D&D 5E Faith, Gods, and your Character in 5E

[CleverNickName]

For all of its faults, 3.X and Pathfinder both did one thing right, in my opinion...deities. Depending on the type of game you are running and the class of character you choose, a hero's beliefs can be pivotal, minor, or completely ignored. I hope that this carries over into the 5th Edition of the game.

This thread is for discussing how that might be achieved.

[SBLOCK=Disclaimer]Obviously, all of this depends heavily on other game mechanics. Character development could be a carbon-copy of an existing game system, it could be something completely new, or (more likely) a blend of the two...and without knowing those details, we can only play a game of "what-if", and that's fine by me.[/SBLOCK]-----

For religion in general, I would like to see a character's religion as a Skill. Characters who decide to follow this tree would put ranks into that Skill (called "Faith," or some-such), and when they get enough of those ranks they could afford to buy a new talent (or feat, or power, or whatever else they are going to call the rungs on the ladder.) This lets any character become as religious as the player wants.

Then, each deity could then have its own talent tree. The tree for Pelor would have abilities for healing and turning the undead, the tree for Kord would have abilities for strength and defense, and so on. If you put enough ranks into the Faith(Deity) skill, you qualify for new abilities. This would mash the 3.X deities' granted powers and domains together, creating something that could be useful for all classes that want it...not just clerics. A thief who serves Vecna? Yes please. A religiously-unaffiliated fighter who follows his instincts? You got it. Polytheistic clerics who serve a handful of gods? Go for it.

Of course, we don't know anything about how the game is going to work. There might not be talent trees in 5E. There might not even be non-combat skills for that matter. But I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

 

[delericho]

IMO, the game should handle faith on an "if you want" basis.

So, in the Starter Set, there should be almost no mention of gods at all. There are just good Clerics and evil Clerics, but they have the same powers.

In the Core Rulebook, the same should probably be true, although it's probably appropriate to have a discussion of the role of deities in the game. (And the same with the Paladin, if included.)

However, in the supplements (and especially settings) they can then introduce deity-specific powers/feats/talents/whatever - some aimed solely at Clerics... but there's no great reason there couldn't be such things for other characters too. Then, if a PC is dedicated to a particular god, they get to add the deity-specific stuff to their list of options when choosing powers for their character. (Some settings can require that Clerics be dedicated to one of the gods, or not.)

FWIW, I would suggest the same with regard to alignment - don't include it in the core, but provide options for it in supplements/DDI for those who want it.

 

[Wormwood]

I enjoy running/playing in homebrew settings occasionally, and I find a 'default pantheon' to annoying if it is hardwired into powers (or their 5e equivalent).

On a minor tangent, I am very much enjoying how these speculative discussions are forcing me to recall game elements stretching back 30+ years. Good for my old brain!

 

[CleverNickName]

in the Starter Set, there should be almost no mention of gods at all. There are just good Clerics and evil Clerics, but they have the same powers.

In the Core Rulebook, the same should probably be true, although it's probably appropriate to have a discussion of the role of deities in the game. (And the same with the Paladin, if included.)

However, in the supplements (and especially settings) they can then introduce deity-specific powers/feats/talents/whatever - some aimed solely at Clerics... but there's no great reason there couldn't be such things for other characters too. Then, if a PC is dedicated to a particular god, they get to add the deity-specific stuff to their list of options when choosing powers for their character. (Some settings can require that Clerics be dedicated to one of the gods, or not.)

I suppose we should also discuss the Starter Set. WHEN the deities get included in the game is just as important as HOW, after all.

I do like the idea of not having gods at all in the "starter" set. If the game uses talent trees (and this is a BIG "if"), it would be simple to just publish all of the religion-based talent trees in a single book. DMs and players who want to run a religiously-influenced game would just pick up a copy of that book, and start taking ranks in the appropriate skills (or whatever). It is clean and elegant. I dig it.

FWIW, I would suggest the same with regard to alignment - don't include it in the core, but provide options for it in supplements/DDI for those who want it.

