Quote from: Brad on December 01, 2024, 10:33:39 PM

Quote from: Ruprecht on December 01, 2024, 09:42:30 PM

Quote from: jhkim on December 01, 2024, 02:17:41 AMIt is an objective fact that none of 1E, Basic Set, or 2E listed the names of any gods.,,,.

Dieties & Demigods (1E and 2E) had a few gods.

Gods, Demi-Gods & Heroes for D&D, Deities and Demi-Gods for AD&D. And Gygax literally said D&DG was one of the "four main books", the others being the PHB, MM, and DMG. So of course Mr. Kim is full of shit, once again. Not including Greyhawk deities in the PHB doesn't mean AD&D didn't list gods, that was the purview of the gods book...

I was talking about the 1E and 2E Player's Handbooks. That was specified in the prior context, but I should have only spoken precisely.

The 1E PHB, Basic Set, and 2E PHB all didn't have any gods listed, just as the 2024 PHB doesn't have any gods listed.

In 5E, descriptive sections on gods are in all the setting books - i.e. gods of Faerun in the Sword Coast guide, and gods of Khorvaire in the Eberron book, etc. For each setting, the gods of that setting are described.

Quote from: ForgottenF on December 02, 2024, 12:21:32 AMBy comparison, the new text is quite possibly representative of a softening of the traditional stance that a Cleric has a single patron deity.

A lot of people ignored that anyway.  An odd number of people are adamant that the PHB says that clerics can worship a principle or a pantheon even though that is quite clearly not what the class description for cleric says.  Often, they will have a TBP style sperg-out and claim that you are accusing them of having "badwrongfun" if you point out what the books actually says. 

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 02, 2024, 05:28:20 AM

Quote from: ForgottenF on December 02, 2024, 12:21:32 AMBy comparison, the new text is quite possibly representative of a softening of the traditional stance that a Cleric has a single patron deity.

A lot of people ignored that anyway.  An odd number of people are adamant that the PHB says that clerics can worship a principle or a pantheon even though that is quite clearly not what the class description for cleric says.  Often, they will have a TBP style sperg-out and claim that you are accusing them of having "badwrongfun" if you point out what the books actually says. 

That was introduced in 3e and some people just assume it continues. I always run with a monotheistic (basically a Medieval Cathol expy) faith in fantasy settings (the others are deceived by demons) when I run.

In terms of D&D I always preferred the 4E approach where once you've undergone the initiation rituals the link to divine power is irreversible (so the faiths do their vetting ahead of time); allowing for the traditional corrupt priest archetype where "he can't cast spells anymore" isn't proof and without the need to slip into the "he turned to worshipping an evil god in secret" explanation for why they aren't just a gimped fighter when you confront them.The

When using my own system, priests all just use the equivalent of arcane magic... the Medieval Church was one of the best institutions for higher learning and it just made sense to extend that into a fantasy faith. You want magic power and don't have the wealth for private instruction, you either find someone to apprentice to or become a priest to learn from their instructors.

Quote from: Chris24601 on December 02, 2024, 11:10:59 AM

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 02, 2024, 05:28:20 AM

Quote from: ForgottenF on December 02, 2024, 12:21:32 AMBy comparison, the new text is quite possibly representative of a softening of the traditional stance that a Cleric has a single patron deity.

A lot of people ignored that anyway.  An odd number of people are adamant that the PHB says that clerics can worship a principle or a pantheon even though that is quite clearly not what the class description for cleric says.  Often, they will have a TBP style sperg-out and claim that you are accusing them of having "badwrongfun" if you point out what the books actually says. 

That was introduced in 3e and some people just assume it continues. I always run with a monotheistic (basically a Medieval Cathol expy) faith in fantasy settings (the others are deceived by demons) when I run.

In terms of D&D I always preferred the 4E approach where once you've undergone the initiation rituals the link to divine power is irreversible (so the faiths do their vetting ahead of time); allowing for the traditional corrupt priest archetype where "he can't cast spells anymore" isn't proof and without the need to slip into the "he turned to worshipping an evil god in secret" explanation for why they aren't just a gimped fighter when you confront them.The

When using my own system, priests all just use the equivalent of arcane magic... the Medieval Church was one of the best institutions for higher learning and it just made sense to extend that into a fantasy faith. You want magic power and don't have the wealth for private instruction, you either find someone to apprentice to or become a priest to learn from their instructors.

I like the idea of "Once a Cleric, always a Cleric". Ebberon went with this too so that as you said... You can have evil Clerics who still have access to their spells.

As for treating it like Arcane magic that you're taught? I think that works well for more historical fantasy and certain campaigns, but for the traditional D&D world having it as a divine connection still fits better.

I've always disliked the expectation of D&D being run in Greyhawk / Forgotten Realms when (IME) it's most frequently run in a homebrew pastiche setting. I never felt any connection to the pantheons of either of these settings, so omitting it is fine by me.

