Changes to deities in 2E


Pathfinder Society

1 to 50 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge 5/5 ⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Online—PbP aka Hmm

3 people marked this as a favorite.

The religion chapter of the 2E core rulebook defines what alignments PF2 gods accept in their followers, and there were some surprises there for me.

Abadar -- Only lawful alignments, which makes sense, given how that deity interacts with the world. I like this change, since I don't think Abadar is impressed with neutral people.

Asmodeus -- Lawful Evil only. This was my biggest surprise. No more lawful neutral Asmodean Advocates in PFS for now. (I'll miss them, because they were always interesting to have at the table. Barristers, go apply to Abadar and Torag!)

Lamashtu -- Chaotic Evil only. No more mother of monster midwives in society, folks. Take your midwives and go apply to Pharasma.

Norgorber -- You want an evil god in Society? This is one of your two options. He accepts N followers in his Reaper of Reputation aspect.

Urgathoa -- The Pallid Princess only accepts evil followers now.

Zon-Kuthon -- The other evil god still legal in Society play, provided you are Lawful Neutral.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:

The religion chapter of the 2E core rulebook defines what alignments PF2 gods accept in their followers, and there were some surprises there for me.

Abadar -- Only lawful alignments, which makes sense, given how that deity interacts with the world. I like this change, since I don't think Abadar is impressed with neutral people.

Asmodeus -- Lawful Evil only. This was my biggest surprise. No more lawful neutral Asmodean Advocates in PFS for now. (I'll miss them, because they were always interesting to have at the table. Barristers, go apply to Abadar and Torag!)

Lamashtu -- Chaotic Evil only. No more mother of monster midwives in society, folks. Take your midwives and go apply to Pharasma.

Norgorber -- You want an evil god in Society? This is one of your two options. He accepts N followers in his Reaper of Reputation aspect.

Urgathoa -- The Pallid Princess only accepts evil followers now.

Zon-Kuthon -- The other evil god still legal in Society play, provided you are Lawful Neutral.

I was honestly heartbroken by Urgathoa's shift to pure evil as my favorite 1st ed character is a Cleric of Urgathoa (Fighter/Cleric/Shadowdancer/Barbarian) and is a Core Campaign character. I had wanted to recreate her in 2E, but with Urgathoa no longer accepting Neutral followers and a lack of Shadowdancer, I'm looking to retire her by switching to Standard Campaign and taking part in the final Special.That said, mere moments before noticing your thread, I think I found a possible way...

Pathfinder Society (2nd edition) Player Basics wrote:

Characters can worship any deity listed in the table of gods on page 437 of the Core Rulebook or any other source listed in Character Options , so long as their alignment matches one of the deity’s listed follower alignments. Champions and clerics must choose a valid deity, though other classes can worship one of the faiths and philosophies presented on page 440 of Core Rulebook or another legal source. Characters can also be agnostic or atheist.

Some characters may revere deities they do not worship. Revering a deity means that your character may do things like wearing the deity’s holy symbol, attending the deity’s religious services, or performing other acts of obeisance that aren’t rewarded with spells or divine powers. For example, many druids revere Gozreh a deity of nature, but their primal magic is granted by Nature itself and does not come from Gozreh. A character may revere as many deities as they wish, but can worship and receive power from only one.

While Serenity couldn't be a Cleric of Urgathoa, or even a follower of Urgathoa, she could still revere her or be an adherent of The Whispering Way. A neutral Undead-bloodline Sorcerer multiclassing as a Rogue (or vice-versa, though that means no Greater bloodline spell until 20th level) while revering (but not worshiping) Urgathoa might be doable. She'd have to switch from Scythe to Elven Curve Blade if she wants to deal sneak attack, though. Or, I suppose Barbarian with the Spirit Instinct multiclassed as a Sorcerer would work with her general attitude and the whole "summoning her own mother as a Shadow and losing it whenever someone hurts it" thing. I'll have to think long and hard on this...

Grand Lodge 5/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:

The religion chapter of the 2E core rulebook defines what alignments PF2 gods accept in their followers, and there were some surprises there for me.

