D&D General The Role and Purpose of Evil Gods

[Maxperson]

The Appendix B domains associated with each god in the various D&D pantheons are explicitly only suggestions.

The PH and DMG overall read to me as saying individual gods have defined associated domains but that there are not official domains for any specific gods, just suggestions for the defined domains that a god has and therefore this is a campaign specific decision for each campaign, including one using a defined D&D pantheons from Appendix B.

So one DM using Greyhawk Vecna and saying he has the Trickery domain in their 5e Greyhawk setting campaign is as in compliance with official D&D rules as one saying he does not have the Trckery domain in their separate 5e Greyhawk campaign.

Similar to numerous aspects of 5e grid combat, 5e leaves it up to the DM.

Absolutely. The DM can add or remove domains as he sees fit. I'd add Arcane to Azuth for example. Seems like Arcane would be a good fit for a god of wizards.

PH page 58 "Each domain is detailed at the end of the class description, and each one provides examples of gods associated with it."

PH Page 59 "Each domain's description gives examples of deities who have influence over that domain."

"Examples" seems like it means a selected set of illustrative iconic examples and not an exclusive list.

The context though, is in examples of which gods have those domains. For instance your first page quote there gives examples of gods who are associated with that domain, while the second gives examples of gods who have influence of the domain. The non-exclusivity implied there is in the incompleteness of the list of gods in the examples, not whether the gods listed have those domains.

Page 60 under the life domain "Almost any non-evil deity can claim influence over this domain, particularly agricultural deities (such as Chauntea, Arawai, and Demeter), sun gods (such as Lathander, Pelor, and Re-Horakhty), gods of healing or endurance (such as IImater, Mishakal, Apollo, and Diancecht), and gods of home and community (such as Hestia, Hathor, and Boldrei)."

Page 62 "Gods of trickery-such as"

PH page 293 "Many deities in this section suggest the Life domain, particularly if they are closely associated with healing, protection, childbirth, nurturing, or fertility. As described in the chapter 3, though, the Life domain is incredibly broad, and a cleric of any non-evil deity can choose it.
A number of other deities, mostly evil ones, suggest the Death domain, which is detailed in the Dungeon Master's Guide. Most clerics who choose this domain are evil NPCs, but if you want to worship a god of death, consult your Dungeon Master."

Sure. It's a non-exhaustive list of gods, but as you note, it's up to the DM to add a domain to a god, not the player. The player only has the suggested domains to pick from unless the DM adds more.

 

[Helldritch]

So, because the DM can choose to add new domains, the book added new domains for the DM that they didn't get to pick, but they didn't do it for all the gods?

You almost got it.
Why do it for all the gods? They did it for "most setting". They even gave examples. And I don't care one Iota about expansion books. Not every one have them.

Because, sure, a DM could say "I'm sorry, you can't be a Light Domain Cleric of Apollo, because I decided that isn't a thing" and just overwrite it, but it seems like they added gods to the "expected" list, for a reason, and there is no reason that the player can't take those suggestions and run with them. Boldrie is the Goddess of Community. She gets the Twilight domain. Why shouldn't Erathis get the Twilight Domain? Not a "The DM gets to decide" give me a reason that a DM is going to say that a similar being won't give similar domains.

If a DM over ride the game. That is his prerogative. The player has no control over this. What the player has control is what domain he wants to play. And among the gods that allow that domain, the player picks one.
One thing is for sure. Many people confuse me with George Lucas. Fine by me. But even if we look alike, I do not have the interest as he does and guess what? I do not have his bank account. If I follow your logic, I should have the same bank account, we have similar faces... Come on man, look alike and similar is not the same.

You guys keep defaulting to "but the DM can tell you no" but the DM can tell you no on anything. They can say that Apollo the god of light and healing is actually a bloodthirsty god of war. But if they are working in a Greek World and the player doesn't like Apollo but wants to be a cleric of light worshipping Hestia... is there a reason they can't? Why wouldn't that be allowed? Why can't we assume that the Goddess who tended the flame and was a beacon of light leading people home wouldn't grant people powers over fire and light?

