D&D General The Role and Purpose of Evil Gods

[Maxperson]

The only people who get cleric spells are clerics, since every spellcasting class (not spellcasting archetype) gets their own spell list. It's not like in, say 2e, where druids got priest spells, but only from certain spheres.

This is only true for PCs. NPCs don't follow PC rules, so they have no class to have a list with. They're just assigned a list as needed by the DM or designers. They are not assigned a class.

No, the Cult Fanatic isn't a 1:1 match to the cleric, but neither is the Priest that is present in the MM; they effectively have a paladin's smite ability (spend a spell slot to increase damage). So, keeping in mind that NPCs don't have to use PC classes or rules, there's nothing in the Cult Fanatic that says that it's not a cleric, and everything to say that it is.

Right. This is because they have no class, so they have no class lists. While there is nothing to say explicitly that the cultist is not a cleric, there is also nothing to say that it is. This is again because it's an NPC and the MM NPCs don't use classes. You can't assume that just because the NPC uses cleric spells that it's a cleric.

The DMG says this about Adventurer NPCs: "NPC supporting characters are easier to play if you limit their class options. Good candidates for supporting characters include a cleric with the Life domain, a fighter with the Champion archetype, a rogue with the Thief archetype, and a wizard specializing in Evocation."

Which means that NPCs may not be built using PC rules, but they are considered to have PC classes.

Sure. Those are specifically built with classes in mind, though, which the MM NPCs are not. The DMG is giving advice to the DM on the various ways to build an NPC, including as an actual PC class.

Also, neither the cultist nor the priest are adventuring NPCs, so they wouldn't use that method in any case. Adventuring NPCs are those who join the PC party as an NPC and need more details than your typical NPC. For the cultist and the priest you would refer to the section on NPC statistics. Under that section you can see that Appendix B NPCs from the MM are NOT adventuring NPCs, but rather Monster Block NPCs as discussed in he NPC Statistics section.

 

[Chaosmancer]

It's a D&D-General thread therefore older-edition material is, I think, fair game.

And why wouldn't it help you in 5e? Even if nothing else, DDG gives you some basic info about each deity and a comparision of relative power levels etc. vs each other; though if your intent is to port these deities/pantheons into 5e obviously you'd need to change the actual numbers a bit.

That said, there's a few TSR-official 2e books which are even better. Faiths and Avatars is one, and I forget the title of the other: one book deals with human pantheons and deities while the other looks at demihuman pantheons and deities.

This has ranged far afield from the original point.

The original discussion was me being told that "Loki" is core to DnD because he is in the 5e PHB. But, he is no more Core than Amaterasu. Sure, reading the DDG or F&A would give you general info on the pantheons... but so would reading wikipedia or Shinto Kami: Deities of Japanese Shinto.

 

[Helldritch]

Then I am curious why you declared "That's between you and him. I'm not sure why you want to argue with me about it." when the question of why the discussion that was being had was being had. That seems to have plenty to do with where the conversation started, since that is what I was talking about immediately before you said this.



We assume optional rules all the time. And since our discussion is more about the general, then demonstrating that the rules were not only perfectly fine with, but had sections to continue utilizing Archfiends as basically gods is relevant.



And by RAW a Cultist who worships a Elemental Prince, Demon Lord or Archdevil has clerical magic. Also, that wuote has some interesting phrasing doesn't it? Between the mortal world and "the distant planes of the gods". Not the gods themselves, but their planes.

Where does the Goddess Tiamat reside? The Nine Hells.
Where does the Goddess Lolth reside? The Abyss.

And I'm sure we can track down many, many more. So, we don't need gods to have clerics, per that quote you just gave. It is their planes that they are acting as intermediaries to.



Well, I guess that depends. How many have joined a cult in her name and worship at a shrine with her image? People from the Cult of Orcus do that, and the Cult of Graz'zt and the Cult of Mammon and the Cult of Fiernia. These are all real religious organizations in DnD. So, your "especially when it comes to fiends" is a bit disengenious, because they ARE worshiped as religious idols.



I've read the lists. They are quite extensive, and I'm sure they are not comprehensive for all of DnD ever published.

Ok. So why do all cultists in prince of the Apocalypse that are worshipping elemental lords are either sorcerers or warlocks and none are clerics? This is 5ed. They worship the elemental lords. These lords are even at the end of the adventure and you have to fight one. Yet, none are clerics...

 

[Helldritch]

This has ranged far afield from the original point.

The original discussion was me being told that "Loki" is core to DnD because he is in the 5e PHB. But, he is no more Core than Amaterasu. Sure, reading the DDG or F&A would give you general info on the pantheons... but so would reading wikipedia or Shinto Kami: Deities of Japanese Shinto.

No it would not. You would not have the basic domain spell related to their portfolio and might even be "forced" to retcon your decision if they were printed on a subsequent book. But Loki is already in the PHB. There is your difference. With Loki, we all have a common reference point. Not with those that are not printed yet.

Edit: And the original point is not what you say but the relevance of evil gods when we have fiends already. Do not get side tracked as I was.

 

[Mirtek]

If/When D&D 5th edition or 6th edition introduces a completely new original setting, an extremely inconsistent power source and cosmology will likely not be tolerated by the ultra critical fandoms of today since they'd expect more of designers today.