Abadar -- Only lawful alignments, which makes sense, given how that deity interacts with the world. I like this change, since I don't think Abadar is impressed with neutral people.

Asmodeus -- Lawful Evil only. This was my biggest surprise. No more lawful neutral Asmodean Advocates in PFS for now. (I'll miss them, because they were always interesting to have at the table. Barristers, go apply to Abadar and Torag!)

Lamashtu -- Chaotic Evil only. No more mother of monster midwives in society, folks. Take your midwives and go apply to Pharasma.

Norgorber -- You want an evil god in Society? This is one of your two options. He accepts N followers in his Reaper of Reputation aspect.

Urgathoa -- The Pallid Princess only accepts evil followers now.

Zon-Kuthon -- The other evil god still legal in Society play, provided you are Lawful Neutral.

I don't have the PF2 core book. Did Rovagug go CE followers only also?

Dark Archive 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Arutema wrote:


I don't have the PF2 core book. Did Rovagug go CE followers only also?

Chaotic and neutral evil only for Rovagug.

Grand Lodge 5/5 ⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Online—PbP aka Hmm

I didn't think about Rovagug. Is he society legal for PF1?

K-kun, I like the way you think, and the creativity you are applying to your problem!

Hmm

5/5

He is which I have always found more than a little bizarre. But then I find clerics of Urgathoa a weird inclusion as well.

Silver Crusade 5/5 ⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria

I am pretty happy about all of those changes, for a number of reasons, and also a couple of other things in the guide.

Grand Lodge 5/5 ⦵⦵⦵ Venture-Captain, Online—PbP aka Hmm

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Asmodeus was the only one I miss as a society option. He always struck me as a civil evil deity, one that would want to lure in the lawful neutral types! However, I have several players locally who will mourn, because they loved coming up with helpful characters who happened to worship evil gods.

Hmm


andreww wrote:
He is which I have always found more than a little bizarre. But then I find clerics of Urgathoa a weird inclusion as well.

To be fair, she was a Cleric of Pharasma (even had a birthmark of Pharasma's holy symbol on her forehead) until I realized that that wouldn't jive with my intention of bringing back Mommy via the Shadowdancer's Summon Shadow ability.

So after she died and was raised, she found that the afterlife wasn't at all like she thought and went through a crisis of faith before being taken in by Urgathoa, who actually encouraged Serenity to bring her mother back as an undead shade` who will always be with her. Serenity seemed to cast two shadows on the ground wherever she went from then on.

Hm, actually, now that I think about it, I think that one of the players I often played in the same core games with Serenity alternated between a scorched earth druid and a Cleric of Lamashtu.

2/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

I for one am glad evil gods are only evil, never made sense to have people playing priest of Rovagug and such in society.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.

As someone who played an Oracle of Asmodeus all the way through Eyes of the Ten, I have to say I'm disappointed with not being able to give her a 2e successor... :(

Sovereign Court 4/5 ⦵⦵⦵⦵

@veltharis... You might be able to... when they release the Oracle class...

Dark Archive

The Ghost of Balin Moonsong wrote:
@veltharis... You might be able to... when they release the Oracle class...

The issue is that she was a LN Asmodeus-follower and the changes to the way worshiper alignment works means I can no longer play an Asmodean in PFS (at least, unless I stick to 1e).

There are plenty of character concepts I have that either need to be adjusted or put on the back burner due to the mechanical options just not being there yet, but this change just flat-out blacklists my main PFS character from ever getting a 2e update. :(

Sovereign Court 4/5 ⦵⦵⦵⦵

You could Revere Asmodeous, according to my understanding, but not be one of his clergy.

Dark Archive

The Ghost of Balin Moonsong wrote:
You could Revere Asmodeous, according to my understanding, but not be one of his clergy.

Not at home at the moment, or I'd check my copy of the Core Rulebook to be sure of the wording, but my read on the whole "Revering" mechanic is that it's meant to facilitate characters with a polytheistic faith, who can't "worship" more than one deity for mechanical reasons, but also want a way to represent an attachment to a broader pantheon: to let a follower of Thor (for example) also have ties to other Norse gods, rather than having to go "down with the false god Odin" because there's only one slot for "Worships" on their character sheet.

