Mechanically, do you lose anything other than a potential weapon proficiency if you worhip an ideal rather than a specific deity?
If you're not interested in your deity's favored weapon, it seems you might as well pick whatever domains you want...
Mechanically, do you lose anything other than a potential weapon proficiency if you worhip an ideal rather than a specific deity?
If you're not interested in your deity's favored weapon, it seems you might as well pick whatever domains you want...
Because it suits the campaign's flavor, usually.
However, if you're running a Planescape campaign, or other campaign where faith commonly has many sources, go for the Faith-in-Ethos. Either way, if it's well played and you have fun with it.
All in the setting, some require you to have a god. In most worlds being a godless cleric would be a rare thing. It takes alot of faith in something to be a cleric
The PRPG Core Book has optional rules for this, so if the gaming world you are playing in allows it, then go for it, if your GM also allows it. Just remember that not all published settings allow for that sort of cleric. For example, Golarion is vague on this topic, as the Campaign Setting book does not say one way or the other and various official Paizo folks have posted different thoughts as well. The one definite for Golarion is if you play PFS games. Josh has stated clearly that for PFS, you must select a deity for your cleric.
Q: Why choose a diety?
A: To lose weighty?
Seriously though. Is your character just a heap of numbers and a jumble of words? Is it just an amalgamation of scores and feats and skill and stats and pecentages? If so, then selecting a deity may not be for you.
Or is he an imaginably living, breathing character in a verisimilitudinous world populated by ill and good, overt and sublime, common and divine? If so, then selecting a deity gives your character an affiliation, a purpose, perhaps even a destiny. It will help to shape him and define him and round out his existence. His deity will become a shining beacon to illuminate his path through darkness, or maybe a vile harkening to usher his path through depravity and debauchery. Or anything in between.
So consider letting your mind run free, your imagination soaring with the possibilities that a deity could infuse into your pile of stats, and maybe he might become a character to cherish for all times.
Or not.
:)
I don't known if you'd consider it a mechanical advantage, but clerics of specific gods automatically have affiliations with certain groups within the setting. You're basically on good terms with your church, and towns/areas that pay specific homage to your god will look on you with favorable eyes.
In a roleplaying game, I'd consider that a boon.
Creative Director
|
For clerics, my take is this: You pick a deity because that's what a cleric does. Just cherrypicking the domains is, in my opinion, kinda boring and bland. Actually having a cleric worship a deity adds a HUGE amount of flavor to the game and the character.
In Golarion, in any event, if you're a cleric you pretty much HAVE to pick a deity. You can't be a cleric of a philosophy or a pantheon or something like that. Oracles are pretty much the divine casters who don't actually serve a single deity.
Mechanically, do you lose anything other than a potential weapon proficiency if you worhip an ideal rather than a specific deity?
If you're not interested in your deity's favored weapon, it seems you might as well pick whatever domains you want...
Can I say munchkin ? =p
Can I say munchkin ? =pMechanically, do you lose anything other than a potential weapon proficiency if you worhip an ideal rather than a specific deity?
If you're not interested in your deity's favored weapon, it seems you might as well pick whatever domains you want...
Not necessarily.
I want my cleric to have the Glory and Nobility domains, which fit together in a roleplaying sense quite well for a noble cleric who likes to wade into combat. Under RAW for Golarion, those domains aren't shared by any single deity.
Does that make me a munchkin, or a roleplayer?
Well if you play forgotten realms, not only must cleric serve a diety, but everyone should pick one as if you don´t you get sucked into the wall of the faithless when you die.
Doesn't the same thing happen in Golarion? Are not the godless also locked away? True it might not be as bad as in FR but pretty sure they are also locked away and denied an afterlife.
Can I say munchkin ? =pMechanically, do you lose anything other than a potential weapon proficiency if you worhip an ideal rather than a specific deity?
If you're not interested in your deity's favored weapon, it seems you might as well pick whatever domains you want...
Not necessarily.
