|
|
|
IronAngel
|
 Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 12:03 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 29 Sep 2005
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
|
Exactly so. For most gods, I would imagine the alignment of a lay worshiper is one of the smallest factors in picking a patron deity. A farmer will worship Chauntea regardless of alignment, a gambler Tymora, a scholar Oghma and Deneir, a traveller Shaundakul, a sailor Valkur, Selûne and Umberlee, and so on. The alignment-focused gods are few (and quite lame!).
_________________ On Joon, Kjetta wrote: The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
|
|
|
|
 |
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 12:04 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
IronAngel wrote: Exactly so. For most gods, I would imagine the alignment of a lay worshiper is one of the smallest factors in picking a patron deity. A farmer will worship Chauntea regardless of alignment, a gambler Tymora, a scholar Oghma and Deneir, a traveller Shaundakul, a sailor Valkur, Selûne and Umberlee, and so on. The alignment-focused gods are few (and quite lame!).
And not solely them ... the great thing about polytheism is that unless you're a priest, you don't need to choose one god to be your patron.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
bluntpencil2001
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 12:17 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Nov 2009
Location: Scotland
|
Yurell wrote: IronAngel wrote: Exactly so. For most gods, I would imagine the alignment of a lay worshiper is one of the smallest factors in picking a patron deity. A farmer will worship Chauntea regardless of alignment, a gambler Tymora, a scholar Oghma and Deneir, a traveller Shaundakul, a sailor Valkur, Selûne and Umberlee, and so on. The alignment-focused gods are few (and quite lame!). And not solely them ... the great thing about polytheism is that unless you're a priest, you don't need to choose one god to be your patron. This gets me to thinking, though...
Would that not make one considered faithless, if one did not select a favourite god? What would the Eternal Order and other Kelemvorites say about this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 12:18 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
bluntpencil2001 wrote: Yurell wrote: IronAngel wrote: Exactly so. For most gods, I would imagine the alignment of a lay worshiper is one of the smallest factors in picking a patron deity. A farmer will worship Chauntea regardless of alignment, a gambler Tymora, a scholar Oghma and Deneir, a traveller Shaundakul, a sailor Valkur, Selûne and Umberlee, and so on. The alignment-focused gods are few (and quite lame!). And not solely them ... the great thing about polytheism is that unless you're a priest, you don't need to choose one god to be your patron. This gets me to thinking, though... Would that not make one considered faithless, if one did not select a favourite god? What would the Eternal Order and other Kelemvorites say about this? I've no idea. I'd assume not, since as far as I know most of Faerun works under this idea.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
bluntpencil2001
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 12:22 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Nov 2009
Location: Scotland
|
Yurell wrote: bluntpencil2001 wrote: Yurell wrote: IronAngel wrote: Exactly so. For most gods, I would imagine the alignment of a lay worshiper is one of the smallest factors in picking a patron deity. A farmer will worship Chauntea regardless of alignment, a gambler Tymora, a scholar Oghma and Deneir, a traveller Shaundakul, a sailor Valkur, Selûne and Umberlee, and so on. The alignment-focused gods are few (and quite lame!). And not solely them ... the great thing about polytheism is that unless you're a priest, you don't need to choose one god to be your patron. This gets me to thinking, though... Would that not make one considered faithless, if one did not select a favourite god? What would the Eternal Order and other Kelemvorites say about this? I've no idea. I'd assume not, since as far as I know most of Faerun works under this idea. Well, I know that on death, provided one was mostly true to one's faith, one becomes a petitioner in their patron's home plane.
If they don't have a patron, they join the Wall of the Faithless. Going between all the deities is pretty much faithless, since you don't have a patron. Having multiple patrons, such as following the whole Triad, the Red Knight and Tempus both, or Sune and Sharess can easily work, but not selecting any particular deities as a true patron would most likely end up with the person being faithless... something none of the faiths would encourage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gunz
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 12:24 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 01 Jul 2006
Location: The City of Fallen Angels, Ca
|
bluntpencil2001 wrote: Monks can follow any deity whatsoever, as can other classes which do not cast divine spells. They sure can. I was just thinking Tormak might have been thinking of Selunes Sun Souls when he mentioned Paladins in her service. bluntpencil2001 wrote: When it comes to deities like Ilmater, though, whose focus is being good, or Cyric, whose focus is murder, being an utterly opposed alignment would be difficult, at least on one axis. A chaotic follower of the lawful good Ilmater is easily possible, but evil is very unlikely. The same goes for Cyric... a lawful follower is unlikely but possible, but good would be next to impossible.
If you're not a divine caster, you can worship anyone you like, as a patron, as a god you respect or just pay lip service to. Being considered false in faith in death is another matter entirely and, frankly, shouldn't play an OOC role in how your character acts.
_________________
My Characters:
Yuilith Kethil Menaiivan Garadeth
|
|
|
|
|
|
TormakSaber
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 12:26 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere
|
|
"Faithless" means you don't worship ANY deity.
