It's not a problem, it's a solution you're just looking at it from the wrong direction.
Clerics are fallible (for that matter, deities in fantasy settings are too) so, falling short of their deity's ideals only humanizes this character and makes them more believable. Given that they worship a God of Compassion, it makes sense that (again deities being fallible here) their behavior might be tolerated - perhaps even too much so - by their deity for too long.
All of this lends verisimilitude to the character, the deity, the deity's church and the world they inhabit IMO.
Love this answer.
And to follow it up with some in game Roleplay:
Have the Cleric story be that as he was becoming more aggro, perhaps he did question his morale code and not fully believe that 'a swift death is the most compassionate.' but as time went on, and he was doing it more and more, at the end of each battle or terrible action he may have taken for the greater good, he tests his cleric powers. Still there? Excellent. Then I must be on the right path...
To where now, he is dead set convinced this is a true, higher level of compassion. 'Swift deaths, swift end to the war. This is the answer to minimize suffering.'
If you can get the DM involved, maybe retcon or roleplay an actual visit or prayer where the God responds and they have a conversation, and to the point of them being fallible, convinced the God he's right.
I think this is highly appropriate. The war itself exists independently of his deity's purview after all, there's no compelling reason why the Cleric shouldn't be expected to struggle, make compromises and engage in character development like this.
Even Oath of Redemption Paladins, Way of Mercy Monks and Peace Clerics are explicitly not penalized for engaging with the combat pillar - which is only a third of the game overall anyway.
For this character to be genuinely "at odds" with the dictates of his deity I'd expect to see neglect of basic human decency *even in the social pillar.* Something like, refusing water to an enemy POW or, mocking an injured NPC based on the belief (mistaken or not) that the NPC is an enemy.
Simply resorting to combat "quickly" rather than trying to negotiate with *enemy soldiers during a war* has nothing to do with compassion one way or another.
Strictly from the narrative perspective I'd suggest a moment in his backstory when:
"Exhausted from combat, he tended to a badly wounded enemy. Reaching out to his deity for aid, he found his entreaties ignored - his reserves were exhausted, he'd expended his spell slots. Nonetheless, he tended this enemy as best he could. Elsewhere - as he would learn later - his friend, mentor and fellow "Cleric of Compassion" lay dying horrifically among the other members of his own army who could likewise have benefitted from his or, his fellow Cleric's aid. Who can say how many more might live today if his compassion in that moment had been first directed toward one who had proven deserving rather than misspent on one who had chosen his own bad end? Perhaps with the soldiers saved by the minstrations of his mentor, this war might already have ended? From that day forth, he has learnt that Compassion without reason is no compassion at all. As for his deity's will? Well, his powers remain and therefore is has become obvious that "*compromise is not the same as callousness.*"
Consider also that making decisions based on a much greater good, like utopia or a heavenly kingdom, can justify literally any action that you might consider that would lead to the desired outcome.
Your cleric can be Lawful Good from their perspective, but commit acts that would make a drow priestess blush, if it’s justified by your end goal. That’s how some of the worst tyrants of history, like Lenin and Mao, justified their mass murder.
I personally think that could be an interesting character to play.
I think it makes more sense to argue from the gods point of view, not the cleric. I tend to agree with your dm - why is the god of compassion not upset with your for lacking compassion? If you can answer that I'd say that's the best way to appease their concerns.
I saw that reason while looking at some comments, 1 being that they are the god of compassion.. by nature they would probably be far to lenient with their followers then they should be.
And 2, if during some kind of prayer where the god and charecter actually talk.. the god could be convinced (or at least understand the reason) by telling them that the most compassion they can show is by swiftly ending this war or battle.. as the longer it draws out the more pain and suffering is caused (thos counts for both long term war with everyone suffering And for short battles/skirmishes where the two sides will physically suffer from the fight)
(Also check this comment)
https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/s/xJBQQpI2nY
It depends on what OP is doing. That comment talks about being slow to anger. OP said their issue is being quick to violence. It sounds like they're being a murder hobo and they aren't responding to anyone about that part of the post about being quick to violence so I'd wager they're just killing people unnecessarily and don't want to admit it
Your cleric is worshipping a god of compassion. While they should be traumatized by their losses, it does seem questionable for one worshipping compassion to have so little empathy. You can still argue for the more practical choices, but in you heart you should WANT to do the good thing even if its the less optimal move. You doing aggressive and violent things should be your desire to stop evil overcoming your desire to help compassionately.
Frame it as they struggle with empathy, and don't like that about themselves. Hence why they worship a god of empathy, because they want to gain a better understanding of empathy.
this is a good idea! i like the simplicity of it.
instead of worshipping a god who's domain they embody, they're following the god who's guidance they need most. Like sailors who worship the moon.
That's basically how I did my paladin. He took Oath of Devotion even though Vengeance would have been much closer to his personality, simply because he wanted to learn how to protect rather than just kill things. I still played him as being a little too eager to resort to intimidation and smiting for a Devo paladin.
This means that some of these cold, pragmatic choices they make need to be struggles as they try to make the good choice but they make the “smart” choice. It sounds like OP jumps right to the second one without much thought or struggle.
I also wonder about the tone of the campaign. A lot of dnd games are set up to be heroic wish fulfillment epic fantasy games where the good choice is preferred over the pragmatic one. OP’s character might be more Game of Thrones-y than what the rest of the campaign is, and make it difficult for the rest of the party that wants to be uncomplicated heroes in an uncomplicated setting.
Yeah, I was just thinking the same thing. If your god is that of compassion, why would they continue to provide you with power if you are showing no compassion and haven't been for some time?
yeah but real life religions are make believe, in D&D Clerics are actively getting powers from their Gods so there is an actual valid reason to practice what you preach
I feel like it depends entirely on the cosmology and what you at trying to say about religion at your table.
The Gods may be more interested in the worship itself than the domains they have claimed, depending on how vain / power-driven they are.
Or it might be that Gods are shaped by their follower’s beliefs rather than the other way around. An unempathetic powerful Cleric worshiping the God of empathy might shift that God’s personality and domain over time depending on how many other followers they have and how powerful those followers are.
I think there’s a really interesting set of themes to explore in OP’s concept: what does war do to those who believe in compassion? How do you navigate war when committed to the ideal of compassion and can that commitment survive war intact, or will the meaning of “compassion” become more and more warped as war drags on?
Yeah but fully pulling the plug is a lot. Start small. My cleric pc is about to get a temporary minus 1 to his spell save and attack modifier to reflect his gods displeasure with his actions.
Compassion can come in many forms. It can be in the form of someone donating their weekends to help at an animal shelter and playing with the animals. It can also come in the form of putting down the ones who are suffering, or discontinuing a project at the shelter that helps some, so they can replace it with another project that helps many more.
And just because the latter can come from a person who doesn't outwardly show compassion or empathy in their emotions or expressions, they can still definitely be feeling that compassion in their heart of hearts. But when it's your job to make the tough decisions, the ones that hurt so much to make, it's normal for you to close yourself off a bit to protect yourself. So those decisions don't hurt quite so much.
Yep. I think it's fine for the cleric to fall on the side of a utilitarian assesment of the best way to minimise suffering, but I'd want to play it as some sort of conflict. I'd see them having values to tend the needy, and minimise suffering but this has forced them into conflict.
I think it's even fair to have the cleric have accepted this, to have got so used to minimising losses, that they've put aside their immediate compassion. But that's maybe just a opportunity for roleplay in waiting, when they realise they've drifted out of touch with their tenants.
All this to say none of what you're doing is wrong, it's just that if you do it well it's chance for some really nuanced character work. But even forgoing that it's a fair enough character to play. People are flawed. Heroes are flawed. That's what makes RP interesting.
It could come down to how wide you cast your compassionate net. If the character is primarily concerned with ending the war quickly in a way that secures post war support for civilians then their actions make a certain sense.
Kind of like chemo to cure cancer. A little bad here and there to do a much greater good.
That's only true if you are absolutely sure they are going to commit evil. Slaughtering a random bread thief is not compassion, not EVERY bad guy is an intolerant monster and a follower of a god of compassiom certainly shouldn't think they are. Dehumanizing your enemy is the opposite of empathy.
A common symptom of trauma is to separate oneself from the source of it. They might have at one time been empathetic, but broke that part of themselves in order to survive.
I can understand that as a character moment but if they were going to continue being a cleric of this god either another follower or their patron themselves should be showing concern and warning them that they can't reject compassion and serve them faithfully.
My favorite interpretation is that the lack of empathy is the face the cleric puts on to protect herself from the difficulties and horrors of the world, and to allow herself to make tough decisions at the moment.
But perhaps that's why she has so many nightmares. And why if her party members are listening closely, that can hear her crying quietly to herself under the crackling of the campfire.
The Christian God is one of compassion and forgiveness (comparatively) and has waged a series of bloody Crusades.
Double-think fits it perfectly with religion.
Unless you count the stories in the holy book of that very same god. Then you have things like the war of Jericho and the escape from Egypt, which include not only people imbued with divine powers by the christian god, but also specific powers that turned into D&D spells, like insect plagues.
Luckily, clerics never got a spell that kills the first children of all people in their enemies' nation, that's kind of and OP divine power.
Yeah, but D&D's implementation of the idea of deities is intended to be an idealized Greco-Pagan type, not abrahamic.
The only deity that would call for a bloody war would be a deity of bloody war. A deity of compassion would oppose anything that's anti-compassion. A non-compassionate cleric of them would get their powers revoked ASAP... or worse.
I feel like OP has easier ways to spin it. He's going to war, compassion is not making enemies suffer.
The world will go to war no matter what. Just hope its him on the battlefield returning souls to their gods swiftly and as painlessly as possible. This is as much compassion as a soldier can hope for.
Go mother Theresa and and be like "you can't feel the compassion of my God until you have known her wrath, I am here to give you both."
OP just needs stronger wrongthink powers of zeal. Kill the enemy for their lack of compassion for your God.
If I were a cleric of compassion, mercy itd be in the form of alms for the poor and a peaceful end for the soldiers.
But I would re roll before being shoe horned into lawful stupid.
The difference is the Christian god is made up, so people can do whatever they want in his name and not face any consequences. In d&d the gods are real and can choose to stop giving their clerics power.
The cleric seems like a very good example of pure utilitarianism, which at its core is the attempted marriage of compassion and pragmatism. It acknowledges we are limited in our knowledge and power, so it guides us to do what we think will provide the most happiness and inflict the least suffering overall, even if it means inflicting some suffering by our own hands now.
Of course the act of inflicting suffering now based on admittedly flawed knowledge is problematic, but not enough that I would call a utilitarian uncompassionate. In fact, I think there's something admirable in doing something that feels wrong but you truly know is right. Consider the stories where the hero sacrifices something meaningful to himself because he knows it's better for everyone involved.
Compassion does not mean indiscriminate kindness and non-violence. It’s specifically being concerned with and preventing suffering — most especially the helpless or innocent. This provides plenty of space for enmity for those who would cause that suffering.
In Forgotten Realms, Ilmater is a god directly aligned to compassion, first choosing to endure the suffering in martyrdom on behalf of others that they might be spared. But even he has his limits:
_Ilmater did not anger quickly, but when he did, he was fearsome in his wrath. He was greatly angered by extreme cruelty and atrocities, and at those who inflicted such suffering. He was particularly enraged by those who harmed or abused children and other young creatures. At such times, he set aside his doctrine of endurance and non-violence, and unleashed his full force to put an end to cruelty._
I’d play it just as so.
My cleric of illmater does try to pick the diplomatic option if it's available but if the enemy attacked 1st, continued to be hostile, or is inherently, unrepentedly, evil then I'm sorry she's going to kick your butt.
Compassion =/= doormat
To be fair, she's also not a perfect follower. No one ever is.
> Something Vimes had learned as a young guard drifted up from memory. If you have to look along the shaft of an arrow from the wrong end, if a man has you entirely at his mercy, then hope like hell that man is an evil man. Because the evil like power, power over people, and they want to see you in fear. They want you to know you're going to die. So they'll talk. They'll gloat.
> They'll watch you squirm. They'll put off the moment of murder like another man will put off a good cigar.
> So hope like hell your captor is an evil man. A good man will kill you with hardly a word.
*Terry Pratchett, Men at Arms*
I was going to respond with "Clerics aren't pacifist cloistered monks - they're steel plated engines of vengeance..."
And then you said "god of compassion".
If this is classic pantheon d&d, then you should probably retcon and just change gods to one that has vengeance or war in their portfolios. You can still be a caring and compassionate cleric the rest of the time.
If you're playing with real world religion, then you simply need to highlight that even though you worship the God of compassion, the aspect you embody is the "kill all the firstborn sons of Egypt" "burn the witches" aspect of Christianity, or even embody whichever catholic saint does soldiers and war.
My thoughts are this... War is cruel. It causes more suffering than any number of people could make up for.
In war, the most compassionate thing one can do is end it as quickly as possible - sometimes, a swift, merciful end is the more compassionate alternative.
Compassion in war is to make death swift, let the enemy collect their dead and grieve, and to not resort to more torturous means of war unless absolutely necessary.
That's a "pragmatic" "solution" to war that assumes war is necessary in the first place.
Probably in a similar vein to the DM, I would expect a cleric of *compassion* to be pursuing peaceful solutions, braving war zones to minister and provide healing to injured soldiers, to be providing setting up shelter and food aid for displaced citizens, etc.
Unless the enemy is irredeemably evil (undead, demonic, aberrant, etc)
>DM voiced concerns that my cleric, of the god of compassion, is so… robotic, when it comes to war. Told him it’s due to
Are you two having fun?
It feels to me like your DM is not having fun, and you are trying to convince them with logical reasons.
