Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Patryn of Elvenshae" data-source="post: 3783886" data-attributes="member: 23094">My guess is that designing pantheons, and the individual spheres of influence within that pantheon, is something most DMs like to do as part of designing their world.  Assigning available domains based on the deities' roles is a natural extension of that.Then, when a player decides to play a cleric, there's an instant character hook when that player decides to be a cleric of the Hearth Goddess, or the Bloody Warbringer, or the Enlightened One.  And if you're a cleric of the Enlightened One, it doesn't really make sense to have the War and Ocean domains, because those don't fit the deity's role.  Neither should the priests of the Bloody Warbringer be taking the Pacifism and Healing domains (though these are perfectly appropriate to his twin sister).It's probably not broken in the core rules, but there's probably a good argument to be made that certain expansion domains shouldn't be allowed to mix.My experience is that, generally, it does work like the FR system (and worked like that in previous editions, as well).  A player decides to play a cleric, and the DM says "Here's the list of gods, their domains, and some info about their churches.  Which one do you want to use?"I think that there's a reason that, in the section on gods (or clerics; I can't recall) in the Eberron Campaign Setting, they specifically restate the ability to take any two domains of your choice (pursuant to DM oversight), representing pulling philosophical power from the remains of the Dragon Above.</blockquote>

Verification