So in my homebrew campaign I have my own pantheon of gods. It's a pretty standard pantheon with gods representing the typical concepts you see in a such fantasy pantheons; There's a Goddess of Nature, a God of War, Goddess of Death, etc. Due to the background of how the pantheon came to power there are a few peculiarities:
1. All divine casters get their spellcasting from a specific deity, with the exception of most druids and some rangers (haven't figured out how hunters fit into this).
2. The power of a deity is directly influenced by its amount of worshipers and/or the prevalence of it's portfolio in the world.
Given these two facts, is it reasonable to decide (from a GM standpoint) that raise dead/resurrection/true resurrection spells will only work on followers of the faith? So, for example, in my game one of the PCs is a 9th level cleric of Malador; would it be unfair if I told him that Malador only grants the gift of a 2nd lease on life to his devoted followers?
I'm mostly asking from a meta-game/fairness point of view, since thematically restricting these spells makes sense to me.
I think it depends on how likely death is for your players and how accessible alternative means raising the dead are. Also it could be considered unfair if you're only just introducing this restriction to a game in progress. As a player I'd be ok with such a restriction if I'm made aware of it before I create my character so that I can take it into consideration.
I do kind of like the idea from a thematic stand point though. Will you be having witches and if so how does their ability to raise the dead relate to these pantheons?
I think it depends on how likely death is for your players and how accessible alternative means raising the dead are. Also it could be considered unfair if you're only just introducing this restriction to a game in progress. As a player I'd be ok with such a restriction if I'm made aware of it before I create my character so that I can take it into consideration.
I do kind of like the idea from a thematic stand point though. Will you be having witches and if so how does their ability to raise the dead relate to these pantheons?
1. I would be introducing this in game.
2. One of my players had a witch character (player unfortunately had to quit due to scheduling conflicts) so it's established they exist. Witches in my game however are looked upon with suspicion by divine types and keep a low profile. Since they're not divine casters, however, their raise spells would work as normal.3. The one thing I'm not so sure about are those spells being cast from scrolls. The PCs do have a scroll of raise dead in their possession, so it's something I'd have to figure out.
Who made the scroll? You could have it that a scroll made by a cleric of X is still restricted to the followers of X (the scroll could have the holy symbol of X on it). If the source of the scroll isn't yet known by the players you could just say a witch made it and is thus unrestricted.
With such a rule in place I could see witches being considered a threat by divine types as they present an alternative means to similar spells without religious influence or obligations. If you're concerned it could be too restrictive you could expand the limitations to include followers of closely allied gods (presuming that's how relationships between your gods work).
you could expand the limitations to include followers of closely allied gods
Good idea. Maybe add a quest-type payment for being resurrected, the severity being determined by how closely allied the PC's patron deity is to the priest's?
|
I think it makes sense thematically. It also should send the party who doesn't want to troubles of dealing with the local clergy (or the lack of their god locally) to alternative means of raising. Witches and druids reincarnating in their back woods shacks come to mind. It adds a rock and hard place angle to the RP of getting raised.
Then you get to the part where stipulations could be attached. Firstly, you could have the spell itself become alignment typed based on the deity raising. Evil gods' cleric raises you, you radiate evil for a time as the magic fades away. Also, perhaps you can allow priests to place a mark of justice or geas/quest upon the corpse during the raise that the soul must accept to re-enter the body. Only temple nearby is that of Asmodeus? Sorry paladin, but since you're not a worshiper, you're going to have to go oppress some peasants to get back to the mortal realm. Oh that doesn't work for you? Well good luck finding another 9th level cleric before you've rotted too much to raise. *evil cleric laugh*
Scrolls are meant to skip the whole caster process. If they've got one, they should be able to use it without issue, as the magic is already stored in the scroll. I would make them unable to be bought, though, if you're playing with stingy rez magic gods.
@Decimus - Witches are looked down upon in my homebrew world by divine types not just because of being able to raise dead but because of the source of their magic period.
As far a the scroll issue is concerned I looked back on my notes and can't find evidence I gave the PCs a scroll of Raise Dead like I thought I did, so it may be a moot issue.
