Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Remalle]

...
ignore everything I said about the klik thing.

SPOILERS

[scriver]

IIRC clerics using blunt weapons is based on real warrior monks from the crusades, who did it so they don't shed blood (hey, if it's internal bleeding, it's not shedding).

Funnily enough, I remember reading somewhere that there isn't any evidence from back then of there ever being such a rule or idea, though, but it was accepted as a "known truth" by the 18th-19th century. Most likely it was a myth that sprung up after the medieval days were gone. Of course, those myths served as adequate reason for "balancing" DnD clerics regardless of their truthiness.

[Tiruin]

...
ignore everything I said about the klik thing.

SPOILERS

That's just Xan being silly. Really.

IIRC clerics using blunt weapons is based on real warrior monks from the crusades, who did it so they don't shed blood (hey, if it's internal bleeding, it's not shedding).

Funnily enough, I remember reading somewhere that there isn't any evidence from back then of there ever being such a rule or idea, though, but it was accepted as a "known truth" by the 18th-19th century. Most likely it was a myth that sprung up after the medieval days were gone. Of course, those myths served as adequate reason for "balancing" DnD clerics regardless of their truthiness.

I agree. None in my knowledge of history in that time points towards that exact idea defining the arms and armor of the clergy. [I mean, medicine was developed at that time. Just..not as advanced as we know today, but NOT as..crude as the general notion dictates]

[DJ]

Yeah, I know, most of things we "know" about the Middle Ages are inventions from early modern times. But I don't find this one that far fetched. People certainly knew about internal bleeding back then, but it was considered a loophole when it comes to shedding blood, evidenced by how the Mongols (was it Timur or someone else?) executed the Persian shah by rolling him in a carpet and trampling him because there was some prohibition against shedding royal blood.

[Jimmy]

The Inquisition punished heretics by fire, to elude the maxim, "Ecclesia non novit sanguinem;" for burning a man, say they, does not shed his blood. Otho, the bishop at the Norman invasion, in the tapestry worked by Matilda the queen of William the Conqueror, is represented with a mace in his hand, for the purpose that when he despatched his antagonist he might not spill blood, but only break his bones! Religion has had her quibbles as well as law.

Curiosities of Literature, Vol. 1 (of 3) by Isaac D’Israeli (1766-1848) - p. 230

This urban legend has been around for many years, but in truth there's little evidence to support the claim that religious figures used blunt weapons to avoid shedding blood. Nevertheless, the idea certainly gained traction with the D&D community in the early editions, but has since been more or less discarded for the more recent iterations. Many deities favor bladed weapons, for example, though I have no idea what Forgath's deity's weapon would be.

[Sheb]

The Holy Pack of Crisps?

[Rolan7]

The myth might have been from memes of the time.  In medieval tarot, sword directly represented the noble class:

In tarot, swords correspond to the element of Air, and as such signifies freedom but also quick change. The Swords suit also traditionally represented the military, which implies strength, power and authority, but also responsibility, violence and suffering.

The clergy were represented by chalices, which you can't exactly use in battle.  (Rods were peasants, coins were merchants).
There doesn't seem to be evidence that clergy were *forbidden* were using swords, but the swords represented knighthood and nobility.

Furthermore, it seems to me that a clergyman, even a very athletic one, would generally not have as much weapon training as a professional knight.  A mace or club is a simpler weapon which bypasses armor, allowing imprecise attacks.  It could also be a lot cheaper.

[Mephansteras]

The myth might have been from memes of the time.  In medieval tarot, sword directly represented the noble class:

In tarot, swords correspond to the element of Air, and as such signifies freedom but also quick change. The Swords suit also traditionally represented the military, which implies strength, power and authority, but also responsibility, violence and suffering.

The clergy were represented by chalices, which you can't exactly use in battle.  (Rods were peasants, coins were merchants).
There doesn't seem to be evidence that clergy were *forbidden* were using swords, but the swords represented knighthood and nobility.

Furthermore, it seems to me that a clergyman, even a very athletic one, would generally not have as much weapon training as a professional knight.  A mace or club is a simpler weapon which bypasses armor, allowing imprecise attacks.  It could also be a lot cheaper.

Many clergy were nobles, usually 2nd or 3rd sons, and often did have marital training.

The image, from my understanding, comes mostly from a famous tapestry showing a Bishop going into combat wielding a mace. So someone tried to rationalize that, as opposed to realizing that a mace is actually a) a good weapon and b) a symbol of power. His brother was a Duke, if I recall, and also usually wielded a mace in combat for the same practical reasons.

There are other images of various holy figures using swords in the middle ages, so it seems to pretty much be a fabrication that caught on in later years.

[Sheb]

Odo, Half-Brother of William the conqueror, Bishop of Bayeux, Earl of Kent. Here's the tapestry part with him and his trusty club rallying his troops.

[scriver]

Heh, that's not even a mace. That's a god damned blessed stick. That has to be a metaphor or something.

...Possibly for his wood.

[Tiruin]

The myth might have been from memes of the time.  In medieval tarot, sword directly represented the noble class:

In tarot, swords correspond to the element of Air, and as such signifies freedom but also quick change. The Swords suit also traditionally represented the military, which implies strength, power and authority, but also responsibility, violence and suffering.