Versimilitude? Credibility? Continuity?
Some gods have one domain, others have two and some have three. Maybe the power level has something to do with it... One thing is for sure, in the PHB, the maximum is three (with only two gods having three), and two domain gods are generaly reserved for powerful gods with many interest. Most have only one.

This is a reason why I usually insist to keep to the core books. Splat books are notorious to create inconsistencies and to confuse things a lot.

 

[Voadam]

It is particularly annoying that the statements on the life domain are contradictory. Almost any and any are not the same thing.

PH Page 60 under the life domain "Almost any non-evil deity can claim influence over this domain, particularly agricultural deities (such as Chauntea, Arawai, and Demeter), sun gods (such as Lathander, Pelor, and Re-Horakhty), gods of healing or endurance (such as IImater, Mishakal, Apollo, and Diancecht), and gods of home and community (such as Hestia, Hathor, and Boldrei)."

PH page 293 "As described in the chapter 3, though, the Life domain is incredibly broad, and a cleric of any non-evil deity can choose it."

 

[Maxperson]

It is particularly annoying that the statements on the life domain are contradictory. Almost any and any are not the same thing.

PH Page 60 under the life domain "Almost any non-evil deity can claim influence over this domain, particularly agricultural deities (such as Chauntea, Arawai, and Demeter), sun gods (such as Lathander, Pelor, and Re-Horakhty), gods of healing or endurance (such as IImater, Mishakal, Apollo, and Diancecht), and gods of home and community (such as Hestia, Hathor, and Boldrei)."

PH page 293 "As described in the chapter 3, though, the Life domain is incredibly broad, and a cleric of any non-evil deity can choose it."

Yeah. That sort of thing really doesn't help. Of course, I wouldn't let "almost any" have it, either. Gods of nature, healing, birth, etc. would get it, but not simply those who have Sun or light.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Because you said that vigilance was part of twilight. It's not. Twilight in this one instance was a part of vigilance.

Ah, the classic "you got peanut butter in my jelly. You got jelly in my peanut butter" defense.

Helm is a human god. He may have some non-human worshippers, but those are exceptions.

I would agree with you that Helm is a human god de facto, but he is not written expressly as a human god. In fact he is considered a "general" god, and not a specifically human god. This is something that irritated me, as you never have Human gods you have "general gods that just happen to be majority human worship"

This doesn't change.. literally anything about my point though.

Your rejection is irrelevant. It won't change that the human god Helm has twilight so that his human clerics can do their jobs better.

Well, you are wrong. So... your insistance on repeating yourself is irrelevant. The game tells us that Helm is supposed to be a general deity. They also tell us that gods of vigilance and watchfulness have access to the Twilight Domain. Nowhere does it say "only races without darkvision have access to the Twilight domain"

It also doesn't address the lack of twilight domain for Araleth Letheranil - Elf God of Stars. Do star gods not get the Twilight Domain if their people have Darkvision? Or, what about the gods of community. The Twilight Domain has a lot of flavor about protection and sanctuary, which is why the community gods like Boldrei have access. Boldrei, who's followers include races with Darkvision. So, why don't other community gods like Mya the Dwarven Goddess of Clan and Family have access to Twilight Domain?

You've latched onto the Vigilance aspect, but it wasn't the only aspect.

Ask Crawford.

You are the one claiming that we are limited to only these choices, why don't you have an answer for why those choices aren't consistent?

RAW doesn't let them pick beyond those suggested by the PHB. The DM can use the DMG to add others to the suggested list.

Yep.

Sure.

Where is that stated? The PHB cleric section requires a god.

Nope! We've quoted it to you. Repeatedly. You don't get to declare that it doesn't exist just because you don't like it.