@VRMH - I was thinking along those lines. Something like if you're not a follower of the god you can get raised but you'll owe the faith a service (in addition to the normal cost of being raised).
@archmagi1 - Yeah, I really like the idea of having to go to some witch in order to get raised if you want to avoid a church.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My first thought is that the gods grant clerics the ability to raise the dead, and the cleric uses their discretion on who is worthy of being raised. The cleric could find someone of another faith still useful for furthering the goals of the cleric, for example.
If it were just for the devoted followers of the god, the god would just raise them as they died (or once they were in a safe location).
So personally, I don't think the idea is worthy of following up with, but perhaps a compromise could be made where devote followers don't have the negative level?
I can add this to Because You're the GM, over in Forum Games.
I give deities more latitude. The lawful deities all act as you suggest.
Eris on the other hand likes to gift to followers a jar labeled Lotion of Speak with Dead. It's actually Raise Dead, but if the body is all there and recent enough, yeah, ask away. If she's felling generous, she gives them a scroll with 3 Make a Hole spells on it. They are mislabeled Make Whole spells that can repair a body so you can Raise Dead it.
I would have the raise dead cost 2 levels, and they don't get the 2 restoration spells till they bring the head of an enemy of the church to the church. :)
|
What happens to the souls of the fallen?
If they go to the plane of their deity, then your idea works perfectly, as the deity's followers "release" the soul as the spell is cast. The deity may choose release the soul soul even if someone outside the faith casts raise dead.
If they go to an underworld, like Hades, you can flavor the spell effect as the deity's minions mount an escape for it. In this case the deity and followers wouldn't take this risk for someone outside their faith.
Another question (applies more to scrolls): Are the above decisions made when the spell is granted via morning prayer, or as the spell is cast? (i.e. you can abuse the spell by casting it on the unworthy, but it will only happen once in your lifetime) In this case scrolls will be harder to come by as the writer is hoping the scroll is used as intended or he/she gets "blackballed".
I like the flavor you are going for.
Lastly, you can restrict the spells to a single (or few gods). Ex. Only the god of death can return the spirit as he alone has control over his domain (except his mischevious "daughter" who has been known steal into her father domain on occasion knowing the back passages and such.)
What happens to the souls of the fallen?
If they go to the plane of their deity, then your idea works perfectly, as the deity's followers "release" the soul as the spell is cast. The deity may choose release the soul soul even if someone outside the faith casts raise dead.
If they go to an underworld, like Hades, you can flavor the spell effect as the deity's minions mount an escape for it. In this case the deity and followers wouldn't take this risk for someone outside their faith.
Hmmm... I haven't really thought about this.
^solid bit of advice.
I'll add on to it from an in-game point of view: most people in a polythiestic society freely worship all deities, depending on the prayer and the associated events (harvest, travel, etc...). I would easily consider these worshipers to be devoted for the purposes of your spell restrictions.
IF you were to go this route and ignore Lazar's advice, I'd recommend only limiting the spells from characters (PC or NPC) who actively claim atheism or agnosticism AND from whom the caster decides they are not worthy of the spell or not a potential convert.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
From a metagame point of view? It just makes worshiping a deity something you mechanically MUST do not to be disadvantaged.
It automatically gives Clerics and the like an even bigger advantage over other classes, and disadvantages anyone who doesn't want to be a devout bible thumper for no discernible reason.
You'll end up with one of about three player archetypes:
1.) "Okay, I'm a follower of...what's the most convenient deity to worship again? I don't really give a s@&$ but I'd like to be able to keep my character if I die."
2.) "Screw it, I guess if I'm dead I'll make a new guy because I don't want him to worship a deity. *Long suffering sigh*"
3.) Guy who always make a Cleric of other devout character: "Dude, what's you guys' problem? Not like it changes anything."
I see no way this IMPROVES your game. At best, it doesn't matter, and at worst it's obnoxious.
From a metagame point of view? It just makes worshiping a deity something you mechanically MUST do not to be disadvantaged.
