New Design and Development: Pantheon

I wonder how the new phanteon will affect the monsters in 4E. For example with Bahamut now being the (a) universal, beloved paladin deity the metallic dragons will be regarded much differently by humans than in 3Ed.
Even if the humans only think that Paladin is not a dragon himself but carries the title Platinum Dragon out of respect, they will regard metallic dragons (especially nearly platinum looking like silvers) much more friendly (look messenger/servant of Bahamut!) than how many DMs played them in 3Ed (Eeek! A big dragon!).
 

log in or register to remove this ad

lukelightning said:
It's obvious that many of us will houserule/homebrew/domiciledecree our own pantheons. Here's mine:

... Hextor, ... PirateCat

I think I have all the bases covered, right?
Looks to me like you have one of you bases covered twice.

Henry said:
(Then again, they probably wouldn't be using the same currency, either, but that's for another thread.)
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.

Sundragon2012 said:
Seems like Paladine from Dragonlance has made it into the 4e core. Damn Right! Props to the greatest paladin god ever!! :) This "Bahamut" might not be called Paladine, but he is Paladine and anyone who is a DL fan or knowns anything about this god will be able to see it.
Sure, I see it. But if any D&D designer comes within a mile of mentioning the name "Fizban", or that Bahamut is often seen in the company of a precocious "halfling" in a rabbit-fur vest, I will personally beat them to within an inch of -10 HP.
 


Pffft. This cross-bred pantheon holds about as much appeal as roadkill (and is about as useful). They should have stuck with generics in the PHB and rather have given the DM some advice on coming up with a decent pantheon in the DMG. Generic adventures could have used sidebars to suggest setting-specific deities and the art department could have used any one of those for thematic elements.
This is quite the most off-putting element of 4E for me thus far. The core books should be setting neutral. They should inspire creativity, not stifle it with such poorly executed ideas.
 

Irda Ranger said:
But if any D&D designer comes within a mile of mentioning the name "Fizban", or that Bahamut is often seen in the company of a precocious "halfling" in a rabbit-fur vest, I will personally beat them to within an inch of -10 HP.
You know what bothers me about that vest? It's inside out. Its insulating properties work best if it's flipped over and has the ability to shut a little tighter.

I think the little bastard just likes killing rabbits, and wasn't cold at all.
 

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
You know what bothers me about that vest? It's inside out. Its insulating properties work best if it's flipped over and has the ability to shut a little tighter.

I think the little bastard just likes killing rabbits, and wasn't cold at all.

Wasn't his knife called "Rabbit Killer?"


On topic, I'm really glad they're doing this. From a generic pantheon standpoint, everything sounds on point. The generic pantheon should be buffet drawn from all D&D IPs. Out of the box D&D should have a pantheon covering all the bases, and that pantheon should connect with the settings' pantheons. I'm also really glad they're divesting the racial gods of their dedicated racial associations and instead making them deities that would particularly appeal to certain races, but are worshiped/worshipable by all races.
 

GoodKingJayIII said:
Diathalese just made my top 5 favorite gods.
I wish I could take credit for it, but it came from the DM of a group I played 2e with very briefly. I played a dwarven cleric and the DM assigned me Diathalese as a deity because I joined the game while the party was in a dungeon and they had recently found a shrine to Diathalese. I was like "what the heck?!!?" at first but quickly came to really like this deity. The DM didn't have any info on him other than his name, so I made up liturgy and theology. To cast spells/turn undead/invoke Diathalese you wiggle your fingers on your head like they're antennae. Also, Diathalese was inexplicably Lawful Good, so I said "just like the fire beetle, a priest of Diathalese must bring the Light of Goodness into Dark Places."
Irda Ranger said:
a precocious "halfling" in a rabbit-fur vest,
What about a rabbit in a hobbit-fur vest?
 
Last edited:

Irda Ranger said:
Sure, I see it. But if any D&D designer comes within a mile of mentioning the name "Fizban", or that Bahamut is often seen in the company of a precocious "halfling" in a rabbit-fur vest, I will personally beat them to within an inch of -10 HP.

I wouldn't worry. After the Soth Incident, I don't expect that anything DL-specific will be included as part of the core D&D cosmos ever again. Actually, I don't think any DL-originated creatures even made it into the 3E monster books.
 

I'm not a fan of the mix & match core pantheon, but the current line-up seems like an improvement over the previous one that included Thor, Athena, etc alongside existing D&D gods. I didn't really like the Greyhawk-lite core pantheon of 3e, but I got used to it as placeholder names.

I wish they had not opted to include Bane though, I think he is pretty much comical as a god. And Planesailing, while I can agree with you that Hextor is sort of a campy name, I think Bane is hokier name still.

Oh well. Not the end of the world, most of my campaigns will probably use some other pantheon anyway.

On the upside, between this newly revised core pantheon and the Pathfinder pantheon, Sean K Reynolds should have plenty of work for the next several years. Perhaps it is all an evil plot on his part...
 


Remove ads

Top