EEPC Races and SCAG Deities Lists

[Bob_no_Oni]

I have a question for everyone. I know that you can't use both the EEPC and the SCAG together. However, I was wondering if you were able to take a race, like say Earth Genasi, from the EEPC and use the deities lists from the SCAG for making a cleric? I am looking mainly at say making the Elemental Gods clerics, but just wondering in general. Thanks.

 

[kalani]

While this would be harmless, sadly the rule does not allow this. To simplify the ruling: if you choose the EEPC for your character, the SCAG does not exist for that character. You can't choose anything from it, no matter how harmless. If you choose the SCAG, the EEPC and PotA appendixes don't exist for that character.

The rule does not make exceptions for mixing even the deity list. It is an either or situation with no exceptions.

 

[Rhogar_Rarr]

"Races or other options that are mentioned but whose rules are found in another source (i.e. aasimar or genasi) do not become legal without other campaign documentation unless that source is also legal for your character’s story origin."
http://dndadventurersleague.org/the-sword-coast-adventurers-guide-and-you/

If it's a legal race for your story origin, it sounds like you can be that race and pick from the SCAG. However, you cannot use anything else from the EEPC. But that's just my personal interpretation.

 

[Pauper]

"Races or other options that are mentioned but whose rules are found in another source (i.e. aasimar or genasi) do not become legal without other campaign documentation unless that source is also legal for your character’s story origin."
http://dndadventurersleague.org/the-sword-coast-adventurers-guide-and-you/

If it's a legal race for your story origin, it sounds like you can be that race and pick from the SCAG. However, you cannot use anything else from the EEPC. But that's just my personal interpretation.

That's a bit of a reach -- what the rule is actually saying is that, if the race is mentioned in the SCAG, but the rules for that race are in another source, you may only take that race if it is legal for your character's story origin. So you can't be a Rage of Demons genasi by claiming you're using the SCAG as your rules source, since the rules for genasi aren't in the SCAG; they're in the EEPG, so you have to be an Elemental Evil genasi with the EEPG as your rules source, which eliminates the SCAG.

Contrast this with the deep gnome, which does have rules in the SCAG -- so you could be a Rage of Demons deep gnome by taking the SCAG as your rules source, or an Elemental Evil deep gnome by taking the EEPG as your rules source. (That the two races appear to be mechanically equivalent is irrelevant -- the point is you're choosing your rules source by choosing which deep gnome you want to be.)

As a DM, I wouldn't have a problem if you wanted to choose a deity from the SCAG list for your Elemental Evil character; it's not as though the gods are different based on what season you're playing. That would be like saying you couldn't have an EE character from Aglarond, since Aglarond isn't mentioned in either the PH or the EEPG. With that said, I likely would not allow an EE character using the EEPG as a rules source to take the Arcane domain, since that domain only exists in the SCAG; since every AL cleric has the option to take the Life domain regardless of deity choice, this isn't as big a problem as it might be otherwise.

--
Pauper

 

[Rhogar_Rarr]

It may be a bit of a reach, but I still believe some argument can be made as it is written. However, I understand that this is probably not their intent and I personally agree with your points.

Anyway, I don't think any of the DMs that I've personally come across would ban your character for picking a deity you liked. Rather, they would compliment you for doing your research and creating an interesting character. It's not like your trying to power-game or break the system with unseen combos; you're just making an interesting character.

 

[skerritthegreen]

It may be a bit of a reach, but I still believe some argument can be made as it is written. However, I understand that this is probably not their intent and I personally agree with your points.

That is correct your original comment/argument is not our intent. The intent of the wording is to future proof future seasons. For example, lets say there is a future season that is underwater and we decide to make water genasi playable for everyone. The wording is intended to allow you to use the SCAG and pick a water genasi, even though its rules are in a different book because in my hypothetical example, they are legal for that story origin.

 

[Rhogar_Rarr]

That is correct your original comment/argument is not our intent. The intent of the wording is to future proof future seasons. For example, lets say there is a future season that is underwater and we decide to make water genasi playable for everyone. The wording is intended to allow you to use the SCAG and pick a water genasi, even though its rules are in a different book because in my hypothetical example, they are legal for that story origin.

Thanks for clarifying, since apparently I was confused as well. Your hypothetical example also sounds like lots of fun by the way.