Worlds of Design: RPG Gods - Benign or Malign?

​

Most RPG settings have some form of godhood. Yet there are some age-old questions that come into play as you create religions.

By Unknown author - Os Deuses Egípcios – IMAGICK, CC BY-SA 4.0, File:Deuses Egipcios.png - Wikimedia Commons​

Gods and “hokey religions” (to quote Han Solo in Star Wars a New Hope) are usually part of fantasy and science fiction role-playing games. From a world-building standpoint, you can approach religion as a form of philosophy, a way to guide one’s life, but a lot more people are into religion than philosophy. Rather than using a religion that resembles a modern day equivalent, let’s start from scratch by asking some fundamental questions:

How Many?​

How many gods are there? In human history, ancient gods often were members of a pantheon, a group of gods. So it is with many RPG campaigns and settings. Gods from these ancient pantheons (Greek and Roman most prominently) were superpowerful and immortal, but otherwise behaved much like humans. Less common was a single god, or a god who has an oppositional aspect (effectively another god) as in Manichaeism or Persia’s Zoroastrian religion (Ahura-Mazda and Ahriman). It has been uncommon to think that only “my” gods exist, and no others. The belief is more likely when there is only one (or two) god(s) in a religion rather than a pantheon. After all, if you can have a bunch of gods, why can't someone else, and those gods compete with one another?

Gender?​

Male vs female? Virtually all the ancient religions were heavily male-oriented, just as societies were heavily male-oriented. Some did have powerful goddesses often related to fertility. But male orientation is not necessary in a fantasy world in which women are often treated much differently than women in the ancient world. There is some notion that in prehistoric times, some religions were heavily female oriented.

Belief?​

Do you believe? Just as in the real world, some characters are going to want nothing to do with gods, while others will devote their lives to them. Some will assume that gods are only bad for humanity, others that gods provide great good for humanity. A GM/World-Builder can influence this strongly through the actual behavior of the gods.

Do You Have a Choice?​

Is there State Sponsorship (forcing everyone to conform)? In the real world, sometimes people are free to choose their religion, other times they are required to conform to the state religion. And you have cases where the laws are devised to encourage someone to convert (as when non-Muslims paid an additional tax in the early centuries of Arab expansion). The Roman Empire changed state sponsorship from their pagan religion to Christianity in the fourth century CE. And so on. The player characters could be religionists resisting state-imposed religion.

Divine Right?​

What about men/women worshiped as gods? There have been many times in human history that rulers justified their right to rule by declaring themselves to be gods. Among these are the Pharaohs, the later Roman emperors, and many medieval kings of Europe. For some it was just an excuse, but others seem to have really believed it.

Manifestations?​

How much do gods manifest in (appear or directly influence) the world? Some ancient gods, e.g. Greek, were thought to constantly meddle with the world. Egyptian gods were less present in the world. If gods do meddle with the world, how do they do it? Provide direction for worshipers (even holy war?)? Give boons to their most prominent worshipers?

Fear or Love?​

Do characters fear their god(s) (and for that matter, rulers), or love him/her/it/them? This depends on the priesthood, or on the behavior of the “actual god(s)”. It also depends on what the ruler thinks is best. It’s easy to make people fear him/her/it when the gods themselves are involved.

The Old Gods?​

What about the “old gods,” the ones who no longer have worshipers? Do they fade away entirely, or do they hang out in the background, so to speak—perhaps providing quest material for players? If they hang out, do they become neutral, or benign, or malign?

What Are They Really?​

"Gods" as Aliens - or Monsters. What are the gods, really? Perhaps they're all part of a big scam?

For an in-depth exploration of different ways to implement religion in your campaign (and answers to some of these questions), see Andrew “Corone” Peregrine’s excellent series of articles on the topic.

Your Turn: What questions did I miss?

 

[Yaarel]

I'm not sure "a lack of understanding of deep history" is particularly North American, or has a strong connection with spirituality. There is plenty of deep history in the UK, but few bother to understand it, and the culture is broadly agnostic and materialistic.

The same tends to be true in modern Scandinavia, but there remains a palpable reverence for nature. Also there remains a cultural literacy about the Eddas and Sagas.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The same tends to be true in modern Scandinavia, but there remains a palpable reverence for nature.

I guess there is a difference between the English and the "Celtic fringe" who tend to be more spiritual and have more reverence for nature. I guess it's because the English are latecomers, so the deep history isn't their history.

