D&D General The purpose of deity stats in D&D.

[Willie the Duck]

Nice digging.


Synnibarr used that power points (god points) based on number of worshippers concept.

Bruce Heard (of later Known World/Mystara fame) created his own similarly-flavored game world (The World of Calidar) that took it a step further. Gods are so defined by their worshippers that if the majority of the laity has a misconception about their deity, that misconception can retro-actively become true.

The Order of the Stick played around with the same concept, having Thor having been redheaded (as in Norse Myths) until Jack Kirby turned him blond with the Marvel comics.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

The earliest mention I've found of deities needing mortal worship in D&D comes from Gary Gygax's "Deities and their Faithful" article in Dragon #97 (May, 1985), which says the following:

Not D&D, but the same idea is in Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels, most centrally, Small Gods (1992).

 

[Mannahnin]

Not D&D, but the same idea is in Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels, most centrally, Small Gods (1992).

Discworld deities work in this way, and that is rather well known setting. I don't know if it originated the idea, but I'm pretty sure that it does not exist in any real mythology. It is a game/fiction rationalisation of how the divine works.

Yeah, I think it's a rationalization which originated in sci-fi/fantasy, and carried over to RPGs. Good call on Discworld, though The Colour of Magic wasn't until 1983, and I'm sure the concept is older.

 

[Micah Sweet]

"Rationalization" is a somewhat pejorative term for it. I prefer "explanation" or "idea".

 

[Upper_Krust]

I think this is fairly case specific.

With multiple options GMs can always pick and choose.

In 1e Deities and Demigods and in the 5e DMG gaining sufficient worshipers is a possible path for ascension.

In 2e and on FR it is a world specific stricture imposed by the FR overgod Ao on FR gods to tie them closer to their worshipers by tying their deific power to worship. In canon this is a point in time change by Ao, there was a time when gods were not tied to worship.

FR seems like the sort of closed Cosmology you mentioned previously with AO the tier above.

In contrast 1e Greyhawk for instance had greater gods being specifically remote and not caring about worshipers while Xagyg ascended by trapping demigods and magicking himself into godhood.

Is it mentioned anywhere Zagyg siphoned power from any of the imprisoned Immortals & Demon Princes? Presumably at the very least he would have gained XP through 'defeating' them...although a quick check suggests he would have only gained XP enough for approx. 2 wizard levels from imprisoning all 10 (discounting defeating any servants they had with them).

 

[Mannahnin]

"Rationalization" is a somewhat pejorative term for it. I prefer "explanation" or "idea".

Rationalization has a negative connotation, but in this case, as with a LOT of D&D rules, rationalize is a directly applicable and appropriate term for what we're doing.

To try to render rational via logic, to systematize, to categorize and organize. Even if the subject matter is inherently irrational, illogical, or unknowable. Like how D&D defines and categorizes all sorts of monsters and creatures with strict boundaries and taxonomy when such clear boundaries and definitions were rarely clear in real life folklore or mythology.

I often use the verb when referring to what 3E did in trying to reorganize and overhaul D&D's various bespoke subsystems and impose more unified core mechanics.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Rationalization has a negative connotation, but in this case, as with a LOT of D&D rules, rationalize is a directly applicable and appropriate term for what we're doing.

To try to render rational via logic, to systematize, to categorize and organize. Even if the subject matter is inherently irrational, illogical, or unknowable. Like how D&D defines and categorizes all sorts of monsters and creatures with strict boundaries and taxonomy when such clear boundaries and definitions were rarely clear in real life folklore or mythology.

I often use the verb when referring to what 3E did in trying to reorganize and overhaul D&D's various bespoke subsystems and impose more unified core mechanics.

Fair enough, but I don't think you can use that term without it being seen as a dis, at least by some.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Discworld deities work in this way, and that is rather well known setting. I don't know if it originated the idea, but I'm pretty sure that it does not exist in any real mythology. It is a game/fiction rationalisation of how the divine works.

It also is kinda like it works in real life, at least from an atheist perspective - religions only have power if they have worshippers that follow their traditions. (Though obviously, for an atheist, there is just the religion, no deity, and no "supernatural" powers. Just what the community of worshipers can accomplish together.)
I am very partial to the Discworld version of belief, though I don't think it's a prevalent among game settings.

I also like the idea for world-building that gods can exist independent of worshippers, but they actually gain something from them. Of course, that definitely means they aren't omnipotent or anything. Just powerful.
My idea for the Demigod Destiny in my D&D 4ified Arcana Evolved is that the Demigod gains the ability to teleport to places of worship from its domain, and back to its domain. Of course, that' just their demigod stage, who knows what gods actually do.
The story of the Diamond Throne setting suggests at least one group of gods that interacted with mortals a few centuries back, 3 adventurers that found an artifact and became the Hanavere Trinity. But they had limited power, they were apparently killed by the Demonic-Draconic Dramojh conqueroers when they tried to defend their nation or city. But most larger religions seem to worship gods seem to be the distant kind that no one interacts with ever. Though the Faen apparently often pray to minor, possibly personal gods of the moment. And the Giants seem to be more into ancestor worship than deities.

