Male Lolth Drow Clerics!?!

[ChentallyMallenged1]

Are impossible. Read Homeland by R. A. Salvatore to understand this. Please fix this.

[Vixziค็็็็็n]

Originally posted by sevensided:

While I'm a supporter of the notion that Male Drow Clerics of Lloth are not a thing, there is nothing in the Drow entry in the PHB for 5e that suggests as much.
PHB Drow, p 24:

While not in the PHB to my immediate knowlege, you would be incorrect in terms of your broader suggestion

There is and others have posted similar pieces directly from the rulebook. Try looking at the 5e Monster Manual page 128 as an example but there are a ton of official books from where to pull from.

Quoted as follows:

"The Spider Queen doesn't allow male drow to hold such positions"

And goes on to show only that the only option listed under drow for priests is "Drow Priestess of Lolth"

Another example would be in the D&D book "Drow of the Underdark" page 17. "Male drow are never accepted into the priesthood, and can at best hope to be a favored servant of a priestess" And since only Clerics can be priests of Lolth as it is also stated that means that by the same token a Male Drow could not be a Cleric of Lolth.

Edit: I stand corrected it is also suggested as such in the PBH on page 122. "For example, a male drow cleric defies the traditional gender divisions of Drow society, which could be a reason for your character to leave that society and come to the surface" Here it isn't suggesting that Male clerics could even be a thing to be played lol... it is instead suggesting that players should seek the surface if they want to play a male Drow cleric.

[sevensided]

I stand informed, it is indeed in the Monster Manual.

[Vixziค็็็็็n]

Originally posted by sevensided:

I stand informed, it is indeed in the Monster Manual.

No shame at all. I too had no idea as I had actually assumed it was changed along with some of the lore for 5e, until Trap Queen posted various cited books... and I have a lot of the books myself too and still didn't know lol.

[AdahnGorion]

Originally posted by Metallicus:

Originally posted by ChentallyMallenged1:

Are impossible. Read Homeland by R. A. Salvatore to understand this. Please fix this.

This is 5E D&D where everyone and everything is woke and equal just like RL.

Soon 5E will be history and 5.5 will be the new dawn of light, that protects the world from evil, no matter how you look or act.

[Harukage]

Originally posted by Darkie:

Soon 5E will be history and 5.5 will be the new dawn of light, that protects the world from evil, no matter how you look or act.

More like 5e will be the lesser evil between the two.

[Renamis]

Originally posted by Vixzian:

Originally posted by sevensided:

While I'm a supporter of the notion that Male Drow Clerics of Lloth are not a thing, there is nothing in the Drow entry in the PHB for 5e that suggests as much.
PHB Drow, p 24:

While not in the PHB to my immediate knowlege, you would be incorrect in terms of your broader suggestion

There is and others have posted similar pieces directly from the rulebook. Try looking at the 5e Monster Manual page 128 as an example but there are a ton of official books from where to pull from.

Quoted as follows:

"The Spider Queen doesn't allow male drow to hold such positions"

And goes on to show only that the only option listed under drow for priests is "Drow Priestess of Lolth"

Another example would be in the D&D book "Drow of the Underdark" page 17. "Male drow are never accepted into the priesthood, and can at best hope to be a favored servant of a priestess" And since only Clerics can be priests of Lolth as it is also stated that means that by the same token a Male Drow could not be a Cleric of Lolth.

Edit: I stand corrected it is also suggested as such in the PBH on page 122. "For example, a male drow cleric defies the traditional gender divisions of Drow society, which could be a reason for your character to leave that society and come to the surface" Here it isn't suggesting that Male clerics could even be a thing to be played lol... it is instead suggesting that players should seek the surface if they want to play a male Drow cleric.

Just going to point out that in the book series that kicked off this thread, there is literally a priest of Lolth. Rai-guy Bondalek, a member of Bregan D'aerthe. He was actually the high priest of Ched Nasad before a coup which lead him to Bregan D'aerthe.

Some books said males can't be priests. Some said they could, but could only go so far before they'd raise ire and end up dead. Most likely it depends on the city and political landscape surrounding that particular drow.

[Vixziค็็็็็n]

Originally posted by Renamis:

Originally posted by Vixzian:

While not in the PHB to my immediate knowlege, you would be incorrect in terms of your broader suggestion

There is and others have posted similar pieces directly from the rulebook. Try looking at the 5e Monster Manual page 128 as an example but there are a ton of official books from where to pull from.

Quoted as follows:

"The Spider Queen doesn't allow male drow to hold such positions"

And goes on to show only that the only option listed under drow for priests is "Drow Priestess of Lolth"

Another example would be in the D&D book "Drow of the Underdark" page 17. "Male drow are never accepted into the priesthood, and can at best hope to be a favored servant of a priestess" And since only Clerics can be priests of Lolth as it is also stated that means that by the same token a Male Drow could not be a Cleric of Lolth.

Edit: I stand corrected it is also suggested as such in the PBH on page 122. "For example, a male drow cleric defies the traditional gender divisions of Drow society, which could be a reason for your character to leave that society and come to the surface" Here it isn't suggesting that Male clerics could even be a thing to be played lol... it is instead suggesting that players should seek the surface if they want to play a male Drow cleric.

Just going to point out that in the book series that kicked off this thread, there is literally a priest of Lolth. Rai-guy Bondalek, a member of Bregan D'aerthe. He was actually the high priest of Ched Nasad before a coup which lead him to Bregan D'aerthe.

Some books said males can't be priests. Some said they could, but could only go so far before they'd raise ire and end up dead. Most likely it depends on the city and political landscape surrounding that particular drow.