"False" means Kelemvor called you out for pretending to worship a deity but not really, or for exceptionally bad circumstances.
If you worship several deities, you're not ending up in the wall.
_________________
Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds
Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham
|
|
|
|
|
|
IronAngel
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 12:27 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 29 Sep 2005
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
I would imagine some god will pick you up at death's door if you've lived close enough to its dogma and tenets, and you get one more chance to choose your patron. Maybe. Wouldn't be IC knowledge anyhow.
This is from earlier in this topic, me pwning Kjetta:
IronAngel wrote: The idea of a "patron deity" is relatively new and, IMO, artificial. Since PCs don't actually know anything definite about the afterlife, I don't reckon it has much IC signifigance. I doubt most people even know this whole "patron deity" business is; it's probably an subconscious choice. For the common man, his patron deity is the one who he happens to be the closest to in terms of interests or outlook. I doubt it has to be acknowledged or decided. Kjetta wrote: IronAngel wrote: For the common man, his patron deity is the one who he happens to be the closest to in terms of interests or outlook. Earlier, you have stated that this notion is a stupid fallacy among Amians. Rather, you have argued that most people (certainly commoners) don't individually choose their patron deity based on personal interests or outlook, but rather have their patron deity choosen for them by their culture/community. Is worship in the realms a personal or a cultural matter, Iron? Make up your mind, biatch!IronAngel wrote: Well, it's both. I think the question of the metaphysical relationship between mortal and patron deity, and the actual worship in daily life, are seperate matters. (Though I've rarely thought about the actual nature of the patron deity relationship.)
In this context, the question is whether all/most people consciously state (aloud or in their mind): X is my patron deity, I choose X to judge me worthy of an afterlife.
What they certainly don't do is go over a catalogue of gods, pick the one that suits their personality and interests, and say "This shall be my patron."
Instead, I imagine they will worship the gods known to them locally. Out of these gods, they may or may not choose a "patron deity." Most probably don't, especially if there are a few equally important gods in the community. They may go to Lathander's mass on First-day, pray Chauntea on Second-day, and then drop by Helm's church on Third-day, without ever picking one consciously as the "best."
However: of all the gods they know, their patron deity will probably be "magically" determined by their outlook. Perhaps this even applies to gods they don't know about: A warrior might live his life according to the dogma of Tempus, portraying the ideals of a warrior, without ever hearing about the god of war. I think it's still plausible that when he dies, Tempus may judge him worthy and take him as a petitioner, assuming the guy hadn't made a stronger/conscious "patron god agreement" with another god.
Maybe. This is just speculation, but it makes sense.
You didn't catch me yet. Try harder, loser! _________________ On Joon, Kjetta wrote: The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
Last edited by IronAngel on Fri, Dec 25 2009, 12:28 PM, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gunz
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 12:28 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 01 Jul 2006
Location: The City of Fallen Angels, Ca
|
|
While people may worship a whole pantheon, or parts of a pantheon, many would probably still have their patron, knowingly or unknowingly.
_________________
My Characters:
Yuilith Kethil Menaiivan Garadeth
Last edited by Gunz on Fri, Dec 25 2009, 12:30 PM, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 12:30 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
bluntpencil2001 wrote: Well, I know that on death, provided one was mostly true to one's faith, one becomes a petitioner in their patron's home plane.
If they don't have a patron, they join the Wall of the Faithless. Going between all the deities is pretty much faithless, since you don't have a patron. Having multiple patrons, such as following the whole Triad, the Red Knight and Tempus both, or Sune and Sharess can easily work, but not selecting any particular deities as a true patron would most likely end up with the person being faithless... something none of the faiths would encourage.
I know in the PHB there's nothing wrong with worshipping the entire pantheon, rather than a specific god, and I'm looking atm for something that states you can't in FR.
Edit: Page 93 of the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting talks about it.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
Last edited by Yurell on Fri, Dec 25 2009, 12:32 PM, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
|
|
|
|
bluntpencil2001
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 12:31 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Nov 2009
Location: Scotland
|
o0GuNz_N_RoSeZ0o wrote: While people may worship a whole pantheon, or parts of a pantheon, many would probably still have their patron, knowingly, or unknowingly.
Ah, this clears a lot up for me.
I didn't think that someone might unknowingly have a patron, but that makes a lot of sense, considering that some deities go by many names, such as Chauntea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
bluntpencil2001
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 12:33 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Nov 2009
Location: Scotland
|
Yurell wrote: bluntpencil2001 wrote: Well, I know that on death, provided one was mostly true to one's faith, one becomes a petitioner in their patron's home plane.
If they don't have a patron, they join the Wall of the Faithless. Going between all the deities is pretty much faithless, since you don't have a patron. Having multiple patrons, such as following the whole Triad, the Red Knight and Tempus both, or Sune and Sharess can easily work, but not selecting any particular deities as a true patron would most likely end up with the person being faithless... something none of the faiths would encourage. I know in the PHB there's nothing wrong with worshipping the entire pantheon, rather than a specific god, and I'm looking atm for something that states you can't in FR. Forgotten Realms cosmology is very different from PHB. You need a patron, or you go to the Wall. Standard DnD doesn't have the Wall. If you worshipped the whole pantheon, without a patron, you are faithless, or maybe false.
