Arelith

I don't believe it'd be a hard change - I would like to see more but it's a good compromise at the very least. If it really is that hard of a change then I don't believe Arelith is any stranger to (dis)advantageous grandfathering either.

I'd bet a fair sum of cash that retroactively applying this would never happen, since it's such a minor thing; retroactively applying changes to characters in many ways has proven difficult in the past; and it lacks precedent, by and large. So, preventing the current two gifts from being in the chargen convo, and adding a new gift that combines the scripts of both, is, unless I am incredibly mistaken, actually p easy. And you aren't the arbiter of Irongron's to-do list, thankfully.

Durvayas wrote: Sun Jul 21, 2019 4:47 pmAs to the assertion I'm whiteknighting, piss off.

lmao ok durvayas

Kuma wrote: Sun Jul 21, 2019 6:16 pm

Durvayas wrote: Sun Jul 21, 2019 4:47 pmAs to the assertion I'm whiteknighting, piss off.

lmao ok durvayas

I'd appreciate it if the hostilities were kept down and more productive conversation continued on. Can't we all play nice?

While FR doesn't have racial restrictions on deities, it is unlikely corellon would help an orc forge an elf slaying ax.

These mechanical boons we get for picking a deity are also extra- they don't exist at all in FR.

So putting thematic restrictions on them from a dev perspective makes sense, and people being polytheistic doesn't matter- perhaps these boons are arelith specific bribes by the gods to choose a patron, and they only want certain followers.

Edit: I feel inclined to point out- if you want to rp worshipping an unusual deity, I don't object. If you want specific mechanical awards for worshipping one, I think your character should fit the archetype for it or pay something. A gift seems appropriate, just like playing a good monster.

I feel like this is a good opportunity to voice a pet peeve of mine- assuming on behalf of the dev team.

Comments like "there are more important things" or "it's too challenging to script" or "that's more work for the DMs" assumes a stance on behalf of the devs/DMs that they have not stated.

Arguing on behalf of the dev/dm team is not a valid criticism of any suggestion/feedback. We have a thousand ideas or feedback thoughts but it is the discretion of the devs to use it or not.

Aelryn Bloodmoon wrote: Mon Jul 22, 2019 12:36 am Edit: I feel inclined to point out- if you want to rp worshipping an unusual deity, I don't object. If you want specific mechanical awards for worshipping one, I think your character should fit the archetype for it or pay something. A gift seems appropriate, just like playing a good monster.

Gifts are not awards. You do not spend a gift to play a good monster, you spend an award. Gifts are a natural part of character creation whereas awards are retirement awards. I'm not a fan of an award being used for it either as it inhibits future RP possibilities. A good aligned monster on creation is hardly an inhibition as the DM team with adequate reasoning and sufficient RP backing are not beyond alignment shifting a monster to a good alignment that didn't have an award spent on them. At least to my understanding the same sort of option doesn't exist for deity restrictions.

Furthermore while the bonuses may be extra they come coupled with worshipping a deity to begin with. As exists the boons inhibit something that I think narratives would be more free/open to without it.

Aniel wrote: Mon Jul 22, 2019 3:12 pm Furthermore while the bonuses may be extra they come coupled with worshipping a deity to begin with. As exists the boons inhibit something that I think narratives would be more free/open to without it.

This train of thought is actually the entire reason I got into the thread- I disagree with this premise entirely. The DM's have okayed worshipping gods other than your Patrons. You aren't prohibited from any Role-playing aspects of worshipping whomever you want on any character, your character just won't get any mechanical bonuses from it.

Present one narrative situation that you can't accomplish solely because you can't god-save on a piece of gear or a disguise check, and you'll persuade me.

I don't think these restrictions were ever intended to enforce some kind of monotheism, but more to keep the number of characters who claim to worship deities wildly outside their typical pantheon low. I think the mechanical cost succeeds in that.

I'm not even saying those deities give good bonuses or bad bonuses - but thematically, it's a bit outside the norm, and just like good drow or characters with wings and tails and dragons and everything else that's outside the norm but awesome, if everyone does it, it starts to become eye-roll worthy.

But if you really want to RP that anyway without the mechanical bonuses, you still can.

Aelryn Bloodmoon wrote: Mon Jul 22, 2019 4:56 pm The DM's have okayed worshipping gods other than your Patrons.

I hate to ask this but is there a source for this ruling? To my understanding and the way it's mechanically presented you must choose your deity that you worship. It certainly doesn't seem to be selecting a patron or someone that you pay respects to but rather explicitly so the deity that you serve and worship. And it says that you're mechanically unable to worship those deities as a consequence of not having taken that gift. Following WYSIWYG and what's on your sheet is true, if you don't mechanically worship a deity can you say that you want worship them?

If so where is the line drawn with when you're allowed to disregard mechanics in favor of RP? That seems very messy to me.