Spoiler: Campaign Ideas

I think for my campaign I will go for the idea that the original gods left. Some kind of war broke out, either between the gods or against the Primordials or a combination, and when they realized it could destroy the world, they left.
it is believed only mortal souls can go where they are. The immortals that served them couldn't follow them, however.
New gods might still be born later, but they might not have the power the original gods have - but even that can't be certain, because they can't interact so far.
The immortals left behind split into the demon, devil and angel factions. The angels tend to the divine machinery left behind by the gods and they guide good, noble souls to what the Immortal consider the Gates of Heaven, places where mortal souls can pass through, presumably to wherever the gods are waiting for them. They seem to gain power the more noble and old the soul is. They hope that if they send enough such souls, the gods will return for them.
The devils try to keep souls with undue ambition and selfishness from going to heaven. If they find them, they nourish their dark passions to see how far they will go, and on death, will punish them for their transgression, until al their guilt has been depleted and they can be sent to heaven, with the devils gaining power from this process. They seek to use this power to create and fuel their own machines of creations.
The demons found the abyss, and they discovered this object of malevolence and destruction could be strengthened by adding vicious and destructive souls to it. The souls wander through the abyss, releasing power to the abyss, until they reach the Gates of Haven, but the demons don't really care about that anymore. They seek to empower the abyss. Demons love to incite violent conflicts, hoping to find the souls they need that way.
With enough power, they believe it can destroy the world, though the demons don't really agree on the ultimate goal - some belief it will finally allow them to die and find peace, others believe it will allow them to break the gates of heaven and punish the gods for abonding them. In fact, even devils and angels internally do not entirely agree on what to do when they manage to reconnect with the gods - will they continue to serve, will they demand a new role, or do they seek revenge?
The devils and angels worry about the demons plan and the abyss, it could defeat what they are doing.
The demons and devils worry that the Ancient Machines of Creation in the hands of the Angel could eventually hinder their plans, stopping the growth of the abyss or the punishment of evil souls.
The demons and angels worry that the hells could finally create new machines of creation that could be blasphemous to the gods, or help protect the material world from destruction by the abyss.

 

[pemerton]

I believe that is a 3e specific thing of a cleric needing to be within one step of a god's alignment. 1e and 2e had worshiper alignments which varied fairly widely by individual gods and 4e and 5e have no specifications that I can recall. '14 PH lists a god's alignment but the cleric entry says nothing about alignment.

DDG says that a cleric must be of the same alignment as their deity (p 6):

WORSHIPPER'S ALIGN: This refers to the general alignment of those who worship, adore or propitiate the deity. This does not necessarily apply to the alignment of the deity's clerics, which must be identical with their patron's.​

I did a quick look through the introduction in Deities & Demigods (DDG) and I didn't see anything. I will look through the appendices, but I don't remember there being anything in the 1e DDG.

EDIT: I didn't find anything in the DDG appendices either

In the 1985 Dragon article that was mentioned upthread, Gygax says that

we are interested only in deities with followers dwelling on the Prime Material Plane of the campaign. These faithful give the various deities power. Of course, this idea is not new. It has been put forth often by others, whether seriously or as a device of literature. It serves as an excellent game device as well. (Dragon 97, p 8)​

In an earlier issue (Dragon 92, December 1984, p 8), an article by Paul Vernon - "First, spread the faith: Clerics need to keep their mission in mind" - says that "The power of the gods is often proportional to the number of worshipers they enjoy". In the same issue (p 12), an article by Bruce Barber - "The more, the merrier: How clerics can 'find' new followers" - similarly says that

it seems reasonable to assume that the power of the gods, and perhaps their continued existence, stems from the number of worshipers that the deity can claim as his or her own. In a fantasy gaming milieu that utilizes many gods, this theory makes perfect sense.​

I'm pretty sure these articles were the first time I encountered the idea, but as per Gygax's remark it seems likely to me that they're drawing on earlier works.

 

[cbwjm]

DDG says that a cleric must be of the same alignment as their deity (p 6):

WORSHIPPER'S ALIGN: This refers to the general alignment of those who worship, adore or propitiate the deity. This does not necessarily apply to the alignment of the deity's clerics, which must be identical with their patron's.

2e at least allowed different cleric alignments from the deity, in many cases at least. It was still a curated list of alignments though, such as the priests of Bast who were allowed to be any non-evil.