It's considered reasonably common knowledge in-character, thanks to the efforts of every single faith, most especially the Kelemvorite faith.
However, a very good point was just made... one could have a patron unwittingly. Someone who worshipped the whole pantheon would likely have a patron befitting their position in society. A farmer's would likely be Chauntea, a noble's Siamorphe, for instance.
Last edited by bluntpencil2001 on Fri, Dec 25 2009, 12:36 PM, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 12:35 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
|
There's a whole lot of stuff there, including about worshipping the entire pantheon, but "The belief system of most Faerunians generally centres on a particular deity whose interests and influences are most likely to affect them, but acknowledges other gods as significant and important, too."
Page 93 FRCS.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 12:38 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
bluntpencil2001 wrote: Yurell wrote: bluntpencil2001 wrote: Well, I know that on death, provided one was mostly true to one's faith, one becomes a petitioner in their patron's home plane.
If they don't have a patron, they join the Wall of the Faithless. Going between all the deities is pretty much faithless, since you don't have a patron. Having multiple patrons, such as following the whole Triad, the Red Knight and Tempus both, or Sune and Sharess can easily work, but not selecting any particular deities as a true patron would most likely end up with the person being faithless... something none of the faiths would encourage. I know in the PHB there's nothing wrong with worshipping the entire pantheon, rather than a specific god, and I'm looking atm for something that states you can't in FR. Forgotten Realms cosmology is very different from PHB. You need a patron, or you go to the Wall. Standard DnD doesn't have the Wall. If you worshipped the whole pantheon, without a patron, you are faithless, or maybe false. It's considered reasonably common knowledge in-character, thanks to the efforts of every single faith, most especially the Kelemvorite faith. However, a very good point was just made... one could have a patron unwittingly. Someone who worshipped the whole pantheon would likely have a patron befitting their position in society. A farmer's would likely be Chauntea, a noble's Siamorphe, for instance. I thought to be Faithless you didn't truly believe in gods in general, can you please cite a source saying that one needs to worship one god above all others to avoid the Wall (and as an aside, that god can't be Ao or you're off to the Wall ... he's a bastard like that).
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
bluntpencil2001
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 12:39 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Nov 2009
Location: Scotland
|
Yurell wrote: There's a whole lot of stuff there, including about worshipping the entire pantheon, but "The belief system of most Faerunians generally centres on a particular deity whose interests and influences are most likely to affect them, but acknowledges other gods as significant and important, too."
Page 93 FRCS.
Yeah, I imagine that a true follower of any god would likely defer to clerics of Kelemvor, for instance, when funerals were concerned. A follower of Tempus would know that praying to him for a good harvest would be a waste of time when that's Chauntea's job.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 12:52 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
|
Hmmm, page 2 of the second ed Powers and Pantheons disagrees with this 'primary god' idea, and says that an individual usually regularly worships numerous deities.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
bluntpencil2001
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 13:00 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Nov 2009
Location: Scotland
|
Yurell wrote: Hmmm, page 2 of the second ed Powers and Pantheons disagrees with this 'primary god' idea, and says that an individual usually regularly worships numerous deities.
2nd ed is somewhat out of date, though.
And a patron is required (don't have my FRCS with me right now, sorry). Like I said before, a follower of Tempus would pay homage to Chauntea when harvests are concerned, but they would have a particular patron, in this case Tempus. When they die, they will go to Tempus' side.
Regardless, someone can have a particular patron, such as Tempus like said before, but pay homage to other deities when relevant. A follower of Tempus would pray to Chauntea for a good harvest, and revere Kelemvor at a funeral.. but their patron deity is still Tempus.
If it were simply rejecting the gods entirely that made one faithless, the Wall would be very small, since the Gods are pretty evident in the realms, to the point where atheism and blatant rejection would be an alien concept to the vast majority of people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
IronAngel
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 13:02 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 29 Sep 2005
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
Yurell wrote: Hmmm, page 2 of the second ed Powers and Pantheons disagrees with this 'primary god' idea, and says that an individual usually regularly worships numerous deities.
As I said, it's a new idea. AFAIK, it was introduced only in 3e, and it certainly disagrees with most of Ed Greenwood's accounts. It was emphasized unduly in 3e, at the very least. I would take any single source with a grain of salt. The general idea is that you worship pantheons or several gods. Must you have a single patron deity? That's a metaphysical question unknown to mortals, surely. It's not very interesting, so I would just ignore it. I also doubt you'll find conclusive evidence either way.