After really digging in Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting 3.0, my perception of the deity system has changed. Honestly, it's clear that the deity system falls in line with what Forgotten Realms asks of the PCs.

FR Campaign Setting, pg. 93 wrote:Some Faerunians zealously follow one deity. Others make sacrifices to many deities, while upholding one as their personal patron. Still others sacrifice to as many deities as possible, shifting allegiances as their circumstances and needs warrant. It's a rare Faerunian who hasn't occasionally hoped to avert the baleful influence of an evil deity with a propitious gift, or thanked a good power for an unexpected blessing. The belief system of most Faerunians generally centers on a particular deity who's interests and influences are most likely to affect them, but acknowledges other gods as significant and important, too.

This changes my position on how Arelith represents deities. The setting book doesn't go into percentages of these three types of worshipers, but the majority of Faerunians have selected a patron deity that aligns to their interests. In this way, the deity system we have currently aligns with that. A big component that I think Arelith misses mechanically are the ideas of boon or baleful influence.

Because we select a patron deity, the majority of religious roleplay usually focuses on that first group of worshipers: the zealots. There's nothing wrong with zealots, except that throughout the rest of the book there are examples of even religiously aligned clerics giving thanks to Tymora for a lucky shot, or preparing for battle with an offering to Tempus, and more importantly offering sacrifices to evil deities to evade their wrath.

Importantly, it seems that the forgotten realms setting really impresses the idea of ying-yang with deities.

FR Campaign Setting, pg. 93 wrote: Divine magic can play a significant role in society, but not always through the direct intercession of a druid or cleric wielding divine spells. Deities of prosperity and plenty, such as Chauntea, answer their worshipers' prayers with abundant harvests and fair weather. Gods of plague and famine—Talona, primarily—demand placation and send all manner of blights and epidemics against those foolish enough to deny their power. These supernatural influences tend to balance each other, with the extremes of bounty and famine generally unlikely to occur. Chauntea finds a way to bring forth some sustenance in even the worst blights, and Talona manages to mar even the most plentiful harvest in some way.

I take that sort of influence as something that might happen at the macro-level, however I could see individuals bearing a heavier burden if they chose to curse, slander, or ignore a god's influence.

Tying this together, I think that Arelith's system models the setting well, but there's room for improvement. The transient nature of non-divine characters should not be punished with an XP hit and negative piety. In fact, I think that sort of behavior should be encouraged. For divine characters, there is a specific way in which they switch deities (going on a quest to prove their worth) and the XP loss and piety loss make sense in this situation.

Mechanically, this does pose some issues for transient worshipers in the fact that they might shift to Gond to do crafting, and shift back to Mystra for enchanting, but the Campaign Setting seems to encourage that type of behavior in non-divine characters. Of course a smith would turn to worshiping Gond when attempting to complete a task, and turn to Tempus for blessing during his next adventure against an unknown foe.

I think having locations where non-divine characters could provide an offering for a temporary or permanent deity change might be worthwhile to promote the transient nature of faith for non-divine classes.

One last piece I'd like to impress is that religious characters are not opposed to any deity, but they are opposed to their faiths. The deities seem to hold an almost aloof presence, and I think Silvard really gave a great comparison on Arelith Discord 3.0:

Silvard wrote:I think a better comparison is YouTubers and their subscribers. They don't really care about them in that they're by and large an impersonal number, but their income is based on how many subs and views they have so some put up a show for them, others are pretty dismissive or disrespectful but that plays into their audience, but they mostly stick to their niche and people follow them because they like it.

Deities care about their followers, but on an impersonal level. Conflict between religion is ultimately against the faiths and beliefs of those deities, and not the deities themselves. A paladin of Torm might dislike the faith of Bane, but might also note that even a lawful good society can be tyrannical in some nature and be mindful of tyranny's influence.

Ork wrote: Thu Jul 25, 2019 6:16 am After really digging in Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting 3.0, my perception of the deity system has changed. Honestly, it's clear that the deity system falls in line with what Forgotten Realms asks of the PCs.

FR Campaign Setting, pg. 93 wrote:Some Faerunians zealously follow one deity. Others make sacrifices to many deities, while upholding one as their personal patron. Still others sacrifice to as many deities as possible, shifting allegiances as their circumstances and needs warrant. It's a rare Faerunian who hasn't occasionally hoped to avert the baleful influence of an evil deity with a propitious gift, or thanked a good power for an unexpected blessing. The belief system of most Faerunians generally centers on a particular deity who's interests and influences are most likely to affect them, but acknowledges other gods as significant and important, too.

This changes my position on how Arelith represents deities. The setting book doesn't go into percentages of these three types of worshipers, but the majority of Faerunians have selected a patron deity that aligns to their interests. In this way, the deity system we have currently aligns with that. A big component that I think Arelith misses mechanically are the ideas of boon or baleful influence.