I want my cleric to have the Glory and Nobility domains, which fit together in a roleplaying sense quite well for a noble cleric who likes to wade into combat. Under RAW for Golarion, those domains aren't shared by any single deity.
Does that make me a munchkin, or a roleplayer?
That was not the tone of the OP's question though, I do not stick to rules if it makes RP sense and has a semblance of balance there is a good chance I'll allow it as long as the character is following the book for the better part, I dont want to make alot of exceptions for a single character on the fly.
Well if you play forgotten realms, not only must cleric serve a diety, but everyone should pick one as if you don´t you get sucked into the wall of the faithless when you die.
I kinda like this particular aspect of FR, Gods in fantasy are turning into cuddly giant teddybears.
Punishment for the sinners, put some Fear Of The Gods back into those whiny mortals.
It's not so much picking a god as it is picking a particular faith or ideal. A single entity that exists at the head of the ideal in the outer planes will go by may names, and might have many dogmatic religions in that name or ideal.
The wall of the faithless is supposed to be where people go when they don't believe in anything. And they go there, because they aren't going anywhere else (no pull to any particular outer plane). The resident god of death then does what he wants with them (and in FR, it's sticking them in the wall).
If someone didn't believe in a particular dogmatic faith or deity, and instead believed in an ideal, the god of that ideal would still be there, being the conduit of his powers. That's how the outer planes work.
The mortal might be deluding himself, but he'd very likely end up going to that outer plane when dying since he still believed in that ideal.
The gods in D&D aren't supposed to be the creators of the ideal, rather the manifestations or embodiments of the pinnacle of that ideal. As long as there is free will, then "Chaotic Good" still exists even if you go all Klingon and take the god out of the picture.
Picking a god is simply easier to identify and run with. I would not allow a person to just pick any two domains all willy-nilly because they weren't picking a God. It'd still have to make sense to the ideal that the follow (and the player and I would have to sit down and figure out exactly what ideal he's following, so I know when he's straying from his own beliefs later down the road).
.
At least, that's how I like to play it from the decades of planescape and D&D material I've played with.
Personally I do use "clerics of small gods" in my campaigns sometimes, basically they worship a concept or most often a powerful creature that is not a true god. Just they are not as powerful as True Clerics of the gods, they get a single domain and powers dependent on how many other worshippers this "small god" has, it might not be able to cast spells higher than 5th level for example, on rare occasions a massive number of worshippers created a new demi-god, or allowed one to enter into this existence.
Having powerful clerics of no god diminishes the gods themselves in my opinion.
I disagree with the notion that not picking a diety would be munchkinism. Most DnD settings are polytheistic, meaning that many gods influence many different things. Why wouldnt a worshipper of Pelor give a quick prayer to Procan and Osprem when embarking on an ocean voyage? Why wouldnt a worshipper of Obad-Hai beseech Hextor or Heironius or both before engaging in a war? I think that a cleric "of the gods. every single one of them", would be rife with role-playing opportunities. That being said, as a DM, Ive never once had a player play a cleric this way, even though I always remind them that they can, if they so choose.
Why should the worshiper of one god gain the domains of another? Giving thanks to and offering a prayer to know and then are not the same thing as devoting your life to that god.
A cleric of a god in a world where gods are real and do interact with mortals can't just give lip service.
As has been said many times it's all in the game world. This can't be answered without knowing what world and how gods work on that world as that is the biggest factor.
Why should the worshiper of one god gain the domains of another? Giving thanks to and offering a prayer to know and then are not the same thing as devoting your life to that god.
A cleric of a god in a world where gods are real and do interact with mortals can't just give lip service.
As has been said many times it's all in the game world. This can't be answered without knowing what world and how gods work on that world as that is the biggest factor.
I was using those as examples. In a true polyhteistic world, most people wouldnt worship just one god. Why? Because they are all powerful beings that can have direct affects on one's life. So, one would offer prayers to one god when planting his garden and an entirely different god when exploring a cave, and finally a third god when fighting a battle. It doesnt make sense from a polytheistic viewpoint for a person to believe that one god holds sway over everything that person does. "Mighty Erythnul, I beseech you. Make this corn that I plant mighty and strong! May any weeds be struck down by your horrid might as a warning to others!" Seems a rather silly prayer to me.
