D&D 4E 4e Races and Classes: "Why we changed the gods"

[kennew142]

I have yet to meet anyone past the age of 14 who actually plays or DMs in the "World of Dungeons and Dragons?", the uncharted, unnamed, undeveloped "world" that all these fluff changes represent.

I have to say that I know many GMs over 14, including some very good ones, who use the implied setting. They flesh it out and customize it, to be sure, but they use it nonetheless.

Because the gods of FR, Krynn, Mystara, Midnight, Midkemia, Greyhawk, Earth, Super Mario World, etc. are NOT impacted in any way by a revisioning of who the "core" gods are, I would think that who the "core" god of justice is would be largely irrelevant.

For example, FR does have a goddess of agriculture despite the fact that in the World of Dungeons and Dragons, no god or goddess who is not useful to adventurers exists. :\ Krynn has 3 gods of magic despite the fact that Corellon Larethian is assuming this position in the implied setting. Bane snatching up the tyranny portfolio from whichever Greyhawk deity once owned it does not effect Greyhawk because Greyhawk is no longer the assumed setting.

On this point we agree 100%. The gods of the implied core setting have zero impact on any non-core world, even those published by WotC - unless the designers choose to be impacted.

I admit to being bothered by a certain "dumbing down" of things so as to simplify everything to the point where no intellectual challenge can possibly exist. "Uh...why is there a god of agriculture in an adventure game?" and "Uhhhh (drool)....more than 12 gods confuse me...make it stop WoTC, make it stop." but I can understand the decision as 4e is aimed at new players and DMs and the fact that more experienced DMs and players don't need to have their "D&D experience" spoon fed to them.

Is it really dumbing down? Who was the god of harvest and agriculture in the 3rd edition PHB? How many gods were in the PHB? It would seem that this statement is not only factually challenged, but also insulting to the designers and the target audience.

I know that in my campaign Asmodeus is not a god and PCs don't challenge or ever become gods. Slaying an avatar as a climactic conclusion to a campaign, cool. Messing around with an actual deity, no way. And I do have a god of agriculture and yes, you can choose to worship her and adventure in her service.

IMC (4e homebrew, rebooted from earlier editions) Asmodeus is not a god either. No gods directly intervene in any way, and never have. Much like the real world, there is no evidence for the existence of gods. That's why it's called faith, because there is no proof. There are clerics of Asmodeus, who do cast spells, just as there are clerics of the Lords of Light, Selene, Morpheus and the Lords of the Four Quarters. PCs can meet beings who claim to be servitors of these gods, but it is unclear if they have anything to do with the magical power exhibited by their clerics. The existence of non-deistic cults, such as the Pythagoreans and the Theurgists, would imply that there are none.

The point is that everyone handles deities, religion and divine power sources differently in their own games. The core rules should keep it simple enough to provide a basic framework for GMs who choose not to design an entire campaign sourcebook for the homebrew. Keeping it simple is not dumbing it down; it's good design.

 

[EATherrian]

The most fun I ever had was as a Cleric/Fighter of Chautea, the Goddess of Agriculture in the Forgotten Realms. I basically acted as a protector to the local farming village. I'd go out and fight orcs when they threatened and bless crops, marriages, and farm implements when there wasn't much going on. This was in 2nd edition, so we had more actual down-time to play then I recall from 3rd edition. Still I think ANY deity can be a worthwhile adventuring deity, even the God/dess of Peace. That would be a hard play, but I think a fun experiment.

 

[kennew142]

As for the particular issue of a god of agriculture...

I think it is easy enough to just dump the agricultural portfolio onto any god that is reasonable. For example, Pelor makes a great god of agriculture, in addition to everything else a Sun God can be. Obad-Hai is another great candidate.

To use a real world example (ancient Rome), Mars was the god of agriculture (or one of them, alongside Ceres and Bona Dea) and Apollo was the god of shepherds. This is true for many real world religions.

The fact that D&D campaign worlds separate every little concept possible into its own god, is one of the reasons that I find D&D Pantheons to be uninteresting and unauthentic. IMO Eberron handles this best, with its distant gods with broad concepts and lack of intervention. Arcanis is another excellent example of this design.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Brilliant, this is exactly as it should be. Crunch first, fluff second. Once you get the gameplay right, you come up with a world to support that gameplay.

 

[OakwoodDM]

I disagree. Why does a cleric of Death need to go out into the wild? There's plenty of death going on in cities, after all. On the other hand, particularly in a "points of light" setting, the front line of civilisation against the wild will always be farmers. These farmers will need a championr, or they will fail and their farms will be abandoned. Who better than a priest of their god to serve this role?

That's all well and good, but it does pretty much tie the priest into staying on that one farm, thus kind of ruining his fledgeling adventuring career.

As far as I'm concerned, the PHB needs simply enough gods to facilitate player choice without taking up pages that could be used to better explain the rules. If people are playing DnD, they have a good enough imagination that they can come up with a god of spiderwebs or whatever they need.

 

[nerfherder]

I'm 37 years old, and I've been DMing for over 25 years.

And I have every intention of playing 4e in it's "Core Setting" only. No Realms, no Eberron, and no 500 page homebrew opus.

The fact that 'points of light' will be vaguely defined is appealing to me. The fact that I don't have to deal with 'canon creep' is a feature, not a bug. The fact that each official module can be used off the shelf, without substituting my own history and place names is a major plus.

Add 3 years to your age and experience and that describes exactly my position, too.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Ah. At least here, I've got some hard evidence that there was at least one significant COMPLETE FAILURE OF IMAGINATION from the 4e team.

I've already used those exact words (perhaps we can abbreviate them as FoI, for future ease of use) to describe their approach to gnomes. Now we have two good examples of this phenomenon.

 

[Wulfram]

That's all well and good, but it does pretty much tie the priest into staying on that one farm, thus kind of ruining his fledgeling adventuring career.

Not really. Their job could well be to serve a whole region - they'd be the go-to guy for any farmers in the vicinity, helping them out in any number of ways, from "my crops aren't growing" and "my cattle are sick", to "Orcs kidnapped my children" and "Wyverns are eating my cattle". In the more dangerous parts of the world, that'll amount to an adventuring career.

As far as I'm concerned, the PHB needs simply enough gods to facilitate player choice without taking up pages that could be used to better explain the rules. If people are playing DnD, they have a good enough imagination that they can come up with a god of spiderwebs or whatever they need.

I don't necessarily disagree, in the general case. Gods of minor things don't need to be in. I just don't agree that the god of agriculture is either minor or unsuited to player characters.

 

[Daniel D. Fox]

I'm 37 years old, and I've been DMing for over 25 years.

And I have every intention of playing 4e in it's "Core Setting" only. No Realms, no Eberron, and no 500 page homebrew opus.

The fact that 'points of light' will be vaguely defined is appealing to me. The fact that I don't have to deal with 'canon creep' is a feature, not a bug. The fact that each official module can be used off the shelf, without substituting my own history and place names is a major plus.

Do you use modules only?

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

I'm going to back WotC on this one.

In the first book of the system I'd rather have a handful of new feats/talents and or spells than a fully fleshed out pantheon.

In a setting book then go ahead and give detailed writeups on the gods of Agriculture, Doorways and Pocket Lint.

In the FR setting book? I want the juicy details on the pantheon. In the first Core PHB? I want a bigger Feats chapter.

Who said anything about detailed writups? How much space in the 3e PHB does the listing for Ehlonna take up?