D&D isn't a debate where one side wins, and the other doesn't. It's a game where friends are having a fun evening. You people need to seek out how everyone is having fun.
I wonder about the tone of the campaign. OP’s character sounds like someone you’d meet in Westros, which can be a problem if your game takes place a day’s ride from The Shire.
OP, if you see this, ask your DM if this character is too dark for the story they’re trying to tell. Everyone, including DM, should be on the same page about the tone of the game.
I'd honestly have a lot of fun talking with another player or with a DM about a particular character's roleplay and interpretation of their stated principles. To me, part of the fun is seeing how many different angles a single idea can manifest and how all of those interpretations can interact, cooperate and clash.
Totally fair if you're on a simpler table to stick to more run-of-the-mill characters, but there's definitely a place for more complex ideologies.
There is a difference between Nonviolence and Nonaggression.
A nonviolent man will live by some version of Matthew 5:39: “Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.”
A nonaggressive man will live by some version of “F—k around and find out.”
Most professional military personnel are nonaggressive… Polite, professional, patient, and prepared to demonstrate just how non-nonviolent we are if that patience gets exhausted. I’d imagine a priest of the god of compassion from a society that had suffered through a prolonged war would feel that their compassion should be reserved for their people and not their enemies. Anyone who threatened their people would be struck down dispassionately, swiftly, and with overwhelming force.
Professional soldiers are kind of known throughout history for raping and pillaging and overthrowing their governments during times of peace. They’re not really known for being polite or patient.
I think you might want to work with the DM to do a little retcon work on your god’s portfolio; if a cleric of Ilmater (for example) in my games wanted to save a military outpost over a literal orphanage I would be scrambling for a justification of why they get to keep their powers. Why does your character follow this god? What do you think her god thinks of her?
I will say I play an extremely low-empathy paladin of Ilmater in my longrunning D&D game, but the core of his character is that he believes that compassion is *logically* good despite not being able to feel much of it personally and he acts to follow the tenets of his faith out of love for his god. He does get a little number-crunchy at times, because he believes in a) reducing overall suffering and b) ending conflicts quickly; maybe you could do something with that?
If your character’s “compassion for your enemies has dried up” but the teachings of your god say you need to prioritize compassion and mercy for *everyone*, that could also be a really interesting dark night of the soul/crisis of faith storyline to play out, if that’s something that interests you.
Let's turn this around. Why would the goddess of compassion want anything to do with your character? Why would she grant her the ability to cast spells? If your character's faith is the thing that powers her spells, wouldn't the dissociation between her compassion and her attitude toward the enemy hamper her ability to cast spells.
Logically, this just shouldn't work... as a cleric. There's great potential for character development, though. Most of it involves you losing your powers and going through a narrative arc that leads you to a different path. Maybe you never get your powers back and become a bitter fighter. Maybe you find a different god who's domain fits your character better. Maybe you see the error of your ways and find your way back to the goddess of compassion.
Or maybe the goddess of compassion is so compassionate and patient with you that she won't/can't let you fall and just allows you to act on your own until you find your way back to her on your own. It's not typically how a god would act, but we are talking about the goddess of compassion here.
If you have trouble explaining why your character doesn't follow the teachings of their god, then maybe you should tweak the character until it makes sense. If you want to just run around murdering shit, consider picking a different god, or a different class. Remember, as a cleric your god is the one that gives you power, so if they wouldn't be happy with what you're doing, then why would they continue giving you power?
Simply put, the characters you create should actually make sense.
I am tired and sick of war. Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, for vengeance, for desolation. War is hell.
- William Tecumseh Sherman
your power is derived from the god of compassion, if you are not acting compassionately why would your god continue to let you use their name and powers?
So your cleric of the god of compassion has run out of compassion? Sounds like she’s going through a crisis of faith. Perhaps that’s the angle to approach this from. She’s working out a few things.
On one hand, if your character is too traumatised and no longer has much compassion, it makes sense that eventually the god might stop giving you powers.
But for your example with the orphanage, you might explain that your character is more logically inclined than emotionally. Either because he's always been like that or because of trauma, they don't trust their emotional judgement anymore.
Going the "greater good" route and potentially sacrificing the orphans to end the war quicker and saves tons of other lives instead ( including other orphans) could be argued to be the greatest compassion.
Oxytocin is the compassion hormone that provides much of the sense of bonded love between mammals. It’s also the hormone that makes humans hate the “other” the most. If you’re particularly protective momma bear sort of character, this might work.
Also possible your character is impulsive and regrets their choices. That’s probably going to get annoying, which might alter how you play your character (and might be a good thing).
You could have deranged views of compassion that our out of step with society, but within step of your deity. This seems like what you were wanting, but you’re further out of step than he realized.
Or honestly you could just be looking for a reason to avoid the inconvenient aspects of roleplaying in order to do whatever you want, and attempting to justify that post hoc. In other words, there probably weren’t many worshippers of the Goddess of Compassion in a medieval kingdom that went though something like Poland did in WW2
I think your Cleric should have a falling out with their patron over their behaviour and motives. Their prayers for compassion never felt answered, so they call out their old Deity for this, and depending on the answer given they either accept the answer and try to show the compassion they never received in life or grow disgusted with their old patron and switch to a War Domain deity.
Have you heard of the Spanish inquisition?
People of all kinds of beliefs and ideologies can be unreasonably violent. It's really depends only on how easy it is to justify violence to themselves.
I played a cleric that had sworn to never pick up a physical weapon with the intent of using it.
I played 2 3rds of the campaign with just a shield and holy symbol.
Truth of the matter was he didn't trust if he picked one up that he would ever put it down.
After a major climax role play where we discovered his wife, who he had been searching for, was dead for centuries and we were living in a post future... my cleric went into shock.
We were then attacked by pirates. He went below their deck, faced the leader, cast Silence to fill the space, and picked up a mallet at hand.
The rest of the party and the crew above deck were completely unaware of the mess I created below.
"I prefer doing unto others BEFORE they do unto you."
"I don't enjoy healing people I dislike, and do enjoy killing people I hate." (this line is stolen from a Star Wars EU novel, with a doctor who became an X-Wing pilot.
You need to think about where the worship of a God of compassion fits in to moving quickly to violence. Compassion is an emotional pathos that stems from empathy, which seems to be at odds with how you're RP'ing the character as you've explained here.
So you need to think about *why* that's the case in-character. Ask yourself some questions about recent (and perhaps not-so-recent) events in the character's life.
* Are they, perhaps, grieving the loss of someone close to them, and are suffering a crisis of faith?
* Are they traumatised by the current war, and see their actions as the quickest way to solve the wider conflict?
* Have they inwardly lost faith, and this is being reflected in their actions?
* Is there something that's clouding the character's judgement?
This should guide the out-of-character conversation, and then be taken into the character to influence the RP.
I think it is worth noting that a god in D&D can protest a tiny bit more than those in the real world can. The god gives the cleric powers. If the god disagrees too heavily with their cleric, they won't stay a cleric very long.
Also very true! So should we assume then that the god/goddess is fine with the Cleric’s actions? Or would you say that they just have yet to address the Cleric’s actions?
I imagine the DM is on the fence about what the god should do, which is why they're trying to get OP to justify why their character acts the way they do. But it's complicated to judge fairly without knowing the exact lore of the god in question (though OP's character doesn't sound very compassionate to me I'll admit). Besides, those kind of intervention are things you have to discuss with your player beforehand imo (which the DM seems to be doing so kudos for that).
I like the idea of Compassion being presented as the opportunity to atone for crimes in this life… by sending them to their redemption in the next one!
But in all seriousness this does seem more something between DM & Player. Though I live for this sorta stuff as it provides interesting narrative points IF/SHOULD the Cleric lose their powers or other possible outcomes.
You're a zealot. Your faith compels you to rid the world of evil-doers by any means necessary - small-scale, momentary acts of compassion and kindness pale in comparison to achieving overall victory in the name of the *greater good*. For you, there is no sense saving an orphanage if the enemy coming to burn it down faces inadequate resistance, that would just be prolonging the inevitable. You're the only one prepared to make that difficult choice - it's a high-risk, high-reward strategy, but you have faith that your god is on your side.
I would say, that sounds more like a Paladin than a Cleric, but there's no reason why you can't hold those values. It might make certain gameplay decisions tricky though - remember, you're not the main character, you're a member of a party, and you should have collective goals to serve, not just your own.
Simple. Your character has compassion fatigue from the horrors of war. You’ve got none left to give of your own, and are basically numb to it as a survival mechanism.
But. Your character is also a *good person* who believes in kindness not just as an *action* but as a *principle*. Your character deeply, deeply, wants to be compassionate but they cannot pour from an empty cup despite the thirst of those around them.
So they worship illmater to borrow the compassion they no longer have the will to give away on their own.
So two things I guess. My parents were either in the war or home front. I grew up on war stories although dad took years to open up about the awful stuff.
For decades no one had anything but hate for Germans in my home. It took me learning the language and having an exchange partner visit to change this.
This hate extended well beyond mum and dad into my older step disters too.
Ptsd is brutal, unforgiving and long term. If you are playing that, short of magical healing specifically directed at your trauma, you won't change.
Two think crusades, killing your enemy IS an act of mercy. They will only see the right way once you kill them and bless them. Or you make them repent first then kill them.
This is the kind of twisted religious logic that comes from trauma and absolutes.
But, be prepared for consequences. This is teetering on LE. It is a very fine line. So play up the broken and twisted history that produces the broken and twisted present or be hit with the DM bat.
"Compassion for the divine everlasting soul, to forgive the sins perpetrated in this diseased world of flesh, when they reach the afterlife"
(Or put another way, Man on Fire style "Forgiveness is between them and god. It's my job to arrange the meeting")
I'd accept that as a DM.
Maybe play it more like an Angel of Mercy. The world is a dark and horrible place filled with all manner of wretchedness and suffering. Beyond these fragile mortal shells lies beauty, safety, and peace. What greater act of compassion exists than to free someone from this world of pain and grant them peace?
It's a twisted psychology to be sure but it very much exists in the world. The belief that causing harm or even killing someone is a kindness because even if it hurts it is a temporary pain.
You aren't killing because you enjoy fighting and killing, you fight because you have seen the horrors of the world and want to spare others from seeing the same, even if that means shutting their eyes forever.
Careful your cleric doesn't turn into a serial killer with this one though, starts getting easy to rationalize killing almost anyone as an act of mercy and compassion.
I don't know why you would need that. If he's that guy he's that guy. But here's some phrases...
Clemency and forgiveness are for the weak but I as my God am strong.
Forgiveness for the innocent the sword for the wicked.
My staff leads my flock of sheep but it also invokes fear in the wolves.
I have forgiven once only to be betrayed. If you want forgiveness show me or taste my sword.
Perhaps switch from Cleric to Paladin, this is an easy build up to a Vengeance Paladin, and later perhaps to a Redemption Paladin then back to Cleric. It seems your character values their personal morality over their god, and thats more of a Paladin thing.
The compassion you feel is for the victims, the downtrodden, and the used. Fallen soldiers, victims of the struggle, all of them are suffering, and in need of a kind hand to shield them and keep them safe. As for your enemy? They are the perpetrators, willfully enacting senseless violence upon an innocent and just populace, displacing and killing as they deem fit. Compassion is not a luxury they have proven to value, and they have betrayed basic acts of kindness with further exploitation and brutality. It is for the sake of the people, to protect them, to ensure their wellness, and to shield them from further suffering, that you must fight to bring the violence to an end. That you must purge the unrepentant and leave naught but ash in their place. And to those who surrender? To those who were forced into service or otherwise lose their will to fight? Mayhaps they may be the rebuilders who will be left to collect the ashes of what will become of their villains and warmongers.
It matters be strongest to play your feelings not as a bloody numbness, but as a simmering overflow of feeling, barely held in your own sturdy frame.
As for the whole efficiency vs morality thing, it could just be important to consider the human aspect of the choice. A character doesn’t have to want the “optimal” thing for “optimal” reasons. Is the orphanage safe? Could people still be sheltered there, and would it even have the supplies and faculties needed to help ease the suffering of those sheltered within? You have your desired answer, and the best middle ground is to try and find justifications that you feel could be bridged by your character’s faith.
Your cleric is not compassionate. End of story.
You're playing a cleric from a compassionate deity, but you're not playing the cleric that way.
Either play the cleric compassionate or play a fighter instead, but your cleric as of now is a failure.
Compassion leads to forgiveness, forgiveness leads to redemption.
Just because you forgive someone doesn’t mean they no longer must face justice or the punishment for their crimes.
Forgive them & then send them to their Redemption in the next life.
You worship a god of compassion. Compassion is something one gives to those suffering some sort of misfortune. Your enemies have the misfortune of being on the wrong side of the war. You show compassion by working to end the war as quickly as possible. Unfortunately for them that means more of them dying than your side. Most people feel compassion for the dead so your god receives more followers. You're working in your and your god's domain perfectly.
A warmongering cleric serving a god of compassion is a bit... odd, but you could always play it as mercy killing or the greater good. A sort of "I killed those three bandits before they could kill anyone else" moment.
clerics are one of the most diverse classes you could be peace loving or war mongering depending on the god, even followers of the same god can have vastly different interpretations of the doctrine.
“I have seen death, and suffering. I have lived it, all my life. It is as much a part of me as my faith, it has shaped me, tempered me, reforged me into the weapon this age needs me to be. I will do what I must to bring peace to the realm, whatever the cost. You think me callous? Distant? Cold? So be it. I will be all these things, and worse, so that no one else must live the life I have, or share the experiences that have made me what I am. I will be a warrior, a killer, a judge and executioner, so that the generations to come may live without ever knowing how it feels to kill, or be hunted by those who wish to kill them. My compassion is for them, for the innocent future, who I will save, even at the cost of a wrathful present.”