In other words, it doesn't seem (to me) to be a mechanic intended to serve as a backdoor way of worshipping deities on the blacklist as long as you're just at the level of "wear the symbols as fashion accessories and maybe go to church once or twice a month" and don't play a Cleric or Champion.

I wouldn't be surprised if they clarify that player characters can't Revere a deity they couldn't also Worship (or at the very least, restrict the options to the deities already on the whitelist) at some point down the road.

Much as being the former player of a Asmodeus-worshipping Diabolist from Cheliax might imply a love for exploiting ambiguous language and finding loopholes, I much prefer being on solid rules footing when building my characters, even if I may admittedly skirt the line a bit.

Dark Archive

Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:
Urgathoa -- The Pallid Princess only accepts evil followers now.

Wasn't happy to see this either, but I'll try to enjoy my Urgathoan cleric/monk in PFS1. I'm glad to see there are still some "evil" options.

This does have me worried about Achaekek though. Hopefully it'll allow LN and LE.

4/5

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Gamerskum wrote:
I for one am glad evil gods are only evil, never made sense to have people playing priest of Rovagug and such in society.

Agreed. I for one am tired of "neutral because society doesn't let me be evil" characters seeing how far they can push the boundaries and then complaining that good characters are the problem.

Grand Lodge 3/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
RealAlchemy wrote:
Agreed. I for one am tired of "neutral because society doesn't let me be evil" characters seeing how far they can push the boundaries and then complaining that good characters are the problem.

My Inquisitor of Asmodeus was trained to be LN specifically so he could operate outside of the Empire. He never did anything to jeopardize his position in the society, so he was squeeky clean. He never committed *any* evil acts. Ever. Well, just some minor mocking of Andoran (East Cheliax) and Halflings.

Personally I'm an old fart and I don't enjoy playing evil characters, but I do enjoy moral grey areas. This witch hunt to stop boundary pushing would prevent me from playing one of my favorite characters. Fortunately he is 14th level so I have a "been there, done that" attitude to this concept.

I don't have a solution to stop people from being dicks. But I want it to be clear that some concepts which are not problematic will now be illegal. Collateral damage is always unfortunate.

Dark Archive

As I was one of the ones bemoaning it, I suppose I should note that there has been some clarification in the PFS guide's glossary entries for "Revere" and "Worship".

(From this thread)

Linda Zayas-Palmer wrote:

Some quotes from the Pathfinder Society Guide to Play for context:

"Revere: Player characters can revere any Golarion-specific deity, pantheon, or philosophy without alignment restriction. This extends to evil deities as well, so long as the PC does not participate in or glorify activities that violate the Pathfinder Baseline or otherwise incur an alignment infraction (see Pathfinder Core Rulebook 486 and Infamy and Alignment Infractions)."

"Worship: In Organized Play, worship refers to a relationship between a character and a deity where the character gains a mechanical benefit (e.g., a cleric’s spells and abilities or access to options tied to that deity) in exchange for their dedicated worship. A PC may worship only one deity and must choose a deity that accepts worshippers of their alignment. However, the PC cannot participate in or glorify activities that violate the Pathfinder baseline or otherwise incur an alignment infraction (see Pathfinder Core Rulebook 486 and Infamy and Alignment Infractions)."

The goal of this distinction is to offer a broad range of character belief and expression while remaining consistent with published information about which types of believers each deity is willing to grant power to.

Your PCs can revere deities and philosophies that haven't shown up in Second Edition products yet. So you can have your character be a follower of any of the Eldest (but they can't use revering an evil Eldest as a reason to have their character engage in behavior that is inappropriate for the table). Until we've published key mechanics like what alignments are required to gain power from a deity and which of the new domains they have, characters can't worship them as defined above. But the list in Lost Omens Gods and Magic is quite extensive, so there will be many more options for deities for your clerics in the near future.