Bluntpencil, you are very convinced of your stance. But what's your take on, say, clerics with multiple patrons? A few pages back, I listed a number of such NPCs from the books. _________________ On Joon, Kjetta wrote: The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 13:05 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
bluntpencil2001 wrote: Yurell wrote: Hmmm, page 2 of the second ed Powers and Pantheons disagrees with this 'primary god' idea, and says that an individual usually regularly worships numerous deities. 2nd ed is somewhat out of date, though. And a patron is required (don't have my FRCS with me right now, sorry). I couldn't find mention of that in the FRCS, to be honest, and the PGtF only really had page 93 about it, where I couldn't even find mention of the Wall. And second ed provides a whole lot more information than third ed (although I suppose any third ed canon would supersede second ed). bluntpencil2001 wrote: Like I said before, a follower of Tempus would pay homage to Chauntea when harvests are concerned, but they would have a particular patron, in this case Tempus. When they die, they will go to Tempus' side.
Regardless, someone can have a particular patron, such as Tempus like said before, but pay homage to other deities when relevant. A follower of Tempus would pray to Chauntea for a good harvest, and revere Kelemvor at a funeral.. but their patron deity is still Tempus.
I don't disagree that they can, I am asking whether having such a god worshipped above all others is absolutely necessary.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 13:07 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
IronAngel wrote: Yurell wrote: Hmmm, page 2 of the second ed Powers and Pantheons disagrees with this 'primary god' idea, and says that an individual usually regularly worships numerous deities. As I said, it's a new idea. AFAIK, it was introduced only in 3e, and it certainly disagrees with most of Ed Greenwood's accounts. It was emphasized unduly in 3e, at the very least. I would take any single source with a grain of salt. The general idea is that you worship pantheons or several gods. Must you have a single patron deity? That's a metaphysical question unknown to mortals, surely. It's not very interesting, so I would just ignore it. I also doubt you'll find conclusive evidence either way. Ah, thanks Iron. I dn't want to know for RP on Amia, I was just curious as to the Lore. There are ways to find out ICly, but that would require the stuff being found out to be known to someone on an OOC level first. To me, religion is one of the most interesting aspects of FR.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
IronAngel
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 13:12 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 29 Sep 2005
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
|
Well, I doubt there's an absolute divine rule about it. The Seldarine all live in Arvandor together; whether you pick one of them as patron seems irrelevant, since you're going to the same place anyhow. The same for the Triad, or Mystra and Azuth, for example.
If you worship multiple gods from different planes, I suppose your afterlife might be determined by whose doctrines you happened to live by, the most. I don't necessarily see it as a conscious decision that has any effect until your death.
It might vary case by case, and what Kelemvor told his priests if asked (if he tells anything at all) might not be true at all times. They're gods, so it seems likely they're free to make the choice case by case, assuming it's not against the will of the deceased (and thus the laws).
_________________ On Joon, Kjetta wrote: The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
|
|
|
|
|
|
bluntpencil2001
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 13:23 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Nov 2009
Location: Scotland
|
IronAngel wrote:
Bluntpencil, you are very convinced of your stance. But what's your take on, say, clerics with multiple patrons? A few pages back, I listed a number of such NPCs from the books.
I think it would depend on the patron.
The cleric would likely go to the home plane of whichever deity was granting his spells upon death. I would imagine that, generally, one would not be granted their spells by two deities at once, at least not two from differing planes. I can't imagine, say, Torm and Tymora granting spells to the same cleric at once.
I would assume that most clerics of multiple deities would be worshipping connected deities, though, such as a cleric of Tempus and the Red Knight, or a Triadic cleric, or even Lathander and Chauntea.
Other possibilities could include the three deities worshipped in Rashemen, as the Hathran often include clerics of the Three as a whole, in a similar fashion to the Triad. I would imagine that, unknown to the cleric, depending on personality, one of the Three would be the true patron, possibly changing over time. On death, they would likely go to the plane best fitting them.
In effect, they wouldn't really have multiple patrons in the strictest sense, I don't think, but would have a primary patron, and would then have two other deities that they consider equal to their patron, the rest of the pantheon being lesser in their eyes. The chances are that the cleric herself would not know which of the Three was their patron, granting their spells.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 13:26 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
bluntpencil2001 wrote: In effect, they wouldn't really have multiple patrons in the strictest sense, I don't think, but would have a primary patron, and would then have two other deities that they consider equal to their patron, the rest of the pantheon being lesser in their eyes. The chances are that the cleric herself would not know which of the Three was their patron, granting their spells.
I believe in the previous examples Iron gave both the deities were granting spells, indicating that neither was the primary.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
bluntpencil2001
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 13:32 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Nov 2009
Location: Scotland
|
Yurell wrote: bluntpencil2001 wrote: In effect, they wouldn't really have multiple patrons in the strictest sense, I don't think, but would have a primary patron, and would then have two other deities that they consider equal to their patron, the rest of the pantheon being lesser in their eyes. The chances are that the cleric herself would not know which of the Three was their patron, granting their spells. I believe in the previous examples Iron gave both the deities were granting spells, indicating that neither was the primary. My guess here, and a guess it is, is that the true patron would change from day to day, depending upon which deity the cleric was more closely serving that day.
