Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="HungerSquid" data-source="post: 8463352" data-attributes="member: 7033246">I see a lot of advice out there about making D&amp;D religions like real world religions. However, I tend to disagree with a lot of the notions I see in this advice. As a person who believes that all real world religions are all just superstition, I think D&amp;D religions would be much different.Some people like the idea of using conflicts between different sects of the same basic religion because of the drama it can provide. While this is true, I don't think a god that actually exists would allow this to happen. And I think you can get just as much drama in conflicts between followers of different gods, even ones with the same basic alignment.On the other hand, maybe some chaotic deity might get his kicks watching followers argue over details. Maybe a chaotic evil war deity would enjoy seeing bloody conflict between his sects.&nbsp; Who knows?I don't see that you could have clerics that were terribly corrupt when their God actually exists. If the God did not smite them outright, they would likely at least refuse them spells, which should out them to other clerics as not pious enough. I suppose there might be two types of priests; those who do miracles and those who do not. Maybe the non-casters could be corrupt. But what religious hierarchy would give them any real power when there are many demonstrably faithful miracle workers?I see a lot of DM's using one or a few main human religion(s), like the Catholic church in the middle ages. I like the idea of polytheism carried forward to the middle ages. If there are numerous real gods, wouldn't competition likely&nbsp; keep things more balanced rather than one deity having way more power in the world than others?Not that campaigns that go against my ideas can't be fun. I've played in numerous ones, and had lots of fun. I'm just saying what I think might make more sense in context.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="HungerSquid, post: 8463352, member: 7033246"] I see a lot of advice out there about making D&D religions like real world religions. However, I tend to disagree with a lot of the notions I see in this advice. As a person who believes that all real world religions are all just superstition, I think D&D religions would be much different. Some people like the idea of using conflicts between different sects of the same basic religion because of the drama it can provide. While this is true, I don't think a god that actually exists would allow this to happen. And I think you can get just as much drama in conflicts between followers of different gods, even ones with the same basic alignment. On the other hand, maybe some chaotic deity might get his kicks watching followers argue over details. Maybe a chaotic evil war deity would enjoy seeing bloody conflict between his sects. Who knows? I don't see that you could have clerics that were terribly corrupt when their God actually exists. If the God did not smite them outright, they would likely at least refuse them spells, which should out them to other clerics as not pious enough. I suppose there might be two types of priests; those who do miracles and those who do not. Maybe the non-casters could be corrupt. But what religious hierarchy would give them any real power when there are many demonstrably faithful miracle workers? I see a lot of DM's using one or a few main human religion(s), like the Catholic church in the middle ages. I like the idea of polytheism carried forward to the middle ages. If there are numerous real gods, wouldn't competition likely keep things more balanced rather than one deity having way more power in the world than others? Not that campaigns that go against my ideas can't be fun. I've played in numerous ones, and had lots of fun. I'm just saying what I think might make more sense in context. [/QUOTE]

Verification