Edit: long story short, Im saying it actually does not make sense RP wise to pick just one diety in a polytheistic world. One would probably pick ideals that he holds dear (domains), but he would have to pay at least lip service to all the gods. In a fantasy role-playing world the gods are very much real, as you mentioned. I doubt that they would like it much if you gave another god credit for something that they influenced.
In are own world clergy would often hold services for the whole of the pantheon yet still have a main god as their personal god. Golerion is also like that, you can find church with Pantheonic worship and the high priest will hold service for them all yet be the cleric of only one god.
And yes while the gods may hold sway over everything a cleric is not a lay worshiper but a cleric of a god. While he may give thanks to other gods his chief devotion is to one god. I know polytheistic people and why they do give thanks to many gods each and every one{i know} has one god they have a deeper link with.
Now you can make a world where no god has cleric but the clerics worship all the gods at once, but that is not the standard set up and again gods back to it depends on the setting.
Edit to your edit: Yes it does make sense, the power of a cleric does not nominally come from a genric "god pool" of power but is given by individual gods to those they deem most devote. Why give out personal power of your own to someone who only pays you lip service?
I want my cleric to have the Glory and Nobility domains, which fit together in a roleplaying sense quite well for a noble cleric who likes to wade into combat. Under RAW for Golarion, those domains aren't shared by any single deity.
Does that make me a munchkin, or a roleplayer?
My take on this is to allow a player to domains not listed for a deity if they have a good rationale why those domains fit that deity. They then can be part of an heretical sect, or a mystic with their own heretical beliefs.
|
My take on this is to allow a player to domains not listed for a deity if they have a good rationale why those domains fit that deity. They then can be part of an heretical sect, or a mystic with their own heretical beliefs.
I want my cleric to have the Glory and Nobility domains, which fit together in a roleplaying sense quite well for a noble cleric who likes to wade into combat. Under RAW for Golarion, those domains aren't shared by any single deity.
Does that make me a munchkin, or a roleplayer?
Agreed. There are many different "strains" to each religion, even in our world. Maybe a history buff could reference that war way back when, involving two sides of the same religion? Can't remember details because its SIX IN THE MORNING!
lol I'm tired :)
But yes, it looks like this playing isn't trying to min/max his way around RAW, it seems like he has an idea for a character and a somewhat-irrelevant rule is impeding his idea.
|
Hmm... I might have some mean fun with this player if I were the dm.
"Sure, you can play that character. Your god routinely sends you messages through your dreams, giving you information and direction. You know that, unlike certain general rituals, these orders you can't afford to disobey."
I can just see going so many fun ways with that.
Like three months later when he runs into a major temple of his god, and they all disavow his religious connection. Is he really a priest, or just a demented madman who hears voices and has strange powers?
Heck, if a person claims to be a cleric of God A, and yet dislikes 90% of the things that god commands, and yet exemplifies the qualities of God B, who's to say that God B isn't secretly powering his mojo and hiding his existence from God A? :D
In are own world clergy would often hold services for the whole of the pantheon yet still have a main god as their personal god. Golerion is also like that, you can find church with Pantheonic worship and the high priest will hold service for them all yet be the cleric of only one god.
And yes while the gods may hold sway over everything a cleric is not a lay worshiper but a cleric of a god. While he may give thanks to other gods his chief devotion is to one god. I know polytheistic people and why they do give thanks to many gods each and every one{i know} has one god they have a deeper link with.
Now you can make a world where no god has cleric but the clerics worship all the gods at once, but that is not the standard set up and again gods back to it depends on the setting.
Edit to your edit: Yes it does make sense, the power of a cleric does not nominally come from a genric "god pool" of power but is given by individual gods to those they deem most devote. Why give out personal power of your own to someone who only pays you lip service?