So followers of the "No Non-Evil Worshipers" evil deities are apparently allowed, so long as they adhere to the usual behavioral guidelines (which I wholeheartedly agree with) and don't play a Cleric or Champion, which I still feel is a bizzare restriction...

But then, I fall more toward the "faith grants the power, not the god" mindset when it comes to cleric-types... It's the Eberron fan in me.

DougSeay wrote:
RealAlchemy wrote:
Agreed. I for one am tired of "neutral because society doesn't let me be evil" characters seeing how far they can push the boundaries and then complaining that good characters are the problem.
My Inquisitor of Asmodeus was trained to be LN specifically so he could operate outside of the Empire. He never did anything to jeopardize his position in the society, so he was squeeky clean. He never committed *any* evil acts. Ever. Well, just some minor mocking of Andoran (East Cheliax) and Halflings.

More or less the same for me.

I won't deny that my Oracle was deliberately designed to be a bit unnerving (one of her influences was Melisandre from Game of Thrones), but she was developed with a Planescape Blood War-style "Law vs. Chaos" mentality and styled as an Asmodean Demon Hunter during the build-up for Season Five (though I was new enough I didn't know it at the time). She generally takes a zen view of things, treating "misguided" paladins and their ilk with an "I'll be here to guide you back on the proper path when you're ready" kind of attitude.

Mainly, I play her as exceedingly pleasant, if a bit snobby, and always strive to be a team player. I just enjoy getting cross looks from the other people at the table from time to time...

From local group's Notable Quotations thread wrote:

A movanic deva under the control of an evil wizard looms over the paladin with a flaming greatsword. My oracle, Imperia, a proud and open follower of Asmodeus, had spent a fair amount of time deliberately antagonizing him during a previous, non-hostile encounter.

Deva: I am truly sorry, holy one, but I cannot disobey the commands imposed upon me. Rest easy in the knowledge that I will kill the foul heretic lurking in your midst soon after your own demise. (*GM looks not-so-subtly in my direction*)

GM: Oracle, you're up.

Me: I cast Dismissal. *Beat its SR, deva fails its Will save*

Imperia: *Smiles and waves goodbye*

Deva: ...I feel conflicted about this. *Pop*

Grand Lodge 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It’s a philosophical argument that will never be “won” by one side or the other. IMO, you cannot divorce yourself from any part of a deity’s dogma so you cannot properly worship, say Asmodeus, and claim you stick to the lawful stuff and ignore the evil stuff. I just don’t believe that is how religion works given that the deity is demonstrably real and aware of their follows. However, since I am not the campaign GM, I live with the rules as Paizo has defined them. I just chose not to play divine characters who worship evil deities or use evil spells and avoid characters who I feel drift too closely to the dark side. YMMV

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

Bob Jonquet wrote:
It’s a philosophical argument that will never be “won” by one side or the other. IMO, you cannot divorce yourself from any part of a deity’s dogma so you cannot properly worship, say Asmodeus, and claim you stick to the lawful stuff and ignore the evil stuff.

I’ve always been of the opinion that based on their write-ups the worship of many of Golarion’s deities is far more nuanced than a simple “within one step of the deity’s alignment” can convey. How can you possibly worship Rovagug without being evil? Chaotic - even chaotic neutral - really doesn’t mesh with Pharasma. On the other hand Nethys doesn’t really care what you use magic for, as long as you are using magic.

I like how PF2 has narrowed it down to only certain alignments that are particularly suited for the deity.

Though like a lot of people I’m surprised at how narrow they made Asmodeus. I always viewed him as being more than willing to give power to anyone who would work to further Hell’s plots (wittingly or un-).

1/5

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

They decided to short-circuit any Edgy McEdgerperson in this edition.

Whether this will draw in more folks wanting to avoid that in their fantasy game or drive away more who view the revamped world setting as the No Fun League remains to be seen.

EDIT: Though, if the Make Murderhoboing Great Again crowd thinks about it, there will be some potentially AMAZING group synergies between champions/clerics of Torag and Gorum.

