D&D (2024) I have the DMG. AMA!

[mamba]

I think the big point of contention is that it's a big mechanical consequence to a role-playing action.

if this were the consequence for one small action I’d agree. This is not the result of one minor transgression however but of continued, knowing ‘disobedience’ and actively working against your god for a while, at least from my perspective

 

[Neonchameleon]

It was me mocking your attitude towards DMs when I responded to you that one time.

I don't have an attitude "towards DMs". I am one and count as friends some very good ones all of who do things differently. However there are certain forms of toxic behaviour I've seen from DMs - almost all of which spring from DM entitlement and the DMs thinking that they should be in charge of the PCs and rather than just the setting and the world, and that everything should be about their choices.

Obviously, and I'd never let you within sniffing distance of one of my games. But I dispute that is a DM heavy zone in absolute numbers. There may be a greater ratio of DMs than the ratio at a table which is like 1 to 5 or 1 to 6. But more DMs in absolute numbers? No.

All I can say is that in absolute numbers the amount I've seen is about even. And entitled PCs aren't really a thing IME. The player I had to get rid of from a con game was playing a murderhobo who tried to set the bar on fire then fought the rest of the party when they tried to stop him.

So when they perform the rite to get their spells the Deity refuses to some degree. I don't start with you lose everything unless it is really really extreme.

The point of a basic rite is that it doesn't require involvement.

Of course you say that and you don't even caveat it with "for my style of game".

And I meant not to caveat it any more than I would caveat the idea that filling your house full of asbestos is bad. Plenty of people have done it and got a lot of joy living in those houses and it has a function. But this doesn't make it a good idea.

Gygax' take on religion was bad. It provided a misleading understanding of religion and harmed gameplay experience even if it can occasionally deal with some problems.

You do know that in all the protestant dominations of which there are many you are not.

There's no one take for "all the protestant denominations". You are simply wrong here. In some protestant denominations you are correct. But it's not an inherent thing for religion.

But what does in world religion concerning ordination have to do with receiving spell powers from a fantasy Deity. If I had your view I'd just get rid of divine power as a source. You want divine power, God knows why (pun intended), but you don't want any of the trappings or responsibillity to the God.

Now you're just making things up. You don't have a case to argue other than that you want to wield divine power as the DM and want it to work the way you want it to. So you're projecting this onto me.

Would it be more appropriate if the Deity just zapped the player with permanent feeblemind until they atoned. That would be "in game" I suppose. You see what is in game is up for debate. That is the issue.

Everything I am reading shows you to be a DM who wants to be a God.

And all of this religious argument you are making is just way off the beaten path and should be dropped. If the God of the Catholic church gave out spell powers, I don't imagine priests who've fallen from the faith receiving them. Until you have an example of that in real life we will just have to drop this nonsense.

Your lack of understanding of religion is at this point well established. But if you want to blow your mind then in Judaism even direct divine miracles and intervention don't establish the rightness of a position. The Oven of Akhnai - Wikipedia

 

[Maxperson]

I use the downtime rules in Xanathar and not the ones in the DMG. Apparently that's no longer 5e.

What do you mean? Xanthar's is a book of optional 5e rules.

 

[Remathilis]

What do you mean? Xanthar's is a book of optional 5e rules.

Optional books aren't 5e rules?

Fine. You cannot be a human and get +1 to all ability scores and have the variant humans's skill and feat choice.

 

[Laurefindel]

A character can have an adversarial relationship with their patron god/goddess - that's an interesting (if potentially disrupting) RP avenue - but as long as I don't perceive animosity from the player I don't see it as an affront to my work (when we can call it as such). That implies that the player is aware and ready for consequences of his RP. I generally disapprove of character-arcs that are disruptive to other players but I've seen it done properly*.

That said I have one golden rule at my table: Don't be a jerk.
"Sorry guys, but that's what my character would do" is not an excuse to be a jerk to the DM and other players. For me, that constitutes a player problem, not a character problem. But players playing jerk characters in good faith and for the benefit of other players (and the story) have my go.

*I have a character in one of my campaign who is a cleric of an evil destruction god. The character is dead-set against its religion, but the PCs leave such a trail of destruction in their wake that the god is actually quite pleased with his cleric...

 

[Emerikol]

Also the playerbase.

I've got at least twenty years of data on how much players hate RP traps like the 3e falling mechanics and evidence that they've been steadily removed as WotC realizes they don't play well with the people they want as customers.

Falling mechanics? It sounds like they must have been pretty happy if they've gotten down to falling mechanics to complain about.

I think there is also the belief that people like me will soldier on modifying the game so they can ignore my preferences. It's why I haven't bought a single 5e item and won't 5e 2024. If I have to heavily mod a game to get it to work, then I'll start with a game closer to the mechanics I want. I bought C&C for example. Not perfect but closer.

And I consider the move from 4e to 5e to be a big move in my direction. But they failed in their promise to make a game that is super easy to customize. I think the 3e engine was good but needed simplifying and streamlining. Some would argue that is what 5e is but 5e slipped in some new age mechanics that were bad. The whole healing approach is bad for me. So them changing clerics away from tradition is just one of many ways they've departed from the roots of the game and for the worse. IMHO.

 

[Emerikol]

See, I view this is a huge violation of the player's agency on par with 'your character wouldn't do that'.

The DM doesn't say "Your character doesn't do that." He is warning the player about knowledge the character has that the player may have forgotten but their character most certainly would not have. You might even say the God is in some kind of spiritual communication with the player. I don't stop anything. I warn from the Deities perspective. If you don't want a Deity involved don't play a DIVINE character.

 

[mamba]

But the goal isn't to make the character atone. The point you seem to be glossing over is that the player putting his character in this position is not making a mistake.

I don’t think you can speak for all cases in which this occurs. If this was not an accident but the player intentionally following some arc, then maybe they should discuss that arc with their DM instead of going rogue, hoping for the best, and complaining about tyrannical DMs when the DM is not a mind reader

 

[Remathilis]

A comment/disapprobation isn't necessarily disrespectful but otherwise yes, as a DM I tend to see a player going against the tenets of a religion (as opposed to a character going against those tenets) as a comment/disapprobation on my world-building.

Sometimes I got to agree with the player in the end though.

I had a DM start a campaign on a different world (Mystara, but more of a janky Known World homebrew variant) before deciding to move his game back to his own personal homebrew world. At the time, he had two clerics in the game (myself and another player) and upon entering his world, we could no longer cast magic until we converted to one of HIS deities. (He was a fan of Dragonlance, so he copied the heathen priests rule). Neither of us wanted to change deities, so we were basically screwed. I'm pretty sure we both ended up rolling up new characters because of it.

The experience so soured our group to playing divine PC it was several years and a new player before we ever saw a cleric again.

 

[Micah Sweet]

You make this sound adversarial in nature. Someone has to have "the upper hand".

I believe it is being presented in the new books in an adversarial way, to always fall on the side of giving players (and their PCs) what they want.