Given their current direction I'd expect the exact opposite. Don't nail anything down, be as vague as you can get away with it still being a "setting", not shackle yourself to any canon way of how things work

 

[Minigiant]

Given their current direction I'd expect the exact opposite. Don't nail anything down, be as vague as you can get away with it still being a "setting", not shackle yourself to any canon way of how things work

Oh that would be the easiest way for avoid criticism of a setting directly.

But vague doesn't sell settings. Vague sells adventures. Concrete sells settings.

My point is if WOTC tried to make a loose pantheon of defined powers, they would get murdered if they didn't focus on consistency and nailing down the background of the world. Evil Gods as Rogue's Gallery only works these days if the villains are engaging.

Although having lot of different bad guys to fight every session/adventure/campaign is fun, the beauty is when the bad guys are truly different.

 

[Mirtek]

if they didn't focus on consistency and nailing down the background of the world.

But what if next week or in two month they have a neat idea for an adventure that would not work with the consistent nailed down background? Can't have themselves tie their hands like that. no no no

 

[Maxperson]

Then I am curious why you declared "That's between you and him. I'm not sure why you want to argue with me about it." when the question of why the discussion that was being had was being had. That seems to have plenty to do with where the conversation started, since that is what I was talking about immediately before you said this.

I responded to certain things, none of which were "every setting is homebrew." THAT portion was just you and him and shouldn't have been brought up with me, since my response had nothing to do with that aspect.

We assume optional rules all the time. And since our discussion is more about the general, then demonstrating that the rules were not only perfectly fine with, but had sections to continue utilizing Archfiends as basically gods is relevant.

And that's one reason you things wrong so often. You cannot assume any optional rule is in play. Rules discussions are about the default rules, not optional rules. Unless the discussing is specifically about a specific optional rule OR optional rules in general.

And by RAW a Cultist who worships a Elemental Prince, Demon Lord or Archdevil has clerical magic.

No. They use the cleric list. They are explicitly do not have character classes, being an NPC using the Monster Block(per DMG page 92) method of creation and not the Adventuring NPC method.

Where does the Goddess Tiamat reside? The Nine Hells.
Where does the Goddess Lolth reside? The Abyss.

Good God. That's a tortured reading. This should help clear that up.

"Divine magic, as the name suggests, is the power of the gods, flowing from them into the world. Clerics are conduits for that power, manifesting it as miraculous effects. The gods don't grant this power to everyone who seeks it, but only to those chosen to fulfill a high calling."

It's the god's power and they grant it.

 

[pemerton]

The Cult Fanatic also isn't necessarily a cleric. Bards can have cure spells, despite being arcane and not divine. It would make sense that the cultist spells are divine as a power source, but that doesn't mean that they are clerics or get their spells directly from the Archdevil they follow, rather than from belief or some other way.

Here are the special abiities of the Cult Fanatic from the SRD:

Dark Devotion. The fanatic has advantage on saving throws against being charmed or frightened.​

​

Spellcasting. The fanatic is a 4th--‐level spellcaster. Its spellcasting ability is Wisdom (spell save DC 11, +3 to hit with spell attacks). The fanatic has the following cleric spells prepared:​

​

Cantrips (at will): light, sacred flame, thaumaturgy​

​

1st level (4 slots): command, inflict wounds, shield of faith​

​

2nd level (3 slots): hold person, spiritual weapon​

That looks to me like a cleric, not a bard!

EDIT: mostly ninja'd by @Faolyn.

 

[Chaosmancer]

This is only true for PCs. NPCs don't follow PC rules, so they have no class to have a list with. They're just assigned a list as needed by the DM or designers. They are not assigned a class.

Right. This is because they have no class, so they have no class lists. While there is nothing to say explicitly that the cultist is not a cleric, there is also nothing to say that it is. This is again because it's an NPC and the MM NPCs don't use classes. You can't assume that just because the NPC uses cleric spells that it's a cleric.

Sure. Those are specifically built with classes in mind, though, which the MM NPCs are not. The DMG is giving advice to the DM on the various ways to build an NPC, including as an actual PC class.

Also, neither the cultist nor the priest are adventuring NPCs, so they wouldn't use that method in any case. Adventuring NPCs are those who join the PC party as an NPC and need more details than your typical NPC. For the cultist and the priest you would refer to the section on NPC statistics. Under that section you can see that Appendix B NPCs from the MM are NOT adventuring NPCs, but rather Monster Block NPCs as discussed in he NPC Statistics section.

I ended up asking about this, so I'm going to jump in here.

Your position is that a worshiper of a being, who gets cleric spells from that being, specifically clerical spells that are only on the cleric spell list, like Inflict Wounds, can't be considered a cleric? Because "NPCs operate by different rules"?

Well, that certainly is a stance that A) has no basis in anything and B) Suddenly turns this discussion on it's head. Because now you are saying that only PCs can be clerics. Meaning that the idea that Evil Gods make evil Clerics would be limited entirely to players playing evil clerics. Which is not anything we have discussed before.



We have a statblock of a worshiper of an Archfiend, who gets clerical spells. That is irrefutable.