I agree for the most part. Just trying to show that being a cleric "of the gods" wouldnt be "munchkinism" and that it would be decent for RP purposes. One of my favorite comics as a kid was Conan and I remember a story arc where Conan traveled with a holy man who revered all the dieties. I thought it was an interesting concept and am glad the rules give a chance to play that guy. Guess that makes me a min-maxing munchkin.
It makes you a munchkin if you pick the domains with no roleplaying concept. Most folks who talk about it are cherry picking powers for a build not a concept.
You could play a cleric like that in eberron however, but there gods were not real anyhow so ya had the "big pool of god magic" with on one over seeing it.
Why should the worshiper of one god gain the domains of another? Giving thanks to and offering a prayer to know and then are not the same thing as devoting your life to that god.
A cleric of a god in a world where gods are real and do interact with mortals can't just give lip service.
As has been said many times it's all in the game world. This can't be answered without knowing what world and how gods work on that world as that is the biggest factor.
I was using those as examples. In a true polyhteistic world, most people wouldnt worship just one god. Why? Because they are all powerful beings that can have direct affects on one's life. So, one would offer prayers to one god when planting his garden and an entirely different god when exploring a cave, and finally a third god when fighting a battle. It doesnt make sense from a polytheistic viewpoint for a person to believe that one god holds sway over everything that person does. "Mighty Erythnul, I beseech you. Make this corn that I plant mighty and strong! May any weeds be struck down by your horrid might as a warning to others!" Seems a rather silly prayer to me.
Edit: long story short, Im saying it actually does not make sense RP wise to pick just one diety in a polytheistic world. One would probably pick ideals that he holds dear (domains), but he would have to pay at least lip service to all the gods. In a fantasy role-playing world the gods are very much real, as you mentioned. I doubt that they would like it much if you gave another god credit for something that they influenced.
This is all true, but in our polytheistic world, most societies that had multiple deities worked exactly like you described - but usually only for the commoners. The priests usually served just one god. In Greece, for example, a priest/ess migth serve in the Temple of Apollo, or Temple of Zeus, or whatever. They learned, lived, and preached the tenets of one god. No, they didn't denounce the other gods, they just 'served' the one god to whom they were pledged.
It was the commoners who would pray to whichever god suited their needs at the moment.
In are own world clergy would often hold services for the whole of the pantheon yet still have a main god as their personal god. Golerion is also like that, you can find church with Pantheonic worship and the high priest will hold service for them all yet be the cleric of only one god.
And yes while the gods may hold sway over everything a cleric is not a lay worshiper but a cleric of a god. While he may give thanks to other gods his chief devotion is to one god. I know polytheistic people and why they do give thanks to many gods each and every one{i know} has one god they have a deeper link with.
Now you can make a world where no god has cleric but the clerics worship all the gods at once, but that is not the standard set up and again gods back to it depends on the setting.
Edit to your edit: Yes it does make sense, the power of a cleric does not nominally come from a genric "god pool" of power but is given by individual gods to those they deem most devote. Why give out personal power of your own to someone who only pays you lip service?
I agree for the most part. Just trying to show that being a cleric "of the gods" wouldnt be "munchkinism" and that it would be decent for RP purposes. One of my favorite comics as a kid was Conan and I remember a story arc where Conan traveled with a holy man who revered all the dieties. I thought it was an interesting concept and am glad the rules give a chance to play that guy. Guess that makes me a min-maxing munchkin.
Edit to reply to your reply to my edit:I disagree. Gods have sway over certain things. Know how much sway Erythnul has over growing plants? none. Thats Obad-Hai and Beory territory. So a cleric who only followed Erythnul would offer that prayer, much to the chagrin of Obad-Hai and Beory. But a non-denominational munchkin cleric would give thanks to them (thus increasing their god-like power) and then give thanks to Erythnul after slaughtering some innocents ( thus increasing his god power).
So then the munchkin cleric would be doing his best to please all the gods. A balancing act to be sure, but hey, theres no RP opportunity there.
Can I say munchkin ? =pMechanically, do you lose anything other than a potential weapon proficiency if you worhip an ideal rather than a specific deity?