That being said, I don't particularly like the omission of deities either. In my view the best way to approach this would be to have a sidebar that outlines how to work with the GM to develop or identify a deity and crafting a one-sentence description of how this deity relates to the Cleric's domain.

e.g. "My Cleric is Bjorn who worships Thor. My Clerical domain is Tempest/Forge/etc, so I channel Thor's might as it relates to this domain."

Quote from: yosemitemike on December 02, 2024, 05:28:20 AM

Quote from: ForgottenF on December 02, 2024, 12:21:32 AMBy comparison, the new text is quite possibly representative of a softening of the traditional stance that a Cleric has a single patron deity.

A lot of people ignored that anyway.  An odd number of people are adamant that the PHB says that clerics can worship a principle or a pantheon even though that is quite clearly not what the class description for cleric says.  Often, they will have a TBP style sperg-out and claim that you are accusing them of having "badwrongfun" if you point out what the books actually says.

The Player's Handbook (1E) states "This class of character bears a certain resemblance to religious orders of knighthood of medieval times. The cleric has an eight-sided die per level to determine how many hit points he or she has. The cleric is dedicated to a deity, or deities, and at the same time a skilled combatant at arms."

In 2nd edition, it elaborated on the difference between clerics of different mythos.

QuoteIn the simplest version of the AD&D® game, clerics serve religions that can be generally described as "good" or "evil." Nothing more needs to be said about it; the game will play perfectly well at this level. However, a DM who has taken the time to create a detailed campaign world has often spent some of that time devising elaborate pantheons, either unique creations or adaptations from history or literature. If the option is open (and only your DM can decide), you may want your character to adhere to a particular mythos, taking advantage of the detail and color your DM has provided. If your character follows a particular mythos, expect him to have abilities, spells, and restrictions different from the generic cleric.

Quote from: Zelen on December 02, 2024, 09:03:06 PMI've always disliked the expectation of D&D being run in Greyhawk / Forgotten Realms when (IME) it's most frequently run in a homebrew pastiche setting. I never felt any connection to the pantheons of either of these settings, so omitting it is fine by me.

In fairness, most of those homebrew settings functionally are Greyhawk/Forgotten Realms, just with the names and history switched around.

Quote from: ForgottenF on December 03, 2024, 12:16:52 AM

Quote from: Zelen on December 02, 2024, 09:03:06 PMI've always disliked the expectation of D&D being run in Greyhawk / Forgotten Realms when (IME) it's most frequently run in a homebrew pastiche setting. I never felt any connection to the pantheons of either of these settings, so omitting it is fine by me.

In fairness, most of those homebrew settings functionally are Greyhawk/Forgotten Realms, just with the names and history switched around.

While I think that D&D's rulesystem codifies a lot simply with how its mechanics impact play and imply setting elements, most of the campaigns I'm referring to have been run by people with little to no direct knowledge of any official D&D setting.

I think they should have printed a new Deities & Demigods that included pantheons from all of the D&D IP as well as maybe Celtic, Greek, and others. Lastly that is where the Arch Devils and Demon Lords should be. Such a book should concentrate on the religious hierarchies and how the Clerics and Druids fit into that (as well as an archetype/subclass/Divine Domain for each) rather than stat blocks for deities you shouldn't be fighting.

Also essays and tables on how to create your own pantheon.

Quote from: Ruprecht on December 03, 2024, 08:37:18 PMI think they should have printed a new Deities & Demigods that included pantheons from all of the D&D IP as well as maybe Celtic, Greek, and others. Lastly that is where the Arch Devils and Demon Lords should be. Such a book should concentrate on the religious hierarchies and how the Clerics and Druids fit into that (as well as an archetype/subclass/Divine Domain for each) rather than stat blocks for deities you shouldn't be fighting.

Also essays and tables on how to create your own pantheon.

WOTC did publish a D&DG, for 3.0 D&D.  They already have a template of their own, to draw from.

Quote from: Chris24601 on December 02, 2024, 11:10:59 AMI always run with a monotheistic (basically a Medieval Cathol expy) faith in fantasy settings (the others are deceived by demons) when I run.
...

^This is the way^

I have just found it so much easier to have religion be relevant to the PC's in my games with a monotheistic faith.

Most players are just not able to wrap their heads around polytheism at the table in any meaningful manner.

Unless the setting and character generation specifically ties in polytheism to the core of the setting, and you get player buy-in for that, the juice just isn't worth the squeeze.

Monotheism is just an easier paradigm for most players to wrap their head around. And unless they have some kind of personal issue, I've had zero friction mapping in a Medieval Catholic export.

I get that people like the idea of "pantheons" because they have been around since the beginning of the hobby, but the truth is they are almost always crap from a worldbuilding perspective. You are not more imaginative than history.

