How Might D&D Religions Differ From Real Life Religions?

It'll just depend on the gods' personalities, if they're fine with their followers praying to others, if they need prayers to survive, if they can communicate with mortals, and if the pantheon as a whole has some agreement regarding on who can get prayers from who. You can't really compare it to real life pantheons since the gods can just work in completely different ways, and societies in the game should be a lot different with magic, monsters and devils undeniably existing.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I suposse you are talking about "monolatry", when you worship only one deity, but you accept the existence of others. Somebody says the ancient Israel was closer monolatry than true monotheist, and maybe it was true, at least for a time.

For storytelling elements, I miss the vestiges from3.5 Pact of Magic. I liked the idea of potential conflicts between the binders and the divine spellcasters. Also I love the psionic ardent, because these were perfect to create stories about hate-love relations with the rest of divine spellcasters. Here Asian philosophies could be a source of inspiration.

Sometimes I imagine a new class mixing the summoner from Pathfinder, the vestige binder, and the incarnum totemist shaman, about summoning totem spirits and these giving monster traits as "feats". Some powers would work like martial maneuvers, the middle point between at-will and once-encounter.
 

The mistake, I think, comes more at the table when players and DMs bring their own experiences with religion, overwhelmingly through the ubiquitous monotheistic religions of today.
This has been my experience. On to of that, popular culture tends to deal in stereotypes, so lots of assumptions are made about spiritual thought and practices, churches, etc. Without efforts to prevent it, at the table the result of all that tends to be bland portrayals of large religions, "primitive" belief systems, and their leaders and practitioners.
 
Last edited:

We shouldn't forget the possible complains about cultural apropiation if we used elements based in no-Western cultures.

Other point is if a commoner can see with their own eyes divine spellcasters or a supernatural monster, then he worries about the trial in the afterlife and the eternal punishment. Even the richest social classes would think twice about the salvations of their souls.
 

Setting aside most of the discussion and just touching on the original question, the biggest thing for me is that in a world like the Realms where the deities can be pretty active in directly interacting with mortals, there should be a lot fewer doctrinal disputes. When you can go on Reddit and see a thread that says "I'm literally Athena, goddess of wisdom, AMA" it seems like it would be a lot easier to get these things sorted.
 

What features of real life religions couldn't apply to D&D religions?

What features probably wouldn't apply?

In what ways would (or could) D&D religions mirror real life religions?

There are no wrong answers, or at least I don't think there are.

Your thoughts?
Assuming a setting where the existence of the gods is clear and not in question - the result of their repeated and clear presence and intercession in people's lives:

With actual proven gods whose agendas are clearer, there would be less doubt about whether to fight the other folks who worship the other proven god with the other clear agenda that threatens your gods agenda. This assumes that any given god will want their worshipers to fight for their agenda.

There might be more understanding between the followers of different gods, since there would be less interpretation of gods' agendas? this doesn't mean more or less fighting, of course.

"Mirror real life religions" gets into too many assumptions about "religion", which is a term often used to cover too many things, so I'm just going to skip that.
 

Assuming a setting where the existence of the gods is clear and not in question - the result of their repeated and clear presence and intercession in people's lives:

With actual proven gods whose agendas are clearer, there would be less doubt about whether to fight the other folks who worship the other proven god with the other clear agenda that threatens your gods agenda. This assumes that any given god will want their worshipers to fight for their agenda.

There might be more understanding between the followers of different gods, since there would be less interpretation of gods' agendas? this doesn't mean more or less fighting, of course.

"Mirror real life religions" gets into too many assumptions about "religion", which is a term often used to cover too many things, so I'm just going to skip that.
Or to put it another way

"Most witches don’t believe in gods. They know that the gods exists, of course. They even deal with them occasionally. But they don’t believe in them. They know them too well. It would be like believing in the postman."
Terry Pratchett, Witches Abroad
 

I have watched in youtube a video telling a sypnosis of the Korean supernatural thriller "Hellbound", and the social impact of certain doubtless supernatural event. And it is curious because, and it is not a true spoiler if I say it, the consecuences of the faith without mercy. Everybody accepts there is a supernatural punishment for the sinners, and most of people try to be better, but the fear to the hell without mercy, is a very bad combo. They want to save their lives and their souls, but they forget ethical values as the respect of the human dignity. Let's imagine the family of a sinner punished by a outsider, being rejected by the rest of the society.
 



Remove ads

Top