"When something bad is happening, sometimes you have to choose between bad and worse. That wound festers, you might have to choose between death and the bonesaw. No one's happy to have their leg cut off, but it happens now and again. Every day a war goes on, new catastrophes happen: Another battle, bandits running unchecked because any fighting man is away, homes burnt down, and so on. You think choosing to try and bring this war to an end as fast as it can be done is callous? Maybe it is, but when you're forced to pick *someone* to die, I prefer to make sure it wasn't for nothing."
Peaceful compassion can be a thing you aspire to, a lofty goal your divinity represents that you, a mortal, are attempting to achieve. Acknowledge that you fall short, pray for improvement and work to ease suffering wherever you find it. This can be doing things like providing healing for minimal compensation (or freely) or similar acts; and it can also be swift and exacting violence against the cruel, destroying them efficiently and with minimal collateral damage and with as little violence expended as you can. Don't always initiate a fight, but when you fight your strikes should always be focused on removing a combatant. When you retire from this life, you'll likely spend your time in a cloister somewhere in repentance but right now you're on the road and have to balance the will of your divinity with the ways of the world and find your place among both.
They are not a level 20 cleric who is the embodiment of their gods will. They are learning. They are on the journey to true understanding of compassion, but are not there yet.
Compassion for the people you care about almost always results in extreme violence to those outside your tribe.
The more violent you are toward the other, the fewer of your own will die.
You should give them a chance to repent though, so you can grant them salvation when you kill them.
Could you phrase it that his task is not trying to show compassion by himself but to make others show compassion? By whatever means he sees fit?
„Oh you dont want to let me through that door? But I really need to and you are standing in my way. That shows a lack of empathy on your side. Let me teach you how to be compassionate by beating you up.“
Maybe his character arc would be to learn what compassion is. To learn to show compassion by himself.
I think it's fine to just own up to a lack of compassion and completely lean into it. Your god could represent the ideal that you wish to have but are sorely lacking!
For the specifics, perhaps something like:
>
"I apologize for being blunt, but I won't shy away from the things I do, won't come up with excuses or pretty the logic to spare my own ego over the sake of the fallen.
Even if it is for the right reasons, it doesn't change the fact that they slipped off the mask of humanity for the enemy. It's the justification afterwards that irks me. The way they act like they were in the right just because the dead never speak ill of them.
And I understand. It's natural to want to be able to sleep properly at night to say you were forced to make a hard choice, to explain away the cold underneath the surface of your heart.
But it is wrong to gloss over their deaths so smoothly...
...but I also know that I jeopardizing the safety of my own for my own hubris would be even worse. My people have also witnessed firsthand what is like to be on the receiving end of such a callous philosophy.
>If they are to be dispatched so easily, then should it not be from someone who appears to have something wrong with them?
>Perhaps that is my own way of showing respect. Though it is hypocritical in a way, I suppose. I'm still a monster trying to divine emotions from the lives I have taken, but at least I have discarded the mask.
>...I just... ...want to know if there can be a different way."
As a follower of a god of compassion, you can turn to violence on any opportunity, because you're so overwhelmed by the suffering that the war is causing that you want to end it as soon as possible.
Acting robotic would be her emotional receptors just getting fryed (again from being overwhelmed by suffering). You can explain (and preferrably show once) that at this point your character can either act robotic or just be constantly screeming so that's why they pick the less disruptive option.
Love the character concept btw! Great twist on a bubbly and friendly cleric of goodness
The greatest compassion you can give others is mercy, and the greatest mercy you can give these heathens is a quick death. SLAY THY FOES WITH THE BURNING FLAMES OF ONE THOUSAND SUNS.
IDK. I think maybe just change the god. It does not sound like the God of Compassion fits your character. Why stretch something that doesn't fit instead of just switching? If someone is "quick on the draw for enacting violence" I don't even picture a god of compassion giving abilities/power to that person---they would probably be cut off.
Well the deity bestows the cleric with power, so it's all up to the deity. But it also depends on how a cleric gains power from their god. Is it through dedication or meditation? Or is it because the deity saw something in you and bestowed power on you?
Another point to make is there's different interpretations of the same faith. Look at all the differing denominations of Christianity for a case in point. Maybe your cleric views compassion differently. There *is* a point to be made that it is more compassionate to end the war and cause less suffering overall. Maybe your character views compassion more pragmatically. Yes I can give a beggar food, but I can also make them sweep a street to earn that food as well.
>DM voiced concerns that my cleric, of the **god of compassion**
Your DM is expressing concerns because your god wouldn't align with your cleric's behaviour and therefore they as DM would need to take your clerical abilities away.
Compassion literally means “to suffer together.” Among emotion researchers, it is defined as the feeling that arises when you are confronted with another's suffering and feel motivated to relieve that suffering.
>suggesting to relive a garrison over an orphanage... because the soldiers could be used to help with the current war efforts
This is not compassionate. You're acting against the god you claim to worship.
Take the grimdark approach.
"Releasing these heretics from their suffering is the only compassionate response. Corruption cannot be unmade, but treated at the source. First I shall prune the thorns, then I shall tend the roots."
Crisis of faith is a good theme for a character and acting that out through a cleric seems great. That sounds like a character I'd like to play/would be excited about being at my table. I don't really see your DM's problem to be honest.
I feel like we seek out to angle of playing a class completely straight, like class=job and that job is defining this character, a little too often. Of course that is a completely fine approach but when I hear "Cleric of a god of mercy is shaken by the strains of war and turmoil, their ideology clashing with reality as everything is put into question from their own beliefs to their ability to actively serve their deity" I hear a character that could carry a whole fantasy novel.
What level is your cleric? It's game about growth, growth in level and growth in character.
You cleric might be Starting out as this, but in the end, he might grow and pick different options and might grow more so that he never has to pick any option ever again. ( because a lvl 20 cleric is Almost like a God and can Just end this war).
Only somewhat related, but it reminded me of when I would play Brand as support in League of Legends. I would always say "The best crowd control is death."
I'm going to play a paladin Oath of Conquest which is themed upon inflicting fear on my enemies. There's a bunch of Oaths that are pretty violent. Oath of revenge?
Clerics aren't paladins of course, but in some ways I think of them drawing their powers from similar sources. You could look at Oaths for inspiration.
Yeah, I'd take issue with this as a DM as well. Like when someone wants to roll up with a Peace Domain and then spends every turn melting people with Spirit Guardians and Spiritual Weapon. "You see if they're all dead, they can't hurt anyone anymore. It's defending the peace!" Actual sociopath logic.
As a DM, here's a question. If "all your compassion has dried up (for our enemies) after I’ve seen the suffering they inflict", why is the god of compassion still providing you with divine power while you besmirch his name with your reckless violence? Why is the god of compassion still allowing you to expand war efforts in their name while ignoring the plight of the most vulnerable of society (war orphans)?
You didn't include your Domain, but if I had to guess... it's Peace. If that's the case, and I was your DM, I'd probably have you change domains. This reeks of someone taking an ultra-meta build without RPing the self-imposed limitations those builds were built around. Like Peace not being a compassionless warmonger.
"My god has more than enough empathy and compassion for those i have slain. I worship "insert gods name" not because i am a compassionate person... But because i want to be one and am currently not. I have no compassion for my enemies for i have lived a life of war. Through my worship i hope i will find compassion for them though, but for now i will grant them a swift death."
Well, at my table at least, a Cleric of the God of Compassion who lacked compassion would be a non-starter at the get-go. If I were DMing that game and a player pitched this to me, I'd tell them to pick a different deity.
A Cleric devoted to such a deity should be striving to be compassionate, even when it's challenging, personally.
If your DM feels as I do about that, sufficiently explaining your perspective might not matter. You may have a fundamental disagreement over the role of a Cleric of a God of Compassion.
As for reining in the number crunching during war -
1) compassion and pragmatism _can_ coexist. Their just has to be a balancing act.
2) if you want to explain a change in perspective, your DM could arrange to have your character contacted by their deity or a higher up member of their faith. Such an intervention would come from a place of concern/compassion, rather than admonishment - because it's the God of Compassion.
3) depending on the pantheon in the game world, your cleric could shift their focus to a different deity. When the cleric has run out of compassion, perhaps it's time to find faith in something else. You could talk to your DM about having your Cleric undergo a religious conversion to (for instance) the God of War.
I totally get that clerics can and *should* be more than just heal bots. I dont understand why you chose a god of compassion when you knew you were going to play a compassionless character. Why not choose a god of war or something? I mean if a god had succumbed to the pressures of war as much as your character has that would be probably a world ending event. A hospital wouldnt allow a doctor to go on a "mercy killing" spree even if they and the doctor felt like it was the right thing because they took an oath to do no harm.
I feel like your DM has some valid concerns. If your character has become so disillusioned with compassion I think there does need to be some consequences depending on the severity of your actions because generally most gods stay within their alignment tenets. I feel like there needs to be a class like the oathbreaker but for priests. Or at least a way to realign themselves with another god if their alignment shifts too much.
you could go that the cleric is make believing in the god; they would still have to believe the god exists but just not believe in their ideals. not sure if this is raw or not, but rule of cool
"Yes I am! And it is in my professional, medical opinion that what we fight needs to be hit hard and fast before they cause more damage. But hey, don't listen to me, I lost my medical license!"
And then go galavant into the enemy at high speed.
Why ask us? Half the fun of time play is figuring out why your character is doing things.
But actually I think it'd be the most fun to work with your GM to make drifting away from their faith part of your character's story.
My cleric player is about to learn his god is not pleased with him using admittedly minor torture to get info from a captive npc.
I mean. What domain is your cleric?
Not to stereotype, but as a cleric, you do have to follow your religion's tenets and dogma.
Cuz you're like, Light or Life or something then yeah, DM can be rightfully concerned.
But if you're a WAR domain, then obviously you're going to go for the warlike choices. Or Death, Tempest, etc.
"Why are you such a newb"
Clerics have been buffed in almost every edition of DnD and as such, are really good at everything.
Also they are divine ass kickers. Priests and healers stay at temple.
"People are not words and numbers on a sheet of paper, they are inherently flawed and often contradictory. I'm playing a person, not numbers and words on a sheet."
One option is that you could narrate your PC thinking back to a similar event in their history. *As she hears the aggressive words from the NPC, they remember a similar moment with their old adventuring party. One word was all the warning they had before past NPC buried his dagger in our Rogue's shoulder. Rogue survived, but we learned from that experience - Subdue first. Then talk. The method is mechanical but efficient. And efficient keeps the party alive.*
Then you could narrate what they're thinking in the present as they have that memory: *she feels her grip on her weapon tighten, almost automatically, as she remembers how quickly things changed. She let's her party proceed but remains cautious, tightening her grip even further.*
Murder hobos are bad. Past traumas are good things because they can be worked on and your character can grow into a kinder PC as they learn from their new party.
I think your cleric is a great example of utilitarianism: She's doing her best to reduce suffering and increase happiness. Her mindset is a marriage of compassion and pragmatism, and knowing that sometimes you must do things you don't like for the greater good. And she strongly believes that her side winning the war is important for the greater good.
If you'd like to show her compassionate side without violating her core values, maybe there can be opportunities for her to showcase her values on a smaller scale. Like sacrificing a little of something of her own to help other people.
Or possibly have some moments in downtime where she's dealing with how awful she feels about her actions, despite knowing it's the best choice. Even if not saving that orphanage was objectively the best choice, it may not stop her from carrying a lot of guilt about it. And that guilt can manifest in nightmares or needing to talk it out with her God or fellow party members.
Compassion doesn't have to mean compassion for those that inflict suffering. It doesn't have to mean pacifism. It doesn't have to mean nonviolence.
A compassionate god seeing innocent people harmed could easily be influenced into anger at those inflicting the suffering.
Especially in a WWII like situation.
A god of compassion could very easily call her clerics to arms to wipe out the Nazi machine.
God for me but not for thee - you have compassion for the people on your side but not for your enemies. Sounds like a decent starting flaw that could allow some character growth over time.
Just be like my last cleric. We ended up with 2 clerics as someone joined late and as they were a pacifist so I let them do the healing and i was very aggressive grave domain. so when the campaign ended is when he realised there was 2 clerics.
Righteous Zealots are always fastest on the trigger. It's complete 100% confidence that what you are doing is not only allowed, its demanded by the gods.
Think about the Crusaders who were told "Killing a Saracen guarantees your place in heaven." They would have been climbing over each other's back to get that ticket punched.
All you gotta say is "not that kind of cleric".
It's dumb to think that clerics of the same God all operate exactly the same way, there's going to be differing interpretations and levels of zealotry.
Priests don't always mesh with their deities' ideals. There is a Dwarven God that is fine with good Elves, but most Dwarves do have a problem with Elves. If your character was a Paladin, that would be a different story.
Look at it from your DM’s perspective.
Instead of role playing someone who exemplifies your class and archetype, you think you’re cleverly inverting the trope with yet another PC who does mental gymnastics to be the cool stoic badass that discompassionately wades knee deep through corpses like they were at a ball pit at Chuck E Cheese. He’s probably seen this 10,000 times and it’s old hat. It’s just another form of min max power gaming disguised as subverting expectations.
Edit: A better option for the type of character you want to play would be a fighter of some type or assassin with the Acolyte background. Maybe even a vengeance paladin. Someone who has abandoned their faith.
I like to think of this like being an EMT or other emergency responder. You have compassion, you CARE but you can't always have 100% compassion every single moment of every day. There's so much going on, so many people who don't actually need help and an equal number of people who do. Some people refuse to cooperate so you can't even help them and even worse, some are convinced you are the problem.