 

[Yaarel]

I guess there is a difference between the English and the "Celtic fringe" who tend to be more spiritual and have more reverence for nature. I guess it's because the English are latecomers, so the deep history isn't their history.

I suspect, because Britain is a blending of different ethnicities, the result is a worldview that is unique. It has aspects of Celtic polytheism, Norse animism (compare Scottish witch trials documents and Shakespeare descriptions of fairies), plus a pragmatic rationalism that is perhaps distinctly British.

 

[Helldritch]

Ok, gods in fantasy...

My approach is both varied and quite static. Gods in a fantasy setting can not be compared to real world religions. Simply because if a worshiper has any doubt, he can ask his God and chances are that the god in question will answer.
So having schism in a religion in a fantasy setting is kind of not knowing the simple fact that with priest and clerics able to speak directly with their god, this can not happen.

And if you try to tell me that non caster can be in the church hierarchy this is again something entirely BS to say. The lowest caster will prime on the highest non caster follower of the deity simply because that deity is favoring the caster. The cleric/priest casts spells because the god grants them directly to him/her. That is quite an endorsement that can not be compared to a non caster.

So with gods active and willing to intervene according to some rules where does that lead us to? Why do gods needs worshippers? Simple, power. The power of gods are directly related to the number of worshippers they have. This was so in AD&D and it explained why there were pantheon wars. The Greek Pantheon attacking Norse pantheon to acquire new worshippers and so on. But at the same time, war in heavens and hells are to be avoided as gods fighting each others could level the cosmos. So they act through their worshippers to avoid destroying the source of their power, devotion (or fear) of their worshippers.

Because worshippers have souls or spirits they can give energy to the gods that can harness it. Mortal worship the neutral and good gods with devotions and prayers and evil one are placate with fear and offering to appease them. Whatever the method, the god gets what he needs, worship energy. As the god gets more and more worshippers (or gets appeased) he gets more power and rises in power. This is why in old editions we had greater, lesser and demi gods. (Yes, I know about major and quasi deities).

It is also why demons and devils want to divert mortals from the gods. To deprive them of their powers. Even if demons and devils gain nothing from their devotion, they deprive their foes from the source of their power and that is in and if itself a victory. And with every souls perverted away from the gods, the fiends can use the souls as nourishment or as a power to create more of their kind to fight the gods (or other fiends).

On the warlocks....
Some people like to point that warlocks gain spells in a similar way as the clerics and other divine casters. In this case similar is not the same thing as the same. Fiends (and other patrons) can fragment a part of their essence and put it into the warlock. Most warlock can not even heal because that is not the nature of the normal patrons. Recently, some angels have taken on them to become patrons too. Thus the appearance of the new warlock subclass. But again, this is not the same as the god giving powers to his clerics. It might looks like it but it isn't. Normally, a fiend or a non god, should have a limited number of warlock under contract as the non god must fragment its essence (well a part) to give power to the warlock. As long as the warlock is obedient and works to further the goals of his/her patron everything should work out fine. Far realm patrons wants to come back, fey patron might be fickle but want to protect the few entries to the feywild, fiends are obvious and the rest should be also easy to figure out.

So gods wants worshippers to get powers. This is as simple as that. If you have multiple pantheons, they fight among each others for the precious resource that are worshippers and it explains why evil deities are not banned from a pantheon. They are needed to cover the domain in the pantheon.

If however, your world have only one pantheon, then evil deities work for themselves only and the justification for them is a bit harder to make but still possible. It is just that the war is between the gods and that they are vying for power just the same. Fiends still want to deprive the gods from their power source. But it might make for a more active role of the gods in the world and against fiends. Since they do not have to contend with other pantheons they could be more active against fiends and much more prone to ally with each other when faced with fiends incursion while in multiple pantheons, evil deity in the pantheon might simply not risk themselves hoping to see a comrade fall and to take its power...

All in all, gods can be anything you need them to be. Just do not over do it or over use them.

 

[Jfdlsjfd]

And, in English, when describing something as a divinity or divine, you're going to get people thinking at least moderately big. You can, of course, give the local definition of divinity, or (my preference) use a neologism or a loanword. The latter means using, or finding, a term for that space of being, allowing "divinity" to remain useful as it is. The former means...doing as I described, diluting "divinity" and then needing to invent or reuse some new term to describe what "divinity" previously did, such as upthread where it was referred to as "[the] ultimate(s)."