Quote from: Jaeger on December 10, 2024, 06:50:09 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on December 02, 2024, 11:10:59 AMI always run with a monotheistic (basically a Medieval Cathol expy) faith in fantasy settings (the others are deceived by demons) when I run.
...

^This is the way^

I have just found it so much easier to have religion be relevant to the PC's in my games with a monotheistic faith.

Most players are just not able to wrap their heads around polytheism at the table in any meaningful manner.

Unless the setting and character generation specifically ties in polytheism to the core of the setting, and you get player buy-in for that, the juice just isn't worth the squeeze.

Monotheism is just an easier paradigm for most players to wrap their head around. And unless they have some kind of personal issue, I've had zero friction mapping in a Medieval Catholic export.

I get that people like the idea of "pantheons" because they have been around since the beginning of the hobby, but the truth is they are almost always crap from a worldbuilding perspective. You are not more imaginative than history.

WFRP does a fairly good job of polytheism despite the Empire having Sigmar as it's primary patron diety.

Quote from: Jaeger on December 10, 2024, 06:50:09 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on December 02, 2024, 11:10:59 AMI always run with a monotheistic (basically a Medieval Cathol expy) faith in fantasy settings (the others are deceived by demons) when I run.
...

^This is the way^

I have just found it so much easier to have religion be relevant to the PC's in my games with a monotheistic faith.

Most players are just not able to wrap their heads around polytheism at the table in any meaningful manner.

Unless the setting and character generation specifically ties in polytheism to the core of the setting, and you get player buy-in for that, the juice just isn't worth the squeeze.

Monotheism is just an easier paradigm for most players to wrap their head around. And unless they have some kind of personal issue, I've had zero friction mapping in a Medieval Catholic export.

I get that people like the idea of "pantheons" because they have been around since the beginning of the hobby, but the truth is they are almost always crap from a worldbuilding perspective. You are not more imaginative than history.

Most fantasy polytheism is trite and doesn't really encompass what a true polytheistic world would be. Christianity is a spiritual revolution, and without that revolution, things would be unimaginable. I usually invert the values given by Christianity for fantasy religions. For instance, I made a religion with a god of the industro-military complex (and blood) as its head in henotheistic style.

Instead of Forgiveness, Mercy, and universality, I make ethnic religions that prize brutality, cruelty, vengeance, promiscuity, xenophobia, etc etc etc. I also just outright say 'You're playing master moralists like Nietzsche said' complete with an explanation. I say 'You play a character that worships a god that would put Jesus on the cross and laugh at him and his followers for being weak.' I make festivals where the characters perform human sacrifices and the pcs are expected to get in. Or where hated enemies of the religion are turned into dolls and destroyed. etc etc etc.

Basically I try to make it clear you aren't playing people with Christian morality, but fantasy morality in a fantasy world. No matter how horrible or alien you think it is. In an ideal campaign, the players accept this, and have fun. For instance, instead of going to save a princess from a monster, they save the monster and kill the princess, simply because the princess is of the wrong race and the monster put up a good fight.

Quote from: Jaeger on December 10, 2024, 06:50:09 PMI get that people like the idea of "pantheons" because they have been around since the beginning of the hobby, but the truth is they are almost always crap from a worldbuilding perspective. You are not more imaginative than history.

Polytheistic and (especially) "Mystery Cult" style Henotheist sword & sorcery type settings can work well, eg Primeval Thule I thought worked. You're clearly not playing in a Christian moral paradigm.

But D&D is a Godwaful mess, with Conan Gandalf and Lancelot all expected to get along in the same setting. Maybe it was ok when it was just Law vs Chaos in OD&D, but Gods Demigods & Heroes really screwed the pooch. Ever since we have had medieval Clerics worshipping Thor (or even Loki). Most of the main D&D settings fully embrace the shittiness, notably Forgotten Realms, but Greyhawk is nearly as bad. Mystara gets a partial pass for mostly ignoring the polytheist-style Immortals in terms of what Clerics do.

Quote from: S'mon on December 11, 2024, 08:57:24 AMBut D&D is a Godwaful mess, with Conan Gandalf and Lancelot all expected to get along in the same setting. Maybe it was ok when it was just Law vs Chaos in OD&D, but Gods Demigods & Heroes really screwed the pooch. Ever since we have had medieval Clerics worshipping Thor (or even Loki). Most of the main D&D settings fully embrace the shittiness, notably Forgotten Realms, but Greyhawk is nearly as bad. Mystara gets a partial pass for mostly ignoring the polytheist-style Immortals in terms of what Clerics do.

  And then there's Dragonlance, which combines Gygax's bad foundation with Hickman's LDS theology (which I find has all sorts of problems) and Weis' infatuation with evil.

  (On the example, I can actually see Gandalf and Lancelot coexisting, although Gandalf would have harsh words for Lancelot's adultery. It's Conan, and also Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser, another foundational model for D&D PCs, who would conflict with the other two in terms of cosmology and philosophy.)