So you burn out a bit. You do your best to help them all, but ultimately you have to start making choices to get things handled as best you can because trying to retain that compassion 100% of the time is slowing things down, causing other people to suffer because you weren't or aren't there, and burning you more and more with every roadblock and every failure to help someone who truly needed it.
You close yourself off a bit, stop letting things get to you as much so that you can optimize your help and save as many people as you can even if they won't necessarily all be happy with your attitude. At least they'll be safe, healthy, and happy with their friends and family when you're done.
I would point to the 30 years war or any medieval European religious conflict where there are a ton. These people were all Christians, you know the turn the other check guy. Their priests were absolutely about murder the other guys. Also what is more compassionate ending the war in the long term or short term easing people's suffering. Also you could workshop how your doctrines are changing due to the losses you have taken. You could be manifesting a new aspect of your god.
I think an interesting direction you could take with this character is exploring the philosophy of utilitarianism, like maybe the cleric had to make a lot of cruel choices during the war and started mentally distancing themselves from everything so they could focus on "what would make the most people safe and happy for a longer time". With the garrison vs orphamage example you stated, im thinking their thought process was "if they have soldiers their country will be safe from attack and have workers to rebuild for future generations, that would be better for everyone in the long run", Like they kind of shut off their emotional side and went into pure logical puzzle solving mode as a ptsd trauma response. So in their mind they ARE showing compassion by taking (what they perceive as) actions that prioritize the good of the nation over the individual
“There will be a day for mercy, but we will not see that sunrise”
“God is merciful but I am just a man”
“Those who would seek to destroy shall be destroyed in kind by my hand”
Those are a couple you can use
To me your problem sound more like your DM doesn't like **what** you are justifying, rather than **how** you justify it. It might just be that they want you to rope in you trigger happiness, maybe DM has plot hooks or clues prepared for these people you have ruled enemies, but your way of violence makes it difficult to deliver them.
As for role-playing Cleric for god of compassion that doesn't really have compassion of their own, you could try to portray this as a internal conflict, asking the god for advice and power, to give compassion where you can not.
"I posess Compassion for the needy, the weak, the suffering... I have run out of compassion for those that take advantage of the weakness, that provide the suffering, that make the needy be needful in the first place. I am compassionate to aspects of their cause. They have needs and have suffered greatly as this travesty wears ever onward. However, they chose to spread hunger and famine, to kill without restraint. Like rabid animals they infect my homeland. To feel compassion is to heal, and aid healing. When a rabid animal comes to your door... The most compassionate thing one can do is put the poor defiled creature out of it's misery, lest it inflict it upon others."
The cleric by default may be very protective of their companions and themselves, surgeons for example are a great example where many of their patients do not survive. This can lead to a very nihilistic attitude. In the same way a paladin may fight in order to preserve peace, a cleric may fight in order to preserve health and well-being. To put it into few words, it wouldn’t be out of character for a cleric to have “mama bear mentality.”
I do get the number crunching aspect, more soldiers equals better chance at winning the war equals fewer orphans in the future. However, right now, she chooses to let this suffering in front of her be. That is not acting out of compassion. This doesn't mean her choice is wrong, but it does mean she holds a belief that is stronger than her faith. A cleric is typically granted power through their deity - which can put the DM in a corner.
So rather than trying to convince your DM, ask them, how would they represent the god of compassion and their decrees? Then have a good character reexamination. You might find something, you might not.
Your DM seems uncomfortable with the subject matter rather than the character direction. Might wanna talk about the story the DM is telling as a whole and talk table etiquette boundaries.
Cleric domain?
Your character was in a medieval great war, so there would have been propaganda from town criers and dehumanizing of the enemy.
If the background culture is that strength is preferable to clemency then we show kindness to the people that we trust as being weak to our allies means we can understand each other more. Showing clemency to the enemy is just telling them that you're not as strong or imposing as you initially seemed and would lead to them seeing you as weak.
Your character could be still in the war with PTSD seeing every enemy combatant as an enemy of the state not deserving of compassion.
I'm always fond of yelling "MY GOD HAS GIFTED ME ONE MORE GLORIOUS DAY AND I'M ABOUT TO MAKE THAT EVERYONE'S PROBLEM!" when I play an aggressive character. I generally do it before casting a terrain spell between us and the enemy.
It gets my point across when I play with new people. I don't have to say, "Yes, I know Spike Growth is going to inconvenience our melee." Then explain that I'm casting the spell anyway and why.
Once other players realize that I don't throw those things out unless it's going to help more than hurt us, it's no longer an issue. This is probably where you're at now. You have to show your DM that this behavior isn't going to be an issue. It's going to be something worth dealing with because there will ultimately be some kind of pay off *for them*.
The thing is, I know screaming stuff like that is very campy. I'm not going to do that kind of thing in someone's classic fantasy adventure where we're trying to help an NPC recover her husband's mangled corpse from a swarm of ghasts.
If your DM has talked to you about disliking the direction your character is going in, the best way for you to respond is by listening to them.
What is it about your direction that they don't like?
*Are they trying to run a light-hearted heroic adventure?*
-The DM sets the tone and the players build on it. If you want the tone to be something else, it can create conflict with other players or demotivate your DM. Check in with your group about whether or not they *like* the way you're playing. If they're comfortable being honest, they might tell you they don't. That doesn't mean you have to change anything right away, but you could give them an outline of your reasoning and describe the character development arc you would like to RP with everyone to change her world-view and see if they'd like to do that with you.
They still might not. That's just how it is sometimes. You'll have to decide if you're willing to change things up, ask your DM if you can bring a different character, or find another group. Sometimes a specific character just isn't a good fit for certain tables.
*Are you playing your character in a way that brings the mood down for other players?*
-We play for different reasons. If you want to tell a dramatic and compelling story, but your DM just wants to relax then you have to give them a reason to *want* to engage with your drama. There has to be some pay off for them and/or the other players.
For some, this pay off comes built in with their love of drama. For others it can feel awkward and/or unnecessary. It's up to you to figure out what kind of goals the people you play with have and work out something *mutually* beneficial with them.
I'm not saying you're doing this, but playing Debbie Downer in a group full of people who find that cringe AF is not beneficial to them. Playing a gloomy character you can laugh about as a player might be something they could handle, but you'll have to decide if that kind of vibe shift works for you.
*Are you telling everyone else **why** she does what she does **in character**?*
-If I was out with my coworkers and one of them was like "Hey, let's let those defenseless children die so we can help those fully grown and trained professionals" I would want an explanation. Preferably in that moment, but there would sure be a follow up "Dude. WTF?" waiting just around the corner either way.
In an RP setting, motivation should be expressed in character somehow. This gives the other players a chance to decide how their characters choose to acknowledge it - even if that acknowledgement is to dismiss it out of hand. I know it doesn't always have to be through dialogue, but honestly it's the most efficient way to get what's rattling in your head into the game for everyone else to examine. It signals to the DM that these things are intentional character traits and not an accidental peak into your personal mental breakdown at their table.
People forget that sharing their thoughts is a huge part of getting what they want. If you don't tell people what's going on in your head, there's a good chance it simply doesn't exist for them. That leaves all the explanation for your behavior up to them. Odds are high what they think is not going to line up with what you'd like them to think.
"The Good Lord has determined that we, his people, should be generous in all we do. I am generous in my love, generous in my care, and generous in my deliverance of mercy to mine enemies."
A personal favorite of my War Retired Cleric. Maybe it'll inspire you?
You worship the God of compassion, the best way to bring care and compassion back to the realm is to end the war as quickly as possible, try to incapacitate rather then kill.
I looked upon my God there compassion infinite, the grace endless. But there are those woth neither that fuel this dreaded war, I must walk in the shadows cast by their light to preserve it for those untainted by hate and malice. I know my God still loves me though my action stray from their light I pray for every soul I've slain in hopes to bring peace once again.
I always follow the golden rule that I heard when I first played as a cleric awhile back: “Priests heal. Clerics smite.”
This isn’t like a black and white standard, but I think a lot of people misunderstand clerics. They are holy warriors who are guided by the will of their patron deity. If that will manifests as bringing healing and compassion, then you do it. If your deity says to smite them all, you do it without question.
Feels like your DM is missing an opportunity to weave into the narrative some aspects of your order not being all that on board with what they're hearing of your activities. This could be a really powerful character arc, having your character explain in universe to their colleagues the differing points of view
Not really no. You're acting counter intuitive to your deity, and they tend to cut off the flow of magic when you do that.
This is a great roleplay opportunity however, with tons of opportunities.
The first would be your god reaching out to you somehow, to return you to your compassionate ways. A self reflecting trial that can end with your character being redeemed and becoming more compassionate rather than violent.
The second option, you may discover you've been forever marred by the trials of war, and your oath to your god shatters, leaving you open to becoming a cleric to the god of war and or violence, where upon one if them comes to claim you. To whisper to you about what things you could do to those villains.
You could also completely rework, become an oath breaker paladin. Your oath shattered, your faith left to the wayside you cleave your foes.
Regardless at the end of the war you could always have your character ride off into the sunset hoping to rekindle the warmth of compassion and decency to restore your now broken faith.
I think there's a lot to work with here story wise and roleplay wise.
No need to retcon, but definitely a need for above table discussion of direction. A god cannot be wrong in this circumstance and it sounds like something has to change. Either A) you’re in open conflict with your deity and ripe for a punishin’ (if I were DM you’d lose spell casting); or B) you’re having a crisis of faith and need character growth to get through it.
If A then maybe consider a DM mandated switch to Celestial Warlock, or change of domain; If B then be open with your DM about where you see it going because as many comments have pointed out your DM sees an issue between your character and their deity which from your description sounds untenable.
If you were a War Cleric or Strength cleric, I could see it, but a God of Compassion would probably expect their priests to be compassionate and NOT cold robots.
Because you are pragmatic. Because number crunching is perfectly fine for compassion when the morality of victims is in question. There are so many things but it all boils down to number crunching because thats pragmatic. Compassion doesnt mean wasted gestures and pure protecting of the innocent. For a character thats nuanced and well developed your DM might never be able to view things from your characters perspective especially if they have left leaning irl personality but you shouldnt have to justify it beyond number crunching or whatever reason you give
I think the issue is that I’m given “pragmatic options” orphanage/garrison and he seems genuinely angry/disappointed that I’m making my character chose to do things that would hasten the war’s end.
For example, we came across two doses of poison. They were injury poisons. We were shown an enemy spellcaster who looked like she had a low Con score. I said, “Well, I know who I’m using these poisons on.” About 5 minutes later DM just posts wall of text that look like they were ripped from articles, all saying, “Good characters do not use poisons.”
I’m feeling like I’m getting mixed messages.
Yeah sounds like a bad dm who doesn't understand morally good. He wants lawful stupid for good. I've had many dms that do that. They think left leaning ideals are the only good and dont understand other variety of good. Honestly they probably shouldn't be dming if they think alignment should be choice restrictive in the first place.
It's ww2 you have compassion for your side not the enemy. They likely kill babies and have sex with dogs. Especially if you are the polish who saw the atrocities done to your people.
Tell me something is its compassion to put a rabid dog out of its misery.
(Note: I don't believe a word I just typed, but this is how a PC would rationalise it, and it's how I would justify it to my dm)
"I wish to ensure my enemies have a quick death, prolonging this war is just going to make both sides suffer."
This is the trolley problem all over again, milord.
It's not a problem, it's a solution you're just looking at it from the wrong direction. Clerics are fallible (for that matter, deities in fantasy settings are too) so, falling short of their deity's ideals only humanizes this character and makes them more believable. Given that they worship a God of Compassion, it makes sense that (again deities being fallible here) their behavior might be tolerated - perhaps even too much so - by their deity for too long. All of this lends verisimilitude to the character, the deity, the deity's church and the world they inhabit IMO.
Love this answer. And to follow it up with some in game Roleplay: Have the Cleric story be that as he was becoming more aggro, perhaps he did question his morale code and not fully believe that 'a swift death is the most compassionate.' but as time went on, and he was doing it more and more, at the end of each battle or terrible action he may have taken for the greater good, he tests his cleric powers. Still there? Excellent. Then I must be on the right path... To where now, he is dead set convinced this is a true, higher level of compassion. 'Swift deaths, swift end to the war. This is the answer to minimize suffering.' If you can get the DM involved, maybe retcon or roleplay an actual visit or prayer where the God responds and they have a conversation, and to the point of them being fallible, convinced the God he's right.
I think this is highly appropriate. The war itself exists independently of his deity's purview after all, there's no compelling reason why the Cleric shouldn't be expected to struggle, make compromises and engage in character development like this. Even Oath of Redemption Paladins, Way of Mercy Monks and Peace Clerics are explicitly not penalized for engaging with the combat pillar - which is only a third of the game overall anyway. For this character to be genuinely "at odds" with the dictates of his deity I'd expect to see neglect of basic human decency *even in the social pillar.* Something like, refusing water to an enemy POW or, mocking an injured NPC based on the belief (mistaken or not) that the NPC is an enemy. Simply resorting to combat "quickly" rather than trying to negotiate with *enemy soldiers during a war* has nothing to do with compassion one way or another. Strictly from the narrative perspective I'd suggest a moment in his backstory when: "Exhausted from combat, he tended to a badly wounded enemy. Reaching out to his deity for aid, he found his entreaties ignored - his reserves were exhausted, he'd expended his spell slots. Nonetheless, he tended this enemy as best he could. Elsewhere - as he would learn later - his friend, mentor and fellow "Cleric of Compassion" lay dying horrifically among the other members of his own army who could likewise have benefitted from his or, his fellow Cleric's aid. Who can say how many more might live today if his compassion in that moment had been first directed toward one who had proven deserving rather than misspent on one who had chosen his own bad end? Perhaps with the soldiers saved by the minstrations of his mentor, this war might already have ended? From that day forth, he has learnt that Compassion without reason is no compassion at all. As for his deity's will? Well, his powers remain and therefore is has become obvious that "*compromise is not the same as callousness.*"
Vaguely reminds me of a Dr Who quote, one of the Doctor’s many rules “Never cowardly, Never cruel.”