I'm more familiar with Rashemi witches, so I'll use that example.
One, a cleric of the Three, prays to all three everyday, however, is granted their spells by only one of Miellikki, Chauntea and Mystra daily, depending upon which they are closest to that day. Some deities may not like sharing clerics, and refuse to grant spells, others may be happy to share, such as the Three. The patron, I think, might vary between all three, or a combination of some of them, or simply might be one.
On death, the 'primary patron' might either be the patron at time of death, or whichever was the cleric's patron for the majority of the time of their life, depending on what Kelemvor says as well as any deals by the deities involved.
Most of this is pure supposition, though.
I also doubt that a cleric with multiple patrons could take a domain from both deities. For instance, with the example of the Three, I can't see a cleric taking Magic from Mystra and Nature from Chauntea.
In fact, now that I think about it, the primary patron would be the one providing domains. When the domains are shared, that's when daily closeness to deities would matter. For two deities at odds, like the cleric of both Ubtao and Tyr... I imagine the domains of said cleric change daily.
|
|
|
|
|
|
IronAngel
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 14:19 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 29 Sep 2005
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
|
You're taking mechanical rules way too literally, IMO.
We should apply Occam's Razor, here. You can take everything in recent rulebooks as an accurate representation of gameworld facts, and come up with a complicated explanation of how something unusual is possible. Or you can take them as the rules and general guidelines of a game, whose primary purpose is to keep the game simple and fun.
Rules such as the Patron God and One-Step Rule guide player choices and make the game easy to grasp. It's considerably easier to state one generalized, simple rule in one book, than to do the 2e thing: giving vague IC accounts in several books, and giving every deity a unique list of both worshiper alignments and clergy alignments, as well as what classes were part of which clergy. The 2e approach is more accurate, interesting and true to the gameworld, no doubt, but the 3e approach is much easier and more attractive to the casual player.
Of the two aforementioned options, Occam's Razor leads us to choose this: the rules aren't to be interpreted literally as metaphysical facts, but rather guidelines of how to play the game. We do not need to explain how several possible exceptions fit in with the Patron Deity Rule, if we assume it is a useful generalization rather than the final truth. Especially so, because we know the rule that you try to reconcile with exceptions came much later than the exceptions, and therefore it's just explaining inconsistencies in retrospect. With FR (and D&D in general), that's pretty futile. The world is 4 decades old, and you couldn't possibly make it coherent without violent retcon. That's why it's best to treat the world as seperate from individual descriptions, something that's partially reflected in every game edition and product, but never fully explained.
But yeah, it's just speculation. Personally, I think your theory is way too full of unnecessary clutter, which can be eliminated with a simple change of perspective. A theory should be as simple and elegant as possible, as long as it can still explain all relevant phenomena.
_________________ On Joon, Kjetta wrote: The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
|
|
|
|
|
|
bluntpencil2001
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 14:26 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Nov 2009
Location: Scotland
|
Good points, it largely doesn't matter, really, but it's interesting nontheless, at least in my opinion.
I've always found Faerun's strange afterlife stuff intriguing, particularly the old 'evil clerics of Helm going to the House of the Triad' and 'Paladins of Hoar going to the Lower Planes'.
Clerics with multiple deities, Triad excepted, is something new to me, and very interesting. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
GreatPigeon
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 14:44 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 04 May 2009
Location: London, UK
|
bluntpencil2001 wrote: 'Paladins of Hoar going to the Lower Planes'.
Explain this please? _________________ The Peacock wrote: [GreatPigeon] is better than me. Uncle-Opustus wrote: Just before I fall asleep, I like to pretend it's just a public feat so Pigeon can succeed in politics and save the world from poverty... with his unicorn and shining armour and Excalibur.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gers
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 15:10 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 30 Apr 2005
Location: Kentucky, USA
|
|
Hoar shares the realm known as The Barrens of Doom and Despair with several other, notably evil, deities, not the least of which is Bane. The Barrens are an FR-specific plane, to my knowledge, so it doesn't have an analog in the core cosmology I think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
GreatPigeon
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 15:12 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 04 May 2009
Location: London, UK
|
So when Hoarites die they get to be happy and hunt down bad people for all of eternity _________________ The Peacock wrote: [GreatPigeon] is better than me. Uncle-Opustus wrote: Just before I fall asleep, I like to pretend it's just a public feat so Pigeon can succeed in politics and save the world from poverty... with his unicorn and shining armour and Excalibur.
|
|
|
|
|
|
bluntpencil2001
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 15:14 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Nov 2009
Location: Scotland
|
GreatPigeon wrote: So when Hoarites die they get to be happy and hunt down bad people for all of eternity I can just imagine a Paladin of Hoar, a petitioner in the Barrens of Doom and Despair, laughing as he smites nearly every other petitioner within reach for all eternity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mobile_Svensk
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 15:15 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 21 Jul 2005
Location: Awarded most Confused Git of 2014!
|
GreatPigeon wrote: bluntpencil2001 wrote: 'Paladins of Hoar going to the Lower Planes'.
