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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="doctorhook" data-source="post: 6341412" data-attributes="member: 58401">For sure, although I'm pretty forgiving about it. For one thing, the "Here, have some pantheons!" approach is at least as old as 1E AD&D's Deities & Demigods, and that was itself rooted in fantastical tales from pantheon-worshiping cultures (Norse, Greco-Roman, and Egyptian, just for starters). Second, all we've really seen for 5E settings is peeks of Forgotten Realms. FR is neck-deep in pantheons, but it makes sense in FR's terms: if gods are literally people that sometimes walk down your street, there's probably a lot of them, and there's probably very little variation between types of religions. Finally, a tidy pantheon can make religion a lot more straightforward in your game; I was a big fan of 4E's pantheon for exactly this reason.I love Eberron, and I love its careful, nuanced approach to belief-systems, but I don't think a similar approach would be desirable in every game.Wait, what other than normal and friendly would you consider Japanese Tentacle Porn Monsters? I'd say they're the very model of friendliness, by at least some definitions.Even as far back as when the warlock was introduced in 3.5E, there was still the implication that every warlock had a patron, even if there was mechanical enforcement of that. The same was true in 4E, with the exception of the vestige warlock (who killed 3.5E's binder class and took its stuff). We still have yet to see the 5E warlock in its entirety, so it's much too early to complain about what warlocks are forced to do.Clerics have gods. Warlocks have patrons. Depending on the table you're playing at, you may play a whole campaign without ever even having to specify who your god/patron is. At the moment I see no reason to expect 5E to deviate from this pattern. What's the problem?The word "patron" certainly implies personification, but I think that might be a misnomer for the concept it represents anyway. I don't see any reason why the examples you've given couldn't be perfectly legitimate.</blockquote>

Verification