It automatically gives Clerics and the like an even bigger advantage over other classes, and disadvantages anyone who doesn't want to be a devout bible thumper for no discernible reason.
You'll end up with one of about three player archetypes:
1.) "Okay, I'm a follower of...what's the most convenient deity to worship again? I don't really give a s&** but I'd like to be able to keep my character if I die."
2.) "Screw it, I guess if I'm dead I'll make a new guy because I don't want him to worship a deity. *Long suffering sigh*"
3.) Guy who always make a Cleric of other devout character: "Dude, what's you guys' problem? Not like it changes anything."
I see no way this IMPROVES your game. At best, it doesn't matter, and at worst it's obnoxious.
From a mechanics point of view, I think you're absolutely right. From an in-game point of view, why would the Gods care if non-believers and those who refuse to convert didn't get resurrected? It's not like those individuals are advancing the Gods' agendas. Unless, of course, those specific non-worshipers were actively on a quest for said God.
From a mechanics point of view, I think you're absolutely right. From an in-game point of view, why would the Gods care if non-believers and those who refuse to convert didn't get resurrected? It's not like those individuals are advancing the Gods' agendas. Unless, of course, those specific non-worshipers were actively on a quest for said God.From a metagame point of view? It just makes worshiping a deity something you mechanically MUST do not to be disadvantaged.
It automatically gives Clerics and the like an even bigger advantage over other classes, and disadvantages anyone who doesn't want to be a devout bible thumper for no discernible reason.
You'll end up with one of about three player archetypes:
1.) "Okay, I'm a follower of...what's the most convenient deity to worship again? I don't really give a s&** but I'd like to be able to keep my character if I die."
2.) "Screw it, I guess if I'm dead I'll make a new guy because I don't want him to worship a deity. *Long suffering sigh*"
3.) Guy who always make a Cleric of other devout character: "Dude, what's you guys' problem? Not like it changes anything."
I see no way this IMPROVES your game. At best, it doesn't matter, and at worst it's obnoxious.
He asked for an opinion based on the mechanics in the OP, so I gave him one.
From an in-game viewpoint I would actually contend the OPPOSITE.
Assuming something even vaguely like the Golarion/Forgotten Realms/What have you cosmology, most deities would prefer it if their non-worshipers came back to life, and their worshipers stayed dead.
Why?
The people who worship them go to their afterlife, and become powerful Angels/Demons/Whatever that serve in their armies for the rest of eternity.
The people who DON'T worship them die and go to SOMEONE ELSE'S afterlife and become powerful Whatevers in THEIR armies for the rest of eternity.
A forth waller might insist that his character believes life is a game and he worships the Game Master. You can grant him all his spells because, You're the GM!
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Gods aren't usually that "jealous" in a polytheistic setting, so rather than what you suggest, it would be more reasonable to restrict raising the dead to those who are bent to any purpose to which the caster's deity is sympathetic (and presumably, any adventuring priest would only go on quests to which their deity is sympathetic, so one could assume that their party members would automatically be eligible, since they share a cause).
From a mechanics point of view, I think you're absolutely right. From an in-game point of view, why would the Gods care if non-believers and those who refuse to convert didn't get resurrected? It's not like those individuals are advancing the Gods' agendas. Unless, of course, those specific non-worshipers were actively on a quest for said God.From a metagame point of view? It just makes worshiping a deity something you mechanically MUST do not to be disadvantaged.
It automatically gives Clerics and the like an even bigger advantage over other classes, and disadvantages anyone who doesn't want to be a devout bible thumper for no discernible reason.
You'll end up with one of about three player archetypes:
1.) "Okay, I'm a follower of...what's the most convenient deity to worship again? I don't really give a s&** but I'd like to be able to keep my character if I die."
2.) "Screw it, I guess if I'm dead I'll make a new guy because I don't want him to worship a deity. *Long suffering sigh*"
3.) Guy who always make a Cleric of other devout character: "Dude, what's you guys' problem? Not like it changes anything."
I see no way this IMPROVES your game. At best, it doesn't matter, and at worst it's obnoxious.
He asked for an opinion based on the mechanics in the OP, so I gave him one.