Because we select a patron deity, the majority of religious roleplay usually focuses on that first group of worshipers: the zealots. There's nothing wrong with zealots, except that throughout the rest of the book there are examples of even religiously aligned clerics giving thanks to Tymora for a lucky shot, or preparing for battle with an offering to Tempus, and more importantly offering sacrifices to evil deities to evade their wrath.

Importantly, it seems that the forgotten realms setting really impresses the idea of ying-yang with deities.

FR Campaign Setting, pg. 93 wrote: Divine magic can play a significant role in society, but not always through the direct intercession of a druid or cleric wielding divine spells. Deities of prosperity and plenty, such as Chauntea, answer their worshipers' prayers with abundant harvests and fair weather. Gods of plague and famine—Talona, primarily—demand placation and send all manner of blights and epidemics against those foolish enough to deny their power. These supernatural influences tend to balance each other, with the extremes of bounty and famine generally unlikely to occur. Chauntea finds a way to bring forth some sustenance in even the worst blights, and Talona manages to mar even the most plentiful harvest in some way.

I take that sort of influence as something that might happen at the macro-level, however I could see individuals bearing a heavier burden if they chose to curse, slander, or ignore a god's influence.

Tying this together, I think that Arelith's system models the setting well, but there's room for improvement. The transient nature of non-divine characters should not be punished with an XP hit and negative piety. In fact, I think that sort of behavior should be encouraged. For divine characters, there is a specific way in which they switch deities (going on a quest to prove their worth) and the XP loss and piety loss make sense in this situation.

Mechanically, this does pose some issues for transient worshipers in the fact that they might shift to Gond to do crafting, and shift back to Mystra for enchanting, but the Campaign Setting seems to encourage that type of behavior in non-divine characters. Of course a smith would turn to worshiping Gond when attempting to complete a task, and turn to Tempus for blessing during his next adventure against an unknown foe.

I think having locations where non-divine characters could provide an offering for a temporary or permanent deity change might be worthwhile to promote the transient nature of faith for non-divine classes.

Great post!

In some ways, I struggle with the gamified representation of religion in Forgotten Realms. The concept of having a single patron deity, even if you hop around and pick different ones, is extremely odd, and other than the occasional Roman senator/emperor claiming they had some special connection to a particular deity, I don't really know of any polytheistic religion that involved every person selected their own deity to watch out for them day to day. Rome had daemons that served that purpose, but it didn't have any real mix of afterlife built it. They were more like guardian angels.

This leads me to my issue with afterlife in Forgotten Realms (and DnD, in general). The concept of getting siphoned off to the home of your specific deity is strange. Other than a few cases, such as Valhalla for some warriors who died in battle in Norse mythology, or following the sun across the sky, for women who died in child birth in Aztec mythology, this kind of thing really has never existed in any religion I'm aware of. In nearly all polytheistic religions, almost everyone ends up in the same place. Whether that's a gloomy, forboding place like the Sumerian or Iron Age Greek afterlife, or if it's a land of gardens and sunshine, like the Egyptian, Greek, and Roman afterlives (and most others, to be honest), there's very little splitting up of souls to go to different places in any real world polytheism that I'm aware of.

Now, obviously Forgotten Realms isn't real life, so their religion can be however they want. However, it hits on a key pattern in religion. Namely, the religions with crappy afterlives have tended to die out or evolve. People, in general, seem extremely inclined towards religions in which the afterlife is a paradise where they will spend eternity with their loved ones.

Forgotten Realms doesn't have this, and the reason is almost certainly gamification. The afterlife doesn't really matter in DnD, because you don't really create a character who has a life in most DnD games. You do your adventures, and when your character dies, you wad up the character sheet and roll up a new one. The only time the afterlife comes into play is in those same adventures, when you take some portal to Banehold where everything is evil and you go around slaying evil outsiders because they're evil and everything looks red and evil.

But given how wonderful the afterlife is for followers of a few good deities, and how horrific it is for followers of most evil deities, we hit a sort of issue, in my mind. Deities maintain their power based on how many and how fervent their worship is. Given the fixation of humanity on the afterlife, however, most of those evil deities offer very little to their worshippers. A stressful life of fear they'll displease their evil god, followed by an awful afterlife of strife, torture, and who knows what else. Other than a few lunatics, who then would worship those deities on any consistent level? And who wouldn't worship the good gods like Lathander, Chauntea, etc., who not only would offer their worshippers a good life, but a good afterlife? And who are known to allow the souls on their planes to intermix with one another?

Religion in Forgotten Realms, in my own opinion, suffers from a very gamey lack of concern for the afterlife, which is something that has proven to be one of the most compelling parts of religion across the ages. It may be a small thing, but it's always made Forgotten Realms religion very unimmersive to me. It feels very much like a video game mechanic, and very much unlike a religion.

Absolutely none of this really ties to the question at hand. I had a point I was going to tie it back to, originally, but then I went off in a different direction, and at this point I've put too much work into this post to delete it.

I agree that there shouldn't be an XP or piety penalty for non-divine characters to change deity.