D&D General Nay-Theists Vs. Flat-Earth Atheists in D&D Worlds

[Blue]

This thread is meant to have a general discussion about having Nay-Theist and Flat-Earth Atheist characters in campaigns...

As a side note, your links are going through DnDBeyond before heading off to their final destination.

 

[Mistwell]

Oddly, I think 1e AD&D was more conducive to the athiest flat-earthers, because of the Deities and Demigods book. By providing stats for deities, it turned into another way of saying "this is just a really tough foe who you can still kill if you get to a high enough level and acquire the sufficient magical tools and weapons to do it."

 

[SehanineMoonbow]

I prefer the settings where the existence of the gods is fact (Forgotten Realms, Exandria). I'm big on afterlife stuff (tell me where the souls go!). In FR, nay-theists would probably get Walled, but in Exandria (from my understanding), nay-theists may be more common, and there isn't a punishment for them--at least as long as they were otherwise decent people. I think souls go to the appropriate god/plane.

Personally (and I may get some flak for this), playing a non-theist cleric or paladin should be a setting-based option. It works for settings like Eberron, but less so for settings like Forgotten Realms, so I don't think it should be an "all-settings" option. People seem to get bent out of shape over deities, when they're fine with every other fantastical thing in D&D. Why can't there be gods, and thus clerics and paladins who receive spells from them? I'm not particularly religious irl, but that doesn't mean I don't enjoy deities in fantasy worlds. Indeed, I think they enrich the world.

It's a one off tweet that didn't get a lot of engagement, but it might be an indication that the Wall might not be a thing going forward.

This particularly Tweet may not have gotten much attention, but an errata from the Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide did. The paragraph on the afterlife originally contained a single sentence mentioning the Wall, but that has been omitted. This caused several discussions in FR circles. So far, it's just an omission, and there hasn't been any further explanation.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

As a side note, your links are going through DnDBeyond before heading off to their final destination.

Okay. I'll try to fix that.

 

[Charlaquin]

This seems to be conflating powerful supernatural entity with god.

Other than whether or not you worship it, what’s the difference?

If there is a supernaturally powerful but false god,

False by what metric?

an efreeti or demon or something similar claiming to be a god, and you acknowledge it is a powerful supernatural entity but don't consider it a god and don't worship it, are you a nay-theist?

Not if there are other entities you do believe in and worship as gods. If you don’t believe any supernatural entities are gods worthy of worship? Then yeah, though the efreet isn’t unique in not-being-worshipped-by-you.

 

[Voadam]

It seems like Ao the Overgod (and possibly the Luxon from Exandria) is/(are) basically the only deity/(deities) that would fit their definition of being a true god.

I think you missed the morally worthy of worship criteria.

 

[Levistus's_Leviathan]

I think you missed the morally worthy of worship criteria.

How is Ao not "morally worthy" of worship? Or the Luxon?

 

[Charlaquin]

Oddly, I think 1e AD&D was more conducive to the atiest flat-earthers, because of the Deities and Demigods book. But providing stats for deities, it turned into another way of saying "this is just a really tough foe who you can still kill if you get to a high enough level and acquire the sufficient magical tools and weapons to do it."

I would say that justifies nay-theistic beliefs. A flat-earth atheist would be someone who doesn’t believe the entities those stat blocks represent exist at all.

 

[Voadam]

Other than whether or not you worship it, what’s the difference?

False by what metric?

Not if there are other entities you do believe in and worship as gods. If you don’t believe any supernatural entities are gods worthy of worship? Then yeah, though the efreet isn’t unique in not-being-worshipped-by-you.

I am just trying to figure out your point of view here.

It seems to be that any supernatural being is a god, but the defining factor is a supernatural being who is worshipped.

So the world with one efreet who is worshipped and no other supernatural beings is a world with a god.

No requirement for a concept of the divine or sacredness separate from being supernatural.

Not the standard D&D one of gods being a subset of supernatural divine beings (excluding non-divine supernatural beings and lesser divine beings such as angels).

 

[Mistwell]

I would say that justifies nay-theistic beliefs. A flat-earth atheist would be someone who doesn’t believe the entities those stat blocks represent exist at all.

You know they exist, you just don't think they're deities. Instead, they're just really high level monsters or NPCs posing as a god. It's godhood you're disbeliving.