Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kennew142" data-source="post: 3949452" data-attributes="member: 18490">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.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.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.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.</blockquote>

Verification