Is it? Don't you use "gods" to refer to the lar familiaris or the di manibus? I checked Wikipedia and they use "household gods" and "chtonic deities" to describe them. I can see how "capital-G God" would bring the idea of being big, but "the god of a specific spring" would work without being a contradiction (especially when speaking about Terensis, the god of threshing or Lactans, the goddess who ensures sap flows in tree). I won't further dispute meaning of English words with a native speaker, though. I am just surprised that god isn't used to talk about the countless "little gods".

The point you make about in-setting farmers not caring is exactly what I was pointing to: before creating a mythology for a fantasy setting, it is useful to establish how the people in setting relate to their gods. It would be not very useful to develop the rich personalities of 342 gods for a setting if basically nobody in the story is going to care because the only interaction there will be in the story with them is going to be transactional.

For the same reason I don't feel awe or reverence for Alexa, or my food processor, or a good bag of fertilizer, or a handful of other things.

Because, maybe, we understand Alexa or fertilizers and we don't ascribe a personality or agency to them. They are extremely mundane. Ted the talking turnip can have a temper tantrum. (I like the way this sentence sounds...) and we wouldn't know how he is doing things. Personnally, I would be awed if a random piece of household furniture suddenly developped feelings and the ability to speak, claimed to be called Alexa and proposed to order things to be delivered to me if I gave a modicum of worship and my CC number. It would actually shatter my worldview (once every possibility of a hoax are excluded).

I would certainly be thankful, and if all it takes to secure that benefit is the occasional ritual then sure, whatever, no skin off my back. But I'm not going to have "a feeling of deep respect tinged with awe" about the Tony the Turnip making my turnips plump and flavorful. Being thankful that a supernatural being did something good for you, and consequently being neighborly to that supernatural being, is a far cry from reverence, awe, or worship.

But the same would work with the Olympians. Poseidon or Ares are major gods, even with the value of ancient greeks they certainly wouldn't be considered "nice" and inspiring reverence or worship, yet everyone was nonetheless doing propitiation to him, so not to lose wars and fleet in a storm. The prohibition of hubris by the gods (and the countless stories of people being harshly punished for thinking themselves above their lot) is very close to your mafia analogy. "We alloted you some place in destiny, do not ever think to get a larger part or we'll punish you". Yet nobody tried to exorcize Poseidon from the seas (and attempting it would certainly be a prime example of hubris... the same as exorcizing Ted from your turnip patch because who are you, lowly human, to think yourself equal to a god, even it's Ted the Talking Turnip?).

And I don't see it that way. That's a spirit, a genius loci or possibly an agathodaemon, or a kami/yōkai, etc. Also, "religious (=binding) rituals" is at the very least not an accurate description of ancient religions as I have understood them (indeed, it is much closer to the ancients' understanding of witchcraft, e.g. as shown in the completely secular trial for witchcraft that Apuleius went through. The lines between what we would call "religion," "magic," and "witchcraft" were drawn very differently back then, but "religious ritual" certainly did not mean something "binding" on the gods or anyone else--often they were undertaken merely in the hope they might achieve something.)

I didn't mean that it was to force the supernatural forces to do something but that there was an expectation that ritual would work (do ut des). The basis of worship wasn't connected to the personal feelings or general behavior of the worshipper but to the proper conduct of rituals. If they didn't work, it was either because they were rejected (as the god was of course able to consider a proposed offering insufficent or inappropriate, hence the need to perform omen-taking to ensure the deal was accepted by the god when it really mattered), or because the ritual was improperly conduced, or because some other circumstance wasn't taken into account to explain the failure (such as a former offence to the gods not resolved), not the whims of the god to take the offering and ignore them randomly. You "hoped" the gods to accept the proposed deal, but you didn't expect them to reneg on it willy-nilly after accepting the offering. If you determined what was a good day to have a battle, fought on this day and lost, it wasn't because "hey, the god we asked said through omens that it was OK, but he wasn't obliged to tell the truth despite accepting our offerings, we were just hoping to get a hint from him anyway and this failure will not lessen the reverence we have for him." It was because one called the god in question by an improper name, the priest doing the omen taking was unclean and so on.

 

[RareBreed]

​

Most RPG settings have some form of godhood. Yet there are some age-old questions that come into play as you create religions.

