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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ilbranteloth" data-source="post: 7157327" data-attributes="member: 6778044">And I disagree. The text as a whole, scattered as it may be, implies a world with more than a single god. Again, I don't know if you object to several monotheistic religions in your fantasy world, just as there are many monotheistic (and polytheistic) religions in our world.Furthermore, the text doesn't say "unless it conflicts with their deity" it says a cleric can be of any alignment, dependent upon their deity.Meaning: A cleric can be of any alignment. The specific alignment is restricted by the choice of your deity. If you want to be a different alignment, choose a different deity.With all of the other text supporting, implying, or outright stating that there are multiple gods in the campaign in AD&D, the mention of "deity or deity" is allowing the possibility that the cleric can actually serve more than a single deity. Again, the default is that a D&D cleric worships a single deity in a polytheistic religion.But it's more than figurative. They grant spells to the druids, and they can refuse to grant them spells as well. That's not a misuse -  mechanically, in game terms, they are deities to the druid.No, as far as the game design is concerned it's a core book. Whether players choose to treat it that way is different, but as Gary stated, it was an integral part of the design. Also, again, the statement of it being a "guideline" and not "rules" doesn't mitigate the fact that the rules-the framework-were based on a polytheistic approach, with a god for each alignment at the very least. What the disclaimer in Deities & Demigods is stating is that the specifics of that implementation is up to you. But it's quite clear that the assumption on the part of the designers is that everybody will be running a campaign with a polytheistic religious system.I don't find this curious at all. Alignment was a significant part of the design at the time. That is is often confusing and misunderstood doesn't make it unpleasant or inane. It's really not all that different from the 5e trait, ideal, bond, and flaw approach for additional guidance on the personality of a given character. It's also a good shorthand for tying a deity to a cleric without having to design a complex religion with tenets and beliefs to determine whether the cleric has strayed too far or not.While I personally prefer the more complex approach of developed religions and oaths and such for classes such as clerics and paladins, the simplicity of the alignment system in that regard is missing. Actually, the entire concept that a cleric can stray and lose their abilities has pretty much been removed.For you. Clearly this is not the case in RPGs in general, nor in fantasy fiction for that matter. As you've noted, the approach became more integrated as time went on, and it hasn't stopped people from playing, nor even from taking it farther and debating the actual nature of their fictional gods. If anything it seems to have sparked a lot of passion for their campaigns. It's not even the case for the majority of the people in this thread.Actually, the wording the in the 5e PHB is pretty close to AD&D, "the most important question to consider is which deity to serve and what principles you want your character to embody...Check with your DM to learn which deities are in your campaign. If you only have one, then it's simple - pick a domain and continue.You can choose to read only those passages in the AD&D 1e books that don't include the word "gods" and ignore things like the fact that druids are a sub-class of cleric, and receive their powers in the same manner of a cleric, and can be judged and lose those abilities from their gods, and you can ignore that the gods in AD&D are directly tied to the alignment system, and thus must have more gods than one, etc. Or you can do the same thing and ignore the sentences that you don't like in 5e. There isn't anything hard-coded to alignment in 5e like it is in 1e, which seems to be another part of AD&D you dislike. But the overwhelming amount of material published before, during, and after AD&D is that the intention, and the default, is that AD&D assumes a polytheistic approach to religion in the game.</blockquote>

Verification