Again. No.... The only book that says they can would be something in an R.R. Salvatore book which is it's own canon. WotC specifically mentions this when discussing the characters from his books. Particularly so they can basically pick and choose which characters and lore they wish to include in their works while not having to explain others outside of their own lore and rule sets.

So basically this would be a homebrew type of situation. As the core rules specifically state there are no male Drow Clerics of Lolth. Not to be stated they couldn't be created if you have the right story line but again that's more homebrew and would be the exception that is completely against the general rule.

[Quillithe]

Originally posted by Vixzian:

Originally posted by Renamis:

Just going to point out that in the book series that kicked off this thread, there is literally a priest of Lolth. Rai-guy Bondalek, a member of Bregan D'aerthe. He was actually the high priest of Ched Nasad before a coup which lead him to Bregan D'aerthe.

Some books said males can't be priests. Some said they could, but could only go so far before they'd raise ire and end up dead. Most likely it depends on the city and political landscape surrounding that particular drow.

Again. No.... The only book that says they can would be something in an R.R. Salvatore book which is it's own canon. WotC specifically mentions this when discussing the characters from his books. Particularly so they can basically pick and choose which characters and lore they wish to include in their works while not having to explain others outside of their own lore and rule sets.

Yes, like they said the book series that kicked off this thread.

At the least it's pretty funny that OP uses the technically non-canonical series (I say this because they were retroactively made non-canonical, iirc) that supports male drow priests of Lolth as their argument for why they shouldn't exist.

[Vixziค็็็็็n]

Originally posted by Quillithe:

Originally posted by Vixzian:

Again. No.... The only book that says they can would be something in an R.R. Salvatore book which is it's own canon. WotC specifically mentions this when discussing the characters from his books. Particularly so they can basically pick and choose which characters and lore they wish to include in their works while not having to explain others outside of their own lore and rule sets.

Yes, like they said the book series that kicked off this thread.

At the least it's pretty funny that OP uses the technically non-canonical series (I say this because they were retroactively made non-canonical, iirc) that supports male drow priests of Lolth as their argument for why they shouldn't exist.

Go ahead and cite an official rulebook with this. I'll wait. As despite what he sourced as incorrect, his actual point is correct in that they don't exist in D&D outside of homebrew or books that fall outside of the canon for the race as written in the core rules..

[Quillithe]

Originally posted by Vixzian:

Originally posted by Quillithe:

Yes, like they said the book series that kicked off this thread.

At the least it's pretty funny that OP uses the technically non-canonical series (I say this because they were retroactively made non-canonical, iirc) that supports male drow priests of Lolth as their argument for why they shouldn't exist.

Go ahead and cite an official rulebook with this. I'll wait.

...did you read literally any of the words in my post or are you just trolling to try to start an argument again? lol

[Vixziค็็็็็n]

Originally posted by Quillithe:

Originally posted by Vixzian:

Go ahead and cite an official rulebook with this. I'll wait.

...did you read literally any of the words in my post or are you just trolling to try to start an argument again? lol

I don't have time for the sensitive angle again. Either cite something that contributes to the conversation or stop posting after every single time I do.

[sevensided]

Originally posted by Quillithe:

Yes, like they said the book series that kicked off this thread.

At the least it's pretty funny that OP uses the technically non-canonical series (I say this because they were retroactively made non-canonical, iirc) that supports male drow priests of Lolth as their argument for why they shouldn't exist.

Its a case of "Task failed successfully" for the thread's OP, it seems.

Originally posted by Vixzian:

Go ahead and cite an official rulebook with this. I'll wait.

This particular deviation that Renamis brings up is more about the fact that the original poster of this thread based his initial argument on a book that countered his argument. Not so much a commentary on the rules as is, but more about the book series.

[Vixziค็็็็็n]

Originally posted by sevensided:

Originally posted by Quillithe:

Yes, like they said the book series that kicked off this thread.

At the least it's pretty funny that OP uses the technically non-canonical series (I say this because they were retroactively made non-canonical, iirc) that supports male drow priests of Lolth as their argument for why they shouldn't exist.

Its a case of "Task failed successfully" for the thread's OP, it seems.

Originally posted by Vixzian:

Go ahead and cite an official rulebook with this. I'll wait.

This particular deviation that Renamis brings up is more about the fact that the original poster of this thread based his initial argument on a book that countered his argument. Not so much a commentary on the rules as is, but more about the book series.

His point is about male Drow Clerics not existing. He happened to use a terrible source for that conclusion but the conclusion is correct nonetheless particularly since he is talking about it as a possibility in the BG game which is based upon D&D.

"D&D: WotC Declares That Novels Aren’t ‘Canon’ For 5th Edition And Vice Versa"

[Vixziค็็็็็n]

Originally posted by Frogshackle:

It angers me when make-believe crap isn't adhered to dogmatically.

It would beg the question as to why you would be in these forums at all then being that's all this is primarily... lol

[Quillithe]

Originally posted by Vixzian:

Originally posted by Quillithe:

Yes, like they said the book series that kicked off this thread.

At the least it's pretty funny that OP uses the technically non-canonical series (I say this because they were retroactively made non-canonical, iirc) that supports male drow priests of Lolth as their argument for why they shouldn't exist.

Go ahead and cite an official rulebook with this. I'll wait. As despite what he sourced as incorrect, his actual point is correct in that they don't exist in D&D outside of homebrew or books that fall outside of the canon for the race as written in the core rules..

Yes. That's why I mentioned the books are retroactively non-canonical.

I've never tried to make the argument they exist in lore. The most I've done is mentioned that it's not really a big deal to just not make one while creating your PC.

Unless you don't care that much about or don't know about the current official canonical lore. Then do make one if you want.