Explain this please? Ye, What is this? And can there even be Paladins of Hoar?
As my previous question - "Are Paladins of Waukeen possible"; it was a Nay, since it's a True Neutral diety,
But then it became slightly confusing when Sune was involved. Nevertheless, Hoar is a pretty Chaotic neutral Diety so i dont think it's even possible to champion Hoar as a paladin
_________________
Amia Minecraft Server Ip: vps1602.directvps.nl
NWN Damage Calculator: http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/dnd/
NWN Build Calculator: http://nwvault.ign.com/View.php?view=Other.Detail&id=856
|
|
|
|
|
|
bluntpencil2001
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 15:16 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Nov 2009
Location: Scotland
|
Muspelkvist wrote: GreatPigeon wrote: bluntpencil2001 wrote: 'Paladins of Hoar going to the Lower Planes'.
Explain this please? Ye, What is this? And can there even be Paladins of Hoar? As my previous question - "Are Paladins of Waukeen possible"; it was a Nay, since it's a True Neutral diety, But then it became slightly confusing when Sune was involved. Nevertheless, Hoar is a pretty Chaotic neutral Diety so i dont think it's even possible to champion Hoar as a paladin Hoar is Lawful Neutral. Lawful Evil in 4th ed, but Lawful Neutral in 3rd. He has Paladins, like most LN deities do.
Last edited by bluntpencil2001 on Fri, Dec 25 2009, 15:17 PM, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 15:17 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
Muspelkvist wrote: GreatPigeon wrote: bluntpencil2001 wrote: 'Paladins of Hoar going to the Lower Planes'.
Explain this please? Ye, What is this? And can there even be Paladins of Hoar? Yes, and: Gers wrote: Hoar shares the realm known as The Barrens of Doom and Despair with several other, notably evil, deities, not the least of which is Bane. The Barrens are an FR-specific plane, to my knowledge, so it doesn't have an analog in the core cosmology I think.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
GreatPigeon
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 15:19 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 04 May 2009
Location: London, UK
|
|
Yes, but as a god of vengance his paladins have to do some pretty naught things. They are charged to fight the evil as the evil would fight then. Poetic Justice. If someone steals a chicken and boils it to eat it, the LG guys would lock him up, the evil folks would most likely kill him... Hoar has a sense of humor I think.... When this happened we cooked the guy who did it.
I think of any diety Hoar and maybe Kelemvor are the most likely to condone gray guards.
_________________ The Peacock wrote: [GreatPigeon] is better than me. Uncle-Opustus wrote: Just before I fall asleep, I like to pretend it's just a public feat so Pigeon can succeed in politics and save the world from poverty... with his unicorn and shining armour and Excalibur.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 15:21 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
|
I imagine Hoarite paladins would be very difficult to play. But it is possible nonetheless - as was stated before, it's within one step (he's LN and pally is LG).
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
bluntpencil2001
|
Posted: Fri, Dec 25 2009, 15:23 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Nov 2009
Location: Scotland
|
|
Now that I think about it even more, the chances are that although Paladins of Hoar go to the Barrens of Doom and Despair, they are probably rewarded by Hoar for doing good, in spite of this plane, for the most part, being horrible. My reasoning here is that Hoar teaches that good receives good in turn, evil deserves evil in return.
In spite of it not being the House of the Triad, the paladin petitioners in the Barrens of Doom and Despair are probably given some sort of heaven, as opposed to being tortured by devils or whatever, since they've not earned punishment by Hoar's count.
I still like the idea of them laughing maniacally as they administer just desserts to bad guys for all eternity, though. 'Thought you could escape justice in death, did you!? Bane will not save you now!'
Edit: Yes, they would be difficult to play, but certainly possible. It is possible to administer poetic justice without doing evil, if the paladin is suitably creative. With the chicken example, he could literally tar and feather the culprit, for all to see him as a chicken thief.
I think playing a Sunite paladin is harder though, since her faith demands loving one's self above all others except Sune... which goes somewhat against the selflessness expected from Paladins. That and she's chaotic, making several core beliefs go against the code.
|
|
|
|
|
|
BlackDahlya
|
Posted: Mon, Dec 28 2009, 1:23 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Location: Land of the Scorching Sun, Empowered by Global Warming
|
|
I cannot find the following information bloody anywhere: shadow dragon vulnerabilities.
Are they considered undead?
_________________
BlackDahlya
Once Upon A Time Played
Adr'ael Ken'rahel, Auron Teken’ath, Aurora Mesodias, 'Daniel' Daoskinaxarijikkym, Eilin'ira, Helena Rios, Layla Faircurrent, May'Une Do'Ndar, Mellinda Tellus, Michael of Cliffside, Rizzen of Twilight, Valkirya d'Claddath
|
|
|
|
|
|
TormakSaber
|
Posted: Mon, Dec 28 2009, 1:34 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere
|
|
No, they are dragons.
