Azzy
ᚳᚣᚾᛖᚹᚢᛚᚠ (He/Him)
Um, no.
Core+1
- Thread starter Yaarel
- Start date
Um, no.
Parmandur
Book-Friend, he/him
What? There is no rule change in Xanathar's related to theism.
Yaarel
🇮🇱 🇺🇦 He-Mage
I had the following text in mind. But on rereading it now. 5e core rules continue to push polytheism in the most heavy-handed way possible.
Xanathars Guide to Everything (p. 18)
"
Serving a Pantheon, Philosophy, or Force
In certain campaigns, a cleric might instead serve a cosmic force such as life or death, or a philosophy or concept, such as love, peace, or one of the nine alignments.
Chapter 1 of the Dungeon Masters Guide explores options like these.
Talk with you DM about the divine options available in your campaign, whether they're gods, pantheons, philosophies, or cosmic forces. Whatever being or thing your cleric ends up serving, choose a Divine Domain that is appropriate for it, and if it doesnt have a holy symbol work with your DM to design one.
The cleric's class features often refer to your ‘deity’. If you are devoted to a pantheon, cosmic force, or philosophy, your cleric features still work for you as written, think of the references to a ‘god’ as references to the divine thing you serve that gives you your magic.
"
Sadly. On reread. It seems like nonpolytheistic clerics are strictly homebrew and remain illegal in AL.
Last edited:
Henry
Autoexreginated
Knowing our DM, probably so, but we’re all experienced players and are comfortable with being told “no” to some options, so as far as I know no one’s bothered to ask, and it hasn’t come up.
Satyrn
First Post
I would think that, since AL is played in FR, a cleric of a monotheistic deity would be wildly out of place and pure heresy.
Mistwell
Crusty Old Meatwad
Yeah that's my point. The rule is not about balance. It was never about balance and it doesn't address any balance issues that were not already there with just Core+1. It's a rule purely about giving players a sense they are not overwhelmed by the books and/or falling behind if they don't buy them all. I really don't buy this claim that it's a balance themed rule.
S
Sunseeker
Guest
Heresy you say? So this monotheistic deity would employ say, a fanatical legion of all-female Vengeance paladins?
Enevhar Aldarion
Hero
I am starting to think that some people, [MENTION=58172]Yaarel[/MENTION] included, do not know what the definition of monotheism is. It is not that a person follows and worships only one god, it is that a person not only worships only one god, but also believes on their god is real. In a fantasy setting, like the Realms or other standard fantasy settings, where multiple gods exist and their powers are manifest in the world, a monotheistic person would have to be mentally ill or completely delusional to believe their chosen god is the only god that exists. For a monotheistic character to work, and be believable, the setting would have to be made specifically for it.
S
Sunseeker
Guest
I disagree. One can believe a being exists, but deny that it is a god or worthy of worship. The fact that a powerful being shows up and does things beyond comprehension does not mean they're a god, it just means they're incredibly powerful.
And frankly, D&D has a rather loose definition of "deity" anyway.
cbwjm
Seb-wejem
I wonder if people confuse it with being about balance because the developers have said that, when creating new options, they always balance them against the options in the PHB. Mearls brings it up a few times in his weekly design stream. I always thought it was about new players not wanting to be have to feel like they need to buy all the books to keep up.