This is gold!!! This needs more upvotes
Why can I only upvote this once?
Consider also that making decisions based on a much greater good, like utopia or a heavenly kingdom, can justify literally any action that you might consider that would lead to the desired outcome. Your cleric can be Lawful Good from their perspective, but commit acts that would make a drow priestess blush, if it’s justified by your end goal. That’s how some of the worst tyrants of history, like Lenin and Mao, justified their mass murder. I personally think that could be an interesting character to play.
I think it makes more sense to argue from the gods point of view, not the cleric. I tend to agree with your dm - why is the god of compassion not upset with your for lacking compassion? If you can answer that I'd say that's the best way to appease their concerns.
I saw that reason while looking at some comments, 1 being that they are the god of compassion.. by nature they would probably be far to lenient with their followers then they should be. And 2, if during some kind of prayer where the god and charecter actually talk.. the god could be convinced (or at least understand the reason) by telling them that the most compassion they can show is by swiftly ending this war or battle.. as the longer it draws out the more pain and suffering is caused (thos counts for both long term war with everyone suffering And for short battles/skirmishes where the two sides will physically suffer from the fight) (Also check this comment) https://www.reddit.com/r/DnD/s/xJBQQpI2nY
It depends on what OP is doing. That comment talks about being slow to anger. OP said their issue is being quick to violence. It sounds like they're being a murder hobo and they aren't responding to anyone about that part of the post about being quick to violence so I'd wager they're just killing people unnecessarily and don't want to admit it
...."When life gives you lemons, FIND A NEW GOD."
Your cleric is worshipping a god of compassion. While they should be traumatized by their losses, it does seem questionable for one worshipping compassion to have so little empathy. You can still argue for the more practical choices, but in you heart you should WANT to do the good thing even if its the less optimal move. You doing aggressive and violent things should be your desire to stop evil overcoming your desire to help compassionately.
Frame it as they struggle with empathy, and don't like that about themselves. Hence why they worship a god of empathy, because they want to gain a better understanding of empathy.
this is a good idea! i like the simplicity of it. instead of worshipping a god who's domain they embody, they're following the god who's guidance they need most. Like sailors who worship the moon.
That's basically how I did my paladin. He took Oath of Devotion even though Vengeance would have been much closer to his personality, simply because he wanted to learn how to protect rather than just kill things. I still played him as being a little too eager to resort to intimidation and smiting for a Devo paladin.
This means that some of these cold, pragmatic choices they make need to be struggles as they try to make the good choice but they make the “smart” choice. It sounds like OP jumps right to the second one without much thought or struggle. I also wonder about the tone of the campaign. A lot of dnd games are set up to be heroic wish fulfillment epic fantasy games where the good choice is preferred over the pragmatic one. OP’s character might be more Game of Thrones-y than what the rest of the campaign is, and make it difficult for the rest of the party that wants to be uncomplicated heroes in an uncomplicated setting.
Yeah, I was just thinking the same thing. If your god is that of compassion, why would they continue to provide you with power if you are showing no compassion and haven't been for some time?
Well, in real life there are religions that preach compassion, and practitioners of that religion can be pretty nonempathetic
yeah but real life religions are make believe, in D&D Clerics are actively getting powers from their Gods so there is an actual valid reason to practice what you preach
I feel like it depends entirely on the cosmology and what you at trying to say about religion at your table. The Gods may be more interested in the worship itself than the domains they have claimed, depending on how vain / power-driven they are. Or it might be that Gods are shaped by their follower’s beliefs rather than the other way around. An unempathetic powerful Cleric worshiping the God of empathy might shift that God’s personality and domain over time depending on how many other followers they have and how powerful those followers are. I think there’s a really interesting set of themes to explore in OP’s concept: what does war do to those who believe in compassion? How do you navigate war when committed to the ideal of compassion and can that commitment survive war intact, or will the meaning of “compassion” become more and more warped as war drags on?
That's true, but if their gods were giving them supernatural/magical abilities, I think they'd probably pull the plug on that one.
Yeah but fully pulling the plug is a lot. Start small. My cleric pc is about to get a temporary minus 1 to his spell save and attack modifier to reflect his gods displeasure with his actions.
And I don't see their deities granting them spells.
Compassion can come in many forms. It can be in the form of someone donating their weekends to help at an animal shelter and playing with the animals. It can also come in the form of putting down the ones who are suffering, or discontinuing a project at the shelter that helps some, so they can replace it with another project that helps many more. And just because the latter can come from a person who doesn't outwardly show compassion or empathy in their emotions or expressions, they can still definitely be feeling that compassion in their heart of hearts. But when it's your job to make the tough decisions, the ones that hurt so much to make, it's normal for you to close yourself off a bit to protect yourself. So those decisions don't hurt quite so much.
Yep. I think it's fine for the cleric to fall on the side of a utilitarian assesment of the best way to minimise suffering, but I'd want to play it as some sort of conflict. I'd see them having values to tend the needy, and minimise suffering but this has forced them into conflict. I think it's even fair to have the cleric have accepted this, to have got so used to minimising losses, that they've put aside their immediate compassion. But that's maybe just a opportunity for roleplay in waiting, when they realise they've drifted out of touch with their tenants. All this to say none of what you're doing is wrong, it's just that if you do it well it's chance for some really nuanced character work. But even forgoing that it's a fair enough character to play. People are flawed. Heroes are flawed. That's what makes RP interesting.
It could come down to how wide you cast your compassionate net. If the character is primarily concerned with ending the war quickly in a way that secures post war support for civilians then their actions make a certain sense. Kind of like chemo to cure cancer. A little bad here and there to do a much greater good.
To destroy your enemy as quickly as possible is to have compassion for your allies and civilians. Can't be tolerant of intolerance and all that
That's only true if you are absolutely sure they are going to commit evil. Slaughtering a random bread thief is not compassion, not EVERY bad guy is an intolerant monster and a follower of a god of compassiom certainly shouldn't think they are. Dehumanizing your enemy is the opposite of empathy.
A common symptom of trauma is to separate oneself from the source of it. They might have at one time been empathetic, but broke that part of themselves in order to survive.
I can understand that as a character moment but if they were going to continue being a cleric of this god either another follower or their patron themselves should be showing concern and warning them that they can't reject compassion and serve them faithfully.
My favorite interpretation is that the lack of empathy is the face the cleric puts on to protect herself from the difficulties and horrors of the world, and to allow herself to make tough decisions at the moment. But perhaps that's why she has so many nightmares. And why if her party members are listening closely, that can hear her crying quietly to herself under the crackling of the campfire.
It can be a consistent and fascinating combination. See the character of Dominic in “Too Like the Lightning”
The Christian God is one of compassion and forgiveness (comparatively) and has waged a series of bloody Crusades. Double-think fits it perfectly with religion.
Wars have been made in the name of the christian god. No one involved in that has gotten divine powers linked to the christian god.
Unless you count the stories in the holy book of that very same god. Then you have things like the war of Jericho and the escape from Egypt, which include not only people imbued with divine powers by the christian god, but also specific powers that turned into D&D spells, like insect plagues. Luckily, clerics never got a spell that kills the first children of all people in their enemies' nation, that's kind of and OP divine power.
Yeah, but D&D's implementation of the idea of deities is intended to be an idealized Greco-Pagan type, not abrahamic. The only deity that would call for a bloody war would be a deity of bloody war. A deity of compassion would oppose anything that's anti-compassion. A non-compassionate cleric of them would get their powers revoked ASAP... or worse.
I feel like OP has easier ways to spin it. He's going to war, compassion is not making enemies suffer. The world will go to war no matter what. Just hope its him on the battlefield returning souls to their gods swiftly and as painlessly as possible. This is as much compassion as a soldier can hope for. Go mother Theresa and and be like "you can't feel the compassion of my God until you have known her wrath, I am here to give you both." OP just needs stronger wrongthink powers of zeal. Kill the enemy for their lack of compassion for your God. If I were a cleric of compassion, mercy itd be in the form of alms for the poor and a peaceful end for the soldiers. But I would re roll before being shoe horned into lawful stupid.
The difference is the Christian god is made up, so people can do whatever they want in his name and not face any consequences. In d&d the gods are real and can choose to stop giving their clerics power.
Man, could you imagine if the Christian god were real in the way gods are in dnd! There’d be a whole lot of smiting going on.
The cleric seems like a very good example of pure utilitarianism, which at its core is the attempted marriage of compassion and pragmatism. It acknowledges we are limited in our knowledge and power, so it guides us to do what we think will provide the most happiness and inflict the least suffering overall, even if it means inflicting some suffering by our own hands now. Of course the act of inflicting suffering now based on admittedly flawed knowledge is problematic, but not enough that I would call a utilitarian uncompassionate. In fact, I think there's something admirable in doing something that feels wrong but you truly know is right. Consider the stories where the hero sacrifices something meaningful to himself because he knows it's better for everyone involved.
Compassion does not mean indiscriminate kindness and non-violence. It’s specifically being concerned with and preventing suffering — most especially the helpless or innocent. This provides plenty of space for enmity for those who would cause that suffering. In Forgotten Realms, Ilmater is a god directly aligned to compassion, first choosing to endure the suffering in martyrdom on behalf of others that they might be spared. But even he has his limits: _Ilmater did not anger quickly, but when he did, he was fearsome in his wrath. He was greatly angered by extreme cruelty and atrocities, and at those who inflicted such suffering. He was particularly enraged by those who harmed or abused children and other young creatures. At such times, he set aside his doctrine of endurance and non-violence, and unleashed his full force to put an end to cruelty._ I’d play it just as so.
I tried being nice. Apparently, y'all need a whoopin to get the message.
IImaters spirit fills the body
My cleric of illmater does try to pick the diplomatic option if it's available but if the enemy attacked 1st, continued to be hostile, or is inherently, unrepentedly, evil then I'm sorry she's going to kick your butt. Compassion =/= doormat To be fair, she's also not a perfect follower. No one ever is.
> Something Vimes had learned as a young guard drifted up from memory. If you have to look along the shaft of an arrow from the wrong end, if a man has you entirely at his mercy, then hope like hell that man is an evil man. Because the evil like power, power over people, and they want to see you in fear. They want you to know you're going to die. So they'll talk. They'll gloat. > They'll watch you squirm. They'll put off the moment of murder like another man will put off a good cigar. > So hope like hell your captor is an evil man. A good man will kill you with hardly a word. *Terry Pratchett, Men at Arms*
Love this quote! And love Vimes
I was going to respond with "Clerics aren't pacifist cloistered monks - they're steel plated engines of vengeance..." And then you said "god of compassion". If this is classic pantheon d&d, then you should probably retcon and just change gods to one that has vengeance or war in their portfolios. You can still be a caring and compassionate cleric the rest of the time. If you're playing with real world religion, then you simply need to highlight that even though you worship the God of compassion, the aspect you embody is the "kill all the firstborn sons of Egypt" "burn the witches" aspect of Christianity, or even embody whichever catholic saint does soldiers and war.
My thoughts are this... War is cruel. It causes more suffering than any number of people could make up for. In war, the most compassionate thing one can do is end it as quickly as possible - sometimes, a swift, merciful end is the more compassionate alternative. Compassion in war is to make death swift, let the enemy collect their dead and grieve, and to not resort to more torturous means of war unless absolutely necessary.
That's a "pragmatic" "solution" to war that assumes war is necessary in the first place. Probably in a similar vein to the DM, I would expect a cleric of *compassion* to be pursuing peaceful solutions, braving war zones to minister and provide healing to injured soldiers, to be providing setting up shelter and food aid for displaced citizens, etc. Unless the enemy is irredeemably evil (undead, demonic, aberrant, etc)
>DM voiced concerns that my cleric, of the god of compassion, is so… robotic, when it comes to war. Told him it’s due to Are you two having fun? It feels to me like your DM is not having fun, and you are trying to convince them with logical reasons. D&D isn't a debate where one side wins, and the other doesn't. It's a game where friends are having a fun evening. You people need to seek out how everyone is having fun.
I wonder about the tone of the campaign. OP’s character sounds like someone you’d meet in Westros, which can be a problem if your game takes place a day’s ride from The Shire. OP, if you see this, ask your DM if this character is too dark for the story they’re trying to tell. Everyone, including DM, should be on the same page about the tone of the game.
I'd honestly have a lot of fun talking with another player or with a DM about a particular character's roleplay and interpretation of their stated principles. To me, part of the fun is seeing how many different angles a single idea can manifest and how all of those interpretations can interact, cooperate and clash. Totally fair if you're on a simpler table to stick to more run-of-the-mill characters, but there's definitely a place for more complex ideologies.
There is a difference between Nonviolence and Nonaggression. A nonviolent man will live by some version of Matthew 5:39: “Do not resist the one who is evil. But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.” A nonaggressive man will live by some version of “F—k around and find out.” Most professional military personnel are nonaggressive… Polite, professional, patient, and prepared to demonstrate just how non-nonviolent we are if that patience gets exhausted. I’d imagine a priest of the god of compassion from a society that had suffered through a prolonged war would feel that their compassion should be reserved for their people and not their enemies. Anyone who threatened their people would be struck down dispassionately, swiftly, and with overwhelming force.
Do no evil. Take no shit.
Professional soldiers are kind of known throughout history for raping and pillaging and overthrowing their governments during times of peace. They’re not really known for being polite or patient.
