D&D 5E Atheism/Agnosticism in 5e?

[Hussar]

D&D rules, as written don't logically follow this principle. If magic has no sentience then anyone can invoke it - hence in the world view above there cannot logically be a split between the spells of wizards and clerics. Game balance demands otherwise though - so we arrive at a quandary.

My own setting divides magic into five distinct types. Study of any given type of magic precludes study of the others. No given character can master all spells.

Also, the above world type perforce bans spells that do put spell casters into direct contact with outer powers (or can do so) such as contact other plane, planar ally, and gate.

Not really though. Game balance does not demand that magic be split between divine and arcane. After all, lots and lots of spells cross the boundary anyway, so, there's never really been a hard and fast split between the two. Never minding something like a 3e bard which casts cleric spells as arcane. Or a 2e Specialty Priest, many of whom gain Magic User list spells as part of their own spell list.

Cleric and wizards cast different spells, sure, but, there's no real game balance reason we can't include them both under the same umbrella.

 

[Michael Morris]

Not really though. Game balance does not demand that magic be split between divine and arcane.

Game balance does demand that not all options be available at all times. Consider Magic: The Gathering. That game splits the spell effects across five colors. Each color is good at certain things, and bad at others.

In the absence of this color wheel, only the best spells would be played. The color wheel forces players to occasionally make suboptimal choices - and it broadens the relevant pool of cards.

In D&D the same thing would happen if you removed class restrictions from spells. Only the very best spells would be used. Worse, only the very best class irrelevant of spell ability, would be played - which has historically been the cleric and druid. Wizard spells are, healing excepted, usually better because wizards, without their spells, suck.

It's possible to modify D&D such that a character can, conceptually, eventually learn any spell. The mage prestige class in Dusk allows for this, but at a cost of limiting the character's ability to use other spells.

 

[Hussar]

Game balance does demand that not all options be available at all times. Consider Magic: The Gathering. That game splits the spell effects across five colors. Each color is good at certain things, and bad at others.

In the absence of this color wheel, only the best spells would be played. The color wheel forces players to occasionally make suboptimal choices - and it broadens the relevant pool of cards.

In D&D the same thing would happen if you removed class restrictions from spells. Only the very best spells would be used. Worse, only the very best class irrelevant of spell ability, would be played - which has historically been the cleric and druid. Wizard spells are, healing excepted, usually better because wizards, without their spells, suck.

It's possible to modify D&D such that a character can, conceptually, eventually learn any spell. The mage prestige class in Dusk allows for this, but at a cost of limiting the character's ability to use other spells.

But, that's not what's being discussed. If we remove the arcane/divine divide, it doesn't follow that every class suddenly gains access to all the spells. After all, lots of classes are limited to particular caster schools and the like. Clerics cast from the cleric list, wizards cast from the wizard list. It's just that both lists are now just "Magic" rather than divine or arcane.

It's not a big deal.

 

[Michael Morris]

But, that's not what's being discussed. If we remove the arcane/divine divide, it doesn't follow that every class suddenly gains access to all the spells.

It is the original explanation from 2e why healing magic was off limit to wizards though. You can keep the class lists and remove the divide, but it's illogical.

 

[Dausuul]

It is the original explanation from 2e why healing magic was off limit to wizards though. You can keep the class lists and remove the divide, but it's illogical.

Why? Wizards study branches of magic that can't heal people. Clerics study branches that can. Mastery of wizard magic doesn't let you cast clerical spells. Surgical equipment and computers are both technology, but knowing how to program a computer doesn't make you a surgeon.

 

[Janx]

I'm working on a warlock character, & I think he might be of the 'these beings are indeed powerful, but not truly 'gods' in the way that word is commonly used' bent - if permitted.

I realize that a zillion posts have been said since this started, but I gotta ask:

In a medieval world, how is an immensely powerful being that grants spells to clerics NOT a God?

Methinks that you may be applying modern thinking too much, and mincing words.

In D&D: A god = immensely powerful being that grants spells to clerics.

If your PC acknowledges that Thor exists, calling him a god is like saying Legolas is an Elf. It is stating a fact of nature, akin to describing his race or power level.

To argue that Thor is not a god is to imply there is something greater than he. Which in the scale of 1st level Warlock who thinks he understands the universe, is just infeasible, because 1st levels don't know anything.

Now it's possible your PC is working with something that claims it is greater than Thor, but at 1st level, your PC has no evidence to that being actually true. Your PC would have to take it on faith.

And in the end all things form a hierarchy, so something greater than Thor does not make Thor any less of a god.

 

[Michael Morris]

Why?

Two can play that game. You're the one making the assertions here, so you can do the justifications...

Wizards study branches of magic that can't heal people.

Why?

Clerics study branches that can.

Why?

Mastery of wizard magic doesn't let you cast clerical spells.

Why?

Surgical equipment and computers are both technology, but knowing how to program a computer doesn't make you a surgeon.

False equivalence. I've known some surgeons out there take the time to learn how to program, especially in the areas of prostetic (sp?) limbs.

 

[Umbran]

Folks, a little clarification of definitions was okay, so everyone coudl be on the same page about language.

But adding in judgmental commentary about people's real-world beliefs is not cool. I've had to delete one post. Next person who does such probably gets a vacation from the site.

 

[Umbran]

You can keep the class lists and remove the divide, but it's illogical.

*Logical* magic is technology. Be glad you have magic that operates in a consistent, predictable manner - that right there is a lot to ask of "magic" to begin with.

 

[Umbran]

In a typical D&D universe, with multiple competing deities each demanding a monogamous relationship from mortal worshipers (in the sense that, although there are other acknowledged gods, mortals are supposed to pledge themselves to just one immortal)

That's not clearly true. Clerics, or others who wield divine power, are typically asked to do so, yes, and that covers many of our gaming-related questions, as we are playing such characters. But, it is not at all clear that everyday people are expected to do so. The farmer goes to one god to pray for rain, and another to protect him from invading armies, etc., has always been the typical model I have used.