If you're not interested in your deity's favored weapon, it seems you might as well pick whatever domains you want...
Not necessarily.
I want my cleric to have the Glory and Nobility domains, which fit together in a roleplaying sense quite well for a noble cleric who likes to wade into combat. Under RAW for Golarion, those domains aren't shared by any single deity.
Does that make me a munchkin, or a roleplayer?
Not enough info to answer that question, and I tend not to judge (too much).
Simply put, there are two roads that can be followed here:
1. You were born in this world, raised in this world, and found your calling as a priest of one of the gods of this world. Priests don't make up their own gods because the gods were here first, and the gods are what they are. Choose one.
2. Pick and choose what you want. Nothing in the game world is set in stone as long as any of the players want to change it. Make it up as you go to suit your needs and move on. It's just a game so have fun, whatever it takes.
Some DMs and some game groups prefer the first approach. Others prefer the second. And there's probably some gray area in-between, too.
So, the answer to your question lies in which kind of gaming group you're playing in.
That was not the tone of the OP's question though
Please don't presume to dictate what I meant by my question. The first word of my original post was "mechanically" for a reason. I am fully aware of the role-playing and setting repercussions and am not at all interested in opinions on that matter (which is why I didn't ask about them). What I was not fully clear on was the RAW consequences of not choosing a deity. That has been cleared up (though I'm not sure where in the Golarion guide it says a deity must be picked - I haven't read that material cover to cover).
Any discussion about the ethics, role-playing factors, or any other judgments have nothing to do with my question. You are welcome to discuss that amongst yourselves, but leave me out of it.
I already have my own opinions on just about everything, and they are far more important to me than yours. ;)
|
Creative Director
|
Also... playing a cleric means that you're playing a character who's entire purpose is to honor and live up to the ideals of a religion. On a certain level, that means that all clerics are servants of their deity. You can become a powerful leader in your church, but you're always going to remain the "help" when it comes to your deity.
If you want to play a divine spellcaster who doesn't think of themselves as subservient to a greater power... cleric is not the right choice.
I wonder if the fact that clerics are implicitly servants to a greater power, whereas all other classes can be true "lone wolves" who answer to no one is part of the reason a lot of gamers just don't want to play clerics? Because they just don't like the idea of their character being someone's minion?
|
Not necessarily.
I want my cleric to have the Glory and Nobility domains, which fit together in a roleplaying sense quite well for a noble cleric who likes to wade into combat. Under RAW for Golarion, those domains aren't shared by any single deity.
Does that make me a munchkin, or a roleplayer?
Well, I'm rather surprised that Iomedae doesn't have the Nobility domain given that she does have "rulership" listed as part of her portfolio. Why she has the Sun domain is the part that makes no sense to me.
If I were your GM, I'd say just go ahead and play a cleric of Iomedae with the Glory and Nobility domains (and her favored weapon, the longsword), but you'd have to make sure and uphold those two ideals in-character.
Also... playing a cleric means that you're playing a character who's entire purpose is to honor and live up to the ideals of a religion. On a certain level, that means that all clerics are servants of their deity. You can become a powerful leader in your church, but you're always going to remain the "help" when it comes to your deity.
If you want to play a divine spellcaster who doesn't think of themselves as subservient to a greater power... cleric is not the right choice.
I wonder if the fact that clerics are implicitly servants to a greater power, whereas all other classes can be true "lone wolves" who answer to no one is part of the reason a lot of gamers just don't want to play clerics? Because they just don't like the idea of their character being someone's minion?
I rarely play clerics if I get to play, I think it is because playing a cleric feels restricted, on one side bound by the rules of whatever deity you follow, by the DM who tends to impress his own vision on the deity conciously or not and other players expect you to heal and support them.
Finally some people I play with just have a mild aversion towards religion in general and have a hard time "faking" religious zeal and making it a believable and fun to play character.
|
And when I first saw the stats, I thought that evil and healing seemed like an odd (but interesting) combination. Is there a deity in Golarion that has those domains? The domain combo looked a bit cherrypicked to me.