From an in-game viewpoint I would actually contend the OPPOSITE.
Assuming something even vaguely like the Golarion/Forgotten Realms/What have you cosmology, most deities would prefer it if their non-worshipers came back to life, and their worshipers stayed dead.
Why?
The people who worship them go to their afterlife, and become powerful Angels/Demons/Whatever that serve in their armies for the rest of eternity.
The people who DON'T worship them die and go to SOMEONE ELSE'S afterlife and become powerful Whatevers in THEIR armies for the rest of eternity.
In the Planescape universe (multiverse), deities' powers grow based on the number of mortal worshipers. Once their worshipers die (and become Angels/demons/whatnot), they no longer contribute to the raw power of the deity. Sure, they contribute in other ways, but not as worshiper power.
From a Golarion or Forgotten Realms point of view, I agree with your assessment. And that would certainly make for an interesting world: Raise Dead is only effective on those who don't worship the deity. Now that would be rather hilarious.
If I was in the group, and we as a group did not like the idea we would likely just all worship the same deity to get around it.
I also don't see why deity could care about a mortal being brought back to life unless that mortal was directly against him, especially if the deity was a good one.
Deity: Ya know, I could allow you to live, BUT you decided to follow another deity, so I will you work that out with him. Yeah I understand that your deity and myself are both ____, and this quest is for both of us to a large extent. I just don't care.
I'll add on to it from an in-game point of view: most people in a polythiestic society freely worship all deities, depending on the prayer and the associated events (harvest, travel, etc...). I would easily consider these worshipers to be devoted for the purposes of your spell restrictions.
OMG, this is a great point and one I totally forgot about when I first posted. You're right, most of the people in the world would be Polytheistic: A farmer gets up in the morning and says a prayer to Belan, God of Wind and the Sky, because she needs the rains to come so her crop will be successful. That evening at dinner she and her family offers thanks to Redeif, God of Wealth and the Hearth for the prosperity they enjoy, and at night before she goes to bed she offers thanks to Lynnain, Goddess of Life, for the fact she and her family are healthy.
So having rethought this, now I'm more inclined to think that the good and neutral gods would not be so strict, but the evil gods would.
I'll add on to it from an in-game point of view: most people in a polythiestic society freely worship all deities, depending on the prayer and the associated events (harvest, travel, etc...). I would easily consider these worshipers to be devoted for the purposes of your spell restrictions.OMG, this is a great point and one I totally forgot about when I first posted. You're right, most of the people in the world would be Polytheistic: A farmer gets up in the morning and says a prayer to Belan, God of Wind and the Sky, because she needs the rains to come so her crop will be successful. That evening at dinner she and her family offers thanks to Redeif, God of Wealth and the Hearth for the prosperity they enjoy, and at night before she goes to bed she offers thanks to Lynnain, Goddess of Life, for the fact she and her family are healthy.
So having rethought this, now I'm more inclined to think that the good and neutral gods would not be so strict, but the evil gods would.
Why? From an Evil cleric/god point of view, ressurrecting someone that isn't a worshipper is a good way to say 'you owe me one' or 'see! I'm not as bad as the other gods say, am I?' It's a great gateway to try and corrupt people.
Also form the point of view of any religion it can be used as a show of power. 'You keep praying to Belan but it was the power of Malador that brought you back. You should convert to the God who actually cares about you.'And for Evil it can also be a nifty way to mess with the mind of the adventurers: 'Clerics of the God of evil ressurrected me? Why? Are they manipulating us? Have I done evil? Has this whole quest been in their favor all along?'
Another thing to consider with this scheme is, why would a god be pleased with a cleric going around with a group the deity didn't think was serving its interest in the first place?
Presumably, the cleric is advancing his deity's interests one way or another, and the party is therefor by proxy a tool to get those interests served. There's two ways of serving a deity, one is of faith, and one is of service. The latter need not necessarily be conscious or willing. So then why would the deity want to sacrifice the latter (service) in the favor of the former (faith)?
"Of course I grant raise dead, and animate dead, and both create undead spells, because, they come in handy."