_________________
Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds
Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham
|
|
|
|
|
|
BlackDahlya
|
Posted: Mon, Dec 28 2009, 1:39 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Location: Land of the Scorching Sun, Empowered by Global Warming
|
|
What about their vulnerabilities?
I was going with the logic that, his breath weapon being of level drain - which is probably of the Negative Energy descriptor - perhaps his vulnerability would be of the opposite energy.
_________________
BlackDahlya
Once Upon A Time Played
Adr'ael Ken'rahel, Auron Teken’ath, Aurora Mesodias, 'Daniel' Daoskinaxarijikkym, Eilin'ira, Helena Rios, Layla Faircurrent, May'Une Do'Ndar, Mellinda Tellus, Michael of Cliffside, Rizzen of Twilight, Valkirya d'Claddath
|
|
|
|
|
|
TormakSaber
|
Posted: Mon, Dec 28 2009, 2:00 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 16 Dec 2004
Location: Somewhere
|
|
They, like Greens, Blues, Blacks, Bronzes, and Coppers, have no vulnerability.
_________________
Davion Telemos - Monk of the Four Winds
Korthan Isharnos - Dragon Shaman of Thunder Spirit Zamasham
|
|
|
|
|
|
BlackDahlya
|
Posted: Mon, Dec 28 2009, 2:20 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Location: Land of the Scorching Sun, Empowered by Global Warming
|
|
I considered that they could have none, but thought it could be some accidental oversight. I just wanted to make sure.
Thank you!
_________________
BlackDahlya
Once Upon A Time Played
Adr'ael Ken'rahel, Auron Teken’ath, Aurora Mesodias, 'Daniel' Daoskinaxarijikkym, Eilin'ira, Helena Rios, Layla Faircurrent, May'Une Do'Ndar, Mellinda Tellus, Michael of Cliffside, Rizzen of Twilight, Valkirya d'Claddath
|
|
|
|
|
|
Halecta
|
Posted: Mon, Dec 28 2009, 7:19 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 10 Jul 2008
|
|
Silver Dragons also have no Vulnurability, and are in fact immune to both Acid and Cold
|
|
|
|
|
|
QPR
|
Posted: Wed, Dec 30 2009, 20:19 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Location: Norway
|
|
About dragons and dragon diciples: Just how draconic does your appearence become with each level? Like: would anything show if a character only had one level? Or three? And compared to having seven levels? etc. Could a dragon diciple with less than 5 levels hide his draconic heritage for instance?
_________________
"Edwin do this, Edwin do that. Somebody get this jerk a banana!" - Edwin, BG II
Valygar 'Stonesnake' Stark -Human Ranger
Garret Smith - Archer and peddler of deity-statuettes
Dáin Saltbeard - Dwarven sailor and fencer. No, I'm not joking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
BlackDahlya
|
Posted: Wed, Dec 30 2009, 22:37 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Location: Land of the Scorching Sun, Empowered by Global Warming
|
|
Depends on how far you want to go, QPR.
You certainly will not look like a real half-dragon, but you will get scales (that is how I interpret the increased AC), your hand will get very long and very sharp and very thick nails (they gain claw attack), you will get draconic teeth (you do gain bite as an attack), your muscles will ~bulge~ out of your frame (not sure how else to interpret the bonus strength) and I am sure I am forgetting something, but I am currently at work and getting distracted making sure no customers are without attendance. >_>;;
I'll get back to this later, unless if someone else posts.
_________________
BlackDahlya
Once Upon A Time Played
Adr'ael Ken'rahel, Auron Teken’ath, Aurora Mesodias, 'Daniel' Daoskinaxarijikkym, Eilin'ira, Helena Rios, Layla Faircurrent, May'Une Do'Ndar, Mellinda Tellus, Michael of Cliffside, Rizzen of Twilight, Valkirya d'Claddath
|
|
|
|
|
|
IronAngel
|
Posted: Wed, Dec 30 2009, 22:40 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 29 Sep 2005
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
|
Well, I'll simply say: look at what abilities you get, check their descriptions, and think very carefully of the implications. If you gain Strength and AC, it is quite obvious that there will be some sign of unnatural muscle growth and scales, for example. But beyond that, the specifics are up to your imagination.
I am not aware of any additional source of RDD lore outside of the PrC description, so that's as much as I can tell you.
_________________ On Joon, Kjetta wrote: The guy that probably has sexual fantasies about masturbation. I mean, Iron, you're a bookworm nerd that even in your wildest escapism fantasies flee to the internet to play the role of another bookworm nerd? Come on!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mr T
|
Posted: Thu, Dec 31 2009, 0:06 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 12 Jun 2006
Location: England
|
|
There would not necessarily be unnatural muscle growth. Many real world animals simply have more effecient muscle tissue than humans and are thus pound for pound stronger.
In fact most of the WoTC artwork depicts dragon disciples and half-dragons with regular builds, sometimes built, but never hugely overmuscled. Personally I would say it's down to the character, do what you think fits.