View attachment 257034
By Unknown author - Os Deuses Egípcios – IMAGICK, CC BY-SA 4.0, File:Deuses Egipcios.png - Wikimedia Commons​

Gods and “hokey religions” (to quote Han Solo in Star Wars a New Hope) are usually part of fantasy and science fiction role-playing games. From a world-building standpoint, you can approach religion as a form of philosophy, a way to guide one’s life, but a lot more people are into religion than philosophy. Rather than using a religion that resembles a modern day equivalent, let’s start from scratch by asking some fundamental questions:

How Many?​

How many gods are there? In human history, ancient gods often were members of a pantheon, a group of gods. So it is with many RPG campaigns and settings. Gods from these ancient pantheons (Greek and Roman most prominently) were superpowerful and immortal, but otherwise behaved much like humans. Less common was a single god, or a god who has an oppositional aspect (effectively another god) as in Manichaeism or Persia’s Zoroastrian religion (Ahura-Mazda and Ahriman). It has been uncommon to think that only “my” gods exist, and no others. The belief is more likely when there is only one (or two) god(s) in a religion rather than a pantheon. After all, if you can have a bunch of gods, why can't someone else, and those gods compete with one another?

Gender?​

Male vs female? Virtually all the ancient religions were heavily male-oriented, just as societies were heavily male-oriented. Some did have powerful goddesses often related to fertility. But male orientation is not necessary in a fantasy world in which women are often treated much differently than women in the ancient world. There is some notion that in prehistoric times, some religions were heavily female oriented.

Belief?​

Do you believe? Just as in the real world, some characters are going to want nothing to do with gods, while others will devote their lives to them. Some will assume that gods are only bad for humanity, others that gods provide great good for humanity. A GM/World-Builder can influence this strongly through the actual behavior of the gods.

Do You Have a Choice?​

Is there State Sponsorship (forcing everyone to conform)? In the real world, sometimes people are free to choose their religion, other times they are required to conform to the state religion. And you have cases where the laws are devised to encourage someone to convert (as when non-Muslims paid an additional tax in the early centuries of Arab expansion). The Roman Empire changed state sponsorship from their pagan religion to Christianity in the fourth century CE. And so on. The player characters could be religionists resisting state-imposed religion.

Divine Right?​

What about men/women worshiped as gods? There have been many times in human history that rulers justified their right to rule by declaring themselves to be gods. Among these are the Pharaohs, the later Roman emperors, and many medieval kings of Europe. For some it was just an excuse, but others seem to have really believed it.

Manifestations?​

How much do gods manifest in (appear or directly influence) the world? Some ancient gods, e.g. Greek, were thought to constantly meddle with the world. Egyptian gods were less present in the world. If gods do meddle with the world, how do they do it? Provide direction for worshipers (even holy war?)? Give boons to their most prominent worshipers?

Fear or Love?​

Do characters fear their god(s) (and for that matter, rulers), or love him/her/it/them? This depends on the priesthood, or on the behavior of the “actual god(s)”. It also depends on what the ruler thinks is best. It’s easy to make people fear him/her/it when the gods themselves are involved.

The Old Gods?​

What about the “old gods,” the ones who no longer have worshipers? Do they fade away entirely, or do they hang out in the background, so to speak—perhaps providing quest material for players? If they hang out, do they become neutral, or benign, or malign?

What Are They Really?​

"Gods" as Aliens - or Monsters. What are the gods, really? Perhaps they're all part of a big scam?

For an in-depth exploration of different ways to implement religion in your campaign (and answers to some of these questions), see Andrew “Corone” Peregrine’s excellent series of articles on the topic.

Your Turn: What questions did I miss?

I find it a bit interesting that there is usually little talk or discussion about creating non-pantheistic religions, or even religions without gods per-se.

ughh, I hit the backbutton and apparently it auto-posted this and I can't figure out how to delete it. So let's try this again. I think at least three important questions were missed

• Does there even have to be Gods?
• What limits are there to a God's power?
• How do followers interface with their God(s)?
• Is there a set of canonical scriptures to define the religion?
• Are there violently opposed sects of the same religion?

Does a religion need Gods?
Many religions started out as philosophical systems, or even just mundane practices. For example, the Tao Te Ching really has no mention of anything supernatural, including the Celestial Court, Yama Kings or the various dragons. The earliest records of Taoism was not just a way of living in harmony with the Tao, but a kind of metaphysical explanation of the duality of the world (Yin and Yang). Buddhism also started out with almost no supernatural beings in the original Theravedic sutras. It was later accumulations that introduced for both Taoism and Buddhism the notions of gods and immortal beings.

What if a religion was just a way of life and of seeing the world? Of course, some will argue "where's the fun in that in a fantasy roleplaying game?". Even a world without Gods per se could be interesting. Manipulating forces of nature (eg Taoist Earth, Air, Water, Fire, Wood) or the mystical forces of Chi could be quite interesting even without Gods.