Dark Archive 4/5

I always thought that Asmodeus wouldn't give powers to people who don't further his plans somehow, so all clerics of Asmodeus are willing accomplices to his evil plan. That is why I at least were always frustrated with LN Asmodean clerics(LN barristers of other classes, sure, but clerics aka the people who serve the deity? Gods never give power to someone who doesn't actually serve them unless they are Groetus)

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kevin Willis wrote:
How can you possibly worship Rovagug without being evil?

FREEDOOOM! For all beings no matter the cost!

I'm sure he'll calm down once we let him out
awww he just wants walkies....

Sometimes I think reality is unrealistic in the lengths people will go to justify some things.

Quote:
Chaotic - even chaotic neutral - really doesn’t mesh with Pharasma.

I could VERY easily see death as CN. This guy ate drank and slept around his way to 95, this other guy was a kurgess worshiper in tip top shape and got struck by a bolt of lightning clear out of the blue at age 25.

Dark Archive 4/5

But Rovagug's worship is literally about breaking everything <_< Just freeing him isn't worshiping him funnily enough :p

And Pharasma is too orderly to really fit CN followers

1/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I disagree on Pharasma being orderly.

If she was, she really wouldn't have such a big deal about undead.

She wouldn't be so proprietary about randos in the dead zone getting back to 'reality'.

Nah, she very much is the Neutral, she's sometimes very orderly, sometimes she's like that person who's distracted and trying to do a dozen jobs all at the same time and *looking* competent when in reality all the jobs are being done half-arsed.

Does Peter's Principle apply to Golarion deities, I wonder...?

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Texas—Dallas & Ft. Worth aka Belafon

Pharasma’s area of concern - though summarized as “death” - can be more accurately described as “the processing of souls after death.” (Along with fate, prophecy, and other areas.) Whether a creature dies from old age or a random flight of arrows in a battle is irrelevant to her. She desires everything to happen as it is supposed to happen, when it is supposed to happen. Pharasma’s hatred of undead isn’t even close to chaotic. She hates them because the creation of undead involves a disruption in the proper flow of souls.

Not to say that I think she should be a lawful deity (I don’t), but rather that she wouldn’t be inclined to imbue those who enjoy chaos with power. Which, again, is why I like the changes made in 2E. Pharasma can still be true neutral without granting power to CN worshippers. Calistria can be CN and insist that her clerics have at least some aspect of chaos to them.

Dark Archive 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Online—VTT

I think a lot of people have a view of the gods that just isn't necessarily upheld in the Golarion lore to be honest, for example Sarenrae offers spells both to her non violent clerics who preach redemption, healing and tolerance and to the Cult of the Dawnflower who preach "there are no second chances in the desert" and kill any enemies who refuse their single offer of mercy "even against non-evil foes". Both groups get spells from her and count fully as worshipers.

Gods are far more complicated than just requiring everyone to follow all of their areas of concern equally and fully or entirely refusing power. Certainly gods known for contracts and lies would be very likely to accept non evil followers into their embrace, how better to slowly get them to switch over to their side fully after all?

Grand Lodge 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

Richard Lowe wrote:
Certainly gods known for contracts and lies would be very likely to accept non evil followers into their embrace, how better to slowly get them to switch over to their side fully after all?

As I stated above, that is a philosophical evaluation and one that many people disagree with. That's not to say you are wrong, just that we disagree how fantasy religion and dogma work.

This has been an issue for as long as there has been deity worship in fantasy games. Generally speaking, we are simply going to have to agree to disagree. The only aspects that really matter is (1) the campaign GM (Paizo) has determined what is legal and what isn't so as long as your alignment is a legal for worship, you can do it and (2) if you intend to do something your GM would determine is anathema, then they have an obligation to notify you prior to the action. Then its up to you to chose to your fate.

Scarab Sages 4/5

From a lore standpoint, I understand the change and how it is beneficial.

From the standpoint of trying to explain things to a new player who wants to know which gods they can worship and what alignment the character can be to do so, it seems like it might be more complicated. When someone asks, the answer is just going to be “look at the chart” more often, as I’m not going to be able to remember all the corner cases. As opposed to the fairly straightforward one step rule from PF1E.