We've quoted to you repeatedly as well. Sections of Clerics of Philosophies, how the they literally state "the cleric chooses the domain, not the god". Yet you seem fine ignoring all of that. Now you are even trying to claim that player's can't pick domains not in the PHB without explicit permission? Since when has it been that you need explicit permission to use an officially printed subclass? Any sort of "well the DM might ban them" ALSO applies to the PHB, so that isn't an answer.

Sure you can. That's what the knowledge domain is for. Learning the secrets.

But the powers of the knowledge domain don't represent the power of the secrets I have learned. So, why can't I use the subclass that most accurately represents my character?

 

[Chaosmancer]

You almost got it.
Why do it for all the gods? They did it for "most setting". They even gave examples. And I don't care one Iota about expansion books. Not every one have them.

I don't care if everyone will have them. They are meant to illustrate the point. Some gods that were more iconic got listed. They obviously weren't going to list every god. Instead, they expected people to add the domains where appropriate.

This clearly indicates that the listed domains for the gods are NOT exhaustive. Adding to that list is expected.

If a DM over ride the game. That is his prerogative. The player has no control over this. What the player has control is what domain he wants to play. And among the gods that allow that domain, the player picks one.

But if your only argument against something is "The DM might not allow it" then that argument can be applied to everything and anything. "I would learn the fireball spell at level 5 as a wizard" "Well, the DM might not allow you to do that. It is their prerogative to override the game"

Yeah, we get that. That is an understood point. But, moving past the obvious "DMs do whatever they want" we can look at the expectations put forth by the game... and it seems very likely that they expected the player to be in control of this point. The Player decides that they worship Apollo as Pheobus, the Light, and what that means. There is no reason they can't do the same for any other deity. Yes, they have suggestions, but those suggestions are just that.

For example, Hermes was the god of travelers and merchants. But he was also a Psychompomp and escort of the Dead. What reason is there to say "You can't be part of a cult that worships Hermes in his role as Psychopomp, because he doesn't have the Grave domain"? He was a Psychopomp. Just like Apollo was known as Pheobus. Barring the DM going on a tirade about how their Hermes is different from Hermes, and that the player should have known that they were only sort of following greek religions, what purpose is there in denying this?

One thing is for sure. Many people confuse me with George Lucas. Fine by me. But even if we look alike, I do not have the interest as he does and guess what? I do not have his bank account. If I follow your logic, I should have the same bank account, we have similar faces... Come on man, look alike and similar is not the same.

So... being a god of a thing is less like looking like someone and more like having the same job. Think Michael Bay might have a similar bank account to Lucas, both of them being massive movie producers. I mean, if you are a god of light... you are probably into light stuff. If you are a god of war, you probably like fighting. If you are a god of community then you probably share interests with other gods of community. It doesn't matter what your face looks like.

Versimilitude? Credibility? Continuity?
Some gods have one domain, others have two and some have three. Maybe the power level has something to do with it... One thing is for sure, in the PHB, the maximum is three (with only two gods having three), and two domain gods are generaly reserved for powerful gods with many interest. Most have only one.

This is a reason why I usually insist to keep to the core books. Splat books are notorious to create inconsistencies and to confuse things a lot.

So, no splat book in talking about Hestia (she's in Appendix B) or the Light Domain (The PHB) so, not sure why the post about splat's.

But let's look into Versimilitude. Cults exist. We agree on this. Cults exist to emphasize aspects of a deity. We agree on this. Why is it MORE "versimitudal" to have Hestia, famous for her fire and light, to be UNABLE to grant a domain of light to a cult about that light, than for her to be able to do that?

I mean, literally, her entire job description on Olympus was caring for the Hearthfire. That was it. What sort of break in logic is it to say that that light is important enough to warrant a domain?

NOTHING says it has anything to do with power. Multiple very powerful gods only have one domain. And so in all three questions you ask... your point fails. It follows the continuity of the goddess, it makes realistic sense, and it is credible. the only stumbling block is you saying it must not make sense... because reasons.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Yeah. That sort of thing really doesn't help. Of course, I wouldn't let "almost any" have it, either. Gods of nature, healing, birth, etc. would get it, but not simply those who have Sun or light.