What limits are there to a God's power?
This question is related to the Manifestations consideration, but goes into a little more detail. Many classical religions of old or in fantasy literature have Gods with total or near total dominion with some aspect of reality. Life, death, fertility, healing, war, justice, disease, knowledge, all-father, all-mother, agriculture, etc etc. But if a God has near total control of some aspect of reality, why don't they use it more? What is holding them back?

Is there some complex bureaucracy that holds them back? Some truce between the gods of light and dark? Is there some veil such that the Gods can no longer exert their influence? All of these questions have to be answered or it will create plot holes and ruin the versimilitude of the setting.

How do followers interface with their God(s)?
Even if the Gods can exert their power in the world, will they if someone calls upon a God's aid? Again, is there some kind of celestial rules that must be followed for the Gods to bestow a request? If it is simply at a God's whim or discretion, why wouldn't they? Do they not want to make their followers too reliant on them? Would it be like a Denial of Service attack if the God tried to fulfill all his/her prayers at once...and if so, how powerful really is the God?

Do the Gods listen only to "official" priests, or can anyone with devout and sincere belief call upon aid? If powers can only be bestowed through some kind of official investiture (ie, ordained priests or priestesses), why? Do the Gods only care about those who devote themselves totally? Who gets to "talk" to the Gods? Can Joe Farmer commune with his diety directly, or does he have to have a middle man do it for him? And how direct is this communion? Does the person literally hear his God talking to him, or is it more like signs, portents and omens?

Is there a set of canonical scriptures to define the religion?
Is there a set of "official" and canonical texts that establish the religion? Or has it grown organically over time and through oral traditions? Is the canon still being written, or has it been set in stone and only a new prophet can change direction? Or is the religion at a stage where the ecclesiastical powers re trying to define what is orthodox and what is heretical? What would happen if someone found a "lost" book that conflicted with current orthodoxy?

If there is no cannon, then who gets to decide what is "correct" worship? Will people be more willing to follow new authors with new visions or communications from their God? Will this be a threat to the establishment religion? Do the priests and holy texts even matter if Jane Candlemaker can directly commune with her God?

Are there violently opposed sects of the same religion?
If the gods don't directly commune with their worshippers, then miscommunication is bound to happen. What about religions with two or more sects violently opposed to each other (in the real world, Protestants vs Catholics, or Shiite vs Sunni easily come to mind).

For that matter, if you have diametrically opposed dieties, why aren't they at war with each other until one side or the other wins?

 

[Yaarel]

I find it a bit interesting that there is usually little talk or discussion about creating non-pantheistic religions, or even religions without gods per-se.

I suspect, it is the Western (Christian) culture, where many find it difficult to even imagine a "religion" that doesnt worship some kind of person.

 

[Maxperson]

Not, in my opinion, if that creature is mortal enough to die of old age.

Physical immortality and the inability to age unless intentionally desired is IMO divine requirement #1.

While I think those are requirements, I don't think they are #1. To me a God of the Sky isn't God of the Sky because he's immortal and doesn't age. It's because he has power over the sky, storms, things that fly in it, etc. and can grant power to worshippers. Those are the #1 and #2 for me, the ones you describe are #3 and #4.

 

[Lanefan]

While I think those are requirements, I don't think they are #1. To me a God of the Sky isn't God of the Sky because he's immortal and doesn't age. It's because he has power over the sky, storms, things that fly in it, etc. and can grant power to worshippers. Those are the #1 and #2 for me, the ones you describe are #3 and #4.

From the point of view of the various mortal worshippers and followers, this would be true. (and raises a thorny side question: do deities claim spheres of influence for themselves or are those spheres in effect assigned to them by their worshippers? I have it as kind of a mix which would take pages of typing to explain...)

However, I'm looking at it from the point of view of the deities themselves - designing from the top down rather than from the bottom up.

 

[Maxperson]

From the point of view of the various mortal worshippers and followers, this would be true. (and raises a thorny side question: do deities claim spheres of influence for themselves or are those spheres in effect assigned to them by their worshippers? I have it as kind of a mix which would take pages of typing to explain...)

However, I'm looking at it from the point of view of the deities themselves - designing from the top down rather than from the bottom up.

How I answer that question for my game is that the egg(intelligent beings) came first. At some point a culture starter revering the sun, the sky, etc. and beings were "born" that embodied those beliefs and began answering prayers. This is why those gods are dependent on belief to survive.