Mr T
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yurell
|
Posted: Thu, Dec 31 2009, 1:00 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 06 Jan 2008
Location: ANU, behind the coffee mug (+10 GMT)
|
|
Quoth the DMG:
"Natural Armour Increase (EX): At 1st, 4th and 7th level, a dragon disciple becomes more draconic in appearance. His skin develops tiny iridescent scales, nearly invisible at first but becoming more noticeable at higher levels [...] As his skin thickens, a dragon disciple takes on more of his progenitor's physical aspect."
"Wings (Ex): At 9th level, a dragon disciple grows a set of draconic wings. He may now fly at a speed equal to his normal land speed, with average manoeuvrability."
"Dragon Apotheosis: At 10th level, a dragon disciple fully realises his draconic heritage and takes on the half-dragon template"
Which means we go to half dragon, so quoth the MM:
"Half-dragon creatures are always more formidable than others of their kind that do not have dragon blood, ad their appearance betrays their nature - scales, elongated features, reptilian eyes, and exaggerated teeth and claws. Sometimes they have wings."
Since you should have bite and claw attacks from just your DD levels (at second level), it's also logical to conclude that you have bigger teeth and claws too. Also, given te increase in strength it seems reasonable that you'd get bigger muscles too, although the artwork in the books (DMG & MM) don't demonstrate this.
_________________
2009's Second Most Overall Contributing Player
يمكنني استخدام مترجم جوجل
|
|
|
|
|
|
BlackDahlya
|
Posted: Thu, Dec 31 2009, 3:42 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Location: Land of the Scorching Sun, Empowered by Global Warming
|
|
I believe that for pure half-dragons they can be born with or without huge muscles. It will depend on parents, I guess.
Now, concerning non-half-dragons that go through the rituals to become a dragon blood I would say that the muscles are very visible in the sense that in a day you are a very tiny person and the next days you suddenly start growing muscles until you have some unnatural build in but a few days.
Of course, as Iron said and I did too, it depends on what you want for your Dragon Disciple.
Adding to what I posted a few posts above, I think that the eyes would change too, assuming a more reptile appearance, since DDs also get Darkvision. I RP my DD having slitted pupils and glowing eyes (since Shadow Dragons have glowing eyes), but this is not a rule. It is what I chose to do.
He also grew horns and spikes all around his body in a given moment, but I RPed that as because his blood was stronger and he went through all the basic 10 steps for the ritual.
Now that he is down to 9 levels, he keeps his original racial features save by the glowing eyes with slitted pupils, the elongated "nails" and the needle-like teeth with prominent canine teeth.
I have no idea if that was possible, but I made he lose some features and one DD level by saying that part of his pact with a fiend (he is a BG) included the fiend taking a fair amount of his dragon blood, that was at its full power back then given all 10 DD levels.
But, alas, I wander.
In the end, all I can give are suggestions because aside from what the PrC says (as quoted above by Yurell), you are free to decide how much of the appearance of your PC will be changed with the awakening of his dragon blood.
_________________
BlackDahlya
Once Upon A Time Played
Adr'ael Ken'rahel, Auron Teken’ath, Aurora Mesodias, 'Daniel' Daoskinaxarijikkym, Eilin'ira, Helena Rios, Layla Faircurrent, May'Une Do'Ndar, Mellinda Tellus, Michael of Cliffside, Rizzen of Twilight, Valkirya d'Claddath
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Cobbit
|
Posted: Thu, Dec 31 2009, 4:06 AM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Location: Satellite Of Love
|
|
Question concerning evil monk orders. Those that I know of:
Order of the Iron Gauntlet (Bane)
Disciples of the Salamander (Kossuth)
Disciples of the White Rod (Loviatar)
Order of the Dark Moon (Shar)
Serpent Guards (Tiamat)
Order of the Long Death (Velsharoon)
Are there any other evil-type orders besides these?
I thought at one time that there was one tied to Talona, or was I just imagining that?
_________________
I have a large seashell collection which I keep scattered on the beaches all over the world. Maybe you've seen it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
QPR
|
Posted: Fri, Jan 01 2010, 19:50 PM |
|
|
Player
Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Location: Norway
|
|
I don't know of any others than those you have mentioned I'm afraid.
I have some questions about sorcerers: They still do research, right? The NwN description says they have no books, no theories, no mentors, but this can't relly be the fact, right? They would need to study something to develop their abilities I am guessing, no?
And aside from dragon blood, where else can the magical power of sorcerers come from? Pacts with spirits generations before? Other mythical creatures? Or just pure accident?
_________________
"Edwin do this, Edwin do that. Somebody get this jerk a banana!" - Edwin, BG II
Valygar 'Stonesnake' Stark -Human Ranger
Garret Smith - Archer and peddler of deity-statuettes
Dáin Saltbeard - Dwarven sailor and fencer. No, I'm not joking.
|
|
|
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 54 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Login