A lot of answers for PF2E and especially PFS2 seem like they’re going to boil down to “look at the chart.” I’m still not sure how I feel about that.

3/5 Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro aka MadScientistWorking

Bob Jonquet wrote:
It’s a philosophical argument that will never be “won” by one side or the other. IMO, you cannot divorce yourself from any part of a deity’s dogma so you cannot properly worship, say Asmodeus, and claim you stick to the lawful stuff and ignore the evil stuff.

Actually, it flat out states in a splat book that huge variations in worship exists and that the gods don't really particularly care all that much about these variations. In fact my favorite example that is from a book are the Abadarians who are abhorred because their sect kind of will partially collapse the economy.

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kevin Willis wrote:
Pharasma’s area of concern - though summarized as “death” - can be more accurately described as “the processing of souls after death.” (Along with fate, prophecy, and other areas.)

She's the goddess of prophecy in an age where prophecy stopped working...

Dark Archive 4/5

Richard Lowe wrote:

I think a lot of people have a view of the gods that just isn't necessarily upheld in the Golarion lore to be honest, for example Sarenrae offers spells both to her non violent clerics who preach redemption, healing and tolerance and to the Cult of the Dawnflower who preach "there are no second chances in the desert" and kill any enemies who refuse their single offer of mercy "even against non-evil foes". Both groups get spells from her and count fully as worshipers.

Gods are far more complicated than just requiring everyone to follow all of their areas of concern equally and fully or entirely refusing power. Certainly gods known for contracts and lies would be very likely to accept non evil followers into their embrace, how better to slowly get them to switch over to their side fully after all?

You say that, but Sarenrae only gives good worshippers spells in 2e. Unless you claim Cult of Sarenrae has lots of good clerics?

Grand Lodge 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

Adam Yakaboski wrote:
the gods don't really particularly care all that much about these variations

Reference?

1/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I was sad Kuthonites clerics can't heal despite the fact that Kuthonites are often highly skilled medical practitioners and use healing magic in order to prolong suffering and contribute to the whole masochism thing.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Cyrad wrote:
I was sad Kuthonites clerics can't heal despite the fact that Kuthonites are often highly skilled medical practitioners and use healing magic in order to prolong suffering and contribute to the whole masochism thing.

They can, they just don’t get the extra Heal only designated spell slots.

That and the Medicine skill should be enough to keep their targets alive.

Sovereign Court 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden aka Ascalaphus

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm not wild about the change to Asmodeus. I've always seen the difference between him and say, Sarenrae in that Sarenrae would like you to truly believe and embrace her teachings in your heart. After your death your soul would obviously head her way then because that's its temperament.

Asmodeus just wants you to sign on the dotted line. And your soul goes to hell because that's what it says in the contract, alignment be damned.

4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I hope when they write up Lao Shu Po they still allow for neutral clerics. The lore says that most wayangs recognize she is a cruel mistress, but they worship her anyway because she helps them hide in the dark. I would assume that is true for many of the ratfolk that worship her as well.

I think that is in part my response to Bob's statement above: that whether we are dealing with wayangs and Lau Shu Po, or Nidalese humans and Zon-Kuthon, the setting has established that there are people that are less evil than the gods they serve out of cultural tradition or ancient pacts.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just tossing in my 2 copper's worth to say that I agree with the last three posts.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Lakes aka TwilightKnight

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Lau Bannenberg wrote:
Asmodeus just wants you to sign on the dotted line. And your soul goes to hell because that's what it says in the contract, alignment be damned.

I agree in so far as that applying to the general worshipper, but not specifically to those few whom he gifts divine power. IMO, a deity is in a way an arrogant being demanding total commitment from their chosen elite whom they can trust to manifest the dogma and portfolio of said deity in the material world. I think it depends a lot on how you believe deities exist. Are they beings first, and then impose their immortal will on the universe or are they a tangible manifestation of the faith and beliefs of the creatures who embrace their tenets? Kind of a chicken or the egg concept. IMO, it’s that latter which explains why generally speaking the more people who worship, the more power a deity wields and why they are so obsessed with expanding their flock. Under those parameters, I do not believe a deity would grant divine power to a creature who intentionally, purposely ignores or even rejects aspects of their spheres of influence. In order for Asmodeus to claim the soul of a creature, they have to be committed to his cause. If he allows them to focus just on the hyper lawful aspects, he risks losing them to another lawful afterlife that more aligns with their demonstrations of good or neutrality over evil. But, that’s just how I feel and YMMV.

