QuoteGot it, you don't like having prenamed D&D dieties for some reason. This is HOW new?

Bzzt.  Wrong answer, and really piss poor argumentation in general.  Just because I don't like this iteration doesn't automatically mean I liked previous iterations.  It also treats all iterations as being of equal quality, which is not automatically true or accepted, as this thread shows.

And of course topped off with a bid of utterly irrelevant ad hominem.  

Pathetic, really pathetic.  I give it a 2/10.

Quote from: J ArcaneBzzt.  Wrong answer, and really piss poor argumentation in general.  Just because I don't like this iteration doesn't automatically mean I liked previous iterations.  It also treats all iterations as being of equal quality, which is not automatically true or accepted, as this thread shows.

And of course topped off with a bid of utterly irrelevant ad hominem.  

Pathetic, really pathetic.  I give it a 2/10.

Well as someone who liked D&D 3, what did you think of their direction with pantheons? Maybe we can work in some genuine comparisons here. Unless you think that D&D has always sucked in that department, then maybe a little clarification could help.

Quote from: JamesVWell as someone who liked D&D 3, what did you think of their direction with pantheons? Maybe we can work in some genuine comparisons here. Unless you think that D&D has always sucked in that department, then maybe a little clarification could help.

The 3e ones were . . . OK.  Maybe it's jsut that it was really the only nod to Greyhawk left outside the RPGA and a few Dragon articles, but them not being from a supported setting made them feel a tad more generic.

But I'd really just rather Bradford's approach.  No specific gods at all, and some really solid GM advice on designing your own pantheons, combined with the flexibility of the Cleric's domain system, and of course, the inevitable Deities & Demigods for those who just want to rip off some old Egyptian gods and call it a day.

Quote from: J ArcaneThe 3e ones were . . . OK.  Maybe it's jsut that it was really the only nod to Greyhawk left outside the RPGA and a few Dragon articles, but them not being from a supported setting made them feel a tad more generic.

But I'd really just rather Bradford's approach.  No specific gods at all, and some really solid GM advice on designing your own pantheons, combined with the flexibility of the Cleric's domain system, and of course, the inevitable Deities & Demigods for those who just want to rip off some old Egyptian gods and call it a day.

When I first read through the 3e pantheons it took me a moment to undserstand it was drawn from Greyhawk because it was a setting I wasn't into. IMO, they did fine, there were plenty of them and they weren't too bland.

It would rock if D&D had a make your own pantheon kit, but I can also understand offering one for the lazy/busy/more importantly new GM. D&D still has the burden of being the entry game for most gamers, so they almost have to fill in the blanks before helping others do it themselves. But I do think they should give a shot at helping newbies do their own thing, if not in the core books, then by supplement.

Quote from: J ArcaneThe 3e ones were . . . OK.  Maybe it's jsut that it was really the only nod to Greyhawk left outside the RPGA and a few Dragon articles, but them not being from a supported setting made them feel a tad more generic.

But I'd really just rather Bradford's approach.  No specific gods at all, and some really solid GM advice on designing your own pantheons, combined with the flexibility of the Cleric's domain system, and of course, the inevitable Deities & Demigods for those who just want to rip off some old Egyptian gods and call it a day.

You know, I never once used any specific gods in any of the dozens of campaigns I played in over the years.  It just never seemed necessary.  No one ever really cared that I can remember.

Good guys were always assumed to be from the "God of Light" or "God of Good" or whatever and the bad guys worshiped the "God of Death" or "God of Darkness" or whatever (it was never stated, but most of the time I'd say everyone envisioned a Christian or Zoroastrian cosmology rather than a pantheistic one).  Maybe once in a while you might throw in some other generic god position, like the "God of the Forge" or "Goddess of Agriculture".

I just never saw the point in named gods with long pantheon mythology stories, etc, that ended up having absolutely nothing to do with the games I ran.  The gods are usually just fluff, at least for me.

Quote from: jgantsYou know, I never once used any specific gods in any of the dozens of campaigns I played in over the years.  It just never seemed necessary.  No one ever really cared that I can remember.

