D&D (2024) New UA one D&D play test document Dec 1st.


log in or register to remove this ad

tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
Epic
To me the flavor matters, in some ways more than the mechanics. I value mechanics and flavor equally.

I need the flavor of the Cleric class description to welcome nontheistic religious traditions as well as theistic ones. This also relates to reallife inclusivity. Not all players come from theistic cultures, nor are especially interested in theism.

The Cleric class works better when more inclusive. This likewise helps the class be more versatile for different kinds of D&D settings.

Setting including cosmology belongs in the DMs Guide. Not the Cleric class.
This is where I disagree with you. the 5e cleric has a super thick layer of FR baseline shellacking that makes it difficult to introduce players to settings like eberron & darksun where the baselines with deities are extremely different. Real life faith shouldn't be imposing on a game, it's about 30some years late for the satanic panic.
 

It is helpful to avoid referring to "gods", when making an effort to describe human religions inclusively.
Depends on what is being talked about. To blanketly ban talking about gods when talking about religion is just as dismissive the other way.

Anyway when it comes to the release of the new core books. The default Cosmology and Settings, along with their gods should be talked about, as D&D is not an outright generic system, it has it's own lore, and culture about it.
 

This is where I disagree with you. the 5e cleric has a super thick layer of FR baseline shellacking that makes it difficult to introduce players to settings like eberron & darksun where the baselines with deities are extremely different. Real life faith shouldn't be imposing on a game, it's about 30some years late for the satanic panic.
Changes from the baseline need merely be mentioned with setting books. Eberron is not too different from the base, minus their being no proof of the existence of the gods and anyone can become a cleric of anything so long as they have sufficient faith in the idea.
 

Yaarel

He Mage
To blanketly ban talking about gods when talking about religion is just as dismissive the other way.
The Cleric class description needs to focus on the sacred community.

The DMs Guide and the Setting Guides need to focus on what kind religions exist in the region, world, or cosmology.
 


tetrasodium

Legend
Supporter
Epic
Changes from the baseline need merely be mentioned with setting books. Eberron is not too different from the base, minus their being no proof of the existence of the gods and anyone can become a cleric of anything so long as they have sufficient faith in the idea.
That sounds good in theory, but a gm is lucky if they can get a player to read even a single page of text, expecting a gm to convince players they need to read a setting book is almost trolling the gm.

Eberron deliberately has conflicting accounts on the gods & no good proof either way, the PHB is entirely certain & certain of specifics & presents lots of proof. Darksun deliberately does not have gods, they may never have existed be in hiding or even be dead, that's an important part of the setting. "shared multiverse" shouldn't mean "this is how FR & similar settings do it"
 

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
Outside or Turn and Destroy Undead, the cleric is any real mechanical ties to gods or religion as a construct.

The cleric class is tied to Divinity. Whatever Divinity on that universe is.
 

Lojaan

Hero
So we can talk about religion but not gods, or we can talk about gods but not religion, because either or both may or may not be inclusive.

Well! Sounds about right.

If it made sense you wouldn't need faith now would you? 😛
 


Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Recent & Upcoming Releases

Top