New Design and Development: Pantheon

[JohnSnow]

Gold is gold, in the forest or the mine. A "gold piece" is an agreed upon standard measure of weight; the fact that the Dwarven Thrak is square and weighs twice what a Shire Pince does is irrelevant to the merchant's scales. Like HP, it's an abstraction.

But everyone speaking Common? Yeah, that makes no sense.

Well, I haven't read the whole thread yet, but I had to respond to this comment.

Common is one of those D&Disms that was ripped straight from the Professor (Tolkien, that is).

In Middle-Earth, everyone spoke Westron. The hobbits and the Rohirrim used to speak something different, as did the men of Dale, there are two elven tongues, and the dwarves use their language in secret only. But Westron is the language spoken by all the peoples of Middle-Earth.

It's an abstraction that makes for easier gameplay. It's also done for the same reason that Tolkien "translated" Westron as modern English and Rohirric as Old English in The Lord of the Rings - to make it comprehensible.

The "common" of medieval Europe was latin. That's why old empires (fallen or not) are so handy - they give you an excuse for a widely-used "common tongue."

 

[Nifft]

The "common" of medieval Europe was latin. That's why old empires (fallen or not) are so handy - they give you an excuse for a widely-used "common tongue."

I used exactly this in my game. First Empire = Latin, and the three major human nations speak French, Spanish and Italian. Gives me a nice source of names, too.

Also IMC, Draconic = Greek, and that's why you get so many Arcane spells with Greek-derived names.

(The classical linguist in my group was very amused when they found an off-world wyrmling who spoke Draconic Linear-B. I love being able to throw in hints like that.)

Cheers, -- N

 

[Transit]

Exactly. What have the Romans ever done for us?

Other than sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, very darned little!

And don't forget that they also invented the D20.

 

[Klaus]

I like Bahamut as a god of paladins and revered by good dragons, but he doesn't seem like Bane's archnemesis. Bahamut works best when paired against Tiamat. I wonder if Tiamat would work better as the goddess of tyrants.

I think Tiamat redone as a chaotic evil dragon goddess could also work, but then she may become too much like Lolth.

The problem here is that you're assuming that Bahamut and Bane have the same relationship as Heironeous and Hextor (archnemesis). As stated in the article, Bane is a war deity that could have visible temples in several human and hobgoblin areas. Bahamut is Rule with Righteousness. Bane is Rule with Ruthlessness.

 

[Sundragon2012]

I would hope that Tiamat becomes the major goddess she should be. She has more cache in the D&D tradition and more traction than nearly any other evil personage. Make her the goddess of avarice, evil dragons, hatred, etc. and turn her into the greater goddess she should be. I never quite understood how, though dragons have been the iconic creature of the game, their gods have been (outside of Io who people really liked) crap.

Hopefully 4e will give the Dragonqueen some props.



Sundragon

 

[pemerton]

I've never minded if real-world past and present religions were in my table games, but for a published rules setting, I've always been a bit more skittish, because at the table I know what to expect from my regular gaming group, and we're able to solve differences in a mature fashion.

Agreed. I use real-world religions in my game, but think WoTC are sensible to avoid them in the core pantheon - and are especially sensible to avoid labelling various historical cultures as good or evil.

Why do the Romans get to be LG?

They are in my game.

Is Roman society in your game a society based on mass slavery? I find that aspect of historical Rome difficult to reconcile with the game's definition of Lawful Good.

In fact, most actual historical societies are difficult to reconcile with the game's definition of Lawful Good, which is (to me) another good reason for the core pantheon to be fictional rather than historical.

 

[I'm A Banana]

In fact, most actual historical societies are difficult to reconcile with the game's definition of Lawful Good, which is (to me) another good reason for the core pantheon to be fictional rather than historical.

Word.

I'm all for adapting historical deities to the D&D melieu (in my high school game, we appropriated the Greek gods all the freakin' time), but it's an ADAPTATION, meaning that there will be (and ought to be) some deep differences to reflect that it is a deity for a game and not for the world.

That irks the purists, though I'm not sure they're worth not irking.

The core pantheon should be fictional, and they should be flavored from D&D's rich history. And then I can inject detail into them later (one of my favorite little indulgences is mythographically analyzing the fictional deities, dismantling them and revealing the mythic strata they stand atop)

 

[Brennin Magalus]

Is Roman society in your game a society based on mass slavery? I find that aspect of historical Rome difficult to reconcile with the game's definition of Lawful Good.

No. I use the Late Roman Empire as a model and there are no slaves. (Idealized, I know, but it is an exercise in fantasy after all!) There are probably coloni (tenant farmers) though.

 

[KingCrab]

So would Ebil Badass, but I don't like that name either.

The professional settings should have names better than those thought up by 12 year old DMs.

Ebil Badass is an angry god and doesn't like people criticising his name.

 

[helium3]

QFT.

Set is an excellent snake god because people tend to think he is a snake god. Historical accuracy can kiss my Druid's Wildshape.

Cheers, -- N

Which is funny, because I think most people would in order of decreasing probability:

(a) not know who Set was.
(b) know that he's an god of the Egyptian pantheon.
(c) know that he's a god mentioned in Conan.

Now . . . Thulsa Doom on the other hand . . .