Good guys were always assumed to be from the "God of Light" or "God of Good" or whatever and the bad guys worshiped the "God of Death" or "God of Darkness" or whatever (it was never stated, but most of the time I'd say everyone envisioned a Christian or Zoroastrian cosmology rather than a pantheistic one).  Maybe once in a while you might throw in some other generic god position, like the "God of the Forge" or "Goddess of Agriculture".

I just never saw the point in named gods with long pantheon mythology stories, etc, that ended up having absolutely nothing to do with the games I ran.  The gods are usually just fluff, at least for me.

I usually invent my own gods and cults for my Cleric characters, because combined with the domain system, it really gives me the oppourtunity to tune my character's faith and beliefs to fit his personality and overall concept.  

When I do use an existing god, it tends to be a real world mythology one, grabbed specifically for appropriateness to concept, and generally without the assumption that any of the other gods from that same pantheon necessariyl exist here, so as not to step on the GM's toes as far as his worldbuilding angle if the god thing is important to the game or setting.  It's really sort of like inventing my own god all over again, only this one happens to have the same name and basic portfolio of influence as Hel from the Norse pantheon or whatever.  

I did kind of get a vague Christian-ish feel from 2e, so I kinda get what your saying there, but I'm not sure where that vibe came from or if I was jsut reading it into it somehow, as I never realyl read much of it and it was long ago.

fuck Zeus, let's get Allah on the pantheon.

Quote from: Seanfuck Zeus, let's get Allah on the pantheon.

Let the art department handle that one.

Quote from: Seanfuck Zeus, let's get Allah on the pantheon.

While I suspect that would probably gain the hobby more news coverage than it's had in years, I also suspect it would ultimately leave many people pining for the days of Jack Chick and Pat Pulling.

while i think they shouldn't have bothered including deities in the new stuff either, at least it's not the huge mess that is the FR pantheons.  :eyecrazy:  i've been partial to something smaller and more manageable.  

really, there's no need to include it in the basic rulebooks, especially since we all know deities & demigods 4e will probably be out relatively quickly.

Quote from: Seanfuck Zeus, let's get Allah on the pantheon.

I still kinda wanna do a D&D game with some realworld medieval theology and religion in place of the usual made up fairy gods or whatever, but I always balk at including real religion in my roleplaying fantasy.

Quote from: J ArcaneBzzt.  Wrong answer, and really piss poor argumentation in general.  Just because I don't like this iteration doesn't automatically mean I liked previous iterations.  It also treats all iterations as being of equal quality, which is not automatically true or accepted, as this thread shows.

And of course topped off with a bid of utterly irrelevant ad hominem.  

Pathetic, really pathetic.  I give it a 2/10.

Sorry, Jenny, your Ego just got in the way of a perfectly good counterarguement. See: I never quoted you, named you, or otherwise implied I was responding to you specifically. In fact, other than the fact that you are yet another faceless nobody in the screaming mob of haters, I didn't think of you at all when I posted that.

So taking points off for my not shaping my disparing remarks to your specific Jenny-naysayer comments is about as relevant as... well... you.

Quote from: SpikeSorry, Jenny, your Ego just got in the way of a perfectly good counterarguement. See: I never quoted you, named you, or otherwise implied I was responding to you specifically. In fact, other than the fact that you are yet another faceless nobody in the screaming mob of haters, I didn't think of you at all when I posted that.

So taking points off for my not shaping my disparing remarks to your specific Jenny-naysayer comments is about as relevant as... well... you.

Yawn.  Pure juvenalia.  "Well, well, I wasn't talking about you, so neener neener!"  

your post was bullshit no matter who you apply it to, and this is nothing more than an irrelevant tangent, that isn't even an accurate reading of the post it was responding too.

You fail at the internets.  Your score is now 0/10.  Hand in your access pass at the door.

Quote from: J ArcaneYou fail at the internets.  Your score is now 0/10.  Hand in your access pass at the door.

This Machine kills Pika?

Don't see it. Nope.

Try again, Jenny.

On a related note, I think when I write another article (after the ones I have planned) I'll attempt to use what I learned in my Religious Studies classes and apply it to tabletop RPG setting design when it comes to rolling your own faiths and gods.