You realize that there is only like one god of light who doesn't get the Life Domain, right? ALL of the rest of them do.

 

[Maxperson]

Ah, the classic "you got peanut butter in my jelly. You got jelly in my peanut butter" defense.

No. That statement shows a fundamental lack of understanding of what I am saying.

I would agree with you that Helm is a human god de facto, but he is not written expressly as a human god. In fact he is considered a "general" god, and not a specifically human god. This is something that irritated me, as you never have Human gods you have "general gods that just happen to be majority human worship"

All the human gods are written expressly as human gods. That's why the Non-Human gods exist as a different category of god. If you aren't a non-human god, you are a human god. This is basic stuff.

This doesn't change.. literally anything about my point though.

Your point is wrong. The few non-human worshippers are not why he has or doesn't have the Twilight domain. Only the human followers are, because he's expressly a human god.

The game tells us that Helm is supposed to be a general deity. They also tell us that gods of vigilance and watchfulness have access to the Twilight Domain. Nowhere does it say "only races without darkvision have access to the Twilight domain"

Look at your own list. See if you can see a pattern.

It also doesn't address the lack of twilight domain for Araleth Letheranil - Elf God of Stars. Do star gods not get the Twilight Domain if their people have Darkvision? Or, what about the gods of community. The Twilight Domain has a lot of flavor about protection and sanctuary, which is why the community gods like Boldrei have access. Boldrei, who's followers include races with Darkvision. So, why don't other community gods like Mya the Dwarven Goddess of Clan and Family have access to Twilight Domain?

A god of the stars should have that domain. As to why that god is not on the list? Because it's EXAMPLES. They expect the DM(not player) to use his brains and give it to him. Community gods wouldn't have it, and dwarven gods probably never. Not much twilight underground.

You are the one claiming that we are limited to only these choices, why don't you have an answer for why those choices aren't consistent?

Because they are examples for the DM. They aren't going to be complete lists. If you think a god should have a domain not listed, ask your DM.

We've quoted to you repeatedly as well. Sections of Clerics of Philosophies, how the they literally state "the cleric chooses the domain, not the god". Yet you seem fine ignoring all of that. Now you are even trying to claim that player's can't pick domains not in the PHB without explicit permission? Since when has it been that you need explicit permission to use an officially printed subclass? Any sort of "well the DM might ban them" ALSO applies to the PHB, so that isn't an answer.

Ahh, the optional alternate religion section. Yeah, that doesn't apply unless the DM has put it into the game.

But the powers of the knowledge domain don't represent the power of the secrets I have learned. So, why can't I use the subclass that most accurately represents my character?

If you want nature, pick a nature god. A god of secrets/knowledge isn't going to have nature.

 

[Faolyn]

Death and war are tenuous at best. Just being undead doesn't mean death/undeath is one of the things you want to promote, and lots of gods go to war without being gods OF war. I might allow death domain, but there's no way I'd okay war.

And like above, just because a god has done something doesn't make him the god of it. Like war, I'd nix any attempt at trickery.

Vecna is literally a god of finding and keeping dark secrets. That has Trickery written all over it.

 

[Helldritch]

And let the fun begins

I don't care if everyone will have them. They are meant to illustrate the point. Some gods that were more iconic got listed. They obviously weren't going to list every god. Instead, they expected people to add the domains where appropriate.

And you should. If you want to argue about the cleric, do it from the core perspective. Otherwise one that does not have that book can not argue with you, understand your point of view or simply constest it.

This clearly indicates that the listed domains for the gods are NOT exhaustive. Adding to that list is expected.

Well, they are quite ok from the PHB and DMG. It does say that when you build your pantheon, you should have only one god of each domain. Ease of use? Ease of building? Ease for the players? Who cares? One is more than enough and if you are not happy with that, homebrew time!