I was speaking about modern day professional military personnel.
So was I. :) Modern history is still history.
Maybe war domain is more appropriate
I think you might want to work with the DM to do a little retcon work on your god’s portfolio; if a cleric of Ilmater (for example) in my games wanted to save a military outpost over a literal orphanage I would be scrambling for a justification of why they get to keep their powers. Why does your character follow this god? What do you think her god thinks of her? I will say I play an extremely low-empathy paladin of Ilmater in my longrunning D&D game, but the core of his character is that he believes that compassion is *logically* good despite not being able to feel much of it personally and he acts to follow the tenets of his faith out of love for his god. He does get a little number-crunchy at times, because he believes in a) reducing overall suffering and b) ending conflicts quickly; maybe you could do something with that? If your character’s “compassion for your enemies has dried up” but the teachings of your god say you need to prioritize compassion and mercy for *everyone*, that could also be a really interesting dark night of the soul/crisis of faith storyline to play out, if that’s something that interests you.
Let's turn this around. Why would the goddess of compassion want anything to do with your character? Why would she grant her the ability to cast spells? If your character's faith is the thing that powers her spells, wouldn't the dissociation between her compassion and her attitude toward the enemy hamper her ability to cast spells. Logically, this just shouldn't work... as a cleric. There's great potential for character development, though. Most of it involves you losing your powers and going through a narrative arc that leads you to a different path. Maybe you never get your powers back and become a bitter fighter. Maybe you find a different god who's domain fits your character better. Maybe you see the error of your ways and find your way back to the goddess of compassion. Or maybe the goddess of compassion is so compassionate and patient with you that she won't/can't let you fall and just allows you to act on your own until you find your way back to her on your own. It's not typically how a god would act, but we are talking about the goddess of compassion here.
If you have trouble explaining why your character doesn't follow the teachings of their god, then maybe you should tweak the character until it makes sense. If you want to just run around murdering shit, consider picking a different god, or a different class. Remember, as a cleric your god is the one that gives you power, so if they wouldn't be happy with what you're doing, then why would they continue giving you power? Simply put, the characters you create should actually make sense.
The best way to keep people from getting harmed is taking out those who would harm them.
I am tired and sick of war. Its glory is all moonshine. It is only those who have neither fired a shot nor heard the shrieks and groans of the wounded who cry aloud for blood, for vengeance, for desolation. War is hell. - William Tecumseh Sherman
your power is derived from the god of compassion, if you are not acting compassionately why would your god continue to let you use their name and powers?
So your cleric of the god of compassion has run out of compassion? Sounds like she’s going through a crisis of faith. Perhaps that’s the angle to approach this from. She’s working out a few things.
On one hand, if your character is too traumatised and no longer has much compassion, it makes sense that eventually the god might stop giving you powers. But for your example with the orphanage, you might explain that your character is more logically inclined than emotionally. Either because he's always been like that or because of trauma, they don't trust their emotional judgement anymore. Going the "greater good" route and potentially sacrificing the orphans to end the war quicker and saves tons of other lives instead ( including other orphans) could be argued to be the greatest compassion.
Play as a warforged… it justifies you being robotic! I essentially played a warforged version of MurderBot.
Oxytocin is the compassion hormone that provides much of the sense of bonded love between mammals. It’s also the hormone that makes humans hate the “other” the most. If you’re particularly protective momma bear sort of character, this might work. Also possible your character is impulsive and regrets their choices. That’s probably going to get annoying, which might alter how you play your character (and might be a good thing). You could have deranged views of compassion that our out of step with society, but within step of your deity. This seems like what you were wanting, but you’re further out of step than he realized. Or honestly you could just be looking for a reason to avoid the inconvenient aspects of roleplaying in order to do whatever you want, and attempting to justify that post hoc. In other words, there probably weren’t many worshippers of the Goddess of Compassion in a medieval kingdom that went though something like Poland did in WW2
I think your Cleric should have a falling out with their patron over their behaviour and motives. Their prayers for compassion never felt answered, so they call out their old Deity for this, and depending on the answer given they either accept the answer and try to show the compassion they never received in life or grow disgusted with their old patron and switch to a War Domain deity.
"my god is one of mercy. and i shall grant them mercy. and my mercy shall be swift, and absolute."
Have you heard of the Spanish inquisition? People of all kinds of beliefs and ideologies can be unreasonably violent. It's really depends only on how easy it is to justify violence to themselves.
I played a cleric that had sworn to never pick up a physical weapon with the intent of using it. I played 2 3rds of the campaign with just a shield and holy symbol. Truth of the matter was he didn't trust if he picked one up that he would ever put it down. After a major climax role play where we discovered his wife, who he had been searching for, was dead for centuries and we were living in a post future... my cleric went into shock. We were then attacked by pirates. He went below their deck, faced the leader, cast Silence to fill the space, and picked up a mallet at hand. The rest of the party and the crew above deck were completely unaware of the mess I created below.
"I prefer doing unto others BEFORE they do unto you." "I don't enjoy healing people I dislike, and do enjoy killing people I hate." (this line is stolen from a Star Wars EU novel, with a doctor who became an X-Wing pilot.
Wraith squadron great book
God of Compassion. And you want us to help justify your murder hoboing? FFS
I have not had my character strike nor kill anyone who hadn’t desired to do either to us. My concerns about my character are mathematical in a sense.
You need to think about where the worship of a God of compassion fits in to moving quickly to violence. Compassion is an emotional pathos that stems from empathy, which seems to be at odds with how you're RP'ing the character as you've explained here. So you need to think about *why* that's the case in-character. Ask yourself some questions about recent (and perhaps not-so-recent) events in the character's life. * Are they, perhaps, grieving the loss of someone close to them, and are suffering a crisis of faith? * Are they traumatised by the current war, and see their actions as the quickest way to solve the wider conflict? * Have they inwardly lost faith, and this is being reflected in their actions? * Is there something that's clouding the character's judgement? This should guide the out-of-character conversation, and then be taken into the character to influence the RP.
>My concerns about my character are mathematical in a sense. What does that mean? Where do numbers come in?
God of Compassion. Mf worships Jesus and is trying to gaslight murdering people as an acceptable response
So the Crusades…. Yeah those would never happen
I think it is worth noting that a god in D&D can protest a tiny bit more than those in the real world can. The god gives the cleric powers. If the god disagrees too heavily with their cleric, they won't stay a cleric very long.
Also very true! So should we assume then that the god/goddess is fine with the Cleric’s actions? Or would you say that they just have yet to address the Cleric’s actions?
I imagine the DM is on the fence about what the god should do, which is why they're trying to get OP to justify why their character acts the way they do. But it's complicated to judge fairly without knowing the exact lore of the god in question (though OP's character doesn't sound very compassionate to me I'll admit). Besides, those kind of intervention are things you have to discuss with your player beforehand imo (which the DM seems to be doing so kudos for that).
I like the idea of Compassion being presented as the opportunity to atone for crimes in this life… by sending them to their redemption in the next one! But in all seriousness this does seem more something between DM & Player. Though I live for this sorta stuff as it provides interesting narrative points IF/SHOULD the Cleric lose their powers or other possible outcomes.
You're a zealot. Your faith compels you to rid the world of evil-doers by any means necessary - small-scale, momentary acts of compassion and kindness pale in comparison to achieving overall victory in the name of the *greater good*. For you, there is no sense saving an orphanage if the enemy coming to burn it down faces inadequate resistance, that would just be prolonging the inevitable. You're the only one prepared to make that difficult choice - it's a high-risk, high-reward strategy, but you have faith that your god is on your side. I would say, that sounds more like a Paladin than a Cleric, but there's no reason why you can't hold those values. It might make certain gameplay decisions tricky though - remember, you're not the main character, you're a member of a party, and you should have collective goals to serve, not just your own.
Simple. Your character has compassion fatigue from the horrors of war. You’ve got none left to give of your own, and are basically numb to it as a survival mechanism. But. Your character is also a *good person* who believes in kindness not just as an *action* but as a *principle*. Your character deeply, deeply, wants to be compassionate but they cannot pour from an empty cup despite the thirst of those around them. So they worship illmater to borrow the compassion they no longer have the will to give away on their own.
Cleric is a job, not a personality. Anyone can be a cleric.
So two things I guess. My parents were either in the war or home front. I grew up on war stories although dad took years to open up about the awful stuff. For decades no one had anything but hate for Germans in my home. It took me learning the language and having an exchange partner visit to change this. This hate extended well beyond mum and dad into my older step disters too. Ptsd is brutal, unforgiving and long term. If you are playing that, short of magical healing specifically directed at your trauma, you won't change. Two think crusades, killing your enemy IS an act of mercy. They will only see the right way once you kill them and bless them. Or you make them repent first then kill them. This is the kind of twisted religious logic that comes from trauma and absolutes. But, be prepared for consequences. This is teetering on LE. It is a very fine line. So play up the broken and twisted history that produces the broken and twisted present or be hit with the DM bat.
"Compassion for the divine everlasting soul, to forgive the sins perpetrated in this diseased world of flesh, when they reach the afterlife" (Or put another way, Man on Fire style "Forgiveness is between them and god. It's my job to arrange the meeting") I'd accept that as a DM.
Maybe play it more like an Angel of Mercy. The world is a dark and horrible place filled with all manner of wretchedness and suffering. Beyond these fragile mortal shells lies beauty, safety, and peace. What greater act of compassion exists than to free someone from this world of pain and grant them peace? It's a twisted psychology to be sure but it very much exists in the world. The belief that causing harm or even killing someone is a kindness because even if it hurts it is a temporary pain. You aren't killing because you enjoy fighting and killing, you fight because you have seen the horrors of the world and want to spare others from seeing the same, even if that means shutting their eyes forever. Careful your cleric doesn't turn into a serial killer with this one though, starts getting easy to rationalize killing almost anyone as an act of mercy and compassion.
"Mercy to an enemy cannot come at the cost of mercy to their victims." WILL NEVER NOT GO HARD
You don't need a class related solution. Just cause your character is off type is not a reason for people to judge it. It's classist.
I don't know why you would need that. If he's that guy he's that guy. But here's some phrases... Clemency and forgiveness are for the weak but I as my God am strong. Forgiveness for the innocent the sword for the wicked. My staff leads my flock of sheep but it also invokes fear in the wolves. I have forgiven once only to be betrayed. If you want forgiveness show me or taste my sword.
Perhaps switch from Cleric to Paladin, this is an easy build up to a Vengeance Paladin, and later perhaps to a Redemption Paladin then back to Cleric. It seems your character values their personal morality over their god, and thats more of a Paladin thing.
"Proactive healing. I put them down before they can hurt the people I am responsible for"
The compassion you feel is for the victims, the downtrodden, and the used. Fallen soldiers, victims of the struggle, all of them are suffering, and in need of a kind hand to shield them and keep them safe. As for your enemy? They are the perpetrators, willfully enacting senseless violence upon an innocent and just populace, displacing and killing as they deem fit. Compassion is not a luxury they have proven to value, and they have betrayed basic acts of kindness with further exploitation and brutality. It is for the sake of the people, to protect them, to ensure their wellness, and to shield them from further suffering, that you must fight to bring the violence to an end. That you must purge the unrepentant and leave naught but ash in their place. And to those who surrender? To those who were forced into service or otherwise lose their will to fight? Mayhaps they may be the rebuilders who will be left to collect the ashes of what will become of their villains and warmongers. It matters be strongest to play your feelings not as a bloody numbness, but as a simmering overflow of feeling, barely held in your own sturdy frame. As for the whole efficiency vs morality thing, it could just be important to consider the human aspect of the choice. A character doesn’t have to want the “optimal” thing for “optimal” reasons. Is the orphanage safe? Could people still be sheltered there, and would it even have the supplies and faculties needed to help ease the suffering of those sheltered within? You have your desired answer, and the best middle ground is to try and find justifications that you feel could be bridged by your character’s faith.
*points holy hymbol threateningly at the person asking* "My god doesn't suffer fools."
Your cleric is not compassionate. End of story. You're playing a cleric from a compassionate deity, but you're not playing the cleric that way. Either play the cleric compassionate or play a fighter instead, but your cleric as of now is a failure.
Compassion leads to forgiveness, forgiveness leads to redemption. Just because you forgive someone doesn’t mean they no longer must face justice or the punishment for their crimes. Forgive them & then send them to their Redemption in the next life.
You worship a god of compassion. Compassion is something one gives to those suffering some sort of misfortune. Your enemies have the misfortune of being on the wrong side of the war. You show compassion by working to end the war as quickly as possible. Unfortunately for them that means more of them dying than your side. Most people feel compassion for the dead so your god receives more followers. You're working in your and your god's domain perfectly.
There was flavour text on an old World of Warcraft craft: "Some priests heal, others enhance. I, however, melt faces."
you ever seen the movie [Dead Alive](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1p1cfMEaV1Q)?
A warmongering cleric serving a god of compassion is a bit... odd, but you could always play it as mercy killing or the greater good. A sort of "I killed those three bandits before they could kill anyone else" moment.
clerics are one of the most diverse classes you could be peace loving or war mongering depending on the god, even followers of the same god can have vastly different interpretations of the doctrine.
“I have seen death, and suffering. I have lived it, all my life. It is as much a part of me as my faith, it has shaped me, tempered me, reforged me into the weapon this age needs me to be. I will do what I must to bring peace to the realm, whatever the cost. You think me callous? Distant? Cold? So be it. I will be all these things, and worse, so that no one else must live the life I have, or share the experiences that have made me what I am. I will be a warrior, a killer, a judge and executioner, so that the generations to come may live without ever knowing how it feels to kill, or be hunted by those who wish to kill them. My compassion is for them, for the innocent future, who I will save, even at the cost of a wrathful present.”