There are 2, both are actually infernal dukes and not true dieties, but they can be worshiped, but very few people actually know about them:
Lorcanand
Jiraviddain
|
|
And when I first saw the stats, I thought that evil and healing seemed like an odd (but interesting) combination. Is there a deity in Golarion that has those domains? The domain combo looked a bit cherrypicked to me.
Well, remember, the GMG isn't supposed to be Golarion-specific; it's supposed to be applicable to any GM's world. No Golarion deity grants Community and Repose, so the Medium (under Seers) is out of luck, too.
For clerics, my take is this: You pick a deity because that's what a cleric does. Just cherrypicking the domains is, in my opinion, kinda boring and bland. Actually having a cleric worship a deity adds a HUGE amount of flavor to the game and the character.
In Golarion, in any event, if you're a cleric you pretty much HAVE to pick a deity. You can't be a cleric of a philosophy or a pantheon or something like that. Oracles are pretty much the divine casters who don't actually serve a single deity.
Where is that in the book? I am asking because there have been two answers on this issues. Right now the "must have a deity" is winning 2 to 1. I am also asking because it is not explicitly(or is that implicitly)* stated anywhere in the book, but hopefully it will be in the updated version.
*I always get those confused.
It was implied pretty damned heavily in the setting book. It did everything but come out and say "must have a god". I am guessing they will have hat line in the new book as folks can't take hints that would drop an elephant at 1000 yards :)
|
|
Where is that in the book? I am asking because there have been two answers on this issues. Right now the "must have a deity" is winning 2 to 1.
I don't see it in the campaign setting, maybe it's in gods and magic, but i dont have time to look right now.
closest I could find was
1)When Azir (or whatever the atheist nation's name is) Banished all clerics, burned the temples, and stated that worshiping a god was against the law. This effectively made cleric = worshiping a god in the eyes of the people of Golorian.. But I don't see this stated explicitly.
2)When the descriptions of clerics of Golorian don't have Any mention any worshiping ideals
It was implied pretty damned heavily in the setting book. It did everything but come out and say "must have a god". I am guessing they will have hat line in the new book as folks can't take hints that would drop an elephant at 1000 yards :)
The rule should be clearly stated. Right now there is no such rule. You know that. You were in the thread. Several veteran poster(those that normally know what they are talking about) could not agree, James supported both sides, no page number or quote can be listed saying it is a rule points to the fact that no such rule exist, even if they want it to be that way. Eberron made it clear that you could ignore a deity's alignment. How hard is it to make it clear?
Example: Unlike the standard pathfinder rules, the world of Golarion does allow for clerics to be able to cast spell without worshipping a deity.
See that, and I am not even a game designer. :)
PS: Since when does a hint equal a rule?
It does not say it outright, it does not bring it up at all when it does take the time to talk about paladins, ranger's, and druids without gods however. It goes to pains to tell how those classes work without a god yet never brings it up one time in the cleric section only talking about false gods not having clerics
It seems like James plans to have this settled in the new book
Edit: I see what your saying wraithstrike, it was clear as day to me and a few others as it was the only class that lacked that info. Implying it could not go godless, but it would not have killed em to put in a single line.Something that needs to be handled in the new book
I am also asking because it is not explicitly(or is that implicitly)* stated anywhere in the book...
*I always get those confused.
Explicit means clearly expressed or readily observable. Implicit means implied or expressed indirectly.
Examples:
Explicit: You didn't know this because you didn't pay attention in English class.
Implicit: People who paid attention in English class would have known this.
Side note: despite the implicit insult in my choice of examples, it is not my intention to imply that you specifically did not pay attention in English class (I don't recall being taught this in any of my English classes either); I simply thought the examples were cleverly resonant regardless of their inapplicability.
Second side note: The first side not let me grammatically link "imply" and "implicit" in a sentence, thereby hopefully creating a mnemonic relationship that will help you or anyone else steer their way through future confusion on the im/explicit issue.
