Would you allow a deity who is not in the core, but is still from paizo for the patron of a cleric? Would you allow a neutral cleric to worship an evil deity?
1. Probably, depending on the character's backstory.
2. Probably not, but I might be convinced depending on the plot of my campaign, the deity in question, and a particularly compelling backstory.
1. Yes. Or from non-Paizo sources. Or the player could invent his own god.
2. If I really used alignment, the answer would be yes, though it bears mentioning that it's already permitted by RAW under the 'one step away' clause.
I know, but I reserve the right to disallow certain RAW in my campaigns.
For example, I don't allow clerics to worship a pantheon or a philosophy. Clerics have to serve a single deity to be a cleric. If you want to be a divine spellcaster not dedicated to a single deity, play an oracle.
In my game, any cleric who doesn't match her deity's alignment is a heretic in some way, and the player has to give me details about the heresy as part of the backstory. (Canon example, although the NPC in question is NOT a cleric: There's a character detailed in Magnimar: City of Monuments that is a CN heretical follower of the demon lord Nocticula. The NPC believes that Nocticula is a fallen Empyreal Lord, and isn't really evil, just misunderstood.)
I will allow heretical clerics, but once a heretical cleric PC reaches 5th level, her deity starts paying more attention, and subtly (or not-so-subtly) tries to nudge the heretic back into orthodoxy.
Bit of bad timing; my 1 and 2 were responding to the OP, not you, Haladir. :) Apologies for the mixup.
And I've certainly no room to criticize people for not using RAW; my not-RAW is basically the opposite of yours. I ignore the one-step rule in favor of 'any alignment, any deity', and in fact my game worlds have no deities; all clerics are clerics of a philosophy, just most of them don't realize it. They need a 'magic feather', so they anthropomorphize their belief.
Assuming there are clerics at all, of course.
1. Yes, or heck, a non-paizo one. Mayyybe made up ones too, maybe not
2. Yes, and i have one. And I think he's pretty darn cool.
I would be willing to look at any god my players come Np with. no matter if they found it in a book or made it them self. But i would pehaps change one with falcata, travel and freedom domains.
An neutral cleric to an evil god. Yes if i think tha story can carry it. And i dont expect that religion to be the major badguys in the story. I once had a LN cleric og Bane in a moonsea forgotten realms game it worked fine.
|
1. Generally yes, but since I don't run games in Golarion the deity's background / campaign role might by altered. For example, in my current campaign the starstone doesn't exist, and a truce between heaven and hell means Ragathiel's half-devil status would be a little less controversial.
2. Yes, and I've considered allowing clerics farther than one step from their deity.
I also include homebrew deities in my campaigns, allow philosophy clerics, include homebrew philosophy faiths, and will allow players to homebrew their own deity if it makes sense and can be fit into the campaign (likely as a minor local deity).
... my game worlds have no deities; all clerics are clerics of a philosophy, just most of them don't realize it. They need a 'magic feather', so they anthropomorphize their belief.
Assuming there are clerics at all, of course.
Off topic:
I'm curious: Is that a case of your personal atheism flavoring your campaign world, Zhayne?
In part, yes. It's also stealing one of the best things about Eberron; the fact that religion is actually a RELIGION. It's based on faith, not facts. You can't KNOW a god exists; you have to believe it.
It also lets you have things like splinter sects and corrupted church members without ludicrous work-arounds. This group of Iomedae followers interpret a text as saying 'kill without mercy', well, so long as they all believe it ... whereas in a 'normal' gameworld, Iomedae would just go 'nope, you're screwed'.
|
|
I will allow heretical clerics, but once a heretical cleric PC reaches 5th level, her deity starts paying more attention, and subtly (or not-so-subtly) tries to nudge the heretic back into orthodoxy.
Have you ever considered doing it 'the other way around' i.e. the heretic is right and while the offical church may disagree, eventually it will be evident that the God is on the heretic's side (and perhaps has shifted alignment).
|
My players haven't run out of interesting things to do with the core deities (and, in fact, I think there are plenty of core deities to play with forever). But I'd allow them to follow a non-core deity if that worked better with their character concept.
I'd allow a neutral cleric of an evil deity, but I'd also allow an evil cleric of an evil deity, so I might not be the best person to ask. I make players explain why their PCs are (or will be) with the group before they start, so I don't really run into alignment problems.
Cheers!
Landon
Have you ever considered doing it 'the other way around' i.e. the heretic is right and while the offical church may disagree, eventually it will be evident that the God is on the heretic's side (and perhaps has shifted alignment).
I will allow heretical clerics, but once a heretical cleric PC reaches 5th level, her deity starts paying more attention, and subtly (or not-so-subtly) tries to nudge the heretic back into orthodoxy.
You're describing a major plot point from an AD&D 2nd Editon campaign I ran back in the '90s!
So... yes.
|
I would allow them to use anything that is printed in a paizo source.
I would allow them to be neutral and to follow an evil deity. It doesn't make sense not too.