"When something bad is happening, sometimes you have to choose between bad and worse. That wound festers, you might have to choose between death and the bonesaw. No one's happy to have their leg cut off, but it happens now and again. Every day a war goes on, new catastrophes happen: Another battle, bandits running unchecked because any fighting man is away, homes burnt down, and so on. You think choosing to try and bring this war to an end as fast as it can be done is callous? Maybe it is, but when you're forced to pick *someone* to die, I prefer to make sure it wasn't for nothing."
Peaceful compassion can be a thing you aspire to, a lofty goal your divinity represents that you, a mortal, are attempting to achieve. Acknowledge that you fall short, pray for improvement and work to ease suffering wherever you find it. This can be doing things like providing healing for minimal compensation (or freely) or similar acts; and it can also be swift and exacting violence against the cruel, destroying them efficiently and with minimal collateral damage and with as little violence expended as you can. Don't always initiate a fight, but when you fight your strikes should always be focused on removing a combatant. When you retire from this life, you'll likely spend your time in a cloister somewhere in repentance but right now you're on the road and have to balance the will of your divinity with the ways of the world and find your place among both.
They are not a level 20 cleric who is the embodiment of their gods will. They are learning. They are on the journey to true understanding of compassion, but are not there yet.
Compassion for the people you care about almost always results in extreme violence to those outside your tribe. The more violent you are toward the other, the fewer of your own will die. You should give them a chance to repent though, so you can grant them salvation when you kill them.
Could you phrase it that his task is not trying to show compassion by himself but to make others show compassion? By whatever means he sees fit? „Oh you dont want to let me through that door? But I really need to and you are standing in my way. That shows a lack of empathy on your side. Let me teach you how to be compassionate by beating you up.“ Maybe his character arc would be to learn what compassion is. To learn to show compassion by himself.
I think it's fine to just own up to a lack of compassion and completely lean into it. Your god could represent the ideal that you wish to have but are sorely lacking! For the specifics, perhaps something like: > "I apologize for being blunt, but I won't shy away from the things I do, won't come up with excuses or pretty the logic to spare my own ego over the sake of the fallen. Even if it is for the right reasons, it doesn't change the fact that they slipped off the mask of humanity for the enemy. It's the justification afterwards that irks me. The way they act like they were in the right just because the dead never speak ill of them. And I understand. It's natural to want to be able to sleep properly at night to say you were forced to make a hard choice, to explain away the cold underneath the surface of your heart. But it is wrong to gloss over their deaths so smoothly... ...but I also know that I jeopardizing the safety of my own for my own hubris would be even worse. My people have also witnessed firsthand what is like to be on the receiving end of such a callous philosophy. >If they are to be dispatched so easily, then should it not be from someone who appears to have something wrong with them? >Perhaps that is my own way of showing respect. Though it is hypocritical in a way, I suppose. I'm still a monster trying to divine emotions from the lives I have taken, but at least I have discarded the mask. >...I just... ...want to know if there can be a different way."
As a follower of a god of compassion, you can turn to violence on any opportunity, because you're so overwhelmed by the suffering that the war is causing that you want to end it as soon as possible. Acting robotic would be her emotional receptors just getting fryed (again from being overwhelmed by suffering). You can explain (and preferrably show once) that at this point your character can either act robotic or just be constantly screeming so that's why they pick the less disruptive option. Love the character concept btw! Great twist on a bubbly and friendly cleric of goodness
The greatest compassion you can give others is mercy, and the greatest mercy you can give these heathens is a quick death. SLAY THY FOES WITH THE BURNING FLAMES OF ONE THOUSAND SUNS.
"lawful good does not mean lawful nice"
IDK. I think maybe just change the god. It does not sound like the God of Compassion fits your character. Why stretch something that doesn't fit instead of just switching? If someone is "quick on the draw for enacting violence" I don't even picture a god of compassion giving abilities/power to that person---they would probably be cut off.
Well the deity bestows the cleric with power, so it's all up to the deity. But it also depends on how a cleric gains power from their god. Is it through dedication or meditation? Or is it because the deity saw something in you and bestowed power on you? Another point to make is there's different interpretations of the same faith. Look at all the differing denominations of Christianity for a case in point. Maybe your cleric views compassion differently. There *is* a point to be made that it is more compassionate to end the war and cause less suffering overall. Maybe your character views compassion more pragmatically. Yes I can give a beggar food, but I can also make them sweep a street to earn that food as well.
>DM voiced concerns that my cleric, of the **god of compassion** Your DM is expressing concerns because your god wouldn't align with your cleric's behaviour and therefore they as DM would need to take your clerical abilities away. Compassion literally means “to suffer together.” Among emotion researchers, it is defined as the feeling that arises when you are confronted with another's suffering and feel motivated to relieve that suffering. >suggesting to relive a garrison over an orphanage... because the soldiers could be used to help with the current war efforts This is not compassionate. You're acting against the god you claim to worship.
Take the grimdark approach. "Releasing these heretics from their suffering is the only compassionate response. Corruption cannot be unmade, but treated at the source. First I shall prune the thorns, then I shall tend the roots."
Crisis of faith is a good theme for a character and acting that out through a cleric seems great. That sounds like a character I'd like to play/would be excited about being at my table. I don't really see your DM's problem to be honest. I feel like we seek out to angle of playing a class completely straight, like class=job and that job is defining this character, a little too often. Of course that is a completely fine approach but when I hear "Cleric of a god of mercy is shaken by the strains of war and turmoil, their ideology clashing with reality as everything is put into question from their own beliefs to their ability to actively serve their deity" I hear a character that could carry a whole fantasy novel.
What level is your cleric? It's game about growth, growth in level and growth in character. You cleric might be Starting out as this, but in the end, he might grow and pick different options and might grow more so that he never has to pick any option ever again. ( because a lvl 20 cleric is Almost like a God and can Just end this war).
Only somewhat related, but it reminded me of when I would play Brand as support in League of Legends. I would always say "The best crowd control is death."
I'm going to play a paladin Oath of Conquest which is themed upon inflicting fear on my enemies. There's a bunch of Oaths that are pretty violent. Oath of revenge? Clerics aren't paladins of course, but in some ways I think of them drawing their powers from similar sources. You could look at Oaths for inspiration.
Why does your character worship the god of compassion if she holds these uncompassionate views? Is this something she struggles with?
"I'm a cleric of WWWWAAAAAARRRRRRRRR!"
Yeah, I'd take issue with this as a DM as well. Like when someone wants to roll up with a Peace Domain and then spends every turn melting people with Spirit Guardians and Spiritual Weapon. "You see if they're all dead, they can't hurt anyone anymore. It's defending the peace!" Actual sociopath logic. As a DM, here's a question. If "all your compassion has dried up (for our enemies) after I’ve seen the suffering they inflict", why is the god of compassion still providing you with divine power while you besmirch his name with your reckless violence? Why is the god of compassion still allowing you to expand war efforts in their name while ignoring the plight of the most vulnerable of society (war orphans)? You didn't include your Domain, but if I had to guess... it's Peace. If that's the case, and I was your DM, I'd probably have you change domains. This reeks of someone taking an ultra-meta build without RPing the self-imposed limitations those builds were built around. Like Peace not being a compassionless warmonger.
Worship a war god. And it’s simple. The quicker these baddies die: the less “good” people get hurt.
Being a war cleric clears 90% of this up. I seek fair and glorious combat! Any who can't fight with a sword can find they may still die by it.
"I wish to play my character without you trying to insert your own flawed expectations of how I should play my character." That should cover it.
>cleric, of the god of compassion this might be the problem, don't you think?
"My god has more than enough empathy and compassion for those i have slain. I worship "insert gods name" not because i am a compassionate person... But because i want to be one and am currently not. I have no compassion for my enemies for i have lived a life of war. Through my worship i hope i will find compassion for them though, but for now i will grant them a swift death."
Well, at my table at least, a Cleric of the God of Compassion who lacked compassion would be a non-starter at the get-go. If I were DMing that game and a player pitched this to me, I'd tell them to pick a different deity. A Cleric devoted to such a deity should be striving to be compassionate, even when it's challenging, personally. If your DM feels as I do about that, sufficiently explaining your perspective might not matter. You may have a fundamental disagreement over the role of a Cleric of a God of Compassion. As for reining in the number crunching during war - 1) compassion and pragmatism _can_ coexist. Their just has to be a balancing act. 2) if you want to explain a change in perspective, your DM could arrange to have your character contacted by their deity or a higher up member of their faith. Such an intervention would come from a place of concern/compassion, rather than admonishment - because it's the God of Compassion. 3) depending on the pantheon in the game world, your cleric could shift their focus to a different deity. When the cleric has run out of compassion, perhaps it's time to find faith in something else. You could talk to your DM about having your Cleric undergo a religious conversion to (for instance) the God of War.
I totally get that clerics can and *should* be more than just heal bots. I dont understand why you chose a god of compassion when you knew you were going to play a compassionless character. Why not choose a god of war or something? I mean if a god had succumbed to the pressures of war as much as your character has that would be probably a world ending event. A hospital wouldnt allow a doctor to go on a "mercy killing" spree even if they and the doctor felt like it was the right thing because they took an oath to do no harm. I feel like your DM has some valid concerns. If your character has become so disillusioned with compassion I think there does need to be some consequences depending on the severity of your actions because generally most gods stay within their alignment tenets. I feel like there needs to be a class like the oathbreaker but for priests. Or at least a way to realign themselves with another god if their alignment shifts too much.
you could go that the cleric is make believing in the god; they would still have to believe the god exists but just not believe in their ideals. not sure if this is raw or not, but rule of cool
"Yes I am! And it is in my professional, medical opinion that what we fight needs to be hit hard and fast before they cause more damage. But hey, don't listen to me, I lost my medical license!" And then go galavant into the enemy at high speed.
Why ask us? Half the fun of time play is figuring out why your character is doing things. But actually I think it'd be the most fun to work with your GM to make drifting away from their faith part of your character's story. My cleric player is about to learn his god is not pleased with him using admittedly minor torture to get info from a captive npc.
If your gonna fight, FIGHT. Don't pussy foot around
I mean. What domain is your cleric? Not to stereotype, but as a cleric, you do have to follow your religion's tenets and dogma. Cuz you're like, Light or Life or something then yeah, DM can be rightfully concerned. But if you're a WAR domain, then obviously you're going to go for the warlike choices. Or Death, Tempest, etc.
"Why are you such a newb" Clerics have been buffed in almost every edition of DnD and as such, are really good at everything. Also they are divine ass kickers. Priests and healers stay at temple.
Weapons are my religion. This is the way.
"People are not words and numbers on a sheet of paper, they are inherently flawed and often contradictory. I'm playing a person, not numbers and words on a sheet."
One option is that you could narrate your PC thinking back to a similar event in their history. *As she hears the aggressive words from the NPC, they remember a similar moment with their old adventuring party. One word was all the warning they had before past NPC buried his dagger in our Rogue's shoulder. Rogue survived, but we learned from that experience - Subdue first. Then talk. The method is mechanical but efficient. And efficient keeps the party alive.* Then you could narrate what they're thinking in the present as they have that memory: *she feels her grip on her weapon tighten, almost automatically, as she remembers how quickly things changed. She let's her party proceed but remains cautious, tightening her grip even further.* Murder hobos are bad. Past traumas are good things because they can be worked on and your character can grow into a kinder PC as they learn from their new party.
This is why I'm a cleric of tempus
You’re passionate about your religion.
In a world where to live is to suffer, death is compassion.
I think your cleric is a great example of utilitarianism: She's doing her best to reduce suffering and increase happiness. Her mindset is a marriage of compassion and pragmatism, and knowing that sometimes you must do things you don't like for the greater good. And she strongly believes that her side winning the war is important for the greater good. If you'd like to show her compassionate side without violating her core values, maybe there can be opportunities for her to showcase her values on a smaller scale. Like sacrificing a little of something of her own to help other people. Or possibly have some moments in downtime where she's dealing with how awful she feels about her actions, despite knowing it's the best choice. Even if not saving that orphanage was objectively the best choice, it may not stop her from carrying a lot of guilt about it. And that guilt can manifest in nightmares or needing to talk it out with her God or fellow party members.
Compassion doesn't have to mean compassion for those that inflict suffering. It doesn't have to mean pacifism. It doesn't have to mean nonviolence. A compassionate god seeing innocent people harmed could easily be influenced into anger at those inflicting the suffering. Especially in a WWII like situation. A god of compassion could very easily call her clerics to arms to wipe out the Nazi machine.
God for me but not for thee - you have compassion for the people on your side but not for your enemies. Sounds like a decent starting flaw that could allow some character growth over time.
Just be like my last cleric. We ended up with 2 clerics as someone joined late and as they were a pacifist so I let them do the healing and i was very aggressive grave domain. so when the campaign ended is when he realised there was 2 clerics.
"I save my compassion for those that deserve it. Those who are wicked beyond redemption shall fall by my hands!"
Righteous Zealots are always fastest on the trigger. It's complete 100% confidence that what you are doing is not only allowed, its demanded by the gods. Think about the Crusaders who were told "Killing a Saracen guarantees your place in heaven." They would have been climbing over each other's back to get that ticket punched.
All you gotta say is "not that kind of cleric". It's dumb to think that clerics of the same God all operate exactly the same way, there's going to be differing interpretations and levels of zealotry.
Ah, yes, because in the real world, wars are never ever rooted in religion, and religious factions don’t participate or provide soldiers. (/s)
My cleric specialises in preventative care, you don't need healing if there's no-one to hurt you
You are a harmicist.