I'm pretty sure that alignment will be included in the Starter set...it was the first thing that Mearls mentioned on his list of things that defined "classic D&D." I concede that there is a lot of overlap between religion and alignment (both are "beliefs," after all), but I don't think they will be lumped into the same chapter of the book.

 

[DonTadow]

IMO, the game should handle faith on an "if you want" basis.

So, in the Starter Set, there should be almost no mention of gods at all. There are just good Clerics and evil Clerics, but they have the same powers.

In the Core Rulebook, the same should probably be true, although it's probably appropriate to have a discussion of the role of deities in the game. (And the same with the Paladin, if included.)

However, in the supplements (and especially settings) they can then introduce deity-specific powers/feats/talents/whatever - some aimed solely at Clerics... but there's no great reason there couldn't be such things for other characters too. Then, if a PC is dedicated to a particular god, they get to add the deity-specific stuff to their list of options when choosing powers for their character. (Some settings can require that Clerics be dedicated to one of the gods, or not.)

FWIW, I would suggest the same with regard to alignment - don't include it in the core, but provide options for it in supplements/DDI for those who want it.

DItto. I run a ton of campaigns without gods, i make up gods, i merge gods. What I don't want is to be forced gods.

However, for the new player, cleric's will need something to reference, this should be covered in alignment in genral form. God of good, god of evil etc.

 

[delericho]

I'm pretty sure that alignment will be included in the Starter set...it was the first thing that Mearls mentioned on his list of things that defined "classic D&D."

Indeed. I'm inclined to think that's a mistake (since as many people hate alignment as like it), but it's not a huge issue to me.

 

[Arctic Wolf]

I like the idea and it would help develop a deeper connection to a character's religion then what we currently see in 4e. It would be like, "thanks for worshipping and obeying me, here are some additional gifts for your service and continued service.* I also think, like you mentioned, that it should be in it's own book so that they can really focus on it. On the topic of Deities and such, while I don't mind having premade ones, they should maybe include a few pages on how to make your own and have it not overpowered or not as overpowered as a deity can be heh. I am really happy how they don't have a god of gods thing going on which would annoy me like hell.

On a side note, they should have all the deities' stat blocks incase you decide to fight good, evil, or unaligned ones but that is just what I think.

 

[howandwhy99]

Okay, I just had to post in this thread.

Here's how we do it and it's silly and serious and doesn't mean it your way, but it's about as freeing as I can understand deities to be and self-defining as any religious-based class can be, especially clerics and paladins, but any class really.

"What deity or deities can I follow?"
"You tell me." That's the answer I got when I made my first OD&D cleric. Can I worship Kermit the Frog? Sure. Sifl & Olly the sock puppets? Yes. Whatever you want.

The catch is, they are as defined or undefined as you want them, but they must also fall under a PC-playable alignment. That it.

Is that my starting alignment too?
Your choice, but, of course, if you start off with a different alignment your deities won't be too happy. IOW, expect some penalties in terms of class abilities until you get back in harmony. But hey! That's your choice right? You opted for it, you get it.

So write out, draw, make codes of conduct, rituals, rites, practices, tell me what you worship. That is IT for you. I'll work with you to get it to fit under one of the alignments and we can get on with the game.

As DM I'll be working that god into the world. Maybe it's simply "Beauty", but the concept will have followers and clerics (and Paladins if Lawful) and they will be tied into everything else going on. They'll have their own agendas, but you'll have your own too. And you can change your characters (of course) in the future, but don't expect your religion's to change (not that you can't try and adventure to change it through other ways). Have fun, play what you want, and make it as serious, silly, awesome, or whatever that you want.

 

[Wormwood]

So write out, draw, make codes of conduct, rituals, rites, practices, tell me what you worship. That is IT for you. I'll work with you to get it to fit under one of the alignments and we can get on with the game.

Should a framework be provided upon which to develop those concepts, that would be my ideal 5e.

Options, options, options.

 

[enrious]

Among the many things I liked about the Scarred Lands was the rule that if you spent a round and prayed to a particular diety, then you'd get a small bonus on a related action.

For example, pray to the god of smiths and you'd get a +1 to a craft (armor) check - I wouldn't want only divine casters to get some benefit.

The rest is setting related to me.