Even real life "holy men/preachers/priest/whatever" aren't 100% on the rules and devotion. When you consider that the average person is significantly less devout then “insert blanket holy person title here”, you starting running into problems with difficulties in staying in line with the deity’s teachings. Most people simply aren’t that used to living with religion in mind 24/7, especially not a fantasy one that is based off of a few pages of text, tops, once compiled from all sources available. . Also there is interpretation (how is one person going to determine the rules and regulations for the finer details that spring up for a made up fantasy religion with only a small source of information compared to another person given the same sources of information).
Even modern day Christians have hundreds of denominations that differ slightly, considering that they all worship one god (the same god), this is pretty telling of how people view religion and faith. (Also consider there are three major versions of the Christian Bible out and about being used with slight difference. This is all to be considered before you account for things like the Dead Sea scrolls).
I would say that as long as you consider the teachings of your deity and attempt to spread the word and that as long as you don’t commit any deity specific taboos you are fine.
Of course you must consider that a neutral character may not enjoy some of the religious rituals an evil deity is likely to have. Being neutral is not being good but it is also not being evil. A neutral character may not want to hold hands and sing Kumbaya with the village but he probably doesn’t want to sacrifice children and skull bang old widows while desecrating his own flesh either.
Unless the campaign is nearly entirely religion based, they can worship whatever they want. Having long ago transitioned from 3.5 every campaign i run (in pathfinder) always has Mask, Tymora, Lathander, Pelor and Correllon Larathian, plus whatever else the group wants/worships.
|
1. I allow only dieties that are in the pantheons of my campaign currently. Norse, Greek, Mesopotamian, and some of the old D+D racial dieties. So I don't even allow the core dieties.
2. Alignment got too irritating, so I removed it. Clerics must follow the teachings of thier diety, at least as represented by the religious community the charactor comes from. So in alignment terms, why not?
|
|
Would you allow a deity who is not in the core, but is still from paizo for the patron of a cleric?
Depends on the deity. I tend to go for "Yes", but if my player shows up with something not fitting for my campaign, he will have to convince me. Minor gods are more likely to be allowed than, let's say, Old Ones.
Would you allow a neutral cleric to worship an evil deity?
No.
I would allow a CN Cleric to worship a TN deity, I'd allow a LG cleric to worship a LN deity...but I don't want to have evil characters in my game and, by extend, no clerics of an evil deity.I'm not saying that I never will allow such a thing, but in all of my current games that's just something I'm not comfortable with - I want my group to consist of heroes and not put up with the angsty "Everybody for himself" crap I had to endure in my previous groups (though that wasn't Pathfinder - it was Shadowrun and Vampire: The Masquerade, but still).
As a fairly new GM I like to keep things simple, especially when I don't know my players too well. Or at least their "gaming personality" - I've known some of them for over a decade.
That and Golarion doesn't exactly have any evil deity that plays too well with others. Maybe Asmodeus and with a BIG maybe Norgorber.
That said: All of this is not because I think "This should not happen!", but because I think "I do not want this in my current game".
I feel there is a certain balance to the Domains granted by deities as well as the favored weapons they grant. To that end I'm a little particular and disinclined to allow too many. I also don't allow clerics of a cause, they must all have a deity. To that end I would allow all the standard major deities, I know they're mentioned in Ultimate Campaign. I can't find them in the CRB, but I believe they're there. Outside of that, I would consider allowing others but would have to give approval first.
|
|
Considering the "They must have a deity!"-Approach:
If you use the Core deities you're usually playing on Golarion. It has been stated multiple times that every cleric on Golarion serves a deity - so while not allowing a deity-less cleric in a homebrew setting is a house rule, disallowing them in Golarion is pretty much RAW for the setting.
Considering the "They must have a deity!"-Approach:
If you use the Core deities you're usually playing on Golarion. It has been stated multiple times that every cleric on Golarion serves a deity - so while not allowing a deity-less cleric in a homebrew setting is a house rule, disallowing them in Golarion is pretty much RAW for the setting.
I don't recall that specifically, but it does seem right. I also don't like the cleric to roll into the oracles territory. They're the divine caster that isn't dedicated to a specific god, that's their schtick.
Considering the "They must have a deity!"-Approach:
If you use the Core deities you're usually playing on Golarion. It has been stated multiple times that every cleric on Golarion serves a deity - so while not allowing a deity-less cleric in a homebrew setting is a house rule, disallowing them in Golarion is pretty much RAW for the setting.
1. That's a PFS ruling only.
2. It doesn't matter; when you run, it's YOUR Golarion, and you can change it however you choose.|
|
Well, kinda. If I recall correctly it went something like this:
In the 3.5 campaign world book it was stated that every cleric needs to have a deity.
In the Inner Sea World Guide they assumed it was in the core rules and the core rules wanted to be universal, so it was forgotten to put in. James Jacobs has said time and again that every cleric in Golarion has to have a deity.
The PFS ruling is that *most* divine casters need a deity, even rangers and paladins.
However, you are of course right: When I run a game in "my" Golarion and decide that there are clerics without a specific deity, I can do that.
I just wanted to make clear that the "every cleric needs a deity" is not so much a house-rule and more a "I play Golarion unaltered in this aspect"-thing.