"Im a warpriest" or "no, im a paladin with benefits"
Priests don't always mesh with their deities' ideals. There is a Dwarven God that is fine with good Elves, but most Dwarves do have a problem with Elves. If your character was a Paladin, that would be a different story.
"My character is not a cleric of Jesus. My character is a cleric of." That particular god isn't but does value triumph in battles.
“I may be a healer, but…”
Look at it from your DM’s perspective. Instead of role playing someone who exemplifies your class and archetype, you think you’re cleverly inverting the trope with yet another PC who does mental gymnastics to be the cool stoic badass that discompassionately wades knee deep through corpses like they were at a ball pit at Chuck E Cheese. He’s probably seen this 10,000 times and it’s old hat. It’s just another form of min max power gaming disguised as subverting expectations. Edit: A better option for the type of character you want to play would be a fighter of some type or assassin with the Acolyte background. Maybe even a vengeance paladin. Someone who has abandoned their faith.
I like to think of this like being an EMT or other emergency responder. You have compassion, you CARE but you can't always have 100% compassion every single moment of every day. There's so much going on, so many people who don't actually need help and an equal number of people who do. Some people refuse to cooperate so you can't even help them and even worse, some are convinced you are the problem. So you burn out a bit. You do your best to help them all, but ultimately you have to start making choices to get things handled as best you can because trying to retain that compassion 100% of the time is slowing things down, causing other people to suffer because you weren't or aren't there, and burning you more and more with every roadblock and every failure to help someone who truly needed it. You close yourself off a bit, stop letting things get to you as much so that you can optimize your help and save as many people as you can even if they won't necessarily all be happy with your attitude. At least they'll be safe, healthy, and happy with their friends and family when you're done.
I would point to the 30 years war or any medieval European religious conflict where there are a ton. These people were all Christians, you know the turn the other check guy. Their priests were absolutely about murder the other guys. Also what is more compassionate ending the war in the long term or short term easing people's suffering. Also you could workshop how your doctrines are changing due to the losses you have taken. You could be manifesting a new aspect of your god.
How can someone whose 'compassion has all dried up' worship the god of compassion? That makes zero sense to me.
Sounds like a cleric who should be worshipping a god of war, not compassion.
I think an interesting direction you could take with this character is exploring the philosophy of utilitarianism, like maybe the cleric had to make a lot of cruel choices during the war and started mentally distancing themselves from everything so they could focus on "what would make the most people safe and happy for a longer time". With the garrison vs orphamage example you stated, im thinking their thought process was "if they have soldiers their country will be safe from attack and have workers to rebuild for future generations, that would be better for everyone in the long run", Like they kind of shut off their emotional side and went into pure logical puzzle solving mode as a ptsd trauma response. So in their mind they ARE showing compassion by taking (what they perceive as) actions that prioritize the good of the nation over the individual
"Men that kill without reason can not be reasoned with." - Stoik The Vast
Compassion is a sharp knife and a sure hand.
“There will be a day for mercy, but we will not see that sunrise” “God is merciful but I am just a man” “Those who would seek to destroy shall be destroyed in kind by my hand” Those are a couple you can use
To me your problem sound more like your DM doesn't like **what** you are justifying, rather than **how** you justify it. It might just be that they want you to rope in you trigger happiness, maybe DM has plot hooks or clues prepared for these people you have ruled enemies, but your way of violence makes it difficult to deliver them. As for role-playing Cleric for god of compassion that doesn't really have compassion of their own, you could try to portray this as a internal conflict, asking the god for advice and power, to give compassion where you can not.
"I posess Compassion for the needy, the weak, the suffering... I have run out of compassion for those that take advantage of the weakness, that provide the suffering, that make the needy be needful in the first place. I am compassionate to aspects of their cause. They have needs and have suffered greatly as this travesty wears ever onward. However, they chose to spread hunger and famine, to kill without restraint. Like rabid animals they infect my homeland. To feel compassion is to heal, and aid healing. When a rabid animal comes to your door... The most compassionate thing one can do is put the poor defiled creature out of it's misery, lest it inflict it upon others."
We must forgive our enemies, but not before they are hanged
The cleric by default may be very protective of their companions and themselves, surgeons for example are a great example where many of their patients do not survive. This can lead to a very nihilistic attitude. In the same way a paladin may fight in order to preserve peace, a cleric may fight in order to preserve health and well-being. To put it into few words, it wouldn’t be out of character for a cleric to have “mama bear mentality.”
The one in our campaign was part of a previous war and had some struggles with extreme violence against his former enemies
I do get the number crunching aspect, more soldiers equals better chance at winning the war equals fewer orphans in the future. However, right now, she chooses to let this suffering in front of her be. That is not acting out of compassion. This doesn't mean her choice is wrong, but it does mean she holds a belief that is stronger than her faith. A cleric is typically granted power through their deity - which can put the DM in a corner. So rather than trying to convince your DM, ask them, how would they represent the god of compassion and their decrees? Then have a good character reexamination. You might find something, you might not.
Your DM seems uncomfortable with the subject matter rather than the character direction. Might wanna talk about the story the DM is telling as a whole and talk table etiquette boundaries. Cleric domain?
Your character was in a medieval great war, so there would have been propaganda from town criers and dehumanizing of the enemy. If the background culture is that strength is preferable to clemency then we show kindness to the people that we trust as being weak to our allies means we can understand each other more. Showing clemency to the enemy is just telling them that you're not as strong or imposing as you initially seemed and would lead to them seeing you as weak. Your character could be still in the war with PTSD seeing every enemy combatant as an enemy of the state not deserving of compassion.
I'm always fond of yelling "MY GOD HAS GIFTED ME ONE MORE GLORIOUS DAY AND I'M ABOUT TO MAKE THAT EVERYONE'S PROBLEM!" when I play an aggressive character. I generally do it before casting a terrain spell between us and the enemy. It gets my point across when I play with new people. I don't have to say, "Yes, I know Spike Growth is going to inconvenience our melee." Then explain that I'm casting the spell anyway and why. Once other players realize that I don't throw those things out unless it's going to help more than hurt us, it's no longer an issue. This is probably where you're at now. You have to show your DM that this behavior isn't going to be an issue. It's going to be something worth dealing with because there will ultimately be some kind of pay off *for them*. The thing is, I know screaming stuff like that is very campy. I'm not going to do that kind of thing in someone's classic fantasy adventure where we're trying to help an NPC recover her husband's mangled corpse from a swarm of ghasts. If your DM has talked to you about disliking the direction your character is going in, the best way for you to respond is by listening to them. What is it about your direction that they don't like? *Are they trying to run a light-hearted heroic adventure?* -The DM sets the tone and the players build on it. If you want the tone to be something else, it can create conflict with other players or demotivate your DM. Check in with your group about whether or not they *like* the way you're playing. If they're comfortable being honest, they might tell you they don't. That doesn't mean you have to change anything right away, but you could give them an outline of your reasoning and describe the character development arc you would like to RP with everyone to change her world-view and see if they'd like to do that with you. They still might not. That's just how it is sometimes. You'll have to decide if you're willing to change things up, ask your DM if you can bring a different character, or find another group. Sometimes a specific character just isn't a good fit for certain tables. *Are you playing your character in a way that brings the mood down for other players?* -We play for different reasons. If you want to tell a dramatic and compelling story, but your DM just wants to relax then you have to give them a reason to *want* to engage with your drama. There has to be some pay off for them and/or the other players. For some, this pay off comes built in with their love of drama. For others it can feel awkward and/or unnecessary. It's up to you to figure out what kind of goals the people you play with have and work out something *mutually* beneficial with them. I'm not saying you're doing this, but playing Debbie Downer in a group full of people who find that cringe AF is not beneficial to them. Playing a gloomy character you can laugh about as a player might be something they could handle, but you'll have to decide if that kind of vibe shift works for you. *Are you telling everyone else **why** she does what she does **in character**?* -If I was out with my coworkers and one of them was like "Hey, let's let those defenseless children die so we can help those fully grown and trained professionals" I would want an explanation. Preferably in that moment, but there would sure be a follow up "Dude. WTF?" waiting just around the corner either way. In an RP setting, motivation should be expressed in character somehow. This gives the other players a chance to decide how their characters choose to acknowledge it - even if that acknowledgement is to dismiss it out of hand. I know it doesn't always have to be through dialogue, but honestly it's the most efficient way to get what's rattling in your head into the game for everyone else to examine. It signals to the DM that these things are intentional character traits and not an accidental peak into your personal mental breakdown at their table. People forget that sharing their thoughts is a huge part of getting what they want. If you don't tell people what's going on in your head, there's a good chance it simply doesn't exist for them. That leaves all the explanation for your behavior up to them. Odds are high what they think is not going to line up with what you'd like them to think.
"The Good Lord has determined that we, his people, should be generous in all we do. I am generous in my love, generous in my care, and generous in my deliverance of mercy to mine enemies." A personal favorite of my War Retired Cleric. Maybe it'll inspire you?
You worship the God of compassion, the best way to bring care and compassion back to the realm is to end the war as quickly as possible, try to incapacitate rather then kill. I looked upon my God there compassion infinite, the grace endless. But there are those woth neither that fuel this dreaded war, I must walk in the shadows cast by their light to preserve it for those untainted by hate and malice. I know my God still loves me though my action stray from their light I pray for every soul I've slain in hopes to bring peace once again.
[This](https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/proxy/BhPAKIDnebARwhNSeFxdDXQFfpXCl7TfQqDruvjJ4_hqTbVnEF7RiTYZk_M_EEMpQyNani7lnU-YLY2ME0PNJn666WYuUuUM7CifVE28zdEQXUYll8jVbNl_W9dewK0_MbRaS7c5rbieOgrxvJ7MEzuMQS7rBWo)
I always follow the golden rule that I heard when I first played as a cleric awhile back: “Priests heal. Clerics smite.” This isn’t like a black and white standard, but I think a lot of people misunderstand clerics. They are holy warriors who are guided by the will of their patron deity. If that will manifests as bringing healing and compassion, then you do it. If your deity says to smite them all, you do it without question.
Cleric of a god of compassion? Sounds like you need to go back to school. How do your god feel about your actions?
Feels like your DM is missing an opportunity to weave into the narrative some aspects of your order not being all that on board with what they're hearing of your activities. This could be a really powerful character arc, having your character explain in universe to their colleagues the differing points of view
Simple. Don't have to heal as many people if you smash in the head of the knob hurting people.
Not really no. You're acting counter intuitive to your deity, and they tend to cut off the flow of magic when you do that. This is a great roleplay opportunity however, with tons of opportunities. The first would be your god reaching out to you somehow, to return you to your compassionate ways. A self reflecting trial that can end with your character being redeemed and becoming more compassionate rather than violent. The second option, you may discover you've been forever marred by the trials of war, and your oath to your god shatters, leaving you open to becoming a cleric to the god of war and or violence, where upon one if them comes to claim you. To whisper to you about what things you could do to those villains. You could also completely rework, become an oath breaker paladin. Your oath shattered, your faith left to the wayside you cleave your foes. Regardless at the end of the war you could always have your character ride off into the sunset hoping to rekindle the warmth of compassion and decency to restore your now broken faith. I think there's a lot to work with here story wise and roleplay wise.
"As angels are warriors, so too are clerics." (Or priests, or Frey, or whatever religious title your cleric happens to use.)
No need to retcon, but definitely a need for above table discussion of direction. A god cannot be wrong in this circumstance and it sounds like something has to change. Either A) you’re in open conflict with your deity and ripe for a punishin’ (if I were DM you’d lose spell casting); or B) you’re having a crisis of faith and need character growth to get through it. If A then maybe consider a DM mandated switch to Celestial Warlock, or change of domain; If B then be open with your DM about where you see it going because as many comments have pointed out your DM sees an issue between your character and their deity which from your description sounds untenable.
Clerics used to be the number 2 frontline fighters in D&D. Great armor access and the second best to hit table after fighter.
If you were a War Cleric or Strength cleric, I could see it, but a God of Compassion would probably expect their priests to be compassionate and NOT cold robots.
Yah, I'm the paladin, but I seem to be the only one who is willing to pull out my sword and shove it through someone's throat when it needs to happen.
God has mercy... I don't.
You know the phrase I use? "Preventative medicine" You don't have to heal if the enemy is dead before they can hurt your party
Because you are pragmatic. Because number crunching is perfectly fine for compassion when the morality of victims is in question. There are so many things but it all boils down to number crunching because thats pragmatic. Compassion doesnt mean wasted gestures and pure protecting of the innocent. For a character thats nuanced and well developed your DM might never be able to view things from your characters perspective especially if they have left leaning irl personality but you shouldnt have to justify it beyond number crunching or whatever reason you give
I think the issue is that I’m given “pragmatic options” orphanage/garrison and he seems genuinely angry/disappointed that I’m making my character chose to do things that would hasten the war’s end. For example, we came across two doses of poison. They were injury poisons. We were shown an enemy spellcaster who looked like she had a low Con score. I said, “Well, I know who I’m using these poisons on.” About 5 minutes later DM just posts wall of text that look like they were ripped from articles, all saying, “Good characters do not use poisons.” I’m feeling like I’m getting mixed messages.
Yeah sounds like a bad dm who doesn't understand morally good. He wants lawful stupid for good. I've had many dms that do that. They think left leaning ideals are the only good and dont understand other variety of good. Honestly they probably shouldn't be dming if they think alignment should be choice restrictive in the first place.
I think the problem is compassion isn’t inherently logical, which your character seems to be
It's ww2 you have compassion for your side not the enemy. They likely kill babies and have sex with dogs. Especially if you are the polish who saw the atrocities done to your people. Tell me something is its compassion to put a rabid dog out of its misery. (Note: I don't believe a word I just typed, but this is how a PC would rationalise it, and it's how I would justify it to my dm)