Cleric of Gruumsh in a party with an Elf

[Riley37]

Churchill ALLIED with Stalin. Some things transcend hatred. Survival tends to be that thing.

That is exactly why I used this particular comparison - thank you for noticing!

Churchill allied with Stalin against Hitler. Gruumsh might become aware of an imminent threat from Nyarlathotep, and thus decide to ally with Corellon Larethian. If Gruumsh and Corellon have each other blocked on direct messaging, then Gruumsh might actively WANT a cleric who's in the same party as an elf, to establish a line of negotiation, on the basis of that cleric and that elf working together on a smaller scale.

My current main PC is paladin of Ancients and warlock with Archfey patron, in the same party as a warlock with Raven Queen patron. The two patrons have a shared enemy, a necromancer is an offense against life itself (according to the Archfey) and a threat to death itself (according to the Raven Queen). If those two can work together...


See also, Darmok and Jelad at Tanagra.

 

[Riley37]

Gruumsh and Corellon might agree to back off in the face of some other problem, and coincidentally the PCs happen to be their chosen group of problem-solvers. What might that problem be? The group can cogitate on that a bit. Maybe Asmodeus is stealing souls that belong to the other gods; maybe the Far Realm threatens to burst into the universe; maybe a number of Primordials are going to break loose rapid-fire and even the gods cannot be everywhere at once.

That's what I had in mind, when I compared Gruumsh's hatred of Corellon to Churchill's hatred of Stalin.

 

[Oofta]

There's a lot of ways to spin that. First of all, Gruumsh's rep basically comes from what was writ' about him BY THE ELVES (at least in most campaigns, and usually what humans know came via that route). Could be that the orcs have a different story. Now, they're typically depicted as a modestly depraved bunch of CE 'barbarians', but that too may just be PR, orcs aren't known to be good at that.

My point is, the GM, assuming he's not locked into some specific lore, is free to interpret Gruumsh and the orcs and the elves in various ways. It might be quite interesting to get the orcish point of view on things!

Yes, the DM is free to craft the world the way they want. Elves could be evil, orcs could be noble savages, etc. That may even be an interesting take on the world. But the OP made no indication that they're changing those things for their world.

Unless the DM specifies otherwise, I'm assuming they're following standard cosmology and assumptions, and anyone being a cleric of Gruumsh (unless evil characters are OK) is running a character that should at some point come into the conflict with everyone else unless gods are simply a superficial label.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Unless the DM specifies otherwise, I'm assuming they're following standard cosmology and assumptions, and anyone being a cleric of Gruumsh (unless evil characters are OK) is running a character that should at some point come into the conflict with everyone else unless gods are simply a superficial label.

And therein lies the disagreement. You and others see each god and what is important to them as back-and-white, others of us see possible shades of grey (even with a god like Gruumsh). So all that's left is for [MENTION=6819400]WarpedAcorn[/MENTION] to decide what to do with their player now that they've received the requested feedback from the rest of us of what could/should/would be possibly done.

 

[Maxperson]

And therein lies the disagreement. You and others see each god and what is important to them as back-and-white, others of us see possible shades of grey (even with a god like Gruumsh). So all that's left is for [MENTION=6819400]WarpedAcorn[/MENTION] to decide what to do with their player now that they've received the requested feedback from the rest of us of what could/should/would be possibly done.

Gods are basically forces of nature. They stand for what they stand for. You aren't going to see Thor taking on some weakling who doesn't like weather just because the guy's last name is Storm and Thor is the god of Storms. There's a bit of leeway. Some clerics might favor thunderstorms, others tornados or lightning storms, but the deviation isn't going to so severe that a god who hates humans and elves is going to be all hunky dory with humans and elves. That's not a "shade of grey". It's a blatant change to the nature of that god, which is fine if you let everyone know that you just re-wrote Gruumsh.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Gods are basically forces of nature. They stand for what they stand for. You aren't going to see Thor taking on some weakling who doesn't like weather just because the guy's last name is Storm and Thor is the god of Storms. There's a bit of leeway. Some clerics might favor thunderstorms, others tornados or lightning storms, but the deviation isn't going to so severe that a god who hates humans and elves is going to be all hunky dory with humans and elves. That's not a "shade of grey". It's a blatant change to the nature of that god, which is fine if you let everyone know that you just re-wrote Gruumsh.

