Undead, +/- Energy, and Religion

[Gwenfloor]

I have been wondering some things in my Ravenloft campaign.
It does not list whether the Lawgiver and the Nevuchar Springs sect of Ezra, both Lawful Evil religions, view the undead. I would assume with the hostility between Theodorus Cranes and the Eternal Order, they would be antagonistic. But under the PHB of D&D, Evil Clerics of Evil deities channel Negative Energy, while Good Clerics of Good religions channel Positive Energy. What about Evil Clerics and religions that hate undead, like the Belenus faction of Nidala, or Good religions that believe that life is about suffering, and that healing magic is wrong?
In short, do the Clerics of the Lawgiver channel Positive or Negative Energy without a Powers checks, or both? Same goes for Belenus worshipers in Nidala and the Nevuchar Springs Ezrites.

[Dimitri Mazieres]

I'm a bit rusty regarding my Ravenloft lore (I haven't received my Gazetteers yet ), but from what I remember of John W. Mangrum's excellent 2nd Edition article "Anchors of Fate" from the Book of Secrets, I'd say that LE clerics of Ezra channel Positive Energy, as not only Ezra isn't an evil deity (wether she is an actual deity or not is another matter), but their "evil" stance is more due to their fanatical outlook on the tenets of their faith. It's a "we or them" view that allows no room for the undeads' existence.

I also think Belenus' clerics would channel Positive Energy, as their god is viewed as a a representation of the sun and giver of life.

The Eternal Order, due to its nature, would channel negative energy and be quite opposite to the ezrites.

Regarding The Lawgiver... I have no idea.

[The Giamarga]

Unfortunately this doesn't work with 3E rules.

A good cleric (or a neutral cleric who worships a good deity) can turn or destroy undead creatures. An evil cleric (or a neutral cleric who worships an evil deity) instead rebukes or commands such creatures. A neutral cleric of a neutral deity must choose whether his turning ability functions as that of a good cleric or an evil cleric. Once this choice is made, it cannot be reversed. This decision also determines whether the cleric can cast spontaneous cure or inflict spells.

from www.d20srd.org

I'd have Ezra effectively as a N deity.

[Jakob]

Sorry to contradict, but in RL 3E an evil cleric can choose whether heal/turn or inflict/rebuke.

[Rotipher of the FoS]

Even in the core rules' own generic/pruned-GH pantheon, there are deities which impose restrictions on what energies clerics of (L)N deities can channel. There's also been precedent for evil clerics who channel positive energy outside of Ravenloft, as one of the evil DL deities (with Destruction in his portfolio; also a rival of the more undead-friendly evil pantheon members) lets his evil clerics use positive energy to blast undead to atoms, rather than subjugate them with negative energy.

In Ravenloft, of course, the deities' distancing from mortals ensures that virtually anything goes. IIRC, there's a LG cleric of Bane/Lawgiver in one of the Books of S, with all the usual qualities for a LG cleric: he simply interprets his deity as far more benign than the mainstream church does, and thinks it's the LE clergy who are getting it all wrong.

[Jester of the FoS]

Ravenloft ignores the one-step rule. We don't know what alignment the gods actually are, we only know what alignment the churches generally are. You can have a good cleric of an evil god and vise versa, as long as they believe and follow the dogma.
So individual clerics pick turn/rebuke depending on their alignment.

[Gwenfloor]

So individual clerics pick turn/rebuke depending on their alignment.

So why be restricted to alignment? As long as it fits the concept and dogma, I am fine with it! Want a Good Cleric who believes that healing magic is wrong and makes people soft? Fine, as long as fits in the story/plot/adventure.

[Jester of the FoS]

Game balance and usefulness in a party for the most part.

It's odd to have a good cleric continually channel negative energy and cast evil spells and enslave undead to their will. It breaks with the definition of "good". And might very well be considered evil. I think a good cleric that continually rebuked undead might quickly find themselves attracting unwanted attention.

Also, one of the strongest abilities of clerics is their ability to channel positive energy that lets them spontaneously cast cure spells. The main job of clerics is to buff and heal allies so having them take up an offensive role (spontaneously casting damaging spells) deprives a party of a healer and gives them an inefficient damage dealer. The cleric also has to choose between memorizing situation spells and healing spells instead of just memorizing the former.

[Nathan of the FoS]

I think it would depend more on the religion's outlook toward the undead--an evil anchorite who vanquishes the Legions of Night turns undead, while a good voodan controls them.

Since "character alignment" on the pertinent, good vs. evil axis is obscured in Ravenloft, I'd say the cleric gets to choose. Evil clerics who want to destroy undead? Fire away!

As Jester points out, it's harder to justify this for a good cleric choosing negative energy, but it depends somewhat on what the cleric's culture thinks about death. I'd countenance a good voodan or good cleric of the Eternal Order who wants to control the undead, rather than destroying them, or a good cleric of Belenus who wants power to smite the unbeliever.

[Rotipher of the FoS]

Personally, I'd recommend uncoupling the cleric's choice of healing vs inflicting from the choice of turning vs rebuking. Jargon about "positive vs negative energy" just lets game mechanics intrude upon in-character thinking and decision-making. If a good-aligned cleric of the Eternal Order honestly believes it's her duty to heal the living, while respectfully bidding the dead return to their proper place, will it really break the game if she can do both?

[Gwenfloor]

Personally, I'd recommend uncoupling the cleric's choice of healing vs inflicting from the choice of turning vs rebuking. Jargon about "positive vs negative energy" just lets game mechanics intrude upon in-character thinking and decision-making. If a good-aligned cleric of the Eternal Order honestly believes it's her duty to heal the living, while respectfully bidding the dead return to their proper place, will it really break the game if she can do both?

Nope, there are easier ways to break the game; Contingency, Balor Mining, Planar Binding Efreet to give you wishes, etc.