off.
However, thereâs no historical evidence that any priests ever tried to work around those rules by restricting themselves to blunt weapons in order to avoid shedding blood. This is not surprising; for one, Church dicta against priests getting involved in combat werenât always phrased in terms of bloodshed, and even when they were, nobody could reasonably claim that bashing someoneâs head in with a mace doesnât shed blood! Even so, the idea of priests wielding blunt weapons in order to avoid violating rules against shedding blood is not a modern invention; itâs basically a thousand-year-old urban legend.
Now hereâs the twist: some martially inclined priests did make a point of carrying staves or rods in battle, but not for that reason. The preponderance of evidence suggests that it wasnât about avoiding bloodshed, but about plausible deniability: a staff or rod could reasonably be claimed to be a symbol of office rather than a weapon, and rules against participating in battle typically didnât rule out simply being present at a battle in order to rally the troops.
So, you know, if you were a priest or a bishop who preferred the personal touch, and somebody was like âwe literally caught you on an active battlefield carrying what is clearly a weaponâ, you could be all hey, this isnât a mace, itâs a rod, and itâs a symbol of your ecclesiastic authority. You were present at that battle purely to lend moral support to your sideâs troops â and if you just happened to be approached by hostile soldiers, and consequently were obliged to bash their heads in with this heavy metal rod that you just happened to have on your person, well, thatâs unfortunate, but self-defence is self-defence, right?
From this,we can take away two things:
1. The tradition of rules-lawyering is embedded in the gameâs historical inspirations just as much as its own history.
2. The fact that youâre playing a respectable cleric doesnât mean you canât be just awful.
areudirty
dededos
baratheonpilled
dailybridgerton
janainaart
prguitarman