But gods don't relate to their followers directly. Especially not when their followers are like in tiers 1-3. Clerics and other religious folk might receive divine magic, but they have no idea who actually is *giving* it to them. Sometimes it might be avatars, some times it might be the angelic servitors of the gods. Which means none of them have a direct line to their supreme being to get it straight from the horses mouth what the god actually wants. As a result, people do what people do... they make their own decisions about what they think is right. And often times they will disagree.

I mean heck... how many different sects of Christianity are there? Dozens upon dozens. And every single one thinks they have the "right" ideas about what God wants and expects. And even when certain individuals received direct communication from God, everyone after them still argued about the communication, generations past that then misinterpreted things, and then even got into holy wars about it.

So like I said... you might run things black-and-white where a god says and wants one thing and one thing only, and every single worshipper knows exactly what that is and they all walk in lockstep to the same exact drummer to make sure that one thing is done. The god speaks, the cleric answers with no misinterpretation. Which is fine! Go nuts!

But don't think for a moment that every other person thinks and does run their gods in that way. Because some of us feel that running the human (and humanoid) beings that worship those gods that way is kinda ridiculous.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I know for one that my Gods are completely alien and whimsical. The faith around them is based of the human interpretation of the few things they think they understand about this all powerful being. Some time the tenets of faith are based on a good understanding of a small part of a god's agenda, sometime they are the construct of a wrongful interpretation by the human mind of their god's true will.

Also, even gods can change their mind, they are not absolute in their will. A good exemplar? What was the agenda of Grummsh before its fight with Corellon? He had a personality before he changed its mind toward full-on hatred of the elves. Jergaal grew tired of its agenda and gave it away. In 4e, Nusenmee was the evil lesser goddess of assassin, daughter of Zehir, before she changed her mind and became the good aligned goddess of redemption; yet part of her original followers followed her on her path of redemption while other stayed evil-aligned with the faith that the goddess was only infiltrating the good pantheon to assassinate another god. Both of those groups still had their prayers answered.

 

[Oofta]

And therein lies the disagreement. You and others see each god and what is important to them as back-and-white, others of us see possible shades of grey (even with a god like Gruumsh). So all that's left is for [MENTION=6819400]WarpedAcorn[/MENTION] to decide what to do with their player now that they've received the requested feedback from the rest of us of what could/should/would be possibly done.

If you're modifying some basic assumptions of D&D, that's fine. But without preconceptions or changes, D&D is pretty black and white.

But now we're in "you're wrong! No you are!" territory. Run the game you and your players want and it's probably a good idea to have a session 0 to discuss this kind of stuff.

Not much more to add.

 

[Eltab]

Churchill ALLIED with Stalin. Some things transcend hatred. Survival tends to be that thing.

Churchill had good reason to be against Communism.
- The 'bloody cellar of Ekaterinberg' (Communists executed the entire family of the Czar, to prevent any possibility of a future Romanov leading opposition to the Communists, even if only a figurehead).
- Stated desire on part of Communist Party to eliminate the nobles and lords class.
- Churchill was the heir to the Duke of Marlborough. Therefore he was on their List too.
Survival, personal.

"My purpose is the defeat of Hitler, and my life is much simplified thereby. If Hitler invaded Hell, I would at least make a favorable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons."
Survival, national: collect an alliance, preferably with other powerful nations.

 

[Riley37]

Churchill had good reason to be against Communism.

George Orwell examined many of the same events from a different angle; I find the comparison interesting.