But if your only argument against something is "The DM might not allow it" then that argument can be applied to everything and anything. "I would learn the fireball spell at level 5 as a wizard" "Well, the DM might not allow you to do that. It is their prerogative to override the game"

You might be getting it afterall. Core you can. But homebrew is homebrew.

Yeah, we get that. That is an understood point. But, moving past the obvious "DMs do whatever they want" we can look at the expectations put forth by the game... and it seems very likely that they expected the player to be in control of this point. The Player decides that they worship Apollo as Pheobus, the Light, and what that means. There is no reason they can't do the same for any other deity. Yes, they have suggestions, but those suggestions are just that.

Nope. World building and the choice related to it are solely on the DM's hands. And this is a firm control. What the player has control over is which domain he can take and which god related to "x" domain he will pick (if more than one).

For example, Hermes was the god of travelers and merchants. But he was also a Psychompomp and escort of the Dead. What reason is there to say "You can't be part of a cult that worships Hermes in his role as Psychopomp, because he doesn't have the Grave domain"? He was a Psychopomp. Just like Apollo was known as Pheobus. Barring the DM going on a tirade about how their Hermes is different from Hermes, and that the player should have known that they were only sort of following greek religions, what purpose is there in denying this?

That is what you would like. Not what you get in the PHB. Not happy? Change it. But core, this is what you get.
Me too find that some choices were not... optimal? But I am not the designer. If you want to keep it raw, you got no say. If you want to homebrew, feel free.

So... being a god of a thing is less like looking like someone and more like having the same job. Think Michael Bay might have a similar bank account to Lucas, both of them being massive movie producers. I mean, if you are a god of light... you are probably into light stuff. If you are a god of war, you probably like fighting. If you are a god of community then you probably share interests with other gods of community. It doesn't matter what your face looks like.

You understand that it was a rough comparison? Gods have ways that only the designers know (or claim to know). And maybe there is an evil god of community somewhere... Or a god of community that is much more interested in war? I do not claim to know all the gods in all the setting. But at some point, you need to have a clear design choice. You may not agree with their choice, that is good (I don't either on many of their decision). But if you want to keep it raw, tough luck. You're stuck.

So, no splat book in talking about Hestia (she's in Appendix B) or the Light Domain (The PHB) so, not sure why the post about splat's.

Me neither. But in the previous post you mentioned Tasha's... So...

But let's look into Versimilitude. Cults exist. We agree on this. Cults exist to emphasize aspects of a deity. We agree on this. Why is it MORE "versimitudal" to have Hestia, famous for her fire and light, to be UNABLE to grant a domain of light to a cult about that light, than for her to be able to do that?

Yep. She is allowed only one domain. Though luck for her. Maybe she should try to be a stronger god?

I mean, literally, her entire job description on Olympus was caring for the Hearthfire. That was it. What sort of break in logic is it to say that that light is important enough to warrant a domain?

Nah... light is not fire. But fire can create light. Not the same thing.

NOTHING says it has anything to do with power. Multiple very powerful gods only have one domain. And so in all three questions you ask... your point fails. It follows the continuity of the goddess, it makes realistic sense, and it is credible. the only stumbling block is you saying it must not make sense... because reasons.

If you conclude that the post is only saying:"reasons" then you clearly do not understand or simply do not want to understand.
Everything has to do with power and designer's decision. You can contest their decisions, but not what is written. Hey I would have kept stats penalties for all races if I had been a designer. But they're not in this edition. So I have no stat penalties because I try to play as close to RAW and RAI as possible. Nothing forces you to comply and fully aligned with the rules. But the rules are clear. Choose a domain, pick a god with that domain. End of choice. A player might say yes but... Then the DM is perfectly entitled to say: "Yes but that is the rule"

And if a table is not happy with some of the designers' choices, nothing, absolutely nothing prevents that table to change it. But then, they are no longer RAW nor RAI.