Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="billd91" data-source="post: 4509110" data-attributes="member: 3400">I don't really think D&amp;D has necessarily gotten it very wrong. Even in polytheistic historical cultures, a lot of dedicated temples had their own specialist clergy, devoted to the mastering the mysteries and rituals of their own dedicated priesthoods. They'd be the ones responsible for the day to day operations of the temple as well as organizing and officiating over any observances related to their god's portfolio including holidays and other more personal events. But I think it does bear repeating that, with respect to the observances of other deities, they're pretty much the same as any other uninitiated congregant.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.But I agree there are points that I think traditional D&amp;D has missed opportunities to develop what polytheism means. I don't think that's necessarily a case of being wrong as much as not exploiting an opening. I could certainly see a level of clergy that performs rituals for (and draws power from) multiple deities, something like a generic priest of a pantheon, performing the rituals appropriate to several civic gods. Similarly, there could be ways to blend the powers and responsibilities of multiple deities without requiring a cleric character to shift religions completely, and without going through the efforts of multiclassing.I just don't think D&amp;D has necessarily been wrong for focusing on one aspect of polytheism (the specialists) without developing the generalists.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="billd91, post: 4509110, member: 3400"] I don't really think D&D has necessarily gotten it very wrong. Even in polytheistic historical cultures, a lot of dedicated temples had their own specialist clergy, devoted to the mastering the mysteries and rituals of their own dedicated priesthoods. They'd be the ones responsible for the day to day operations of the temple as well as organizing and officiating over any observances related to their god's portfolio including holidays and other more personal events. But I think it does bear repeating that, with respect to the observances of other deities, they're pretty much the same as any other uninitiated congregant. 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. But I agree there are points that I think traditional D&D has missed opportunities to develop what polytheism means. I don't think that's necessarily a case of being wrong as much as not exploiting an opening. I could certainly see a level of clergy that performs rituals for (and draws power from) multiple deities, something like a generic priest of a pantheon, performing the rituals appropriate to several civic gods. Similarly, there could be ways to blend the powers and responsibilities of multiple deities without requiring a cleric character to shift religions completely, and without going through the efforts of multiclassing. I just don't think D&D has necessarily been wrong for focusing on one aspect of polytheism (the specialists) without developing the generalists. [/QUOTE]

Verification