Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 9523429" data-attributes="member: 29398">There may well have been some of that thinking involved, but there's also the game-side design practicalities to consider.In the 0e-1e era alignment was a Big Deal.  The deities were to a large extent representative of and core to their alignments, which makes a pantheistic system (with one or more discrete deities per alignment) immensely more game-useful and design-friendly than a monotheistic system where one deity has to try to cover all the bases.I've run up against this myself when designing setting pantheons - if a society is monotheistic, how can that deity represent and support Clerics of all alignments at once?  One alternative is that there's only one alignment of Cleric in that whole society, which isn't much fun for anyone.  Another is that the deity says "Screw it, I don't care what my Clerics do or think as long as they worship me", which would quickly lead to the rather silly situation (see far too often in reality!) where Clerics to the same deity go to war against each other.Seeing stuff like this, whether posted by you or anyone else, makes me immediately want to dismiss whatever else is being said in that post.</blockquote>