The clergy were represented by chalices, which you can't exactly use in battle.  (Rods were peasants, coins were merchants).
There doesn't seem to be evidence that clergy were *forbidden* were using swords, but the swords represented knighthood and nobility.

Furthermore, it seems to me that a clergyman, even a very athletic one, would generally not have as much weapon training as a professional knight.  A mace or club is a simpler weapon which bypasses armor, allowing imprecise attacks.  It could also be a lot cheaper.

Many clergy were nobles, usually 2nd or 3rd sons, and often did have marital training.

The image, from my understanding, comes mostly from a famous tapestry showing a Bishop going into combat wielding a mace. So someone tried to rationalize that, as opposed to realizing that a mace is actually a) a good weapon and b) a symbol of power. His brother was a Duke, if I recall, and also usually wielded a mace in combat for the same practical reasons.

There are other images of various holy figures using swords in the middle ages, so it seems to pretty much be a fabrication that caught on in later years.

I do believe that's 'martial' training? Marital..also somehow makes sense but...

Anyway, I'm thinking that it's due to the...availability any sort of club-type weapon (ie a cudgel) would be towards those who either cannot afford a slashing-weapon (ie blades) or aren't directly using such weapons due to their line of work..though, it is a significant note that soldiers back then didn't all have swords--but any kind of weapon they could finance and maintain.

..I still fail to see how clerics can't wield knives. Unless I missed that note. :v

[Remuthra]

The myth might have been from memes of the time.  In medieval tarot, sword directly represented the noble class:

In tarot, swords correspond to the element of Air, and as such signifies freedom but also quick change. The Swords suit also traditionally represented the military, which implies strength, power and authority, but also responsibility, violence and suffering.

The clergy were represented by chalices, which you can't exactly use in battle.  (Rods were peasants, coins were merchants).
There doesn't seem to be evidence that clergy were *forbidden* were using swords, but the swords represented knighthood and nobility.

Furthermore, it seems to me that a clergyman, even a very athletic one, would generally not have as much weapon training as a professional knight.  A mace or club is a simpler weapon which bypasses armor, allowing imprecise attacks.  It could also be a lot cheaper.

Many clergy were nobles, usually 2nd or 3rd sons, and often did have marital training.

The image, from my understanding, comes mostly from a famous tapestry showing a Bishop going into combat wielding a mace. So someone tried to rationalize that, as opposed to realizing that a mace is actually a) a good weapon and b) a symbol of power. His brother was a Duke, if I recall, and also usually wielded a mace in combat for the same practical reasons.

There are other images of various holy figures using swords in the middle ages, so it seems to pretty much be a fabrication that caught on in later years.

I do believe that's 'martial' training? Marital..also somehow makes sense but...

Anyway, I'm thinking that it's due to the...availability any sort of club-type weapon (ie a cudgel) would be towards those who either cannot afford a slashing-weapon (ie blades) or aren't directly using such weapons due to their line of work..though, it is a significant note that soldiers back then didn't all have swords--but any kind of weapon they could finance and maintain.

..I still fail to see how clerics can't wield knives. Unless I missed that note. :v

It's called AD&D. In AD&D, clerics cannot use bladed weapons, because I have no real idea.

[Mephansteras]

It's called AD&D. In AD&D, clerics cannot use bladed weapons, because I have no real idea.

Basically they took the popular theory that priests didn't use bladed weapons to avoid shedding blood and ran with it. It made a good balancing point, since blunt weapons in D&D did less damage than the bladed weapons. Also worked well with the anti-undead aspect that clerics in D&D have, since Skeletal undead only took full damage from blunt weapons.

Like most things, D&D took an idea and ran with it regardless of accuracy or actual common usage and made it fit whatever they needed to.

Which is just fine, except that so many other things seemed to go 'Well, D&D does that so it must be true!', rather than do their own research.

Plus you get the player's own expectations feeding everything. As a kid I grew up on D&D, and it took me quite a while to get over my assumptions that D&D had everything correct and that anything that did differently was 'wrong'. Only Red or Gold Dragons, for instance, were allowed to breath fire in my mind. Any other depiction was derided.

I grew out of it, but that kind of thinking has had a big impact on games and fantasy culture. So stuff like the Clerics using maces and hammers as their primary weapons sticks around even when the lore of that particular world doesn't require it.

[Jimmy]

Odo, Half-Brother of William the conqueror, Bishop of Bayeux, Earl of Kent. Here's the tapestry part with him and his trusty club rallying his troops.

Image of William, Duke of Normandy (a.k.a William the Conquorer) from the next scene on that tapestry, showing him holding an identical club of wood. William was not a clergyman, but was the half-brother of Odo, who commissioned the tapestry. It's theorized that both are shown holding a club to symbolize a command status rather than their weapon of choice, and probably Odo had this scene showing himself and William holding these to illustrate that they were equals in power (they weren't, but Odo was the one paying the bills on the tapestry creation).

[Sheb]

Is it just me or this guy look like he's shooting a handgun?