Sovereign Court 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden aka Ascalaphus

1 person marked this as a favorite.

One thing I've always liked about Paizo's take on deities is that "what makes you a deity" is quite varied. Some deities are just ancient beings that might have survived from a previous Creation (Pharasma, Asmodeus).

Some are humans ascended through an artifact (Cayden, Iomedae, Norgorber)

Some are humans ascended through magical or philosophical enlightenment (Nethys, Irori, Aroden).

Some are promoted by others or steal their power from others (Lamashtu, Milani, Belial, Mephistopheles).

Some are outsiders ascended to greater power (empyreal lords, demon lords etc., but also Sarenrae)

The "powered by mortal belief" is fairly muted in Pathfinder, and I like that, because it always made them seem kinda inauthentic. How can you provide original meaning of life if you only exist because people believe in you?

Planar Adventures explains one motivation for deities to want followers: because their souls go on to those deities' planes which makes them bigger and stronger (and helps resist erosion into the Maelstrom). It makes sense to me that Good deities care more about authentic feeling driving a soul to their plane while a pragmatic Evil deity like Asmodeus doesn't care all that much as long as quota are met.

2/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The problem with the arguments along the lines of "deities want worshipers" in the context of this discussion, whether you're using Bob's or Lau's or a different view of "why" is that it distracts from the point. Worship does not equal "cleric" or "champion."

You can be a barrister hyperfocused on Asmodeus' law aspect, venerate him with a small shrine in your office, and call for his aid before each trial, and still end up as his property in the afterlife, but that doesn't make you a cleric.

To me, a cleric or champion has signed on whole-heartedly to a deity's cause in its entirety, and that's why you get superpowers above and beyond the swashbuckler who worships Caydean or the assassin who worships Norgorber. That looks like where the PF2 team was going with the change.

But as has been stated multiple times, this isn't an argument to be won. It's just different opinions about a decision the game designers made just like the proficiency system or the 4-degrees of success.

Also, not a PFS issue but a CRB issue.

Dark Archive 4/5

Yeah, I think there is big difference between people who sell their soul to Asmodeus to get power and who want to serve Asmodeus as his cleric

(also on sidenote, isn't soul's type of quintessence dependent on their alignment? Aka CG soul's quintessence wouldn't feed hell because it isn't compatible with Hell's quintessence, hence why they try to change that?)

Sovereign Court 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden aka Ascalaphus

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think nonevil souls are still effective, otherwise why bother with all those contracts. While most peoples' souls get routed towards the alignment or deity they followed in life, a contract trumps that.

But properly aligned souls are probably the tastiest so once you've got someone on contract, remind them that now that they're going to hell anyway, they might as well act like it, there's no bad consequence anymore...

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Yep, Contracts/sacrifices still supersede the normal rules.

3/5 Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro aka MadScientistWorking

Bob Jonquet wrote:
Adam Yakaboski wrote:
the gods don't really particularly care all that much about these variations
Reference?

Divine Anthology and honestly in a lot of books. Abadar is the one I can think off the top of my head where his worship is so do diverse that there are three and more completely different distinct philosophies of worship in play that only play into parts of his portfolio.

1/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I can see Asmodeus's restrictions: There is only one right way to worship him. This is very fitting for him.

But why can there not be CG followers of Gorum?

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Because violence for the sake of violence is not a good thing.

2/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

A Chaotic Good Warrior that loves to fight would probably follow Cayden Cailean.

Sovereign Court 4/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden aka Ascalaphus

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I've always thought of CG Gorum as "I have a need to fight but I'd prefer to channel that need into something good", for example people who go to the Worldwound just to vent.

1 to 50 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Changes to deities in 2E All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.