Here's a thought to further cloud the issue.
What if the cleric believed that there SHOULD be a god/dess that had a certain position. They believe perhaps that they are the only one that has considered this and are actively following and putting for the word. Of what are deities made? Are they constructs created from the faith of their followers? Are they manifest energies waiting to be shaped by the need of humanity? Could a powerful faith allow a nascent deity to manifest and take his/her place amongst the pantheon?
How you choose to represent the gods within the game may answer those questions. In my case I am allowing a player to create her own deity due to the fact that none of those existing fit what she plans for her character. By create I do not mean "Here's the deity that I wish to follow." I mean "Here's the concept I have." I'm thinking that I will allow the domains and let her awaken either a new deity, or perhaps an ancient forgotten deity. Either way there are possibilities for RP and for keeping the Mechanics from being over the top.
Here's a thought to further cloud the issue.
What if the cleric believed that there SHOULD be a god/dess that had a certain position. They believe perhaps that they are the only one that has considered this and are actively following and putting for the word. Of what are deities made? Are they constructs created from the faith of their followers? Are they manifest energies waiting to be shaped by the need of humanity? Could a powerful faith allow a nascent deity to manifest and take his/her place amongst the pantheon?
How you choose to represent the gods within the game may answer those questions. In my case I am allowing a player to create her own deity due to the fact that none of those existing fit what she plans for her character. By create I do not mean "Here's the deity that I wish to follow." I mean "Here's the concept I have." I'm thinking that I will allow the domains and let her awaken either a new deity, or perhaps an ancient forgotten deity. Either way there are possibilities for RP and for keeping the Mechanics from being over the top.
While I like the idea of small gods and fantasy deities being powered by belief, a religion of one just isn't going to be able to grant spells. That's a short step from "I worship myself and have decided to grant myself abilities. Hail, Me!" If, despite having no clerical power (unless granted by some other power for its own reasons, which you might be horrified to discover) you manage to grow the cult into the thousands, then you might start getting spells from your newly created deific being. Congratulations.
But I do like the idea of reawakening an ancient god.
It makes no sense to me to say that those who worship an ideal are munchkins. Why force somebody to worship a deity if it doesn't fit them?
Say a cleric worships the Maelstrom. Or the concept of total chaos. Are you going to force them to worship Gorum, or Lamashtu?
Here's a thought to further cloud the issue.
What if the cleric believed that there SHOULD be a god/dess that had a certain position. They believe perhaps that they are the only one that has considered this and are actively following and putting for the word. Of what are deities made? Are they constructs created from the faith of their followers? Are they manifest energies waiting to be shaped by the need of humanity? Could a powerful faith allow a nascent deity to manifest and take his/her place amongst the pantheon?
How you choose to represent the gods within the game may answer those questions. In my case I am allowing a player to create her own deity due to the fact that none of those existing fit what she plans for her character. By create I do not mean "Here's the deity that I wish to follow." I mean "Here's the concept I have." I'm thinking that I will allow the domains and let her awaken either a new deity, or perhaps an ancient forgotten deity. Either way there are possibilities for RP and for keeping the Mechanics from being over the top.
While I like the idea of small gods and fantasy deities being powered by belief, a religion of one just isn't going to be able to grant spells. That's a short step from "I worship myself and have decided to grant myself abilities. Hail, Me!" If, despite having no clerical power (unless granted by some other power for its own reasons, which you might be horrified to discover) you manage to grow the cult into the thousands, then you might start getting spells from your newly created deific being. Congratulations.
But I do like the idea of reawakening an ancient god.
The ancient option is my preferred as well, but the idea that there are nascent deities, powerful entities that just need a nudge to form into a less abstract form.. is intrigueing. And this is not to say that she is the only one with that belief. Dozens or more may be coming to the same conclusion at the same time.
As I remember (and its been a while since I read this) Clerical spells up to a certain level are more based on "faith" than "deity". To get higher level spells you did need to have contact with a powerful entity. (higher than second level as I recall, but I'm old :P)