D&D 5E Atheism in DnD

[Green1]

Well, it would be hard to deny the existence of gods in a world where clerics are granted powers.

BUT... the "atheist" PC could see gods as just incredibly powerful badasses that are not necessarily worthy of sucking up to and can be killed. Or, maybe he or she just despises temples.

 

[neobolts]

I've heard the call for the atheist PC, and unless you are running a unique setting that allows for it, I generally think it is a garbage idea.

Denying the gods that actively participate in the world makes as much sense as denying the existence of dragons, wizards, or guys with pointy swords.

Thinking the gods are not worthy of praise is another matter. D&D gods aren't all-powerful. They have stats and can be killed. Of course, if your character is going to go around proclaiming that, they might be better off living in Sigil or on Athas. Zeus can be hard to get along with unless you are immune to lightning and/or hot and bothered for ducks.

 

[Cristian Andreu]

Changing the definition of what a deity is is moving the goal posts. That doesn't fly.

First, we have to recognize that deities factually exist in most D&D cosmologies. Every book calls them deities. Every stat block lists them as deities. The DM and players, external to the imaginary universe of the game, know that these entities being deities is as factual as the Dex bonus an Elf gets, or the d8 damage a sword deals. It's not a matter for us as players to debate whether or not they *are* deities. By definition they are. They do gain power when worshiped. They have dominion, sometimes absolute dominion, over some realm of existence. They are literally de jure deities because the rulebook says they are. However you choose to define "deity" you have to include these entities in that definition or you've fundamentally altered the cosmology of the campaign setting.

The question, then, is, "How can a character who does not know the truth establish the truth?"

There is a canonical basis for questioning the nature of a deity, set by Planescape, first by manifesting the conflict presented by the fact multiple entities claimed divine rule over the exact same things (I remember there being at least two different gods of pools, like four of sleep, and over thirty of war), and then by philosophical schools like the Athar (who believed gods were simply very powerful entities) and the Signers (who believed everything was within their own heads).

So while not every setting has to conform to Planescapes's interpretation, considering how it was the default cosmology during the latter years of AD&D, there is a basis within the game itself that asserted the posibility of nuances with terms like "god", "deity", and "divine" (hence the use of the word "power" in PS to describe the lot of them).

 

[Umbran]

Well, it would be hard to deny the existence of gods in a world where clerics are granted powers.

See previous statement - when there are clerics with the same abilities who *don't* have gods (the rules allowing for clerics to just pick domains and paladins to follow principles of their own code, but still have spells), then the existence or status of gods becomes questionable.

 

[Staffan]

Another question is how much the gods affect the natural world. Let's take a coastal village. Are fisherman who pray to the Sea God rewarded with larger catches?

I seem to remember an optional rule from 3e FR where a character could sacrifice to her patron deity and get a small bonus to something at a later date. However, I can't locate that rule at the moment - it might have been in an online article or web enhancement or something.

 

[aramis erak]

See previous statement - when there are clerics with the same abilities who *don't* have gods (the rules allowing for clerics to just pick domains and paladins to follow principles of their own code, but still have spells), then the existence or status of gods becomes questionable.

Looking at Spelljammer, Clerics of non-deities never got better than 2nd level spells, or was it third. Likewise, clerics whose god had no direct parallel also got limited spells back.

5E doesn't make the same assumption.

In Spelljammer setting versions, clerics had a surefire way to test - clerics without a god couldn't raise the dead, because they couldn't get high enough level spells.

Likewise, it's axiomatic in older editions that gods hear all prayers invoking them, but may choose not to do anything about them.

5E (as yet) sets no clear such limits. One can, however, use high level spells to go find the spirits of the dead, and ask them directly. One can also meet a deity and ask them if they got a specific prayer made from another plane.

 

[Umbran]

Looking at Spelljammer, Clerics of non-deities never got better than 2nd level spells, or was it third. Likewise, clerics whose god had no direct parallel also got limited spells back.

5E doesn't make the same assumption.

Meanwhile, in 3e, you most certainly could play a cleric without a god. The real point being: it is game/setting specific, not a generalization across all of D&D.

One can, however, use high level spells to go find the spirits of the dead, and ask them directly.

Ah, but then you have the question - are they answering with "universal truth" or "truth as they understand it"? Are you even certain of *what* it is you speak to when you use such a spell?

One can also meet a deity and ask them if they got a specific prayer made from another plane.

"That could happen to someone, in theory" is not a good basis for "what is reasonable for people in the world to believe".

 

[rollingForInit]

I think being an atheist in someplace like the Forgotten Realms is practically impossible ... but in a homebrew campaign we had a Bard once, who rejected the gods. This bard thought they were either meddling where they didn't belong, or didn't interfere enough (I don't recall which). Basically, he disliked, and didn't worship them.

I think that's as close to atheism as you get. Thinking that the gods aren't worth worship, for whatever reason.