D&D 5E Everybody's got to have a Patron deity. Where did it come from?

[Caliban]

It's a recurrent meme. Not that I like to play like that, but I've seen it many times. Some DMs that insist you fill up that space, even if playing on a homebrew setting and some people I've played with consider it a necessary thing to have a complete character. And like [MENTION=6775031]Saelorn[/MENTION] said, many character sheets, fanmade and official feature Deity on a very visible place.
Recently [MENTION=6778044]Ilbranteloth[/MENTION] mentioned in the FR thread that "everybody picks a patron" is intrinsic to D&D and not a Realms thing, and it got me wondering about where did it come from.

It's a very common assumption, and has been over multiple editions. I just don't think it's ever been required.

The gods are known to exist as a matter of fact, not a matter of faith. They are known to reward their faithful in the here and now, and presumably reward you in the afterlife with a place in their domain.

Thus it is assumed that most people (NPC's especially) will choose to have a patron deity. It's the most reasonable course of action.

 

[Fanaelialae]

It's a very common assumption, and has been over multiple editions. I just don't think it's ever been required.

The gods are known to exist as a matter of fact, not a matter of faith. They are known to reward their faithful in the here and now, and presumably reward you in the afterlife with a place in their domain.

Thus it is assumed that most people (NPC's especially) will choose to have a patron deity. It's the most reasonable course of action.

Of course, there are exceptions such as Eberron, where the existence/nature of deities is far more mysterious. IIRC, divine magic arises from faith, and a corrupt church official or insane zealot is just as likely to be able to perform miracles as a candidate for sainthood is. It's my preferred approach, as it reflects a more RL definition of faith (believing as opposed to knowing). It's by no means the classic D&D assumption though.

 

[hastur_nz]

The fact that there's a space for one's Deity or whatever, in your Character Sheet, is meaningless. You can put whatever you want in that space, including nothing at all, or multiple things.

 

[see]

Originally it came from the AD&D 1st edition Deities & Demigods/Legends & Lore, page 5, which said, "The gods serve an important purpose for the players as well. Serving a deity is a significant part of AD&D, and all player characters should have a patron god." This contradicted previous practice strongly enough that it is often suspected it was included just to try to convince people the book was necessary.

Then nobody really paid it any attention until it was mentioned in the novel Prince of Lies, which created the whole you-get-tortured-for-eternity-if-you-didn't-have-one idea, was made prominent in FR game books (especially the 3e FRCS), and still has a lingering half-life despite efforts to downplay it in (for example) Ed Greenwood Presents Elminster's Forgotten Realms.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Which, like any form that has "Children:" with a blank after it, simply allows someone to write in "none" if they wish. Otherwise, based on this statement, the existence of forms with "Children:" on them would presuppose that everyone must have children!

If that's the logic you want to use, then it would be the only such space on the entire character sheet which worked that way. Every other field expects to have some sort of value. Barring extremely strange exceptions, you can't have a character without a Name or Class or Eyes.

 

[Staccat0]

If that's the logic you want to use, then it would be the only such space on the entire character sheet which worked that way. Every other field expects to have some sort of value. Barring extremely strange exceptions, you can't have a character without a Name or Class or Eyes.

I have a character without a name in my campaign. He wrote it in a magic book that erases things from history without knowing what he was doing. I'd also happily let you play a character with no eyes if you promise you won't let it bog down the game.

Heck, I won't even make you draw a portrait, and I'll even let you leave your spell list blank if you play a fighter.

 

[Chaosmancer]

One aspect of it is a logical extension of the mythos.


Why did pretty much all Greek Sailors make offerings to Poseidon? Because your life and livelihood depended on his good will.


So it follows with deities for farming or commerce as well, you take them on as your patron because what you do in life tends to revolve around their sphere of influence.


Then you can have vows and things like that. I had an NPC mob boss (this did not end well but I thought it was an interesting idea) who had made a vow to the god of healing in exchange for his son's miraculous recovery from a serious illness. In exchange, he wouldn't kill someone or order someone killed for a year and a day. You could imagine the child growing up and perhaps taking the god of healing as his patron, because he literally owes his life to that church.



Eventually it gets to the point where the question isn't "Why do you have a patron deity" and the question is instead "Why don't you have a patron deity" because there are so many reasons you would have one. Even if it is simply that you identify as a worshiper of this deity because your parents or grandparents were devout so that's your default even if you never pray , go to church, or where any iconography.

 

[Mirtek]

Originally it came from the AD&D 1st edition Deities & Demigods/Legends & Lore, page 5, which said, "The gods serve an important purpose for the players as well. Serving a deity is a significant part of AD&D, and all player characters should have a patron god." This contradicted previous practice strongly enough that it is often suspected it was included just to try to convince people the book was necessary.

Then nobody really paid it any attention until it was mentioned in the novel Prince of Lies, which created the whole you-get-tortured-for-eternity-if-you-didn't-have-one idea, was made prominent in FR game books (especially the 3e FRCS), and still has a lingering half-life despite efforts to downplay it in (for example) Ed Greenwood Presents Elminster's Forgotten Realms.

That sums it up. Note that during 3.x FR there was an actual mechanical penalty for not having one: the windows during which you could be resurrected was only xdx days for characters without a patron deity instead of the normal limits of the spells. If that much time passed the character's sould had been judged and became a brick in the wall and normal resurrection magic was not powerful enough to free it.

 

[Sadras]

If that's the logic you want to use, then it would be the only such space on the entire character sheet which worked that way. Every other field expects to have some sort of value. Barring extremely strange exceptions, you can't have a character without a Name or Class or Eyes.

Not strictly true.

Treasure: None
Equipment: None
Weapons: None
Armour: None
Hair (Length + Colour): None
Retainers: None
Loyalties: None
Feats: None
Spells: None
Notes: None
...etc

 

[Li Shenron]

But how did it go from that to "Everybody and their dog must have a patron deity"? Is it a recent thing? Is it very old? Did it come from a setting like Forgotten Realms or was it always a "core" D&D thing?[/B][/COLOR]

It's not a core rule in 5e, and I am not even sure it was in previous editions. It is enforced only in specific fantasy settings.

I used to think that this came from Forgotten Realms, because of some cosmic rule that if someone doesn't have a patron deity, when they die they are guaranteed a bad place for eternity (the "Wall of the Faithless"), compared to which maybe even Hell or Abyss leaves some hope that you can get some freedom (or a career) out of it.