I really see no reason to ban any non-evil deities.
That just seems restrictive for the sake of being restrictive.
That's just silly.
Evil deities should be on a case by case basis. Especially in the case of the Elemental Lords, and Eldest.
Still, I could see banning them.
Eh. Sometimes, you just think something in the game is stupid and throw it out.
|
Eh. Sometimes, you just think something in the game is stupid and throw it out.I really see no reason to ban any non-evil deities.
That just seems restrictive for the sake of being restrictive.
That's just silly.
Evil deities should be on a case by case basis. Especially in the case of the Elemental Lords, and Eldest.
Still, I could see banning them.
Well, you got think of the players.
They may have a different opinion on what is "stupid".
If the DM is like "axes are stupid, I am banning them", and the player wants to play a axe wielding Dwarf, there should be some kind compromise.
"That's stupid" should not be the be all, end all, reason to ban something.
There should be something more than that.
We had a player wanted to worship "Jiezzcock".
Seriously, this happened.
That was just stupid, but it was also not a Golarion deity, and took away from feel of the game, along with being inappropriate.
So, there was more than just "that's stupid", as a reason to ban it.
|
Sounds like devolved Arshea cult.
In general it should come down to how you view sources of divine power. If divine power comes from faith, then nearly everyone could cast divine spells. So in general, it should be more than faith, or perhaps wisdom doesn't reflect belief but adherence to ones faith/deity/philosophy?
If you don't want evil characters as PCs that's your call, having nonevil PCs worshipping evil deities could be really interesting, as long as they are going to be ready to RP repercussions of their choices. In the Golarion one would have to guess 20-30% of a deities followers are not of the same alignment as the deity itself, so it shouldn't be unheard of to meet evil deity worshipping clerics that aren't out to murder everything or working to better communities, in their own skewed way.
Just food for thought
If divine power comes from faith, then nearly everyone could cast divine spells.
Nearly everyone can cast divine spells. Just need a 10 Wisdom. It's not simply needing faith, it's needing ironclad, deep-down, don't-bother-me-with-facts faith.
I actually have non evil people worshipping evil deities. The main setting has pretty much every deity with a neutral component to their alignment. But region to region the church of a deity is different. For example, in Novluka the church of Obozhavati, a LN god connected to law, is a god of civic virtue and order. Lawful neutral bordering on lawful good hierarchy. In Dhuvonik, up north, the church of Obozhavati is a tyrannical state which tries to control every aspect of their citizens lives. The priesthood is most assuredly a lawful evil hierarchy.
Both are completely and absolutely faithful worshippers of the same god. The god does NOT think like a human. Both are worshipping the concept of law and order. Law and order as a concept need not have a moral component. But it can. Obozhavati grants magic to ... Both. And sometimes two groups both worshipping the same god can come into direct conflict.
Osveta, on the other hand, is the neutral evil god of vengeance. In some places the church concentrates more on vengeance in the means of resorting a balance to things - people pay for their crimes, the ledger is evened. Those are neutral, as is that version of the church. Some places - and this one is more a cult - is the ones that worship vengeance for its own sake, and there is nothing proportional about it. What you wreck shall be visited upon you threefold. Both are worshipping Osveta and Osveta grants spells to both.
And so on.
|
|
So then do characters with lower than ten wisdom not have faith, or do things for their faith? Being able to cast spells and being willing to die for ones faith are totally separate. As ones a measurable mechanic in the game while the other is an RP angle, or personality trait. There's a disconnect there in some respect. Anyway, a random thought. Are low wisdom NPCs never played as religiously fervent or motivated?
|
I don't recall that specifically, but it does seem right. I also don't like the cleric to roll into the oracles territory. They're the divine caster that isn't dedicated to a specific god, that's their schtick.Considering the "They must have a deity!"-Approach:
If you use the Core deities you're usually playing on Golarion. It has been stated multiple times that every cleric on Golarion serves a deity - so while not allowing a deity-less cleric in a homebrew setting is a house rule, disallowing them in Golarion is pretty much RAW for the setting.
James Jacobs mentioned that it is true in Golarion in general. If he had his way, it would have been in the core rulebook if I remember correctly. This was all before the faiths and philosophies book though, so that may have been adjusted
For my homebrew world, I tell the players that while many species worship unique dieties they are all infact aspects of the prime nine.
So you can worship Jubity Boop the unforgiving, and you may even get spells if you're a cleric, but in the end that worship goes to one of the primary nine dieties as Jubity is just an aspect of him/her used for slumming with goblins.
This way any player can create/choose a diety to worship and still not disrupt my cosmology.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So then do characters with lower than ten wisdom not have faith, or do things for their faith? Being able to cast spells and being willing to die for ones faith are totally separate. As ones a measurable mechanic in the game while the other is an RP angle, or personality trait. There's a disconnect there in some respect. Anyway, a random thought. Are low wisdom NPCs never played as religiously fervent or motivated?
Faith is tied to Willpower. Willpower is tied to wisdom (the stat).
Low-Wis NPCs can be religiously fervent or motivated, sure. They can do things for their religion, but they can't make their faith do things for them (aka cast spells).